its re-publication. He found upon inquiry, that the Editor of the former volume was contemplating a new edition of the Greek Article: he rejoiced in the intelligence, and was well content to leave it in his hands; but in the mean time that learned person was informed of the steps that had been taken, and subsequently made a proposal to the present Editor to undertake the task of revision. The proposal was acceded to, and the result is now before the public.

The Editor has been favoured with a few additional observations which the learned Author had left in MS. These are carefully preserved in the present volume, as well as one or two references by Archdeacon Bonney, which are distinguished by his initials, H. K. B. The Editor's own additions are similarly distinguished by J. S. These last are neither many nor important: by some perhaps they will be thought too numerous, by others possibly too few: the Editor has no plea to urge for indulgence from the former; and with respect to the latter he has only to say, that he cannot bring himself over to the principle of burying an author under his editor. His object was to put Bishop Middleton's work within the reach of those who needed it, and not to produce a new work of his own.

Some indeed have complained of the dimensions of the original work, as being out of all proportion to the magnitude of the subject; and it is not to be denied that the book is enlarged to a size somewhat appalling by the addition of numerous annotations amounting almost to essays, not immediately connected with the Doctrine of the Article: for example, that on Hebrews ii. 6. These notes, perhaps without exception, are very valuable in themselves; but they a little interfere with the unity of the subject, and have mainly contributed to form the ground of complaint in question.

With respect to the merits of the work as a whole, I cannot persuade myself that any competent judge can read it without a thorough conviction of the soundness of its general principle. A difference of opinion may exist on some of its minute ramifications, as well as on some of the applications of it in detail in the second part of the volume;, but I have read nothing on the subject that has led me to doubt the accuracy of the Bishop's hypothesis. The work at its first appearance excited great attention, and was examined with a keen inclination to condemn by those who were compelled tacitly to acknowledge, how formidable an attack it made on the strong holds of Soci

nianism. It will not be thought very strange that by some of these it should have been discovered, that Bishop Middleton knew nothing about the Article! His work however has been better appreciated by the bulk of Scholars and theological Students; and the demand which has long been made for it is the best criterion of its excellency.

Cambridge, Jan. 1, 1828.

J. S.

The Reader is earnestly requested to correct the following

error:

Page 64. line 2. for opposition read apposition.

THE satisfaction, which usually attends the termination of a literary labour, is, in the present instance, greatly increased by the opportunity afforded me of publicly stating the obligations, which I owe to a Patron and Friend. The day, which first recommended me to your notice, is distinguished in the annals of my life. Your nice and inflexible regard to integrity, your accurate estimate of mental powers, and your almost intuitive knowledge of character, confer honour on those, who in any, even the lowest, degree possess

your favourable opinion: but when I reflect, that endowed with these qualities you selected me to discharge a trust, the most momentous which man can delegate, allowing largely, as I ought to do in such a case, for the fallibility of human judgment, I cannot but feel the value of your preference, I cannot repress emotions of self-complacency and pride.

But not merely for the gratification of my vanity am I indebted to your kindness; I have to acknowledge substantial benefits. You have smoothed the path of my future life; you have supplied incitements to diligence; you have facilitated my exertions, whatever be the end, to which they may hereafter be directed; you have placed me in a situation, in which indolence might sink into repose, and in which, if activity fail of its reward, defeat may find consolation.

And yet, Sir, the retrospect cannot be contemplated without deep regret. Of the two excellent young men, whose minds it became my duty to cultivate, one is now no more: the wound inflicted

* HENRY GEORGE PRETYMAN died of a decline on the 16th October, 1807, having just completed his 17th year: his remains are deposited in Bristol Cathedral on the North side of the Altar in the ensuing autumn he would have proceeded