bours, and of his death. We have every reason to believe, that they did not die there with him.

In our second volume, page 328, our readers will find a notice of Mr. Kay's preaching in that quarter, and of a society which had been formed by him. This gentleman is a countryman of Dr. Priestley's, and was formerly minister of a congregation in Hindley, Lancashire. We extract part of a letter from him to a friend in Liverpool, which gives an interesting account of his situation and labours. It is copied from The Christian Reflector, a periodical work, conducted by Unitarians in the last mentioned city. The date of the letter is Oct. 1, 1822.

"My diocese (if I may use such a dignified expression,) extends to the distance of fifty miles, and includes many places much nearer. I may indeed say, 'that a great and effectual door is opened, and there are many adversaries!' The opposition I have met with, since I came to this place, has been of such a nature, as would have silenced me, had I not been fully satisfied that I was serving the cause of truth, and promoting the best interests of my fellow creatures. Here I stand alone. Not a single minister in the whole of this district to support my hands. Every pulpit resounds with the cry of heresy; and the press has been employed to assist the pulpit, in crying down the blasphemous, soul-destroying doctrines, as they term the pure principles of the gospel. In the midst of this opposition I go on, and have the satisfaction to witness the rapid, and to me, unexampled spread of our views of Christian truth. To give you some idea of the extent of the excitement that has taken place, I will just state to you the places at which I preach, either sta

tedly or occasionally, with their distances from Northumberland, which I call my head quarters.

"Sunbury, two miles, County Town of Northumberland County. New Berlin, ten miles, County Town of Union County. Lewisburgh, eight miles. Chilis

quaque, nine miles. Pennsborough, twenty-seven

miles. Milton, twelve miles. Muncey, thirty miles. Mont Lewis, fifty miles, the summit of one of the Alleghany Mountains. Bloomsbury, twenty miles. Catawissa, twenty miles. Danville, eleven miles, County Town of Columbia. In all these places there are now Unitarians."

New-York Unitarian Book Society.

We have received the Annual Report of this Society, including their Rules, and Catalogues of their Library and Tracts. The library, considering the short time. which has been spent in its collection, is very respectable, both in regard to the number and value of its books. It contains nearly twelve hundred volumes The Society also possess a large number of excellent tracts, which are for sale. We congratulate them on their flourishing condition, and have no doubt, that with their present zeal, they will continue to prosper.

The concerns of the Society are managed by a committee of five, who are, for this year, E. Townsend, Daniel Stanton, James Fox; Henry D. Sewall, Treasu rer, and B. Armitage, Jr. Librarian.

A second Letter from W. P. on the Conversion of the Jews, has Deen omitted for want of room. It will appear in our next number.

Bramunical Arguments against the Trinity.

A PROMISE was given in our last number, at the conclusion of the article headed Bramuns and Missionaries, that a particular account should be presented to our readers of the arguments alleged in the Bramunical Magazine against the doctrine of the Trinity It cannot but be interesting to observe how the learned natives of India reason upon a doctrine which has been so much agitated among Christians; and how far their objections to it coincide with those which have been urged by Unitarians. The controversy is novel in its complexion, and of singular importance from the inferences which may be drawn from it, and the consequences by which it may be followed. It will give us some idea of the minds and attainments of one cast, at least, of a people, with whom the eastern missionaries have now to do; and may lead us to form some conjectures with regard to the reception of a religion so incumbered with mystery as that is, which those gentlemen inculcate. It may also, in connexion with other

existing circumstances, justify us in arguing success to those views, which we regard as true Christianity.

In the second number of the Bramunical Magazine, a writer proposed five questions, or difficulties, on the subject of the Trinity, with a request that they might be answered. They are as follows. Referring to the missionaries, he says,

"They call Jesus Christ the son of God, and the very God. How can the Son be the very Father?

"They sometimes call Jesus Christ the son of man, and yet say no man was his father.

"They say that God is one, and yet say that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God.

"They say that God must be worshipped in spirit, and yet they worship Jesus Christ as very God, although he is possessed of a material body.

"They say that the Son is of the same essence and existence as the ather, and they also say that the Son is equal to the Father. But how can equality subsist except between objects possessed of different essences and existences?"

These difficulties were answered in a partial manner, and in the English language alone, in the Friend of India, a periodical work conducted by the missionaries. The native who proposed them, after expressing his disappointment at not being favoured with an answer both in the English and Bengalee languages, "as the controversy in question," he says, "is intended by both parties chiefly for the benefit of the Hindoo community, and secondarily for the use of Europeans," proceeds with his reply, in the third number of the Bramunical Magazine. This reply occupies the whole of the number, consisting of twenty-four pages of English, and as many of Rengalee, printed opposite to each other. Some of the arguments, as might be expected, are not so forcible as others; but we think that

our readers will agree with us, that when the novelty of this controversy is considered, and the little preparation from study which a Hindoo could have received, the reasoning is in every way remarkably acute and sound.

The first question is one, which it was very natural for a native to put. He reasons with himself thus. If the Father is God, and the Son is God, and there is but one God, why then the Son is the Father. But how can the son be the very father? Of course the missionaries answer this objection in the usual way. But let us hear the account of the Hindoo.

"As to my first question proposed in the Magazine in the following words, "They call Jesus Christ the Son of God, and the very God. How can the son be the very father?' the Editor denies the accuracy of the information on which I found this question, and firmly asserts that 'the Bible no where says that the Son is the Father.' I therefore deem it necessary to show my reason for the above query, leaving it to the public to pronounce on the justifiableness of it, either in their conversation, or religious publications.

"Christian teachers profess that God is one, and that Jesus Christ is the son of God, and the very God. Hence I naturally concluded that they believe the Son to be the Father, and consequently questioned the reasonableness of such a doctrine. For when a person affirms that such a one, say James, is one, and that John is his son, and again says that John is actually James, we should naturally conclude that he means that John the son is James the father, and be at liberty to ask, how can John the son be James the father? But as the Editor, a leading minister of that religion, declares that 'the Bible no where says that the Son is the Father, but says that the Son is equal to the Father in nature and essence, and distinct in person,' and recommends me to reflect on mankind, of whom 'every son, who has not the same human nature with his father, must be a monster,' it would be too much boldness on my part to give preference to my apprehension of the meaning of the Bible over that of the Editor. 1 would therefore have admitted, as suggested by the Editor, that the Son of God is God, on the analogy, and in the sense, that the son of a man is a man, had I not been compelled by his very suggestion to