ties_. At the time of these
profound studies, he occupied a position "in the wilderness," from which
as a stand point, like John in Patmos, he could most advantageously
survey the passing scenes of providence with the ardor of youthful
emotion, and with unsullied affection for the divine Master. With all
these advantages, however, the dispassionate and impartial reviewer may
discover, in the rapid current of his thoughts, that the active powers
of the expositor some times took precedence of the intellectual. Two
special causes may be assigned for this, hereditary love of liberty, and
the actual condition of society at the time. Born in Scotland, the
cradle of civil and religious liberty from the days of John Knox, Dr.
M'Leod's traditions and mental associations were necessarily imbued with
the atmosphere of such surroundings. To such causes may be attributed
occasional declamation, extravagant verbosity and unconscious
inconsistencies, not well comporting with the solidity and self
possession so desirable on the part of an expositor. Yet even in such
outbursts of impassioned eloquence we may sometimes discover noble
conceptions commanding our admiration, if not altogether such as to
secure our approbation. It ought to be considered, moreover, that the
"Lectures" came from their author in a turbulent, if not in a
revolutionary condition of society. Peninsular Europe was convulsed by
the successful military career of that brilliant general, Napoleon.
England and the United States were also at war. The independence and
even the existence of the young Republic were apparently in peril. The
lecturer very naturally sympathized with the land of his adoption, in
which resided his domestic treasures and many of the "excellent ones of
the earth," to whom he was bound by conjugal, paternal and covenant
ties. In a condition of actual warfare, he could not but feel most
keenly the constriction of these manifold and endearing bonds,
especially when thought to be jeopardized.

With these preliminaries, and expressing my obligation to the Doctor's
labors, to whose system of interpretation as well as to most of his
details, I cheerfully give my approbation in preference to all other
expositors whose works it has been in my power to consult; it is
proposed briefly to review some of his expositions and sentiments, from
which I crave liberty to dissent. "It is not the interest of any man to
be in error."

In his interpretation of the sea