cure the generation of chickens. Wherefore 'tis probable that devils, being more skilful than men, may strangely promote the generation of several creatures beyond any human art." the latter sense, I observe, that Mr. Farmer acquiesced. (Mir. c. iv. § 1, note †, p. 266.) But my author deems it "ridiculous to think that Pharaoh's magicians, Jezabel the queen, and king Manassch, did exercise the art of My author next considers the poisoning," and quotes Rev. xviii. opinion of those who“ affirm that 23, where the word pappanaia the magicians'staffs were not really is neither taken for witchcraft, nor turned into serpents, but seemingly poisons, but for impostures, though so, by a deluding juggling trick of our translators have rendered it the devil, who might convey the witchcraft." p. 8. The following staffs away, and slip serpents in passage which presently occurs, their place." He thus proceeds, though long, may be thought wor-"To all such as these I answer, thy of quotation, as an anticipa. that if they once recede from the tion of Mr. Farmer's discussions, letter of the text, and say it was a century afterwards, connected a juggle of the devil, I may as with a curious admission of limited well say it was a juggle merely of diabolical agency. the magicians themselves, who did "Nor let any one think, that it by their sly and secret tricks as for the performance of these coun- the Hebrew word signifies, which terfeit miracles, they stood in our translators have rendered by need of the devil's assistance. their enchantments. Nor let any For what they performed either exceeded not the compass of hu. man art, although miraculous in the eyes of the vulgar. Or, if it it did, then it was not really per formed, but a mere juggling imposture. Such kind of jugglers were those, who stood before Pharaoh, in opposition to Moses ing to the deceived apprehensions and Aaron. For whosoever believes that Pharaoh's Magicians could by the help of devils turn in an instant, a stick into a serpent, he doth ascribe unto the devil an omnipotent creating power, equal to his who did but say, let such a thing be, and it was so." Having controverted the opinion of St. Augustine, he adds; ""Tis true, that men by their well order ing the seeds of plants, may hasten the generation of such plants, and the ripening of their fruits. They may, also, by put bing eggs into camel's dung, pro one wonder that the scriptures should say, the magicians' staffs were turned into serpents; in regard, the scripture speaks only according to the deceived apprehension of the standers by. Just so in the case of Samuel raised by the Witch of Endor, it speaks accord. of Saul and his followers; for neither that woman, nor all the devils in hell could raise Samuel, who had been dead and buried almost two years. As for those who fancy that God did then raise Samuel; 'tis a very likely thing indeed, that God should refuse to answer Saul, when he consulted him in ways appointed by himself, and yet should answer him when` he consulted in a forbidden way. Besides, if Samuel had been raised by God, no doubt he would never have said unto Saul, Why hast thou disquieted me?' for it would have been no disquiet nor trouble of the beaten road of scripturak unto him, to come upon God's criticism, errand. Some there are who will needs have it to be the devil in the likeness of Samuel, because Saul's death was foretold. To this I answer, that 'twas the woman herself, or a person confederated with her, who spake it at a venture, knowing that Saul was going to fight. But as for the certainty of his death, it could not have been foretold by the devil himself." And pointed out the way to noble daring. "The third error" ascribed to 66 our translators," is," their mistaking a consulter with oracles or false prophets, for a consulter with familiar spirits." This cen sure is supported by examining the meaning of the Hebrew words in Deut. xviii. 11, and a reference to Isaiah xxix. 4, where my au Those who consult Mr. Farmer, thor finds the "cheating tricks" of (Mir. ch. iv.) will find that learned the oraclers "plainly alluded writer agreeing with my author unto." He substitutes oracler for as to the nullity of the pretensions familiar spirit, according to the made by the magicians and the common version, adding, "Here sorceress of Endor, but in the I suppose, the prophet chiefly allatter case, preferring their opinion ludes unto the necromantic oracler, who suppose that by a Divine in- or one that pretended to consult terposition Samuel, or his appear with the dead; who himself, or ance, was raised up to denounce his confederate, did therefore counjudgments against Saul. It is re- terfeit a voice, like the pieping of markable that Mr. Farmer should a chicken, that it might the more neglect to name this earlier work plausibly seem to be the small on the subjects he so ably treats, voice of a poor departed ghost." as, I think he must have seen it. P. 15. This opinion is sustained He observes, § 2, p. 3, p. 306, by a reference to Isaiah viii. 19.. that " many learned men have "according to the translation of maintained that it was neither Junius and Tremellius, our own Samuel nor an evil spirit who being hardly sense." And a de now appeared to Saul, but that scription of ventrik quists, such as the whole was the work of human "could speak with their mouths imposture." And at p. 321, he shut, and their voice would seem thus uses some of my author's to come out of their bellies, as if words, which I have lately quoted, they had been really possessed Here it may be asked, Is it with a talking devil: hence cailed likely that God should refuse to Engastrimuthians by the Greeks, answer Saul, when he consulted also Eurycleans, from Eurycles, him in ways appointed by himself, a famous impostor of this kind; yet should answer him in a forbid. and as Plutarch testifies, anciently den way?" called Pythons." (P. 16.) Yet the character of Mr. Far- My author next considers the mer is above the imputation of case of Manasseh's impiety, and a designed suppression of obliga- after objecting to "our translators" tions to an author, who, perhaps, of the common version, on the prinmight first have led his mind out ciple before maintained, he thus concludes his first chapter. "But conformists, but who differed ma Some account of the remaining chapters, with the little which I have been able to collect of the opposition to this, then strange, work, and of the defence of it by a cotemporary author, who went still further into the question of diabolical agency, must be reserv. ed for a succeeding Number. VERMICULUS. Mr. Farmer. SIR, July 27, 1812. Your correspondents (pp. 227, 369-371) have connected two mames, justly eminent among non "He was particularly excellent in the pulpit. His sermons were rational, spiritual, evangelical, and not unfrequently pathetic. Mr. Farmer had an admirable talent, without trimming, of pleasing persons of very different sentiments. When he was speaking of the doctrines of the gospel, there was a swell in his language that looked as if he was rising to a greater degree of orthodoxy in expression, than some persons might approve; but it never came to that point. What he said was always consistent with the most liberal sentiments in matters of religion." B. B. v. 681. It should be recollected that Mr. F's biogra pher was a Unitarian. This swell in his language would be much assisted in acquir. ing for the preacher the reputation of orthodoxy, by the report of those who, like the author of his Memoirs, (1804, p. 31.) "sometimes heard Mr. Farmer speak in strong terms of censure, concerning certain modern publications, and particu larly some of Dr. Priestley's." such an imputation. For I can did or did not believe themselves subjected by the Divine will, to the moral, if not the natural, influence of malignant beings, inconceivably powerful, and only not omnipotent. SIR, IGNOTUS. Anabaptists. Dr. P. appears to have been content with a plain stile, such as not help considering it as unwor Swift recommended, proper words thy of Mr. Farmer's talents and in proper places, and would have character, to evade, instead of deemed a swell in his language meeting fairly, and freely discuss something worse than a defect, ing a question which has been alhad it caused his opinions to be ways regarded in the popular misunderstood. Such a writer creed as highly important. Nor, could be no favourite with Mr. to his own enlightened mind, could Farmer. it appear an alternative of trivial This censure of Dr. Priestley's consequence, whether Christians publications, as a recipe of singular virtue, to make a little orthodoxy go a great way, or even to restore a tarnished orthodox repu tation, I beg leave to recommend to those who may have occasion for its use, from frequent observation of its superior efficacy. To dispense this censure properly, it should be unmixed with any candid acknowledgments of Christian virtues. These would very much Your correspondent Episcopus impair the effect. It should also complains (p. 493) of the use of be given in a high tone, ex cathe- the epithet " Anabaptist," in drá, as by one having authority. Chalmers's Biog. Dictionary. He Mr. Farmer's three important represents it as reproachful and topics, the Temptation, Miracles not descriptive.' I thought so and Demoniacs, almost unavoida- too, till lately an advertisement bly involved the question of evil caught my eye in the Times newsspirits. Yet it has been said, that paper, headed with ANABAPTIST from his writings it could not be MEETING-HOUSE. The advertiseknown whether he denied or be- ment to which this singular headlieved their existence. This I line drew my attention was to the think is evidently the case as to a purport, that a meeting house was part of the "Dissertation on Mira- about to be erected at Hackney, cles," where information on this and that plans and proposals point might be reasonably expect would be received for building it. ed. I refer to ch. iii. § 1, n. 2. in This is I find, on enquiry, a meetwhich the author proceeds "to ing-house, for the Particular or inquire whether the scripture as- Calvinistic Baptists: the advertisecribes the power of performing ment was, of course, drawn up miracles to the devil and his an- by themselves; and therefore I gels." The whole article is an conclude that this sect do not obable argumentum ad hominem. ject to being called Anabaptists, I wish some of your readers, more and that Mr. Chalmers is blameless. conversant with the valuable works of this learned divine than myself, could relieve his memory from N. N. Sir Samuel Romilly. SIR, I transcribe for your use part of Sir Samuel Romilly's Speech to the Electors of Bristol, April 2, 1812; persuaded that you will admire the frankness of it, and the spint of freedom which it breathes. Sir Samuel is answering objec tions which had been made to him as candidate for the representation of Bristol in Parliament. "There is another matter, which perhaps does not deserve to be mentioned; and yet I should be glad to say a few words upon it. It has been published in this city that I am a foreigner, and that if you elect me you will send a foreigner to represent you in a British Parliament. Gentlemen, I was born and educated and have passed my whole life in England, with the exception of a short interval which was spent in visiting foreign countries. My father too was born and educated in Eng land, and spent his whole life in it. My grandfather, it is true, was not an Englishman by birth, but he was an Englishman by choice. He was born the heir to a considerable landed estate at Montpelier in the South of France. His ancestors had early imbibed and adopted the principles and doctrines of the reformed religion, and he had been educated himself in that religious faith. He had the misfortune to live soon after the time when the Edict of Nantes, the great 'Loleration Act of the Protestants of France, was revoked by Lewis the Fourteenth, and he found himself exposed to all the vexations and persecutions of a bigotted and tyrannical government, for worshipping God in the manner which he believed was most acceptable to him. He determined to free himself from this bondage; he abandoned his proconnections, and quitting the perty, he tore himself from his country and its tyrant, sought an asylum in this land of liberty, where he had to support himself only by his own exertions. He embarked himself in trade, he educated his sons to useful trades, and he was contented at his death to leave them, instead of his original patrimony, no other inheri tance than the habits of industry, he had given them, the example of his own virtuous life, an here. ditary detestation of tyranny and injustice, and an ardent zeal in the cause of civil and religious freedom. Among other reasons I I am an Englishman. Gentlemen, have to bless his memory is,—that this is my origin; I trust I need not blush to own it.*" simplicity of a truly great mind. This is manly, the admirable Is it true, then, that this emi owned the Dissenters, on a late nent lawyer and statesman, dis occasion, in the House of Commons? It is most unlikely. The affair, as given in the pub lic his accuser: "He had never been *See "An Account of the Entry of Sir Samuel Romilly into Bristol, &c." 12mo. pp. 14, 15. |