to fubdue the difeafe, and many vernal intermittents ceafe fpontaneously after a few fits, particularly in perfons who have before undergone an intermittent of long duration, we fhall be apt to attribute fome cures thereto that are performed wholly by the powers of the body. Fixed alcaline falt, fuch as that of tartar or wormwood, diluted with cold fpring-water, is nearly of like efficacy with the abovefaid fpirit again vernal intermittents, as I have in fome cafes experienced."

With regard to the epidemical fore-throat and miliary fever, as it appeared in Cleveland, in 1760, we thall briefly obferve, that it differed materially from the fore-throat of a former epidemy in London, and another in Plymouth; with the account and treatment of which doctors Fothergill and Huxham obliged the public. The cure of this at Cleveland is correfpondently different, and is very diftinctly reguJated, in a kind of appendix to the preceding defcription of it. His obfervations on the baftard black hellebore highly recommend it, as the most potent vermifuge our author has experienced, having expelled worms after the mcft celebrated offcinal compofitions had failed. It contains fome good practical directions, with regard to different medicines appropriated to the killing and expelling different species of worms.

Mr. Biffet modeftly apologizes for his ftyle, of which we have given a fpecimen, faying, "he aimed rather at concifenefs and perfpicuity than elegance." Upon this foundation, however, we think there are a few expreflions in this work, which he may, for the greater perfpicuity, avoid in any fubfequent one. For inftance, to infair the diaphorefis, we imagine, may be commuted into the more ufual medical phrafe—to lessen the perfpiration. To incur a great degree of one or more of the nonnaturals, means, we fuppofe, to commit an intemperance or excefs in any of them. An infiuent herpetic humour was probably defigned to fignify the determination of fuch a humour rather to the internal than external parts, or a friking in, as it is vulgarly called. We may conjecture the fame of an influent land-fcurvy, when the peccant humour is fuppofed to be employed rather in exciting a final fever in the mafs of blood, than in difcharging itfelf upon the folids. But a little infiuent fever is rather lefs intelligible, as all fevers feem to be internal, or ficting within, if they are not confined to fome external inflammation, as in a carbuncle, phlegmon, paronychia, &c. even an ague having been fometimes fuppofed by the vulgar to be confined to the face. Perhaps, an effieut antifcorbutic, p. 133, means fuch an antifcorbutic medicine as operates chiefly

by

by fweat, thus expelling or leffening the fcorbutic humour: but if it ejects it equally by urine, will that make it lefs ‹ffluent ? which ambiguity infers, the term is not as strictly afcertained as the author intended it. Bibulary (pores) feems much lefs, if at all, in ufe, than bibulous, and is derived lefs analogically: nor can we perceive any improvement in fubftituting morbous fometimes for morbid. Poffibly the former may be critically supposed to fignify a greater combination, or load of diseases; but this diftinction did not feem intended, where we met with it. It is confeffed, fome of thefe differences are trivial; but all innovations in fpeech, to be commendable, fhould be improvements; and fignify their fubjects more clearly and exactly than the terms or phrates already appropriated to them.

K

A Differtation on Miracles: Containing an Examination of the Principles advanced by David Hume, Efq; in an Elay on Miracles. By George Campbell, D. D. Principal of the Marifchal College, and one of the Minifters, of Aberdeen. 8vo. 4s. Millar, &c.

HE main defign of this candid, spirited, and fenfible performance is, not to refute the reafening and objections of Mr. Hume, but to fet the principal argument for Christianity in its proper light. On a fubject that has been fo often treated, it is impoffible to avoid faying many things which have been faid before. Accordingly, fuch readers ås are converfant with fubjects of this kind will find few obfervations in the Differtation now before us, that are not to be met with in Dr. Adams's ingenious antwer to Mr. Hume, the Criterion, Butler's Analogy, &c. Our author's principal merit confifts in treating his fubject in a more regular and methodical manner than those who have gone before him; and, as he justly obferves, the evidence of any complex argument depends very much on the order into which the material circumstances are digefted, and the manner in which they are difplayed. He treats his ingenious adversary with candor, but without ceremony or referve, and anfwers the arguments contained in his famous Effay on Miracles in a clear and rational manner.

"The Elay on Miracles, fays he, deferves to be con→ fidered as one of the moft dangerous attacks that have been made on our religion. The danger refults not folely from the

Kk 2

merit

of the piece; it refults much more from that of the author. The piece itfelf, like every other work of Mr. Hume, is ingenious; but its merit is more of the oratorial kind than of the philofophical. The merit of the author, I acknowledge, is great. The many useful Volumes he hath published of Hiftory, Criticism, Politics, and Trade, have justly procured him, with all perfons of taste and difcernment, the highest reputation as a writer. What pity is it that this reputation fhould have been fullied by attempts to undermine the foundations both of natural religion and of revealed.

"For my own part, I think it a piece of justice in me, to acknowledge the obligations I owe the author, before I enter on the propofed examination. I have not only been much entertained and inftructed by his works, but if I am poffeffed of any talent in abstract reafoning, I am not a little indebted to what he hath written on human nature, for the improvement of that talent. If therefore, in this tract, I have refuted Mr. Hume's Effay, the greater fhare of the merit is perhaps to be afcribed to Mr. Hume himielf. The compliment which the Ruffian monarch, after the famous battle of Poltowa, paid the Swedish generals, when he gave them the honourable appellation of his mafters in the art of war, I may, with great fincerity, pay my acute and ingenious adverfary."

The genteel and ingenuous manner in which our author fpeaks of his adverfary, muft give every impartial reader a favourable opinion of his candor; and those who are qualified. to judge of fuch fubjects, will, we are perfuaded, after an attentive perufal of his Differtation, entertain as favourable an opinion of his abilities.

A regular abftract of a work of this kind will not be expected from us; we fhall not therefore attempt it, but give the fum of what the author has advanced. It is briefly this: That Mr. Hume's favourite argument, of which he boafts the difcovery, is founded in error, is managed with fophiftry, and is at laft abandoned by its inventor, as fit only for fhew, not for ufe; that he is not more fuccefsful in the collateral arguments he employs; particularly, that there is no peculiar prefumption against religious miracles; that, on the contrary, there is a peculiar profumption in their favour; that the general maxim whereby he would enable us to decide betwixt oppofite miracles, when it is ftript of the pompous diction that ferves it at once for decoration and for difguife, is difcovered to be no other than an-identical propofition,

4

fition, which, as it conveys no knowledge, can be of no fervice to the cause of truth; that there is no prefumption arifing either from human nature, or from the hiftory of mankind, against the miracles faid to have been wrought in proof of Christianity; that the evidence of thefe is not fubverted by thofe miracles, which hiftorians of other religions have recorded; that neither the Pagan nor the Popish miracl.s, on which he has expatiated, will bear to be compared with those of Holy Writ; that, abftracting from the evidence for particular facts, we have irrefragable evidence, that there have been miracles in former times; and, laftly, that his examination of the Pentateuch is both partial and imperfect, and confequently ftands in need of a revifal.

Before we conclude this article we cannot help lamenting, with our author, that fo excellent a writer as Mr. Hume should have treated religion in fo illiberal a manner as he has done. The many ungenerous fneers,, for fo we must call them, that are to be met with in his works, in regard to Christianity and its profeffors, muft certainly, even in the opinion of his warmeft admirers, if they are men of candor, be looked upon as very injurious to his character. It is natural to imagine, that a perfon of fuch exalted fentiments and of fuch diftinguished talents, muft entertain exalted notions of religion; but let the impartial reader judge of this matter from the following paffage, taken from his natural Hiftory of Religion, Sect. xi. 4to. Edit. and which may have efcaped the notice of many of his readers.

"If we examine, fays he, without prejudice, the ancient heathen mythology, as contained in the poets, we shall not difcover in it any fuch monftrous abfurdity, as we may be apt at first to apprehend. Where is the difficulty of conceiving, that the fame powers or principles, whatever they were, which formed this vifible world, men and animals, produced alfo a fpecies of intelligent creatures, of more refined subftance and greater authority than the reft? That these creatures may be capricious, revengeful, paffionate, voluptuous, is eafily conceived; nor is any circumftance more apt, amongst ourfelves, to engender fuch vices, than the licence of abfolute authority. And, in fhort, the whole mythological fyftem is fo natural, that, in the vast variety of planets and worlds, contained in this univerfe, it feems more than probable, that, fomewhere or other, it is really carried into execution."

This paffage ftands in no need of any comment; we fhall therefore only beg leave to obferve upon it, that if Mr. Hume laughs at those who believe in Chriftianity, he laughs with a and that there are few who need be ashamed grace, very bad of their Creed, when compared with his.

R

A Letter to the Authors of the Monthly Review: Or, a Reply to their Animadverfions on a Pamphlet lately published, intituled, the Reviewers Reviewed, relative to the Doctrine of Electricity. By R. Lovett, of Worcester. 8vo. 6d. Sandby.

WE

E little thought to have heard from Mr. Lovett again on this fubject, after what paffed between us in a former Review; much lefs that he fhould complain of our feverity, when he was himself, in so great a degree, the aggreffor: but there are men, as well as arguments, that are unanswerable. Whether what we advanced may be ranked among the latter, it is the part of others to determine. It appears fufficiently plain to us, that our antagonist deserves a place among the former, Bad cafuift as he is, he is a bold combatant; and, though reduced to his ftumps, is determined not to give out. It is very juftly remarked by a judicious French writer, "Tous ceux qui font capable de faire des objections, ne font pas toujours en etat de comprendre tous les principes, dont depend la refolution de leurs objections." This feems to be the cafe with Mr. Lovett: indeed he frankly confelles, that our diftinétions are too refined for the comprehenfion of electricians; and ftyles fuch reafonings, in the ufual cant of ignorance and incapacity, the cobwebs of metophyfics. It does not, however, become a mere experiment-monger to talk fo difrefpectfully of any fcience. And yet this our doughty opponent is very carneft with us to continue the controverfy in our Review. But, fuppofing it confiftent with our plan, as it is not, to what purpofe fhould we difpute? If Mr. Lovett cannot comprehend us, we never can hope to convince him. And as to his strong defire of entering into a nearer and cloter engagement, that the matter in debate may be brought to a fair iffue, and the public no longer remain in doubt, which of us is in the right," we are willing to reft our cause, with the judicious reader, on the merits of what has been already faid. Indeed we conceive, that thofe, who have paid any attention to this little debate, remain in no doubt about the matter: at leaft, we fhall think fo till