Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub

his writings, to be an upright and well-meaning man; who, with Chriftian benevolence and unfeigned pleasure, contemplated thofe great events which, he firmly apprehended, approached fo near.It had been wifer, perhaps, if, inftead of marking out a precife period, he could have contented himself with the opinion of fome of his intelligent friends, that the time might not be very diftant.However, it is juftice to add, that, befide his laborious application, he has difcovered both ability and learning, though we are unable to attend him throughout his multifarious calculation.— He very reasonably expreffes his hope, that he fhall experience a candid indulgence from perfons of all denominations.-One account, which he gives in the epistle to the Jews, appears to us of a doubtful kind; yet he must have fome realon for faying, as far as I can learn, the most intelligent, and most confiderate men among you, do now readily confefs and believe, that the Meffiah has already appeared incarnate in the world, in a flate of humility.'We shall only add, that this writer's former epistle to the Jews is noticed in the first volume of our Review enlarged, April 1790, P 469.

Art. 66. A Dialogue between a Clergyman of the Church of England and a Lay-Gentleman: occafioned by the late Application to Parliament for the Repeal of certain Penal Laws against Antitrinitarians. 8vo. IS. Bladon. 1792.

This dialogue is faid to have taken place at a monthly-meeting of the members of a book fociety in the country. By the argu. ments of the lay-gentleman, who contends for the impolicy and folly of attempting to fupport divine truth by penal ftatutes, the clergyman owns himfelf convinced, and offers to fign the petition in favour of the Anti-trinitarians.

SINGLE SERMONS.

H.

Mooy.

Art. 67. Preached May 13, 1792, in the Parish Church of St.
Margaret's, Weftminfler. By William Vincent, D D. Sub
Almoner to his Majefty. 8vo. 18. Cadell. 1792.

This is rather a political difquifition than a fermon. The author examines feveral plans which have been propofed for alleviating the evil of poverty, and determines that the fchemes of making an equal divifion of land, of reducing the inequality of poffeffions by legal compulfion, and of abolishing the right of primogeniture, are delufive remedies. The encouragement given in this country to induftry, the charitable provifion which is made by the poor laws against the failure of industry, and the extenfive and liberal charity of individuals, and of eleemofynary inftitutions, afford, in the opinion of this writer, fuch relief to poverty, as ought to make the poor, on the whole, contented with their lot. The prefent condition of the poor is certainly far from being fo eafy and happy, as fome writers reprefent it to be. Much yet remains to be done for them, as we apprehend, in the way of law, rather than of charity; and we think that the great object ought undoubtedly to be, to render their labour more productive of emolument and comfort to themfelves.

E. Art,

Art. 68. Preached before the Burgeffes of Westminster, on Friday, July 20, 1792; and repeated on the Sunday following in St. Margaret's Church. By Samuel Hayes, A. M. 4to. 1s. Cadell,

1792.

Against the general doctrine of this fermon, that it is the interest and duty of the members of fociety to live peaceably one with another, nothing can be objected; and the explanation which is given of the nature and extent of this duty, as well as the arguments by which it is enforced, may well deferve attention, both on account of the good fenfe which the writer difcovers, and the correct and handfome language in which the fentiments are expreffed. One application only, which is here made of the doctrine of peaceableness, feems to admit of doubt; viz. that in which the author charges the prefent friends of reform with a violation of public peace. If, as the author appears to think, the political state of thefe kingdoms be fuch as not to need, and fcarcely to admit, improvement, certainly all efforts of this kind may merit the appellation of feditious diflurbances of the public tranquillity: but, if the truth be, as multitudes apprehend, that diforders have found their way into the British conftitution, which have impaired its vigour, and which threaten its deftruction, thofe who apply the remedies neceffary to the correction of these disorders, ought certainly to be regarded in the light of public benefactors. To borrow this writer's own words concerning thofe, who, in an hour of national peril, have nobly stood forward in the lifts of oppofition; The conduct of fuch men is very different from that of interefted and licentious factions; as different as the winds that purify the grofs atmosphere, and renovate the face of nature, are from the ftorms and tempefts that lay waste the beauties of vegetation, and mark their gloomy progrefs by the horrors of famine and deftruction.'

E. Art. 69 A Vindication of the Apostle Paul from the Charge of Sedition. Preached in the Unitarian Chapel in Effex-ftreet, London, July 1, 1792. By John Difney, D. D. F. S. A. 8vo. pp. 17. 6d. Johnfon. 1792.

In the perfon of the apostle Paul, Dr. Difney vindicates from the charge of fedition all thofe who, without disturbing the peace of the ftate, follow their own judgment in the worship of God, and teach fuch religious tenets, as, though pronounced herefy by the legislature, are in their opinion founded in reafon and truth. The remonftrants for Chriftian liberty are, in the judgment of Dr. D. no more to be condemned by the civil power as movers of fedition, than one who has been robbed of his property can be charged with raifing a disturbance in attempting to recover his own; all blame and reproach, in fuch cafe, belonging to the obftinacy and violence of thofe only who reject every Chriftian and Proteftant plea. The vindication appears to us very fairly as well as forcibly urged; and we are fo fully convinced of the weight of the arguments which have been inceffantly pleaded againft intolerance, that we are perfuaded it cannot be long before they will command univerfal affent. We apprehend, with Dr. Difney, that there is a great probability

of

of a restoration of thofe religious rights, which the civil inftitutions of Europe have depreffed.'

E.

[ocr errors]

CORRESPONDENCE.

We have received a long and wordy letter, figned Academicus, from a young man' who, after telling us that he is not one of that defcription of people who speak but half way,' proceeds to fill more than a sheet of paper with vague and diffusive animadverfions on what we have faid (Rev. for October, p. 141, note) of the French fociety known by the name of the Jacobin Club; and then concludes with advifing us, not to court the opinions of half-thinkers, but to fear nothing, and be independent.'

In return for all the time, pains, and paper, that he has bestowed on us, we will give him a fhort piece of advice; of which, if he fhould live to be an old man, he will perhaps know the value. Be cautious of running into extremes. Remember that in politics, as in every other purfuit of life, ne quid nimis is an excellent guide to truth: which will much more often be found among thofe fober reafoners who are branded with the name of half-way politicians, than among such intemperate zealots as intoxicate themselves with their own vehemence, and bawl down the wifdom of others by roaring out liberty and equality!"-" go your length!"

As a general anfwer to this young man's letter, and a reply to his queries, why are the Jacobins hot-brained? why enragés ? &c.— fuffice it to fay, that we think their conduct has amply proved them to be fo. This impreffion of them has been raifed in our minds by the general tenor of their proceedings; and to efface it will require omething more cogent and convincing, than what is to be found in the letter of Academicus.

Let not this correfpondent, however, imagine that we are of fended by his expoftulations. We only wish to check that heat and impetuofity, of which he may one day fee the evil tendency.

Pear.

+ By a general and cafual reflection, in a note, f. 220, of our laft Review, we have expofed ourselves to fome animadverfion, in a letter figned John Fry, jun. Hatton Garden. This letter claims our regard, becaufe, though the writer appears to be more offended than we think there was occafion, he nevertheless expreffes himself with that temper which ever fhews truth and good fenfe to the best advantage. Finding a well-written tract on the commerce of North America attributed to a gentleman defcribed as afiftanttreasurer to the government of the United States; and ceputies being generally the most efficient officers in all departments; we threw out a flight hint, en passant, implying that men of abilities merited the fuperintendance of concerns in the knowlege of which they excelled, instead of being fubordinate to thofe who have more intereft and perhaps fewer qualifications. For this, not illiberal, idea, we find our felves charged with having at once calumniated a character of the firft clafs in America, queftioned the good fenfe

of

of four millions of people, and rendered problematical the advantages of government by reprefentation.' This is a weighty recrimination, which the occafion does not, in our opinion, altoge ther warrant. The character of the gentleman named, was PATRONIZED; no other was introduced, nor even known; there could, therefore, be no calumny; the good fenfe of four millions of people, doubtlefs wishing for abilities in all stations, down to the lowest clerk, was not queftioned by our fuppofing a deputy in any department to be worthy of being a principal; and as to reprefentation, it does not appear, from the preceding confideration, to be affected in the prefent inftance, unless that reprefentation be ftamped with infallibility in all inftances whatever. Add to this, fince we are warmly pushed to a defence,-if human nature and human inftitutions in America be not the very reverfe of what they are in Europe, the lower the office, the greater the labour, and the less the reward.

All for which this gentleman contends, ftands firm to our great fatisfaction, by his information that the chief office in question is filled, as it ought to be, under an equitable conftitution, that provides against ufelefs offices and exorbitant falaries,' by a gentleman, Alexander Hamilton, Efquire, whofe abilities and principles entitle him to the diftinction; and that the Affiftant is in the fair line of promotion. Thus the fact only proves that our general ideas of equity and generofity furpaffed our knowlege of the particular cafe; and facts of this nature, respecting the internal regulations of government in North America, cannot at prefent be fuppofed to be accurately known, nor understood, at fo great a distance from that country.

N

The letter from Thomas of Didymus is expreffed in terms fo polite and refpe&tful, that we cannot retufe to the writer our acknowlegements for his favour; nor fhall we diffemble the fatisfaction which we always receive from the approbation of every candid reader. With refpect, however, to the confideration of his grand question, "Did JESUS really DIE on the cross?" we must decline the inquiry, as a fubject that might involve us in controverfy, and which is, moreover, not within the province of a Review of the productions of the prefs.-We have fome faint remembrance of a pamphlet

on

"Syncopes, or fainting fits," which, we imagine, bore fome relation to this question: it was circulated about forty years ago: but whether it was ever advertized for public fale, we cannot fay: nor did we either review or perufe it. It was faid to be the production of the coarfe pen of Peter Annet: but whether it is to found in the collection of tracts by that unbelieving writer, printed for Richardson, in an octavo volume, 1766, we know not.

tt B. T. informs us, that Mrs. Parfons's farce of "The In. trigues of a Morning," reviewed in our last Number, p. 217, is a copy, almoft literal, of "The Plotting Lovers, or the Difmal Squire," by Mr. Charles Shadwell, nephew to Shadwell the Laureat, and was first acted and printed in Dublin, 1720. Mr.

Shadwell,

Shadwell, however, acknowleges that even he was not the original author, and that it is an abridgement of Moliere's Monheur de Pourceaugnac. On this fubject, we have nothing to add, as we have never feen Mr. Shadwell's publication.

$! We cannot acquaint Mr. Bishop where he may obtain the work concerning which he writes to us, as we procured it abroad; where, as we intimated when reviewing it, we fuppofed it to be printed, though the word London ftood at the bottom of the titlepage. If it can be had, Mr. Elfly in the Strand, or M. de Boffe in Gerard-ftreet, Soho, are the perfons to whom we advise our correfpondent to apply.

§* We know nothing of the work mentioned by J. S. farther than that it is a periodical publication ftill continued. If it fhould fall into our hands when completed in volumes, we fhall give an account of it:-but J S. had no right to make us pay the postage of his letter from a confiderable diftance, because he might have private reasons for impatiently wishing to fee that account.

++ A conftant Reader wishes that, in our account of the Philofophical Transactions, in our laft Review, we had noticed the omiffion of the register of the magnetical inftruments, which used to accompany the Meteorological Journal.' It did not occur to us that we had any right to call on the Royal Society for that which they did not chufe to publifh: but if they find that the public with for the continuance of this regifter, they will doubtless refume it.

** We have received the controverfial paper printed in the Bath Chronicle, relative to the flave-trade; in which fome reference is made to the Monthly Review.-No confideration, whatever, can induce us to difguft the generality of our readers, by fuffering the Review to be made a party in a controverfy of that kind: but we muft remark, that the writer in the Bath Chronicle is miftaken, if he fuppofes that the Reviewers are, in any degree, answerable for the contents of papers which bookfellers, or others, procure to be ftitched up with the Reviews. We obferve, however, that JUSTICE bas held the fcale in this bufinefs, and that both parties have taken the fame advantage.

+++ The Authors of the Monthly Review prefent their compliments to the gentleman (unknown) who fent them an account of a fermon lately preached before the univerfity of Had he recollected that the Reviewers have declared their non-acceptance of fuch communications, he might have been faved the trouble of tranfmitting an article which, however well drawn up, must be declined. The fermon will be noticed in a future Review.

We have likewife received from Somebody, an account of a fomething called "Chriftian Conflict." Such volunteering can never produce any advantage to the M. R.

« ПредишнаНапред »