authorized to examine it, and to de- This maxim has already to a certain extent been acted upon, and a variety of circumstances have led to the conclusion, that the book of Genesis may be a human production; or, in other words, that it may have originated in human sources, and been handed down from generation to generation by means of oral traditions or scriptural records. And truly, could it even be proved that it were grounded on the former alone, still would I hail it as an important document, and its source should be ever sacred to me: for if we feel inclined, once for all, to admit the longevity of the patriarchs, (which, however, it must be owned, is liable to serious objections,) it must also be allowed, that in the earliest periods of the world the pure stream of historical information could not easily, or to any great extent, be adulterated by the accession of turbid waters. And as Lamech may have been contemporary with Adam, and Shem with Lamech; again, as Lamech may have seen Abrahain, and the latter have been seen by Jacob; further, as many of the contemporaries of Moses may have personally known Jacob,-it follows, first, that oral tradition, originating in the earliest ages of mankind, could not have passed through the mouths of many different persons, and was therefore less liable to change or perversion; and, secondly, that inore recent traditions extending downwards to the days of Moses, could not have been circulated for any great length of time without being scripturally recorded, and without their genuineness having been determined by actual reference to the party with whom they originated, or to some other credible authority. But, although the credibility of the narratives contained in the book of Genesis, would in no wise be diminished by their having been compiled from oral traditions at the time of Moses, the general character, and, if I may use the expression, the very genius of the book itself does not warrant its being ascribed to such a source. On the contrary, every thing in it seems clearly to prove the use of scriptural records, and what is more, even speaks for its being a compilation of fragments from separate and VOL. XVII. 3 R distinct documents. Nor has this observation escaped the notice of various writers distinguished by their critical acumen; but either their predilection for a certain system prevented them from pursuing the advantages to be derived from it, or the gleam of truth which dawned upon them was too weak and too quickly lost again in the clouds by which it was surrounded, to admit of their tracing the discovery which they had made throughout the whole book.* physician, at length effected what no Astruc, a celebrated critic by profession had previously ventured to do, and actually divided the whole book of Genesis into distinct fragments. In my turn, I have also made a similar attempt, but to Observ. Sacc. Lib. i. C. iii. pp. 29, seq.; * Writers on this subject are-Vitringa, Clericus, de Scriptore Pentateuchi, § 11; R. Simon, Histoire Critique du V. T. Lib. . C. vii.; Fleury, Mœurs des Israëlites, p. 6; Le François, Preuves de la Religion Chrétienne, T. I. P. ii. C. iii. Art. 1. Detached ideas on this subject may he also found in Jo. And. Sixt., Dissert. de Origine Histor. Creationis, quam Moses dedit, Altorf, 1782, 4to. (Astruc) Conjectures sur les Mémoires Originaux dont il paroit que Moyse s'est servi pour composer le Livre de la Genèse, à Bruxelles, briefly) in his Letters on the Mosaic 1753, 8vo. Jerusalem follows him (but added, a Dissertation of Schultens, which, Writings and Philosophy. To these may be however, contains nothing peculiar or new: Jo. Jac. Schultens, Dissert. qua disquiritur unde Moses res in Libro Geneseos descriptas didicerit. See the same reprinted in Jo. Oelrich's Belgii Litterati Opusculis Historico - Philologico-Theologicis, T. I. pp. 247, et seq. entered so deeply into the subject as Of all the authors here quoted, none has Astruc. Ilgen has since treated upon it ginal State of the Documents belonging very elaborately in his work on the Orito the Archives in the Temple of Jerusalem, 1 vol. Halle, 1798, 8vo., although his excessive minuteness (however laudable in itself) gives him the appearance of wishing to do more than at present it is possible to do. I must leave it to the reader to choose between his work and the present attempt, requesting him, at the same time, to peruse the reviews of Zeitung, (Jena, 1798,) and in Gabler's the former in the Allgemeine Litteratur Theolog. Journal, where he will find much useful information on the subject generally. prevent my being diverted from those views which I had once for all adopted, I considered myself bound to pass over the previous labours of Astruc, and to decline his assistance as my guide. What the results of my inves tigations are, shall be hereafter detailed, without the smallest claim on my part to any superiority over my predecessors, by affecting to shew wherein Clericus and Simon may have suffered themselves to be misled, or in what particulars Fleury and De François may have been mistaken, and Astruc, Jerusalem and Ilgen may have fallen into error. In the mean time, and as a necessary step to our ulterior proceedings, it may not be amiss to devote a section or two to consider the most ancient modes of preserving history. (Desunt §§ 416, b. et c.) I. The Book of Genesis contains several separate and distinct Documents or Records. Several chapters in Genesis bear the stamp of being distinct, isolated records, the authors of which, as far as we are at present able to judge, had nothing whatever to do with the remainder. That portion of it comprising the second chapter, exclusive of the four first verses, but including the whole of the third chapter, exhibits an instance of such a distinct and isolated document. The first chapter is in no wise connected with the second from the fourth verse, and the superscription itself, (chap. ii. 4,) "This is the origin of heaven and earth," plainly enough separates them. The reader will moreover find, that in the first chapter a very ingenious plan is laid down, which throughout is followed up with no small display of art, and according to which every idea has its appropriate place allotted to it; whereas a perusal of the second chapter will shew, that from the fourth verse the narrative is that of early childhood, characteristic of a noble simplicity, and breathing the language styled Jehovah Elohim. It remains to be asked, if so striking a difference can be the effect of mere chance, or rather if it ought not to be considered as denoting the existence of two distinct works, the productions of different writers ? The second chapter, from the fourth verse, and the whole of the third, breathe the same spirit, and exhibit the same train of thought and ideas; so that in fact the narrative contained in both, appears as intimately connected and suited together as ever two fragments of an antique monument can possibly be supposed to be. They inform us, that "God allotted to the first human pair a beautiful part of Eden for their residence, where they were permitted to partake of all kinds of fruits and herbs; but at the same time cautioned against the produce of a certain tree of a deadly nature: notwithstanding which, they suffered themselves to be persuaded by a ser pent to eat of the prohibited fruit, and, in consequence, became subject to death and expulsion from the happy abodes of paradise." Lastly, in no other part of the whole book of Genesis, except in the second and third chapters, is the name Jehovah Elohim applied to God. Such a union of circumstances naturally warrants the inference, that both chapters compose one distinct and separate document connected with the remainder of the book, solely by the subject of which they treat, namely, the earliest history of mankind, and in no wise by the name of their author. The fourteenth chapter, which is introduced into the narrative of Abraham's history, appears equally abrupt and isolated. It has nothing to do with the fifteenth, and is merely connected with the twelfth and the thirteenth chapters by the circumstance of its referring to an event which occurred subsequent to the separation of Abraham from Lot; whilst its general tone and style shew a marked difference between it and any preceding or subsequent chapters. In it alone God is mentioned as the * אל אליון קנה שמים וארץ .of the remotest periods of the world most high God, possessor of heaven and earth;" in it alone the Creator of the universe is designated as The name Elohim is invariably applied to God throughout the first chapter, and as far as the fourth verse in the second; but from thence to the end 'ow," the possessor of heaven of the third chapter he is as invariably and earth;" and in this chapter only p are a succession of parentheses to be met with explanatory of geographical names. (See vers. 2, 3, 7, 8, 17.) Last ly, the whole spirit of this fragment proves its author not only to have lived prior to Moses, but even to have written at a period not very distant from the time in which those events took place which are recorded by him. The style is at once as refined and apposite as can possibly be expected from an historian narrating the events of his own times, and writing at an early period, when no fixed rules of authorship existed. The writer is careful not to let the foreign king of Salem speak of God as Jehovah, or El Shadai, or even as Elohim, but as ,"the most high God," nay, he even makes him change the Hebrew epithet of creator of heaven and earth, קנה שמים into ברא שמים וארץ ,וארץ "the possessor of heaven and earth." On the other hand, when Abraham, as a genuine Hebrew, swears to the king of Salem, he raises his hand to Jehovah, the "most high God, possessor of heaven and earth," and his friend. Expressions like these, varying according to the situation and circumstances of the parties by whom they are used, speak in favour of the writer's having lived at a period when the events narrated by him occurred, whilst the ancient geographical names adopted by him, decidedly pronounce him to have existed prior to those important changes which swept away the original names of the country in which they took place. (To be continued.) SIR, Clapton, August 1, 1822. I KNOW not whether Euclpis (p. 409) is acquainted with the circumstance that the opinions of Dr. Watts, which he has quoted from a work first published in 1725, were considered by strict Trinitarians among his immediate contemporaries, as a virtual renunciation of the doctrine of the Trinity. Thus, according to Johnson's Life of Watts, with Notes, &c., by the late Rev. S. Palmer, (ed. 2, 1791,) "Mr. T. Bradbury, in a letter dated 1725, charged him with making the Divinity of Christ to evaporate into a mere attribute,' and after jeering at his professed love of truth, writes to him thus: It is pity, after you have been more than thirty years a teacher of others, you are yet to learn the first principles of the oracles of God. Was Dr. Owen's Church to be taught another Jesus?-that the Son and Spirit were only two powers in the Divine Nature?”” (P. 91.) To the same purpose was a pamphlet which I once met with, only long enough to copy the following title-page: "The Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity, vindicated, in opposi tion to Mr. Watts's Scheme of One Divine Person and Two Divine Powers, by Abraham Taylor, ed. 2nd, 1728.” The author was tutor of an Independent Academy at Deptford, which preceded the institution now fixed at Homerton. In Vol. XVI. pp. 223, 224, I mentioned Dr. Tindal's "Rights of the Christian Church," the controversy it produced, and how the doughty champions of High-Church, to quote the well-known sarcasm of Jortin, "called upon the constable to come and help them." Looking very lately among those treasures of historical information which Dr. Birch be queathed to the British Museum, I found in his hand-writing the following extract, entitled "Dr. Burnet, Bishop of Salisbury, to Archbishop Tennison, 1st June, 1706." (Ayscough, 4292; 73.) Nonconformists ought, I think, to acknowledge the fairdealing of a clergyman of the Church of England who preserved for posterity such an ecclesiastical document. "as for Tindal's book, I shall be sorry if any of our friends answer it; for so much must be yielded, if we well defend the Refor mation, that it will raise a new controversy; for hot people will think the church is given up, by what is yielded. I know Mr. Kelsey's notions are generally wrong in that matter; and to call for his book and not to make use of it is to affront him. But if your Grace insists on this, I will ask it of him." The annexed letters I copied from the same volume, where they are also in the hand-writing of Dr. Birch. Of these documents I was not aware when I sent you in 1819, (XIV. 721,) some account of the controversies in the Church of England, on the once warmly disputed validity of Lay or Archbishop Tennison to Archbishop Lambeth, MY LORD, In pursuance of the agreement made here by your Grace and the rest of my brethren the Bishops, when I had the favour of your good companies on Easter-Tuesday, I met yesterday with some of them, and we drew up a paper suitable (as we judged) to the proposal then made. It is short and plain, and, I hope, inoffensive, and for a beginning (as I humbly conceive) full enough. I here inclose a copy of it for the use of your Grace, and of as many others as your Grace shall think fit to shew it to. I send the declaration unsigned, because we, who were present, desired first to have the opinions of your Grace and others, who were absent, and should be glad to know, whether you would have any to dine with your Grace the last week. But yet for all that, I can by no means come into the proposal your Grace has now made in your letter, viz., that we should all declare under our hands, the validity of lay-baptism; for I am afraid this would be too great an encouragement to the Dissenters, to go on in their way of irregular, uncanonical baptism. I have, as your Grace desired me; communicated the matter to three of our brethren the Bishops, and we have had a full discourse about it, and are all of the same opinion, that I have now represented. I am, with all sincere respects and hearty wishes of health and happiness to your Grace, Your Grace's most faithful Ayscough, 4292. 67. Mr. Cooper on the Disposition of the thing added to it, or altered in it; for (For Letter I. see p. 217, and Letter II. we affect not the vanity of dogmatizing. We hope for your Grace's speedy answer, (to-morrow, if it may be,) because the evil grows, and we have heard of more odd books and sermons since we met, and of an increase of the scrupulous, and your Grace well knows, that the more timely the check is given, the likelier it is to have, through God's blessing, a good effect. I commend this weighty affair to your Grace's most serious consideration, and yourself to the protection of the great Shepherd of souls, and remain Your Grace's most affectionate CANTERBURY. Dr. Sharp, Archbishop of York, to Archbishop Tennison. Grace's I had the honour of your letter, with the declaration inclosed, the last night. I am entirely of the same sentiments that we all declared' we were of, when we had the honour SIR, YOUR p. 297.) Newcastle-under-Lyme, August 2, 1822. YOUR readers will remember my stating, that during a part of the time I was in Jamaica, I paid considerable attention to the instruction of the Negro children. I formed them into a class, had them to my house every day in the week, and with the assistance of Mrs. C., succeeded in teaching a few of them to read. At one period we had as many as twenty under our care, but this number was soon diminished, in consequence of four or five of them falling ill with an infectious disease; and we were never able to get a sufficient supply of recruits to repair the breach. That such should actually be the case, will, I doubt not, appear rather an extraor dinary case to persons unacquainted with the state of society in the West Indies, but who have been told that we resided on an estate containing a population of four hundred souls. The fact is, the Negroes in Jamaica are a very unprolific race: not that they are naturally so, for they are evidently made barren by that brutal and demoralizing system of government under which they are doomed to pass Mr. Cooper on the Disposition of the Negroes to embrace Christianity. 493 their wretched lives. It is notorious, that slavery is most unfriendly to the production of life, and also that in several ways it leads directly to its destruction. The few scholars we had, made, on the whole, a satisfactory progress. Before they left us, eight of them, including two brown girls, could read the Scriptures with considerable ease: they went through three of the Gospels, besides reading various extracts from the Old Testament and the Acts of the Apostles. But it is unnecessary that I should dwell on this point, it being so well known and generally acknowledged, that the Negroes are capable of learning to read with as much facility as any other people. I must not, however, omit to explain a circumstance of some importance, as connected with their instruction in this art, upon which, I flatter myself, considerable light was thrown by our experience. The loss of time which it might be supposed would be occasioned to the master, if the slaves were allowed an opportunity of learning to read, has been regarded as constituting a most powerful objection to the measure; but the children under our tuition made the progress described above, by the time it is usual to send them into the field to work, and, consequently, an important object was accomplished without putting the estate to any inconvenience what ever. Now there certainly is no reason why the children of other estates might not be brought to make a similar improvement with as little loss or inconvenience to their owners. But it will, perhaps, be said, that by the time they become of age to learn their letters, they might be formed into a gang, and sent out to gather green herbs for the pigs, under the superintendence of an aged woman; and on some estates this is done; not, however, so much in consequence of the value of what is brought in, as the importance of keeping the little creatures out of idleness, and getting them to form habits of industry in early life. But surely the school-master or mistress would be able to secure the former as effectually as the driver, if not the latter also, and at the same time, make sure of laying a good foundation for their future advancement in knowledge and virtue. Thus it appears, that arrangements might be made with the greatest case, sufficient to secure to the slaves the means of a common education; but the policy of the measure is, no doubt, another question. What I now chiefly contend for is, that the children might be brought to a valuable degree of forwardness by the time the planters would think of employing them in the cane-field; and till they are employed there, any thing they may do in the shape of work, can be of but_trifling importance to the estate. For my own part, I have no hesitation in con fessing, what I have indeed, in effect, stated before, viz., that I quite believe education would bring on a revolt amongst the slaves; for I cannot be brought to believe, that an enlightened people would ever submit, with the least degree of patience, to the indig nities, privations and hardships which naturally result from slavery, as it now exists in Jamaica. Any people may be held down for a time, by dint of mere force, but as long as they retain the feelings, faculties and virtues of men, they will be sure to watch for and embrace the first opportunity of escaping. As long, therefore, as the Negroes are to remain the victims of a disgusting tyranny, it seems to be nothing more than a piece of necessary policy to keep them from every species of intellectual improvement; and, what is worse, even to instil into their minds a number of false maxims and erroneous doctrines. It is consistent, if not hunane, in those masters who will not admit of the idea of ultimate emancipation, to keep their slaves not only from reading and writing, but from every thing that ed as at all above the wants of animals may be regarddoomed from their birth to hard labour. Where is the kindness or wisdom of pointing out to a fellow-creature the miseries of his situation, when it is decreed that the cause of them shall not be touched till he goes to the place appointed for all living? I am disposed to believe, that the planters in general would rejoice to see the Negroes become an informed and happy peasantry, provided such an amelioration in their condition could be brought about without endangering their fidelity; but that they are not prepared to risk; and hence they seem to be quite opposed to every |