To the extreme rapidity with which Barrow committed his thoughts to writing, I am inclined to ascribe the hasty and not altogether consistent opinions which he has hazarded on some important topics. I shall confine myself to a single example, which I select in preference to others, as it bears directly on the most interesting of all questions connected with the theory of morals. "If we scan," says he, "the particular nature, and search into the original causes of the several kinds of naughty dispositions in our souls, and of miscarriages in our lives, we shall find inordinate self-love to be a main ingredient, and a common source of them all; so that a divine of great name had some reason to affirm,

that original sin (or that innate distemper from which men generally become so very prone to evil, and averse to good), doth consist in selflove, disposing us to all kinds of irre, gularity and excess." In another pas sage, the same author expresses him self thus: "Reason dictateth and prescribeth to us, that we should have a sober regard to our true good and welfare; to our best interests and solid content; to that which (all things being rightly stated, considered and computed) will, in the final event, prove most beneficial and satisfactory to us: a self-love working in prosecution of such things, common sense cannot but allow and approve."

Of these two opposite and irreconcilable opinions, the latter is incomparably the least wide of the truth; and accordingly Mr. Locke, and his innumerable followers, both in England and on the Continent, have maintained, that virtue and an enlightened self-love are one and the same. I have quoted the two pas

authority of a manuscript of Dr. Doddridge, that most of Barrow's sermons were transcribed three times, and some much oftener. They seem to me to contain very strong intrinsic evidence of the incorrectness of this anecdote.-Mr. Abraham Hill, (in his Account of the Life of Barrow, addressed to Dr. Tillotson), contents himself with saying, that "Some of his sermons were written four or five times over;"-mentioning, at the same time, a circumstance which may account for this fact, in perfect consistency with what, I have stated above, that "Barrow was very ready to lend his sermons as often as desired."

sages here, merely to shew the very little attention that had been paid, at the era in question, to ethical science, by one of the most learned and profound divines of his age. This is the more remarkable, as his works every where inculcate the purest lessons of practical morality, and evince a singular acuteness and justness of eye in the observation of human character. Whoever compares the views of Barrow, when he touches on the theory of morals, with those opened about fifty years afterwards by Dr. Butler, in his Discourses on Human Nature, will be abundantly satisfied, that, in this science, as well as in others, the progress of the philosophical spirit during the intervening period was not inconsiderable.

The name of WILKINS, (although he too wrote with some reputation against the Epicureans of his day), is now remembered chiefly in conse quence of his treatises concerning a universal language and a real character. With all the ingenuity displayed in them, they cannot be considered as accessions of much value to science: and the long period since elapsed, during which no attempt has been made to turn them to any practical use, affords of itself no slight presumption against the solidity of the project.

A few years before the death of Hobbes, Dr. CUMBERLAND (afterwards Bishop of Peterborough) published a book, entitled, De Legibus Natura, Disquisitio Philosophica; the principal aim of which was to confirm and illustrate, in opposition to Hobbes, the conclusions of Grotius, concerning Natural Law. The work is executed with ability, and discovers juster views of the object of moral science, than any modern system that had yet appeared; the author resting. the strength of his argument, not, as Grotius had done, on an accumulation of authorities, but on the princies ples of the human frame, and the mutual relations of the human race. The circumstance, however, which chiefly entitles this publication to o notice is, that it seems to have been the earliest on the subject which at tracted, in any considerable degree, the attention of English scholars. From this time, the writings of Grotius and of Puffendorff began to be; generally studied, and soon after made their way into the Universities Ins

Lord of Rochester, many of these words might have been well spared; but I wist it is often seen that the greatest clerks are not always the wisest men." To which the Bishop replied, "My Lord, I do not remember any fools in my time that ever proved great clerks."

When the Commons heard of this speech, they conceived so great indig nation against the Bishop, that they immediately sent their Speaker, Audley, attended with a number of the members, to complain of it to the King; and to let his Majesty know, "how grievously they thought themselves in jured thereby, for charging them with lack of faith, as if they had been infidels or heretics," &c. To satisfy the Commons, the King sent for the Bishop of Rochester, and demanded of him why he spoke in such a manner? The prelate answered," that being in parliament, he spake his mind freely in defence of the church, which he saw daily injured and oppressed by the common people, whose office it was, not. to judge of her manners, much less to reform them. And therefore he said he thought himself in conscience bound to defend her in all that lay within his power." However, the King advised him "to use his words more temperately another time."

But the injury the Commons thought they had received, by this reflection, was not so easily digested; for, one of the members making use of the gospel doctrine so far, says Lord Herbert, as to take a reasonable liberty to judge of things; and being piqued at the Bishop for laying it all on "want of faith," stood up in that House and spoke to this effect:

‹ MR. SPEAKER-If none else but the Bishop of Rochester or his adhe rents did hold this language, it would less trouble me. But since so many religious and different sects, now conspicuous in the whole world, do not only vindicate unto themselves the name of the true church, but labour betwixt invitations and threats for nothing more than to make us resign our faith to a simple obedience; I shall crave leave to propose, what I think fit in this case for us laick and secular persons to do. Not that I will make

Lord Herbert has not given us the name of this speaker. Hall says he was a gétitleman of Gray's-inn.

my opinion any rule to others when any better expedient shall be offered, but that I would be glad we considered hereof, as the greatest affair that doth or may concern us. For if in all hu man actions it be hard to find that medium or even temper which may keep us from declining into extremes, it will be much more difficult in reli gious worship; both as the path is supposed narrower, and the precipices more dangerous on every side. And because each man is created by God a free citizen of the world, and obliged to nothing so much as the inquiry of those means by which he may attain his everlasting happiness, it will be fit to examine to whose tuition and conduct he commit himself. For as se veral teachers, not only differing is language, habit, and ceremony, or at least in some of these, but peremptory and opposite in their doctrines, present themselves, much circumspec tion must be used. Here then taking his prospect, he shall find these guides directing him to several ways, whereof the 1st yet extends no further than to the laws and religions of each man's native soil or diocese, without passing those bounds. The 2nd, reaching much further, branches itself into that diversity of religions and philosophies, that not only are, but have been extant in former times, until he be able to determine which is best. But in either of these, no little difficulties will occur. For, if each man ought to be secure of all that is taught at home, without inquiring further, how can he answer his conscience? When looking abroad, the terrors of everlasting damnation shall be denounced on him, by the several hierarchies and visible churches of the world, if he believe any doctrine but theirs. And that, amongst these again, such able and understanding persons may be found, as in all other affairs will equal his teachers. Will it be fit that he believe God hath inspired his own church and religion only, and de serted the rest; when yet mankind is so much of one offspring, that it hath not only the same Pater communis in God, but is come all from the same carnal ancestors? Shall each man, without more examination, believe his priests in what religion soever; and when he hath done, call their doctrine his faith? On the other side, if he must argue, controversies

God, being such necessary and essential parts of religion, that all the rest are finally closed and determined in them.-Among the many expiations, Justrations, and propitiations for our sins, taught in the several quarters of the world in sundry times, we shall find that none doth avail without hearty sorrow for our sins, and a true repentance, towards God, whom we have offended.-And lastly, amidst the divers places and manners of reward and punishinent, which former ages have delivered, we shall find God's justice and mercy not so limited, but that he can extend either of them even beyond death, and consequently recompence or chastise eternally. These, therefore, as universal and undoubted truths, should, in my opinion, be first received; they will at least keep us from impiety and Atheism, and together lay a foundation for God's service and the hope of a better life. Besides, it will reduce men's minds from uncertain and controverted points to a solid practice of virtue; or when we fall from it, to an unfeigned repentance and purpose through God's grace to amend our sinful life; without making pardon so easy, cheap, or mercenary, as some of them do. Lastly, it will dispose

us to a general concord and peace; for when we are agreed concerning these eternal causes and means of our salvation, why should we so much differ for the rest? Since as these princi ples exclude nothing of faith or tra dition, in what age or manner soever it intervened; each nation may be permitted the belief of any pious mira cle that conduceth to God's glory, without that, on this occasion, we need to scandalize or offend each other. The common truths in reli ligion, formerly mentioned, being firmer bonds of unity, than that any thing emergent out of traditions, whether written or unwritten, should dissolve them. Let us therefore establish and fix these catholic and universal notions; they will not hinder us to believe whatsoever else is faithfully taught upon the authority of the church. So that whether the Eastern, Western, Northern, or Southern teachers, &c and particularly whe ther my Lord of Rochester, Luther, Eccius, Zuinglius, Erasmus, Melancthon, &c. be in the right, we laicks may so build upon these catholic and infallible grounds of religion, as whatsoever superstructures of faith be raised, these foundations yet may support them.'

Remarks on Mr. Fox's Argument from Scripture for Universal Restoration. SIR,

'Tis highly gratifying to the friends

tot Unitarians

It discover so much anxiety to wipe away the reproach of inactivity and want of zeal with which they have been so long assailed by their opponents. And among the various efforts of their newly acquired zeal for the dissemination of their peculiar opinions, the institution of weekly lectures in different parts of the metropolis, is one of the most promising, and has I understand been already eminently success ful. One of the pre-eminent advantages of the Unitarians over other religious parties, is the unfettered free dom which its ministers and members may and do exercise in the discussion of disputed subjects in theology. Perfectly united in the grand fundamental

truth of their system, that "there is but one God, even the Father" they entertain various shades of difference on almost all the minor parts of Christian speculation, and that with

out breaking the union, and co-opera

tion that ought to exist among all Christian brethren. Perhaps no other sect has allowed, or is capable consistently with their principles of allowing, such freedom of private judgment and public avowal of individual opinion, among their members, without dissolving their social union. It is desirable that this peculiarity should be well understood by the members of other sects, especially by those who are hostile to our general opinions; otherwise they will be apt to impute to the body, sentiments that only belong to some of its members; and hence, no doubt some of our adversaries have derived (what they consider) a ground for triumph, in the discordance and