Having given this brief and imperfect historical sketch, I shall subjoin specimens of the rare versions mentioned, that the reader may compare them. I shall for this purpose take two verses of the 18th psalm, simply because I have no copy of Sternhold and Hopkins before me; and this is the only part of that version which I now retain in memory. But first, the passage in the common translation may properly be transcribed. Psalm xviii. 9, 10—“ He bowed the heavens also and came down, and darkness was under his feet. And he rode upon a cherub, and did fly; yea, he did fly upon the wings of the wind."

Rouse's version. 9. He also bowed down the heavens,
And thence he did descend;

And thickest clouds of darkness did

Under his feet attend.

10. And he upon a cherub rode,

And thereon he did fly;

Yea on the swift wings of the wind
His flight was from on high.

4

Barton's version. 9. The Almighty Lord the heavens bowed,
And downward did descend:

Beneath his feet a sable cloud

Of darkness did extend:

10. A cherub-chariot did him bear,
Whose plumes he made his sail;

The winds his winged coursers were,
And darkness was his vail.

5

Ford's version. 9. The heavens, when their Lord came down,
Did in an humble posture bend;

And for the footcloth of his throne,
Vast darkness did itself extend.
10. His steed a glorious cherub was,
Whose wings did swiftly him convey;
As swiftly as the winds do pass,

When through the air they force their way.

6

Tate & Brady's 9. He left the beauteous realms of light,

version.

Psalterium Americanuт.

Whilst heaven bow'd down its awful head;
Beneath his feet substantial night,
Was like a sable carpet spread.

10. The chariot of the King of kings,
Which active troops of angels drew;
On a strong tempest's rapid wings,
With most amazing swiftness flew.

7

9. The heavens also he bowed down,
And he made his descent;

A cloudy darkness then there was
Under his feet displayed;

10. Upon cherub then he rode,
And flew with wondrous wings,
Yea he flew swiftly on the wings
Of the spirituous wind.

8

Watts' version. 9. He bow'd his ear to my complaint,

C. M.

Then did his grace appear divine.

10. With speed he flew to my relief,
As on a cherub's wing he rode;

10. He rides upon the winged wind,
And angels in array

In millions wait to know his mind,
And swift as flames obey.

9

Davis' version. 9. He bow'd the heavens, and as he past

Darkness beneath his feet he cast

10. He left the heaven of his abode,

And on a cherub swiftly rode.

"The reader my compare these several versions with the common translation, and judge for himself in which the sense is given with the greatest precision. The conclusion, if I am not greatly mistaken, will be this, that to turn the

psa's into metre, however bald and limping, it is unavoidabl o add words to which there is nothing correspondent in original. And surely he that can adopt, for his own use, one of these versifications, ought not to cry out against those who prefer the others, as corrupters of the word of G in this part of his worship. Let every man be fully pei "aded in his own mind; and let no one judge his brother, nor throw an occasion of stumbling in his brother's way. The history of Church-psalmody, if it would be fully and fairly given, would at once cure all the prejudices which are entertained on this subject. God has been worshipped acceptably in Hebrew psalms, the rhyme and tunes of which are now utterly unknown; in Greek and Latin hymns; in psalms turned into the metres of English, Dutch, French, Indian, Hindoosthanee, and a hundred other languages; and in the various versions which we have seen that our ancestors used in other ages. How utterly improper is it then to break the communion of the churches, on account of differences as to the version to be used in public worship."

For several of the above extracts, distinguished by the quotation marks, without the name of an author, I am indebted to the Evangelical and Literary Magazine, published in Richmond, Virginia. In one opinion, however, I am constrained to differ with this judicious writer, as I am too well aware of the strength of prejudice, on this subject, to hope that any history-any argument-or any degree of moral swasion will at once cure all, or ever cure some of the prejudices which are so fondly cherished on this subject.

I apprehend that none of our American versions ever obtained much popularity. The last one by Davis, has some very fine scintillations; but not enough to recommend it to general use. Three of the English versions obtained considerable popularity, and some parts of Sternhold and Hopkins, notwithstanding it was allowed to be obsolete in the time of the Westminster Assembly, will perhaps never be excelled. Tate and Brady's has also its excellencies; but that by Rouse had the advantage of being supported by the higher powers, and prevailed over all its rivals. Indeed, some psalms of this version I do not expect ever to see improved by any other. The meaning of the prose is conveyed with accuracy, with energy, and with taste; but that cannot be justly said of all.

sly

The great object of Mr. M'M. in his book, profedly is peace; and to effect this very desirable end, he zea seeks a point, where the jarring parties may meet incord; where they may ungird their armour, forget their animosities, and unite for a while in a song of praise to God their Saviour.” At last, the wonderful discovery is ma small as the point is, his eagle-eye has descried it his eager grasp has seized it. Now indeed the accents of peace, and love, and meekness, and candour, and harmony, and union, are all flowing, if not from his heart, at least from his pen, and our attention is called with enthusiasm to this point of union and concord. But what is this discovery-this point of union? It is this; do you believe and say and do, as I believe and say and do, and we shall be all friendship, and harmony, and peace. In other words, do you adopt as a part of your creed and practice, as a part of your doctrine and worship, the version of psalms by Rouse, and no other, and all will be well. Mr. M'Master, however, appears rather indignant at the imputa tion of contending for Rouse's, or any other version. He says, "Yet, Dr. E. whether I will or not, will have the Apology' to be no more than a defence of Rouse's poetry!" P. 177. "I have said, the dispute is not about versions: this should be kept in recollection. Let us have what justly merits the name of a version, and the contest shall end. We ought, indeed, to select the best. We believe that used in the church of Scotland, in the Associate and Reformed Presbyterian churches, is the best. We do not say it is perfect; it is susceptible of improvement, as the version of the Bible is; but we have none better; we have no other one so good," p. 77. “Boswell, the friend of Johnson, who gave stability to our language, was a man of talent and of taste: he, too, gives his testimony in favour of this version, as the best extant. Take his own words-I am well satisfied that the version used in Scotland is, upon the whole, the best; and that it is in vain to think of having a better." " I certainly do not wish to imitate our author, in imputing to my opponent sentiments which he disavows; but I have a right to notice the inconsistency and tergiversation, which abounds on this part of the subject. If the question is not about versions, what is the meaning of all the above language, and much more of the

same character. "We believe it is best" 66 we have none better" no other one so good"-"it is in vain to think of having a better," &c. &c. And what are we to think, when this language is compared, or rather contrasted, with the following, We do not say it is perfect"—“it is susceptible of improvement"—"it is not so perfect as to preclude improvement, " &c. &c. Our author can see very clearly the inconsistency of Dr. Ely, in admitting the imperfections of Watts, and still employing his poetry: but he can see nothing inconsistent in his own language or conduct. If the reader can see with him, he will have the felicity to exercise a very accommodating faculty indeed. See Apol. pp. 18, 60, 61, 76, 77, 157.

If my own opinions, about versions, were of any importance, I would say, as already said, that some parts of the paraphrase of Rouse will never be much improved, attempt it who may; but, besides the defective poetry, some other parts are certainly not a true representation of the sentiments or facts of the original. The first verse of the first psalm, and the fourth verse of the sixty-ninth, have frequently been given, with some others, as an unauthorised construction of, or addition to the original. In Ps. cvi. 19, we have a glaring error in matter of fact. The prose says, "They made a calf in Horeb, and worshipped the molten image." The version of Rouse says,

"Upon the hill of Horeb they,
An idol calf did frame:"

6.6

This is utterly inconsistent, not only with the original, and with the translation, but with the history. The hill was fenced around-none dared to touch it, and when Moses and Joshua came to the people who worshipped the idol, they had to descend from the hill for that purpose. Here our author might be interrogated, as he does with respect to Watts, Is a smooth line of poetry, though containing a false statement, of more importance than the truth of God's word.” But while it is no difficult matter to find faults, in any of the versions we have, it is also easy to find excellencies, and this, in my opinion, would justify a selection from the different versions extant; and probably one of the most effectual measures to procure the best possible version, would be to make a selection of this character, proceeding from the first psalm to the last in order.