like the mighty shade of Troy of his country's glory and independence, si-dextrá Defendi possent, etiam hắc defensa fu issent. I mention babe-sprinkling because the terms infant and baptism are not sufficiently precise on a question which carries the diligent inquirer into ecclesiastical antiquity, through ages and countries, where they have described such different persons and practices. Learned Padobaptists acknowledge this, though Padobaptism has been assisted not a little by such ambiguity, Here, however, I leave the question, now happily narrowed into the authority of tradition, in the hands of two disputants well prepared to exhaust the subject. Should they proceed in the discussion, it will, I trust, speedily become a collatio amica worthy to be classed with that of Limborch and Orobio, or Price and Priestley, displaying all the coolness which the subject seems, at first view, naturally to encourage. Yet, however it has happened, on no question has more unseemly warmth been frequently excited. That controversy has, indeed, abounded in "words that buru," as if arguments, like some combustibles, flamed most fiercely in the element of water. My learned kinsman will, I hope, allow me to take advantage of a priority, due only to a much earlier appearance on your pages, and henceforth to subscribe myself IGNOTUS-SENIOR. Grievous Expense of Law Proceedings, (From Edinburgh Review, No. LIV. pp. 356-358.) THE THE grievous expense of law proceedings has long been a theme of complaint among the vulgar; but they who are the best acquainted with the profession of the law, are best able to say (as they must if they speak the truth) that none of the complaints ever made upon this trite subject are in the least degree exaggerated. That a poor man cannot obtain justice, is quite obvious, at least that he cannot obtain it unless he finds some one to lend him the money without security, which is next to impossible; or to lend it him for a share of the property at stake which the law prohibits. But it is said that the poor may sue in formâ pauperis. To what does this privilege amount? First, it extends to those only who are not worth above five pounds besides their wearing ap parel; whereas a man may be worth much more, and yet be a great deal too poor to support a suit in Chaucery, But next suppose he is of the class of mere paupers; he obtains an exemption from the costs of stamps and counsel's fees and court fees; and we shall suppose that his counsel exerts himself to the utmost; that no time is lost by his special pleader's slowness or his counsel's laying aside his case, to make way for others upon which his opinion is requested with peculiar dispatch. What chance has he of an active and industrious attorney to serve this poor client, while he has rich ones on his hands, as he must have if he be an able practitioner and a man who will let no opportunity escape him? But this is not all-who is to pay for his witnesses ? Who is to advance him money for this most necessary expense, when it is known that he may gain his cause, and yet not have enough to pay it? This leads us to the much more grievous case of a man pre vailing and yet being nothing the better, nay, actually being a loser, by than that the recovery of a small debt, his contest. Nothing is more certain or the successful resistance of a small demand, is more costly than acquiescing in positive injustice. If, for example, a person is called upon by one he never saw or heard of to pay fifteen or twenty pounds, and refuses, and suffers an action to be brought against him; and if he gain, as it is to be presumed he will under such circumstances, he will, in all probability, lose more upon the whole than he would have done had he at once paid the sum unjustly demanded. No doubt he gains with costs, but the actual costs always considerably exceed the costs allowed; and in the case of small sums the excess is greater than the sum in dispute. We think it enough at present merely to broach this subject. It forms one of the most intolerable abuses known in the law; and no reform could be more wholesome than one directed to remedy it. The share which the Government bears of the blame does not come have it? Can these passages be other. under the head of extra costs, as all stamps are allowed in taxing; but those imposts are not the less objectionable upon other grounds. They are nevertheless favourites with weak rulers, and flatter some ridiculous popular prejudices. Since the publication of Mr. Bentham's work, no one has ever pretended to doubt their iniquity and gross impolicy. Mr. Rose one day, in Mr. Pitt's presence, took the author aside and informed him that they had read the pamphlet, that its reasoning was unanswerable, and that it was resolved there should be no more such taxes. Yet budget after budget has since been formed, inλoyos be, as Mr. Lindsey would as John's Gospel; after all, if OEds which those duties have made a part; have it, and God was wisdom,' God and Mr. Pitt himself was found to and wisdom must be the same. patronize them upon his return to office in 1804. in ver. 14, Mr. Lindsey must have read ' wisdom was (or was made, or became) Hesh; ο λόγος σάρξ ἐγένετο ; consequently God became flesh, and our point is carried." SIR, THE Nov. 10, 1817. HE writer of the letter from which an extract is given in your last Number (p. 601) is incorrect in stating that Mr. (now Dr.) Nares's "principal object in his book entitled Εις Θεός, Εις Μεσίτης, is to argue against the Plurality of Worlds, from the fatal consequence that would arise of the absurdity of the supposition, that the Creator of the worlds should go about dying for every set of his rebellious creatures." The real object of this work is, to shew that the philosophical notion of the Plurality of Worlds is not inconsistent with the language of the Holy Scriptures; that there is nothing in the expressions used by the sacred writers that necessarily limits their application to the human race; and that there are several passages which seem to imply that the whole universe of solar and planetary systems will be affected by Christ's sufferings. This mention of Dr. Nares induces me to make a few observations upon the following passage, taken from p. 116, of his Remarks upon the Improved Version of the New Testament (Second Edition): "If the Logos imply only wisdom, as Mr. Lindsey pretends, what are we to think of wisdom coming to its own, and its own receiving it not? What of John the Baptist not being that attribute of God? What of one attribute being the only-begotten or dearly-beloved, as the editors would Now From this it is evident either that Dr. Nares never read Lindsey's Observations on the Introduction of St. John's Gospel, or that he has completely forgotten them. Suffice it to remark, that Mr. Lindsey does not suppose the words & dex to mean in the beginning of Christ's ministry; consequently, the Doctor might have spared his note, p. 114: and if he wishes to know what we are to think of "wisdom coming to its own," &c. &c. he may consult any of the respectable advocates for the interpretation here ascribed to Lindsey. Dr. Nares states that " he has a high respect for Mr. L.'s character and consistency, but that he cannot bow down to him as a critic." How is he enabled to estimate the merits of Mr. L. in this respect? From the preceding extract, it would appear that he is unacquainted with Mr. L.'s writings, since in most of them the Proem of St. John's Gospel is explained, and the Doctor's objections fully obviated. I trust no apology is necessary for these remarks. Nares is generally considered a highly respectable writer. His statements receive an implicit assent from many. His errors are, therefore, the more pernicious. My aim in writing this is to guard the inquirer after truth against relying too much on his assertions. I con No. CCCXIX. cation to those offices which really guide the state, from those which are merely instrumental; or that some other and better tests may be put in their place. Letter to Sir Hercules Langriske, No. CCCXX. Methodist Electors. One of the Minutes of Conference, in 1707, deserves the attention of the Wesleians at the ensuing general elec Burke's Prediction of the Repeal of tion: it is to be feared that it is for the Test Act. The act called the Test Act itself, is, with regard to them, (Protestant Dissenters,) grown to be hardly any thing more than a dead letter. Whenever the Dissenters cease, by their conduct, to give any alarm to the government in church and state, I think it very probable that even this matter, rather disgustful than inconvenient to them, may be removed, or at least so modified as to distinguish the qualifi gotten. "Q. How may we prevent bribery at the ensuing election for Members of Parliament? A. 1. Largely shew the wickedness of thus selling our country in every society. 2. Do the same thing in private conversation. 3. Read every where the Word to a Freeholder,' and disperse it, as it were, with both hands. But observe, a voter may suffer his expenses to be borne, and not incur any blame." BIBLICAL CRITICISM. Notes on a few Passages of the Scriptures. November 25, 1817. GENESIS xlii. 6, Joseph's brethren-bowed down them selves," &c. According to the LXX. προσεκύνησαν κ. τ. λ.; the very same word which so frequently occurs, in the same connexion, in the New Testament, and which has been rendered by the ambiguous English verb, worship. Josephus, in his account of this interview, adds, nabws ε005 E51 αυτοίς. Exod. vii. 20. "all the waters that were in the river, were turned to blood." Eschylus (Prometh. Vinct., 811) attests the extraordinary sweetness of the water of the Nile, and calls this river εύποτον ρέος. xi. 2,-"let every man borrow," &c. In the LXX, airycarw. And thus, agreeably to the usage of ancient nations, Geddes, in his translation, has, ask; with which version, how ever, his note, in his C. R., is not quite consistent. xxxiii. 2, "I will send an angel before thee." Here Moses is addressed as the representative of the people of Israel. The angel I take to be Joshua. Geddes appears to have followed a totally unauthorized and improper reading-" before you.” Judges vi. 8, "the Lord sent prophet," &c. 11, -"there came an an gel of the Lord," &c. Perhaps the prophet and the angel, or messenger, were one and the same being. The course of the history, rather directs us to this opinion. Nothing is said, in ver. 21, to countenance the fancy that the angel vanished supernaturally from Gideon's sight. A miracle was indeed performed, to prove that he was an angel of Jehovah: but the miracle consisted in the sudden destruction of the sacrifice, by fire, and was not unlike to Elijah's, recorded in 1 Kings xviii. 33-39. Ps. cxxxvii. 3, -"they that carried us away captives." So, too, the French Genevan Bible, of 1805. The translation lately proposed,* is neither correct nor elegant. What English ear can receive such a clause as the following, "those who captivated us" ? 9, "dasheth thy little Mon. Repos. XII. p. 617. ones," &c. Harsh as are the language and the sentiment, criticism will not permit us to substitute any thing for them, at the hazard of violating all the rules of analogy and evidence. The original words cannot be fairly translated, "dash thy idols to the ground:" and the propriety and spirit of the two concluding verses would be destroyed by such an alteration. Besides, this part of the Psalm is not imprecatory, but prophetic: it represents, in exact and lively colours, an event hereafter to take place, and wonderfully accords with Isaiah's prediction, xiii. 16, of the same circumstance," their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes." See likewise ver. 18, of that chapter. Philip. ii. 5-11, -"in the form of God." Why should we conceive that an allusion is here intended, exclusively or specifically, to "the transfiguration on the mount;" when the phraseology was justified and illustrated by the whole series of our Saviour's miracles? the form of a servant." Here, again the allusion is general; agreeably to what our Lord himself says, Matt. xx. 28, "The Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister," and, in another passage, Luke xxii. 27, "I am among you as one that serveth." The form of a servant, is resemblance to a servant: the form of God, is resemblance to God. 46 &c. Given him a name," "that in the name," &c. The word name has no double sense in this paragraph, but signifies throughout it, "the mediatorial character of Jesus Christ;" to which effect is the clause "that every tongue should confess," &c. Concerning the doctrine of the final restitution of all men to virtue and to happiness, the passage before us is profoundly silent; every tongue and every knee signifying "the whole human race," Gentiles as well as Jews. N. * Mon. Repos. XII. p. 617. + Ib. AM obliged to your Correspondent A. X. [pp. 674, 675,] for bringing under review the subject of Epaphroditus. I will attempt to establish the facts stated in my Eccles. Researches, and I shall feel additional obligation, if he or any other of your readers will refute my statement. The right plan is to place before the reader, all that is said about him, from which we can draw any conclusion. And thus says our apostle, Philip. ii. 25, 66 I thought it necessary to send you Epaphroditus, my brother and fellowlabourer and fellow-soldier, your ambassador and minister to my wants, for he greatly longed after you all, and was full of anguish, because ye had heard that he was infirm, and indeed he was infirm, so as to be nigh unto death; but God had pity on him, and not on him only, but on me also, lest I should have sorrow upon sorrow; receive him, therefore, in the Lord with all joy, and hold such in estimation; because for the work of Christ he was near death, having hazarded his life to fill up the deficiency of your service toward me." Suetonius, Ch. 14-19, "Domitian condemned Epaphroditus, his Sehave assisted Nero in destroying himcretary, because he is supposed to Clement, a man of the most despicable self: and finally, his own cousin, Flav. inertness, he put to death, though he had as yet hardly laid down the Consulship." Dion Cassius, Lib. 77-14, death, with many others, Clement, "In this same year, Domitian put to the Consul, for the crime of impiety, institutions. Epaphroditus, a freedand for having embraced the Jewish man of Nero, whom he had before charge of not having supported Nero." banished, he then slew, under the In the beginning of his Antiquities, Josephus thus writes:-"There were some who, from their love to this sub ject, have encouraged me to undertake it, and especially Epaphroditus, a man who excels in every branch of literature; more particularly in the knowengaged in the management of imporledge of history; having been himself tant affairs, and experienced many vicissitudes of fortune: in all which he displayed a mind wonderfully powerful, and an inflexible adherence to virtue." Now my position is, that the Epaphroditus here spoken of is one and the same person: for he had the same name, was at the same time, was in the same place, and was marked by such peculiarities of character as are sufficient to prove his identity. The opinion of learned men is, that Josephus had published all his Works before the death of Domitian: but Photius, Biblioth. Cod. 33, has the following passage respecting Justus of Tiberias, the rival of Josephus. "Justus begins his history from Moses, and closes at the death of Agrippa, the seventh that ruled in the family of Herod, and the last that reigned over the Jews, who received his dominion under Claudius, had it augmented by Nero, and still more amply by Vespasian: he died in the third year of Trajan, where his history terminates." Josephus notices this history of Justus in his Life, and if it were not published before the third of Trajan, the remaining Works of Josephus, namely, his books against Appian must have been written at a later period. These books are dedicated to Epaphroditus, who, if the Secretary of Nero was put to death the fifteenth of Domitian, must have been another of the same name, contemporary with Trajan. Influenced by this reasoning, Grotius supposes that the Epaphroditus here meant was a procurator under Trajan. But history is quite silent respecting such a person, and his existence is a mere assumption to meet the dates given by Photius; which dates are set aside as false by Josephus himself. The Life of Josephus was originally a part of the Antiquities, being an Appendix to it, and composed and published at the same time with it. At the close of it, he bespeaks the indulgence of his readers for introducing a short Memoir of his own Life, and expressly states, that he concludes his Antiquities in the 13th of the reign of Domitian. In Section 65 he thus accosts Justus: "If you are confident that you have related these things better than any other writer, how came you not to bring your narrative before the public, while Vespasian and Titus, the generals-in-chief of the war, and while Agrippa and his kindred, men extensively acquainted with the literature of Greece, were yet among the living, for you withheld your History above twenty years, thus declining the testimony of all those who, from their own knowledge, were able to sanction its truth. But now, they being no more with us, you have ventured to publish it, as no longer liable to refutation." From this passage, connected with the date previously given by himself, it is evident, that in the 13th year of Domitian, Agrippa was not among the living, though it be evident also, that he survived the event of the Jewish War about twenty years. He must, therefore, have died about the middle of the reign of Do mitian. The books against Appian were composed after the Antiquities, and, as it appears, immediately so. And the interval between the 18th of Domtian and the close of his reign, namels, the space of three years was assuredly sufficient for their production. For learned beyond example as that work is, it required only the arrangement of the materials which the author had amassed while composing his Antiquities. Josephus spent about twenty years in the composition of the works dedicated to Epaphroditus; and he expressly declares, that he undertook that performance by the advice of his friend and patron. At that period, Epaphroditus was already distinguished by learning, integrity and pelitical wisdom, and this testimony necessarily refers him to the reign of Nero, in whose court, as Suetonius asserts, he flourished as a Secretary of State. From Suetonius and Dion Cassius it seems probable that Epaphroditus was a believer: for both these join his death with that of Clement, who suffered for his conversion. From Josephus we might also conclude that he was a convert to the Jewish institutions, as the gospel was then called. The Heathens who rejected Christianity, rejected also, with affected contempt, the true history of the Jews, and adopted with avidity the falsehoods propagated by Appian and others respecting their origin. Nor can we find a criterion by which we can ascertain with more probability the feelings of a Heathen respecting Christ, than the part he took with regard to the history of the Jews. All the enemies of Jesus adopted the |