Board." After proving by facts, and particularly by the immolation of human victims, that the native superstitions are the very reverse of "harmless," Mr. Owen most justly remarks:-"All false religions have been accommodated to the corruption of human creatures, by whom nothing is less sought than justice or purity of heart. It has ever been bodily exercise that profiteth little,' instead of god liness that is profitable for all things.' The people of India have, indeed, line upon line, to make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter. But is that superstition harmless by which a man would sanctify unjust gain by giving part of it to an idol, or purify his soul as he washes his body in the Ganges? I have seen them shew strong symptoms of uneasiness when urged upon this side; and no wonder.

"But it may be asked, if learned men have at no time produced sublimer speculations in morals? Recluse and contemplative men among them have delivered sublime truths, but commonly involved in

mysticism or fable, and in such form as should benefit only the learned. Nay, persons of inferior cast have been prohibited, under heavy penalties, from looking into such books, or acquiring that knowledge without which they cannot read. But the religion of a country is not to be estimated from the meditations of a few recluse men, but from the actual state in which it is delivered to the people. Like other religions of antiquity, they have their doctrines for those that are within, and their doctrines for those that are without. But amidst the round of processions sacrifices, ablutions, and the mummery in which they seek to be heard for their much speaking, urged on them from all sides, by precept and example, who of those who undertake to lead them will ever harangue on justice, mercy, and truth? There are enough to recite the legends of their gods with every comment that can seduce the imagination. But I have not heard by whom or in what circumstances auy thing like moral instruction is delivered to the people."

An Address to the Church Missionary Society, holden at the Town Hall in the City of Bath, under the Presidence of the Hon. and Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Gloucester, on Monday the first Day of Dec. 1817, Word for Word as delivered, from Writing; with a Protest against the Establishment of such a Society in Bath. By the Rev. JOSIAH THOMAS, A.M. Archdeacon of Bath. Bath: Meyler and Sou. 1817. 8vo. pp. 16. A Defence of the Church Missionary Society, against the Objections of the Rev. Josiah Thomas, Archdeacon of Bath. By DANIEL WILSON, Minister of St. John's Chapel, Bedford

Row. London: Wilson. 1817. 8vo. pp. 44. Counter-Protest of a Layman in Reply to the Protest of Archdeacon Thomas, &c. By GEORGE PRYME, Esq. Barrister at Law, and late Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. London:

Hatchard. 1818. 8vo. pp. 16. A Second Protest against the

Church Missionary Society, addressed to Lord James O'Brien, Chairman to the Committee of the Bath Missionary Association. London: Hatchard. 1818. 8vo. pp. 12.

A Letter to the Rev. Josiah

Thomas. By A MEMBER OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. Free Thoughts on the Bath Mis

WE suppose there is scarcely an individual in the three kingdoms above the lowest ranks in society, who is at this moment ignorant of the fact announced in the titlepage of the pamphlet placed at the head of the above catalogue; that on the first of December, 1817, an Archdeacon of the Church of England introduced himself into a meeting called expressly of the friends of the "Church Missionary Society," and delivered an Address " and a "Protest against the establishment of such a society in the city of Bath." The facts also, as stated in that title page, are unquestionable--that the Lord Bishop of Gloucester was in the chair at that meeting, and that this "Address" and" Protest" are printed" word for word" as "delivered from writing" on that occasion. The title-page, however, does not further take upon itself to describe the tone and manner in which the Address was delivered; and we have little disposition to strip from the Rev. the Archdeacon that mantle which he has prudently thought fit to throw over these subordinate circumstances. We are content to have the piece itself, and leave to others to describe the way in which it was got up, and performed. If the Archdeacon offended in the particular mode of discharging this new office, some allowance will probably be made for the entire novelty of the undertaking. Bath,

though famed for the strictuess of its ceremonial laws, had not, we presume, framed any anticipatory rule for the behaviour of a church dignitary under such circumstances. And we venture further to believe, that, if the Archdeacon violated any rule of good manners, he has by this time been made sensible of his misdemeanor, and is sincerely sorry for it. His first offence in this line will, we think, be his last.

When this event was first announced, it produced very various effects upon the public mind. Some persons, as usual, fled to the hostile banners of party, as the only secure post for those who refuse to think and act for themselves. Others pursued, as usual, the ordinary round of gay or busy life, thinking, perhaps, that while they themselves were unmolested at home, it mattered little what became of nearly eight hundred millions of people abroad. Some injudicious friends of the Establishment rejoiced at this additional effort of a somewhat rash and inconsiderate advocate to sustain, by the props of bigotry and contention, that edifice which can be upheld only by the pillars of Truth and Charity. Some persous, on the contrary, who were enemies to the Establishment, rejoiced to behold her own children employed in rending her garments and exposing her, or rather themselves, to the derision of the world. The majority of the country, or at least those members of it who are sincerely interested in the well-being of the Church of England, stood by in painful dejection-wept over this new example of the odium theologicum--lamented to see the venerable name of the Church identified with any resistance, and especially such a resistance, to a society formed for the circulation of the Gospel in heathen lands—and longed and prayed for the happy days when "Ephraim shall no longer envy Judab, and Judah shall not vex Ephraim."

For ourselves, we will own, that

we felt little astonishment at this new assault. The demon of discord is a personage with whom the experience of many years has given us a pretty familiar acquaintance; and her unvaried practice has been to take her station on some of the high places of the land; where, having kindled her torches, she throws round her balefui eye to discover some individual weak, or, shall we dare to say, wicked enough to throw them within the precincts of Charity and Peace. What peculiar qualification may have recommended her present torch-bearer it is not for us to decide. Certainly, however, he has discharged the prescribed duty very faithfully. He has not only carried the torch into a large assembly at Bath; but, with certain other kindred spirits, he has borne it into every part of the kingdom, To drop the metaphor-the Address has been advertised and placarded, and scattered with a prodigality sufficiently demonstrative of the active zeal and large resources of the circulators. Some of the newspapers complain even that it has been forced upon them by a sort of "requisition." We do not exactly know what is meant by the term as applied to the free press of this privileged country; but we trust that none of the editors of these journals are such enemies to the Church Missionary Society as not to publish the Protest the instant it is forwarded to them.

But if not astonished at the "Protest," we were certainly much grieved at it. Some of the reasons for our regret will appear hereafter. At first, indeed, we were greatly disposed to omit all notice of the subject. We seemed to ourselves to be mitigating the evil while we kept out of the contest, and enter tained a hope that the Protest might, after all, sink into the obscurity which it deserved. But that hope has vanished. The "Address" has not only been most

laboriously circulated, but it has been followed, both by some truly decisive replies, and, as will be seen in the list prefixed to this paper, by several affiliated addresses. Silence, in this state of affairs, is impracticable; and we shall, therefore, proceed, with all possible impartiality, to put our readers in possession of the main facts of this controversy, and the pretensions of the contending parties.

To this end we shall begin by briefly noticing the various works to which we have introduced our readers, which constitute the whole of those which have happened to fall under our own notice, though possibly, before this paper meets the public eye, these eight may have multiplied to dozens.

At the head stands the original and redoubtable "Address" and "Protest." Next to this comes what, in the absence of an official document, must be considered as the authoritative and accredited reply to this Protest; the Society, with that forbearance which has ever characterized another much assailed institution, having preserved a wise and dignified silence on the occasion.

The next in order is a very judicious, sensible, and independent paper of Mr. Pryme; who, professing to differ in some points from that body of men whom he calls the Evangélical Clergy, and whom he, with the Archdeacon, conceives to be mainly concerned in originating and sustaining the Church Missionary Society, yet justifies the Society itself, and condemns its reverend assailant.

Next to this stands a "Second Protest against the Church Missionary Society," by an anonymous writer. Though published at Bath, it certainly is not, as might have been supposed by the title, the work of the Rev. Archdeacon himself, and has been attributed to various writers, but, whoever be the author, he is clearly a friend

of the Society. It is, in fact, a sort of parallel to the Archdeacon's Protest, designed, by putting his arguments into plain English-by shewing them, as it were, without their robes-to unmask and expose them to the world.

The fifth document in this collection, is a letter to the Rev. Josiah Thomas, by a gentleman sign ing himself J. C. R. It touches on the inexpediency of any such public protest- on the particular spirit in which this appears to have been made on the disqualification for missionary exertions in the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, originating in its want of zeal-on the neglect on the part of the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge, in bringing its new exertions up to the level of its increased means- on the impropriety of charging those with the assumption of the title of Evangelical whom the world have designated by that name-and on the existence of a far larger, and more mischievous, sect than these in the Church of England; a sect who are mournfully "de ficient in the doctrines, preaching, and practice of the fathers of our church, and of many equally bright examples who have succeeded them; who abound too much with the pride of reason to carry into the pulpit the self-abasing doctines and high tone of piety which pervade our most excellent Liturgy." From this table of contents, which is not much shorter than the letter itself, our readers will be enabled to judge of the general tone and object of this production. We find in it much to commend, and little to complain of; except, indeed, that the author should think that the Archdeacon was "correct" in his entrèe to the Society, as far as respects "the dis cipline of the church."

Next come certain "Free Thoughts on the Bath Missionary Society," by a "Friend to Consistency," and who, by way of mak

ing good his claim to this high sounding title, sets out with telling us, that he is more anxious to heal than to foment the present unhappy dissensions between members of the Establishment," and then proceeds to throw the apple of discord between them with all possible assiduity. What, for instance, will be thought of his pretensions to consistency, who, with the language of charity on his lips, accuses the clergy connected with the Church Missionary Society of instructing the heathen, that they never yet heard the Gospel Gospel from any other Church of England missionaries; that the majority of Church of England ministers do not preach the gospel; that the consoling doctrines, respecting the grace and love towards maukind in general, of HIM whose beloved Sou "died for the sins of the whole world," is a gross delusion; that a few only, out of the posterity of Adam, are elected to eternal life; that what they have hitherto heard of Christian virtue, piety, and morality, is only dung and dross; (we should like to know whence this last quotation is taken) and that unless they can see the Scriptures in an evangelical point of view, Christ will profit them nothing? But we beg the author's pardon. Let him omit his short preface, in which he has announced his intention to heal the dissensions between the members of the Establishment, or let him substitute the word "foment" for "heal," and he will then be perfectly consistent. It may be a satisfaction, however, before we quit these "Free Thoughts,"to let the world knowour author's opinion, that the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts is sufficiently active and extensive to render any other society superfluous. We had certainly understood that this society never has employed mission, aries of any kind, either in Africa, or Asia; that is, in two quarters of the globe. But this friend to

consistency has doubtless visited the fountain head of information, has witnessed the sleepless zeal of that Society, has witnessed the troops of missionaries dispatched by its committee, has listened to the letters of congratulation and thanks from Africans and Hindoos, or has seen, and rejoiced to see, the converted idolater come to cast his idols into the fires of the institution. If such is the case, the friends of the new Society will certainly find it somewhat more difficult to make good their case, and establish the necessity of a second institution.

Some equally incredulous or ill informed persons will be equally surprised to learn from this author of "free thoughts," or, as they would be better entitled, "free facts," that many of the clergy and other members of the Bible Society "have withdrawn their assistance from that motley group;" and lest the interests of "dissent" should suffer by this defalcation, the Church Missionary Society is kindly "playing another card into the hands of Dissenters." We really do not understand this. But if the author means to insinuate that there is in this society, any union of Dissenters, he is entirely mistaken. The conduct of its affairs is confined to Churchmen exclusively. The writer ends by tell. ing us somewhat good humouredly, that they have "hot water" enough at Bath without seeking to increase the quantity by artificial means. Can he design irreverently, to describe the Archdeacon under the vague and unecclesiastical expression "artificial means?" We should deem such an offence impossible, but that we really know of no other person or persons to whom the imputation could apply; as it is very evident, that there was no "hot water" in the meeting till the Archdeacon pumped it in.

But this writer is not satisfied with a single blow; he comes again upon us in the next article, under CHRIST. OBSERV. No. 194.

the form of a "brief Defence of the Archdeacon of Bath, against the vehement Attack of the Rev.Daniel Wilson," modestly claiming to himself no title in this new enterprize, but that of being "the Author of the Free Thoughts." Here indeed the consistency" of the writer discovers itself. As were his "Free Thoughts," such is his " Defence." If they were wise, so is this. If they injured his cause, this injures and dishonours the champion of the cause; that is, the Archdeacon. In one page of the "Defence" Mr. Wilson is gravely rebuked for calling the missionary "magnanimous," when he ought to bave known that no blessing is pronounced on magnanimity, in the Sermon on the Mount. (p. 7.) In another part of the " Defence," Mr. Wilson is again condemned for resting on the commission to "preach the Gospel to every creature," when he ought to have known that it is not "found in the Gospel of St. John-the favourite disciple of Christ." We will tell the writer, however, what declaration is found in the Gospel of St. John. "He that believeth not the Son, shall not see life-but the wrath of God abideth on him." What, then, becomes of the security of the heathen, and what of these "addresses" and " protests" against societies designed for their conversion, St. John being the judge? But we must have done with this very harmless writer, leaving him to tell the world, in some future edition, in what part of the Old Testament he found the precise words which he quotes in the titlepage of his first pamphlet, and on what grounds he charges the friends of the Church Missionary Society with Calvinism in his "Thoughts," and acquits Mr. Wilson of this heavy crime in his "Defence."

We have now come to the eighth and last document which we shall think it right to notice on the present occasion; and this is another "Defence of the Protest of ArchP