Rev. Sir,—We beg to offer you our thanks for your prompt and distinct reply, in the _Liverpool Courier_ of yesterday, to the proposals submitted to you in our letter of Monday. We are as little anxious as yourself for the prolongation of this preliminary newspaper correspondence; and however much we may regret the negative character of your answers to our questions, we should have reserved all comment upon them for notice elsewhere, if you did not appear to us to have left still open to consideration the proposed discussion (independent of the lectures) through the press. That the pulpit controversy should be on _unequal terms_, is, we perceive, a matter of conscience with you; but your objections to a newspaper controversy seem to arise, not from any desire to withhold your readers from our writings, as you would your hearers from our preaching, but from the unfitness of a political journal to be the vehicle of religious argument. Permit us, then, to say, that we have no preference for this particular _medium_ of discussion; that we are wholly indifferent as to its _form_, provided the substantial end be gained of _bringing your arguments and ours before the attention of the same parties_, and that _any_ plan which you may suggest, affording promise of the attainment of this end, whether it be the _joint_ publication of the lectures in your church and those in our chapels, or the appearance in the pages of a religious journal (either already established, or called into existence for the occasion, and limited to this single object), will receive our welcome acceptance.