and were disquieted or broken, ovvλaohσera, until they believed and became "heirs of the righteousness which is by faith." The latter clause of the text refers to the second advent of Jesus, who then "will come as a thief in the night," to take vengeance upon all those ungodly men who look on the things of this world with ease and satisfaction-who have their eyes bent on earthly desires, and carnal expectations-placing no heavenly confidence in the Saviour who redeemed them-but, leaning on an arm of flesh, they endeavour to forget God, the Saviour, the Redeemed One. Then it is that Christ the anointed is wrathful against them: the vengeance of the Almighty comes upon them, (like a rock tumbling from on high,) and Xukμnoe shall consume or crush them in a moment of time, in the midst of their vanities! This, Mr. Editor, is what I consider the obvious meaning of this most awful passage-a passage, which I think, if rightly considered by the deluded Romanist, would teach him to place less confidence in his Priest, his prayers, his penances, his confessions, and his Church. But it applies equally to that professing Protestant who thinks that his salvation is to be purchased by his outward demeanor, his moral character, and his strict observance of the rites and ceremonies of the Church of which he forms a member.

Believe me, Mr. Editor, your humble Servant,

C. M. O.

ON THE PUNCTUATION OF THE SCRIPTURES.

TIT. iii. 8.-1 TIM. i. 13.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE CHRISTIAN EXAMINER.

MR. EXAMINER-I take the liberty of offering to your consideration a few remarks relative to the "punctuation" of the Sacred Scriptures. This, I conceive, is but too little attended to by the generality of readers. It is on all hands admitted, that it is not of divine authority; but few are aware of the great difference a wrong punctuation may cause in the meaning of a passage in the Bible, and how much it may prevent us from discovering "the mind of the Spirit." It would be needless in the present case to multiply examples; suffice it to quote two, a positive and a negative, which, as it appears to me, are erroneously printed in our common Bibles.

The former occurs in Titus iii. S. All the editions of the Bible that I have consulted, except Bagster's Polyglott, have only a comma after the word "constantly," which, I conceive, materially alters the sense of the passage before us; reading it thus, St. Paul is exhorting Titus to "affirm constantly" the necessity of good works. This indeed is advice worthy of the Apostle; but, as the word translated "that" is iva in the original, and not ori, it seems very plain, that, instead of a "comma" after " constantly," there should be a semicolon, and then the true meaning

would be preserved in the translation. St. Paul evidently exhorts Titus to affirm constantly the "faithful saying worthy of all men to be received," which he had spoken of in the three preceding verses; and this (iva) to the end that the natural, the invariable effect of faith in this doctrine, may be “seen and read” of all men. The whole passage would therefore stand thus :—

"But after that the kindness and great love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, (not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost, which he shed on us abundantly, through Jesus Christ our Saviour,) that being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life. This is a faithful saying, and those things I will that thou affirm constantly; to the end that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works."

The other error to which I would call your attention, and which might be termed negative, is the want of a parenthesis in 1 Tim. i. 18. The Apostle, speaking there of his sin and wickedness before his conversion, declares that he "was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious, (but," says he, "I obtained mercy,) because I did it ignorantly and in unbelief." Without the parenthesis, he would seem to mean that he obtained mercy because of his ignorance and unbelief. This would appear strange doctrine, and contrary to the proportion or analogy of faith, as well as to experience; but regarding the verse with a parenthesis, all seems clear and correct: he was injurious because of his ignorance and unbelief; these last are the top of the climax, and deservedly so. It appears further, from the context, that this is the correct view of the subject; for Paul by no means seems to excuse his blasphemies and persecutions—he is magnifying the "exceeding abundant grace of Christ" in pardoning such a sinner as he was; and can we suppose him to sum up all by an excuse? His ignorance, too, was without excuse, as he lived in the golden age of Christianity; and if, as some have ingeniously supposed, he was one of "those of Cilicia" that disputed with Stephen, who could not "resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spake," his unbelief was equally inexcusable. Having said so much, Mr. Examiner, I beg leave to subscribe myself, Your very obedient Servant,

X.

BAGSTER'S COMPREHENSIVE BIBLE.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE CHRISTIAN EXAMINER.

SIR,-The interest which every one must feel in Bagster's Bible, and my own firm conviction that it is beyond all comparison, the most valuable edition of the Bible which has yet appeared in our language, induce me to urge through your pages the immediate necessity of correcting an error of the very grossest nature in the Introduction-an error which cannot be attributed to the

printer, and would afford a most malignant triumph to the enemies of the Reformation. In page 80 of the Introduction, No. 31. we find "Gregory Nyssen," called "the author of the Nicene Creed.” A creed drawn up by the Council of Nicæa before Gregory was born!!! How would Dr. Doyle glory in this blunder committed at this enlightened period by a Protestant publisher of the Bible. I have noticed a few errors in other places, viz. Rom. xvi. 4. " gave" instead of "give"-and at page 1304. 1 Peter iv. in the heading, instead of 1 Peter v.* These are of slight importance, and some such must have found their way into so great and arduous an undertaking; but the error in the Introduction is of a different character, and should be cancelled without delay, as it tends to throw a doubt and suspicion on the whole of that part of the Work. R. H. N.

MISCELLANEOUS COMMUNICATIONS.

ON THE POOR LAWS.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE CHRISTIAN EXAMINER.

SIR,-I confess that I felt some surprise at seeing an article in one of your late Numbers, as also another in that for August last, recommending the adoption of the poor law system in this country. I have been long used to think that this system has operated most prejudicially in England, and also in Scotland; which opinion has been confirmed by a residence, during a great part of the last year in England, where I had some opportunity of observing the state of the poor, and also of conversing with individuals who could inform me, from their own experience, as to the results of this arrangement upon the state of society generally. I have also read with some attention the 2d and 3d volumes of Dr. Chalmers on Civic Economy, in which he handles this subject somewhat fully, and to my satisfaction at least, seems to have proved with his usual force of demonstration, that the temporal circumstances of the labouring classes, and not only these, but their moral character and habits also, have sustained a most serious and alarming injury from this well meant, but as I feel compelled, with the leave of your two correspondents, still to call it, most ill-judged act of legisla tion in former times. The Poor Laws injure the poor in their temporal circumstances by making them still poorer; and they injure them in their moral character and habits, by making them feel that that character and those habits are no longer necessary to procure for them employment, and consequent maintenance.

To the above errors we would add the omission of the word "sent," in Num. xxii. 10.; and the reading of "about" for "above," in 2 Cor. xii. 2.

EDIT.

The poor rates make them poorer, by sealing up fountains of supply for their need, far more abundant than the one which they profess to open. Those fountains, the simple appointments of an All-Wise Providence which has ordained that "the poor shall never cease out of the land," are principally these four-1st, the economic and industrious habits of the labouring classes themselves-2dly, the supply which would be yielded by the best able to earn in families to their own more helpless relatives, toward whom as far as they can, they should be left to shew piety and natural affection, instead of being encouraged to throw a burthen, which is properly theirs, either upon the state or upon the church-3rdly, the innumerable small supplies which the poorest even of the working classes can, and, as we see in Ireland, do, when not interfered with by injudicious laws, afford to one another, that the comparative abundance of one, at any particular time, should meet the need of the other; like as when the manna, which the Israelites gathered in the wilderness of old came to be measured, he that gathered much had nothing over, and he that gathered little had no lack.-4thly, as the more shewy, but, as I apprehend, of all the scantiest and the least efficacious source of relief to the poor taken collectively-the donations of the rich- would flow in to meet extreme cases as they might present themselves, the moment that it was felt by the benevolent rich that they could no longer say to applicants for their assistance go and make your case known to those who are bound officially to take cognizance of it, and, if you are properly entitled to it, to relieve you." Again, the poor are rendered poorer by the poor laws, because the effect of those laws upon the labour market is to sink the wages of labour beyond the level which it would otherwise find. This is undeniable. The laziest and the most improvident among the labouring classes would be, of course, the first to throw themselves upon the parish officers, and they must be relieved somehow by them when they need it, no matter what be the cause (at least I believe this is the almost general and unavoidable practice where there are poor rates at all); backed by which relief, they could now afford to take lower wages for their work than the independent labourer: the consequence of which is, that the latter, according to the price of the necessaries of life, which is ordinarily regulated by the wages of labour, particularly if he should happen to have a family to support, cannot maintain any longer his independence and live. The dire necessity of circumstances imposed on him by this enactment, whereby he cannot now get the full value for his labour, forces him to become a pauper, and to knock, however indignant and blushing, at the door of the poor-house to save his family from starving.

66

Further, the poor laws hold out to paupers an inconvenient inducement to remain as fixtures upon their native spot, instead of seeking to relieve themselves, and the perhaps overstocked labour market, by emigration. Here, then, they continue, and probably marry, whereby also they obtain the privilege of making a further and a still heavier demand npon the parish officer. Their children, for the same cause, remain where they are; and thus

they tread more and more upon the heels of one another in the labour market, and reduce its wages still lower: whereby again the number of names on the list for relief will be increased still more, and the amount of the weekly assistance which each will require will be swelled in the same proportion. And thus I fear that the operation of the poor laws in England has already almost entirely abolished, among the working classes, that description of perhaps sturdy, but honest and independent peasants and artisans, who were once the pride and the bulwark of the country, and of whose characteristics the mischievous effects of poor laws has now perhaps left us little but the sturdiness to boast of. A modern labourer in England, so have the laws in question unhappily shaped his character, cares for nobody, not even for his employer; because he well knows, that however drunken, or debauched, or dishonest, or idle, or insolent he may be, his employer has no alternative but either to continue to keep him as he is, or to bear a share of the burden-perhaps a principal share-of supporting him, at the expense of the parish, in idleness. The operation of the poor laws, deeply as it has deteriorated the temporal circumstances of the lower classes, has, it is to be feared, still more deteriorated their morals: First, by presenting an immediate, and, for human nature, a too strong temptation (as is unquestionable) to abandon their habits of prudent economy and forethought, they have proved the means, I fear, to an awful extent, of plunging that class of the community into a course of dissipation and extravagance from which happier and less artificial circumstances of society would have protected them; but from which, now that they are, alas! initiated into them, it may be difficult, if not impossible, to reclaim them. Under existing arrangements, they are too well aware, that spend their money as they may choose to do, whether in drink, or in gaming, or in dress, or in any other way, when they present themselves as paupers before the officers of the parish, they must, not as a matter of bounty, but of right, obtain the necessary relief. Now human nature being what it actually and universally is, earthly, sensual, and devilish, what in practice, under these circumstances, and unchecked by any better principles, which they have never learnt, as too often is the case, the bulk of the operative population will become, it is not a matter of any difficulty to calculate. Again, what will become of the domestic character and virtues, under this arrangement, which virtually and effectually render it unnecessary that parents should maintain their helpless children, or children their helpless parents; or that any, in short, should "shew piety at home?"—which leads parents to regard their children as a charge rather upon the parish than upon themselves, and children to regard their aged parents rather as the proper inmates of the parish work-house, or alms-house, than as objects for them to honour and make requital to? What, I would ask any person acquainted with facts, and with the real present circumstances of society in England-what has tended so sadly to destroy what Mr. Anderson calls the "domestic constitution" in the humbler walks of life in VOL. VI.

2 T