has been holden by the Quakers, who, it seems, once caused a translation of it to be printed.

The Epistles of Paul to Seneca and of Seneca to Paul, which come next in order, are mentioned by no writers earlier than Jerome and Augustine, and it would be mere waste of words to enter into any argument to prove them a clumsy forgery.

We have next the "Acts of Paul and Thecla." This is mentioned by Tertullian as an apocryphal book, forged by a certain Presbyter of Asia, who, when convicted of the offence, alleged, in apology for himself, that he was influenced by no other motive than "affection for Paul," upon whom, as he seems to suppose, the book would reflect honor. Jerome, too, places it among the apocryphal books. This is sufficient evidence of the repute in which it was holden by the ancient Christians, who certainly never regarded it as sacred or canonical, though they may have believed some part of the narrative to have been founded in truth. The piece, as we have said, originally of no authority, and entitled to no respect, has, as the learned observe, been evidently interpolated, since it contains allusions to usages known not to have existed at the period to which its origin seems to be fairly attributed.

We have now done. The remainder of the volume consists of the writings attributed to the Apostolic Fathers, of which we have already spoken.

From the foregoing brief historical notices, it will appear, if we mistake not, that there is a broad and marked line of distinction between the writings admitted into the New Testament, and the mass which was left, as having no claim to be considered as sacred or canonical books. The latter class were either forgeries, or the productions of men who had no title to credit, and were known to be such, and as such were rejected by the generality of Christians, who were best qualified to judge of their pretensions; or they were the effusions of honest men, but of men who never claimed to be inspired, who were neither Apostles, nor wrote under the sanction and superintendence of Apostles, and whose works, therefore, admitting that we possess them in their original integrity, must be regarded as only the productions of private and fallible Christians.

That a multitude of books were forged, and attempted to

be palmed upon the world as the productions of the Apostles and Evangelists, affects not in the least the credit of their writings. They only prove the esteem in which those writings were generally holden, and thus in some sort afford evidence of the truth of Christianity. That they were detected to be forgeries, and as such treated with neglect or contempt, shows the care and discrimination used by the early Christians, in judging of the claims of the several productions which were from time to time sent abroad, under the hallowed names of the Apostles and first preachers of Christianity.

What happened to the writers of the several books of the New Testament has often happened to others. The same fate attended the early Fathers of the church. Writings were forged, and thrown into circulation, under sanction of their names, but those forgeries are not considered as in the smallest degree impairing the value of their acknowledged remains. The apologies of Justin, the Martyr, are just as precious now, as they would have been, had not the Epistle to Zenas, the Questions and Responses to the Orthodox, and other supposititious writings, been sent out in his name. Forgeries, too, were attempted under the name of Origen, in his own life time. But does that prove that he did not write the Books against Celsus, now found among his works, or tend in any manner to modify our opinion of their merits? Or, to take a more modern example, in what way is the genuine literature of the fifteenth century affected by the attempts of Chatterton, sixty or seventy years ago, to impose upon the public certain poems of his own manufacture, as the remains of Rowley? Just as much, and no more, than the credit of our present Gospels is affected by the forgeries of Seleucus, or whoever he was, who wrote the "Gospel of the Birth of Mary," or the "Protevangelion" of James. The genuineness of the poems ascribed to Rowley, we venture to say, may be defended by arguments quite as good, as can be brought in support of the Apostolic origin of these and other writings of the same class.

The compiler of the "Apocryphal Testament," who is evidently hostile to Christianity, designs to convey the impression, that the books now composing our New Testament were arbitrarily selected from a mass of writings possessing the same or similar claims to respect. This is the object of the prefatory notices to the several pieces, in

constructing which he has drawn largely on Jones, often taking from him whole sentences, or fragments of sentences, without acknowledgment. But these are so adroitly strung together, with the help of a little coloring, and a dexterous use of the arts of insinuation and suppression, that they can hardly fail to perplex and mislead the unlearned reader. Such disingenuous artifice requires to be exposed. We cannot too strongly protest against its use. It is difficult to believe that any real lover of truth can ever resort to it. Such wisdom cometh not from above.

ART. II. Dermot Mac Morrogh, or the Conquest of Ireland; an Historical Tale of the Twelfth Century. In four Cantos. By JOHN QUINCY ADAMS. Boston. Carter, Hendee, & Co. 1832. 8vo. pp. 108.

THE best and wisest of mortals are liable to mistakes. We have too much respect for truth to consider this Tale as any thing better than a mistake, and too much respect for its author, to treat it as any thing worse. It is an error of the head, or of the press, but not of the heart. If it had not been the production of one, lately president of these United States, it would not have been noticed as it has been. If one large edition of it had not been exhausted, and another called for, we should not have noticed it ourselves. As it is, we feel obliged to express our opinion of it, which we shall do in a few words.

The poetry of this "Historical Tale," is not very good, nor very bad, but, we are bound to say, very indifferent. The rhymes are tolerably correct. The flow of the verse is, with now and then a serious interruption, even and regular. But if the reader looks for any sparklings in the river, any wellings up from deep fountains, any striking thoughts, or beautiful images, or signs of what is termed poetical inspiration, he will look in vain. The Tale consists of four cantos. Curiosity carried us through the first, a sense of duty through the remaining three. Though we were not sorry that we had finished it, yet the prevailing impression which it left upon our mind was that of regret, the kind of regret which every one feels, when an unadvised step, which will inevi

tably be attacked and misinterpreted and ridiculed, has been taken by a friend.

The morality of this "Historical Tale" is negative, if there be such a thing as negative morality. We ought rather to say, that, with regard to morality, or moral influence, the Tale is negative. Charges have been made against its character in this respect, but we are convinced they are without foundation. That it was written with a good and moral intention, we have no doubt; and so far as a knowledge of this the writer's purpose produces any effect, the effect is good. But the Tale itself is neither moral nor immoral. There are, it is true, some passages in it which we should not like to read aloud to a lady; and so there are in many excellent books and poems. But there is nothing in it which we should be sorry to have a lady read to herself. If any one, after an unprejudiced perusal, should think. that there was a stanza in it which could be of the least injury or advantage to the morals of man, woman, or child, we should be astonished at the opinion. There is nothing exciting in it, one way or the other. Its principal deficiency is not want of good morals, but of good poetry and good taste. The chief objection we should have to the reading aloud of this" Historical Tale," with the exception of those few passages, would be, that we should much prefer to read something else.

It is said that this Tale has a political meaning. Whether it has or has not, is a question which we shall leave to be settled by others, as it is one in which we feel no interest ourselves.

We will now extract one or two stanzas which we consider to be among the best in this publication. The second of the two following has some force.

"For sturdy Becket, Canterbury's saint,

Had turned the realm of Albion upside down :
Because, regardless of his just complaint,
And in defiance of the triple crown,

Henry had dared the primate's rights to taint;
And cast his mitre's bold pretensions down:
And at some pageant (who can give it credence?)
To York's archbishop had assigned precedence.
"Oh! love of place; is there in earth's wide span,
To sway the human heart, a fiercer passion;

Saint Becket was a meek and humble man;
To prayer devoted as was then the fashion
And whensoever into sin he ran,

Prepared himself smartly to lay the lash on. But sooner than resign one inch of place, In ruin would have sunk the human race. -pp. 49, 50. Here is a pretty strong character of the Augustine friars. "In Dermot's time they were a potent order;

Whose vows of poverty, large wealth repaid;
Whose vows of chastity, cost much disorder:
And of obedience, princes of them made.
O'er every hill and valley, plain and border

Of Christendom they drove their gainful trade:
And soon received from Innocent the Third

Powers to crush heresies, and preach the word."-p. 59. This Historical Tale" will be circulated, not only at home, but abroad, as the production of one of our presidents. We are sorry for this, because it will give him no reputation any where. Happily, his name is united with higher associations, and his fame rests on a worthier and more durable basis. We respect him as an upright and religious man. As a diplomatist and statesman, though not as a poet, he has gained for himself an honorable place in the history of our country; and as a diplomatist and statesman he will be remembered, when this "Historical Tale" shall be, as its hero himself has long been, by the kindness of posterity, forgotten.

ART. III. Argument against the Manufacture of Ardent Spirits. Addressed to the Distiller and the Furnisher of the Materials. By Rev. EDWARD HITCHCOCK. Tract No. 242 of the American Tract Society.

We wish to call the attention of our readers, at this time, to a single branch of the temperance question, viz. the production and sale of ardent spirits as a drink. We think the period has arrived, when a free and full discussion of this point is necessary. The evils resulting from the moderate, the misery and crime consequent upon the immoderate use