it, and hence seem to care as little. They seem contented to live and die, in total uncertainty whether they shall exist after death, or what shall be the nature of that existence. The wild ranting extravagances of Messrs Beman and Finney, would never be heard of, if men showed they were rationally and Scripturally interested respecting the life to come. It is the excess of indifference perceived about this, which naturally leads to their excess of extravagance. Were we obliged to choose one of these excesses, we should prefer the latter. The wild ranting excesses of these men may do some good, but this cold hearted, stupid indifference can do none. If there is to be a future life, and the Bible reveals all we can know upon this subject, those men act most of the two, like rational beings respecting it. Their wild extravagances arise from mistaken views of Scripture, but this indifference proceeds from a disbelief of all divine revelation. No man who believes that the Bible reveals a future life, can be indifferent about what it says on the subject.

The author of the following Essays, fondly hopes, that what he has written, is in some measure calculated to remedy both these evils. The views advanced in the First Essay, lays the axe to the root of all such wild extravagances. If his sentiments, are on examination found Scriptural, and were they universally believed, it would be easier to get up a crusade, than a modern religious excitement. But, if he sweeps away in the First Essay, the whole

ground of the ranting enthusiast, the views advanced in the Second, are calculated to excite every sober, thinking mind, to the subject of a future immortal existence. He trusts, that there future life to man, is placed on a solid, rational, and the only Scriptural foundation. In this he thinks all Christians will concur. In his Third Essay, a number of texts generally quoted in favor of future punishment, are considered. These texts, may be called the cups and balls, by which ranting enthusiasts impose on the public. They are the constant themes on which such preachers love to dwell, and by means of which, a plausible appearance is given to their wild harangues. It will be seen, that these very texts, are Mr. Hudson's principal proofs for a future judgment and retribution. But if his views of them are correct, he is inexcusable, if he does not preach on the subject of his limited punishment, and even with a degree of wild particularity. If it be true, he cannot do too much, in alarming men as to their perilous condition. But we have always understood, that believers in this doctrine, seldom preach on such a subject. We should think then it was not worth while to write about it. We seriously maintain, that if either the doctrine of endless or limited punishment be taught in the Bible, the advocates of these systems, ought, like Messrs Beman and Finney, to prove they believe them, by rousing all to a sense of their danger.

The investigations in these Essays, were undertaken for the author's own personal satisfaction, without any view to immediate publication. When he wrote his two Inquiries, his investigations then led him to suspect, that limited punishment after death, could no more be defended from the Bible, than endless punishment. But, wishing to examine this subject more attentively, little or nothing was said, for or against this question. Besides, he knew that a diversity of opinion prevailed among Universalists, and hence avoided agitating this disputed point. Even now, he had no desire to intrude his opinions on the world. But Mr. Hudson has come forward in the defence of a future retribution, in a series of Letters addressed to Mr. Ballou, in which I and others receive a share of his attention. As Mr. Ballou declined replying to these Letters, this duty next devolved on me, from having the next greatest portion of his castigation. Let all then bear me witness, that I have neither provoked, nor sought a controversy with Mr. Hudson. He ought to be held responsible for its consequences. If he was so anxious to discuss the question of a future retribution, this could have been done, to better effect in ascertaining truth, than by the mode he has adopted. Some suspect that his object was, to have a hit at Mr. Ballou, rather than love for the truth at issue. I most sincerely wish for his own sake, that he had cut off all occasion for such a suspicion.

I am surprised that his prudence did not dictate to him a different course.

When Mr. Hudson's Letters appeared, the substance of my Three Essays was written. It so happened, that all the texts which he quotes in favor of his views, I had considered, with only one or two exceptions, and on these he does not place much dependance. To avoid as much as possible the appearance of a controversy, we have deemed it best, to let the Three Essays remain pretty much as we had written them.. All his texts are considered, and the pages in his Letters are referred to, that our readers may compare what we have respectfully written upon them, and judge for themselves. Mr. Hudson himself will allow, that if the doctrine in my First Essay is correct, his system falls at once to the ground. Should he prolong this controversy with me, he must defend it on different principles and prove several things which he altogether takes for granted in his present Letters. I am persuaded he will frankly admit, that unless my views can be proved radically wrong, his system is totally and forever annihilated. We have given a brief review of his Letters, in conclusion, and had our limits permitted, would have extended our remarks to greater length. But as it is, we hope Mr. Hudson will have no reason to complain.

If "expatiating on the condition of the departed with a wild particularity, is listened to with greediness," it might be expected, my book will be read at least with patience and candor

before it is condemned. It discusses the condition of the departed; but my investigations have ended in a very different result from the common opinions as to their existence in an intermediate state. No one can question, that all the wild and particular descriptions of the condition of the departed, take for granted that the common opinions about immortal souls, and their going to heaven or hell at death, are true. Take these topics of discourse from a ranting enthusiast and he would hardly know what to preach about. I do not expect any such persons to give my First Essay a patient perusal. But better things may be expected of sober minded men, who wish to see the Scriptures calmly examined respecting the state of the departed, and the hope revealed to man respecting his future existence.

Should Mr. Hudson, or any other person reply to the following pages, it is requested, that the radical principles of the book be shown unscriptural. To point out some mistakes or inaccuracies, is easily done almost in any human composition, and certainly the author does not plead exemption from these. He has studied to be correct and scriptural in his sentiments. Respecting the leading principles, he does not ask, nor has he any claim on the indulgence of his readers. That they are at variance with the common opinions of the religious community he has no desire to conceal. He has appealed to the Scriptures for the truth of what he has advanced, and by those Scriptures he wishes