The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-07-05 00:00:00

MARITIME EXVRACTS.

Stornoway, June 30. -The Norah, from Liverpool to Cronstadt,
had her defects made good, and sailed from this on the 29th.
St. Petersburg. July 2. -Sikke Wish, Stein; and Isabella, Driver,
on shore near Narva.— [Mem. The Seikke V. der West, Steen,
arrived at Narva, May 2g, and Isabella, Driver, June 17, both from
Liverpool.]
The City of Montreal, sailed from Liverpool, April 2, for Mon-
t. eal, her signal chest was p eked up in the ice. April 20, in lat. 47,
lon. 48. She was stV)s...queritly reported to have been seen, April 24,
i n lat. 45, lon. 57, but this is supdosed to have been an error, and has
not since been heard of.

The Adams Fazsimons, sailed from Bombay for London, Dec. 1
and has not since been heard of.

The Amity, from Cardiff to Havana, with coals, has been totally
lost oft ot. Domingo.

FOREIGN PORTS.

Despatch, Robert.on ; and Harriet, Guthrie—both sailed from
Cronstadt for Liverpool. June 24.
Grecian (s.s.), from Zante at Messina, at left for Palermo and
Liverpool.
Euphrates (s.s.), hence at Messina, and left for Corfu, &c.
Confidence saile,i from Messina for Licata and Liverpool, June 23.
Amelia, Mautret, hence at Bordeaux.
Earl of Carrick (s.s.), from the Levant at Messina, and left for
Liverpol. June 21.
Sardinian (s.s.). hence at Leghorn, and loft for Naples. June 24.
Catherine Ifociges, Lewis, hence at Garonde.
MAdam White, TAylor, hence at Cuxhaven.
Ocean, and Actaeon—bath hence at Miramichill
Countess of Ellesmere (s.s.), and Geerchna—both hence at
Cr nstadt.
Gaston, hence off Hope Cove.
Margaret sailed from Figuiera for Liverpool, June 23.
Thomas and Elizabeth sailed from Gibraltar for Liverpool, June 23.
Robert Preston sailed from Cadiz for Liverpool, June 17.
Chaves, hence at Neustadt.
intra (..s.), hence at Oporto.
Metropolitan, and Karnak (s.s.)—both hence at Gibraltar.

MISSING Slurs.— On Friday a notice was posted at
Lloyd's referring to three ships which had for some time
been missing, an which there is too much reason to be-
lieve have foundered, and every soul belonging to
them perished : —The ship Adams, (formerly the
Stanley Cacique), commanded by Captain Fitzsimons,
sailed from Bombay on the Ist of last December, with a
rich cargo for London, and has not since been heard of.
The next unfortusate missing ship is the City of Montreal,
a Glasgow built iron vessel, 812 tons register, commanded
by Captain Guthrie ; she sailed from Liverpool on the
2od of April last, for Quebec, and was spoken with on
the 24th of the same month in lat. 45, long. 47, sir'
which not the least tidings have been heard of her
is supposed to have gone down, her crew, forty - ; she
perishing in her. The other ship is the 13number,
Captain Rickeles; she sailed from Liver "Mir Monte,
of March fur Koni band b. gs erg, .pool on the 6th
heard of. .4 riot since been

NO ANSWER YET PROM THE REV. J. B.
LOWE TO " VERAX !"

TO THE EDITOR 07 THE NORTHERN TIMES.

Sir,—Tn your paper of July 2nd, " Observer" ago
" Vertu " this question
'' Does Michaelis countenance the very theory, of inspi-
ration being wholly distinct from infallibility, which is
the churacteri,tic of lifcconaught on Inspiration 1' I

?pl7, Michaelis does countenance this theory, as may be
;en by any reader who will refer to " Michaelis'

[able work," already quoted by me from p. 96, vol. I. of the

edition of 1793. In dealing with the discrepancies of the
gospels, Michaelis perceived that the choice lay before him,
of either denying the inspiration of Mark and Luke, or
" taking the word inspiration in such a sense as " not " to
include infallibility." He preferred the former course ; but,
by gravely proposing the alternative referred to, th.) scholar-
like 'Michaelis showed that his mind was for a time in doubt
whether or not to include the idea of infallibility in the term
inspiration. Fie considered either alternative preferable
to the notion now advocated Lowe, and so he
countenanced the theory which is tiiaracteristic of Mac-
naught on _lnspiration. .

I have, thus, sir, given a plain answer to " Observer's'il
question ; and if Mr. Lowe will reply with equal plaindesd
to the queries I addressed to him in your impressions of the
22nd and 28th ultimo, your readers will be enabled to
abate the suspicions which have been raised by Mr, Lowe's
ominous silence with reference to the following points :

1. Does Mr. Lowe consider " the Spirit of the truth, i.e.,

the Spirit of Christ's revelation" an " uncritical" change in
the translation of John xiv, xvii ? If so—will Mr. Lowe
state the grounds of lis objection to this change of transla-
tion ? If not—why did Mr. Lowe call it an " uncritical "
change in his fifth letter to the Courier ? Whether this
change of translation be critical or " uncritical," will Mr.
Lowe be so good as to explain how he is justified in his
inference, that they, who (like Bishop Hinds, and '• every owl
who understands the original") adopt this most uncritical
change " in the translation, throw overboard the personality
" of the Holy Ghost, the Comforter?"

2. Will Mr. Lowe state what words or sentences of
llaenaught on Inspiration interpret " THE COMFORTZR
to signify merely the " spiritual meaning of the Gospel 7"
These questions, sir, press on Mr. Lowe's attention, not
because they are the only ones of a similar character which
are suggested by Mr. Lowe's seven long, and, as yet, unf•
nished letters, but, because, until these questions shall be
plainly and satisfactorily answered, Mr. Lowe's fairness as
a critic, and his competence as a scholar, are known to be
at stake.

I will only add that, if " Observer," or any of your reader',
will peruse Mr. Lowe's fifth letter to the Courier, it will be
obvious how the strange misprint of a small letter for the
capital is combined with " an absurd charge of uncritical
change of translation in order to support Mr. Lowe in
wilfully drawing an inference which he knew to be unjust'•
—Yours, &c., VERAX.
July, 1856.