will soon constitute a majority of the whole Society, does not in the least allay our "fears." There are, and may be other parties besides Congregational and Presbyterian. We fully agree with our author, that these are small matters; and we hope the day is far distant, when disputes on this subject will occasion any serious difficulties. We do not pretend to say, what will be the subject of dispute. We know there are many things, respecting which intelligent men, and good men do differ, and probably will hereafter differ. We do not pretend to say, what may give the line of division its direction. The probability that such a diversity of opinion will exist, is sufficient for our present purpose. And there is no subject on which jealousies are so likely to arise, as respecting the education of young men for the ministry of the Gospel. It is seen, that they will influence the opinions and doctrines of the churches, and therefore it becomes an object of intense interest, to every party man, that those he aids in educating, should be taught in his own school. The grace of God has never yet entirely extinguished these feelings; and even less matters have a tendency to create difficulties on this subject. We all have our local partialities, our social attachments, and our early associations; and we do not know that we would be better men, or better Christians, if we had not. It requires an effort, a constant effort, to prevent these feelings swaying us when great interests are at stake.

Now is it not probable, that from these, or other causes, parties will spring up in a Society extending over so large a territory, and embracing men, who agree in fundamental truths, but differ in smaller matters? The majority, it is true, decides every question at annual meetings; but they may decide on party grounds, and wield the immensely powerful engine in their hands, to put down their brethren who differ from them. In our voluntary associations, which are truly American, such as the Bible and Tract Societies, and Board of Foreign Missions, and some others, none of these difficulties exist, or at most in a very small degree. But in the case before us, they will operate, and we think we do not express ourselves too strongly, when we say no human hand can prevent so pow. erful an engine as the A. E. Society, from bearing on one party or another; and if it were in the hands of the Presby terian church to-morrow, it would not change our opinion. We are told, that in the management of every great con

cern there must be power, and that power may be abused. That the officers of our national government may abuse the confidence reposed in them. True, but in the two cases there is this remarkable difference: The officers of the government are responsible to the people; the members of this Society are not responsible to the great body of the church. Our author has said, the organization of this Society is "not unlike what the structure of our national government exhibits." Here again we beg leave to differ. We conceive the resemblance would be more complete, if our national Constitution were so changed, that the existing members of Congress were authorized to choose their own co-members and successors, and to appoint the Executive, Heads of Departments, Judges, and all subordinate officers, and to leave the people the privilege of paying their taxes, and of being governed by the laws made and provided for them. If the change suggested were made in our national Constitution, the cases would be nearly parallel. The A. E. Society chooses its own co-members and successors, elects its Directors and officers, receives from the church its funds, and sends her such pastors as the Society and its Branches choose to educate. It may be said, the Presbyteries, Associations, and Councils, may refuse to ordain them. True; but where can they find means of educating any other, as the funds necessary for this purpose are all thrown into one great channel? Will it be said, that the voting members of the Society bear a greater proportion to the church, than the members of Congress do to the people?-Very true. But when we consider that the attendance of the members of Congress is better than that of the Society, and that twenty members are a quorum to do business, the difference is not so great as appears at first view.

Our determination, when we first cast our eyes on our author's second general head of "fears," was simply to sayRemove the dangers which the Reviewer has pointed out, and his fears will subside as a natural consequence. But on examining the contents of this division of the subject, we noticed many things which caused the most deep and poignant regret. We noticed what indeed might be called" sounding the tocsin of alarm, and appealing to popular feeling and party prejudice." We could not persuade ourselves that a writer of our author's distinguished acuteness and ability, would permit himself to make this outcry, unless some pal

pable cause had been given by the Reviewer. On looking at the detached extracts, selected as the ground of his remarks, there appeared to be some foundation for the appeal which followed.

On the other hand, from our personal knowledge of the views and feelings of the Reviewer, confident that he had never taken an active part in the disputes that have sometimes arisen on these subjects, and believing, that although a Presbyterian, he felt no jealousies or ill will towards his Congregational brethren, we could not persuade ourselves that he had said any thing designed to cherish these sectional and sectarian feelings. With a view to satisfy ourselves on the subject, we carefully examined the portions of the review here complained of, and we became convinced, that whatever may be the appearance of the passages quoted, viewed in a detached state, they do not in their connection justify the inferences which our author deduces. Yet we do not accuse him of intentional error; and if the publication were again to be made, we would not exclude a single sentence already uttered; but we would add something calculated to prevent misapprehension of our views and feelings. We would say, as we have said in another part of these remarks, that we would be unwilling to see the power possessed by the A. E. Society, in the hands of Presbyterians or any other body of men. That we would protest and rebel against it, in whatever hands it may be lodged.

We deeply regret this omission, because we are persuaded it would have saved the author of the Strictures the pain he evidently felt on the occasion; and us the pain of reading remarks of no common severity, and in our opinion, of no small injurious tendency.

With regard to our author's remarks on page 599, we choose to be silent. Had we been at liberty to exercise our judgment, we would, for his sake, have cancelled that page entirely. As it is, it must go; but we do not wish to aggrevate the feelings it will too justly excite.

We most fully and cordially agree with our author in the following principles, viz: "To trust in God and do our duty, is the only ground of hope that we have or can have, or that we need have in regard to time future." But here again we differ widely, as will be seen from the tenor of the preceding remarks, in the application of this principle to the case before us.

The author's mode of carrying this prin

ciple into effect, is to accumulate large permanent funds, to establish numerous Scholarships, and to secure the return of the monies expended into the treasury, and to trust in God to keep those who are to manage this concern, for ages to come, faithful in employing the means already provided, to educate indigent pious young men for the ministry of the Gospel. Our mode of carrying the same principle into effect is, to collect all the money which the Christian public is able and willing to give for the purpose, to expend it immediately in educating youth of suitable character, who cannot get an education without such aid, and to send them forth as soon as possible; (for they are all now wanted), and to trust in God our Saviour to be with them, according to his promise, to make their labors successful in converting sinners, hoping that by thus increasing the number of the friends of the Lord Jesus, to gain more efficient strength than if we had now a million of dollars, bearing compound interest until the end of the world. We trust in God, that as nations and individuals are converted to God by means of those we send to preach salvation, they will lend a helping hand, and that the impression will be indelibly fixed on the minds of each succeeding generation of Christians, that the cause of Christ is in their hands; that they must work, and not rely on the funds left by their predecessors to convert the world. The author of the Strictures has given us a homily on the evils of riches, and the blessings of poverty, to a young man. We think he might also have given us an instructive lesson, confirmed by the experience of past ages, on the dangers of large funds laid up for sacred purposes.

We confess, that after all our kind friend has said to sooth our minds, we have still "fears ;" and if we may judge from words and actions, we would venture to say, our author has also "fears." But our fears arise from different causes. He seems to fear lest Christians of the next and following generations, will not be liberal; that the treasury of the Lord will be empty; and therefore he wishes to provide an accu. mulating fund to supply the deficiency, in case the Lord should not give future Christians benevolent hearts and liberal hands. We fear for this simple reason, lest the treasures of the A. E. Society, like the manna which the Israelites, who were unwilling to trust the Lord for their daily bread, hoarded up, should become corrupt. Exod. xvi. 20.

These are our general views on this subject. That there

are particular cases, in which it may be wise and necessary to establish permanent funds, we are ready to admit. The only question is, whether this is the case with regard to the A. E. Society. We think not, for the reasons already stated in a former part of these remarks. The organization of this Society is such, that such funds would be peculiarly liable to perversion. They are in the hands, as before remarked, of every casual majority at any annual meeting. The temptation to abuse the trust, also, is peculiarly strong; ten fold greater than in any mere literary institution, or even theological Seminary. This Society, were its views and wishes. realized, could sway the church nearly at will, and mould our ministry at pleasure. The influence which it already possesses, it is next to impossible not to exercise. We know that it is exercised by the friends and officers of its tributaries and branches; and that too, decidedly and actively. We are willing, that every man should employ his influence to promote his own views. But we are not willing to see funds and power collected and concentrated, to be used by we know not who, and for purposes it may be, and in all probability will be, hostile to the wishes of the donors of these funds, and givers of this power. We know not any one Society, in whose hands permanent funds would be so unsafe. Not from the character of its members, but from the nature of its organization, and the extent and character of its influence. These are our deliberate convictions, and it is our right and duty to express them.

The question, therefore, whether in any particular case, permanent funds are desirable, depends upon a variety of circumstances, and no general sweeping rule can be given. Our author's argumentum ad hominem on this subject, we do not feel, (p. 595). Admitting that there are some theological Seminaries, whose organization is peculiarly insecure, it does not prove that all are so. Besides, there is a vast difference, between an institution under a body, which must take its character, from that of the great majority of the Presbyterian Church; and a Society which eleven party men may seize and maintain; and which possesses a power, presenting the strongest possible temptation to abuse. All that our author has said on the insufficiency of creeds and confessions to secure the General Assembly, is very wide of the mark. We pretend to believe in no magic potency in such formularies; nor do we maintain that the whole church