Stuart at Fort Hunter, and aided him in "adding some additional translations to the new Indian Prayer Book, the Gospel of S. Mark, part of the Acts of the Apostles, and a short history of the Bible, with a concise explanation of the Church Catechism." The Society for the Propagation of the Gospel gave orders to have these printed in New York on their account, but the war prevented this, and Mr. Stuart took the manuscripts, which were ready for the printer, with him to Canada in 1781, giving them to Colonel Claus, the Indian agent. By him they were taken to England, and the Gospel of S. Mark was selected for publication with the Prayer Book. Brant had landed in England in December, 1785, and Colonel Stone says that advantage was taken of his presence to have the Prayer Book printed under his supervision, "including the Gospel of Mark, as translated by him." He adds also that "notwithstanding the ceaseless activity of his life, he had found time to translate the Gospel of Mark into the Mohawk language."

It is evident, however, from Mr. Stuart's statement, that Brant merely assisted in this, and that at a time when he was young and without prominence as a chief; yet his presence in London at this time might have caused the statement on the title-page, that this Gospel was "translated into the Mohawk language by Captain Joseph Brant, an Indian of the Mohawk nation." The great chief was in England less than 6 months, and as he was in America early in 1786, while the Prayer Book was published in 1787, it may be supposed that he had little to do with its supervision. Nor was it necessary. This was left to Colonel Claus, and the preface speaks of him as qualified for this by his accurate knowledge of the Mohawk language. This preface was written by the Bishop of Nova Scotia, well known for his interest in the Iroquois, and it contains observations on reading and pronouncing in their tongue.

In this fine edition one new feature was the printing of the English on one page and the Mohawk on the other, as in the later Canadian editions. It was an

octavo of over 500 pages, and embellished with 19 fine. plates. The title-page has portraits of the King and Queen, with a Bishop on either side, while Indians receive the books from the royal pair.

For the use of the Mohawks and other Iroquois in Canada another and smaller edition was published at Hamilton in 1842, the earlier copies having become scarce, and more being greatly needed. The work was superintended by the Rev. A. Nelles, who had long been chief missionary among the Mohawks and Tuscaroras, and he was assisted by John Hill, a Mohawk catechist, who translated the Collects and some Offices never before printed in Mohawk. The title-page says that this Prayer Book was "compiled from various translations; revised, corrected, and prepared for the press under the direction of the Rev. Abraham Nelles." The additional parts translated, and for the first time published in this, were the Collects, Baptism of Adults, Order of Confirmation, Visitation of the Sick, Thanksgiving of Women, etc. This edition also has a preface, with some historical account of the Mohawk Prayer Book. It is a volume of 456 pages, about 20 of which are hymns.

In New York, while a catechist at Oneida Castle, Eleazar Williams undertook to revise the Indian Prayer Book, under the advice of Bishop Hobart, who called for offerings for the proposed work in 1815. It was not published until some years later, and then appeared as the compilation of Solomon Davis, Mr. Williams' successor. Rev. Mr. Williams' own re-translation, a later work, was published about 1853, under direction of Bishop Wainwright, and the second edition, published in 1875, will serve to illustrate all.

It differs so much from the others that it seems as hard to find a likeness as to connect old English with modern. The words are changed, and g and d are replaced by k and t. In some of the old hymns and anthems the old sounds are retained, but not in all. This Prayer Book, published by our Indian Commission, contains the Morning and Evening Prayer, with the Litany complete, eight Psalms for the morning and evening of

the first day of the month, the Catechism, and the Family Prayers. It does not compare favorably with the larger Canada edition, and having no English except on the title-page, has not the educational use belonging to the printing of both languages. The various Offices occupy but 100 pages, with 38 pages of hymns added. In no edition is the English given with the hymns, which are often sweetly sung in Indian villages in Canada and New York.

It is said to be in Mohawk, but this needs qualification, as it was prepared for the Oneidas. An old Indian missionary says:

Our Prayer Book is the Canada one, modified by using the Oneida dialect wherever possible. The Prayer Book and Scripture translations appear to be done without regard to the rules of grammar, and are not well done. Tand d, g and k, y and i are often used the one for the other. The Canada book retains the guttural sounds of the old Indians; our book is Frenchified as much as possible.

Careful comparison, however, shows that they are independent versions in the main, varying in pronunciation but still more in choice of words and structure of sentences. It is quite likely that those Mohawks whose habitations have been among the French Canadians for 200 years may have developed a local accent of their own, and early habits thus affected Mr. Williams' translation. But the Indian Prayer Book has been more than a monument of a perishing language; it has been doing good for nearly two centuries past.

WILLIAM M. BEAUCHAMP.

FORMS OF PRAYER FOR CIVIL RULERS.

"EXPE

XPERIENCE, like the stern lights of a ship, too often illumines only that portion of our career over which we have passed." This is as true with reference to communities as to individuals. One of its illustrations may be found in the experiences of ecclesiastical life in the mother Church of England, as in our own in this country; and in the failure to recognise their illuminating influences for the future. Putting aside all others, for the present, the proposed action of revision, in reference to forms of prayer for civil rulers, both as to those retained without change and those that are added, is a case in point well worthy of examination. These prayers of our Book, adopted with modifications from those of the English, and adapted to the conditions of the country for the time, formed part of the proposed Book of 1786. With the changes in the adoption of the Federal Constitution of 1789, corresponding changes were made for the Prayer Book now in use. The same enthusiasm of patriotic feeling which dictated the Thanksgiving Service for the 4th of July* may have had its influence in shaping these existing forms. The same wisdom, however, which dropped the former did not recognise the necessity of modifying the latter. Such necessity, indeed, has existence only under certain peculiar circumstances. But "those" circumstances at any moment in the life of a community are liable to be en

"A Form of PRAYER and THANKSGIVING to Almighty God for the inestimable benefits of Religious and Civil Liberty: to be used yearly on the Fourth Day of July, unless it happens to be on Sundays, and then on the day following. The Service shall be as usual, except when it is otherwise appointed. Among the Sentences of Morning Prayer shall be the following.'

Proposed Book.

countered, and should not, therefore, be left without provision. The failure to recognise such necessity, and to make such provision, has, in more cases than one, wrought mischief incalculable.

The problem in this matter is really a very simple one. It is to have a form, or forms, of supplication and thanksgiving for civil rulers, for all in authority, in which all really conscientious people can heartily unite; and this whatever their political opinions or preferences. Two things, perfectly distinct, are usually thought of and treated as identical: prayer for rulers, whether in public or in the closet, and specific prayer for particular functionaries, to the exclusion, and it may be to the reprobation, of others. To have prayed for the king during the old Revolution would have been to pray against the Continental Congress. So would it have been with certain forms in the contending sections of 1861-65. Incidentally, from the Gospel narrative, we ascertain that there were possibilities, indeed actualities, of conflict, as to prerogative, between the Tetrarch of Galilee and the Roman Governor of Judea. Some of these, it appears, were removed or settled in a common outrage perpetrated upon a defenceless and innocent prisoner. Would He who was sacrificed in that unhallowed reconciliation at any time have given or sanctioned a form of prayer specifically for one of these in Galilee and the other in Judea? So, too, the Apostle directs prayers and supplications for kings," the generic term, and "all in authority." But he does not mention the specific functionary, the disgrace to human nature, and the persecutor of God's people, who was then wielding the destinies of the Empire. In a Church which is part of an Establishment such specification may seem more appropriate. Men, too, who get the peculiar advantages of such Establishment must take its inconveniences. Even in such case, however, the subject has its difficulties. Under any Government, or in any Establishment where men conscientiously think and act for themselves, and pray from conviction, or where there is possible or actual