in his garden; but no means that he adopted subdued his constitutional tendency, or prevented or even miti gated his habitual complaint. In the year 1815, public speaking became very painful to him, and before the end of that year he was obliged to desist from his ministerial labours. The sufferings of his early life had made him very apprehensive of pain, and his prayer, in submission to the Divine will, was that he might be taken away by sudden death. Such, however, was not the design of an all-wise but mysterious Providence. "Months of vanity and wearisome nights" were appointed to him. The history of his disease would be a detail of pains and agonies afflictive to the reader. He was sometimes for several successive days without sleep. The nature of his complaint prevented his even reclining on his bed. There were occasionally favourable changes, in which he had intervals of comparative case, and on two occasions of this sort he made a great effort and appeared amongst his congregation at Parliament Court, but his exertion at both these times occasioned a relapse and convinced him that his public life was

at an end.

At West Ham he experienced all the attention that the kindness of an affectionate sister could devise and render; but a change of scene being recommended by his physician, he was removed carly in the month of July, 1816, to the house of Mr. William Smith, his son-in-law, in Spencer Street, Northampton Square, where all his family united in miti gating his sufferings to the extent of their ability. It soon appeared however, both to himself and others that there was but one event from which rest could be expected. This he now looked forward to with pleasure, hailing every symptom of its approach: yet his illness was so tedious and his pains so excruciating that his patience was at times almost exhausted. His religious principles were the only support of his mind. On these be delighted to converse. He solaced himself in the fatherly character of God: he meditated on the example of Jesus Christ in suffering and death: he reviewed his own past life and appealed to heaven to witness his integrity in the midst of his imperfections: and he

expatiated on the glorious change that awaited him when" this mortal shall have put on immortality." Thus enduring as seeing Him who is Invisible, he waited all the days of his appointed time, at seasons nearly overwhelmed by paroxysms of bodily distress, but in the intervals of relaxation from pain composed and serene, grateful to his attendants, affable and pleasant with his numerous visitors, exhibiting retional piety and Christian hope, until Friday the 23rd of August, when, without any perceptible failure of his intellectual powers, he gently breathed his last and fell asleep in Jesus.

So died in the 59th year of his age, William Vidler, one of the ablest and boldest champions in the pulpit of the Universal and Unitarian doctrine, who might have been reckoned upon according to the course of nature as the advocate of truth for years to come, with the growing authority of age, but who was so far favoured by Providence, as he expressed himself on the approach of death, that he did not outlive his usefulness. He had borne patiently opposition and reproach, and was rising by the strength of his mind and character above dis couragements, when, as if his trial and purification were complete, it pleased his heavenly Father that he should rest from his labours and await in peace the summons to inmortality.

Notwithstanding the imperfectness of his education, his knowledge was very extensive. He had read most of the standard books, in the English language, in the various departments of literature; and his clearness of con ception and retentiveness of memory often enabled him to surprize his more intimate friends by the exhibition of his acquirements. He was quick in his perceptions, but at the same time patient in his inquiries and cool in his judgment. His conversation formed after the model of the style which prevailed a century ago, and was occasionally quaint, frequently proverbial and generally sententious, but always intelligent and commonly tinctured with good humour. stances have been already given of his presence of mind in sudden altercations and his smartness in repartee. Under offence, he assumed great severity of countenance, and administered :Buko

I

ina tone and manner which come pelled it to be felt: but he was habitally willing to be pleased, and into whatever family he entered his presence commonly diffused cheerfulness throughout the whole circle. He was fond of children, and on entering a room where they were immediately attracted them to his knee. His heart was soon affected by any tale of diss tress, and in an early period of his residence in London he was much imposed on by persons affecting an equal degree of distress and of religion; in such cases he sometimes gave away all the money that, he possessed: * yet if he suspected fraud no one expressed quicker or stronger indignation. His bodily make, tall and upright; his step, regular and firm; and his countenance, open and unvarying, indicated great courage. Mr. Teulon, whose communications we have before referred to, says of him that “ he was a man to whom fear seemed unknown." In short, his was the old English character, mellowed and refined by the gospel.

As a preacher he excelled chiefly in strength of reasoning, simplicity and perspicuity of style and an open, manly elocution. His voice was clear and strong, his look penetrating, his attitude erect and self-possessed and his person diguified. He would some times indulge in the pulpit an ironical

A man of notorious bad character, whose name was Jewel, and who sometimes attended Parliament Court Chapel, being ill sent for Mr. Vidler, who was so affected with the sight of the distress of him and

his family, that not having as he thought money enough to relieve them, he went for the first time in his life to a pawnbroker's shop, and raised upon his watch as much as he wanted for the supply of their necessities. The return which Jewel made for Mr. Vidler's extravagant charity was waylaying him, with intent to rob him, one dark night, as he was going across the fields to Bethnal Green: the ungrateful wretch was hindered in his purpose, as he afterwards confessed, by Mr. Vidler's stumbling as he crossed a plank over a ditch and striking the board with the brass end of his umbrella to save himself, which Jewel mistook for the knocking of a pistolhead against a style, and supposing himself discovered ran away. His crimes brought this unhappy creature to an untimely end at belunsford many years ago.

turf of expression, which produced a striking effect. In prayer he was less happy than in preaching, and he was accustomed to acknowledge the diffi culty which he found in discharging: this part of his public duty to his own satisfaction: His devotional exercises as well as his sermons were framed in a great measure in the language of Scripture, and this often gave them an interesting appearance of solemnity. Of the merits of his pulpit services we must judge by their effects; and in this point of view a high rank must be allotted to him amongst popular divines, for there have been few preachers who have been able to make upon the minds of an auditory, so deep an impression, not of feeling merely but of knowledge and truth.

Mr. Vidler wrote and published lit tle: besides editions of Paul Siegvolk's Everlasting Gospel, Winchester's Dia logues, with Notes, and_the_Trial_of the Witnesses; a Preface to Revelation Defended, in Answer to Paine's Age of Reason; and the Universalists' Miscellany, in its various forms, the following publications are all that can be traced to him: viz.

1. The Designs of the Death of Christ; a Sermon, delivered in Oce tober, 1794, at Parliament Court Chapel, Artillery Lane, BishopsgateStreet. 8vo. 1795.

2. A Letter to Mr. S. Bradburn and all the Methodist Preachers in England. (Sold at 4d.)

3. A Testimony of Respect to the Memory of Elhanan Winchester, Preacher of the Universal Restoration, who died at Hartford, in America, April 18, 1797, aged 46 years. Being the Substance of a Discourse delivered at Parliament Court Chapel, June 18, 1797. 8vo. (Sold at Is.)

4. A Sketch of the Life of Elhanan Winchester, Preacher of the Universal Restoration, with a Review of his Writings. 8vo. pp. 128. 1797.

5. God's Love to his Creatures Asserted and Vindicated; being a Reply to the "Strictures upon an Address to Candid and Serious Men.". 8vo. 1799.

6. Letters to Mr. Fuller on the Universal Restoration, with a Statement of Facts attending that Contro versy, and some Strictures on Scrutator's Review. 8vo. pp. 180, 1803.

THE beginning of the reign of Anne was distinguished by the punishment, enacted by an act passed in the last reign against those who denied the personal Deity of any of the persons of the Trinity, being inflicted in Ireland on a Dissenting minister of the name of Thomas Emlyn. He had been in England about the time of the Revo lution, and the controversy between Sherlock and South relating to the nature of the Trinity had drawn his attention to that subject. He had examined it in connexion with Mr. Manning, a Dissenting minister in Suffolk, who became in consequence of this examination a believer in the simple humanity of Christ. Mr. Emlyn, after a considerable time and long examination, embraced the Arian creed, that Christ is not God, but that he is a created spirit, employed by God in the creation of the world and in the salvation of men. In 1692 he settled at Dublin, as co-pastor with Mr. Boyse. In this connexion he continued for eleven years. In his account of his own life he says, "I own I had been unsettled in my notions from the time I had read Dr. Sherlock's book on the Trinity, which sufficiently discovered how far many were gone back towards Polytheism. I long tried what I could do with some Sabellian terms, making out a Trinity of somewhats in one single mind. I found that by the tritheistic scheme of Dr. Sherlock I preserved a Trinity, but lost the Unity of God. By the Sabellian scheme of modes and substances and properties I best kept up the Divine Unity, but then I had lost a Trinity, so that I could never keep both in view at once." The result of this was, that he departed from the common way of thinking in regard to the Trinity, and only wanted a proper occasion to declare his senti ments, as in duty he thought himself bound to do. This occasion soon pre sented itself. Some of the congregation

suspecting him of heterodoxy, desired his co-pastor to inquire into his senti ments. Upon this Mr. Emlyn owned himself convinced that the God and Father of Jesus Christ is alone the Supreme Being, and superior in excellency and authority to his Son, who derives all from him. He declared that he had no design to cause strife, and offered to leave the congregation peaceably, that they might choose another, if they pleased, in his place. But the Dissenters in Ireland have a presbyterian form of church government among them, and Mr. Boyse thought it proper to bring the question before the pres bytery, in which Dublin is included. This immediately prohibited Mr. Emlyn from preaching. In the following year, the 3d of Queen Anne's reign, finding a great odium raised against both himself and his opinions, he wrote "A Humble Inquiry into the Scriptare Account of Jesus Christ," intending to go to England as soon as it was printed. Some of his enemies having notice of his design, procured a warrant against him before his book was published. He was prosecuted in the Court of King's Bench, and refusing to retract, sentence was passed on him, that he should suffer a year's imprisonment, pay £1000 fine, lie in prison till it was paid, and find security for his good behaviour during life. After two years' imprisonment, his fine was mitigated to £70, which, with £20 claimed by the Primate of Ireland, as the Queen's almoner, he paid, Upon his liberation he left his intole rant country, and came to London, where he gathered a small congregation on Arian principles. Application was made to Dr. Tennison, Archbishop of Canterbury, to put a stop to this, but the Archbishop nobly refused to be concerned in any persecuting measures. Mr. Emlyn was intimate with Whiston and Clarke, and probably very much contributed to form them to Arian opinions.

In the beginning of the reign of Queen Anne, Mr. St. John, afterwards famous under the name of Lord Bolingbroke, who was an unbeliever in Christianity, and was, during the latter part of this reign, the principal leader of a conspiracy to place the Pretender on the throne, on the death of Queen Anne, instead of the present Royal Family, proposed “a bill for the prevention of occasional conformity," by

which it was enacted, "that any person who held any office, who should attend any meeting of Dissenters, should be disabled from his employment, and pay a fine of £100, and £5 for every day that he continued to act in his office, after having been at a meeting. He was also rendered incapable of holding any other employment, till after one whole year's conformity, and upon a relapse the penalties were doubled." This act, after violent disputes, and after having been rejected several times, was at last passed in the 10th year of the Queen's reign; but after the accession of George 1. it being well known that the bill had been supported by that party who wished to deprive him of the throne, in order that the Dissenters, who were the firmest friends to his succession, might not be able to defend his claims, it was speedily repealed.

In the 8th year of the Queen's reign, Dr. Sacheverel preached and published two sermons, which were considered as reflecting on the Revolution; and the Whig ministry under the influence of the Duke of Marlborough and Lord Godolphin, very imprudently and contrary to the principles of toleration and freedom which they professed, procured his impeachment. He was suspended for three years and his sermons burnt. The people however were violent in his favour, and the employment of a military force was necessary to guard the houses of those who had voted against him. During his suspension he made a kind of triumphal progress through the middle of the kingdom, and excited the people in various places to riot against the Dissenters. Many chapels and houses of the principal Dissenters were burnt by the mobs whom he raised. At Wolverhampton, however, the rioters were repulsed, and the chapel was preserved principally through the exertions of Mr. Elwall, who will come under our notice again in the account of the following reign. This is not the only event which has proved that even the high Churchmen of this country have no objection to exciting riots and using the utmost violence of the mob against their adversaries, and that they blame popular tumults only when directed against themselves; while the Dissenters and all true friends of civil and religious liberty feel sentiments of abhorrence too strong to be expressed in language

for all riotous effusions of popular vioJence against whomsoever that violence may be directed. During the whole of this reign the violent disputes in the convocation concerning the right of the Archbishop to prorogue the Lower House, continued. The Bishops who had been created during the preceding reign, were mostly men of tolerant and liberal principles, but the Lower House were very bigoted, and were mostly under the influence of Atterbury, who towards the conclusion of this reign was made Bishop of Ro chester, and who was one of the prin cipal leaders of that party who wished to have restored the Pretender and to have excluded the present Royal Family from the throne. In consequence of his attempts for this purpose, he was at the beginning of the following reign obliged to leave the kingdom..

In the 9th year of Anne's reign, Mr. Whiston was deprived of his professorship of mathematics, and expelled from the University of Cambridge, in consequence of his having declared and published Arian opinions. He had been desired to suppress them, though he believed them to be true, that the common opinion might go undisturbed; but such motives, were of no weight with him, compared with the desire for the discovery and propagation of truth. In the following reign, George I. with whom he was a great favourite, desiring him to conceal his opinions on account of the odium under which they lay, and the disadvantage they were of to his worldly interests, he replied, "If Martin Luther had acted so, where would your Majesty have been now?" And upon another occasion, Lord Chief Justice King urging hin to conform by saying that he might do more good in the Church, he asked,

Pray, my Lord, in the courts in which you preside would such excuses be admitted?" And the Chief Justice confessing that they would not, he said, "Well then, my Lord, supposing God Almighty to be as just in the next world as my Lord Chief Justice is in this, where are we then?" A question which every conformist to the Church who does not sincerely believe the whole of her Common Prayer Book creeds and articles to be agreeable to Scripture, ought to put to his own heart. The Lower House of convocation wished to have punished Whiston for the books in which he had published

his Arian sentiments, but the Bishops, and particularly Archbishop Tennison, nobly refused to concur in any perseenting measures, though they agreed with the Lower House in censoring his works.

In the year 1712, Dr. Clarke, rector of St. Janies's, Westminster, and one of the Queen's chaplains, published a work in defence of Arianism, entitled, "The Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity Considered. In Three Parts. The First consisting of a Collection and Explanation of all the Texts in the New Testament relating to that Doctrine: the Second, his own Belief on the Subject, set forth at large: and the Third, the Principal Passages in the Liturgy of the Church of England relating to this Subject Considered." This book excited a violent clamour, particularly in the convocation, which censured it as containing assertions contrary to the Catholic faith, as received and declared by the Church of England concerning three persons of one substance, power and eternity in the unity of the Godhead, and passages tending to perplex the minds of men in the solemn acts of worship as directed by our established Liturgy. Disputes on other questions however prevented the convocation from proceeding any farther than to censure the book, and Dr. Clarke continued in the Church. He was a great favourite with George 11. and his Queen Caroline. During the latter part of his life he drew up in manuscript a re

formed copy of the Book of Common Prayer, striking out the Athanasian Creed and many other objectionable passages. This was shown to Queen Caroline and highly approved of by her. After the author's death it was published, and with some alterations it has been used in a few Dissenting congregations, particularly for some time in the congregation in Essex Street, formed on the open declaration of Unitarian sentiments by Mr. Lindsey. The plan however of introducing either this or any other Liturgy into Dissenting congregations has generally failed; and it appears indeed to be in some degree contrary to the main principle of dissent, that a minister ought to be left perfectly free and unbiassed in the formation and declaration of his sentiments. If he be required to use a Liturgy, he cannot form his opinions without some bias towards the opinions declared in that form: or if his religious inquiries lead him to sentiments different from those on which the Prayer Book which he uses is founded, he must find great difficulty in declaring them. For these reasons the prescription of a form of prayer either in or out of an Established Church, appears to have naturally a tendency to restrain the exercise of private judgment and free inquiry, and consequenily to be in some degree a bar to the discovery aud propagation of truth. [To be continued.]

SIR, Clapton, March 16, 1817. VER since I read the account of EVER since read, by his friend Mr. Christie, of Philadelphia, in your VIth Volume, I have designed to offer you some further particulars, from the conversation and correspondence of that interesting, and much injured man. I now fulfil a small part of my intention by sending you the copy of a letter, which was probably the last he wrote on board the Hulk, at Woolwich. It will serve to shew the ardour of his grate

ful mind which disposed him very much to over-rate a few services which I had the pleasure to render him, and which I cannot recollect without

acknowledging the zealous co-operation of my departed friends, Mr. Lindsey and Mr. Joyce, Dr. Hamilton and Dr. Disney, not to mention some who yet survive to serve their generation.

When I first visited Mr. Palmer and Mr. Muir, in the autumn of 1793, on board the Prison-Hulks, where they were separately detained, it was in company with a friend, who had known Mr. Paliner in Scotland, and with the