gleam of the brightness which has passed away. Nature appears to our eyes covered with a new radiance, the green is softer, the white blossoms are purer, and the murmurs of the breeze are more harmonious. Existence seems lightened, the evils of the world are forgotten, and life appears a holy-day dream. The soul discovers beauty every where, and "good in every thing." It looks beyond death and the grave, for affection tends to its native regions, and unites the enjoyments of earth and heaven. This feeling has even now the stamp of its immortality upon it. Thus it has joys too celestial to be expressed in human language, hopes too rapturous for smiles, and thoughts "too deep for tears."

As this affection tends to produce so many intellectual pleasures, it is absurd to suppose that the only happiness of those who experience it is to be found in an immediate union. As soon as it is known to be mutual, all the desires of the heart are satisfied; and is this to be regarded as nothing? The mind then has its inward paradise, on which its imagination will never be weary of reposing. One form seems to stand in the centre of all whom the individual loves or reveres, and to beckon him onward to virtue and to joy. Often in silence and solitude that beatific vision steals over him in the midst of anxious labour-not to enfeeble his spirit, but to impel him to fresh exertions. Even the desire of fame, and the ambition of advancement in the world, become soft and genial emotions when they are subservient to the pleasures of one whom he loves; while that idea increases the stimulus which they are of themselves calculated to supply. In the course of daily life, a holy light is shed on all around him from the object of his atlections, like that

which circled Una's face divine, "And made a sunshine in the shady place."

If I have shewn that love belongs, in a high degree, to the spiritual part of our nature, it is obviously very different from the passion which the scheme of Malthus supposes. It is beyond the reach of his calculi. As well might he attempt to measure a

sunbeam with a line, as to estimate the noble emotions of the soul by his philosophy. And all his theory falls if his first calculation be shaken. [To be continued.]

Anecdote of Dr. John Taylor and Mr. Newton.

SIR,

TRA

July 4, 1817. RAVELLING in a stage coach a few weeks ago, between Birmingham and Shrewsbury, I had a long theological discussion with a gentleman who appeared well acquainted with many of the conspicuous supporters of what is termed orthodoxy in the present day, including some distinguished members of the episcopal body. Finding that I materially differed from him in my religious opinions, he brought forward several texts which are thought to favour the strange doctrines, that "the sin of Adam is by a just and holy God imputed to all his innocent posterity," that "the man Christ Jesus is the One Supreme Jehovah!” and that "an atonement has been made by his blood for the sins of all who, upon the merely inferential intimations supposed to be given respecting them in the Scriptures, can believe things contradictory to hundreds of passages that are too plain to be possibly misunderstood, and in direct opposition to that reason which is "the candle of the Lord" within us, and without the free exercise of which even the Calvinist must allow that we could not be competent to distinguish between Judaism and Heathenism, between the Bible and the Koran.

He lamented the spread of Unitarianism, as a doctrine of all others most to be dreaded, and when I asked him whether he had examined the arguments by which it is supported, he said he had looked into some of them! and to justify his not having anecdote which induced me to send done more, he begged to relate the you this, and which I will give you as nearly as I can recollect in his own words:

"You have, doubtless, heard of Mr. Newton, of Olney, the friend of the poet Cowper; you have no doubt also heard of the late Dr. Taylor, of Norwich, and probably read some

from their civil privileges, solely on account of their innocent religious opinious. Upon what ground, then, does my learned friend rest his defence of a system, which in defiance of reason and of experience, and of the general practice of other countries, makes religious opinions, and not civil conduct, the qualification for civil offices? A system, which is reprobated abroad by every statesman, on account of its impolicy, as we were last year informed by a noble Earl (Aberdeen) on this side of the House, who is a very competent judge; and is most unquestionably disapproved of at home, by every cousistent friend to civil and religious liberty. My learn ed friend, if I understood him rightly, asserts, that an individual who objects to our ecclesiastical establishment, cannot be so good a subject as he who approves both of that aud of our civil constitution also. To this argument it appears to me a sufficient answer to say, cross the Tweed, or take a voyage to Canada, the Roman Catholic inhabitants of which province, not many years since, gave more than common proofs of their loyalty.

I beg your Lordships' pardon for intruding upon your patience; but it is probably the last time I shall ever trouble you upon this or upon any other occasion; and perhaps I ought not to do it now, for the question is not of a religious but of a political nature; it is not, whether this or that system of religious doctrines be the most scriptural, or this or that form of ecclesiastical government be the most perfect; but, whether the Union of Ireland with Great Britain shall be nominal or real: whether it shall be a substantial consolidation of resources, of talents, of interest, aud of affection; or a mere empty, delusive title and whether the loyal, the generous, and the affectionate inhabitants of that unfortunate country shall in future be the firmest bulwark of your empire, or the burthen and vexation of it. This, my Lords, is a question, not for divines, not for law yers, not for young and presumptuous politicians, but for sober, experienced statesmen to decide; and to them I very willingly leave it, requesting only your Lordships' permission to make a few brief remarks upon a sub

ject somewhat more within my own province;-I mean the domestic nomination to the Catholic bishoprics of Ireland.

Anxious to meet not only the reasonable objections, but even the allowable prejudices, of their fellowsubjects and fellow-christians of the Established Church, the Catholics of Ireland bring forward a proposal, which proves at least s strong desire on their part to adopt some conciliatory adjustment, which may be satisfactory to you, and not incompatible with the doctrines of their religiou, or essentially injurious to its discipline. Such a desire demands most assuredly from us a corresponding spirit of mo deration. The Catholics conclude, and I suppose justly, that the two great objects which the Legislature has in view, are, in the first place, to ascertain the character for loyalty and a peaceable disposition of the individual who may be nominated to a bishopric when any vacancy occurs; and in the next place, to prevent, as far as possible, all foreign interference. The plan suggested by the petitioners, seems calculated to answer these two purposes, with sufficient effect. I do not, however, mean to weary your Lordships' attention, by entering upon the discussion of so complicate, and in its different bearings so extensive a subject, especially as it has always appeared to me, that there is no occasion whatever for departing from the present mode of electing Catholic bishops in Ireland; and still less for accompanying an extension of civil privileges with additional ecclesiastical restrictions, of such a nature as, in the judgment of one of the parties concerned, will materially lessen, if not entirely destroy, the value of any indulgence which may be granted. In common life, we should think a man managed very ill, who did a favour with so bad a grace as to confer no obligation upon the person who received it; and in matters of a public nature the case is still stronger. Were it otherwise, is there or has there been, from the time of the Restoration to the present hour, any thing in the character or conduct of the Catholic bishops of Ireland, or of their clergy, which calls for that alteration in their ecclesiastical discipline, which it is

the design of the luminous" Report of the Secret Committee of the House of Commons," in some shape or other to bring about? With respect to the Catholic bishops, it would be difficult to point out any body of men who have displayed more loyalty upon all occasions, or who have more earnest ly endeavoured to impress upon the minds of the lower orders of society the important duty of civil obedience. Read their Pastoral Charges: through every page of those excellent publications, the genuine spirit of Christian charity is diffused; and the beneficial effects of their exertions were acknow ledged in more instances than one by the Government of Ireland. Nor are the Catholic priests of Ireland less remarkable for the exemplary discharge of their ministerial function. I speak, my Lords, of what I have repeatedly seen and known. Is infancy to be instructed,-is youth to be admonished, is old age to be comforted, are the consolations of religion to be administered to a dying peasant in his last moments, the priest, however inconvenient to him, is always at his post. He traverses a wide and dreary bog, in the midst of the darkest night, and of the most tempestuous weather,

"No dangers fright him, and no labours tire ;"

and for all this laudable performance of professional duty, he receives nothing which deserves the name of a compensation, in the present life. It is, my Lords, with heartfelt satisfaction that I go out of my way to bear my humble testimony in favour of men whose merits are very much under-rated; and who are but too frequently neglected by those who, from worldly motives, should pay them attention; were it only on account of the influence which they deservedly have over the minds of their numerous congregations; an influence which, if properly directed, would prove incalculably useful to the Government of Ireland; an influence to which we are at this moment in great measure indebted for the calm resignation with which thousands of miserable wretches bear up against an almost total want of food, of clothes, and of fire. Such being the character and conduct of these

excellent ministers of the Gospel, where, I again ask, is the expediency of making any alteration in their ecclesiastical discipline; admitting, for a moment, the right of a civil government to interfere in the ecclesiastical discipline or doctrine of individuals dissenting from the Established Church, but maintaining no doctrines either subversive of morality or injurious to the welfare of the State, a right, which I was taught in early life to call in question by two of the greatest masters of reason whom this or any other country ever produced-I mean LOCKE and HOADLEY? It is not, however, my intention to abuse your Lordships' indulgence by engaging in abstract disquisitions. I shall therefore only observe further, in answer to those who say, and say most truly, that it is indispensably necessary that we should have ample security for our own civil and ecclesiastical establishment,-nothing, my Lords, can be more incontrovertible than this position-nothing more just than the principle on which it rests; but surely it is a principle which ought to be applied with some reference to a reasonable apprehension of danger. It is not every idle fear, every mean and narrow suggestion of bigotry, every injurious suspicion, every ill-grounded jealousy, which can justify the exclusion of five mil lions of loyal civil subjects from their civil privileges. Shew me, said a very able, a very eloquent, and a very honest patriot, in another place, shew me a real danger, and you shall have any security you wish for. This challenge, my Lords, never has been accepted, and, though no prophet, I dare venture to foretell, never will. With a man who can seriously persuade himself that the admission of six respectable noblemen into this House, and of not twenty-six into the other House of Parliament, would undermine the fabric of our incomparable Constitution, it is impossible to reason: there must be something more than reason at the bottom of his objections. In truth, he who now talks of danger from Popery, would (as Dr. Johnson observed) have cried out fire in the deluge. I shall detain your Lordships no longer. You have it still in your power, by acceding to the prayer of the petitioners for civil pri

vileges, unaccompanied by Vetoism, to tranquillize one-third part of your population; and to gratify exceed ingly another third part, consisting of Protestant Dissenters, and of many, very many, members of the Esta blished Church.-But may I be permitted to add, that no time is to be lost. The Catholics of Ireland, and of England also, have for more than a century displayed a moderation, a forbearance, a meek endurance of ill, which would have done credit to any of the primitive martyrs: but it is not reasonable to expect that they will always continue equally patient and submissive; nor, perhaps, is it even to be wished that they should do so; for there is a degree of insult and oppression, which not only justifies resist ance, but which makes non-resistance a tame, passive, criminal servility, unworthy of freemen, and dangerous in a free state; for slaves have ever been, and must always be, dangerous subjects. Whether the wrongs of injured Ireland have reached this degree, I shall not presume to determine; but sure I am that there is very little of human policy, and still less of Christian charity, in approaching it so nearly.

I

SIR,

Aug. 8, 1817. HAVE referred to the article of W. Manning, in Calamy's Account and Continuation, where he is described, in substance, as at p. 377, except that the Continuation is more exact than the Memorial, mentioning only one work, as your Correspondent has correctly stated.

Mr. Manning's intimacy with Mr. Emlyn is noticed in the life of the latter by his son. 1746. (P. xiii.) It is on the authority and in the words of the Life, that the Account, p. 384, is given of Mr. M.'s fruitless attempts to make Mr. E. a Socinian. The biographer has also preserved (p. xix,) an extract from one of his Father's letters to Mr. Manning, dated from Ireland, April 1, 1697.

Now I have mentioned Mr. Emlyn, I will refer to a passage in Whiston's Memoirs, 2nd ed. p 121, where he speaks of “Mr. John Wesley, one among the present Methodists" [1749] as" having lately shewed somewhat of a true Christian temper, in unsaying what he had heard about Mr. Emlyn' I think I have understood, from a ve

nerable friend, once in the Methodist connexion, that Mr. Wesley used, in his circuits, to visit Lowestoff. There, probably, he repeated some idle tale, which he had too hastily credited.

Comparing the Life of Emlyn and his Narrative with the Article in the Biographia Brittanica, I was surprised to find two interesting passages omitted. One is the countenance given to the prosecution by several Irish Prelates, those reverend Fathers, who were Assessors on the bench," as Mr. Emlyn refers to them, Nar. p. 37. Among these the Primate, Dr. Marsh, and the Archbishop of Dublin, the learned Dr. William King, thus disgraced themselves. The former still farther discovered the tender mercies of State Churchmen, by demanding " as the Queen's Almoner, a shilling in the pound of the whole fine," of 1000/. then" reduced to 70l. which was paid into her Majesty Queen Anne's Exchequer." Mr. E. adds, "I thought his fees must have been reduced proportionably to her Majesty's reducement, and that the Church was to be as merciful as the State; but I was mistaken herein. In short, after several applications and letters to him, he would have twenty pounds of me, and so it was paid him; who thought it no blemish to his charity or generosity, to make this advantage of the misery of one, who, for conscience towards God, had endured grief." Nar. p. 41.

The other passage omitted is given, in the Life, p. xxxvii., from Sir Richard Steele's Dedication to the Pope, of his "Account of the State of the Roman Catholic Religion, 1715."— Having mentioned the trouble "experienced particularly in Ireland by one who could not see exactly what" other Protestants" saw about the nature of Christ before his appearance in this world," he tells the Pope, "As with you, a man had better blaspheme Almighty God, than not magnify the blessed Virgin, so with many of us it is much more innocent, and less hazardous to take from the glory of the Father than of his Son. Nay, to bring down the Father to a level with his own Son is a commendable work, and the applauded labour of many men of leisure; but to place the Son below hisown Father in any degree of real perfection, this is an unpardonable error;