a new heart, and a new spirit: to repent of sin, and believe the Gospel.

It may be further said, that without understanding the distinction in question, our need of the Holy Spirit, and the nature of his operations, cannot be rightly understood. We need the Holy Spirit, not to increase our natural ability; not to give us any new faculties, or natural powers; our difficulty on this subject lies, not in the want of faculties, but in the abuse of them. But we do need the influences of the Holy Spirit to overcome our moral inability, the natural aversion of our hearts to God, and to make us willing, in the day of His power-willing to use the faculties which God has given us in His service, and for His glory.

We only add, that the distinction here illustrated requires to be understood, since without it, it is impossible to refute the cavils of the captious, or to vindicate the ways of God to men. Not a few of those objections which are urged against God, and the claims of His Gospel, owe all their plausibility to a confounding of the distinction between natural and moral ability and inability. "I know thee, that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strewed; requiring more of your servants than they have any power to perform, and then punishing them for not fulfilling a requirement so unreasonable." Now what shall be said to objections such as these? How shall they be met and answered, but by recurring to the obvious distinction between natural and moral ability? God does not require of His creatures beyond what they have the natural ability, the capacity, the faculties to perform. He justly blames them, and will punish them unless they repent, not for failing to perform impossibilities, but for the perverseness of their hearts, and their voluntary rejection of His law and His Gospel.*

Since writing the above, we have received an additional pamphlet, on the same subject, in the form of a letter to Dr. Tyler, by the Rev. Ira Case, of Claremont, N. H. Mr. Case was formerly a pupil of Dr. Tyler, and speaks of himself as a young man; a fact which might be inferred from his letter, even if he had not stated it. He takes his venerable instructor to task without ceremony; charges him with preaching "absurdity and nonsense"-" intolerable nonsense;" and calls upon him to "blot out" no inconsiderable part of his discourse. And let your retraction," says he, "be as public as you have made your doctrine. Resolve never again, in the pulpit and from the press, to encourage, and strengthen, and justify the confidence of men in their own strength. Abandon for ever the practice of wielding this tremendously efficient instrument" (natural ability) "for inflating the self sufficiency of sinners." "The doctrine of your discourse may be wafted over the land, like thistle seed, on the wings of the wind; it may take its seat in every chair of theology in New England, or the world; it may issue forth its poisonous streams from

ART. VII.-REVIEW OF DR. LORD'S LETTER OF INQUIRY.

"A Letter of Inquiry to Ministers of the Gospel of all Denominations, on Slavery. By a NORTHERN PRESBYTER."

A LETTER bearing the above title has been published in Boston, and sent, more or less extensively, to those to whom it purports to be addressed. It is from a minister of New England, of learning, ability and elevated standing, who writes seriously, earnestly, under a deep impression of duty, and who is eminently worthy to be treated with respect and candid consideration. This letter appears in a pamphlet of some thirty-two octavo pages, and consists, almost entirely, of questions. These questions, nearly one hundred in all, remind one of a luxuriant, creeping vine, which, though springing from one root frequently strikes into the fruitful soil new roots, and sends out in every direction, so many far-reaching branches, all interlaced with each other, that it is difficult to tell whence they spring or where they terminate. The author has, however, arranged his questions in eleven classes, designed to present as many distinct phases of his subject. Although nothing is affirmed, yet the design of the writer manifestly is to maintain that Slavery is a divine institution, of great benefit to the world, which ought, particularly in this country, to be strongly supported and widely extended.

To treat each of these numerous questions in detail, would be a needlessly laborious work. We have aimed to ascertain the intention of the writer in each of his divisions, and shall state the same, as fairly as possible, in a corresponding number of distinct propositions, with the proofs adduced; which will

still more numerous pulpits, which shamelessly boast of their Calvinism, or their New England theology; it may cut the sinews of strength, and extinguish the very life of a multitude of churches; it may inflate the self-sufficiency of all who go about to establish their own righteousness; it may grieve the hearts of many, who deeply feel, and wish all to feel, that when they are weak, then are they strong." (pp. 15, 16, 28) And yet Mr. Case intimates, that if Dr. Tyler only means, that "sinners are able, but disinclined to obey the Divine commands," the very thing, certainly, that Dr. T. does mean, he could accept the statement.

We need say no more of this strange letter. If Mr. Case is to do much good in the world, he must reform not only his doctrine, but his manners. He must learn to treat his betters with more of courtesy and humility.

* Rev. Nathan Lord, D. D., President of Dartmouth College.

be carefully considered. To these propositions we will now attend in their order.

I. It ought to be seriously considered whether Slavery may not be of divine origin; and of course right in principle, notwithstanding any wrong use which has been made of it.

The distinction between a principle, or ordinance, and its abuses, is a fair one, which should always be carefully observed. The fact that the marriage relation, parental authority, and civil government, in the hands of wicked or misjudging men, are often sadly perverted, and attended with deplorable consequences, is no proof that they are not of divine origin and essential to the best state of the world. The Sabbath is by many made a day of sinful dissipation; but is still in itself a sacred and most precious institution. In like manner, the mere fact that many evil consequences result from Slavery, as generally practiced, does not prove that the system is fundamentally wrong; neither do any occasional good results prove that it is essentially right. But as its effects, morally considered, have generally been evil, it is but reasonable, in the absence of any positive proof to the contrary, to think that the thing in itself, cannot be right, and never was sanctioned by a God of infinite wisdom and goodness.

That marriage, parental and civil government, the Sabbath and the public worship of God, are divine institutions notwithstanding their abuses, is a matter of positive proof; and whoever maintains that Slavery is a divine ordinance, is bound to substantiate his position by evidences equally direct and convincing. It is a great question, on which the liberty and happiness of millions of our fellow men is suspended, and ought not to be decided hastily. If God has expressly authorized one part of the human family to enslave another part, they have an absolute right to do so, but without such authority the act must be utterly unjustifiable, and eminently criminal. Of this our author is aware; and accordingly addresses himself earnstly to the difficult work of proving that Slavery is indeed a divine institution-that God has established and approved of With what success we shall presently see.

it.

It must, however, in this place be observed, that one point of vital importance in discussing this subject, namely, in what sense the term Slavery is used, is strangely left undefined by this advocate of the system. But as his object evidently is to defend the institution which exists in this country, we may learn from the laws which have established it, and which regulate its administration, what it is. Judge Stroud, in his "Sketch of the laws relating to Slavery," remarks, "The car

dinal principle of Slavery, that the slave is not to be ranked among sentient beings, but among things, obtains as law in all these [slaveholding] States." The law of South Carolina thus lays down the principle, "Slaves should be deemed, held, taken, reputed and adjudged in law to be chattels personal in the hands of their owners and possessors, and their executors, administrators, and assigns, to all intents, constructions, and purposes whatsoever." In Louisiana, "A slave is one who is in the power of a master to whom he belongs; the master may sell him, dispose of his person, his industry and his labor; he can do nothing, possess nothing, nor acquire anything, but what must belong to his master." Slavery," says one great American Lexicographer, is "the state of entire subjection of one person to the will of another." It is to this state of absolute subjection then, in which the person of one, with all his capacities, powers, and possessions, is seized and held by another as his property, that the argument of the Northern Presbyter must be referred, for this is American Slavery. And he asserts,

II. That Slavery is an institution of God, according to natural religion.

Natural religion properly denotes that knowledge of the true God, and of our duty to him, which is, or may be, derived from a study of the works of nature, attended with conscientious endeavors to fulfill our obligations thus ascertained. That it is possible to obtain some true knowledge of God and of our duty to him from a contemplation of his works is evident from the Apostle's declaration, that "The invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead, so that they," the heathen who have not the light of divine revelation, "are without excuse." The infinite power, wisdom, and goodness of God, and his universal providence in supplying the wants of his creatures, of every order, may be learned by the light of nature, and consequently the duty of supreme love and reverence towards him and of kindness towards his creatures, because they are his, and in imitation of his own example. But how it can from the same premises be inferred that it is the will of God that one part of mankind should enslave another part-that they are religiously bound to do so-to an unsophisticated mind may well seem impossible. But our Presbyter, with characteristic honesty, states the train of thought which has led him to this conclusion.

He has observed that in God's providential government of this disordered system, frosts, mildews, earthquakes, and volca

noes, sickness, pain and death, are permitted and made subservient to important ends; that the weaker animals are subjected to the stronger, and given to them for their sustenance; and that all irrational animals are made subject to the dominion of man, to be used for his benefit without regard to their own convenience; he has furthermore seen that among men, while some are ignorant, weak, imprudent, vicious, savage, and in all respects degraded, others are cultivated, powerful, and in most respects decidedly their superiors; that ignorance and vice, left to their own tendency, go down to still deeper degra dation and wretchedness; and hence has been induced to think that it might be for the benefit of these degraded classes to be enslaved by the more powerful, and thus reduced to the necessity of practicing industry, of abandoning their barbarism, and of becoming more cultivated and conformed to the manners and customs of their superiors; that Slavery to them would be a reformatory institution; and hence concludes that it is the will of God, as gathered from the light of nature, that those who judged themselves competent should reduce their inferiors to a state of Slavery, with a view to their elevation and the general good of mankind-that it is their religious duty to do so! That the justice and mercy and all the perfections of God require that it should be done!

But what is all this but vague conjecture, without one particle of proof? How does it follow that because there are convulsions and calamities in the natural world there should be corresponding ones in the moral? that because stronger beasts devour the weaker, the stronger portion of mankind should act like beasts of prey towards their inferiors? or that the best mode of elevating and reforming the ignorant, imbecile, and vicious of our race is to enslave them? How does it appear from the light of nature that this course of severe oppression is better adapted to reform them, than one of manifest compassion and kindness, which should interfere with none of their rights, but leave them in the full enjoyment of rational liberty, with all its proper privileges? The Saviour surely made no reference to the duty of enslaving men, with a view to reform them. If that had been his method, it would have been appropriate to send forth strong companies of slave-catchers and traders, instead of a few peaceful disciples, among the benighted and degraded inhabitants of the earth, to evangelize and elevate them.

The essential difficulties and absurdities involved in the working of such a system are sufficient proof of its irrationality. For, by the mere light of nature, how is it possible to