Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

142

Anecdote of a condemned Criminal.

scious of it, but his disciples were also; but we also are assured that his flesh and blood could not inherit the kingdom of heaven. When he was changed, whether in the tomb or at the time of the ascension, is of no consequence; the objection of Cantabrigiensis ceases to have force, unless he can shew that the flesh and blood of the body of Jesus inherited the kingdom of God.

4. Though the hypothesis of Dr. Watts may be, in part, a supposition to avoid a difficulty, yet to me it does appear that part of that supposition has a very close analogy to the scriptures and what we know of nature. The language of the Doctor would certainly have been more correct had he said "We must ourselves rise at the last day for us to receive rewards and punishments," instead of saying "our bodies must rise.". If the Doctor errs in saying "there may be, perhaps, some original fibres of each human body," perhaps he does not err in the continuing sentence, "some stamina vitæ or primæval seeds of life, which may remain through all the stages of life, death and the grave." In the present state of things, as Dr. Watts says, "If there be any such constant and vital atoms, they are known to God only." Yet man may conjecture whilst he keeps within the bounds of natural and revealed evidence.

All nature makes known a distinction between body and life, whether it is in vegetable or animal union: as far as we know, and here man has extensive evidence, all life is a twofold production; without the animating principle the ovum corrupts, with it life is the consequence: that whose origin is from two may be long combined together; but as it was at first united, it must necessarily have connected with it a possibility of separation; but in all living bodies we have something more, for we have a continual struggle between the energies of the vital principle and the tendency of matter to corruption; corporeality being preserved alone in existence by

Too many of the followers of Dr. Priestley, in the doctrine of the Materialism of the Mind, reason as though organization and mind were the same; but nothing can be more distinct: mind from infancy increases in knowledge and maturity to extreme old age, always feeling through the whole period accumulating evidence by memory of personal identity; whereas the whole of corporeal organization is so constantly passing away that though the man recollects the occur rences that have happened to him for more than a century past, it is probable that not one particle of the matter that constitutes his organization is of more than ten years' standing, and probably has not been one year a part of him. It is the confounding together the actor and the instrument that has confused this plain subject.

Be not alarmed, Sir, I am not going to revive the now exploded sys tem of the pre-existence of the human mind, nor of its necessary immortality: neither to bring forward the spectres nor hobgoblins of past ages to terrify the nervous and alarm the fearful. With you, Sir, I believe that the beginning of life is the commencement, and that its earthly termination of existence is a stop to all consciousness till the great Creator has new clothed it with its etherial dress or habitation. In the mean time, I trust sufficient has been said to prove the scripture resurrection is not improbable or incredible; and that it is a resurrection of that which alone can be called the man, and that the resurrection of Jesus is and ought to be sufficient evidence for us to act upon the expectation of our own future resurrection.

If any of your correspondents wish to carry on this physiological research in connexion with scripture evidence and it meets your approbation to permit its continuance, it will give much pleasure to

CREDO.

Hackney, Feb. 5, 1816.

SIR, the energies of vitality. Nature itselfdemned criminal, extracted from HE following anecdote of a con

does therefore demonstrate that man is not a one indivisible being as it regards body and mind; but that mind is the man, and the body is the organic instrument by which the mind obtains information and power to act.

a late publication, entitled, "Letters from a Gentleman in the North of Scotland," may not be unacceptable to your readers.

"Then the ministers of the town

Secession from the Church.-Sir I. Newton's MSS.

went into the jail to give him ghostly advice, and endeavoured to bring him to a confession of his other sins, with out which they told him he could not hope for redemption-for besides this murder, he was strongly suspected, &c. &c. * * * But when the ministers had said all that was customary concerning the merit of confession, he abruptly asked them, if either or all of them could pardon him in case he made a confession: and when they had answered No; not absolutely,' he said, You have told me, God can forgive me?' They said it was true. Then said he, As you cannot pardon me I have nothing to do with you, but will confess to him that

can.'

[ocr errors]

There are other curious matters related in the author's account of this extraordinary Highlander, but not of sufficient interest for your pages. I remain, Sir, Yours respectfully,

IB

SIR,

S. C.

London, Feb. 28, 1816.

T is well known that Mr. George Baring has lately resigned the vicarage of Winterbourne Stoke, Wilts, and seceded from the Church of England, and that several other clergymen of the same neighbourhood have also left the Establishment. But the

grounds of their secession have not, believe, been made public. I beg leave therefore to request of some one of your correspondents in the West an explanation of this curious piece of news. Have the seceders been actuated by love of orthodoxy or love of heresy?

SIR,

NONCON.

H, Jan. 18, 1816,
N the second vol. of the "Annals

Thomson, (p. 247,) the editor has
reprinted from his "History of the
Royal Society," a " Biographical Ac-
count of Sir Isaac Newton," and to
that part of the Memoir which touch-
es upon Sir Isaac's religious senti-
ments, has subjoined the following
note (page 322).

"I have heard it affirmed by some of the self-constituted philosophers of the present day, that Sir Isaac Newton believed the Christian religion merely because he was born in a

143

Christian country; that he never examined it; and that he left behind him a cart-load of papers on religious subjects, which Dr. Horsley examined and declared unfit for publication. These gentlemen do not perceive that their declarations are inconsistent with each other. Nobody who has ever read a page of Newton's works could believe that he could write a cart-load of papers on a subject which he never examined. Newton's religious opinions were not orthodox; for example, he did not believe in the Trinity. This gives us the reason why Horsley, the Champion of the Trinity, found Newton's papers unfit for publication. But it is much to be regretted that they have never seen the light."

In the regret expressed by the biographer, I presume all your readers will participate; and my reason for copying the note is a hope that, by being republished in your Miscellany it may meet the eye of some of your numerous readers, who may be able, through the same channel, to communicate information as to the existence and present situation of the papers in question. I am, Sir, Your constant reader, A. F.

SIR,

Plymouth, Dec. 25, 1815.

perusing a work which I suspect

HAVE lately had the pleasure of

is not so much known as it deserves to be; nor do I recollect to have seen the name of its author amongst those of the champions of the proper unity and supremacy of God the Father, although he well deserves to have been placed in the very first rank of them. The copy I have before me is stated to have been published in the year 1815, and to be the

circumstance, and from the rank of the author, and the style of the work, I presume it has moved chiefly in the very highest circles, where I cannot but hope and believe it has produced a strong effect, although at present we have seen no better proof of it than the facility with which the persecuting laws relative to Anti-Trinitarians were repealed in the last session of our parliament. Indeed the way in which Mr. Smith's bill was carried after the bishops had been assembled

144

On Gifford's "Illucidation of the Unity of God."

to consider the expediency of it, and the very liberal views which are now generally entertained by the Lords of the Upper and the Gentlemen of the Lower House of Parliament, are convincing proofs that a very different manner of thinking prevails in the higher circles upon religious subjects than that which induced our wary ancestors to furnish religion with props and shores, which, while they are no support, are an enfeeblement and a disgrace to it.

The book to which I refer is called "An Illucidation of the Unity of God deduced from Scripture and Reason." It is dedicated to the Society of Unitarian Christians at Montrose, in North Britain, by James Gifford; who resided at Girton, in Cambridgeshire; and was, I am informed, a Lieutenant Colonel in the Line, and an intimate friend of Mr. Lindsey. The dedication is dated July 25, 1787. It is accompanied by a letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury; and the whole of the performance exhibits a deep research into the sacred volume, and serious inquiry into the meaning of its declarations, with an uncommon degree of firmness of manner, yet mildness of expression, a fortiter in re with a suaviter in modo, scarcely ever to be found united in a case of such incalculable importance. The work is published for Rowland Hunter, (late Johnson) St. Paul's Church Yard.

I am desirous of calling the attention of your readers to this very interesting work; and especially to an illustration of the Divine Unity, which I conceive, to many, will be new. After speaking of the grand unity of design which all nature exhibits, and which points our intellectual powers distinctly to a unity of the Divine Nature, he adds,

"God has taken care that we should have more reasons than one to believe that all things were formed by one Great Mind, that all are the effects of the same Great Cause; and I think he has interwoven the truth of his Unity in our very nature, if we would attend to its operations. I shall endeavour to give proof of this by a familiar instance; but I beg leave to introduce it rather as an accessory circumstance than as a fundamental argument.

Whenever a multiplicity of objects are presented to the mind, we

Or

find it necessary, in order to contem-
plate with any accuracy, to confine
ourselves to one and drop all the rest.
A consequence ever unavoidable while
the thinking principle is closely en-
gaged. And hence it happens, that
the Unity of God forces itself upon
us in the act of devotion, from the
indivisibility of thought. For we may
observe that, when we address our-
selves intently in prayer, we find it
impossible to fix our meditation ab-
solutely on more than one object of
worship at the same moment. All
others are neglected in the instant,
and cannot enter the mind without
confusing and dissipating the atten-
tion. This alone plainly shews, that
the mental faculties are not calculated
to attend fixedly to more than one
object. We may indeed associate
three or more different things or per-
sons in idea, and then consider them
in one collective view, but this does
not destroy their individuality, and
when we would contemplate any one
of these objects with precision we
must dismiss the combination.
we may blend three or more distinct
things or subjects together in idea,
and then consider them in the aggre-
gate as one; but, besides that this
is the mere work of the imagination,
it would be held both dissatisfactory
and dangerous with respect to the
Trinity: because we are expressly
enjoined in our present received doc.
trines to preserve the distinction of the
three persons, and acknowledge them
to be, not only separate but also equal
objects of prayer and thanksgiving.
Notwithstanding this in the solemn
acts of devotion, the mind betrays an
election for the one or the other; and
this preference, we find, is generally
given to God the Father Almighty
himself, and every other object is ex-
cluded from the mind at the time.
For He incessantly rises in the col-
lected soul, and fills it. Thus the
great truth of the unity of the Deity
seems to have been implanted by him
in our nature; and the mind of man,
with which it is in perfect concord,
in its most serious and attentive mo-
ments, is necessarily led to acknow
ledge it. In praying to or glorifying

*Notwithstanding the polytheism of the Heathen, it is certain from their own wri tings and monuments, that the belief of a Supreme God naturally prevailed among

[ocr errors]

New Jury Court of Scotland.

the Trinity in their turns, we still give the precedence to the Father, but by a positive distinction in their persons, and in our worship, we unavoidably destroy the very notion of one only God, and, as I apprehend, overthrow the great basis of revealed religion.

"What will naturally follow from these observations is this: that, as the indivisibility of thought will not permit us to pray fixedly to more than one object at the same time, for the very attempt to divide the attention confuses it; therefore we are com

system, to invoke and worship the three persons in a separate manner, as we find is done in the Litany and in many of the Collects. Thus when we worship the Father, we adore a person different from the Son and the Holy Ghost; and when we worship THESE, we adore two persons different from the Father and from each other. For, howsoever they may be connect ed, their persons are to be preserved distinctly in the mind, and their worship of course to be distinct also.

"Now, under these circumstances, it appears impossible, from the very nature of thought, to free ourselves from the idea of their being three distinct Gods. For since we cannot divide our attention, which if we could would be the highest disrespect to the person meant to be adored, it must be always changed with the object of our worship; and then it inevitably follows, that every other must be neglected at the time; and these are exactly the consequences with all polytheism whatsover; from which therefore 1 humbly apprehend it is extremely difficult to distinguish the present system. But, on the other hand, if we blend the three persons together, and consider them as one and the same intelligent being, then the Athanasian hypothesis is destroyed, and any distinct or discriminating worship appears totally superfluous and contradictory." I am, Sir,

Yours,

J. W.

them, and was sometimes openly testified. See Acts xvii. 22, 23. Most of them, indeed, conceived that he was too great or too far removed to attend to men or their supplications. We are obliged to revelation for the complete cure of this most discouraging apprehension,

VOL. XI.

145

P.S. Since writing the above, I have little doubt that the former edi- . tions of this work were of the size of a pretty large pamphlet, and that the present edition was published after Mr. G's. death, by his son, a gentleman also in his Majesty's service, enlarged into an octavo volume by numerous valuable notes, and other additions. Mr. Gifford had three sons, two in the army, the other in the navy.

New Jury Court of Scotland.
N Monday, the 22d instant, the

first time.

The Right Hon. William Adam, Lord Chief Commissioner; Allan Maconochie, Lord Meadowbank; and David Monypenny, Lord Pitmilly, the two other Commissioners, being assembled; and the names of the thirty-six Jurymen returned to try the issues, being called over, and having answered to their names, the Lord Chief Commisioner opened the business of the Court in a speech to the following effect :

[ocr errors]

MY LORDS-Before we proceed to the cause appointed for trial this day, I wish to say a few words to the Court. I believe I am justified, according to immemorial precedent, as a newly appointed presiding Judge of a supreme tribunal in this country, in addressing the Court. This has been the uniform practice of all Presidents on their appointment.

I believe I am justified in this Court which is to administer justice by a jury, as in the Criminal Courts of this country, according to the practice of those courts on their circuits, in saying something to you, Gentlemen of the Jury, upon your being assembled here; and I think I should not be justified at the opening of this new court for the first time, if I did not state what has occurred to me on this occasion; exhibiting a new and an important feature in the judicial system of Scotland.

It may not be unfit, recent as it is since the Act of Parliament passed creating this court, shortly to retrace the circumstances which have given rise to the institution of this tribunal.

In the year 1808, an Act of Parliament passed for improving the judicatures of this country. It empowered and required that his Majesty

146

New Jury Court of Scotland.

should appoint commissioners to ex- for this purpose in all the countries

amire into that grave and weighty, subject, and to report to the King and the two Houses of Parliament. Among other things, the commissioners were to be called upon by the Act of Parliament to inquire into the fitness of introducing trial by jury in civil causes into the Scotch judicial establishment. In the month of May, 1810, the commissioners reported on that subject, stating, that if care was taken" that no alteration of our municipal law was made by such institution, the enabling the Court of Session to direct issues of fact to be tried by jury, might afford a safe foundation on which important experiments might be made."

This Report lay untouched for several years. But in the interval between making this Report in May, 1810, and the close of the session of Parliament, 1814, many cases had occurred in the House of Lords, moving entirely on matter of fact, accompanied with long printed proofs, calling upon the Supreme Court of Appeal, which should only be required to decide matters of law, to perform a duty not properly belonging to it, by deciding cases resting upon intricate, difficult, and ill-proved facts. This created observation in the House of Lords, out of which the statute grew, under which this Court sits, and from which it derives its authority and constitution.

It is to be observed then, that the great distinguishing feature of this, tribunal is, that it is the first duty of its Judges so to act, as not to disturb in any respect that ancient and admirable system of the municipal law of Scotland, handed down to us by our ancestors, and secured to us by the Act of Union, constituting, as it were, a charter for the preservation of the jurisprudential system of Scotland.

It shall be my peculiar care, as it` is my, duty, to walk in this course; and however I may distrust my own ability, I feel assured I shall be able to do it with the assistance of your Lordships.

The object then, of the law under which we sit, is to receive and try issues directed by the decisions of the Court of Session, wherein matters of fact are to be proved by the intervension of a jury."

This institution has been long used

t

which speak the language we speak. It is of a tradition so high that nothing is known of its origin. It is of a perfection so great for its object and purpose, that it has remained in un-' abated vigour and purity from its time. commencement to the present

It is the character of all other institutions for the investigation of facts to have become inadequate to their end. It is the character of this mixed tribunal, where a jury decide on the facts under the direction of a court, to have preserved its original perfection unabated. These extraordinary and important features of durability and perfection seem to arise out of causes which it may not be unfit to state upon the occasion of introducing it into the administration of civil justice in Scotland. They are the natural results of its modes of acting.

It is to be observed, first, that it can only proceed by settling of a clear distinct issue to be tried. The advantage of this is manifest, it obliges the directing Court to compel the parties to precision, and relieves the causes at the commencement of litigation from all dispute as to what the questions are between the parties. It enables the proof to be made clearly as applicable to those questions.

It requires no more enlarged statement to enforce the advantages of this effect of the trial by jury.

Secondly. It adds a casual to a permanent tribunal; and, by their acting and re-acting on each other, the na tural qualifications of both are improved, and their defects amended.

The great feature of the casual part of the tribunal, The Jury, is its being constituted and assembled, in a manner (as far as human wisdom can ac complish any end) to secure impartiality and perfect indifference in the causes to be tried by it.

It is chosen from among the people at large, according to a certain qualification, insuring the education and understanding necessary for the duty. A certain number are returned, greater than the number required to try, as you thirty-six. Gentlemen are now returned here, to try the appointed issues. The return is made by the sheriff, a magistrate of high rank,'unacquainted with, and uninterested in the parties, having no connexion with them; and when returned, the twelve

« AnteriorContinua »