mates their bosoms, and while their carelessness about communicating their religion to others belies their own sense of its value. Year after year rolls on; the generation among whom we are acting our parts is quickly passing from the theatre of life: yet this great work is scarcely begun, and we may fear that we shall run our whole religious course, and see it no more advanced than it was at the outset. This is the more afflicting when so much is done every day by others; when every sect which is destitute of the clear light of our reasonable and amiable views, leaves us so far behind in Christian zeal and activity; and when not only their zeal is observable, but also the success with which their endeavours are in general crowned. It is indeed difficult, in the midst of all this, to discern an adequate reason, why the Unitarian Fund, as well as the Missionary Societies of other Christian names, should not undertake some labour for diffusing the name of Jesus among mankind. A deficiency in the requisite resources is sometimes given as a reason against such an enterprise. If we admit this plea, it indeed reflects deep disgrace upon us as a body. Are we then so much the fewest and poorest of all the denominations, that we can do absolutely nothing, where others do so much? Are we so poor that we cannot support half a dozen Missionaries, when the Moravians can maintain hundreds? For our credit's sake, I hope such an argument will not often be urged, nor our opponents allowed such a triumph. Let the trial be fairly made, and let it be seen whether Unitarians have not liberal hearts, and open hands, and Christian sympathy, as well as others. In my belief they only want leaders. The late accounts of Rammohun Roy, which make it plain that, after much inquiry, he is become a decided and zealous Unitarian Christian, give us reason to think it possible, that we may have an excellent Missionary in India, without sending one from England. Perhaps, were this great and interesting man assisted by the Unitarian Fund, he might get a chapel erected in Calcutta, and devote himself to the regular ministry of the word. This would probably be attended with the happiest effects, as he would command much attention, both from the English and his own countrymen. But I will not presume to prescribe what others are to do. Only the importance of the subject can justify me in saying what I have. Every endeavour of this kind has for its aim, to diffuse the best of blessings to whole races and nations of men, and to generation after generation. And when such a work ought to be done, and is left undone, the feeblest may not be to blame if he lifts up the voice of exhortation, aiming, at least, to merit that not mean commendation, "He hath done what he could." WH York, SIR, Sept. 10, 1822. THEN I published the Second Part of the Family Bible, I expressed my hope that the Third Part, which was to complete the Pentateuch, would appear in the course of the last year. I was proceeding to realize that hope, and had nearly printed the Book of Numbers, when I was attacked, now more than twelve months since, by very severe illness, which compelled me to lay the work aside, and, till nearly the present moment, has rendered me incapable of resuming it. I am much concerned to learn, from various quarters, that many persons who have purchased the two first parts, have expressed, not disappointment merely, but extreme indignation at the delay which has taken place, and have declared that they will purchase no more. Had the delay been occasioned by any indolence or inattention on my part, the encouragement I have hitherto received would have been justly withdrawn but in the circumstances in which I have been placed, I trust I shall be considered as having some claim to the indulgence of the public. They who may be still disposed to encourage my arduous undertaking, may rest assured that in the prosecution of it, I shall spare no exertions consist ent with a due regard to my health, which is by no means re-established, and with other important occupations in which I am necessarily engaged. C. WELLBELOVED. Extract from a Sermon preached in behalf of the Rev. J. Gisburne. 547 Extract from a Sermon on the Duty of Christians to imitate the Example of Jesus in his Compassion towards the Paralytic, according to the Measure of their Ability: preached at Maidstone, Sept. 15, 1822, by the Rev. G. Kenrick, in behalf of the Rev. J. Gisburne and his distressed Family.* THE no Mark ii. 11: "Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house." HE crowd assembled in the court where our Saviour was preaching, were greatly surprised at the apparent presumption of the command to such an unfortunate creature as he who lay before them, to take up his own couch and walk! It might for a moment be suspected that it was intended in mockery of his hopeless calamity; but the mandate is sooner issued than it is obeyed. The shrivelled limbs, withering in premature old age, become instantly animated with new youth, the vital current rushes with the rapidity of lightning into its almost forsaken channels, and he who could not lift a hand, now bears his own couch, to prove the completeness of his cure. "Go into thine house," adds Jesus. Significant words! What transport would his arrival occasion there! Joy would almost blind the eyes of his household, while he walked with the firm, unwavering step of health into his own dwelling. Blessed change! He went out by the will of others; he returns of his own accord: he went out with a mind dark, confused and cloudy, an eye vacant and unmeaning; he returns with a countenance beaming with intelligence and animated with joy: he went out borne of four; he returns bearing his own couch: he went out the pitied emblem of Divine chastisement; he returns a monument of Divine mercy! Which of us, my brethren, would not rejoice to become the honoured instrument in communicating a happi now ness like this to the afflicted and respected brother and his destitute household whose cause I am pleading? Were it conceivable that any of us should be so highly favoured by Him who is all-powerful to make whole as well as to wound, to restore * The sum of 127. 14s. 9d. was col lected on the occasion. as well as to destroy, with what de- and sinful to be so blessing and so Does any one ask, What return shall I have for my money? That you will enjoy any great temporal reward for what you are about to give, I dare not promise you. The objects of your beneficence are not likely, by your utmost efforts, to be placed in a situation where they will have the power of conferring great favours on others. I cannot even assure you that their parent's tongue will invoke on your heads that blessing which prospereth; for a hand whose doings I presume not to question, has commanded it into silence; and his family altar I almost fear may be cold. But you will not be without your reward even in this life. These tender plants board, which but for you must be which are springing up around his speedily uprooted from their places, and cast forth to grow wild in the desert, or be scorched in the sun or choked by the weeds of vice, trained by your hand and watered by your beneficence, will grow up in luxuriance and fertility. And perhaps it may be the lot of some of you in the weary journey of life, when deprived of those means of promoting your own comfort and relieving the distresses of others which you now possess, thankfully to pluck some portion of their fruit. For which of us can tell what need we may have for the services of those to whom we do good? "Cast thy bread upon the waters, for thou shalt find it after many days." Your benevolence will be rewarded even here, for God will give more of it, and increase your happiness in the same proportion. But you will be abundantly rewarded in a better world, where the tongue of the dumb shall be unloosed, where "that which is sown in dishonour shall be raised in glory, and that which is sown in weakness shall be raised in power," and where you shall receive those acknowledgements which were here withheld, and where Christ himself shall undertake to return the kindness which has been shewn towards his afflicted "little ones." SIR, Hove-House, expected, the deficient sums were immediately advanced by the Committee; and it is certain that there is no intention on the part of any gentleman who did so, to require interest for the sums so advanced, till the people of Brighton shall be better able to bear it. More than two years have passed since the chapel was opened for divine worship; and there has been no omission of morning or evening service in that time. It is proper that this should be made public for the information of those of our friends who, knowing as little of the Brighton case as your correspondent, might be misled as he has been. The New-Road Chapel in Brighton ought to have been named as a case not of warning, but of encouragement and incitement. SIR, JOHN MORELL. Clapton, As that rians" he does not know the case of Brighton, he may be excused on the plea of ignorance for having reported it from a reporter in terms which imply a censure upon men who have deserved none. My reason for noticing it is, however, that the report states what is not the fact, and what could not be believed to be the fact without doing harm. The reporter said, that the people of Brighton were unable to complete their scheme, and advised with respect to Clifton, "Let the expense of the building be known, and the money advanced before the undertaking." Now the fact is, that the Unitarians of Brighton never supposed themselves able to build a chapel for the common accommodation of themselves and visiters from London and other parts of the kingdom; and the work was not undertaken by them. The subscription did indeed commence in Brighton, and with great liberality; but the building was undertaken by a Committee of gentlemen at a distance, who both counted the cost and completed the scheme. As the subscriptions from London and other parts were less numerous, but not less liberal, than might have been regret of S. C. (p. 459) by that discreditable transaction. I would not apply the term to any of those jurymen who, under the disadvantages of prejudice and misinformation, could believe that they were doing God service, by devoting to imprisonment and confisca tion, for such a cause, a fellow-creature, alike the offspring of their heavenly Father, though so unhappy as to reject his revelation, or even to deny his existence. The discredit attaches to those who wished that “restraints upon discussion were abandoned," and yet contributed to consign a persecuted publisher to the tender mercies of the King's Bench, satisfied with the exclamation, "What could we do, and how could we act otherwise?" They certainly might have done much. They might have borne a testimony highly honourable to Christians, whose faith stands not in human policy, but "in the power of God," by absenting themselves (as they would probably have done, without scruple, for an adequate personal convenience) from such a jury, at the possible hazard of pecuniary penalties, rather than lend their assistance to the execution of what they esteemed an unrighteous law. No Mr. Rutt on the Conviction of Mrs. Wright, &c. one, I think, will envy the reflections of these "professing Unitarians," when the victim of their verdict shall, as is too probable, be torn from her husband and infant family by a sentence to a prison, and perhaps that family beggared by a moderate fine. 549 Mr. Ramsay remarks that "master and slave are in every respect opposite terms; the persons to whom they are applied are natural enemies to、 each other," and that "to make a man capable of religion, we must endow him with the rights and privileges of a man; we must teach him to feel his weight in society, and set a value on himself as a member of the community, before we can attempt to persuade him to lay in his claim to heaven." Then "to shew the necessity of advancing the slave in the scale of social life," he proceeds to "relate the little efficacy of such attempts as have been made to communicate religious knowledge to him in his hitherto debased state." But there are, in the conclusion of your correspondent's letter, some important considerations, which have not yet received the attention they deserve. I am incompetent to decide on their application to the case in question; but of this I have no doubt, that jurymen, especially in the cases of libel, ought, as S. C. recommends, to examine more minutely than they have generally done, and upon moral rather than on legal principles, the accusations of a prosecutor, who, by the Among Mr. Ramsay's testimonies wordy vituperations against a defen- is "Robertson, a minister of Nevis," dant, with which he is allowed to who "wrote professedly on the concharge his weapon of warfare, whe- version of slaves in our colonies,” ther a declaration, indictment or infor- (about 1734,) "and seems to have mation ex officio, often becomes him- laboured honestly in it himself." He self the publisher of "a false, scanda- appears, "from his observations," to lous and malicious libel." have been" of opinion that the maThat interesting letter, (pp. 492-nufacture of sugar and the practice 495) the result of much attentive observation and mortifying experience, is calculated to make a humane Englishman blush for his country, and wish that the Protector's Admiral in 1655,instead of conquering Jamaica, had, steered homeward in an opposite direcThe following representations may serve to confirm Mr. Cooper's opinion respecting the hopelessness, or rather the impolicy, if not the injustice, of attempting to communicate religious instruction to Negroes, while they are to remain the victims of a disgusting tyranny," under a perpetual hereditary bondage, which shews how incomplete was the applauded triumph of humanity in the Abolition of the Slave Trade. tion. "The Rev. James Ramsay, M.A., Vicar of Teston, in Kent," (where he died in 1789,) published in 1784, " An Essay on the Treatment and Conversion of African Slaves, in the British Sugar Colonies," among which he had resided 20 years. This author, described by Clarkson as "the first controversial writer, and one of the most able and indefatigable labourers" in the cause of the Abolition, has a chapter entitled, "The Advancement of Slaves must accompany their Religious Instruction." of religion were things incompatible; and that before we began to deliberate about the conversion of slaves, the previous question had need to be discussed whether we should maintain this manufacture, or apply ourselves to promote the growth of Christianity." This just view of the subject seems to have been well understood by the privileged orders in the West Indies. Mr. Ramsay relates, that, on his "first settlement" there, besides instructing Negroes in his own family, he "made also some public attempts to instruct slaves." It was, however, "quickly suggested, and generally believed, that he wanted to interrupt the work of slaves, to give them time, forsooth, to say their prayers; that he aimed at making of them Christians, to render them incapable of being good slaves." Thus he stood, in opinion, a rebel convict against the interest and majesty of plantership." And as, "in the bidding prayer, he had inserted a petition for the conversion of slaves, it was deemed so disagreeable a memento, that several white people on account of it left off attending divine service;" so that "he was obliged to omit the prayer entirely, to try and bring them back." never to see our Mr. Ramsay has, I think, been quoted on this subject in one of your early volumes [VI. 452]; also the opinion of that ambitious statesman and polite scholar, or rather that let tered barbarian, Carteret Lord Granville, who died in 1763, according to Biog. Brit., (III. 278,) with a verse of Homer on his lips, leaving papers on various subjects, among which is expressed his hope Negroes in America become Christians, because he believed that this would render them less laborious slaves." Lord Granville, however, was neither so inconsistent nor self-convicted, as those West-India proprietors who support Bible, Tract, or School Societies; for "at home he was not for having the vulgar taught to read, that they might think of nothing but the plough and their other low avocations." (Ibid. IV. Addend. to III.) Happily, the barbarous monopoly of knowledge has now scarcely a noble, clerical, or untitled advocate; for Church and State have at length judged it expedient, no longer to discourage the education of the people, even though the Duke of Richmond's dreaded universal suffrage should, one day, be the unavoidable consequence. SIR, IN J. T. RUTT. Swansea, Sept. 10, 1822. [N all probability many of your readers will have seen the notice of a late reply to my Remonstrance, with " answers to the questions by a Trinitarian," and a reference in your pages to this work may be deemed an attention due from me to the Unitarian public. Beyond this reference, however, it is not my intention to give any consideration to this publication; and to this determination I have been led by the two following reasons first, because I have but too much cause to think that the precaution of the author in not having openly advanced into the field, is little better than a tacit acknowledgment of his insufficiency to meet the subject. He has warily and prudently, as concerns the nature of his reply, placed himself in ambush, since in truth the work is stamped generally with a spirit which all true Christians must reject; and it does not come within the scope of my intention to subject myself to the pride and contumely of any disingenuous anonymous writer. This opponent, whoever he is, has indulged in misrepresentation, imputation and misquotation; the character of the work at once displays itself. Let but the subjects of its second and third pages be compared with their respective heads in the Remonstrance, and the reason why this "Trinitarian" has shot his arrow in the dark, will immediately stand manifest. Secondly, as to sound argument, I deem the work altogether too frivolous to be deserving of a lengthened attention. The evasions are generally so palpa ble and puerile, that any man of sense might truly be ashamed to subscribe his name to them. Against such a reply, I leave the Remonstrance charged with its own vindication, suffi ciently satisfied that under any thing like a fair comparison, its merit, be it what it may, will be found to have lost little or nothing by the test of this "Examination.” I have no desire, however, that my opponent's work should be given over to die a natural and sudden death; on the contrary, should it not be found to hang inconveniently heavy upon its leadingstrings, I could wish it to be held up for a time, that Trinitarians of sound understanding, on viewing the ricketty offspring, may turn aside their faces for shame. As to Unitarians, were they in want of any materials for argument, this volume would furnish them with an ample supply, besides, perhaps, no small amusement; for the varied, studied and endless contrivance and subterfuge is diverting enough, and must have cost the author no small pains, for, as may be seen, instead of plain, concise answers, he has occupied upon some single questions more pages than the whole of the questions themselves would require. The attempt, however, may not be without its use, and it will serve me in stopping up a few insignificant crevices through which an approach has been sought. An answer to Unitarian questions was what I particularly desired to see, having an assurance (and in which I am fortified by the "Examination") that such an adventurous course could not fail greatly to expose the weakness of the Trinitarian cause, and in like degree to display |