plan of improvement which, either directly or indirectly, contemplates a blow at the root of the evil. The highest object aimed at by the most benevolent seems to be, to make them as happy as their situation will possibly admit of. But this may not be doing enough; for liberty seems evidently to be the natural right of every human being. Why not then admit of their being prepared for the enjoy ment of privileges which cannot be held from them without acting contrary to the sacred laws of truth and justice? The planters, however, are not the only persons with whom I would remonstrate on this subject, for all who indulge in the consumption of West-India produce, or contribute in any way to the maintenance of the present order of things in our sugar islands, ought, in common fairness, to bear their share of the blame. With what propriety can a consumer of rum or sugar cast a stone at the cultivator of the sweet cane? The Negro is the injured individual: he is robbed of his liberty, and with that, of every thing that can render a rational existence desirable. He is denied all the advantages of education; condemned to the vilest ignorance, lest by becoming informed he should discover and seek to remove the cause of all his unmerited misfortunes. He cannot marry, and is thereby not merely tempted, but in a manner compelled, to form the loosest and most unhallowed connexions. I would appeal to the common discernment and feeling of mankind, whether marriage can exist where a third person has it in his power to step in and disannul the holy league. Now, every one knows that this is virtually the case with respect to the slaves in the West Indies. The connexions which they form do not always take place be tween individuals belonging to the same proprietor; in numerous instances they are the property of different persons. But it is no uncom mon thing for the inhabitants of one plantation or settlement to be removed to another, situated, perhaps, on the opposite side of the island; and, consequently, in all such cases, husbands, wives and children belonging to other gangs, are, contrary, no doubt, to the wishes of the respective masters, left behind. Others, again, are seized and sold to pay the debts of their owners. These evils might be removed by attaching them to the soil, but then others would remain, of a nature almost equally formidable. Every slave being compelled, under pain of corporal punishment, to yield implicit obedience to the will of the master, the wife, as well as the husband, would be under the necessity of joining a gang under the command of a driver, and in case of not giving him satisfaction, to submit to the most degrading chastisement, administered in the most indecent manner. I have known them point to things of this description for the purpose of shewing that it is impossible for them to marry. Over their children, it is obvious they could have no authority resembling that which parents in a free country possess: they could only leave them the same wretched inheritance which they received from their ancestors. Hence, those who have children, are generally careless with respect to the habits they form and the lives they lead: they know they can never sink lower in the scale of society than they already find themselves placed, and they have no hope of rising. A regular line of orderly conduct may save them from the lash, but it can effect no radical change in their condition. The highest office to which they can ever aspire is that of a driver; an office which no one, not destitute of every manly and generous feeling, could wish to hold. In short, they have nothing to gain and nothing to lose; they have no character at stake; a good name, which, Solomon says, "is rather to be chosen than great riches," is of no avail to them. Their worth is esti mated by the strength of their bodies, and the talent and disposition to perform their masters' work. The greatest villain, therefore, in a moral respect, may be, and sometimes is, the most valuable slave; the natural consequence of all which is, that the Negroes, as a people, are as destitute of correct morality as they are of liberty. Chastity is utterly out of the question amongst the whole tribe, and both men and women are found to vindicate, as innocent, practices which it is scarcely allowable to name amongst Christians. This is followed by low cunning and contempt of truth, a determined resolution to thieve, and the greatest aversion to every species of labour. Gratitude, affection, fidelity, activity and courage, make no part of the character of the West-India slave, and yet thousands and tens of thousands of them have been "received into the congregation of Christ's flock, and signed with the sign of the cross," &c. &c. I have been present, more than once, at the christening of two or three hundred of them, and of ten thousand a-year currency. In a thousand instances the clergy are rather to be pitied than blamed; and I have not the least doubt that many a curate most deeply repents that ever he crossed the Atlantic. I shall trouble you with one more letter. T. COOPER. repeatedly conversed with individuals GLEANINGS; OR, SELECTIONS AND who have been thus regenerated. Need REFLECTIONS MADE IN A COURSE No. CCCLXXXIX. In the present state of the moral world, despotism, falsehood, injustice, and brute force, are not the preventatives of revolutions, but the seeds by which they are infallibly generated; and the sovereigns who have recourse to them, in order to stifle the spirit of the age, are only throwing water upon unslacked lime, and attempting to smother a fire with gunpowder. The re-action will be proportioned to the pressure-they will be upset by the recoil of their own instrument; but even then I would not have the friends of liberty forget their proud pre-eminence of clemency and generosity. I would pare to the quick the nails of these royal tigers, and give them another trial. If they still attempted to fasten their fangs in the flesh of their preservers, I would remove them to some uninhabited island in the Northern Ocean, where, if their thirst for blood and power remained inappeasable, they might have the privilege of knocking down one another with their respective crowns, and beating out each other's brains with their sceptres; that so, when some future traveller contemplated their bones, he might be told-these are the remains of the human Mammoths, who so cruelly harassed and devastated the world, that their subjects, in self-defence, transported them to this island, where they exterminated each other, and the race is now happily extinct. Morning Chronicle, May 23, 1822. REVIEW. "Still pleased to praise, yet not afraid to blame."-POPE. ART. I.-A Course of Lectures, con- ΤΗ It may be useful to remind our readers, that the subject of the fifth part of the Lectures was the authen ticity of the New Testament; * and that by its authenticity the Professor * Mon. Repos. XV. 473. understands its having proceeded from Before he be offers arguments for the credibility of this volume, he examines into the integrity of the writings which compose it: he inquires, whether “the books which we possess as works of Apostles and Evangelists, are the posed by Apostles and Evangelists?" same books as those which were com But he does not confound the notion of integrity with the notion of a perfect text: he distinguishes between a there shall be no deviation from the copy of the Greek Testament, in which autographs of the sacred writers, and one in which there is as near an ap proximation to a perfect text, as under all circumstances can be justly expected. "If," says he, "we can prove, that the New Testament has descended to us, upon the whole, in the same state in which it was origiconfide in every thing which relates nally written, and that we may justly to facts and to doctrines, this will be sufficient." : that a general corruption of the sacre The Professor, accordingly, shews, text was not in itself practicable. Different parties were mutually watchful: copies were widely and quickly multiplied. No union of sentiment existed no combination embracing the majority of Christians, could be formed. Such a combination, even had it been feasible, could not be carried into effect, without becoming a matter of notoriety. The impediments to this corruption were further augmented by the ancient versions of the New Testament, which, in the main, accord, as to facts and doctrines, with the Greek manuscripts. Here again, as likewise in the quotations contained in the voluminous writings of the Greek Fathers, we have a proof that the Christian Scriptures have, for the most part, descended to us in the same state in which they came from the writers themselves. Bishop Marsh illustrates his observations by a reference to the history of the celebrated text in 1 John v. 7. He is aware, that not only a specific argument on which himself insists, but every argument for the integrity of the New Testament, which he uses in this Lecture, must fall at once to the ground, "if it be true that the passage in question proceeded from the pen of St. John." Nothing can be more satisfactory than his estimate of the evidence, both external and internal, which some critics perceive, or fancy that they perceive, in behalf of the disputed words. His conclusion does great honour to his discernment and learning as a scholar, and to his fidelity as a lecturer. In the opinion of this very able judge, We have thus laid before our read ers a summary of the Professor's twenty-seventh lecture: in the twentyeighth he argues from the character of the writers of the New Testament to the credibility of their writings. Beginning with the historic books, the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles, he, in the first place, considers "the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. John." These Evangelists not only saw and heard what was said and done by our Saviour; they themselves bore a part in the transactions which they have recorded. Their sincerity is undeniable. Not merely did they renounce all worldly advantages; they submitted to persecutions, such as VOL. XVII. no 3 s man would endure, except from a firm conviction, that he was propagating nothing but the truth. The sufferings, too, which they underwent, were not accidental or unforeseen. Further, it is not credible that the apostolic historians were deceived themselves. The facts which they recorded were of such a description, that nothing more was wanted than the use of their senses to determine, whether these events really happened or not. In the conduct of the apostles no signs of fanaticism appear. These men even doubted the truth of their Master's resurrection, till they were convinced of it by his actual presence. The situation and circumstances of the Evangelists Matthew and John, attest the credibility of their narratives: the dates of their several Gospels, in respect both of place and time, prove the moral impossibility of these compositions containing a fabricated story. Had this kind of fraud been attempted, the detection of it was unavoidable. In Judæa, and beyond Judæa, numbers of persons were still living, by whom the imposture Jews who embraced Christianity in would have been exposed. Yet the the apostolic age, gave positive evidence of their own belief in the gospel history. And even those of this nation who rejected Christianity have, at least indirectly, borne testimony in its favour. No where do we learn that they regarded the gospel history as a fable: no where do we find that the unbelieving Jews questioned the reality of the miracles, however they evaded the proper inference from them. The first apostolic historian was not confuted by the Hebrew Jews: the other apostolic historian was not confuted by the Greek Jews. Though Mark and Luke did not write from their own knowledge, yet these Evangelists derived their information from the best sources which can be opened to those who rely on others for intelligence: the credibility, therefore, of their respective Gospels, rests on a foundation which is perfectly secure. In estimating that credibility, there are two subjects of special inquiry: the former of them regards the materials; the second, the mode in which those materials were employed. The Margaret Professor now makes a digression, with the view of elucidating and establishing what he had stated in his Dissertation on the Three First Gospels, concerning the verbal harmony of certain of the Evangelists. He thinks that his hypothesis does not militate against the supposition of Mark and Luke having written independently of each other. That they applied with fidelity the materials which they obtained with certainty, he proves by the same arguments from which it was inferred, that the apostolic historians employed their materials with fidelity. With a sketch of this proof he concludes his twentyeighth Lecture. In that which follows he estimates the credibility of the facts recorded in the New Testament, from a consideration of the facts themselves. But, for the present, he limits his attention to the ordinary events related there, without adverting to miracles in particular. In conducting the inquiry thus modified, he rapidly compares the several parts of each single book, one book with another, and the whole with other works of acknowledged credit. Each of the Gospels is consistent throughout each contains a plain and unaffected narrative, all the parts of which have a perfect agreement; no examples occur of incongruity or incoherence. The Gospels, too, of Matthew, Mark and Luke, are similar both in matter and in manner. Indeed, when we have deducted what each of these three Evangelists has peculiar to himself, the matter which remains common to all three, constitutes one uniform narrative of our Saviour's ministry, from his baptism to his death and resurrection. To the subject of a common document, which explains the harmony in the matter of the three first Gospels, the Professor once more adverts. Afterwards, he makes some pertinent remarks on the Gospel of John, and notices, in a general way, the alleged contradictions in the Evangelists. He refers to vindications of the history of the resurrection, and speaks with signal and deserved approbation of Bishop Sherlock's Trial of the Witnesses. From the Gospels he proceeds to the Acts of the Apostles, which, says he, "must obviously be com pared with the Epistles of St. Paul." The principle, the nature, and the result of such a comparison, are accordingly pointed out. Illustrations of the credibility of the New Testament, from the works of Josephus and of Tacitus, are next alluded to or brought forwards: and the Lecture concludes with a most forcible statement of that proof of the truth of Christianity, which is afforded by the evangelic delineation of the character of its Founder: "If the learning and the ingenuity of Plato or Xenophon might have enabled them to draw a picture of Socrates more excellent than the original itfelf, it was not in the power of unlettered Jews to give ideal perfection to a character which was itself imperfect, and to sustain that ideal perfection as in a dramatic representation, through a series of imaginary events. Indeed it is highly probable, that the Apostles and Evangelists were not wholly aware of that perfection which they themselves have described. For that perfection is not contained in any formal panegyrio, expressive of the writer's opinion, and indicating that opinion to the reader. It is known only by comparison and by inference. We are reduced therefore to this dilemma, either the actions which are ascribed to our Saviour, are truly ascribed to him; or actions have been invented for a purpose, of which the inventors themselves were probably not aware, and applied to that purpose by means which the inventors did not pos sess. And when we further consider, that the plan developed by those facts was in direct opposition to the notion of the Jews respecting a temporal Messiah, we must believe in what was wholly impossible, if we believe that unlettered Jews could have invented them.”—Pp. 72, 73. The thirtieth Lecture, the last in this part of the course, is occupied by a special inquiry into the truth of the miracles recorded in the New Testament. To this kind of evidence for the gospel, Bishop Marsh justly attaches the highest degree of importance. "Miracles and prophecy," he declares, "alone can prove that the origin of Christianity is divine." He defines a miracle to be "something which cannot be performed without the special interference of God himself." The attempts of the Jews, in the time of our Saviour, to evade the inference from miracles, by ascribing them to the agency of evil |