On this page

• Text (2)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    Untitled Article

  • 

    Untitled Article

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Untitled Article

    eause ' though thGire-vas some humour there was no argument in them . u On the first publication of this sermon ^ I was . much abused by ministerial writers ^ as a man of republican principles . I did not deign to g-ive any answer to the calumny , excepting- by printing on a blank

    page , in subsequent editions of it , the following' interpretation of the ternjs from Bishop Hoadly ' s works : — < Men of Republican principles—a sort of dangerous men who have of late taken heart and defended the Revolution that saved us . ' " Mr . Fox , in debating- the Sedition Bill , in December 1795 , said , ' that the measures of ijie united brandies of the legislature might Ibe so bad as to justify tlie people in resisting the government . T'hiS doctrine he had heen taught , mot only b \ Sydney and Locke , but by Sir G , Saville and the late Earl of Chatham ; and if these authorities would not suffice , fee would refer the House to a sermon

    preached by Dr . Watson , the present Bishop of LandaiF , which in his opinion was replete with manly sense and accurate reasonings upon that delicate but important subject 66 I bar ' ! always looked upon Mr . Fox to be one of the most constitutional reasoners amd one of the most argumentative orators in either House of Parliament . I

    was at the time tins compliment was paid me , and am still , much gratified by it . The approbation of such men ever has been , and ever will be , dearer to me than the most dignified and lucrative stations in the church . " Pp . 58—60 .

    The speech of Mr . Fox ' s , which the Bishop quotes , was one of the richest effusions of patriotism and eloquence which ever flowed from a

    noble heart , ( fe'ee Mr . Fox ' s Speeches , in 6 VoSsl 8 vq . 1815 . Vol . VSO pp . 62 —74 . ) At this period , when the Whig principle is either forgotten or decried , we think it not useless to refer the reader to this explanation and assertion of it ; especially as , with one honourable exception in the See of Norwich , Dr . Watsosi was the last of our Whig Bishops . [ To he continued . ] 1

    Untitled Article

    in our last volume [ XII . 284—289 ] , of the letter in reply to it by Mr . Fox inserted in the same volume [ XIL 333 —389 ] , and of a rejoinder to Mr- FoxP which was not admitted into the Monthly Repository ; besides a Preface 9 containing an historical sketch of the progress of religious opinions in this country .

    The Old Unitarian complains of owt refusing to insert his second letter m this miscellany * " except on terms with which he could not possibly comply . The motives / * he adds * i 6 of this rejection are best known to others ;

    a private communication which has been received , having by » o means thrown any light upon the subject . " ( Pref . J Now , as we set some value upon

    our character for impartiality * we think it right to enable the public to judge of our conduct . We have only to gi ^ e an history of the affair , without any comment . We admit ? then , that the Old Unitarian did send us a second

    letter for insertion ^ having received from some of our friends and correspondents , most respectable for years , talents * character and'station , a serious remonstrance against the continuance of the controversy , and perceiving from the complexion of the

    letter that , if the controversy were continued it must become directly personal , we returned the communication to the writer , with a request that it might be withdrawn . The grounds of our wish were fully explained . Our correspondent seemed to admit the

    force of our objection , and to be inclined at first to accede to our request - At length , he signified to us that he had new-modelled the letter , leaving out the particulars to which we had objected ; and inquired whether we would insert it in its amended form ?

    His concession appeared to call for concession on our part , and we replied in the affirmative , but added that , as the magazine was about to be made up for the month , it must be sent to us on or before , a given day * , The writer then informed us that ho

    had doubts concerning the publication qf the letter ; that he had put it into the hands of a friend , on whose judgment he relied , with permission either to hold it back or to forward it ; and that , if it did not reach us by a particular day , we might conclude that It

    Untitled Article

    6 6 ffleview . ' — Unitarianism * 4 ) ld and . New

    Untitled Article

    hi iii ' iiii i'i ¦ Art . II . —Vnitarianism ^ Old and New > p Exemplified-and Illustrated , in Three hettersp addressed to the Editor of the Monthly Mepository 9 fyc * with a Preface . By an Old Unjtaiiane Masoo Chichester . 8 vo . pp . 100 «

    181 ? . THI S publication consists of the Letter which , under the signature of An Old Unitarian , appeared

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Jan. 2, 1818, page 56, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2472/page/56/