and short account of the matter: but the bishop was to be made the aggreffor. How was this to be brought about? by a very extraordinary fetch of wit.In this unlucky year, 1756, an acquaintance of the bishop's examined Bishop Sherlock's Sermons, in which the doctor's opinion of the age of Job was controverted by a quotation from the book itfelf. But now unluckily again, the examination was publifhed fome months before the correfpondence began.-What then? Might not a convention be broken before it was made, as well as an idolater be punished by the judge before the office was created?'

On this note by the bifhop, we have the following notes by Dr. Lowth: In the year 1764, fays his lordfhip: here, fays the doctor, is a fmall chronological mistake. The note in queftion (in the fecond edition of the Prelections) was printed, and publifhed, towards the end of the year 1763. This by the way fhews, that his lordship's animadverfion upon the injurious note was no hafty performance, no precipitate effufion of fudden paffion. It worked in his head, and fermented in his heart, for a long time; and it was preceded from the firft by violent and frequently repeated menaces. The fift, of above a year's accumulated wrath, and ftudied invective, at laft iffued forth in the Appendix; a piece, which, for conclufive reafoning, delicate wit, deep erudition, fine tafte, and juft criticism, cannot be paralelled from all the archives of Dunciad literature.'

This is a clear and short account of the matter, fays the bishop: this is not a clear account of the matter, fays the doctor, nor the whole of it. The matter is explained in the letter to the author of the Divine Legation, p. io, &c. and fhall be more minutely explained here. The Examination was published upon, or within a day or two of, May 18, 1756. The former cor refpondence was opened towards the end of Auguft; as appears by the date of Dr. C.'s and Mr. S.'s letters to the profeffor. Almoft the whole of which interval the profeffor spent as follows in a journey in June from Winchester to Durham; in refidence, and further ftay, at Durham, and in the neighbourhood in a journey from Durham to Chatfworth; and after fome time spent there, from thence to Winchefter. During which time the P. faw no one perfon, who probably could give him any information of the contents of the examiner's book; except Dr. Warburton, who made no mention of it to him. He had not the leaft notice of them from any other quarter, till fome time after the correspondence was finished; as may be fairly concluded from the fecond paragraph of letter 3d, in the former correfpondence; where no notice at all is taken of the examiner, whofe book furnished the abfurd objection there refuted: nor did he enquire for, or fee, the book, till above two years after it was published. The examiner's book therefore was in effect,

effect, as far as regarded the P. and his part in what is here called the Convention, as if it had remained all the while unpublifhed.'

• Might not a convention be broken before it was made? fays the bishop: How, replies the doctor, or by whom? By the examiner, who was no party in the convention, and had no manner of concern in it; and therefore could not break it? Or is this merely defigned to introduce the pleasant conceit, which follows; as well as an idolater be punished by the judge, before the office was created:-as if there were no judges in the time of Job, because they did not wear a scarlet robe, a full-bottomed wig, and a coif.'

On letter 2d, we have the following note by the bishop:And yet, if the account which has been given to the bishop of the doctor's printed letter to him, be true, (and he has reafon to think it fo from this very letter) there is more abuse in it than in all the bishop's writings put together.To select one curious particular. He charges the bifhop with having, in his fermon preached before the king, laft Lent, fomething reflecting on, or alluding to, particular perfons or tranfactions of a recent date. Now the man who affirmed this to the doctor, (if any fuch there were) and the doctor who affirms it to the public, are infamous calumniators. It is well known to feveral perfons of confideration, that this very fermon, with every paffage, (and in the very words) which gave birth to the calumny, was written and preached, more than once, (and at court too) many years ago.'

On this note we have the following notes by the doctor. There is more abufe, &c. fays his lordfhip: an accufation, fays the doctor, of a moft heinous and flagitious nature, founded on hear-fay; on the report probably of fome of his own creatures, whom he has all the reafon in the world to think prejudiced, and bad evidence, in this cafe: and of whofe veracity indeed he feems to have fome doubt; for he fpeaks with a caution and hefitation (if the account given him be true) which is not in his ufual manner. He advances this horrible charge on hearfay, against a printed and published letter, which he might at any time have read, to fee whether what was reported to him were true or not; and which, at the fame time that he accufes it as an infamous libel, he modeftly declares, that he has not read, and never will read. More abufe in the letter than in ail his writings put together!-Courage, my lord; never fear! YOUR writings fhall always ftand unrivaled in this refpect:

fume fuperbiam Quafitam meritis.

You have always valued yourself on your talent for abuse; and none fhall dare to difpute the palm with you. The Sifenna

Bb 4

and

and the Barri of antient times, the Aretines and the Scioppiufes of later date, fhall all vail the bonnet to you: and if any upstart ribald of the prefent age fhall dare to enter the lists against you in this career; tell him with your usual spirit, that, at the long run, he shall have no reason to applaud his fituation.

To after age THOU halt be writ the man,

That belt with bitter words cou'd arm the tongue,

• And dart the venom'd taunt with keenest rage.

To cite full and particular evidence of his lordship's fuperiour merits, in this way, would be an endlefs tafk. To felet therefore one curious particular only; and that, from a piece in the panegyric ftrain: for he has the addrefs to exhibit his faculty upon every occafion, and to furprize us with the dif play of it, when leaft expected. In the dedication prefixed to the third yolume of Divine Legation, he qualifies all thofe, whofoever they may be, who had controverted his opinions, many of them perfons of known probity, piety, and learning, as zealots and bigots; as madmen leading the blind: as belying a zeal for religion by a ridiculous TARTUFFISM; that is, by a fanctimonious hypocrify, put on as a mask to cover the most fagitious defigns. And he clofes the lift with the addition of a venerable archbishop of Canterbury, not long fince deceased; marking him out by the initial letter of his name, as the encourager of falfe zealots, and the head of the unbelieving politicians. In would be impertinent to enquire, how this well-judged and decent addrefs was received by the truly great and refpectable perfon, to whom it was prefented, in quality of patron. But one may ask, as a question of law, what judgment the fame great magiftrate would probably have paffed upon it, in quality of Lord Chief Juftice of England; if it had been prefented to him, as a libel, by information in the court of King's Bench?

Let us now confider the remaining part of the note, containing a charge of an INFAMOUS CALUMNY.The profeffor has hinted at a famous fermon preached at court, which was univerfally understood by thofe who heard it to reflect on, or allude to, perfons or tranfactions of a recent date. In difproof of this it is alledged, that this very fermon, with every paffage, and in the very words, was written and preached many years ago. Has the Pro. faid one word relating to any of these circumftances? Has he fo much as intimated, that the fermon was old, or new-vampt; that it was, or was not, preached before, with every paffage, and in the very words? He has nothing to do with thefe circumftances: be they true or falfe, his veracity is not in the leaft concerned: fit fides penes auctorem. But, was not fuch a fermon preached? It is not denied: are the fentiments, or even the words, of that fermon mifreported? It is hot pretended, that they are; was not fuch an interpretation of them

them made by all that heard them, or heard of them, as reflec ting on perfons and tranfactions of recent date? That it was, is a matter of public notoriety; it cannot be contradicted. And this interpretation was confirmed by the perfonal behaviour of the preacher to the perfon fuppofed to be reflected on. So that at last this INFAMOUS CALUMNY turns out to be a fimple allufion to a notorious, undenied, undeniable MATTER OF FACT.'

In his lordship's first letter, he fays, I have neither read nor feen, nor, I believe, ever fhall your printed letter to me. Dr. Lowth obferves upon this, that his lordship imitates the wisdom of the Ostrich; who, when he is purfued, runs his head into a hole, leaving his hinder parts all expofed; and in that fituation, feeing nobody, concludes that nobody fees him.-A good hit, this; and which the Reader will eafily enter into the meaning of, without any comment.

His lordship, in his fecond letter to Dr. Lowth, mentions the decent comparison to father Harduin, which the remarker calls an infolent and injurious one— Is there any thing, says the Doctor, in the very name of Harduin, that carries with it more than ordinary reproach in the very mention of it? Is his character fo univerfally bad, that no comparison with regard to any part of it can be made, without indecency towards the perfon, who is in any refpect compared with him? Harduin was a man of extenfive learning, of much more extenfive reading, of great genius, of a strong, a lively, a fruitful, a forgetive imagination; but very confident, arrogant, precipitate, injudicious, and violently addicted to hypothefis and paradox. What fhould poffefs the BISHOP, to confider this as a character so univerfally contemptible, hateful and infamous.'

In his fecond letter too, his lordship fays,-give me leave, first of all, to laugh heartily—and then I will give you an answer. As a gentleman was reading this paftoral letter to a circle of literati at Oxford, one of the company, Dr. Lowth tells us, begged to interrupt the recital at this place, and, after the Bifhop's example, to make a paufe in it, for the relaxation of the audience, by telling them the following ftory.

"A country fellow, among other fights of London, went one day to fee the great fight of all, the lions in the Tower. He foon joined there fome others, who were come upon the, fame' errand. When they were introduced to the den, and the keeper began to perform his office by exhibiting the feveral animals to the company; the old lion of all, the great king of the beafts, as refenting the indignity of being expofed for a fhew, shaking his fhaggy mane, lafhing his fides with his tail, and flaring with his fiery eyes, uttered a moft tremendous roar. The poor. countryman, all aghaft, with his hair standing an end, and fhuddering in every limb, flunk away, and crept into a corner

to

"

to hide himself. • What's the matter, honeft friend? says the keeper; prythee, what art afraid of? Why, man, he only LAUGHS Laughs, quoth a, fays the countryman; d'ye call this LAUGHING? If he looks fo plaguy ugly, and makes fuch a hideous noife, when he LAUGHS; what muft he do, when he GROWLS ?"

an

I have expofed, fays his lordship, or if you will, in your own language, abufed (and I hope to the no fmall fervice of religion and my country) writers of all ranks and characters, civil and ecclefiaftical, living and dead.-Dr. Lowth's remark upon this, is as follows: It has been faid, that a civil ambaffador is, honeft and grave man, fent abroad to LIE for the good of his country. Agreeably to the Bishop's claim of merit in this place, á facred ambaffador may with equal propriety be defined, a meek and holy perfon commiffioned to RAIL and REVILE for the benefit of the Chriftian religion.'

These are some of Dr. Lowth's notes and remarks on the fécond epiftolary correfpondence between him and the Bishop of Gloucefter: there are feveral others equally fpirited and pertinent; but we leave our readers to their own reflections on the fpecimens we have given from his unpublished pamphlet: which we apprehended might, without impropriety, be introduced in company with the critical performance that is the more immediate fubject of the present article.. R.

The principal Truths of natural Religion defended and illuftrated, in nine Differtations: wherein the Objections of Lucretius, Buffon, Maupertuis, Rouffeau, La Mettrie, and other ancient and modern followers of Epicurus are confidered, and their Doctrines refuted. By H. S. Reimarus. Octavo. 6s. Law.

HERE are no writings that afford greater pleasure to a well-difpofed mind, or that are better calculated to eftablish and strengthen the principles of genuine piety, than those that illustrate the divine power, wisdom, and goodness, in the works of creation. The marks of thefe perfections are fo numerous, fo clear, and fo ftriking to every attentivé observer, that it is juft matter of wonder that any who call themselves Philofophers, fhould exclude active, intelligent defign from the univerfe, and afcribe the whole material world, with its various and aftonishing phænomena, to blind chance and neceffity. Such, however, there ftill are, notwithstanding the many excellent performances, wherein the neceffary exiftence of an intelligent being, the cause and origin of the whole frame of nature, is clearly and unanfwerably demonftrated.

As