Dr. Walton had sent a specimen of the work to the exiled monarch, before he had entered upon it; and had received an answer, worthy of a King to give: namely, that if means had not been wanting in his axile, he would have supplied the costs of such a work. Dr. Walton proceeds to inform his Majesty of the resolution he had formed, after he was deprived of his preferments, and not allowed to officiate publicly as a clergyman; lest, as he modestly expresses himself, he should seem to have lived wholly useless. He then says, that at the very be ginning of the work he intended to dedicate it to his Majesty; that many could attest this; that, during the usurpation, the intention could only be concealed; and that the usurper of royalty was not fairly entitled

to a dedication of it. For Cromwell, whom he emphatically calls the great dragon, seems to have considered the Polyglot, at its outset, as affording an opportunity of exhibiting himself as a great literary patron; and, perhaps, be communicated to Dr. Walton the desire of having the work, there. fore, inscribed to him; which the learned editor, if he did not absolutely refuse, hesitated to promise. Perhaps, the coldness of Dr. Walton, upon this occasion, was the reason why neither the once expected thousand pounds, nor any part of it, in aid of the work are believed to have been advanced by the influence, or from the purse of Cromwell. However, through the dependents

of the Usurper, it is evident, that Dr. Walton understood a suppression of his work, unless it should be dedicated to Cromwell! For a deliverance from the implication, as well as from any fury of the Usurper, Dr. Walton is, therefore, truly grateful. "It is probable that this tribute of welcome was sent to the King in 1659; about which time also, we may suppose the two

last leaves of the original Preface to the

Polyglot to have been cancelled, and three others substituted in their place. The former mentioned Cromwell thus: "Primo autem commemorandi quorum favore chartam à rectigalibus immunem habuimus, quod

quinque abhunc annis (1652) à Concilio secretiori primo concessum, postea à Serenissimo D. Protectore ejusque Concilio, operis promorendi causa, benignè confirmatum et continuatum erat. In the latter, there was merely the mention of acknowledgment for the favour of having his paper, duty free, omitting the Protector's name, and includ. ing him and his Council under of eos, quorum favore chartam à rectigalibus immunem habuimus. It would have certainly been in conformity to the liberal notions, encou⚫ raged by the republic of letters, not to have disguised a benefactor and the benefaction. But Dr. Walton had been work ing under a Government which allowed him, indeed, his paper free from duty, but had deprived him of all his preferments; the head of which had also ungenerously

aimed to extort a dedication from him."Vol. i. pp. 81-85.

We

On this most exquisite morsel of argument so curiously wrought, to justify ingratitude and courtly servility, we must take the liberty of offering a few remarks. doubt very much whether Mr. Todd himself is quite satisfied with the reasoning; at any rate, we are sure very few of his readers will be. We entertain no doubts of Walton's good affection to Episcopacy and royalty, even during their adverse fortunes; and that it would have been, we scarcely need say, probably, more agreeable to his feelings and principles to have dedicated the Polyglot to Charles. Nor are we disposed to impute blame to him for entertaining these principles and attachments. It is his subsequent conduct, that we strongly censure, and still more so the reasoning of his biographer in its defence.

receives

It is really amusing to observe the stress which Mr. T. lays on the promise worthy of a King to give! The promises of kings in general are, we fear, not much to be depended on. The promise of such a King as Charles in exile, it is pitiful to quote as evidence of any thing. We hope if Mr. T. any assurances of royal favour, they will be more worthy of credence. Walton's talking of Cromwell as the great dragon, will probably remind our readers of the ass and the dead lion. Cromwell was no more, when Walton ventured thus to revile him. was not enough to blot his name out of his dedication, it was thought right to blot it out of the Lamb's book of life. Cromwell it seems considered the publication of the Polyglot, an opportunity of appearing as a literary patron, and therefore endeavoured to extort a dedication to himself. That Cromwell patronised literature, is well known, independently of his aiding the publication of the Polyglot.

It

That he tried to procure it to be dedicated to him, and threatened a suppression if it were not, are calumnies unsupported by a particle of evidence unless the seems of Mr. Todd, and the ambiguous language of Walton about the mancipia of Cromwell, be taken for proofs. What is the evidence that Cromwell desired its dedication? Perhaps, says Mr. Todd! What is the proof that the £1000. subscribed by the Protector's council was not believed to be paid? Perhaps, says Mr. Todd, the coldness of Dr. Walton! But what is the proof that the money was not paid? Why Dr. Walton did not acknowledge it! We will try the force of perhaps too. Perhaps Dr. Walton did not think it worth the acknowledging-perhaps, he thought it a small return for the loss of his rectories and preferments, (of which, by the way, he had not been deprived by Cromwell's Government) -perhaps, the gratitude of Walton was not so powerful a principle as his love of literary fame-perhaps, he included it in his general acknowledgment to the favour of the Protector and his Council. Of Walton's forgetfulness in acknowledging his obligations to others, Mr. Todd has furnished a striking illustration in this very volume. Speaking of Castell, the author of the Lexicon, he says, " On him, as on other learned assistants, Dr. Walton mentioned, that he had bestowed gratuities; but mentioned not that De Castell had spent upon the work, as he himself tells both the gratuity for his assistance, and a thousand pounds besides." p. 168. If Walton forgot the favours of his friends, it is not wonderful that he forgot those which he received from such as he deemed to be his enemies. But there can be no perhaps, as to the probability of his making public Cromwell's breach of promise, had he really never received the thousand pounds. Mr. Todd does

us,

not look at all on that side of the argument. A few perhapses are the most convenient things in the world for propagating slander, supporting a bad argument, and concealing truth and righteousness. The conduct of Walton is altogether highly discreditable to him, and the clumsy defence of his biographer does no honour either to his head or his heart. We are sorry to dwell on such a subject, but since it must be dragged forward, let the imprudence of those who have done so, and who will plead disingenuously for evil, bear the blame.

In noticing Dr. Owen's opposition to some of the doctrines advanced in the Prologomena to the Polyglot, Mr. Todd introduces a note, which, as another specimen of his fairness in reasoning, where men of another profession are concerned, we quote for the edification of our readers.

in his inconsiderate attack upon Dr. Wal"Dr. John Owen, however he has failed ton, was certainly a man of considerable learning. Wood calls him and Goodwin the two Atlasses and Patriarchs of IndeBut though a rigid Calvinist, he is said to pendency,' in the University of Oxford. have been of very tolerant principles. His sermons, however, occasionally exhibit great art in paying homage to the sovereignty of lawful King; in arguing also upon doctrithe people, and in withdrawing it from the nal, as well as political notions, maintained by Calvin, which let us hope will never more turn religion into rebellion, and faith into faction; the misery of which our forefathers

witnessed in the time of Owen. See the

Rebels' Catechism, composed in an easy and familiar way, by Peter Heylin, to let them

see the heinousness of their offence. Where the 17th question is, p. 12. Is it not lawful to bear arms against sovereign princes for the preservation of religion? And the answer is, Yes, for those men who place religion in rebellion, and whose faith is faction; but for no man else.'"

Alas! Mr. Todd, this is miserable writing, worse reasoning, and drivelling theology. We are expected to admit, it would seem, that Calvinism is so closely linked, first, with intolerance, next, with faction, and finally, with rebellion,

that scarcely any of this obnoxious sect are, or have been, free from those fearful crimes. John Owen is an exception to this sweeping impeachment, or at least Mr. Todd has heard so; and Peter Heylin is an evidence of the truth of the general charge against Calvinism!! The allegations against Owen's sermons are as false as all the rest, and are evidently founded, not on Mr. Todd's acquaintance with them, but on the report of others. His language is a mere repetition of the slander of Anthony Wood. We intended, had our limits permitted, to have entered somewhat fully into the controversy between Owen and Walton, which Mr. Todd has revived by republishing, very unnecessarily, as we think, Walton's "Considerator considered." We say unnecessarily; not because we are not glad to see the book, which had become very scarce, but because, as a vindication of the Polyglot, it is now altogether uncalled for. It is besides so full of unchristian asperity, and malevolent insinuation, that it only tends to strengthen the unfavourable opinion of Bishop Walton's religious character, which the memoirs of Mr. Todd painfully justify us in entertaining. The account of the whole controversy our readers will find in Orme's Memoirs of Owen, of which Mr. Todd appears to us to have made a very liberal use in his appendix. His attempt to con

trovert some of Mr. Orme's re

marks, we leave, with a perfect conviction, that those who will take the trouble of comparing the two writers, will have no difficulty in deciding on which side the truth lies.

Of Walton's coadjutors in the Polyglot, and some other miscellaneous matter in this work, we must reserve our account till next

month.

(To be continued.)

An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scrip

tures.

By Thomas Hartwell

Horne, M. A. Second Edition, revised, corrected, and enlarged. Illustrated with numerous Maps, and Fac-similes of Biblical MSS. Four volumes, 8vo. London : Cadell. 1821.

An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures. By T. H. Horne, M. A. (Supplement, to complete the former edition.)

ALTHOUGH it be no part of our plan to review successive editions, yet, in the present instance, we are induced, by the high character of the work, and the anxiety we feel to render its meritorious author all possible service within the range of our recommendation, to depart from a rule of which the general observance is indispensable.

Our previous examination will, however, release us from the necessity of entering at large into the details of arrangement and execution; and a reference to our

Review of Books' for February and April 1819, will put our readers in possession of the general character and contents of these volumes, even in their present enlarged and improved form. The praise which we then bestowed, we feel rather inclined to re-inforce than to retract; and the industry and intelligence which have been exercised, in the removal of the greater part of the few deficiencies there pointed out, give the author a special claim to our approbation. In its original state, this Introduction' contained an extensive variety of information, judiciously compressed, on the important subjects to which it refers the labour of seventeen years, had been devoted to its comple tion, and seldom had a similar space of time been more usefully or effectually employed. It now

6

appears with all the additional advantages, which subsequent revision and research have enabled Mr. Horne to supply, and comprizes, in its present shape, an immense quantity of matter, distinctly arranged, and perspicuously expressed. Without entering into a minute and unprofitable specification of the very numerous particulars of improvement, we shall content ourselves with a general statement, that the work is more than doubled in bulk, and that it appears to have undergone a thorough and beneficial re-examination.

The first volume consists of matter entirely new, and contains a complete digest of the arguments and facts connected with the evidences of Christianity. But though we regard this as a very important, and, on the whole, as an exceedingly well executed portion of the book, we have doubts respecting the expediency of connecting it with the present publication. In the first place, it seems to have been in some degree provoked by the miserable attempts of Carlile, and his abettors, to discredit the testimony of Holy Writ. Now, though we disapprove, on every ground, of prosecution for opinion, we really think that such persons are utterly beyond the reach of argument; there is a moral degra dation, an intellectual vulgarity in their cast of thought,' that renders them incapable of comprehending the pure and simple, but high and glorious, verities of the Gospel; they reject Moses and the Prophets; their heart, like that of Pharaoh, is hardened, though their conscience, like the magicians of his court, has said, this is the finger of God!

In the second place, we think, that this part of the work might have appeared to more general advantage, as a separate publication: it is remarkably comprehensive, and might have served as a

;

guide and aid to many, who are not likely to meet with it in its present connexion. We are, however, anxious not to be misunderstood, as making any objection to the inquiry itself, or to the mode in which Mr. Horne has conducted it. In this respect, he has our cordial approbation; he has neglected no source of information he has levied rich and ample contributions from all quarters; and he has brought into a clear and well compacted system, a noble treasury of evidences and reasonings. If he has now and then been tempted, by the abundance of his materials, to weave his texture too largely or too finely, he has been also induced to this by the shifting and vexatious warfare carried on against Christianity, by men, rancorous and faithless, who scruple no means of annoyance, and shrink from no species of hostility, however despicable and degrading, against a revelation, which is at once the object of their hatred and their dread. We would not condescend to debate with the incurable malignity, or the hopeless infirmity, of such arguers as Dupuis and Volney; we have no feeling but scorn or compassion for the wretched beings, who can gravely affirm, that Jesus Christ is the Sun, and that the twelve apostles are the signs of the Zodiac! If these desperate absurdities are to be tolerated, what history, what narrative of yesterday's events, is to be received? If these things. are to be deemed worthy of acceptation, we may as well make brief work of the whole matter, and throwing Livy, Thucydides, Tacitus, and all their noble race, into one grand pile, dance round the flame, singing pœans to folly and ignorance, the worthy deities of antichristian superstition. What book has ever been sifted like the Bible? Learning and illiteracy, wit and stupidity, have alike employed themselves in assailing its