and, coming from thence home, she was again followed by the children, who threw dirt upon her, and followed her with injurious reproaches, even to St. James's-Alley, near St. James's Church, in Germain Street, where then lodged Made de Laulan, at an English apothecary's house. This evil treatment put our girl into such a consternation that she went weeping into her mistress's chamber; who, after she had understood the cause of her crying, advised her to read the Holy Scriptures to comfort her; which she did; and, in reading the second chapter of the Gospel of St. Mark, which gave an account of the healing of one sick of the palsy and the incredulity of the Jews, the girl shewed a surprise at their obstinacy, and declared to her mistress, as we have heard from her own mouth, that, if she had lived at that time, she should have had faith enough to have been healed: and at the same instant she felt a great pain, and heard a noise that the bone of her thigh made, and thought she heard a voice which said to her, 'Thou art cured.' The crack the bone made was heard by her mistress, but not the voice, as she hath told us. However the matter was, she was, at the same instant, that is to say, between seven and eight of the clock in the evening on the six-and-twentieth day of November last, actually cured and continues to be in so good a condition that she now walks straight upright; her legs being of the same length; her knee, her foot, her hip, and thigh, being in their natural situation, as they ought. This is all that we can say about the cure of our daughter which we cannot look upon but as miraculous, and for which we give our most humble thanks to God. In witness whereof we have signed this certificate, in London, this eighteenth day of December 1693.

"Jurant 19 die Decemb. 1693, coram me, William Ashurst, Mayor."

"John Maillard."
"Charlotte du Dognon."

We intend publishing in our next the affidavits of Mary Maillard herself; of Mrs. Laulan, her mistress; of M. de Batt, surgeon; of M. Lafargue, physician; of M. de la Menardiere; and Dr. Welwood's letter to Lady Ashurst-if we have room.

TO CORRESPONDENTS.

AN error, which is greater in appearance than in reality, has crept into the observations which we made in our last Number upon the fierce and unjustifiable attack of the Christian Observer on Mr. Gordon's conduct in the House of Commons. In commenting on this attack we shewed why the Christian Observer and its party were anxious to detach themselves from that gentleman. The paragraph in which the error occurs begins with the words, "The Evangelical clergymen who have been for many years the principal writers in the Christian Observer have"-done certain things. Further on we say; "The Christian Observer has ever been the most active defender of that creature of Lord Brougham, the London University, and patron of a system of education from which God was professedly and explicitly rejected."

The present Editor says, that he has never defended the London University. We reply, that the party of which he claims to be the organ, and declares that Mr. Gordon is not the organ, has defended it: and, without going into farther details, we quote two of perhaps the brightest ornaments of Evangelicalism, in pointing out Mr. Wilberforce as a subscriber, and Mr. Macaulay, for many years Editor of the Christian Observer, as at this moment one of the Council of the London University. It is as notorious as the sun at noon-day, that the Highchurch party has constantly opposed the principles of the London University; and equally notorious that the Evangelical Liberals, both in and out of the Established Church, have supported it. The utmost we can consent to do is, to place, amongst the Errata of a second Edition,- for "The Christian Observer has ever been," &c. read, "The party of which the Christian Observer is the organ, and Mr. Gordon is not the organ, has ever been," &c. The Christian Observer has practised a dishonest artifice, in coupling the Record Newspaper with the Morning Watch in its vituperations, as if these two publications were quite of one mind. The Christian Observer knew full well, that the Record had expressed itself in the strongest terms of opposition to some of the doctrines we hold; and that in our last Number, where we thought it right to praise the Record on some points, we distinctly excepted its theology. The Record has felt indignant at this ruse of the Christian Observer, and has inserted several articles against opinions, which it falsely assumes we hold, concerning the Human Nature of Christ. These articles are only reiterations of what it has before published, and we have answered in former Numbers; and the doctrine, therefore, we leave, with simply referring our readers to our previous remarks. But as the Record of Oct. 31 charges us with maintaining, that "the virgin imparted to her Son of her impurity," we declare this to be a false charge. And as, in the paper of Nov. 21, it says that Mr. Irving has taught "the sinfulness of the flesh of Christ," we state our belief that this is also a false charge, and in proof appeal to Mr. Irving's Declaration, published in No. IX. of this Journal, saying with it, that "We utterly detest and abhor any doctrine that would charge with sin, original or actual, our blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." As often as such charges are brought forward against us or our friends, we shall meet them with flat contradiction.

We have received papers on "Babylon" and on "The Signs of the Times,” which, with some shorter ones, we hope to find room for in our next.

We have also five Cases of Healing since our last, which we hope to insert, if we and our country are spared so long.