"better country," an "abiding place," a "city which hath foundations!" and using all the powers which have been entrusted to them to extend the knowledge of that great salvation which God has graciously offered to the world by Jesus, the "author and finisher of our faith." Then would every form of idolatry vanish from amongst the sons of men; all would see and acknowledge that "the Lord is One and his name one," and unite to worship the infinite Jehovah, as the disciples of his Son Jesus Christ. Let that sect which has hitherto been "every where spoken against," set themselves in earnest about this great work, this "consummation, so devoutly to be wished;" and may the great Being whom alone we adore, give a blessing to our zealous endeavours, and grant that by reviving the genuine doctrines of our Master, and diligently striving to exemplify them in our lives, we may bring salvation to ourselves, and forward the progress of gospel truth amongst our brethren of mankind! SIR, M. H. Lower Clapton. Ttroversies of infinite importance, HE following queries involve conwhich still divide the Christian world. I shall be happy if any of your readers of the popularly orthodox faith shall think them, or any of them, deserving of their notice; and offer such a solution of them to my understanding, as appears to be satisfactory to their own. First. If to deny the personality of the power which we call divine, is atheism, and to assert it Theism, is it not Tritheism to ascribe personality to three powers, each of them divine? Secondly. If the existence of a mind implies personality, must not two minds,constitute two persons; two infinite minds, two persons both infinite; and two minds, one finite and one infinite, two persons, one finite and the other infinite? If then Christ be both God, and man, is he one person or two persons? Thirdly. If it is universally true that a finite being cannot have attributes that are infinite, since guilt is an attribute of finite beings only, is not infinite guilt impossible, and to assert it a contradiction? Fourthly. If guilt can be expiated by the suffering of substituted inno cence, either it is not necessary under the divine constitution that guilt be punished, or the guilty have been punished when the innocent only has suffered: which ought we to affirm? Fifthly. Is personal identity intransferable, and can personal attributes, such as merit and demerit, be transferable? Sixthly. Can Christians pray consistently as Christ commanded they should pray, for the forgiveness of sins, if the orthodox doctrine of atonement be the doctrine of the scriptures; unless, not to punish what has been once adequately punished, not to demand a penalty which has been already paid, be to forgive sins? Seventhly. If depravity implies guilt, is not innate depravity impossible, unless it be a crime to be born? Or is the same being at once depraved and innocent? And then, is it just that he be punished for the necessary consequences of an innocent depravity? Eighthly. Since the exertion of divine power, in the regeneration of all who are regenerated, is acknowledged to be an act of special grace,-or an interposition of divine power not in the course of nature,-the event is a under the Christian dispensation, a miraculous one: is it then true, that, dispensation of mercy, every man is born into the world subject to a divine government so constituted, that nothing but a miracle can save him from remediless and infinite woe, at the same time that this miracle is in fact performed in favour of but a small part of men, born notwithstanding under a dispensation of mercy? I observe annexed to the Clergyman's Letter to the Bishop of St. David's, (see M. Rep. x. 590,) the following postscript: "I have taken the unusual liberty of sending a copy of this letter to the bench of bishops; I hope they will excuse it; my motive is good. Their sentiments on the subject are of the utmost consequence. If they agree with you, that a belief in the Athanasian Trinity and Creed makes us Christians, and is necessary to salvation, they will confirm your opinion in their future charges and publications, and enforce it with much greater zeal than has hitherto been done. If they differ from your lordship, they will, I am persuaded, act in a manner becoining the character of Christians and Christian bishops." That they do Reply to Mr. Norris on the Revision of Dr. Watts's Hymns. agree is not to be doubted, as long as Στητ' ἐλελιχθέντες, καὶ ἀμύνετε Φεύξεσθ ̓ ἐκ πολέμοιο δυσηχέος· J. M. SIR, THE 273 April 12, 1816. HE man who ventures to arraign his neighbour for misrepresentation, should be careful of the accuracy of his own statements: were it only from respect to himself and the cause which he espouses, however incapable he may be of other views. And yet, when Mr. Norris speaks of the revision of Dr. Watts's Hymns, as "bearing all the outward semblance of the genuine edition," he deviates widely from the fact. The original work is entitled, "Divine Songs attempted in easy Language for the Use of Children, by I. Watts, D. D.;" whereas, the little book which has been so clamorously and unjustly assailed, bears the title of "Dr. Watts's Hymns and Moral Songs for Children, revised and altered by a Lady." How is it possible, then, that these two works should be designedly confounded, where the slightest attention is sufficient to prevent mistake? "The same course has, indeed, been taken with that popular tract Melmoth's Great Importance of a Religious Life;" but it is the course of honour and of fairness, carefully stating in the preface wherein the alterations consist. Neither of these works have been "palmed upon the public," otherwise than as revisions of books of acknowledged merit and general excellence, although containing views of Christianity in which the revisers could not acquiesce. They are consequently adapted to the use of a very different class of readers; and were offered to the public with the most correct and benevolent design. Is it not a high compliment to the devotional writers of the Church of England, that Christians of any other denomination should acknowledge their excellence, by making use of their works as far as they can consistently with their own sentiments, and frankly avowing the obligation? And with what propriety can that practice be censured in Unitarians, which has been repeatedly sanctioned by the example of orthodox Churchmen, with respect to the devotional compositions of the Church of Rome? I trust, therefore, that these unwarranted attacks will no longer disgrace the writings of the strenuous friends of the Establishment, or, at least, that their more liberal brethren will openly discountenance the ungenerous charge. DETECTOR. 274 Effect of the Portrait of Washington on some Indian Chiefs. P.S. I will thank you to notice as errata the word lawfully for carefully, in my last letter, p. 151, col. ii. 1. 37; and the omission of afterwards before arraigned in 1. 37 of the succeeding column. Effect of the Portrait of Washington on I some Indian Chiefs. [Extract of a Letter from New York.] CALLED to-day on Trumbull, the great artist, and saw him and his exquisite paintings. On my observing how much an Indian would be struck with his first sight of a 'painting, he told me, "that having painted a portrait of General Washington, the General invited him to dinner to meet a deputation of the Creek Chiefs: after dinner they were shewn into a room where the General's portrait was placed, the General accompanying them, dressed as there represented, and with Mr. Trumbull. The Indians were lost in astonishment; they alternately looked at General Washington and at the portrait with many signs of wonder, and finding, on approaching it, that there was no projection, and that it was quite flat, were convinced it was a piece of enchantment. In fact, they sat up in council all that night to resolve how it was possible for the man," (Trumbull,) to work a like piece of magic. Mr. T. endeavoured to prevail on them to let him take one of their portraits, but nothing could induce them to consent to it, as they were firmly persuaded, that when once he had wrought the phantom, they would be evermore entirely under the influence of his infernal agency." IN Mr. Parkes's Account of a Visit to Birstal, Dr. Priestley's Native Place. SIR, London, May 8th, 1816. IN consequence of your having suggested that the public would be gratified by an account of an incident which occurred to me during a journey in the summer of the last year, I now sit down to comply with your request, being happy that I have it in my power to contribute, in any degree, towards illustrating the character of one who is already so dear to the lovers of science, truth and virtue. Having occasion, on the 31st day of last July to pass through the village of Birstal, in Yorkshire, I was very desirous of seeing the house, situated at Birstal-field Head, where Dr. Priestley was born, and accordingly I stopped at the inn, for the purpose of obtaining the necessary directions. The man informed us, that the house was two miles distant, but that the chaiseman would have a good opportunity of pointing it out to us from the top of a hill which we should have to pass over, and being pressed for time I was under the necessity of resting satisfied with a distant view of a mansion which had acquired so much celebrity from the peculiar character of one of its earliest occupants. "Do you know, Sir," said the landlord, "that a brother of Dr. Priestley lives in this place?" This question very much surprised me, for I had no idea that any brother of the Doctor's was then living. "Yes," said the landlord, "Mr. Priestley, who is a younger brother of the Doctor's, has resided here the greatest part of his life, and he is as worthy a man, and has always been as much respected as any person in the village." "I should be very glad," replied I, "if I could see this neighbour of yours; would it be possible for me to be introduced to him?" "If you respect the character of his brother," added the host, "I am sure, although you are strangers, he will be very glad to see you; and this person," said he, pointing to a respectable looking man, who sat by, "will, I dare say, think it no trouble to shew you the way to his house." The man having, with great good nature, acquiesced, I immediately set out, accompanied by my daughter, who was travelling with me; and I believe the circumstance of having discovered so near a relative of Dr. Priestley in so obscure a situation, afforded both of us more pleasure than any unexpected event which, till then, had occurred to us during the whole of our journey. As we passed through the village, Mr. Joshua Priestley met us, and our guide introduced us to him. Having informed him that we were desirous of paying our respects to him in consequence of our regard for the memory of his brother, he kindly invited us to his house, and in the way introduced us to one of his sons, who joined us, and walked in with us. When we arrived, we found it a very neat, cleanly cottage, quite in the style of simple country life; and in an antique chair sat a respectable-looking, Mr. Parkes's Account of a Visit to Birstal, Dr. Priestley's Native Place. 275 aged female, who proved to be the wife of the Mr. Priestley to whom our visit was intended. We had not been long within the house before Mr. Priestley introduced us to his wife, and when he told her that we called to see them out of respect to the character of his brother, the Doctor, the good old woman burst into tears and sobbed violently. This behaviour very much astonished us, and the more so, because she was for a long time quite unable to speak. However, when the good old lady could articulate, she apologized for her weakness by saying, that she could never hear the name of that good man (meaning Dr. Priestley) mentioned, without being overcome in a similar way." This sudden, unpremeditated, involuntary tribute to the memory of an excellent individual, whom we both esteemed, struck us exceedingly, so much so that both of us were glad to sit down, to talk further with these good old people, and inquire more of their history. During the course of the conversa tion, I learnt that Mr. Priestley, if he lived to the end of that week, would be eighty years of age; and that his wife, the individual whom I have already spoken of as being so singularly affected at the mention of Dr. Priestley's name, was in her eighty-fourth year. Mr. Priestley told me, that he had had thirteen children by his present wife, and that one of his daughters had fifteen children. He said he had now only five children living, viz. three sons and two daughters, and that his sons are all married, and have each many children. He added, that he had now living nearly fifty grand children and more than twenty great grandchildren. The old man told me also, that he was healthy and well, and still able to walk to the Dissenting chapel at Hickmondwicke, which is two miles distant from his house, every Sunday, and back again. Mr. Priestley and his wife both gave us a very pressing invitation to partake of their dinner, but this our other engagements prevented us from accepting. When we were taking leave and about to depart, Mr. Priestley, jun., son of Mr. Joshua Priestley, said, very kindly, that we should probably like to see the burial place of Dr. Priestley's father and some of his more remote ancestors, as many of them were interred in Birstal church-yard; and he would walk with us and show us the spot with pleasure. This offer we accepted; and in our walk to the church, had a good deal of conversation with Mr. Priestley, jun. whom we found to be a sensible and well-informed man, for the sphere of life in which he moves. While we were in the church-yard, we were joined by a youth of eleven years of age, a son of Mr. Priestley's, a smart, lively little fellow; and when I asked him his name and he replied, Joseph Priestley, his father added, with great animation and much selfcomplacency, that as he was born about the time that Doctor Priestley died, they had thought it right to name him Joseph after him and in remembrance of him. From the retired manner in which Mr. Joshua Priestley appeared to live, I was apprehensive that he might be in straitened circumstances, and therefore took the liberty of questioning his son on that point; who immediately said, that he had great pleasure in informing me, that his father and mother were as comfortable as to the state of their pecuniary affairs as their best friends could wish; adding, that the Doctor had taken care of that, he having given them some canal shares, which had made them as independent as their circumscribed wants required. I am glad to have it in my power to make the public acquainted with this circumstance, as it redounds very much to the credit of Dr. Priestley, especially as it is well known that he had several children of his own to provide for, and was himself never rich. The intimate friends of Dr. Priestley were well acquainted with his generous temper and disposition, but I do not think that this particular instance of his benevolence was known to any of them. I doubt, indeed, if it was known to his son, Mr. Joseph' Priestley, for if it had, he surely could not have omitted, in the Memoirs which he published, to have mentioned a circumstance so highly honourable to the memory of a revered and beloved father. In the church-yard of Birstal, our attention was directed to three handsome tombs, made entirely of stone, 1 and were told, that this was the burial place of Dr. Priestley's ancestors, and some of his contemporary relatives. I would gladly have copied all the inscriptions, but being much pressed for time, I transcribed only those which are upon the tomb belonging to the Doctor's father. They read as follows: "To THE MEMORY OF JONAS PRIESTLEY, THE SON OF JOSEPH PRIESTLEY, OF FIELD-HEAD, WHO DIED FEBRUARY 18TH, 1779, AGED 79 YEARS. ALSO, MARY, HIS WIFE,† WHO DIED DECEMBER 28TH, 1739. ALSO, ANN, HIS DAUGHTER, WHO DIED JANUARY 8TH, 1763, AGED 20 YEARS. WHO ALL LIE INTERRED NEAR THIS PLACE. THIS CORRUPTIBLE MUST PUT ON INCORRUPTION, AND THIS MORTAL, IMMORTALITY." On the flat stone which covers the same tomb is the following inscription: "HERE LIETH THE BODY OF SARAH, WIEE OF JOSEPH PRIESTLEY, OF BIRSTAL-HEAD, WHO DIED 29th DECEMBER, 1728, AGED 68 YEARS. HERE ALSO IS INTERRED THE BODY OF JOSEPH PRIESTLEY,|| OF BIRSTAL FIELD-HEAD, WHO DEPARTED THIS LIFE THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST, IN THE 85TH YEAR OF HIS AGE. ANNO DOMINI 1745." The two other tombs were erected to the memory of Dr. Priestley's uncles, and their descendants. They are close to each other, and close to the tomb first mentioned. Before 1 left Birstal, Mr. Priestley, jun. informed me, that theirs was one of the largest and most extended families in Yorkshire, and in confirmation of it said, that as we were going through Hickmondwicke, if we would call at the old chapel yard in that place, we might satisfy ourselves of the truth of what he said. Accordingly, as we had occasion to pass close The Mr. Jonas Priestley here mentioned was the father of Dr. Priestley. + Dr. Priestley's mother. A half sister of the Doctor's. § This person was Dr. Priestley's grandmother, a woman of excellent character, so much so that the Doctor named his only daughter, Mrs. Finch, after her, Dr. Priestley's grandfather, a manufacturer of woollen cloths and cloth finisher, and resided at the family house at Birstal Field-head, Yorkshire. to the chapel, we directed the chaiseman to stop at the place, and as the keeper of the chapel lived very near' to it, we procured the keys without difficulty. Here we saw a row of eight very handsome tombs all built alike and entirely of stone, belonging to the Priestley family; but as we had no one with us who could explain the exact relationship of any of the deceased to the late Dr. Priestley, I did not take the trouble of copying any of the inscriptions. Thus, Sir, have I endeavoured to comply with your request, and I do flatter myself that those persons who value the character of the late Dr. Priestley, either as a man, as an author, or as a successful and industrious chemical philosopher, will thank me for my attempt to rescue these few unpublished facts respecting his family, from oblivion. I am, Sir, yours, &c. SAMUEL PARKES. YOUR most learned correspondent Mr. Cogan, and others, have recently exposed the absurdities and inhumanity of this dreadful system. Now this system consists not of plain declarations of scripture, which contain no system expressed in connected arrangement, but is in fact a system of reasoning and deductions from certain expressions in the writings of St. Paul. It is at least as much a system of reasoning as the Unitarian system. Its advocates find in the writings of Paul, the doctrine of the divine prescience, and infer the divine predetermination. From the pre science of God and his uncontroul able power, they infer that all his determinations are accomplished. They infer from their doctrine of original sin, and some declarations on few that are saved, that all that are saved, are so by divine favour, and all the rest lost, by divine appointment. Their system is evidently a system of reasoning from the divine attributes, collected from detached passages in scripture; and yet they decry reason and all philosophy! I ask them for a scriptural statement of their system, as such, in direct and scriptural language. As to distinct passages in the writings of scripture, if they be our guide, every opposite system may |