their facility of reference. The Notes' contain illustrations of various points of geological inquiry, some of which have a decided bearing on Mr. Lyell's views. The paper on the Geographical Distribution of Organic Remains in the Oolitic Se'ries of England and France,' is excellently done; combining, in convenient space and form, facts and illustrations derived from authorities not always readily accessible. The 'Sections and Views' present, on forty plates, a large and valuable selection of diagrams, chiefly coloured, with succinct, but clear explanations. The study of this volume will do much towards preparing the student for the investigation of nature.

We have added to the present series of available works, the second edition of what may be called a grammar of Oryctology. In this well printed volume, Mr. Parkinson has comprised an extensive and well arranged variety of information on the subject of fossil organic remains; supplying to the learner, an easy and complete introductory manual, and to the well informed, a text-book of convenient reference. The graphic illustrations are copious and distinct.

We close these brief criticisms with a recommendation of mineralogy as an early study. The quick eye, the ready mind, the elastic step of youth, are all favourable to the investigation of natural phenomena; and impressions made while the memory is fresh and unlaboured, are vivid and permanent far beyond those of later years. There is a charm in these inquiries, arising from the peculiar qualities of their objects, their boundless variety of form, hue, character, and combinations, their delightful associations, and the mighty train of reasonings and results to which they lead. Nor can, humanly speaking, a better security be taken against the misemployment of time, than by such an early direction of the mind to a profitable and attractive pursuit.

Art. IX.-1. The Constitution of the Bible Society defended, in a Letter to the Hon. and Rev. Gerard T. Noel. By Joseph Fletcher, D.D. 8vo. 1s. 6d. London. 1831.

2. A Letter addressed to the Hon. and Rev. Baptist W. Noel, occasioned by his Statement and Illustration of certain great Principles of Áction, in the Speech delivered by him at the Anniversary of the British and Foreign Bible Society, May 4th, 1831. By Fiat Justitia. 8vo. Price 1s. London. 1831.

3. A Letter to T. Pell Platt, Esq. F.S.A.,_ Honorary Librarian to the British and Foreign Bible Society, in Reply to a Letter from that Gentleman. By the Rev. A. Brandram. 8vo. Price 6d. London. 1831.

4. Naval and Military Bible Society. The Speeches delivered at the Anniversary General Meeting held at Exeter Hall, on the 10th of May, 1831. 8vo. London.

5. Observations addressed to the Trinitarian Friends and Members of the Bible Society, comprehending the principal Arguments in Support of the Proposed Alteration in the Constitution of the Society. By a Clerical Member of the Provisional Committee, sometime Secretary to an Auxiliary Society. 8vo. 1831.

6. Conduct of the Committee of the British and Foreign Bible Society reviewed. By Robert Haldane, Esq. 8vo. London. 1831. TO the divisions and disorders which arose in the primitive

churches, how much are we indebted, as having furnished the occasion of some of the most important and eloquent portions of the Apostolic Scriptures! And to modern controversies within the Church, we owe some of the most valuable of uninspired compositions. Much as we regretted, at first, the renewed attack upon the constitution of the Bible Society, as coming from a quarter in which we have not been accustomed to look for adversaries, we begin to think that the exposition and defence of the grand principles of the Society, which it has called forth, will prove of so much lasting service, both to the Institution and to the cause of truth, as will more than compensate for the disturbance of harmony. Dr. Fletcher's Letter' alone would go far towards reconciling our minds to the occasion, unhappy in itself, which has elicited so luminous and powerful a vindication of the two Protestant principles upon which the Society is grounded; and we must indulge ourselves in citing somewhat copiously from his pages.

The controversy,' says Dr. F., which is now unhappily agitating the friends of the Bible Society, and causing the bitter waters of strife to spread in all directions, is of so momentous a character, and involves in its decision such important consequences, that it is incumbent on every supporter of that Society to defend, to the utmost of his power, the purity, simplicity, and integrity of its constitutional principles. Those principles appear, to my own mind, self-evident and incontrovertible. The recent attempt to introduce a test in the Bible Society, produced something like the effect which results from the startling paradoxes of scepticism, when it assails the settled assurances of the mind on those points of historic belief or moral conviction, which had been heretofore regarded as fixed and incontrovertible. I have always been accustomed to consider the constitution of the Bible Society as impregnable on two grounds: first, that it recognized the supreme and exclusive authority of the Scriptures; and, secondly, that it admitted the right of private judgement in matters of religion. These principles are the vital elements of Protestantism. They are no less essential to Christianity; and they are sustained by an accumulation of proof which gives to each and to both, the weight of moral demonstration.

In the first establishment of the Society, almost every objection brought against it, might have been resolved into an opposition to one or other of these principles. Its constitution was the object of virulent attack and most unrighteous misrepresentation; but whatever was the pretext of its opponents, all might have been reduced to the allegation, that its terms of admission were not exclusive, and that it presented its expanded portals for the reception of all, without exception, of every name and every clime, who professed to acknowledge the authority of the Holy Scriptures. The objection was itself the strongest argument in the Society's defence. It was its characteristic excellence, and the very crown of its glory, that it prescribed no preliminary inquiries, instituted no tests, and required no subscription to creeds and formularies. It therefore proposed no act of worship, or exercise of fellowship, which might so operate on the minds of the weak, the timorous, or the prejudiced, as to commit them unwittingly into an approbation of principles which they could not sanction, or a communion with persons whom they would be unwilling to recognize. Its projectors and first supporters were all, without exception, I believe, of what are termed evangelical principles, and, therefore, individually believers in the Holy Trinity. But their enlightened and comprehensive views went beyond all personal and sectarian considerations. They knew that the moment they selected any one principle of the great system in which they agreed, as the peculiar and distinguishing feature of their Society, there would be instantly introduced materials for debate. However they might have agreed in the abstract proposition, other principles, they knew, would be so associated, in different degrees and proportions, mixed up with more or less of error, that no single proposition would be a satisfactory guarantee for the prevention of what some would have been disposed to exclude. There was therefore no medium between a constitution altogether exclusive, and which would have confined the Society to a section of the Christian church, and a constitution of an unexclusive character. The one object aimed at, required no limitation; while the immense magnitude of the work to be achieved, and the prodigious expenditure that would be necessarily involved in its prosecution, demanded and justified universal co-operation. Thus the constitution was settled on a large and unrestricted basis. It disarmed intolerance, conciliated prejudice, and afforded the most scrupulous no ground of reasonable offence.' pp. 4—7.

Dr. Fletcher states it as his deliberate conviction, that, such being, unquestionably, the original Constitution of the Society, the Committee, as trustees, appointed to execute the provi'sions of a specific deed, agreed upon by the unanimous con'currence of thousands and tens of thousands of the friends of 'the Bible,'-ought never to have entertained at all the proposition to make so fundamental a change.

I feel warranted,' he says, 'in asserting, that the moment a member of the Committee introduced a question which directly tended to violate the constitution, it became that Committee to have put it down instanter, and ended at once all discussion. Complainants in these cir

4. Naval and Military Bible Society. The Speeches delivered at the Anniversary General Meeting held at Exeter Hall, on the 10th of May, 1831. 8vo. London.

5. Observations addressed to the Trinitarian Friends and Members of the Bible Society, comprehending the principal Arguments in Support of the Proposed Alteration in the Constitution of the Society. By a Clerical Member of the Provisional Committee, sometime Secretary to an Auxiliary Society. 8vo. 1831.

6. Conduct of the Committee of the British and Foreign Bible Society reviewed. By Robert Haldane, Esq. 8vo. London. 1831. TO the divisions and disorders which arose in the primitive

churches, how much are we indebted, as having furnished the occasion of some of the most important and eloquent portions of the Apostolic Scriptures! And to modern controversies within the Church, we owe some of the most valuable of uninspired compositions. Much as we regretted, at first, the renewed attack upon the constitution of the Bible Society, as coming from a quarter in which we have not been accustomed to look for adversaries, we begin to think that the exposition and defence of the grand principles of the Society, which it has called forth, will prove of so much lasting service, both to the Institution and to the cause of truth, as will more than compensate for the disturbance of harmony. Dr. Fletcher's Letter' alone would go far towards reconciling our minds to the occasion, unhappy in itself, which has elicited so luminous and powerful a vindication of the two Protestant principles upon which the Society is grounded; and we must indulge ourselves in citing somewhat copiously from his pages.

The controversy,' says Dr. F., which is now unhappily agitating the friends of the Bible Society, and causing the bitter waters of strife to spread in all directions, is of so momentous a character, and involves in its decision such important consequences, that it is incumbent on every supporter of that Society to defend, to the utmost of his power, the purity, simplicity, and integrity of its constitutional principles. Those principles appear, to my own mind, self-evident and incontrovertible. The recent attempt to introduce a test in the Bible Society, produced something like the effect which results from the startling paradoxes of scepticism, when it assails the settled assurances of the mind on those points of historic belief or moral conviction, which had been heretofore regarded as fixed and incontrovertible. I have always been accustomed to consider the constitution of the Bible Society as impregnable on two grounds: first, that it recognized the supreme and exclusive authority of the Scriptures; and, secondly, that it admitted the right of private judgement in matters of religion. These principles are the vital elements of Protestantism. They are no less essential to Christianity; and they are sustained by an accumulation of proof which gives to each and to both, the weight of moral demonstration.

In the first establishment of the Society, almost every objection brought against it, might have been resolved into an opposition to one or other of these principles. Its constitution was the object of virulent attack and most unrighteous misrepresentation; but whatever was the pretext of its opponents, all might have been reduced to the allegation, that its terms of admission were not exclusive, and that it presented its expanded portals for the reception of all, without exception, of every name and every clime, who professed to acknowledge the authority of the Holy Scriptures. The objection was itself the strongest argument in the Society's defence. It was its characteristic excellence, and the very crown of its glory, that it prescribed no preliminary inquiries, instituted no tests, and required no subscription to creeds and formularies. It therefore proposed no act of worship, or exercise of fellowship, which might so operate on the minds of the weak, the timorous, or the prejudiced, as to commit them unwittingly into an approbation of principles which they could not sanction, or a communion with persons whom they would be unwilling to recognize. Its projectors and first supporters were all, without exception, I believe, of what are termed evangelical principles, and, therefore, individually believers in the Holy Trinity. But their enlightened and comprehensive views went beyond all personal and sectarian considerations. They knew that the moment they selected any one principle of the great system in which they agreed, as the peculiar and distinguishing feature of their Society, there would be instantly introduced materials for debate. However they might have agreed in the abstract proposition, other principles, they knew, would be so associated, in different degrees and proportions, mixed up with more or less of error, that no single proposition would be a satisfactory guarantee for the prevention of what some would have been disposed to exclude. There was therefore no medium between a constitution altogether exclusive, and which would have confined the Society to a section of the Christian church, and a constitution of an unexclusive character. The one object aimed at, required no limitation; while the immense magnitude of the work to be achieved, and the prodigious expenditure that would be necessarily involved in its prosecution, demanded and justified universal co-operation. Thus the constitution was settled on a large and unrestricted basis. It disarmed intolerance, conciliated prejudice, and afforded the most scrupulous no ground of reasonable offence.' pp. 4-7.

6

Dr. Fletcher states it as his deliberate conviction, that, such being, unquestionably, the original Constitution of the Society, the Committee, as trustees, appointed to execute the provi'sions of a specific deed, agreed upon by the unanimous con'currence of thousands and tens of thousands of the friends of 'the Bible,'-ought never to have entertained at all the proposition to make so fundamental a change.

I feel warranted,' he says, 'in asserting, that the moment a member of the Committee introduced a question which directly tended to violate the constitution, it became that Committee to have put it down instanter, and ended at once all discussion. Complainants in these cir