Vrtsblyttrian ``aitrter. fITTSBUR6II, WEDNESDAY, MUST 24, 1864. TO 0111 i SUBSCRIMS. In the great advance of prices - brought about by the war, probably nothing has in creased more than the cost of the labor and materials employed in publishing a newspa per. Every intelligent mind must be fully convinced of this; and certainly every pub lisher has been made to know it by an ex perience that will not soon be forgotten. The consequence- has been a general rise in the subscription price all over the coun try. The secular papers have advanced their terms greatly. And they have been followed by the religious press. The New—York Observer now charges $3.00 in advance, and $3 50 after three months The Presbyterian, which started out last Spring with a double sheet, but is now printed on a less sheet . than the Banner before our enlargement last April, charges $2 50. The Presbyter, published at Cin cinnati, has raised its terms to $2 50 in ad vance, $3 00 after six months, and $3.50 at the expiration of the year. The Boston. Recorder, and Watchman and Reflector, have both been raised to $3 00 per annum. The question is frequently put to us, "Will you not be oompelled to raise your terms ?" Our reply is, We do not wish to advance unless the times become much worse than they even now are." We are now expending a vast amount of labor and money on the Banner, and we are gratified to learn from so many sources, that our ef forts are so highly appreciated. But to continue at our present rates, we need the assistance of every one of our subscribers. Let each of our subscribers send on the rioney for the following year, just as soon as his time expires, or if he would send a little in advance, it would be an accommo dation to us. ~Also, let every subscriber make the attempt to send us a new name along with his own. In this way you will do us a kindness and also benefit your neighbor. And we appeal especially to our ministerial brethren. By them we have been most cordially welcomed to our pres ent position. They will readily admit that no other paper is doing more to strengthen their hands, and that the circulation of the Banner in every-family of their congrega tions would be a great benefit. Therefore, we ask your influence in speaking a word in our behalf—in renewing the lists of sub scribers in your churches and in increasing them. The Elders, also, may in this way dons and the people over whom they rule, a valuable service. We respectfully ask you to engage in this work. In this way one thousand new subscribers may be easi ly secured before the first of October, and all apprehensions of a necessity for an ad vance removed. THE PRINCETON REVIEW AND TIIE PRES BYTERIAN ON TaB•IIIOPIIEETERS USE. Por many years Dr. HODGE has given a ` - resume of the proceedings of the General Assembly, and also an expression of his own views as to its acts, in the number of the Princeton, Review immediately succeed ing the rising of the Assembly. This year the article devoted to this purpose is largely occupied with the action of the Assembly on Slavery, and with the com plaint of Dr. MCPHEETERS. As usual, this Review is not in advance of the Church, but is lagging in the rear. With all its ability and learning, , it has never stood in the forefront of the battle when great questions Of vital importance were to be met and decided. This was the case in 1837, in 1861, and we regret to say that this is also true in 1864. With respect to the paper on Slavery, it is difficult to tell what side the author would have taken had he been a member of the Assembly. But y. , to make every thing clear, he undertakes to define what the Assembly must have meant by that deliverance, and also what it-must not have meant, according to his apprehensions of the whole subject. This was altogether "unnecessary : because the Assembly un derstood its own action in all its bearings, and expressed its meaning clearly, without leaving the interpretation to any theolog ical professor, or to any other person. But it is the MONEETERS ease which especially brings down the condemnation of the Review upon the late General As sembly. Yet we do not see that the Mem bers who voted against sustaining that memorable complaint, which has been mag nified into proportions and an importance to which it was' never entitled, have any cause for alarm on account of this attack upon them. Dr. HODGE wholly misappre hends the state of things in our churches in St. Louis, the position of Dr. MCPHEE: TEES, and also the nature of the proceed-- lugs of the Presbytery of St. Louis. Every one who listened attentively and , with, unbiased mind . to the Records of. the Presbytery and to the whole discussion, and who has read the article in question, has been fully convinced that Dr. HODGE had a very partial and ex parte view of the whole case, and that consequently his rea soniogs are so unsatisfactory and so incon clusive. , However, this is not all. The ease was decided against Dr. 51cPuzaTaas, by a vote of 117 to 46. Now such a vote as this, in our General Assembly, is entitled to the highest respect of every minister and member in our • Church. But how does Dr. HODGE treat it ? He says one place, "In our judgment, the whole course of the Assembly was singularly unfair!' I A another place he says, "We think grave injustice was done, not Only to Dr. MOPREETERS, but to the whole Presbyte rian Church : and that the sanction of the Assembly has been given to acts and prin ciples deserving universal reprobation." Now, in plain language, do not these charges amount nearly to a " railing accu sation " 7 against the Assembly, and that too by one of iesi most distinguished and honored theological professore. Again, Dr. Homq is unfair in the impression he metres with regard to : the supporters and opponents of. the _complaint _of Dr. Mo. PHEETERS. He says : '