I

fits of despondency, nor at that frightful lapse into intense despair which at last swallowed up all his literary and social talents, and almost petrified his benevolent heart. The idea of his utter rejection by God, was attended by a belief that every attempt to couhteract it would but aggravate the severity of his doom. He did not, therefore, dare to go to any place of worship, nor even to pray. The last of his posthumous compositions, published by Mr. Hayley, entitled the Cast-away, when read with this clue, appears to me the most affecting lines that ever flowed from the pen of genius; and it pleads more strongly than a thousand arguments against permitting such unworthy ideas of the Almighty to enter into our minds. May the example of Cowper's despair not plead in vain! then shall we cease to lament the years which the amiable, but, in this point, bewildered sufferer spent in agonizing woe; the innocence of his life, and the amiable tenor of his writings, seem to justify the resplendent vision of hope which depictures him as awakening from his long night of wretchedness, at the rapturous sound of Well done, good and faithful servant, enter thou into the joy of thy Lord!"

We should have been happy, if the limits of our article would have allowed it, in quoting the whole of Mrs., W,'s address to mothers on the education of their children, being perfectly of the same opinion with her, that instruction is now made to depend upon agreeableness instead of obedience, and more directed to open the understanding than to correct the heart.

'A great error in education (Mrs. W. observes) seems to be, the pains that are taken to make instruction wear such an agreeable habit, that children may be cheated or played into learning, rather than obliged to apply to it as a labour and a duty,as was formerly the custom. This method may forin many intelligent infants, and some conversible men and women; it is to be doubted whether it ever will make a sound scholar; and we have seen it produce pert babies and coxcomical adults. But the greatest danger arises from the moral injury which the character may receive by being thus early ha bituated to do only such things as are perfectly agreeable.

Combined with this error, are the objects to which this premature infusion of science is directed. We aim at first opening the understanding; surely our chief attention should be paid to the temper and the heart. Of all infantine graces, affectionate simplicity and ingenuous playfulness are the most attractive; it is to be feared, that a very early course of philosophical experiment, and scientific scrutiny, must impress this pliant mass of docile imitation with a very different cast of character. However we may be amused with what is called a well-cultivated child, if it has lost the diffidence and credulity (shall I not say the endearing folly?) of its age, we rather consider it with wonder than delight.'.

I in common life, the introduction of a friend to a society

of females, be a matter of decorum and nice circumspection, the recommendation of a book, which is to be the companion of the weaker sex in the hours of solitude and reflection, is an act of the most serious importance and of the most sacred consideration. We therefore do not venture assert, that not merely as

without mature deliberation to critics, but as parents, husbands, and brothers, we can recommend to the ladies of Britain THE LETTERS OF MRS. WEST.

ART. II.-A Vindication of certain Passages in the Common English Version of the New Testament; addressed to Grauville Sharp, Esq. Author of the Remarks on the Uses of the Definitive Article in the Greek Text of the New Testa ment. By the Rev. Calvin Winstanley, A. M. pp. 84. 12mo. Longman. 1805.

IN the Critical Review for the months of February and March in the year 1804, a detailed account may be found of the contents, and a critique on the respective merits of Mr. Sharp's Remarks, Mr. Wordsworth's Six Letters to that gentleman, and of the Six more Letters by a writer under the assumed title of Gregory Blunt, Esq. To those articles we beg leave to refer such of our readers as are desirous of making an accurate aud well-informed judgment on the subject of Mr. Winstanley's Vindication; and the more par、 ticularly because we see no reason to dissent in any point worthy of mention from the sentiments which are there detailed respecting Mr. Sharp's original Inquiry, and the sub, sequent investigations to which it had then given birth.

But, to make our present remarks at all intelligible to the general reader, it must previously be told that the principal object of Mr. Sharp's Dissertation is to deduce from the New Testament a remarkable idiom or rule of grammar in the Greek language, and to apply that rule so deduced to correct the interpretation of several texts in the sacred volame, which, if they are to be understood according to Mr. Sharp's views, would materially enlarge the number of scripture testimonies to the divinity of our Saviour. Mr. Wordsworth's Six Letters tended particularly to establish Mr. -Sharp's conclusions by another mode of proof, from a long, laborious, and very successful appeal to the Greek and Latin fathers. Mr. Blunt's object was to assail both those gentlemen; but his design was carried on in such a manner as to impart little more than ridicule in the place of argu ment, and buffoonery in that of wit,

Mr. Winstanley's design also is to attack: but, without anticipating our judgment of the general success of his undertaking, we have much pleasure in stating, that, though not in itself intirely free from blame, yet, by comparison, the manner in which he has conducted his hostilities is a great deal more creditable to his own character, and the character and feelings of his readers.

Near the commencement of his epistle, Mr. Winstanley informs his correspondent,that the observationswhich it contains have lain by him for a considerable time, owing to causes which it is not necessary to state:' but the circumstance he thinks fit to mention, for the sake of shewing that they have not been hastily prepared for the press, and to justify the explicit avowal of his pretensions, and the design with which they are communicated: which is, that they may suffice to convince Mr. Sharp, notwithstanding the acknowledged authority of his learned editor, (the present bishop of St. David's) that he has not decidedly applied a rule of construction to the correction of the common English version of the New Testament; that there exists no necessity for correcting that version; aud that it does not conceal from the English reader any thing discoverable in the original.'

Mr. Winstanley speaks feelingly, we think indeed with much too great sensibility, of the dread of the imputations to which his character may be exposed, as a man not strictly orthodox in his creed, on account of the vindication which he has undertaken, and the arguments into which bis design must necessarily lead him. We should be very unwilling to think that his fears are not greatly over-charged. From bigotry indeed, and malignant ignorance, no man can ever be perfectly secure, however blameless and irreproachable may be his behaviour, But we have no hesitation in avowing that Mr. Winstanley is strictly in the line of his duty, as a minister of the church of England, both in the vindication, of the established version of the scriptures, and in the exertion of his utmost endeavours to preserve our common faith from suffering in the hands of those whom he deems overzealous and injudicious partizans, and in his desires to res cue us from appealing to unsubstantial authorities, or to what are in his opinion perverted interpretations of scripture. Nay, we are persuaded, that if there be nothing wrong and unworthy in the manner in which his argument is conducted, he will be protected from all unwarrantable imputations, and be the rather esteemed and honoured by all those whose regard can be an object of desire to a Christian minister, by every noble and good man. No! we will not suffer

Mr. W. to think, or to complain, that be incurs any danger from the nature of his present undertaking.

After recapitulating Mr. Sharp's rules, Mr. W. thus states the method which he means to observe in his investiga

tious.,

First, I shall point out some sources of error common to all your rules.

Secondly, I shall consider a class of exceptions which are not repugnant to the conclusion you would establish.

Thirdly, I shall produce such exceptions as are inconsistent with that conclusion.

Fourthly, I shall offer some remarks on the syntax of the definitive article, and the copulative.

Lastly, I shall examine the passages of scripture, which are the objects of this investigation.' P. 6.

From a mere consideration of the nature of the question in debate, particularly so far as it respects Mr. Sharp, it will be easily inferred, and a perusal of the tract will tend to establish the same conclusion, that the strength of Mr. W.'s argument must be contained under the third of the divisions which we have just enumerated. No rule of grammar, it is plain, can ever be supported against a numerous and compact band of unimpeachable exceptions: to this most important part of his work, our observations, therefore, will be principally confined.

The exceptions which are adduced, consist all of them, necessarily, of extracts from Greek writers. The manner therefore, in which these are made, is an important consideration, and a very fair subject for criticism. And truly nothing can be more unscholar-like, and more justly reprehensible. In the first place, all the extracts are mere scraps, utterly dislocated and disjointed from every thing like counexion or context. But, what is even worse than this, we have besides, references to extensive and voluminous writers; we are referred to Aristotle, Thucydides, Origen, Clemens Alexandrinus, &c. and often without any mention at all of the tract, the book, the chapter, the page, or the volume, in which the words cited are to be found. This is utterly unpardonable; and will necessarily make in the outset a very unfavourable impression upon every considerate reader. We can speak ourselves of its inconvenience, from the pains which we have been obliged to take in detecting two or three of Mr. W.'s quotations, which perhaps we shall have another occasion to take notice of in the progress of our critique. When we mention that Mr. W.'s alledged and imputed ex

ceptions against Mr. Sharp's principle of construction are numerous, it will not be expected that we can enter into a very minute or particular examination of every separate quotation. Unless, however, we greatly deceive ourselves in the estimate which we have formed of their nature and importance, they may all, without any great degree of injustice or disrespect, be sorted and arranged into two principal divisions: which classification, after it is once made with all the requisite precautions, the entire aggregate value and weight of the two orders taken together, as exceptions to Mr. Sharp's principle, may be pronounced to be nothing; and their separate general characters may be thus correctly enough respectively assigned to them.

1. The one order, are of such as are rightly understood and interpreted by Mr. W., but are not exceptions to Mr. Sharp's principles.

2. The second, are such as are wrongly understood and interpreted by Mr. W. and are so far from being exceptions to Mr. Sharp's rule, that they are examples of it.

We shall proceed in due order, to investigate and to display more at large the characters of each of these arrangements. The effusions of Mr. Winstanley's predecessor Mr. Blunt, in which he so largely indulged himself, respecting such forms of expression as the king and queen,' the husband and wife,' &c. &c. and the perfect self-complacency with which he took upon himself to prove, that, according to Mr. Sharp's principles, these would be so many examples of his rule, and therefore male and female, husband and wife, fa ther and son, &c. &c. must be one person, if they provoked at all a smile or a frown, it must have been against himself. And why? Because they all proceeded upon the grossly unphilosophical principle, that the science of grammar is an art independent of sense and reason; that it does not presuppose those qualities in men who make use of it; that it is not itself dedueed solely from reason and language, and is in subjection and subordination to the essences and characters of things, but has some mystical and artificial power to make sense and language, and to domineer over them and nature. Perhaps, if Mr. W. bad condescended to peruse Mr. Blunt's performance, (which it would seem he has not done) he might have profited by the perusal, have been startled with its absurdities, and been induced to reconsider his ground, before he ventured to approach so nearly to the imitation of such an example.

The following extract will present to the reader Mr. Sharp's