New Jury Court of Scotland. not to interfere with any fixed rule, or with any part of the system of the municipal law of Scotland, and that we are only to try such issues as the Divisions of the Court of Session shall think it right in their discretion to send here: these, it may be material to observe, will be of three sorts :1st. Cases where the issue may comprise both the injury and recompence or damages. 2nd. Cases in which the Court of Session, or Lord Ordinary, having decided as to the injury, refer the damages to be assessed by a jury. 3rd. Cases where the Court of Session, or Lord Ordinary, wishes for information by the verdict of a jury to inform its understanding, so as to enable it to pronounce a judgment upon the law." The case about to be tried is of the description last mentioned. But in that, and in all cases, it will be easy to clear away difficulties. In the first place, allow me to observe, more particularly addressing myself to you, gentlemen, who are assembled to serve on this jury, that our inquiries here are not into hidden and occult acts of crime, where the discovery of truth may often be involved in intricacy and difficulty, and in doubtful testimony, by the very nature of the acts. But we shall have to do here with the open acts and transactions of men in the ordinary affairs of life and intercourses of the world. In such transactions, when examined into in open Court, seeing and judging of the witnesses, as I have described their examinations to be ́conducted, with all the fences against the admitting falsehood, and all the securities for obtaining truth, which a well-regulated law of evidence affords; with a tribunal judging from their own just and honest impressions, uncontaminated by intercourse or extraneous impressions, and only influenced by the detailed, explained, and fully delivered opinion of the presiding Judge, he being alike removed from undue impressions; there is nothing likely to happen but an easy solution by a general verdict. But when there does occur prevarication, or contradictory testimony, that worldly sense and intercourse with mankind which those composing Juries possess, and which affords, perhaps, a better power of extrication than the learning 149 of more retired men, will never fail to guide you: while the court has it in its power, according to the nature of the case, to relieve all difficulties, by directing a special verdict, or even a verdict specially, finding the evidence as given, and returning it to the Directing Tribunal; so that that court from which the issue comes will always attain, what it wants, the best possible information of the fact on which to ground its judgment. The case for trial will soon afford a practical instance of what I here state; and I trust by its event it will shew, though, from the great number of witnesses, it must be long, that in less than twelve hours we shall accomplish, to satisfaction, that which would not have been attained, in the ordinary course, in twelve monthsthat we shall, by our labour of twelve hours, put an end to all litigation; while the other course would, at the end of twelve months, only give a commencement to litigation, with a power to a litigious spirit to continue it for years to come. If this experiment is successful, and I augur sanguinely of it, although, as in all experiments, failure may be expected at first, there will be attained for this country the great objects of justice, viz. certainty, satisfaction, dispatch, and cheapness; and with this I might conclude, but I cannot refrain from observing, before I close my address to you, that I augur success to the experiment most peculiarly, and with most certain hope, when I consider that the casual tribunal, as I have denominated the Jury, is to be derived from the body of the people of Scotland, distinguished for good education, for a most correct morality, for a love of justice, for extended information, and for a pure religious persuasion. I trust and hope with unfeigned anxiety, that I may be able in my person to bring to the aid of this most important experiment, the qualities requisite to its success. But when I reflect that though I have, during all my professional life, been accustomed to courts thus administering justice, that I have never yet dispensed it-that, from being a critic on the acts of others in that awful station, I am now myself to be the subject of observation and remark, I cannot but be full of anxiety and ap prehension, in having the interests In this situation, new to me, and When I look before me to the bar, I derive comfort from the certainty that I am to be enlightened in the seat of justice by their learning and their eloquence, and that I am sure to receive comfort from their urbanity, and from the mildness of their judgments on my first exertions. When I look to the Jury now assembled, and the succession of such a class of men to discharge this duty, there again I derive comfort and feel convinced that their anxiety to do justice, and their steady attention to every case, will secure against any bad effects from my want of experience or incapacity. If I should prove at all a serviceable instrument in giving success to this important measure of justice, while I live I shall enjoy the comforting reflection that my early education in Scotland, and my habits, have preserved unabated through life my devoted attachments to its interests and its people, and made the high station to which I have been graciously advanced an object of my most ardent desire. I will conclude, therefore, with the anxious hope, that it may be inscribed with truth upon my tomb, that the experiment has proved successful, and that I have not been useless in the accomplishment of this mighty benefit to my native land. But, as the same motives cannot ac tuate minds of a different compass, or expansion, it is scarcely justifiable in those principles of action, which, in such persons to attribute to others similar circumstances, they would not have hesitated to adopt. The selfish hypocrite is rarely able to comprehend the grasp of truly generous and enlightened minds. The man of honour should not be reduced to the same level with the sycophant. And ments or prospects in an opulent essuch as conscientiously resign prefertablishment, rather than forfeit their integrity, cannot be fairly estimated by the aspiring pluralist, who defers implicitly to his superiors, both in Church and State. I am led to these reflections, by the virulent and illiberal censures, which have been of late so often cast revisions of Watts's Hymns and Moon the judicious and truly scriptural ral Songs for Children, and Melmoth's Great Importance of a Religious Life; as if such revisions had been actually genuine works of the original writers, "palmed upon the public," as the whatsoever. Yet nothing can be fairwithout any notice of the alterations their respective prefaces, by which all er than the conduct of the editors, in idea of deception or concealment is removed. The revision of Dr. Watts's Hymns avowedly proceeded from a lady, who "considering them defective, or rather erroneous, in some particular doctrines and phrases, judged it expedient to make many alterations to the instruction of her own chilin both respects, in adapting them dren; and afterwards for the better accommodation of others in the same sentiment, and for the further early advancement of religious truth committed her useful labours to the press." Nor was the Editor of the Great Importance less "studious to avoid insponsibility for the omissions of docvolving the original author in any retrines originally adopted by him, or clandestinely ingrafting his own alterations on the labours of another; earnestly hoping that no just cause of offence could be taken, by the most tenacious theologian, for the simple omission of occasional language or sentiments, thought to be derogatory from the genuine sense of the gospel of Christ, and distant from its true and even tenor." In conformity, there Outery against the Revision of Popular Works. fore, to these statements, and in compliance with a more correct interpretation of the Bible, all ascriptions of praise and thanksgiving are confined to the one only living and true God; and all expressions omitted which gave countenance to the common though erroneous notions of " the sacrifice of Christ as a satisfaction to divine justice;" "the eternity of hell fire as a place of future torment," and "the all-pervading influence of the devil." Such, Sir, were the candid and honourable proceedings which have been so vehemently arraigned. Such are the alterations which, alarming the prejudices of a narrow and petulant high-churchman, conscious of his own disingenuousness, as accessory to a secret and altogether unwarranted suppression, in the garb of a British Critic, or under the disguise of a Plain-Dealer, has been so idly and slanderously assailed. But it is in vain that facts have been distorted, and conjecture substituted for proof. In vain has Mr. Nares or Mr. Norris impeached the integrity of the Revisers' motives, where all idea of deception or concealntent has been so clearly and unequivocally disavowed. And, in the face of this undeniable fact, it required no common effrontery, in a Parochial Vicar, in his "Remarks on Mr. Belsham's Letters to the Bishop of London," (pp. 11-13,) resting on their authority for his statements, to renew the slanderous and unfounded charge. The judicious conduct of the Revisers as advocates for the supreme authority of the scriptures, correctly interpreted, in all matters of religion, was not less worthy of their beuevolent design, of rendering these deservedly admired works, as unexceptionable in doctrine and language, as for inculcating moral virtues and Christian piety, they have long been universally approved. For how, let me ask this new assailant, has "the beautiful composition or Christian piety of Dr. Watts's Hymus," evaporated, or "the utility of Mr. Melmoth's Tract, for calling the attention of young minds to the observance of Christiau morals, or to the knowledge of doctrines peculiarly Christian," been affected by their revision? Whilst they pretend not "to inculcate ALL the principles of the original writers," 151 what moral precept, what truly scriptural doctrine, has been, in either case, withdrawn? That "they are cleared of all doctrines peculiarly Christian," is an assertion as false as it is foul; unless the Vicar is prepared to shew that Christianity comprises no peculiar doctrines, when the Deity and atonement of its founder, the eternity of hell-torments, and the devil, are withdrawn. In rejecting all such unwarranted interpretations of detached or highly figurative passages, and in recurring to the uniform and consistent testimony of scripture to the divine wisdom and benevolence, the editors have essentially contributed to "the advancement of religious truth." And their little works may be safely put into the hands of children or reflecting persons without the fear of exciting those erroneous views of the dispensations of providence, which are calculated only to terrify or disgust. How can they be deemed "mutilated and imperfect," where every deficiency is so well supplied; where the genuine simplicity of the gospel is restored by the removal of excrescences which tend only to vitiate and deform? So far from being "marred," they are meliorated both in sentiment and language; so far from being" despoiled," they are adjusted to the legitimate standard,scripture; and instead of being “eviscerated," are lawfully cleansed from the gangrene which assails the vitals of the Christian scheme. When the "real purpose" is so explicitly avowed, and the design so judiciously executed, where does the Parochial Vicar find any traces of "that ingenious management, or that imposing artifice," which he so uncharitably ventures to impute? How is this "method of conveying instruction and persuasion inconsistent with what is generally understood by the terms, fair and honourable?" And with what propriety can this common and most useful practice of revising books of instruction, be so vehemently censured by the clergy of the Church of England, whose boasted scheme is nothing more than the religion of Rome "marred, despoiled and eviscerated;" whose Liturgy is no better than a Mass Book altered and revised? But, Sir, as the whole merit of these improved works is strictly due to the editors, who alone were concerned in the publication; upon what principle are Unitarians, who, as a body, were never caled upon to sanction them, involved in the imputed blame? Would it be right to involve, the numerous adherents of the Church of England, in the censure which may justly be attached to these unfounded charges, or to any other instances of misrepresentation or suppression, which individuals have practised in its support? Indiscriminate censure is at once illiberal and unjust; it cannot advance the cause of public reformation, or deter from the most mischievous pursuits. But in the present instance the censure is unfounded, and the Revisers entitled to unqualified approbation for their truly benevolent design. With as little reason has the Improved Version of the New Testament been involved in this unwarranted attack, as it is certainly founded on the basis of Archbishop Newcome's Translation, without involving that prelate in any responsibility for the numerous variations from his text. On the whole, Sir, these censures could only have proceeded from persons determined to find fault; from men, resembling a certain highchurch dignitary, who having vented his wrath against the new edition of the Great Importance, on the mere perusal of the preface, arraigned the conduct of the editor, as if his purpose had been studiously concealed. Want of candour and ingenuousness has prevailed through the whole of these pitiful attacks: unqualified assertions, remote from truth and probability, have supplied the place of evidence, whilst the most pure and disinterested motives have been" scandalously and industriously maligned." such unwarranted proceedings have emanated from correct and honourable minds? Are they calculated to support the credit of the Church of England, or consistent with the dif fusive benevolence of the gospel, which inculcates charity and good-will to all? Do they not rather savour of those narrow prejudices, which to the destruction of every liberal principle and feeling, have too often marked the conduct of established churches, in their hostility to the claims of private judgment, and the free investigation of religious truth? DETECTOR. Can The Holy Alliance. (See pp. 113, 114.) A curious circumstance relating to the Holy Alliance lately made between the Emperors of Russia and Austria, and the King of Prussia, has come to our knowledge through so respectable a channel, that we conceive it deserving of being communicated to our readers. In 1815, a Madame la Gridner was at Paris, whither she arrived from Riga, her native country, invited there, as is generally understood, by the Emperor Alexander, who had previously known and consulted her. The Prophetess Gridner, who, like all the inspired persons of this class, is not devoid of talent, and particularly possessed of the sublime and obscure jargon of mystical rites, trusting to feeble minds, reasons about every thing, discusses facts tolerably well, supports her opinions by religion, and frequently interrupting her conversation to implore, by a fervent prayer, the rays of a divine Spirit, terminates by an emphatic prophecy developing some confused but brilliant idea, together with certain consequences which she foretells, as an infallible and almost divine solution of the conversation that had been agitated. La Gridner arrived and established herself in a large hotel in Paris, prepared for her, which was furnished after her own fashion; that is, when one had traversed a suit of five or six apartments, where nothing but the bare walls were to be seen, and even no lights in the evening, one arrived at a large inner room, the whole furniture of which consisted of a few rush-bottomed chairs and a pallett, on which she was always reclined. It was on this throne or tripod, from which she never descended, that she ushered forth her mystical reveries and pronounced her oracles. The Emperor Alexander was known to go almost every evening to the rendezvous of that Sybil, and here it was that the three Sovereigns, au thors of the Sainte Alliance, discussedtheir projects, &c. as well as their interests and line of political conduct; and it is well understood that, under the dictates of the said Sybil, the treaty in question was drawn up and signed, without the intervention of any one of their respective ministers. Letter of Mr. Foster's to Ratcliff Monthly Meeting. Whatever the ulterior object of this Convention may be, certain it is, that it is intended as a strong league, made in the name of God, against liberal opinions. How truly does this remind us of the Sovereigns of the thirteenth century !!!-M. Chron., Feb. 19. Bromley, Jan. 2, 1816. SIR, the Yearly Meeting of Friends, Committees are from time to time appointed, to inspect periodical works as they come out, that any remarks concerning their principles or practices which require it, may be prompt ly noticed, and their testimonies be supported. The late Joseph Gurney Bevan, of Newington, was one of those appointed to have the theological superintendance of your Journal, so far as it might relate to the concerns of Friends. In the latter part of his life he was much disabled from writing or reading by a complaint in his eyes. I believe the last article from his pen, sent to your Work, was signed Breviloquus: it is inserted Vol. V. p. 647. I do not know who has been nominated in his room, but suppose such Committees of the Meeting for Sufferings are still appointed, although several articles which seemed loudly to call for replies, not being noticed, I have thought whether the members of these Committees are not become more fastidious than their predecessors, and wave giving any replies to anonymous writers. Should this have been the reason why a paper signed "An Inquirer," in your last Vol. p. 546, has been passed over in silence, I would obviate that objection by the inclosed letter, which was sent to the Meeting, by which I was excommunicated. If you think fit to insert it, some member of the Society, if not of that Meeting, may feel the propriety, when thus publicly called upon, to attempt an explanation of the "apparent inconsistencies and contradictions," which your correspondent has pointed out. As to my letter, it was not even allowed to be read in the Meeting, and has not procured me any information how it is thought the Epistle for 1810, and the ostensible grounds on which I was excommunicated, can be recon VOL. XI. 153 ciled with the Epistle of the last Your sincere friend, To Ratcliff Monthly Meeting, to be held 10th Mo. 19th, 1815. DEAR FRIENDS, Having incurred your censure for “calling in question" certain doctrines " pro tle for 1810," and being now able with much sincerity to avow my cordial approbation of those which its Epistle for the Present year contains upon the same subwill not be deemed an improper exercise jects, I hope expressing the same to you of my Christian liberty, or give you just canse for dissatisfaction. How this Epistle can be reconciled to the former, I know not, but this I beg leave to refer to you, as being well worthy your consideration. On bearing the latter epistle read in the Quarterly Meeting, I was forcibly struck with the soundness, clearness, and scripwith that of the former, upon every point tural simplicity of its language, compared of doctrine on which erroneous opinions are imputed to me by your records, and that without feeling conscious of any change in my sentiments. My attention was again drawn to this Epistle, as the latest and most authentic exposition of the doctrines of the Society, by the delivery of a copy to me, by one of your members appointed to distribute those Epistles. Since this time I have carefully examined its contents, and in the respective situation in which we stand to each other, as fellow-christians, and children of the same benevolent Parent of the Universe, even THE GOD and FATHER of our Lord Jesus Christ," I feel that I owe it to you, before I close this letter, briefly to call your serious attention to those parts of the last Yearly Meeting Epistle to which I have alluded. In doing this I shall annex a few words to mark more plainly how guishing them from the text. It begins I understand the Epistle, always distinthus: 66 "In offering you this salutation of our love, we believe it right to acknowledge our thankfulness to THE AUTHOR OF ALL GOOD, that we have been permitted to meet together. We have had again to rejoice in a sense of the goodness of Him ["the Author of all good"] who, by his presence, owned us in times past-we have felt the consoling assurance that the and whose mercies are over all his works] Divine Power [of Him who is omnipresent, is both ancient and new." That is, I presume more properly, is unchangeable. "It is from this holy source [" of all good"] that every enjoyment," says this Epistle, |