As part and parcel of this view, Criddle argues
Walter Scott took Campbell's idea of a restoration a step further, even calling for a "new Bible." Hayden described Scott's preaching in the winter of 1827-1828 this way: "He contended ably for the restoration of the true, original apostolic order which would restore to the church the ancient gospel as preached by the apostles. The interest became an excitement; ...the air was thick with rumors of a 'new religion,' a 'new Bible.'" [not an entirely different Bible, but rather, Alexander Campbell's 1820's edition of the New Testament].First, let's look at the quote from Hayden (1875) in context (p.120).
He contended ably for the restoration of the true, original apostolic order which would restore to the church the ancient gospel as preached by the apostles. The interest became an excitement. All tongues were set loose in investigation, in defense, or in op- position ; which foreshadowed good results. Nothing so disastrous to the sailor as a dead calm. Let the vessel heave under a tempest, rather. The Bibles were looked up, the dust brushed off, and the people began to read. " I don't believe the preacher [i.e. Walter Scott, RCK] read that Scripture right." "My Bible does not read that way," says another. The book is opened, and lo ! there stand the very words ! In the first gospel sermon, too — the model sermon — as what "began at Jerusalem" was to be " preached to the ends of the earth." The air was thick with rumors of a "new religion," a "new Bible," and all sorts of injurious, and even slanderous imputations — so new had become the things which are as old as the days of the apostles. (Hayden 1875, p.120)So Criddle makes a mistake in attribution. Walter Scott, though he supported the Campbell effort for a better bible, no doubt, was not here arguing for a new Bible. Hayden indicates this to us by writing "The book is opened, and lo ! there stand the very words !" This is not a difference between the Campbell translation and the KJV that Hayden is focusing on.
Rather, people who were surprised to read their Bible afresh were insinuating that Scott was using a different translation; that what Scott was preaching them was not their old religion from their old Bible, but a new religion from a changed Bible. This is why Hayden uses "all sorts of injurious, and even slanderous imputations" --- that's not a compliment!
In fact, for someone who is trying to perform a Restoration, the ultimate insult is that it is "new". It would never be something that Walter Scott were actively calling for.
Hayden is trying to make an argument of estrangement, so the rumors must be false for that argument to work.