Bible Society.

It is said to be the practice of the Post, "in harmony with its policy of suppression," and in contrast with other leading papers, "to treat with scant courtesy many of the matters in which the Christian section of the community are most deeply interested," and the recent centenary of the Bible Society is specially cited as illustration, inasmuch as the Post did not "report the amount of the collections." The collections on the centenary Sunday were explicitly stated in page 3 several churches to be incomplete, and the totals when made up were never communicated to the Post. This is what the Post did, without any request or suggestion from the churches:—

Published, a week in advance, a short article drawing prominent attention to the forthcoming centenary services.

On the day preceding, devoted the first editorial article to the history and work of the Bible Society, mentioning that the Society had a large deficit, and urging liberal support to "a noble institution."

On the day following, reported that special services had been held; and collections made in nearly all the churches, and that a substantial sum had been raised; outlined the nature of the discourses, and gave prominence to a suggestion that the first Sunday in March should be annually observed as "Bible Sunday." The statement that "so far as these columns are concerned no man to this day is aware whether a single commemorative service was held or a single collection obtained in this city," is therefore absolutely untrue. Moreover, it is doubtful whether any other leading daily paper gave equal prominence to the subject or dealt more sympathetically with the movement.

The following references to articles that have recently appeared in the Post furnish further answer to the baseless charge that it "is the practice of the Evening Post to treat with scant courtesy many of the matters in which the Christian section of the community are most deeply interested":—