this particular fubject. The investigation of a law-thefis hath no charms for the generality of readers. Courts of justice do not fit to decide abftrat points of law. They require real parties, real intereits, and an actual caufe depending before them; but there is always an avenue to the judgment of men of learning through the medium of the prefs. Ingenuity can here exert itself with no other client than the bookfeller, and hind its way to public notice, though the gates of Wetminster-hall are shut.

[The above account was prepared for the prefs before we were informed of the melancholy event which has deprived our country of the refpectable Judge, whofe opinion is canvaffed in this pamphlet. Criticism may lay afide her pen; and Controverfy herself for a while forget her acrimony, to thed a tear over departed genius and learning. An author's beft and nobleft monument is his writings. Non omnis moritur. And we have the fatisfaction to hear that a pofthumous work is bequeathed, by Sir W. Black ftone, to the profeffion of the law, as well as fome Additions with which his Commen. taries on the Laws of England will be enriched.]

HORTICULTURE.

Art. 37. The Garden Mushroom: Its Nature and Cultivation. A Treatife exhibiting full and plain Directions, for producing this defirable Plant in Perfection and Plenty, according to the true fuccefsful Practice of the London Gardeners. By John Aber crombie, Author of the Gardener's Kalendar. 8vo. I s. 6 d. L. Davis.

Though this treatife contains nothing materially new, yet, as it enters more minutely into the fubject than any former publication, it will not be without its ufe to the curious gardener, who wishes to cultivate the vegetable of which it treats, in the highest perfection. The rules, as we learn from a gentleman who has had fome experience in thefe matters, are the fame which are obferved by the best gardeners. MISCELLANEOUS.

Art. 38. Leffons in Elocution; or, Mifcellaneous Pieces in Profe and Verfe; felected from the best Authors, for the Perufal of Perfons of Talte, and the Improvement of Youth in Reading and Speaking. By William Scott, Teacher in Edinburgh. 12mo. 3 s. Elliot, Edinburgh; Longman, London. 1779.

The idea of this compilation is evidently borrowed from Dr. En field's Speaker, a work, the general ufe of which is its belt praife. A very confiderable part of the leffons in both are the fame; and where they differ (to fay the leaf), we fee no reafon to give the preference to Mr. Scott's judgment and tafte in felection. With refpect to the difpofition of the materials, the method adopted in the Speaker, of arranging the pieces under the feveral diftinét fpecies of elocution, narrative, didactic, argumentative, eratorical, &c. is certainly much better fuited to answer the purpose of improvement in fpeaking, than a promifcuous mifcellany in proje and verfe; for each branch of elocution has its proper tone and manner, which must be best acquired by repeated exercife.

Art.

Art. 39. An Enquiry into, and Remarks upon, the Conduct of Lieu tenant General Burgoyne. The Plan of Operation for the Campaign, 1777. The instructions from the Secretary of State. And the Circumftances that led to the Lofs of the Northern Army. 8vo. 1 s. Matthews. 1780.

This review of the conduct of General Burgoyne, with regard to that unfortunate expedition, which ended in the lofs of his army, is written with keenness and energy, but with a degree of rancour which marks the fpirit of party.-Perhaps, we may infer, without any great pretenfions to fagacity, that if the lucklefs General had forborne to connect himself with Oppofition, fince his parole return to England, he would have been lefs expofed to the virulent attacks of thofe literary Pandours, who fkirmish under the minifterial ftandard.

CORRESPONDENCE.

To the AUTHORS of the MONTHLY REVIEW.
GENTLEMEN,

I meet of

Did not meet with the late book, intitled, The Church of England vindicated, till I faw your remarks upon it in the Review for laft November; where you justly call the Author a mot illiberal intolerant. One thing I took more particular notice of, that he fays,

"The old Will Whifton affirmed, that Jefus Christ was a mere man, the fon of Jofeph and Mary, in the fame manner as he was the natural product of a male and female Whifton."

Now, as grandfon to Mr. Whifton, and well acquainted with his opinions, I will take upon me to affirm, that that was not his belief; and the Author has no right to charge him with it, unless he can produce one paffage, at leaft, out of his numerous writings, which fays fo; which I hereby call upon him to do. And if he does not know the difference between a Socinian, which Mr. Whifton was not, and what is called an Arian, which he owned himself to be, this Author is not qualified to write on that controversy.

Mr. Whilton's opinions, which I fhall neither deny, nor am afhamed of, will be beft feen by fome quotations from his own writings I fhall take them from his Account of the Primitive Faith, in the fourth volume of his Primitive Chriftianity revived; where he fays as follows:

Art. 5. Jefus Chrift is the Holy One of God, a Being or Perfon, of fupereminent and divine perfections, knowledge, power, and authority; and fo far fuperior to all fubordinate creatures; i. e. to all the thrones, dominions, pricipalities, powers, cherubim, feraphim, archangels, angels, and men, which are made fubject unto him.'

Art. 6. Jefus Chrift is the Moyos y medianos, The first begotten of all creatures, The beginning of the creation of God, i. e. a Divine Being or Perfon, created or begotten by the Father before all ages; or before all fubordinare creatures, vifible and invisible.'

Art. 7. God the Father by his Word, by his Son, or by Jefus Christ, as his minifter or active inftrument, at first created, made, ordered, or difpofed; and ftill governs all the fubordinate creatures, vifible and invvisible.'

Art.

Art. 9.

Jefus Chrift, the Word and Son of God, was very frequently fent by the Supreme God, the Father, in the ancient ages; and again, more apparently at his incarnation; as his fervant, his vicegerent, and minifter, into the world.'

Art. 13. Jefus Chrift, the Word and Son of God, did in his Divine nature, in the moft ancient times, properly defcend from heaven, and appear at feveral times, and in feveral places, to the patriarchs; perfonating the Supreme God, or acting wholly in his name, and as his deputy and vicegerent in the world."

Art. 14. Jefus Chrift, the Word and Son of God, descended properly again from heaven, in his Divine nature, and became man; being by the power of the Holy Ghoft, conceived in, and born of, the bleffed Virgin Mary; and increafing afterward in wisdom and ftature like other men.'

From thefe quotations, to which more might be added, let any impartial perfon judge, whether Mr. Whiton thought our Saviour a mere man; who he fays was far Superior to angels and men, and as God's minister created and governs them (Art. 5, and 7.), or that he did not exist before Jofeph and Mary; who, he fays, was before all ages, and in the most ancient times appeared to the patriarchs (Art. 6 and 13.). T. BARKER.

Lyndon, Jan. 17, 1780.

We are forry that any thing we have faid concerning Dr. Delany, in our Review of the Supplement to the Works of Dean Swift, fhould have drawn on us the fufpicion of hafte or partiality. We refpect the abilities and learning of Dr. D. and we efteem his general character. In quoting fuch paffages as occurred in Lord Orrery's letters, refpecting the Doctor, we meant rather a compliment to his virtues, than a reflection on his memory. If his Lordthip mifreprefented fome parts of the Doctor's character, at the time when he bestowed fuch liberal encomiums on other parts of it, we are not answerable for the miflake. From the anecdotes preferved of the Doctor, and published by Mr. Nichols, we fee enough to convince us, that the best men have their peevish and fplenetic hours; and unlefs Lord Orrery can be fufpected of an illiberal falfehood with refpect to the man for whom he profeffeth fo much good-will, we muft give credit to the complaint he made of the harsh treatment he had met with from Dr. Delany.

We acknowledge the politeness of C. D's letter, and thank him for his obliging hint respecting a General Catalogue.

N. B. If C. D. can produce fufficient proofs to invalidate the reflections of Lord Orrery, or will communicate any particulars to illuftrate the character of Dr. Delany, we fhall probably have no objection to laying them before the public.

In your Monthly Review for Dec. 1779, I find a mistake † in P. 444. It is there related, in the Article Hittorical Account of

* See Review for November, Art. IX.

Not of the Reviewer, but of the Author there quoted.

the

the Rife and Progrefs of the Colonies of South Carolina and Georgia,” that a frolling Moravian preacher came to Carolina, to the family of Dutartres, and filled their heads with wild and fantastic ideas, which produced mifchiefs, for which three perfons were defervedly hanged in 1724. Now it happens, that none of the Moravian Brethren, whatever nonfenfe they may be accused of, ever came to Carolina, till ten years after that date, at leaft. Mr. Garden, on whofe exanefs the Author of that book relies, may, in 1738, have heard of a Moravian being at Purysburg, and confounded his ideas. Certain it is, that none of the Moravian Brethren were in Carolina fo early; nor could I ever learn that any of them were used to spread Jacob Behmen's books, whatever their merit or demerit may be. , I am, Gentlemen, yours, &c.

Feb. 5, 1780.

AN OLD CORRESPONDENT.

I fee in your Monthly Review for Jan. 1780, an account of an Article in the Philofophical Tranfactions, relating to a machine which Mr. Le Cerf, watchmaker at Geneva, pretends to be the inventor of. It was not of his invention; Mr. Louis Preudhomme, of Geneva, was the inventor. Le Cerf arrogated to himself the invention of an instrument he does not even understand, but has spoiled. Some papers relative to this machine, are in the hands of the Prefident of the Royal Society, and I believe Lord Mahon has, fince the communication of Le Cerf's paper to the Royal Society, been informed by fome of his friends at Geneva, of the true ftate of the facts relative to this machine; but I know not whether the Royal Society, confiftent with its ufages, can now do any thing in the matter. When the Tranfactions of the Geneva Society of Arts fhall appear, the fact with regard to Le Cerf will, I am informed, be fet in its true light. However, I fhould hope, Lord Mahon will, if he has received true and fatisfactory information, give it to the Royal Society. I am, Gentlemen, yours.

Feb. 6, 1780.

J. H.

$15 In answer to an application which we have received, relative to a paffage in our Review for laft month; we need only reler our Correfpondent to the late publications of Dr. Priestley, for inftructions relating to the methods of imitating, and even excelling, with respect to their medical qualities, the waters of Spa, and others of that class.

Itt Dr. FRANKLIN's Political and Miscellaneous Pieces in our next. Alfo Mr. FELL's Demoniacs.

The defign of a General Index to all the volumes of The Monthly Review, is poftponed for the prefent.

An accident has prevented Mr. Hey's Letter from appearing in this Month's Review. It will be given in our next.

THE

MONTHLY REVIEW,

For MARCH, 1780.

ART. I. Damoniacs. An Enquiry into the Heathen and the Scripture Doctrine of Dæmons. In which the Hypothefis of the Rev. Mr. Farmer, and others on this Subject, are particularly confidered. By John Fell. 8vo. 5s. Boards. Dilly. 1779.

WHE

HEN we began to read the preface to this publication, we flattered ourselves that we were about to perufe, at leaft, a candid difcuffion of the fubject mentioned in the title. We fufpected, however, before we had finished it, that we were mistaken and now that we have gone through the whole work, we find ourselves obliged to confider Mr. Fell as a prejudiced and conceited writer, whofe performance is equally deficient in judgment and in candour. We have had occafion, heretofore, to reprove Mr. Fell for his pertnefs and arrogance; but he has not profited by our admonition. In his present publication, Mr. Farmer is treated with an air of fuperiority and contempt; which would have been unjuftifiable, even if Mr. Fell had been as much fuperior to Mr. Farmer, with respect to judgment and learning, as Mr. Farmer is to most writers on this contraverted fubject. The opinions of this Author are, in general, advanced with the confidence of infallibility, and the principles and spirit of thofe against whom he writes, are arraigned and condemned with equal feverity and presumption, Mr. Fell has yet to learn, that modesty and humility are qualities neceffary to give a writer of his moderate abilities and attainments a claim to attention, and that judicious inquirers will not take confident affertions for conclufive arguments, but will ever fufpect the foundness of that writer's judgment, and the goodness of his caufe, who, inftead of proving that the fyftem which he opposes is not well founded, is perpetually declaiming on its tendency and confequences, and inveighing against its

abettors.

VOL. LXII.

N

The