ready alluded to, were so presumptuous as to publish their respective versions of the scriptures, or any portion of them, with a view or expectation, (such as was evidently entertained by Mr. C., in giving his new version to the world,) thereby to supersede that which has been, and continues to be, in general use, the result has proved how greatly they were mistaken in their calculations. Still, Mr. C., although professedly a mere compiler, has not been disappointed in his expectations, at least, to the same extent. How is this to be accounted for? The translators alluded to, for the most part, at least, were persons of candor, piety, and impartiality, who had no sectarian or party views to accomplish-no selfish or ambitious schemes in view. They did not, therefore, strive to make the scriptures speak a language different from their true meaning, and such as would seem to discover some easier way to heaven. They were willing to rest the claims of their respective translations to the patronage of the Christian public, upon their intrinsict value. And the consequence has been, that however highly some of these translations may have been esteemed as a valuable acquisition to a library, no attempt has ever been made to adopt them, or any one of them, instead of that version which has been so long approved.

But Mr. C. has wisely, (as it regards his own interest and the promotion of his sinister designs,) identified the claims of his patched version, with his system of divinity, or rather his system of errors, which may well be compared to a coat of many colors, and made up of many patches, some of which are indeed very old, and long since were considered to have been worn out, and others are of a more recent fabrication, which, by a bold misnomer, he calls the "ancient gospel." The consequence has been, that whilst the great body, not only of profess ing Christians of every evangelical sect, but also of men of intelligence and candor in our country, who make no profession of religion, have set their seal of decided reprobation upon the new version, of the " Bishop of Bethany," all his converts or proselytes, as a matter of

course, receive it as containing the lively oracles of God. And when it is considered that he boasts of his 150,000 followers, (the most, if not all of whom, we may conclude, have become purchasers of his New Testament,) and the increasing progress of what he calls the cause of reform, it cannot but be perceived what a strong temptation was presented to his cupidity, in undertaking to furnish a new version. The facts and circumstances from which it was, and still is inferred, that he yielded to the temptation, and that a desire to make money was one of his governing motives in giving to the world his New Testament, I shall now distinctly present to view. Whether they will prove as convincing to my readers, as they evidently did to a great majority of the hearers, yet remains to be seen. The principal, or leading fact, from which the inference just stated was drawn, was, that whilst in defence of his new version, and in justification of his own conduct in reference to its publication, he labored to produce a conviction in the minds of the audience, that the old version was very defective and erroneous; and that the cause of truth and the salvation of perishing men, called loudly for a new version, such as his. He had been careful to secure "the copy right" to himself, according to the provisions of an act of Congress, in that case made and provided. And further, that not content with the profits of his first, he had continued to hold on to the same right in the publication of his second edition. From which it evidently appeared, that however important to the cause of truth, and the salvation of souls, he deemed his version of the New Testament to be, still he would rather that truth should suffer injury, and souls perish "for lack of knowledge," than that he should lose his profits upon the work. What would have been thought, and what would not have been said, and that too by Mr. C. himself, had the translators of the Bible, under the reign of king James, used similar means to line their pockets as a reward for their labors? This strong fact, which was brought out in full relief to public view, seemed to be quite unexpected by the

propagated against the American Bible Society, as well as the other benevolent institutions which exist in our country; but also to the fact, that he, as well as many of his followers, seize with greediness every occasion that is presented, to disparage and bring into disrepute, the old version; and especially by affixing thereto the appel lation of "the king's translation," and to the learned and pious men, who executed the work with such unparalleled fidelity and ability, that of the " king's translators." He well knows how to take advantage of the prejudice which exists in the minds of the free-born sons of the United States, against that which savors of monarchy, and especially that of Great Britain, by which we, or our fathers, were once oppressed. But however well founded or commendable this prejudice, in regard to politics or government, Mr. C. cannot but be well aware, that no substantial objection can be raised against the old version, because it was prepared, not only under the reign, but the immediate direction of a king. If this were indeed a just cause for such objection, it might with equal force be alleged against the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament into Greek, (which was made some two centuries before the birth of our Saviour, and which appears to have been the version of the Old Testament scriptures, that was uniformly quoted by him, as well as his apostles,) for this translation was made by seventy learned Jews, in pursuance of the direction or command of one of the kings of Egypt. What then, it is asked, can be the mo tive of Mr. C. in thus laboring to lessen the estimation in which the old version is held, by the people of these United States, if it be not to promote the sale of his own wares, and thereby to increase his stores?

In detailing the series of proof, relied upon to show the deception practised upon the public by Mr. C., in the publication of his new version, the reader is, in the first place, referred to the title page of the work. This may well be compared to a false sign hung out at the door of a house of entertainment, with a view to draw in customers. It is well known that the great mass of such as

would be most likely to purchase this new version, belong to that class of readers, who are guided in forming a judgment concerning the books they purchase, by the title they bear. Of this Mr. C. could not but be well aware, and he knew as well how to turn it to his advantage. The title page, therefore, of his version, informs his readers, that it was "translated from the original Greek, by George Campbell, James M'Knight, and Philip Doddridge, Doctors of the Church of Scotland;" when in fact Dr. D. was an English Dissenter and a Congregationalist, or Independent, in principle, and in all his ecclesiastical connection. Here we are at once - met with a misrepresentation, which thousands of the readers of the new version, would not be possessed of sufficient information to correct. And the only excuse offered by Mr. C., (found under the head of Errata, or mistakes, in his 2d edition at the close of the volume,) is, that "since the publication of the first edition, he had learned that P. Doddridge, D. D., was not a Presbyterian, but a Congregationalist, or a Doctor amongst the English Independents." Upon this pitiful excuse for a misrepresentation of a fact, which when properly considered, will, it is believed, justly affix disgrace to the author of the new version, it is very obvious to remark, that the Bishop of Bethany finds himself in a dilemma. That his veracity and integrity may not be impugned, he is willing, nay desirous, that his readers should believe him to be very ignorant, notwithstanding his high pretensions. But admitting that Mr. C.'s knowledge of men and things, is not so extensive or so accurate as many would suppose, and his loud sounding pretensions would imply, can it after all be believed, that he really did not know, when he published his first edition, that Philip Doddridge never was a Doctor of the church of Scotland? Bishop of Bethany, a native of Ireland, and educated at one of the colleges or universities of Scotland, and conversant with the writings of Philip Doddridge, and yet not know that he was neither a Scotsman, nor a Doctor of the Church of Scotland! The question will arise in

The