species of this animal has a small stump, or horny protuberance, above his horn, but this certainly is not entitled to the honour of being called a second horn; much less can the animal employ it for tossing its enemy. A description of this creature, accompanied by a wood-cut representation of its head, may be seen in the "Illustrated Commentary."* It may be further observed, that the parallelism in this passage, as well as the simple fact, that the reem is associated with the bullock, affords a presumptive argument that both are nearly related. The next reference to this animal occurs in Job xxxix. 9—11 :—

"Is the reem willing to serve thee?

Will he abide by night in thy crib?

Canst thou bind the reem in the furrow with his reins?

Will he harrow the valleys after thee?

Wilt thou confide in him because his strength is great?

Wilt thou leave thy labour to him?

Wilt thou trust in him that he will bring home thy harvest?
And collect thy thrashed corn?"

Here strength and untameableness are qualities of the reem specially noticed, chiefly the latter; but these are qualities common to many kinds of animals. There is, however, an allusion in this passage which indirectly, but strongly supports the idea, that the wild buffalo is intended. The allusion is to the tame buffalo, which commonly performed all the labours here mentioned. If the reem be the wild buffalo, this language is most natural; and the "difficulty or impossibility of making the animal perform just such services as tame buffaloes actually do perform," which this passage speaks of, at least "countenances," as the editor of the "Illustrated Commentary" says, the idea above expressed.

In Psalm xxii. the reem comes again before our notice, verse 22 :—

"Save me from the mouth of the lion;

Even from the horns of the reems thou hast heard me."

To hear, in Hebrew phraseology, frequently signifies to deliver; this is the force of the word here. All that we learn from the passage is, that the were a fierce description of horned animals; and that they used their horns for tossing or lifting their prey.

In Psalm xxix. the word presents itself again; speaking of the "cedars of Lebanon," the Psalmist says,—

"He maketh them to skip like a calf;

Lebanon and Sinon like the young of reems."

Here, too, the parallelism, as well as the associating of the animals, is strongly in favour of the view we advocate, and strongly opposed to

*Illus. Com. vol. iii. p. 175.

the introduction of the rhinoceros or unicorn. Besides which, agility is here spoken of as characteristic of the reem. Now, this quality exactly applies to the bos bubalus, but not to the rhinoceros ; for although this animal moves very quickly, considering its immense size, yet it is not noted for its agility or fleetness. The introduction of the rhinoceros by the Psalmist would be quite out of place. As for the unicorn, it is more than questionable, if such an animal does really exist, that it was ever known in Palestine.

We meet the word again in Psalm xcii. 11, "Thou wilt exalt as the reems my horn." It is obvious that some word must be supplied before reems. We may supply either horn or horns; either is allowable. If we were obliged to supply the singular, this would afford no proof that the reem is a one-horned animal: horn would, in that case, be plainly a noun of multitude. Either "Thou wilt exalt my horn as the horn of reem," or, "Thou wilt exalt my horn as the horns of reems,” is correct; but neither favours the one-horned idea.

The only other place where the word is found, is in Isaiah xxxiv. 7, "The reems also shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls;" the prophet is denouncing vengeance against the Edomites, and here he refers to their princes and great men as being about to be slaughtered. As far as this passage bears on the subject under consideration, it is strongly in favour of the view advocated. The

is associated with bullocks and bulls; this leads us to infer that they were of a similar description, most likely the bos bubalus; and such an animal appears more suitable than the rhinoceros, to be figuratively employed to denote the princes and nobles of a land.

These are all the places where the word reem (rendered unicorn in our version) occurs; and such are the remarks which presented themselves to the writer upon them. There is nothing said, in any of these places, inconsistent with the opinion that the wild buffalo is intended, while there is much to favour it; but, on the other hand, while there are some things said which accord with the known character of the rhinoceros as a wild, fierce, untameable, and powerful animal, there is much altogether at variance with the supposition that such is the creature intended. The agility ascribed to the reem, its being described as having horns, the association of it with bullocks, and bulls, and oxen, the allusion to the difficulty of yoking it for labours performed by the tame buffalo, and the parallelism of several passages where the word occurs, are all opposed to the idea of the μovoképws or the rhinoceros, but are all in favour of the wild buffalo, a beast well known in Palestine and the surrounding countries.

As some parts of the descriptions of the reem will apply to the rhinoceros, so some particulars will apply to the oryx, or gazelle; the oryx is a large and fierce species of the antelope, and remarkably fleet, and answers to the description of the reem much better than the

rhinoceros; still it is deficient in other particulars, which deficiency vitiates its claims to be considered the reem of sacred Scripture. But all the qualities of this animal which are mentioned or alluded to, all the descriptions given, and the familiarity with which it is referred to, all meet in the bos bubalus; and therefore, we conclude, although Jahn asserts that "wild animals of the ox kind are not mentioned in the Bible," ,"* that this is the REEM of Moses, Job, David, and Isaiah; and that its claims to be so considered must be regarded as valid until some more likely claimant of this honour shall be produced. Cork.

I. J.

ON THE IMPORTANCE OF CHRISTIAN DECORUM.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE CONGREGATIONAL MAGAZINE.

SIR,-In the present day, when the attention of society seems directed more particularly to what is useful, than to what is merely speculative or ornamental, we find common sense is very justly held in high estimation. In every pursuit of life, those persons generally command the greatest measure of respect, who possess this quality in the highest degree, and use it to the best advantage. Nor is there any just ground why this principle should not pervade our religion. Believing, as we do, that the purest religion is the highest reason, both in theory and practice, it is but natural that we should be anxious to find those who profess to be religious, manifesting, by their conduct, that they are indeed influenced by principles which purify and exalt their nature, and thus lead them to act in perfect consistency with correct feeling and good sense.

It is because this has not always been the case in the present day, that I have been induced to trouble you with a few remarks, which, I trust, will not be deemed unnecessary or obtrusive. The habits of feeling and behaviour, which are in a considerable measure prevalent among our own denomination, appear to me very likely to exhibit us (as Christians) to the world generally, under an aspect by no means calculated to win that regard, or secure that respect for the principles of our religion, which ought, I think, to be felt for them, by those confessedly not under their influence, from seeing the manner in which they soften and regulate character.

In short, then, it seems there is, in many instances, a want of that attention to propriety and general consistency, (taking the words in their most extended sense,) which ought to distinguish the Christian above all other men. It is true, these remarks apply only to the less important features of the Christian character; but if the matter were

more attended to, that character would be rendered more attractive and consistent than it frequently is at present. There is often a want of that simple dignity-of that respect to the feelings of others—and of that regard to occasions and circumstances, which certainly are comprehended in "a conversation becoming the Gospel ;" and which would go far to make the professor of that Gospel beloved and respected by all around him. I merely allude now to the expression of that amiability and propriety, which it is within the power of every one to cultivate. Where the principles of the Gospel exert most power, there will be most of this; and I have often met with individuals in the humbler grades of society, who, from the operation of these very principles, have habitually conducted themselves with such simple and correct feeling, and who were so greatly superior in this respect to the class to which they belonged, that it was evident that religion alone could have effected the change. Such individuals adorn society, and furnish a striking proof that the Gospel exerts no common power in purifying and refining the character. Most of us, I should think, must have almost blushed for some of our friends, when their general demeanour has been the subject of conversation. Many who know nothing of the vitality of religion, act as if they were more truly under the influence of it, than many of its professors. For instance, I have sometimes contrasted the apparent reverence and solemnity which often distinguishes the worship of the Episcopal church, with the open irreverence and inattention which too frequently prevail in our own chapels; and though I am no advocate for the sanctity of places, yet, if each individual were to reflect on what worship realises, and the feelings with which he ought to engage in it, there would, I think, soon be a marked change in the appearance of many of our congregations.

I might mention other things, but I am aware that this is a delicate subject to touch upon, and I forbear. The principle I have mentioned may be carried out in all the relations of life-in the family-in business-in society at large; and if it were, men "possessing godliness" would, I think, be regarded in a very different light, to that in which they frequently are now, and the world would learn to love and respect them and their religion, for their sakes. This would merely be acting on the principles we profess, in accordance with the dictates of good sense. It would be showing that we were anxious, that those who now sneer at us for being "religious," (as they are pleased to term it,) should not misunderstand us; and that we wished them to see that the religion of the Gospel, while it renovates the character, imparts to it consistency and gracefulness. And, above all, it would be obeying the spirit of the precept, "Let your light so shine before men, that they, seeing your good works, may glorify your Father who is in heaven." I am, Sir, yours, &c.

H. E.

THE HEWLEY SUIT:-THE REV. R. HUNTER'S REPLY

ΤΟ 66 VERUS."

TO THE EDITOR OF THE CONGREGATIONAL MAGAZINE.

SIR,-In my reply to "Verus," in your January number, I stated that I might perhaps trouble you with some further animadversions upon his attack of "the three Secession ministers" who represent the interests of one of the orthodox Presbyterian classes in the Hewley suit. Since that time he has been unremittingly engaged in trying to impugn our statements; and as I was unwilling to give him any interruption, until it might be fairly concluded-he had brought his labours to a close, I have hitherto delayed the resumption of a controversy to which nothing but a strong sense of duty should have prompted me

to recur.

As it is much more congenial to my feelings to commend than to censure, I am gratified to find that his views in reference to several points-upon which I was reluctantly called to animadvert-appear to have undergone a considerable change. I stop not to inquire by what instrumentality his conversion has been accomplished; but if I be not mistaken in my conjectures as to his indentity, his admissions must be considered as invested with additional importance, from his supposed confidential connexion with the gentlemen who are litigating for the exclusion of every Presbyterian, however orthodox, from all interference with the management of the Hewley Trust.

1. Our opponent concedes, "that Lady Hewley, at the time of founding her charities, belonged to the body called Presbyterian." This is the primary position which I attempted to establish; and, had I been aware that "Verus" never held a different opinion, I might have been relieved from the necessity of adducing any evidence in support of a notorious and well-authenticated fact. But he could not be ignorant that the Congregational relators, with whose proceedings he is pleased to identify himself, had not been always accustomed to use the same language of assurance. If he had carefully perused the documents which, in 1836, were filed in the Master's Office, and which were subsequently published in a volume, entitled, "The Third Act," he could not be ignorant that the Independent relators, and one of their most respectable authorities, had endeavoured to question or evade the fact. In their "Counter Statement," issued in April, 1836, against those whom the Rev. Dr. James Bennett had just represented, in 1831, as "the real Presbyterians," the said relators declared,

* See Congregational Magazine for January, p. 33.

† See Appendix to Appellants' Case before the House of Lords, between Samuel Shore, Esq. and others, Appellants, and Thomas Wilson, Esq. and others, Relators and Respondents, pp. 108, 111.