translating his head' instead of his hand,' at the end of Zephaniah, chap. ii. 'Conciliate the regard of Jehovah' is not any improvement, either in sense or sound, on 'pray before Jehovah.' The word 'peg' for is, by itself, not more dignified, or more suggestive of the oriental idea, than ‘nail.' A paraphrase, or notes, must be used, in such cases, to bring out the idea.

These translations are introduced by a General Preface, and there is a special preface to each of the separate books. The General Preface contains a lucid sketch of the history of the Collection of the Twelve Minor Prophets, their arrangement, chronology, historical relations, figurative style, and prophetical character. The industrious author has

'Laid under contribution all the means within his reach, in order to ascertain the original state of the Hebrew text, and the true and unsophisticated meaning of that text. He has constantly had recourse to the collection of various readings made by Kennicott and De Rossi; he has compared the rendering of the Targum, the Syriac, the Arabic, the Vulgate, and other ancient versions; he has consulted the best critical commentaries; he has availed himself of the results of modern philological research; and he has conducted the whole under the influence of a disposition to place himself in the times of the sacred writers, surrounded by the scenery which they exhibit, and impressed by the different associations, both of a political and spiritual character, which they embody.'

The separate prefaces lay before the reader, within a narrow space, the fruit of much inquiry, and the outlines of many learned controversies. We might select from each of the Twelve Books passages exhibiting that familiarity with the oriental tongues for which Dr. Henderson is well known, together with a command of picturesque and musical English words, well fitted to convey the meaning and the tone of the ancient poetry of the Hebrew prophets. Of the Commentary, it is difficult to give anything like an adequate notion, excepting to those who are well acquainted with the same author's Commentary on Isaiah. As compared with that Commentary, the one now before us may, we think, be fairly described as more copious, embracing a wider course of reading, solving a larger number of philological and critical questions, and presenting a work to which we know not of any parallel in the English language.

There are several classes of readers who will be disappointed in this book. The Millennarian will see that the patient study of the language of prophecy, and of the connexion of the many

passages on which he has been wont to rely, will not bear out his theory. The ordinary readers of the Bible will be surprised to see that no ground is offered in the Scriptures rightly interpreted for the application of favourite texts to subjects with which they have been empirically connected, by the traditionary habits of some popular commentators and preachers: they will be perplexed, too, by seeing the whole theory of spiritual interpretation, as they have deemed it, overlooked in general, and, in particular places, purposely condemned. There is one subject on which Dr. Henderson has expressed his views most decidedly in his Commentary on Isaiah, and has repeated them in the present work:

In no instance has the theory of a double sense been permitted to exert its influence on his expositions. The author is firmly convinced, that the more this theory is impartially examined, the more it will be found that it goes to unsettle the foundations of Divine truth, to unhinge the mind of the biblical student, to invite the sneer and ridicule of unbelievers, and open the door to the extravagant vagaries of a wild and unbridled imagination. Happily, the number of those who adhere to the multiform method of interpretation is rapidly diminishing; and there cannot be a doubt, that, in proportion as the principles of sacred hermeneutics come to be more severely studied, and perversions of the Word of God hereditarily kept up under the specious garb of spirituality, and a more profound understanding of Scripture are discovered and exposed, the necessity of abandoning such slippery and vulnerable ground will be recognised, and the plain, simple, grammatical and natural species of interpretation adopted and followed.'-pp. ix. x.

We heartily agree with the author in his anxiety for the 'natural species of interpretation,' and in his reverence for the principles of Sacred Hermeneutics;' nor are we disposed to offer a syllable in defence of the double sense of Prophecy. At the same time we submit, with all respect, that there is a danger of verging towards the opposite extreme, of treating the Holy Scriptures, in all respects, as though they were merely the productions of men. We are fully convinced that there is a solid basis for distinguishing the meaning attached to the words of prophecy considered as human words, or considered separately by themselves, and the meaning intended by the Holy Spirit in harmony with the entire scheme of Providence, and the broad aspect of prophecy, considered as one system. We are, likewise, convinced, that there is an element in the prophetic poems the Hebrews, quite peculiar to them, which marks their divine origin, and which is essential to the full comprehension of 'the

of

mind of the Spirit, as expressed in the written dictates of inspiration. For this reason we are jealous-we have no wish to conceal it-of the principle of interpretation, which rises no higher than the level of the Anti-supernaturalists of Germany. If it be admitted, that the Hebrew poems are inspired, there is nothing irrational, but just the contrary, in expecting that they shall sometimes mean more than can be apparent to those who deny their inspiration. Did the Hebrew people fully understand the prophecies delivered to them? Are we sure that the inspired prophets themselves fully understood their own predictions?

6

The New Testament writers, generally, point out the peculiar position of the Hebrew church as a typical church, its worship a typical worship, its government a typical kingdom; and it is very apparent to us that, as some symbols of prophecy are taken from the natural scenery, and the usages of the Hebrews, others are deeply tinctured with the typical character of the whole series of the divine dispensations towards their land and their people. Dr. Henderson avails himself of this principle, to some extent, both in his Commentary on Isaiah, and in this Commentary on the Minor Prophets. He applies the words David, Jerusalem, Zion, to Christ and to the Christian church. He regards Joshua and his companions (Zec. iii. 8.) as 'typical persons.' He describes the incense and pure offering' of Malachi as sacrificial terms,'' transferred, from their original application to ceremonial objects and acts, to such as are spiritual, agreeably to the nature of the new economy.' He comments on Zech. xiv. 4, 5., as conveying in language of the most beautiful poetic imagery, the assurance of the effectual means of escape that should be provided for the truly pious.' We agree with the excellent author in his views of these passages; but we feel that in so agreeing with him, we press, and have a right to press, and are bound to press, the symbolical character of the prophetical poetry farther than it would be possible to press the productions of a merely human genius. Moreover, we are utterly at a loss to explain to our satisfaction the Messianic Psalms, without admitting that their reference to Jesus Christ is based upon their application, in a partial degree, to David, to Solomon, and to others, as types of Christ, precisely as predictions of His sacrifice are based on their application, in a partial degree, to the typical sacrifices of the Hebrew altars. We are as anxious as the esteemed author, or as Melancthon, whose simple words are adopted as the motto of this Commentary, to seek, everywhere, a definite and simple

meaning; but in a system of typical things, and persons, and events, we apprehend that we fall short of the full intention of the Holy Spirit, if, in any prophecy, we confine our regard to the interpretations which would exhaust the one meaning of any prophecy before it is contemplated as part of a whole revelation. Can anything be more certain than that we, as Christians, understand many prophecies of the Old Testament better, more fully than they were understood in the ancient time? But our vantage ground lies not in better acquaintance with the language, and the oriental imagery, of the prophets; it can lie, as we take it, only in our larger acquaintance with the plans of divine wisdom and grace to which the things regarded by the ancients as principal events, were only subordinate and typical. Let it be granted that predictions fulfilled -or yet to be fulfilled-in the history of the Hebrews, have been improperly applied by Christians to their own spiritual affairs; it ought, on the other hand, to be granted, that there is a splendour in the description of the returned captives from Chaldea, or of the restored wanderers from among the nations, which can be justified only by considering the external prosperity of that people as the shadow of a higher glory which they are to share with all the nations of the saved.' This appears to us to amount to no more than a just extension of the principle of symbolical interpretation, warranted by the nature of religion, by the analogies of poetry, by the peculiar constitution of the Hebrew system and language, by the undoubted practice of the New Testament writers, in their references to the Old Testament, and by the common consent of spiritually minded believers and expounders in all ages.

We are willing to go as far as any writer can go, in severely examining the natural force, and obvious sense, of every word of Scripture. We repudiate the entire business of allegorizing its facts, and precepts, for ourselves. We deem it a thing impossible to extract any meaning more spiritual than the literal meaning of any word employed by the spirit. But as the same light falls on the distant mountains and on their nearer shadows in the lake, so may we understand the same prophecy to apply to David, to Solomon, to Jerusalem, and also to the Saviour, and to the church, inasmuch as the one is held forth in Scripture as the type or shadow of the other.

Many Christian readers will regret that so able an expounder as Dr. Henderson should have abstained from pointing out to his readers, and urging on them, the sound practical application of the prophecies which he so faithfully translates, and so ably illustrates. Though we do not profess to partake of such

regret, we may be allowed to express a hope that other writers, and preachers especially, will avail themselves of the treasures of knowledge which Dr. Henderson has so profusely set before them, by bringing home the truths so learnedly elucidated to the bosom and the business' of every man. We tender our sincere and respectful thanks to Dr. Henderson for these precious fruits of his invaluable labours, venturing to express, in conclusion, our strong desire to enjoy the benefit of his practised skill and his rare attainments on the remaining fields of Hebrew prophecy.

Without the means of knowing, we would presume that he is preparing a translation with commentaries on Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel, and that he will thus complete a series of works, deeply needed in the theological literature of our country, and which he is peculiarly qualified to supply.

ART. VII.—Illustrations of the Croton Aqueduct. By F. B. TOWER. London and New York. 1843.

Metropolitan Sewage Manure. Report of Parliamentary Committee. 1846.1

IT has often been remarked that the great works of England have been done by individuals, each seeming to fight for his separate interests. But we may add, that these individuals have acted with as much unanimity, and followed up distinct courses as decidedly as if subjected to the voice of an approving or disapproving government. Such especially is the appearance of the works when finished; and when required we put our strength to the task, with as much of oneness in our aim, as if set like slaves to build a pyramid, with scant allowance of time and wages. We have done many things, and these things have become necessary causes for doing other things. At the same time we have sufficient encouragement to do; our works, when viewed as a whole, giving greater results than we could have anticipated, and at all times instructing, by presenting features which we could not foresee, and telling us that, however in some respects we may have done less, we have in other respects done more than we intended.

One of the great works which we are now about to examine, is the supply of water to towns, and the use to be made of it. The supply of water over all this country being comparatively regular, the demand has not been pressing except in