« ZurückWeiter »
censure of the recent and strange pretensions of the latter. In a word, this discourse does ample credit to the abilities of the preacher. Art. 58. The Example of our Enemies a Lejon of national Abasement
and Reformation to ourselves,-at Yeovil, by George Beaver, B.D. Rector of Trent, in the County of Somerset; and West Stratford, cum Frome Billet, Dorset. 4to. 13. Baldwin.
We meet with so many indications of narrowness of mind, and of bigotry of sentiment, in our fast-day sermons, that when we turn over the pages of a discourse that is free from imperfections of that disgraceful kind, we are ready to exclaim, “ Well done! thou that haft done no ill!"-In Mr. B.'s discourse, we fee nothing reprehensible; on the contrary, there is ample room for commendation; particularly where the preacher cautions his hearers against depending on a formal de. precating of God's wrath, &c.' and takes notice of the apparently little effect of those periodical solemnities, which seem to be too generally regarded as an easy method of entering into a composition with the Almighty for the fins of a whole nation, &c.' Art. 59. The Times, &c. preparatory to the Public Faft.-By W.
Gilbank, M. A. Rector of St. Ethelburga, London. 4to. IS. Robson, &c.
Mr. Gilbank's fast fermon is to be chiefly regarded as a zealous philippic against the French; the honest preacher, however, does not forget his own countrymen, but tells them, as the vulgar phrase goes, a little of their own.'
• Fasts,' says he, have been proclaimed with all the devotion that could sanctify the occasion: the people have been called to meet in folemn assembly, to humble themselves before God, and to acknowlege their errors: but has there afterward been seen any fign of true repentance? Is there any where less anxiety shewn in the pursuit of wealth? Is the intemperate thirft after disinction and preeminence at all abated? Is expensive or criminal pleasures become less an object than before? Have the obligations of conjugal fidelity been better observed ? Has the extravagant rage for dissipation at all subsided? Has there in any clafs of people appeared a greater regard for religion, or a ftricter attendance on religious worthip? In short, have we much reason to suppose that we are not, by our multiplied transgressions of commission and omiffion, almost as much the objects of Divine vengeance as our neighbours?'
Every reader, who is in any tolerable degree a competent observer of the “ signs of the times," will be ready, without much hefitation, to give a proper answer to the foregoing hone-put questions. Art. 6o. -at Henley on Thames. By the Rev. Edward Barry,
Parsons, &c. There is a peculiarity of cast in this discourse, (somewhat difficult to describe,) in which the preacher carefully avoids the common style of declamation respecting the war, and the wickedness of tbe French; confining himself chiefly to such notice as he thinks proper to take of our national and private iniquities. There are many good things in his remarks and admonitions; though, as we must be free to add, we Mave met with nothing equal, in point of excellence, to the 3d, 4th,
M. D. 4to.
sch, and 6th verses of the lviii. chapter 'of Isaiah, with which Mr. Barry's discourse is very properly introduced by way of text.
• Framlingham, April 8, 1795. In your Review. (February, p.191.) of the Marquis de Cafaux on the
Effects of Taxes, you quote him as affirming that, towards the close of the last century, viz. from 1688 to 1697, wheat was some few pence more than 50s. a quarter ; and adducing it, (with the amount of the whole produce of England and the price of labour in that period, compared with the price of corn and produce of the land from 1744 to 1780,) as an irrefragable proof of the benefit of taxes, and that the united enjoyments of the land owners and labourers have actually increased very considerably in the latter period.
• Has his affirmation fet forth a real fact, the inference drawn from it would not, in my apprehension, necessarily follow; for the high or Jow price of wheat at any given period may be entirely owing to the Season and consequent state of the crop, the farmer being better able in a plentiful year to sell his grain for a small price, than after such a harvest as the last for more than double the same fum, when the average quantity of wheat, (at least in these parts,) appears to have fallen much below four coombs per acre.
. But the affirmation is, I believe, false and groundless, and the argu. ment drawn from it in favour of taxes, and horrid war, altogether inconclusive. I beg leave to confront with it the statement of the price of wheat in that period given by that accurate observer, Mr. Samuel Say of Westminster, in a letter to Dr. Short of Sheffield, accompanying a copy of his journal of the weather, which commenced with the year 3695. The letter is dated Feb. 1744.
Mr. Say writes,~" I think I can remember that the seasons were kindly to the fruits of the earth, the latter end of the reign of K. James, and the beginning of K. William's. I fee under the hand of a person on whose relation I can depend, that wheat fold for 2s. the bushel only, by the quarter, at Yarmouth market in the year 1688." (Mr. Sag had in bis poffeffion the books and papers of his uncle, Mr. N. Carter, a considerable merchant in that place. ] “ The spring was very mild and forward the year 1690, and wheat only 2s. 6d. The bushel that year, and other proportions agreeable. From 1691 to the end of 92, I boarded at Nor. wich for 11l. per ann. in a good family; and, if I miftake not, the fol lowing winter of 169} was very severe;-” which is in general a prelude to a favourable wheat harvest.
• I leave it to the Marquis, and others, to reconcile his affertion, that wheat was somewhat more than gos. per quarter from 1688 to 1697, with Mr. Say's statement of the fact, that it was only from 168. to 205. in 1688 and go, and that he had reafon to think it to have been plentiful and cheap the four following years, at least in 91 and 92, when he boarded in a good family in the city of Norwich for iil. per annom.
' Not taxes, but the earth's fruitfulness, kept wheat at lo low , price during these years, and a fucceffion of unfavourable weather in 1695 and the following years raised it to a much higher pitch in 1698 than Aated by the Marquis, viz. 725. 10 809. per. quarter ; but though, from the wetness of the autumn in 1698, there was but half a crop rown, yet in 1699, from the heat and reasonableness of the summer, wheat fell to a reasonable price, and continued so for several years.
• From • From this account, it seems just to conclude that the Marquis's statement of the price of wheat, at the first period mentioned, muit be materially erroneous, and that the great increase of it in 1698 was entirely owing to a remarkable badness of the season. In the other period, the variation in price in different years was nearly as great, according to the seafons, and not as influenced by the taxes. His arguments in favour of them may be specious, but they are too contrary to the common sense and feelings of mankind to prove convincing.
• S. S. Toms.
• To the Editor of the Monthly Review. • SIR, * HAVING seen in your Correspondence of last month that Mr. T. G.
in justification of his having omitted my name, as the original author, in his translation of the Tour to the Pennine Alps and Defcrip. tion of Nice, acquaints you that he purchased these works of me, four years ago, I must request you, in order to clear this matter to the public, to insert in your next publication, that when T.G. applied io me for the purchase of the plates belonging to those books, he assured me that they were merely to be coloure and framed for exportation ; and as T. G. did not introduce himself to me as either author or book. feller, on these conditions only I parted with them.
• The present being a true state of the case, I defy T. G. to prove, that he ever purchased of me the copy right, although it is certain, that at the time I parted with the plates, I made him a present of a few of the remaining copies, looking on them as useless ; intending, as the introduđion to my description of Nice (which he has likewise omitted) formed the public, to enlarge that description with a fequel of obfervations, &c. on that country at a future period, and which I have now perfe&ly completed in my present book on the Maritime Alps, &c. and which I flatter myself will soon appear before the public.
• My cause of complaint does not however entirely originate from the translation of those works ; but from their having been done without my consent or knowledge; and the suppresion of my name, which last omission I have most forcibly felt, from the idea of its being particularly unjust, those books having met with the most Aattering indulgence from men of taste and science in this country.
"I am, Sir, . South Molton-street, Your most obedient humble servant, April 9,1795.'
1111 We have received a long letter from Mr. Anstice, in which he mentions certain practical observations, and cites some authorities, that furnish, he presumes, an argument or an apology for his reviving the famous controversy about the estimation of mechanical force. The principles which we explained on the occasion of examining his late pamphlet* were sufficient, we thought, to satisfy every reasonable doubt which might be entertained on that head : but the novelty of some of the doctrines then advanced, and the conciseness at which we commonly aim, have perhaps prevented several of our readers from fully comprehending our views. We shall therefore refome the subject, and bestow a few reflections on the material passages of Mr. Anfice's letter,
See Review, vol. zv. p. 465.
It is now very generally admitted by philosophers, that the noted controversy about the force of moving bodies was at bottom a dis. pute of words. The loose and undefined acceptation of the terms attior, effect, performance, &c. in mechanics, proved the source of endless debate. A question in reality so nugatory affords not a fingle conclufion applicable to practice. Both parties agreed on the fundamental principle of dynamics : but the followers Leibnitz were guilty of inconsistency in superadding an arbitrary propofition.
To shew that the Newtonian doctrine does not answer, fo well as the Leibnitzian, the purpose of the practical mechanic, Mr. Anftice describes the machine used in founderies for breaking caft-iron, &c.
• It consists of a ball of iron of one hundred weight, which is raised by manual labour to the height of 64 feet, where it is disengaged and fuffered to fall on a pig or bar of that brittle metal, which by its velocity it is just sufficient to break. Now this ball is raised to the above height by the exact same muscular labour and in the same time, as would be requisite to raise a ball of 4 cwt. 16 feet by using any of the mechanic powers. But what will be the efforts in this case to break the iron ? ' In the former, the velocity at the moment of percussion will be as 8, in the latter 4, which, according to the Newtonian doc. trine, will produce a momentum in the one as 8 by i=8, in the other as 4 by 4=16, with this advantage attending the latter, that, although it be raised by the same power in the same time, it will fall when disengaged in half the time which the former will require. Therefore, by the Newtonian account, there will be great waste of labour, unless the weight of the ball be altered to the greateit, and the height through which it is raised to the least, which the given power, as to exertion and time, will admit of."
It is to be observed that neither the Leibnitzian nor the Newtonian doctrine is adequate to the explanation of the fact here mentioned. According to the former, for instance, the effect of the stroke would be the same if 64 cwt. fell from the height of one foot :—but Mr. Anftice, and every person acquainted with practical mechanics, will readily acknowlege that the fubftitution of this slow ponderous mass will not produce the end desired. The true explication must be de. rived from the principle which we formerly stated. The rapidity of the descending body is such as to concentrate the whole action of the stroke on the contiguous portion of the obstacle, without allowing time for the motion to diffuse itself through the mass. Hence the fracture is commenced, and is continued by the general tremor which ensues. A similar consideration will obviate another objection which Mr. Anstice proceeds to make. • If a ship break from her moorings by the action of a current moving with the velocity 1, and it be found that a chain of brittle metal be just sufficient to stop her': if the velo. city of the current were 2, it would by the Newtonian doctrine require 2 such chains, and by the Leibnitzian 4 such, to stop her mo. tion; and as the effects in both cases would at lait appear to be inftantaneous, it would be in vain to urge that the times of action, during the separation of the metal in those instances, were different.' The assertion at the close of this quotation is very hafty and inac. curate. Our senses are not sufficiently delicate for philolophical ob. 6
fervation, Motions, whether extremely rapid or extremely slow, elade their discrimination. In these cases, it is reason or the analogy of facts that must direct our decisions. Were ropes substituted for the metallic chains, the progressive straining of their fibres, which teraninates in rupture, would render the interval of time apparent ; yet the only difference in the effects consists in degree. Instantaneous in the ftriét acceptation is absolutely inconceivable; in ordinary language, it denotes a celerity which outstrips the current of our sensa. tions. All motion is performed in time : this axiom, although often Reglected, is of most important application in natural philosophy.
We advanced that all the modifications of force may be resolved into prejure. To this doctrine Mr. Anftice urges the objection that one bard body may press, by its gravity, &c. on or againf another, during a hundred days, without producing more effect (as to any mechanical purpose) than in one; although, by the above pohtion, the force exerted be a hundred degrees more in one case than in the other; therefore, causes and effects cannot here be equal.' We would only observe that absolute hardness is a mere fiction of theory. All fubftances are condensible, and differ only in the degree of that qua. lity. The incumbent body will occafion such a compresion as to form a repulsion equal to the weight; and these two opposite forces will maintain perpetual balance. If the weight rested on a spring, Mr. Anttice could be at no loss to conceive our meaning.
What has confused or misled our author, and many others who are not exercised in metaphysical discussion, is the crude doctrine delivered in the common books on Natural Philosophy. The treatises written in the Englit language are particularly defective. We are sorry to confess that mathematical learning has long been on the decline in Great Britain. The memory of paft glories has nourished our vanity and damped our exertions. Supinely proud of our imagined superiority, we have ceased to cherish the ardent impetuous Ipirit of research.
JOINHERIA, and X Y Z, must excuse our non-compliance with their requests. We really have not time to answer all the applications for literary advice, &c. which are continually made to us.
+++ The letter figned • An Old Woman' is received. We do not queflion the Lady's veracity.
111 W. D, -Clericus of Leicestershire,- J. W. &c. &c. are under confideration.
161 Several small tracts have been transmitted to us from certain of the North country Prefies, [Whitehaven, Carlisle, Penrith, &c.] but are unsuitable to our purpole; some are of a date too remote ; others are not of sufficient consequence.
$115 The late Mr. STUART's Antiquities of Athens, Vol. III. will appear in our next Review.