outrage on the consciences of his clerical brethren at Exeter: "1688, Nov. 9. The first thing his Highness did, was to go and pay his grateful acknowledgment to Almighty God, and to cause Te Deum to be sung in the Cathedral Church for his safe arrival. After the Collects were ended, Dr. Burnet began to read his Highness's declaration, at which the ministers of the church, there present, were so surprised that they immediately left their seats and went out; however, the Doctor continued reading, and the declaration being ended, he said, God save the Prince of Orange, to which the major part of the congregation answered, Amen."

P. 1. "The Nonconformist" has well chosen, in the Italian Reformation, a subject unacountably overlooked, so far as I have observed, by our ecclesiastical historians. I had occasion to make this remark in Vol. X. of Priestley's Works, where, at p. 290, some of your readers may find a note on the subject.

I there quoted the complaint of Cornaro, on a sober life," in 1549, that l'opinion Lutherana was one of tre mali costumi which then prevailed in Italy. The other two were l'adulazione, et la ceremonia, and la crapula (intemperance). This, Cornaro at tacked, in his Discorsi della Vita Sobria, the English translation of which is a very common book. As to the other two, the noble Venetian fondly predicted, (for he says, son certo,) that some great genius, qualche gentile spirito, would soon appear, to oppose and drive them from society, levarle dal mondo.

Alas, for the credit of Italian prophecy, a third century is wearing away while we wait the advent of qualche gentile spirito. Still l'opinion Lutherana proceeds; nor (judging from the Styles very lately displayed at Brighton, according to the Morning Chronicle,) does l'adulazione retrograde.

In the note to which I have referred, I also mentioned an Italian Testament, printed in 1551, at Lyons, as translated from the Greek; a mode then, I apprehend, peculiar to the Reformers, for whose use, in Italy, it was no doubt designed. I also referred to Clarke's Persecutions, 1651, (pp. 231 -241,) for an account of martyrs in Italy, from 1546 to 1560. A Papist,

whom he quotes, says their executions "resembled the slaughter of calves and sheep."

66

P. 3, col. 2. "John Valdesius or Valdesso," of whom, I think, there is some account in one of your early volumes. Walton, in his "Life of Herbert," on the authority of Mr. Farrer, who translated the "One Hundred and Ten Considerations," describes "John Valdesso" as a Spaniard," who "had followed Charles V., as a cavalier, all the time of his long and dangerous wars." At length he resigned his appointments to the Emperor, saying, "there ought to be a vacancy of time between fighting and dying." If this account, which I have also seen in some writer quite as early as Walton, be correct, he was not merely a civilian" and “private secretary" to the Emperor. Yet Sandius, I observe, who claims Valdesso as an Anti-trinitarian, gives no hint of his military character. Young, I see, in his Centaur, (Letter II., on Pleasure,) refers to the story, with some variations, thus addressing a gay assembly: "Ye fine men of rank and parts, a common soldier, (your contempt no doubt,) shall reproach you.' One of them, requesting dismission from Charles V., gave this reason for it: Inter vitæ negotia, extremumque diem oportet aliquod temporis intercedere. Much more inter vitæ voluptates, and our last hour;" as if fighting, were much more rational and praiseworthy than "dancing, into death."

P. 6. Dr. Morell's valuable remarks on a highly important subject, remind me of an anonymous publication, so early as 1648, which has been long known as the production of Sir William Petty. It is a pamphlet of four sheets in small quarto, entitled, "The Advice of W. P. to Mr. Samuel Hartlib, for the advancement of some particular Parts of Learning." I had once the curiosity to examine it at the British Museum.

After proposing "that proper persons be employed to collect from books all real and experimental learning contained in them, in order to facilitate the way to farther improvements," the author recommends "that there be instituted Ergastula Literaria, (literary workhouses,) where children may be taught as well to do some

The author proceeds to recommend that "such poor children be employed in works, whereby they may earn their living, equal to their strength and understanding. And if they cannot get their whole living, and their parents can contribute nothing at all to make it up," that they stay somewhat the longer in the workhouse." He further recommends, "that they use such exercises, whether in work or for recreation, as tend to the health, agility and strength of their bodies;-that they be taught to read by much more compendious means than are in common use, which is a thing certainly very easy and feasible ;”– and "that the elements of arithmetic and geometry be by all studied, being not only of great and frequent use in all human affairs, but also sure guides and helps to reason, and especial remedies for a volatile and unsteady mind."-Advice, pp. 3-5.

Such, at the age of 25, without the benefit of an example, and with scarcely a coadjutor, was the anticipation of improvements, reserved for a distant generation, but now contemplated by this almost universal genius. In Ward's Gresham Professors, p. 223, the Advice is mentioned as the earliest of the author's publications. I cannot help remarking how highly honoured was Mr. Hartlib, by the confidence of such a triumvirate, as Boyle, Milton and Petty!

P. 20. I thank Mr. H. Taylor for his information. Since I mentioned Dr. John Taylor's pamphlet, I have found "A Letter to the Society of Protestant Dissenters at the Octagon in Liverpool. London, 1766." This pamphlet contains an introductory letter inviting to an examination of the subject of baptism. This is followed by a letter from "A Pædobaptist," with a reply, both which had appeared, October, 1765, in the General Even ing Post, the first letter being occasioned, by an advertisement in that

75

paper, from Dr. Gill, in which he asserts that "the Pædobaptists are ever restless and uneasy, endeavouring to maintain and support, if possible, their unscriptural practice of infantbaptism; though it is no other than a pillar of Popery."

Then follows (p. 26) the "Copy of a Letter published in the Whitehall Evening Post, Sept. 17, 1747, with Notes by the Author." This is a severe charge of inconsistency against the Dissenting gentleman (Mr. Towgood) for his zealous defence of Infant-Baptism, compared with his assertion of Christ's sole authority, in reply to Mr. White. The Dissenting gentleman is loudly called upon to explain himself. One of your correspondents can, perhaps, say who was the anonymous Letter-writer, and whether Mr. Towgood ever replied.

P. 50, col. 1. "The confounding of Wollaston with Woolston" was once very common. Mr. Clarke, in his Preface to "The Religion of Nature,” 1750, attributes the mistake not only to the similitude of names," but to the circumstance of both those writers having been members of the same college in Cambridge.

Ibid. col. 2. Voltaire's last moments were not so described nearer the time of his death in 1778. Condorcet, in his Life, annexed to Vol. C. of his Works, (1792, p. 164,) says, not indeed much to the credit of Voltaire's sincerity, "L'Abbé Gauthier confessa Voltaire, et reçut de lui une profession de foi par laquelle il déclarait qu'il mourait dans la religion Catholique où était né." An earlier account, probably the earliest in English, (An. Reg. 1778, XXI. 4,) makes Voltaire reply to the question on the divinity of Christ: “Ah! M. le Curé, if I pass that article to you, you will demand if I do not also believe in the Holy Ghost, and so go on, until you finish by the Bull Unigenitus."

P. 52, col. 2. The late King's "bad education." In Lord Melcombe's Diary, (ed. 3, 1785, p. 171,) the Princess Dowager, in October 1752, says of her son Prince George, "that he was very honest, but she wished that he was a little more forward and less childish, at his age," (just past 14,) and “ that she hoped his preceptors would improve him," adding, in answer to

the courtier's further inquiries, that "she really did not well know what they taught him; but, to speak freely, she was afraid not much; that they were in the country, and followed their diversions, and not much else that she could discover."

P 52, col. 2. "The Bishop of Peterborough, Mr. Stone and Mr. Scott." The Princess (Diary, 172) says, "that Stone was a sensible man, and capable of instructing in things, as well as in books-that Scott, in her opinion, was a very proper preceptor; but that for the good Bishop, he might be, and she supposed he was, a mighty learned man, but he did not seem to her very proper to convey knowledge to children; he had not that clearness which she thought necessary; she did not well comprehend him herself, his thoughts seemed to be too many for

The first of these interpretations, "lovest thou me more than thou lovest thy nets, thy boats and thy fishing employment?"—has been adopted by Whitby and Pearce, and certainly has the claim of ingenuity to recommend it. Peter was by occupation a fisherman; and, judging from many little circumstances which are incidentally mentioned in the Gospels, was fond of his employment, and took a pleasure in it unconnected with any prospect of emolument. It was, therefore, reasonable, as well as natural, that Christ should endeavour to obtain from his own lips a confession that he was not less attached to the cause of the gospel than to his worldly occupation. Hence it has been thought, that, in the question, "Lovest thou me more than these?" our Lord had a reference to the instruments of Peter's trade; which are supposed to have been upon the spot where Jesus and his disciples were assembled at the time when this interesting dialogue commenced. But there is a delicacy and reserve in the Apostle's answer, the supposition that the question rewhich was altogether unnecessary on lated merely to his worldly occupation: for, though he promptly and unhesitatingly replies, "Yea, Lord!" the answer is afterwards so qualified as to exclude all idea of comparison between his love to Christ and other objects. It is also worthy of remark, that, in his subsequent answers, he repeats, without any material variation, what he had said in his first reply; cautiously avoiding that comparison, whatever it might be, which it was the design of our Lord's question to draw from him: "Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee:"" As if he had said, “I am unwilling, after the severe trial which my fidelity and attachment have lately undergone, and the imperfect manner in

displayed, to make any further professions; but, notwithstanding my three-fold denial of thee, at which thou hast manifestly hinted by thrice repeating this embarrassing question, I can affirm, with sincerity and confidence, that my love towards thee still remains unshaken." Now, had Peter attributed to our Lord's question the meaning assigned to it by the advocates of the above interpretation, it appears