THE AVERAGE PRICES of NAVIGABLE CANAL SHARES and other PROPERTY, in -Kennet and Avon, 20l. 10s.-Ellesmere, 824.-Lancaster, 204-Grand Union, 704" Leeds and Liverpool, 2147. ex dividend.—Monmouth Canal, 1657. ex dividend 107. Grand Western, 647. discount.-Severn and Wye Railway, 301.-West India Dock, Feb. 1815 (to the 24th), at the Office of Mr. SCOTT, 28, New Bridge-street, London.clear-Grand Junction, 2231. ex half year's dividend, 34. 10s. clear. Rochdale, 587 1574-London Ditto, 911. 90%-Imperial 50%.-Hope Ditto, 21. 2s.-Strand Bridge, 21-Ditto Annuities, 107. premium.-Southwark Ditto, 57. discount.-Kent FireOffice, 387. Chelsea Water Works, 13%. — Commercial Sale Room, 384 British Copper Company 341. to 401.-Covent Garden Theatre 4001. 4051. Days EACH DAY'S PRICE OF STOCKS IN FEBRUARY, 1815. Bank SperCt. 3perCt 4 per Ct. 15 perCt B.Long Irish | Imp. Imp. India Sou Sea, 3 per Ct. India Ex. Stock. Stock. South Sea Bonds. Bills. nium. Om 3 193 31 64 65 56 18 pr. 6 pr. 21 dis. dis. 1934 1921 681 64 69 70 54 2 pr. 3 dis. pr. 3 dis. 8. pr. 3 pr. 7 pr. 2 pr. 13 dis. 3 dis. RICHARDSON, GOODLUCK, & Co. Bank Buildings, London. Printed by NICHOLS, SON, and BENTLEY, Red Lion Passage, Fleet Street, London. THE GENTLEMAN'S MAGAZINE : LONDON GAZETTE MARCH, 1815. CONTAINING Meteorological Diariesfor Feb. & March 194,286 Staff.-Stamf. 2 Taunton-Tyne Wakefi.-Warw. Worc. 2-YORK 3 IRELAND 37 SCOTLAND 24 Sunday Advertiser Jersey2. Guern.2. ARCHITECTURAL INNOVATION, No. CCIL....230 Miscellaneous Correspondence, &c. Review of New Publications, viz. ....223 By SYLVANUS URBAN, GENT. Printed by NICHOLS, SON, and BENTLEY, at CICERO'S HEAD, Red Lion Passage, Fleet-str. London; where all Letters to the Editor are desired to be addressed, POST-PAID. METEOROLOGICAL DIARY KEPT AT EXETER. Foggy; at noon cleared up. 29.31 442 23 do. 29.38 44 22 do. Wet haze with small rain... 29.27 47 23 do. Fine. Fine, though a little hazy... Very fine.... 29.85 53 6 do. Fine.. 29.75 45 19 do. F.& C.; rain; fair. F. & C. 29.46 50 21 do. Do.; after 6 smail rain. 29.38 47 22 do. Fine, though some haze..... 29.60 50 16 do. Very fine. 29.61 47 21 do. 29.34 48 22 do. Do. do.; after 5 fair. 29.41 44 22 do. Fair. Rain. Dark and cloudy [sm, rain. 29.54 46 19 do. Do..... 29.48 44 21 do. Do. ...... 29.40 47 Do.; after 6 haze and rain. 47 22 do. Do. 29.18 43 81 do. Blowing fresh, with rain.. Fine, but cloudy. 29.56 53 do. Do..... ............. 29.56 50 16 do. 16 M Hazy; after 2 small rain... 29.45 49 7 do. Small rain.. ......... 29.45 42 17 do. Fine. M Wind, with squalls of rain.. 29.68 47 16 do. MFoggy and frosty. 30.17 47 17 do. F. & C. blowing strong 22 M 20 29.67 50 20 M 21 29.90 52 22 M Fine, though some haze. 30.10 48 20 do. Fine.. 29.88 46 ... 20 do. Cloudy & windy. 29.69 511 20 do. Do. 30.08 51 22 do. Do.; hazy; after 4 moderate 29.76 42 214 do. Do. 49 22 do. F. & C. 22 30.15 48 22 M Very fine.... 30.16 5616 do. Do.. T 30.17 43 17 do. Do.; frosty. 17 M Very fine........... 30.09 51 14 do. Very fine.. 30.09 47 12 do. Fine. 14 M F. & C.; blowing fresh.. 45 14 M Cloudy and lowering.. 27 30.31 30 28 30.28 42 12 M Fine, sharp frost. 10 M Fine, with little haze.. 29.97 51 11 do. Cloudy. 13 do. F. and C......... 5 D. Do. THE GENTLEMAN'S MAGAZINE, For MARCH, 1815. Mr. URBAN, March 6. Tham's answer, I request you to HE following reply to Mr. Belinsert in your Magazine. Yours, &c. T. ST. DAVID'S. judge of this controversy, or that he cannot believe what he says. Of this declaration, however, Mr. Belsham * professes to have "just and heavy reason to complain ;"-to com A Second Address to Persons calling plain of my charging him with an themselves Unitarians. UNITARIANISM is so contrary to Christianity, that I can impute your adherence to it to nothing but your confidence in the accuracy of the assertions respecting the doctrines of Scripture, which you meet with in such publications as Mr. Belsham's "Calm Inquiry." For such confidence it is my wish to provide a remedy; and I have some hope that you will find it in the following pages. To counteract the influence of Mr. Belsham's opinions, I endeavoured, in my former Address, to convince you, that he is an incompetent reporter of the doctrines of the Gospel, and of the Primitive Church, I now once more beg leave to offer you my "unsolicited" advice "to take heed what ye hear," (Matth. iv. 24.) in a matter that so nearly concerns your salvation as your faith in Christ. You will perceive in the following pages that Unitarianism is made up of. misrepresentations and inaccuracies and unfounded assertions. After stating in my former Address Mr. Belsham's assertion, that Bp. Horsley was baffled and defeated in his controversy with Dr. Priestley," I said, "Mr. Belsham may say this, but he cannot believe it." If any one tells me, It is night, when it is mid-day, and I know him to be in his senses, I am sure that he cannot be lieve what he says. Mr. Belsham's assertions, that Bp. Horsley was defeated, that the Bishop knew this, and that be would have laughed to scorn the ignoramus who should have thought otherwise, are quite as much at variance with the truth; and therefore I contend, that Mr. Belsham is either wholly incompetent to say, untruth, when he has charged the whole body of the Established Clergy with an "aversion to, and an abhorsham, after being reminded of this rence of, the truth." Yet Mr. Bef unjustifiable language, can venture to "he should have been ashamed say, to use the language" that I do, when I he" cannot believe what he says" of Bp. Horsley's defeat. What Mr. Belsham's sense of shume may be, it is easy to conjecture from his avowed opinion of the Clergy, and of the established religion of his country: especially when we know, that the words, which I have just quoted, were not the hasty effusion of an angry moment, but his old and accustomed language. In his "Review" of Mr. Wilberforce's excellent work, he says, an established Priesthood is, in its very nature, a persecuting order. All breathe the same fiery and intemperate spirit. Truth and honest inquiry they are paid to discountenance and repress t.” He says, that "I charge him with using harsh language of the Clergy and their doctrines." Does he deny the charge? If he does, he cannot look at the passages, which I have quoted and referred to, and "believe what be says." But he does not state my charge against his language and opinions strong enough. I said that any one, who could hold such an opinion of Bp. Horsley as he does, and could utter that most uncandid and untrue opinion of the Established Church and Clergy which he did, is *Gent. Mag. Aug. 1814, p. 125. + See this and many similar passages in the Dean of Cork's excellent work on the Atonement, vol. II. P. 415. incompetent (either from want of learning, or from the force of prejudice, or from both) to pass an impartial judgment on the opinions of the antient Fathers, or of the doctrines of the Established Church. The extent of Mr. Belsham's sense of shame and consistency, we see in his renewed declaration, that Bp. Horsley "knew that he was defeated, and that he would have laughed to scorn the solemn ignoramus who should have thought otherwise," though Dr. Priestley is every where throughout the controversy convicted of inaccuracies and misrepresentation, and a radical ignorance of his subject. Bp. Horsley's general judgment on the controversy is strongly expressed in the passages quoted in my former address. But, as Mr. Belsham has since repeated his gratuitous assertion to the contrary, I will add here two other passages from Bp. Horsley's Remarks on Dr. Priestley's Second Letters, 9 and 12. "These and many other glaring instances of unfinished erudition, shallow criticism, weak argument, and unjustifiable art to cover the weakness, and to supply the want of argument; which must strike every one, who takes the trouble to look through these Second Letters; put me quite at ease with respect to the judgment which the publick would be apt to form between my antagonist and me."- "As for the outcry which be makes about my intolerance, and my bigotry to what he calls high church principles, I consider it as the vain indignant struggle of a strong animal, which feels itself overcome; the mere growling of the tiger in the toils; and I disdain to answer. Yet Mr. Belsham persists in his assertion, that Bp. Horsley knew that he was defeated. And what is this but saying, Bp. Horsley "did not believe what he said?" But this is nothing to that gross instance of "defamation against the memory of the dead, of which Mr. Belsham is guilty,, in saying that Bp. Horsley would have laughed to scorn the solemn ignoramus who should have thought him not defeated." What can Mr. Belsham be ashamed to say of any one, after such a charge of hypocrisy, duplicity, and contempt of truth? It is indeed no more than he said before, in general, of the Clergy. "In terested priests and crafty statesmen will continue to support a religious establishment, which answers their private and political purposes, at the same time that they hold its doctrines in contempt." On the offensive passage against the Clergy, occasioned by Mr. Horsley's defence of his Father's Tracts, Mr. Belsham has now put the following gloss: "The idea I mean to convey in that passage is, that persons all whose expectations in life depend upon their profession of a particular system of opinions, cannot, in the nature of things, be unbiassed inquirers after truth." How far this gloss can be called the meaning of the text, we shall see presently. But what is the bias that is here meant? bias of professional obligation: a bias not peculiar to the Clerical profession. The Clergy engage themselves at the commencement of their Ministry, by the most solemn vows that man can enter into, that they will inculcate and maintain the doctrines of the Church, of which they are Ministers; and, as far as in them lies, will banish and drive away all contrary doctrines. The doctrines which they promise to teach, are perfectly well known to them before they enter into this engagement. They are the doctrines, which they imbibed with the first elements of their Christian education. They professed them publicly in the face of the Church, when they came to years of discretion. They studied them in their principles and proofs, before they offered themselves candidates for the Ministry. And at the commencement of their Ministry they declared their entire acquiescence in them, and solemnly promised to inculcate and maintain them. And in what way does the professional obligation which binds them to their duty, differ from the obligation which attaches to all important offices of trust, except in the magnitude and sanctity of its object? If "they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar," must the sincerity of their faith be suspected, more than the loyalty of the brave defenders of their country, who are bound by similar obligations? Must the patriotism of the Navy and the Army be doubted, because they are biassed by *See Magee on the Atonement, as before. |