after a long and painful affliction, died happy in God, Sep. 20, 1808, aged 56.

In his last illness, which lasted but a week, he was set at liberty by the Spirit of Him who came to deliver them who, through fear of death, were all their life in bondage. Nearly fifteen years ago, when he laboured under a heavy affliction, he begged of God to lengthen his days, as he did those of Hezekiah; and, had he survived till the following April, it would have been just 15 years. He chose for his funeral-text, Isaiah xliii. 1, last clause, I have called thee by thy name: thou art mine.' The Rev. Mr. Cooper improved his death from it; and, as some of his relations could not, on account of distance, attend at Chelmsford, at the request of his daughter, his death was attempted to be improved by J. Bain, pastor of the Baptist Church, Potter's Street, Harlow, Essex.

MRS. EDKINS,

at Warwick. During her residence at various places, she was held in estimation by the most respectable characters; but her natural diffidence and unassuming manners would not permit her to make any display of her piety; so that she was rather backward in talking of religion, except to her particular friends. Through the whole course of her life she exemplified the character of a real Christian, and that without bigotry or narrow attachment to party. No one was more strictly conscientious in every action and word she spoke, even in private; so that she sometimes did not do the best, thro' fear of doing wrong.

She employed her long confinement in preparing for eternity; and had a number of pious books close to her chair, that she might read and meditate on them.

She frequently said she had not a wish to live, if she was prepared to die; and her whole trust was in the mercy of God through Christ. For a year or two before her death, she was subject at times to spasms, and a gouty complaint in her stomach but was in general as well as she had been for the last six months, till the

with the greatest patience, and never was known to murmur at the afflictive dispensation, but was calmly resigned to the will of God.

She was daughter-in-law to the Jale Rev. Mr. Turner, of Abingdon, who married her mother when she was two years old, and ever proved a real father to her, and for whom she had always the greatest affection. With a truly paternal care he formed her mind to purity, virtue, and religion, so that she was pious from her early years; and, by divine grace, she persevered in that course through life. She mar ried early to a Mr. Flight, of Lon don, who died soon afterwards; and, several years afterwards, to a Mr. Edkins, then of that place. She was many years a member of Dr. Rippon's church, in which she continued till Mr. E. retired from a mercantile connection to Newbury, where they lived about 11 years, and afterwards fixed their residence

she was seized with them, and was in much pain; but the doctor having given her a draught that relieved, her, she went to bed composed, easy, and resigned, and desired not to be called till late next morning. Mr. Edkins went softly into the chamber soon after nine on the Monday morning, and she appeared asleep and breathing; but in going in again about ten, he found she bad breathed her last; so that she died, apparently, in her sleep. Thus this good woman obtained an easy dismission from Earth to Heaven. She has left behind, beside her husband, two amiable daughters with families. Edmonton.

W. W.

REV. JOHN HILL.

WAS born in London, in 1753. His parents belonged to the Established Church, in the principles of which he was instructed; but, tho' he attended regularly her worship,

and was strongly prejudiced in favour of her tenets, till he arrived at the age of 21, he was blind to the light of the glorious gospel.

was

At this time he providentially went into a chapel in CumberlandStreet, when Mr. Udiburg preaching an occasional sermon. Such were his prejudices in favour of gowns and bands, that he was shocked at the irreverence of the man being in the pulpit without them. Mr. Udiburg founded his discourse on Ezekiel xxxvi. relative to the valley of dry bones. Mr. Hill, in relating the impressions made by this discourse on his mind, shortly before his death, said, My self-righteous hopes were shaken. I saw myself a guilty sinner, and I was led to exercise confidence in the blood of atonement as the only ground of my hope. Often, during my life, has my faith in this blood been tried; but never could I for a moment trust to any thing else. In it I have rejoiced, and in it I now rejoice. God forbid that I should glory save in the cross of Christ!'

Continuing steadfast in his religi⚫ ous profession, he joined the church under the pastoral care of the late Mr. Towers; and, notwithstanding the opposition of his former friends, he was determined, in the strength of divine grace, to follow the Saviour through evil as well as through good report.

Some time after Mr. Hill's conversion, he began to enquire how he might best dispose of himself for the glory of God and the good of

men.

His attention was directed to the wretched state of the poor in workhouses; and here he first began to exercise his ministerial talents, till he was received into a new se-minary, formed under the tuition of Messrs. Barber, Brewer, and Kelio.

Having finished his studies, he first went to Preston, where he continued about one year, part of which time he preached at Elswick: hence he went to Haslington, where he laboured about three years: from hence he removed to Carlisle, where he preached for about the space of four years: hence he was called to Ravenstonedale.

This was the chief scene of Mr. Hill's labours. Here he preached the gospel of his Lord and Master for nearly 20 years, to a peaceable and pious people, who to the very last, bore to Mr. H. the warmest affection; and he tenderly loved them in return. His discourses here were made the mean of bringing many from darkness unto light. In summer Mr. H. preached three times on the Lord's Day; and, in winter, twice, and taught a sunday school between the services. Beside which, he endeavoured to spread the knowledge of his name in the adjacent villages of Dufden, Kerby, Seven, Temple, Sowerby, Dent, and Garsdale; in some of which places he was amply rewarded, by having souls for his hire.

For about two years before his death, he felt a very sensible decline in his strength; but, though his outward man was perishing, his inward man was renewed day by day.

On the Sabbath on which he died, one of his hearers asked him how he did. To whom he replied, 'All is well!

all is well! Whether I live or die, I have nothing to fear!! A little before he expired, he, with uncommon energy, exclaimed,' Frecious, precious, precious Christ!' His daughter was standing near his bed, to whom he said, "My dear (pointing his finger to Heaven) look up to that God who has brought me through many trials, and he will bring you thro' yours.' Then, taking Mrs. Hill by the hand, and raising his eyes up to leaven, he gently fell asleep in Jesus, on the 26th of Nov. 1809, in the 56th year of his age. Mr. Hill has left be-hind him a most destitute family, for the relief of whom, we hope, the friends of evangelical truth will be ready to contribute.

RECENT DEATH.

DIED of a consumption, at, the Bristol Hotwells, on Wednesday, the 11th of April, aged 32, Ms. Banister, wife of the Rev. John Banister, of Wareham, Dorset, and second daughter of the late Mr. John Lawis Baker, one of the managers of the Bristol Tabernacle.

The Judgment delivered, Dec. 11, 1809, by the Right Honourable Sir John Nicholl, Knt. LL. D. Official Principal of the Arches Court of Canterbury, upon the Admission of Articles, exhibited in a Cause of Office, promoted by KEMP against WICKES, Clerk, for refusing to bury an Infant Child of Two of his Parishioners, who had been baptized by a Dissenting Minister. Taken in Short-hand By Mr. Gurney. Price Is. Gd.

[Concluded from our last.]

Sir John adds, p. 36, 'It seems by no means proper, however, wholly to pass over the view which may be taken of this subject as affected by the Toleration Act. By that act, an important change was worked in the situation of his Ma. jesty's Protestant Dissenting Subjects; and the baptisms now administered by the Dissenting Ministers, stand upon very different grounds from those by mere laymen. There were many laws, both of church and state, requiring conformity to the church, creating dis. abilities, imposing penalties, and de.. nouncing excommunications upon all nonconformity. Now, supposing that, during the existence of these disabilities, it could be maintained that, in point of law, no act of nonconformists could be recognized in a court of justice, and therefore that a baptism administered by such persons could not be noticed at all, either by the church or by the courts administering the law of the church, yet, could it be maintained now that such a baptism was to be considered as a mere nullity? If such could have been considered as the view of the law before the Toleration Act, yet that act would change the whole shape of the thing: that act removed the disabilities; it allowed Protes tant Dissenters publicly to exercise their worship in their own way, under certain regulations: it legalized their ministers, it protected them against prosecutions for nonconformity.

The judge very candidly observe!, that Protestant Dissenters then, being allowed the exercise of their religion, being no longer liable to pains and penalties, their ministers lawfully exercising their functions, the rites of that body being allowed by the law, it can no longer be considered that any acts or rites performed by them, are such as the law cannot, in the due administration of it, take any notice whatever of; or that a baptism performed by them, when attended with what our own church admits to be the essentials of baptism, is still to be looked upon as a mere nullity; or that infants so baptized, are to be rejected from burial as persons unbaptized at all, or, in other words (though that has been disavowed by the counsel in the argument) as not being Christians; for the court finds it difficult not to concur with the learned counsel who spoke last, that unbaptized and not being Christians amount to pretty much the same thing.

Sir John next proceeds to consider the opinions of ecclesiastical writers on this subject, particularly Hooker, Fleetwood, Watson, and Wheatley; and combats the sentiments of the last as erroneous; for, W. says, all persons are supposed to die unbaptized, but those whose names the registers own:' on which he says, 'To what extent, to what

monstrous lengths would this go? No foreigners, no Catholics, no persons born in Protestant countries and dying here, could be buried according to the forms of the Church of England. He adds, That, in that case, ' none of his Majesty's Scots Presbyterian subjects could be buried here; no member of the Church of England, whose baptism has been by omission neglected to be registered in his parish,' &c. Such is the monstrous conclusion to which Mr. W.'s position leads, and which seems to have misled Mr. Wickes in the present affair!

Now it is quite obvious,' proceeds the judge, that in stating this, Mr. Wheatley is not explain ing the law, but he is making the law; and he is making it, not with the tolerant spirit of the Church of England, but with a considerable degree of intemperance and mistaken zeal. Does the Toleration Act, which allows Protestant Dissenleis to have separate places of worship, require them to have separate places of burial? No such thing. Is it consistent with the liberal spirit of toleration, that because their consciences will not allow them to join the church in the form of administering the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper (for they hold them to be the sacraments) therefore they may not join the church in the ceremo nies of marriage or burial? for they also hold those to be ceremonial only. Surely, this would be departing entirely from the principles of the Established Church. Its principle is, to bring over by conciliation, not force away by severity; to conciliate by indulgence, not to repel by persecution; to extend its pale, not to contract it by unnecessary exclusion.'

Sir John then asks, Is Mr. Wheatley's notion consistent with the principles of common justice and common equity? Dissenters are obliged by the Toleration Act itself, to pay their tithes, to pay church rates, to pay Easter offerings, and other dues, and to contribute to the support of the church and its ministers. Why are they to be excluded

from its rites as far as their consciences will allow them to partake in them?'

Sir John observes, that this case is important both to the interests of Dissenters and of the Church. To the former, that their right of church-burial should be established, that their baptisms should be recog nized, and should not be considered as aullities. He considers it also as important to the interest and digpity of the church, and especially interesting to the clergy who may be doubtful what the law is. He concludes with the following passage:

Upon the whole of the case, and for the reasons assigned, the court is of opinion, That the minister, in refusing to bury this child in the manner pleaded in the articles, has acted illegally. The suit is probably brought for the sake of deciding the question, rather than of punishing the individual. The minister may have acted, and, it is presumed, has acted from a sense of his public duty; for, upon his understanding of the law, it was his duty, and he was bound not to perform the service, which he might most willingly have performed if he had more correctly understood the law. The Court has, therefore, thought it proper to state its opinion, and the grounds of that opinion, the more fully, in the hope of setting the question at rest, and of putting an end to the suit. If the facts are truly stated, and the decision now given upon the law should be acquiesced in, it may reasonably be expected, from the spirit of candour which has been avowed on the part of the promoter, that he would be satisfied in correcting the error and in establishing the right, and that the suit might end here, and harmony be restored between these parties, each of them recollecting that, however they may differ upon certain points, either of doctrine or of ceremony, still they are both equally bound, by Christian charity, to dismis as quickly as possible from their minds all feelings of animosity, and to return to the exercise of mutual kindness. The Cout, upon

the grounds already stated, has no doubt at all in admitting these articles, and does admit them accordingly.'

Reasons for declining to become a Subscriber to the British and Foreign Bible Society. By Christ. Wordsworth, D. D. Dean and Rector of Bocking, and Domestic Chaplain to the Archbishop of Canterbury. Dated from Lambeth Palace. Second Edition, Price Is. A Letter to Dr. Wordsworth, in Reply to the above, by Lord Teignmouth, President of the Bible Society. 13.

A Letter to Dr. Wordsworth, also in Reply to the above, by the Rev. W. Dealtry, M. A. Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, and Examining Chaplain to the Bishop of

Brisiol. 1s.

THE first of these pamphlets belongs to that class of insigni. ficant publications, which, merely by receiving some degree of import ance from their bearing the name of a reputable author, are, in part, rescued from merited neglect and oblivion, the common destiny of productions which tend neither to admonish, interest, or inform its object plainly is to vilify the British and Foreign Bible Society, more particularly on account of the injury the author would represent, that it occasions to the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, which is connected exclusively with the Established Church. We find that it was written to a clerical friend, without any intention of pub licity; and that, probably, to him we are indebted for advising its publication.

Our readers will, we presume, consider with us, that an individual, who undertakes to criminate an Institution which has received support, to an extent almost unprecedented, from every description in society, morally respectable, from many of the highest characters in church and state, and which has been instrumental in dispensing the word of life to many thousands of our fellow-creatures, must either

submit to the charge of being blindly dogmatical or wantonly mischiev ous, or be fortified with arguments, which, by their wisdom, shall impress, and, by their novelty, astonish. We have, however, to console them with the persuasion, that, although these pages are remarkably indigent in Christian liberality, they are by no means chargeable with presenting any very dangerous intellectual hostility. To accomplish an undertaking of such responsibility, the Doctor has contented himself with vague generality and epistolary declamation. As if conscious that argument was quite extraneous to his business, his pamphlet scarcely furnishes any thing specific and tangible. We are then not to murmur, that even in that part of it in which he professes to offer in form an answer to an application to subscribe to the Society in question, he, at once, assumes the position disputed; and observes, "I am already a Member of the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge, and wish all others to be so likewise; and, therefore, the direct and baneful operation which the Bible Society has to interfere with, impede and curtail the inestimable interests of piety, peace, and true religion, commands me to withhold my hand,' &c. Page 9. Whether or not it has such direct and baneful operation, and at what points this operation is discernible, we must understand, it was entirely foreign to the Doctor's purpose to unfold; and that, in truth, he regarded the enquiry as unnecessary, is revealed in page 13; where he asserts, That this matter can need no proof. In fact, setting aside (as irrelevant when we are examining Reasons) all that is contaiued in this pamphlet, in the way of insinuation, censure, and lamentation, we may thus present the argument. There can be no propriety in a Churchman's subscribing to the Bible Society, since every object of utility which that Society professes to attain, is also included in the exertions of the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge, The purity of the source insures the healthiness of the streams; and the