may wish to conceal it, their real opinion will certainly escape. But the Bible Society give Bibles, an article specifically defined and agreed upon beforehand: this is quite another affair: it calls for no opinion, it elicits no lurking principle, and has nothing in common with any other association*.

That some dissenting subscribers to the Bible Society still retain a spirit of hostility to the Church can excite no surprise: it would be a miracle indeed if all were changed. But it is an undeniable fact, that much has already been done in the way of conciliation; that kind feelings have succeeded to feelings of dislike; that animosities have subsided, and that a better spirit is rapidly extending its influence..

Not all the conjectures and hypotheses, which you have so profusely lavished on this head, can possibly do away this indisputable truth.

* In a Note you tell us, "If I am rightly informed, the secret history of this literary journal, in its rise, progress, effects, and issue, would supply us with a Commentary very closely illustrative of the views and apprehensions which I entertain in regard to the British and Foreign Bible Society, and an apt specimen of what we may invariably look for from such combinations." Your confidence has been so much abused with respect to information upon other subjects, that I verily believe you are not rightly informed upon this point.-Do you, by the expression "such combinations," mean "similar combinations?" Can two things be more unlike, than the simple act of giving a Bible, and the employment of writing a Review? For a discussion upon the word "such," I beg to refer you to the 116th and 117th pages of your Letter to Lord Teignmouth.

SECTION VI.

VI. I come next to the remedics which you sug gest, as calculated to put an end to these "baneful operations."

1. If, in the progress of this controversy, I have been occasionally surprised at the arguments adduced to prove that the Bible Society is a most pernicious institution, I have not been less surprised at the remedy which it is the great object of your letter to recommend, viz. that the Church-of-England subscribers should now secede, and leave the Dissenters to themselves. Of three remedies proposed, this is the chief.

What are the grounds of this recommendation? If it be true that Bibles given by Dissenters afford such encouragement to the dissenting interest as to endanger the Establishment: if a Dissenter never gives a Bible without explaining it, and therefore perverting its meaning: if the Scriptures thus distributed speak any and every sort of doctrine, according to the prejudices of those who read them: if they do directly, and of necessity, spread heresy and schism, and provoke hostility to the truth: if the circulation of Bibles among Dissenters is in fact the distribution of arms † to avowed and inveterate

* See Mr. Daubeny's Charge of 1810, p. 15, 17, &c.; the "Coun try Clergyman;" "An Enquiry," &c. &c.

Supply these men with Bibles (I speak as a true churchman), and you supply them with arms against yourself."-Country Clergy. man's first Letter to Lord Teignmouth, pp. 12, 13.

enemies, who will hereafter wield them against us and our Establishment, and the whole church of God if the Bible Society itself is in such degree contaminated by their presence as to become "pernicious, unconstitutional, anarchical, and calculated not for the edification but the destruction of the body of Christ *:" then, I contend, we ought, at all hazards, and at any rate, to prevent this diffusion of the Scriptures by means of Dissenters. It is our bounden duty to tie up their hands, and to forbid, under the severest penalties, without hope of miti gation or possibility of pardon, the crime of giving Bibles, especially to the lower orders of society. This is a legitimate conclusion; and I do not perceive how those who allow the premises can refuse it their sanction†.

Your plan, however, requires nothing of the sort. It not only admits a Dissenting Bible Society, but, in glowing language, displays the many advantages which you think would arise from it. t. No man who should read your 53d and 54th pages, ought to doubt of your anxiety for the widest dsssemination of the word of God. It must also be obvious, that you see no evil likely to result from the "noxious channels," which so much disturb the repose of persons of inferior understanding and of evanescent charity.

* Dr. Wordsworth, p. 38. See this and other topics of objection pleasantly and conclusively rallied in "a Letter to a Country Clergyman, by a Suburban Clergyman," published by Hatchard.

+ Unless I deceive myself, Mr. Daubeny, "a Country Clergyman," and the author of "an Enquiry, &c." will see nothing revolting to their feelings and system in the conclusion I have drawn. Dr. Wordsworth, pp. 53, 54.

In truth, I cannot comprehend your reasoning. In many parts of your pamphlet, you express a fear that the Dissenters will gain influence by distributing Bibles, even in connection with us; and that their influence will ere long raise up a powerful force against the Established Church. You affirm, that if the Scriptures pass through their hands, they pass through" noxious channels;" and that a conspiracy of many societies is now forming, which is of a most formidable and devouring aspect. Yet you say, that if the Bible Society had been left with them, you would never have questioned" the right, the necessity, the expediency, the wisdom, and praise, and salutary fruits of such a Society. The Bible, thus dispersed, whether at home or abroad, would have come, at least as far as we of the Church of England are concerned, an unmixed offering of good into the common stock and treasure-house for the relief and refreshment of afflicted humanity *." This, I confess, is, in my comprehension, utterly inexplicable.

But to proceed what good would you secure by the change proposed? Would you increase the circulation of the Scriptures? Certainly not. If it were merely a transfer of the Churchmen to the Society in Bartlett's Buildings, the other remaining the same, in its nature, and numbers, and connec tions, the funds employed would not be increased: and I see no reason to believe that there would be any augmentation of influence and zeal. One most powerful appeal to the religious, both of this and of

* Dr. Wordsworth, p. 53.

other countries, is the "liberal plan," that spirit of Christian charity," which forms the basis and bulwark" of the Bible Society. The energy which this constitution has given to the proceedings, and the lustre which it has thrown about the character, of the institution, have invited the co-operation, not merely of all classes of the community at home, but of all that love the Gospel abroad. It cannot be denied, that the name and influence of the Clergy offer a strong recommendation in its behalf, and render, independently of their subscriptions, essential service. This is admitted on all hands. "But could they not render the same service by recommending the Society in Bartlett's Buildings?" I ask, would they be admitted? Would their advice be regarded? Take the most favourable supposition you please, I am convinced that their services could not be so effectual: No, there wants the powerful appeal, the "liberal basis." I do not mean to object to the constitution of the Society in Bartlett's Buildings; it may be adapted to the particular end which that Society is designed to promote: but it is undeniable, that the ordeal of admission is with many a strong objection; and that an institution like the Bible Society does, and must, meet with more general approbation than an exclusive system, however pure, and however excellent. But some person, it seems, in an address to the Scotch Methodists, has been alarmed at this union†; and hence you infer, that

* See Lord Teignmouth's Letter to Dr. Wordsworth, pp. 17, 18: and the Letter to Dr. Gaskin, p. 3.

+ Dr. Wordsworth, p. 87.