So far indeed is he from being mifled by that blind attachment to the antients, which men of his great learning and claffical taste are apt to contract, that, in a very beautiful criticism, he has boldly compared the plan of Lillo's Fatal Curiofity with that of the Oedipus Tyrannus of the Grecian poet.

In the Appendix to the Enquiries, we have an account of the Arabic manufcripts, belonging to the Efcurial Library in Spain; -of the manufcripts of Livy in the fame library-of the Greek manuscripts of Cebes, in the library of the King of France, at Paris,-together with fome account of literature in Ruffia, and of the progress towards civilization in that country.

ART. VIII. Divine Benevolence afferted, and vindicated from the @bjections of ancient and modern Sceptics. By Thomas Balguy, D. D. Archdeacon of Winchester. O&avo. 2 s. 6d. Davis.

N the Author's Advertisement, prefixed to this treatife, we are Author's a told, that it is a specimen of a larger work on the fubject of natural religion. Every one that is capable of reading it with that degree of attention which it deferves, and of judging of its merit, will be impatient to see these outlines filled up. Dr. B. appears to be mafter of his fubject, and to have bestowed all that attention upon it, which its importance deferves. We do not remember, indeed, to have feen any treatife more strongly marked with precifion, accuracy, and metaphyfical acumen.

Nothing, furely, can give greater pleafure and comfort to perfons of a serious and contemplative turn, than to have their faith in the goodness of the Supreme Being firmly established on the basis of folid argument and juft reafoning; and we know not where fuch perfons can have a more fatisfactory view of this very interefting point than in the treatife before us.

The fubject of natural religion is reducible to three general heads: God's Being, his Perfection, and his Moral Government-Goodness is that part of the fubject which is now offered to the Public.

The Author introduces it with obferving, that the Divine goodness is confidered by fome writers ás confifting wholly in benevolence; by others, as comprehending fome other moral perfections, not perhaps reducible to this head; but that the idea of benevolence is by all writers included under that of goodneis, and is at least a very affecting and interefting part of it.

He goes on to mention, very briefly, the arguments by which different writers (fome of them of great authority) have endeavoured to prove that the Author of nature has been influenced by a benevolent principle, both in framing and preferving the univerfe, viz. the degree of happinefs actually produced in this fyftem, the prepollency of good, &c. -It may be more fatisfactory,

he

he obferves, to confider feparately the various causes of pleasure and pain; and to examine how far thefe oppofite effects were defigned or accidental; i. e. whether either or both were ultimate ends. By the word ultimate he only means the last discernible intention. Our present state may have reference to other states and other fyftems; but this being unknown, proves nothing for, or against, the divine goodnefs. If the conftitution and laws of every part of nature appear ultimately intended to produce good; it cannot but be the joint intention of all the parts. Nor hall we have any fufficient reafon, he says, to reject this conclufion, if many of the phænomena, not all, fhew an intention of producing good and no part, or circumftance, fhew an intention of producing evil, except only in fubordination to good; which, to the purpofe of the prefent enquiry, is in truth no exception at all.

The various intentions difcernible in the works of nature, are all reducible, we are told, to thefe two: 1. To produce a regular fucceffion of men and animals; including the birth, temporary prefervation, decay, and diffolution of each individual; 2. To furnish them with the means and occafions of exercising their various powers of perception and action. The Doctor fhews, that thefe intentions concur in the various works of nature, and that the first is fubordinate to the fecond.

Perception and action, therefore, being the fole ends (within the compass of human reafon) propofed by the Author of nature, it remains to enquire, what kind of perception was intended by him, whether pleafant, or painful, or both. And here, previous to a particular enquiry, our Author points out fome circumftances, which form a ftrong prefumptive proof, that pleasant perceptions only were intended; and that the pains are accidental confequences, attending the means of producing pleasure; i. e. the pains arifing on the prefent fyftem of things are not ul timate ends; but unhappy appendages of a fcheme formed with no other defign than the production of good.

He now proceeds, more directly and particularly, to examine and lay open the fubject before him, viz. Whether the feveral parts of the univerfe, and the laws to which they are fubject, were defigned by the Author of them for the production of good. In other words, whether the fucceffive exiftence, perceptions, and actions, of the various animals which inhabit the globe, and the caufes on which they depend, all of them proceeding from the intention of their Maker, be reducible to a higher, or more general intention, viz. the production of happiness.

To judge of the general principle, which includes all the ends difcernible in the conftitution of things, we must confider, our Author fays, the nature and condition of men and other animals, during their abode on this globe, i. e. Whether their

5

frame

frame and circumftances be adapted to make them happy or miferable. In the purfuit of this inquiry, he confiders, 1. The conftitution of the bodies of animals: 2. The external caufes which are capable of affecting them; 3. The powers and faculties of the human mind; 4. The mutual dependence of men and other animals; 5. The mutual dependence of mankind.

As a previous remark he tells us, that an intention of producing good-will be fufficiently apparent in any particular inftance, if the thing confidered can neither be changed nor taken away, without lofs or harm, all other things continuing the fame. Were we to fuppofe various things in the fyftem changed at once, we could neither judge of the poffibility, nor the confequences, of the change, having no degree of experience to direct us. This remark, we are told, is to be carried along through the whole proof of Divine benevolence.

Having confidered the different parts of the conftitution of nature, and the particular laws to which each of them is subject, our Author proceeds, in the fecond part of his treatise, to enquire into thofe more general laws, which extend through God's whole adminiftration; and thefe alfo, he fays, will be found to fuggeft probable arguments of a benevolent intention in the Author of nature; certainly to afford no prefumption of a contrary intention.

This part of his enquiry comprehends an answer to the following queftions: 1. Whether the more general laws of divine adminiftration afford any prefumption of good or ill intention in the Deity? 2. Whether any additional evidence arifes, on either part, from the uniformity and conftancy with which God's Jaws are adminiftered? 3. Whether the continual oppofition made to Divine adminiftration by human agents, affords us any caufe to doubt of the benevolence of our Maker?

In the third and laft part, our Author fhews, from the apparent intentions of nature, that good, prepollent good, is the refult of all, and answers objections.

From the general view we have given of the contents of this treatise, the Reader, who is converfant with fuch fubjects, will naturally expect much inftruction from it, and, if we are not mistaken, he will not be difappointed in his expectations. Confidering the variety of matter contained within a narrow compafs, it was impoffible for us to do any thing more than give a 1hort abftract of the contents.

ART. IX. Eays addreffed to young married Women. By Mrs. Griffith. 12mo. 2 s. 6 d. fewed. Cadell. 1782.

RS. Griffith's reputation, as an elegant Moralift, is fo perfectly established, that it wants no fuccour from our

MRS

applause.

In

In thefe Effays we fee religion giving dignity to youth and beauty; while politeness receives no incumbrance from formality nor is cheerfulness reftrained by fuperftition. Mrs. G. unites the pleafing with the ufeful. Her maxims are the purest that innocence can imbibe for its protection; and on the basis of female virtue fhe hath reared that fuperftructure, which in the end will be found to be the only temple of happiness.

Thefe Effays profeffedly treat of the following fubjects, viz. Religion; Conjugal Affection; Temper; Neatnefs; Domestic Amusement; Friendship; Parental and Filial Affection; and Economy. Each of these subjects is difcuffed with much good fenfe; and with a delicacy of fentiment and elegance of language peculiar to Mrs. Griffith.

As thefe Effays are meant to be generally useful, it would be impoffible, fays this amiable and ingenious Writer, to confine their precepts to any particular rank or fituation; of course there can be no rules laid down for the conduct of individuals under any particular circumftances: and indeed the whole work may rather be confidered as a sketch, from which the intelligent mind may deduce inferences, and make applications, than a regular plan to be diligently purfued.'

The Author's fentiments on friendship are not the vain effufions of a frothy and fickle fancy; but the fteady and permanent convictions of judgment and experience. We will present our Readers with one extract from this effay; and we do it the rather, in order to correct a moft obvious blunder of the prefs; for we regret that any thing fo beautiful fhould be marred by careleffnefs:

As the word friendship is at prefent generally understood to be a term of little import, or at moft extending merely to a preference of liking, or efteem, I would by no means exclude my fair Readers from that kind of commerce which is now accepted under that title, in fociety. But even this fort of connection requires much caution in the choice of its object; for I should with it might be reftrained to one; and that one ought to obtain this preference, from the qualities of the heart, rather than thofe of the head. A long and intimate acquaintance can alone discover the former; the latter are easily and willingly displayed -For love without efteem is as a shower, foon fpent. The heart is the spring of affections, but the mind is their refervoir.' p. 82, and 83.

ART.

ART. X. Obfervations on the Poems of Thomas Rowley: In which the Authenticity of thofe Poems is afcertained. By Jacob Bryant, Efq. 2 vols. 8vo. 8s. 6d. boards. Payne. 1781.

THE

HE learned and ingenious Author of the prefent work reminds us of that celebrated Quixote in Chemistry, Paracelfus, who, though he failed in difcovering the philofopher's ftone, yet, in his wild ranges through nature, made difcoveries of much greater confequence, and opened a field of entertainment and information which amply recompenfed his affiduity, however diftant it might leave him from the original object of his purfuit. This remark is more particularly applicable to Mr. Bryant's Opus Palmarium, THE ANALYSIS; yet it is not wholly inapplicable to the work now under review, notwithstanding its object is of far lefs confequence, and the learning and ingenuity displayed in it be in every view inferior. It feems, however, to be the peculiar fate of Mr. Bryant to undertake the defence of paradoxes and hypothefes, which have no exiftence but in fancy and fiction; and to be in earneft where others are in jest! Fairy land is holy ground to him; and caftles in the air are as facred as the temples of divinity!

In the present inaufpicious attempt we are prefented with fomething to amufe curiofity, and fomething to afford information: but we have more to excite our furprize at the author's temerity; and still more to raise a fimile at his credulity. We never faw learning fo debased by weak reasoning, nor ingenuity fo blended with abfurdity. A ftudied attempt to render the cause of Rowley ridiculous, could not have answered that purpose more effectually than the laboured efforts of this author to make it ferious; and in the very moment when he is molt gravely engaged in repelling its enemies, he fupplies them with weapons to facilitate his own defeat.

The firft pofition which is laid down by Mr. Bryant is the following: viz. That the poems of Rowley were written in a provincial dialect, according to the idiom of the people in whofe country the author refided and was probably born.' To illuftrate this pofition, Mr. Bryant examines the writings of fome of our older poets, and hath given two or three ample fpecimens of provincial terms and modes of expreffion, from the Chronicle of Robert of Gloucester, and from a curious MS. which belongs to the library of King's College in Cambridge, written in the thirteenth century, under the patronage of Humfrey Bohun, Earl of Hereford, who was nephew to King Edward the Second.

The language of the former is, as our Author obferves, very broad and coarfe, and the whole favours ftrongly of the county of which he appears to be a native.' The latter from a certain provincial mode of expreffion, he conjectures to have REV. June, 1782. formed

Ff