Considering that Dr. Balch derived his information from oral tradition, its accuracy is a matter of wonder, though his opportunities of learning the facts which he records were unusually good. "My wife," he writes to Dr. Green, " is a great grand daughter of Col. Ninian Beall, who laid the foundation of the Presbyterian church in Marlborough, and was one of the most active members in building it up. Moreover, my father-in-law, Col. George Beall, who died lately in the seventy-third year of his age, and who, in the male line, was grand son of Col. Ninian Beall, was well acquainted with some of the circumstances which I relate, and which you and Mr. Hazard wish to know."

Dr. Balch furnished two accounts of this interesting congregation; the one dated April 2d, 1793, and the other December 18th, 1810, neither, therefore, written during his second childhood, as Dr. Hill conjectures. The former, which is much shorter and more general than the other, does not present a single case of discrepance with the official records of the presbytery.* In his second communication,

We here insert all that part of this account which relates to the early history of this congregation. "In the reign of Charles II. king of Great Britain, a persecution was set on foot by the Episcopalians against the Presbyterians. This storm fell with great weight upon-[we cannot make out the word here]; many of them were burnt, drowned, hung, or otherwise tortured to death; others were compelled to leave their pleasant houses, their wives and children, and to take refuge in foreign climes. Of this latter class, was Col. Ninian Beall, a native of North Britain, who, for the sake of conscience, fled from his own land and nation, and fought for that liberty in Maryland which was denied him on the other side of the Atlantic. Some years after his arrival in Maryland, he made a purchase of several large tracts of land from the tribe of Piscataway Indians. On one of these tracts he laid out the town of Upper Marlborough, and there fixed his own residence. Remembering that he had a large number of relations at home, subjected to the same sufferings from which he had escaped, and now enjoying the sweets of religious and civil liberty, he wrote to his friends to come over to Maryland, and participate of his happiness, urging it upon them, at the same time, to bring with them a faithful minister of the gospel. They arrived some months afterwards, accompanied by the Rev. Mr. Taylor, their pastor. Col. Beall marked off a lot in Upper Marlborough for a meeting house and burying ground, containing about an acre and a half of land. A house for public worship was built, and the small but growing congregation were happy and thankful under the labours of their minister, when, lo! Mr. Taylor, to the great grief and consternation of his flock, was suddenly called into the invisible world. They lamented, for a time, this dark process of divine Providence; at last, however, they took courage, and made application to some of the presbyteries or synods in Scotland for another minister. Mr. Magill was sent over, and being by nature of a morose, sulky temper, he and the congregation soon differed and parted. The Rev. John Orme, a native of Derbyshire, was fixed on for their next pastor. He arrived at Upper Marlborough in 1719, and continued labouring among them with success until the year 1758, when he was removed from his charge by death."

Dr. Balch goes more into detail. After narrating particularly the manner of Col. Beall's escape from Scotland, he fixes his arrival in this country at about 1690, and that of his friends, to the number of at least two hundred, about 1700.* He calls Mr. Taylor, Mr. James Taylor, instead of Nathaniel, and Mr. Magill, Mr. Robert Magill. He also places the death of Mr. Taylor in 1703, whereas he was living in September, 1709. Such inaccuracies are precisely what might be expected from an attempt to be so particular in giving, from tradition, such minute circumstances. Instead of weakening, however, the credibility of his account, they rather confirm it, by showing that it is entirely independent of the official records, by which, as to all the essential points, it is so wonderfully confirmed. All the main facts, in Dr. Balch's statement, viz: that Mr. Taylor was the pastor of Marlborough before 1705, that he died early, that he was succeeded by Mr. Magill, and he by Mr. Orme, are sustained by the coincident statements of the minutes, in such a manner as to leave no doubt of their correctness.

With regard to Mr. John Boyd, who was ordained by the presbytery at the first meeting of which the records are extant, viz: that of 1706, Dr. Hill says, "Who he was and whence he came, we know not. Professor Hodge claims him as a Scotchman; but what credit is due to such claim's from our professor, or to such unpublished manuscripts of which he has had the exclusive privilege of culling from, we have already seen." p. 164. On the 6th page of the minutes, it is recorded: "A letter, presented by the people of Freehold, about the settlement of Mr. Boyd, is referred to the next meeting." And again, on the same page," ordered that Mr. Boyd shall supply, every third sabbath, at Wood

* Professor Hodge was inaccurate in stating 1690 instead of 1700 as the date of Mr. Taylor's arrival in this country. This mistake arose from his confusing the two accounts given by Dr. Balch. In the one he states that Col. Beall arrived 1690, and in the other, that his friends came some years after, without mentioning the year. Hence Mr. Hodge stated the time as about 1690. This mistake is of little consequence, as the only point of interest was to show that Mr. Taylor, was in this country before the organization of the presbytery in 1705.

†The mistakes and confusion as to names in the records and other manuscripts connected with the history of our church are exceeding numerous. The same name is often written several different ways. The Mr. John Boyd of the minutes is called first Samuel and then Robert Boyd by Dr. Woodhull. The man who appears on the minutes fifty times, as Mr. John Guild, suddenly appears for one occasion, as Mr. Jonathan Guile. We see too that the person whom Dr. Balch calls Col. Ninian Beall, Dr. Hill calls Col. Ninian Bell.

bridge, if they desire it, and the presbytery are to write to the people of Freehold, desiring there consent thereto." In the letter to certain ministers in Connecticut, by the presbytery, quoted at length by Dr. Hill, p. 89, it is said: We advised, that Mr. Boyd, minister at Freehold, should, if desired by the dissenting party, come and preach at Woodbridge, one Lord's day every three weeks." Dr. Hill, therefore, had the means of knowing at least that Mr. Boyd was minister of the Scotch congregation at Freehold; and if we are not misinformed, the following passage from the manuscript volume of Mr. Hazard has passed under his eye, though now forgotten: "The death of the Rev. John Boyd was announced to the presbytery in their present session (1709). He came to America from Scotland, and was the first pastor of the church at Freehold in New Jersey." Mr. Hazard's authority for this statement is, indeed, the same manuscript history of that church to which Mr. Hodge appealed. Though Dr. Hill does seem disposed to admit its testimony, its correspondence with the statement of the records of presbytery, as well as the source whence it was derived, place its authority on a perfectly satisfactory basis.*

After

The greater portion of the volume before us consists of a review of about ninety pages of the first part of Professor Hodge's History. Dr. Hill intimates his purpose to continue this review in the future numbers of his work. the exhibition which has just been made, we are satisfied the public will feel that they have no right to assume that the correctness of his representations is admitted, should they be allowed to pass uncontradicted. Any mistakes in Professor Hodge's work which he may detect and expose, we doubt not that gentleman will feel bound to acknowledge and correct. As yet there is but one such error, to the best of our knowledge or belief, which calls for such acknowledgement. It relates to the following passage in Mather's Magnalia. "Before the woful wars which broke forth in the three kingdoms, there were divers gentlemen in Scotland, who, being uneasy under the ecclesiastical burdens of the times, wrote over to New England their inquiries: Whether they might be there suffered freely to exercise their Presbyterian church government? And it was freely answered, that they might. Hereupon, they sent over an agent, who pitched

It was written in 1790 by the late Dr. John Woodhull, for many years the pastor of the church at Freehold,

upon a tract of land near the mouth of Merrimack river, whither they intended to transplant themselves. But, although they had so far proceeded in their voyage as to be half seas through, the manifold crosses they met withal made them give over their intentions; and the providence of God so ordered it, that some of those very gentlemen were afterwards the revivers of that well known Solemn League and Covenant which had so great an influence on the following circumstances of the nation. However, the number of those who did actually arrive in New England before 1640, has been computed at about 4,000; since which time, far more have gone out of the country than have come into it; and the God of heaven so smiled upon the plantations, while under an easy and equal government, that the designs of Christianity, in well formed churches, have been carried on so as no history can parallel it." We think the most obvious and natural interpretation of this passage is: that although the attempt of the Scotch Presbyterians to make a settlement at the mouth of the Merrimack river, was frustrated, yet the number of those Presbyterians who did actually arrive in New England before 1640, was about 4,000. We still think, that any reader would suppose the writer spoke of the Presbyterians, whom he had just mentioned. Dr. Hill, however, says that, upon a close inspection of the pas sage, it will be seen that Mather meant to say, that the number of settlers of all classes who arrived before 1640, was about four thousand. We believe that he is right in his explanation, though we doubt whether any inspection of the passage would ever have led us to that conclusion. We' find, however, the same statement in other writers who refer to Mather as their authority, and we therefore infer that Professor Hodge is wrong, and Dr. Hill is right as to this point. The reason why this latter explanation of the passage never occurred to Mr. Hodge, no doubt, is that the statement that only about four thousand emigrants arrived in New England before 1640, appeared incredible. And we think the estimate incorrect, for the following reasons: First, other writers of high authority estimate the number at more than twenty-one thousand; and, secondly, if it is true that from 1640 to near the close of the century, more people

* Dr. Hill, in the very note in which he corrects Professor Hodge's mistake, tells us, from Holmes, that in the two years, 1637 and 1638 alone, six thousand emigrants arrived.

left the country than came into it, how is it possible to account for the number of inhabitants known to be in New England about 1700? This number is estimated, even by those who had no disposition to swell the amount, at 120,000 in the three provinces of Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island, The natural increase of four thousand, under the most favourable circumstances, in a little more than sixty years, would not amount to one fourth of that number. But the circumstances of New England were not the most favourable to a rapid natural increase of the population. The sickness and hardships attendant on new settlements always retard more or less their progress; and several bloody wars with the Indians occurred during this period, which must have had no small influence in checking the advance of the population. How is it possible, then, that 4,000 emigrants could, with in the time specified, have furnished 120,000 people to New England, besides the numbers who settled upon Long Island and in New Jersey? And where is Dr. Hill to get the people whom he makes so numerous on both banks of the Delaware? The Puritans were a wonderful people, but they could not achieve impossibilities. We believe, therefore, that Dr. Mather is wrong in his calculations. The whole of Bancroft's twenty-one thousand is necessary to account for the subsequent population of the country. We have only to remark, in conclusion, that Professor Hodge's representation of the influence of Presbyterian sentiments in New England, rested only in a small degree upon his mistaken interpretation of Mather. That representation was founded on the explicit statements of the union of Presbyterians and Congregationalists in the New England churches, elsewhere given by Mather and Trumbull, and upon the nature of the ecclesiastical systems there adopted,

ART. III.-The Works of Lord Bacon. Edited by Basil Montague, Esq. London: William Pickering. 1838.

THE object of this article, is to exhibit the nature of the Logic taught by Aristotle, in his Organon, and the nature of the Method of Investigation taught by Bacon, in his Novum Organon. We have treated these two great subjects in con