much as a being wholly perfect in both attributes could and would have attained the same end, without the misery involved in the means. Dr Watson shuts his eyes to this difficulty. We do not say it is insuperable; but only that he has left it where he found it, and has not even removed it a step.

In the year 1760, our author was elected a Fellow of Trinity, and soon after became assistant tutor and professor of Chemistry, a science with which he was at this time wholly unacquainted, having hitherto devoted himself entirely to the abstract sciences and natural philosophy. His ambitious industry, as usual, bore him through all difficulties. I sent,' he says, immediately after my election, for an operator to Paris; I buried myself as it were in my laboratory, at least as much as my other avocations would permit; and in fourteen months from my election, I read a course of chemical lectures to a very full audience, consisting of persons of all ages and degrees, in the University. I read another course in November, 1766, and was 'made Moderator, for the fourth time, in October, 1765.

6

In January every year, when the Bachelors of Arts take their degrees, one of the two Moderators makes a sort of speech in Latin to the Senate; I made this speech three times: the last was in 1766. I had, in a former speech, taken the liberty to mention, with great freedom, some defects in the University education, especially with respect to Noblemen and Fellow-Commoners: and, without hinting the abolition of the orders, strongly insisted on the propriety of obliging them to keep exercises in the schools, as the other candidates 'for degrees did. In this last speech I recommended the instituting public annual examinations, in prescribed books, of all the orders of students in the University. After seven years

6

His libe

of most brilliant success in this chair, he was chosen Professor of Divinity, whereof, he fairly says he then possessed but a 'curta supellex.' But he speedily set himself about mastering this subject with his wonted eagerness and success. rality and good sense had now full play in a very delicate situation; and the following passage may show how steadily he followed those lights, wise by his experience of their use in the walks of other sciences.

I reduced the study of divinity into as narrow a compass as I could, for I determined to study nothing but my Bible, being much unconcerned about the opinions of councils, fathers, churches, bishops, and other men, as little inspired as myself. This mode of proceeding being opposite to the general one, and especially to that of the Master of Peterhouse, who was a great reader, he used to call me autodidaxTos, the self-taught divine.-The Professor of Divinity had been nick-named Malleus Hæreticorum; it was thought to be his

duty to demolish every opinion which militated against what is called the orthodoxy of the Church of England. Now my mind was wholly unbiassed; I had no prejudice against, no predilection for the Church of England; but a sincere regard for the Church of Christ, and an insuperable objection to every degree of dogmatical intolerance. I never troubled myself with answering any arguments which the opponents in the divinity-schools brought against the articles of the church, nor ever admitted their authority as decisive of a difficulty; but I used on such occasions to say to them, holding the New Testament in my hand, En sacrum codicem! Here is the fountain of truth, why do you follow the streams derived from it by the sophistry, or polluted by the passions of man? If you can bring proofs against any thing delivered in this book, I shall think it my duty to reply to you. Articles of churches are not of divinė authority; have done with them; for they may be true, they may be false; and appeal to the book itself. This mode of disputing gained me no credit with the hierarchy; but I thought it an honest one, and it produced a liberal spirit in the University.' p. 39.

Of the same liberal stamp were the doctrines delivered by him upon National Establishments and Subscription.

Whether the majority of the members of any civil community have a right to compel all the members of it to pay towards the maintenance of a set of teachers appointed by the majority, to preach a particular system of doctrines, is a question which might admit a serious discussion. I was once of opinion, that the majority had this right in all cases, and I am still of opinion that they have it in many. But I am staggered when I consider that a case may happen, in which the established religion may be the religion of a minority of the people, that minority, at the same time, possessing a majority of the property, out of which the ministers of the establishment are to be paid. p. 43.

He held, on Subscription, that no Christian church ought to require a confession of faith, upon principles of human invention, or any thing beyond a declaration of belief in the scriptures, as containing a revelation of the will of God. And, speaking of two tracts, in which he maintains these and other principles of an equally liberal cast, both on religious and civil topics, he notes their coincidence with the sentiments of Bishop. Hoadley, and honestly glories in following that illustrious prelate's example, notwithstanding the abuse which he suffered in his own times, and the sneers of Horseley, who has, in ours, called him a republican bishop. In the same admirable, and to us most edifying, spirit, is his remark upon his friend the late Duke of Grafton's Unitarian principles. I never,' says he, attempted either to encourage or to discourage his profession of them; for I was happy to see a person of rank professing, with

with intelligence and with sincerity, Christian principles. If any one thinks that an Unitarian is not a Christian, I plainly say, without being myself an Unitarian, that I think other'wise.' We believe that these passages comprize the greater part of the matter which has caused so great a ferment in the minds of bigotted High-church men and violent fanatics, since this volume was published. Interested and timeserving politicians, who care nothing for either religion or the church, except as they may help to bolster up their temporal power, and afford handles of abuse against their adversaries, have not failed to turn the ferment to their own account. But the good sense of the community has not been wanting upon the occasion; and all the efforts, whether of his deluded, or his hypocritical revilers, have failed to shake the publick opinion of his wisdom and piety.

The pure constitutional principles which Dr Watson cherished himself, he naturally impressed upon the minds of his pupils. Among these, the Marquis of Granby, son of the Duke of Rutland, was one, upon whose education he had bestowed, at all times, unwearied pains. How far he succeeded, may be learnt from the following letter which that nobleman wrote to him in 1775.

"If the Whigs will not now unite themselves in opposition to "such a Tory principle, which has established the present unconsti"tutional system, this country will be plunged into perdition beyond "redemption. I never can thank you too much for making me study "Locke: While I exist, those tenets, which are so attentive to the "natural rights of mankind, shall ever be the guide and direction of my actions.-I live at Chevley; I hope often to see you; you may, "and I am sure you will, still assist me in my studies. Though I "have formed a Tory connexion, Whig principles are too firmly ri" vetted in me ever to be removed. Best compliments to Mrs Watson, and reserve to yourself the assurance of my being most affec"tionately and sincerely yours."

p. 49.

This amicable and honest letter, was written soon after his entrance into publick life. A few years appear to have shaken a little those principles so firmly rivetted,' and to have obscured the recollection of tenets ever to be the guide and direction of his actions.' When Lord Shelburne and the Whigs separated, Lord Granby, now become Duke of Rutland, adhered to the former, and to office. Had he waited for a few weeks, until the coalition had astonished and disgusted the country, and rendered the Whigs universally unpopular, there would have been less cause to lament the noble eleve of Bishop Watson having left them. But he took his resolution, while they had all the right, and all the popular favour on their side;

weary, perhaps, of the long opposition in which he had been engaged, and unable to bear the event which dashed the cup of power from his lips, just as they first touched it. Let us, however, be just to the memory of this nobleman. He made the change upon something like grounds of principle. He gave his support to Lord Shelburne's administration, upon the most positive assurances, that the independency of America was to be acknowledged, and the wishes of the people, relative to Parliamentary Reform, granted.' p. 93. He supported, too, in joining Lord Shelburne, an intimate personal friend; the late Mr Pitt then entering upon his brilliant career, in a high, though a subordinate situation of the ministry. How different such grounds of adhering to the Court, from those upon which many men of exalted rank in our times condescend to abandon their independence, sink themselves among the mob of base sycophants, and support every measure, and every man, that the Palace party may be pleased to patronize! Surely there was something in the talents and the name of such a man as Mr Pitt, calculated to varnish over the conduct of those who clung to him while he dispensed the favours of the Crown, and to make their motives defensible, until they quitted him upon his dismissal, and gave the same support to his feeble successor. But what shall be said of those high-born grandees, filling the rank of princes, and revelling in wealth which the lords of principalities may envy, who yet abdicate all the noblest functions of such exalted station, and, alike regardless of measures, and careless of personal merit, make themselves the regular and almost hereditary minions of every vile and contemptible tool whom the Crown may find it suited to views of selfish policy to employ? The successors of Mr Pitt, with his name ever on their lips to shed a false lustre over their own insignificance, and bind their supporters to the degradation of following such leaders, are notoriously the enemies of his strongest political opinions. When the Duke of Rutland took office with him, it was upon assurance that Parlia mentary reform was to be a primary object of his administra tion. He saw him twice, and in appearance sincerely, attempt this measure; and he died before his conduct changed. But, to which of Mr Pitt's principles do those noble persons lend their aid, who are now deluded by his name into a support of his pretended successors? It would be reckoned too ridiculous in any man to affect personal deference towards the leading members of such cabinets as we have lately seen. The names of Jenkinsonian and Addingtonian, are hardly more barbarous and uncouth, than the nature of such beings would be ridiculous

if they could be figured to have a real existence. Aware of this, the ministers of the passing day have contrived to borrow Mr Pitt's name,-so that whoever finds it convenient to support them, may conceal his humiliation from himself by calling that celebrated man his leader. Yet how perfectly flimsy is the disguise! Acting in his name, our consistent ministers so vehemently oppose the very principles to which he actually sacrificed his place, that his most sincere personal friends are unable to attend the Pitt clubs, which, preferring the favour of the living to the memory of the departed minister, make hostility and the cause of Religious Liberty the shibboleth of their union, and yearly meet to celebrate his birthday, by proscribing his most fixed opinions!

In 1776, Dr Watson preached the Restoration and Accession Sermons before the University, and published the former under the title of The Principles of the Revolution Vindicated.' It was cautiously but boldly written; and cried down by the Tories as treasonable. But Judge Wilson, a friend and fellow countryman of our author's, anxious for his safety, having asked Mr Dunning his opinion of it, he replied, "It is just such treason as ought to be preached once a month at St James's.' The Court, however, was of another mind in the article of sermons and their preachers; and never forgave this Whig discourse. The cry of Republican, (to which the word Jacobin has in our day succeeded), was raised by them against the author; the venal writers were let loose upon him; and Mr Cumberland, little to his honour, led the attack, in some sorry pamphlets, which few could read and fewer could admire. Bishop Hoadley, our author's celebrated predecessor in principles and persecution, defined men of Republican principles to be a sort of dangerous men who have of late taken heart, and defended the Revolution that saved us.' The description is quite as applicable in our times as in those of the two prelates; for now the Revolution is attacked by two classes of declaimers, the hirelings of the Court, and the tools of the mob party. Dr Watson sets against the abuse to which his sermon exposed him, the applause of Mr Fox which it gained; and adds, I always looked upon Mr Fox to be one of the most constitutional reasoners, and one of the most argumentative orators in either House of Parliament. I was, at the time this compliment was paid me, and am still, much gratified by it. The approbation of such men ever has been, and ever will be, dearer to me than the most dignified and lucrative stations in the church. '

It is painful to find the highest personages in the state so tainted with vulgar prejudice, or so forgetful of the tenure by which