grin at those who are at work. You know, my friend, this is a very obscure, a very difficult history, and the writer of it deserves mercy toward his innocent mistakes; however, he will meet with none, and he neither expects nor asks for any. They say, there are no innocent mistakes. What answer can be made? Last night, along with your's, I received from a clergyman of my acquaintance, a perfect master of German literature, a great bulk of German history relative to the German Baptists, and an engagement to visit me in January to assist me in learning German enough to enable me to make out the records written in that tongue. I have time before me, for I query whether Germany will come up before my third volume. Spanish and Italian are nothing, for being only dialects of Latin they are easily surmountable; but high and low Dutch are ruffian-looking rogues. I am half afraid of them; but my friend, who was here a week last summer, put me in a way so that I got through the translating of one paragraph of a German work, which he had with him. If he stays a month next visit, I shall try, but with what success Í know not. I have got Greece, Rome, Africa, and Navarre written fair for the press, and almost all the preliminary essays. Next week my amanuensis begins either Spain or Italy, if I can get time to revise either of them. Forgive my prolixity. You asked to know the state of the work. Accept this desultory account. We retain on our minds with singular pleasure a recollection of your excellent discourse to us at Cambridge, and we do ask one another what the General and Particular Baptists differ about; for, say we, either Mr. Taylor is a Particular, or we are Generals. Accept the best wishes of this family, Most affectionately your's, Chesterton, Feb. 21, 1789. MY DEAR MR. TAYLOR, YOU may not have any concern with the subject of this letter for many years, yet I think it a duty I owe you to give you a hint of it. A friend of mine having informed me of his in tention to leave a considerable sum for more. My neighbour, Mr. Payn, of Walden, has favoured me with " the proceedings of the General Assembly held on Wednesday, May 14th, 1788, at Worship-Street, &c." I see no human test here, and it should seem you hold really as well as professionally the suf ficiency of Scripture. I intend to send it among the friends of freedom in the University, who have, somehow or other, got hold of the book of " rules and orders of the Particular Baptist fund," and are extremely shocked at the absurdity of their conduct, the more so as they thought the Baptists were inalienable friends of the freedom of conscience. Your fund account I hope will be a corrective, and shew that all Baptists are not tyrants over their brethren. I am asked by the University several questions too hard for me to answer, as 1. Had the London Particular Baptists of 1775 the consent of their country brethren to compile a human creed for them? Most certainly they had no authority from Christ. 2. What makes Baptists so fond of the name and the creed of Calvin, seeing the barbarian burnt Servetus, and denounced the vengeance of God and the civil magistrate against all Anabaptists? 3. How is the imposition of a human creed consistent with their profession of the sufficiency of Scripture, and the sole dominion of Christ over the consciences of his disciples? 4. With what face can such men ask for the repeal of the test-acts, seeing they impose human tests upon one another? 5. Have the General Baptists of fended or injured the Particulars, that they have thus excluded them from all their favours? 6. Is the belief of election a virtue, or the denial of it a sin; and is the acknowledging of persons in God any test of grace in the heart? 7. Are a people likely to improve, whose inquiries are bounded by human creeds; and is it not a strong prejudice against Calvinism that it needs such props? &c. &c. I wish their book of rules and orders had been at the bottom of the sea rather than at Cambridge. You cannot think what disgrace it has brought upon the London Baptists. Our church behold it with astonishment, and the University say the authors were strangers to the first principles of Christian liberty. The question is not of the truth of their creed, but of the imposition of it, for such only shall receive our charity as believe as John of Geneva did. Could I subscribe a human creed I would not do it for a poor Baptist dole, I would submit to my lords the bishops, for some good thing in their rich corpora tion. These ecclesiastical sheriffs, appointed by the crown, play Jupiter with a better grace than our little Anabaptist tyrants. Believe what they will, but why pretend to write a creed for me? Why sap the foundation of the good old Baptists? Scripture alone is a sufficient guide for every Christian man. Pardon, dear Mr. Taylor, my prolixity. I hate dominion over conscience, because I am clearly convinced it dishonours God, degrades man, tacitly denies the perfection of the divine word, dethrones the King of saints, and introduces all manner of wicked passions among Christians, withdrawing them from the example of the mild and merciful Master, and imparting to them the contentious and cruel dispositions of bigots. They have tuned the gospel into a miserable system of metaphysics; and to define natures, not to observe facts, is instead of talents natural and acquired, instead of good sense, exact reason, and often, instead of virtue itself. This depression lies upon all human systems, when they are made the tests of Christians. My wife, who sits by, asks how people found the way to heaven before Calvin and Van Harmin were born? I answer, by the light of Scripture alone. Then, adds she, I shall content myself with my New Testament, and leave the great Latin folios to your friend Taylor and you. I reply, you may very safely, and we shall debate our points with as little gall as if the inquiry were which of us could most dexterously jump over a five-barred gate. If you think proper to write to me, you may give your letter to my daughter, or ask her for a frank. She is the wife of a Mr. Brown, wine-merchant, No. 2, Love Lane, Little Eastcheap, where, I am sure, she will be glad to see you, and where probably Mrs. R. and I may have the pleasure of seeing you some time or other. My dutiful re spects to Father Britain, and to your whole family. I am, dear Sir, Ever your's most affectionately, ROBT. ROBINSON. By the way, my friend may alter his will, you will recollect, and then all the former part of my letter is nothing, Is not Mr. Winchester in your connection? His book, on the restoration of all things, is in the University library, and thence I had it to read." His ac EXTRACTS. Letters of Dr. Franklin's. [From his "Private Correspondence, now first published from the Originals, by his Grandson, William Temple Franklin," in one Volume 4to. Printed for Colburn, 1817.] To, GEORGE WHITEFIELD.* SIR, Philadelphia, June 6, 1753. RECEIVED your kind letter of I As to the kindness you mention, I wish it could have been of more service to you. But if it had, the only thanks I should desire is, that you would always be equally ready to serve any other person that may need your assistance, and so let good offices go round; for mankind are all of a family. For my own part, when I am employed in serving others, I do not look upon myself as conferring favours, but as paying debts. In my travels, and since my settlement, I have received much kindness from wen, to whom I shall never have any opportunity of making the least direct return; and numberless mercies from God, who is infinitely above being benefited by our services. Those kindnesses from men, 1 can therefore only return on their fellow men, and I can only shew my grati tude for these mercies from God, by a * One of the founders of the Methodists; born at Gloucester, 1714, died in New England, 1770. readiness to help his other children, and my brethren. For I do not think that thanks and compliments, though repeated weekly, can discharge our real obligations to each other, and much less those to our Creator. You will see in this my notion of good works, that I am far from expecting to merit heaven by them. By heaven we understand a state of happiness, infinite in degree, and eternal in duration : I can do nothing to deserve such rewards. He that for giving a draught of water to a thirsty person, should expect to be paid with his demands, compared with those a good plantation, would be modest in who think they deserve heaven for the little good they do on earth. Even the mixed imperfect pleasures we enjoy in this world, are rather from God's goodness than our merit: how much more such happiness of heaven! For my part, I have not the vanity to think I deserve it, the folly to expect it, nor the ambition to desire it; but content myself in submitting to the will and disposal of that God who made me, who has hitherto preserved and blessed me, and in whose fatherly goodness I may well confide, that he will never make me miserable; and that even the afflictions I may at any time suffer shall tend to my benefit. The faith you mention has certainly its use in the world: I do not desire to see it diminished, nor would I endeavour to lessen it in any man. But I wish it were more productive of good works, than I have generally seen it: I mean real good works; works of kindness, charity, mercy, and public spirit; not holiday keeping, sermon-reading, or hearing; performing church ceremonies, or making long prayers, filled with flatteries and compliments, despised even by wise men, and much less capable of pleasing the Deity. The worship of God is a duty; the hearing and reading of sermons may be useful; but if men rest in hearing and praying, as too many do, it is as if a tree should value itself on being watered and putting forth leaves, though it Rever produced any fruit. Your great master thought much less of these outward appearances and professions, than many of his modern disciples. He preferred the doers of the word to the mere hearers; the son that seemingly refused to obey his father, and yet performed his commands, to him that professed his readiness but neglected the work; the heretical but charitable Samaritan, to the uncharitable though orthodox priest, and sanctified Levite; and those who gave food to the hungry, drink to the thirsty, raiment to the naked, entertainment to the stranger, and relief to the sick, though they never heard of his name, he declares shall in the last day be accepted; when those who cry Lord! Lord! who value themselves upon their faith, though great enough to perform miracles, but have neglected good works, shall be rejected. He professed that he came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance; which implied his modest opinion that there were some in his time who thought themselves so good that they need not hear even him for improvement; but now-a-days we have scarce a little parson that does not think it the duty of every man within his reach to sit under his petty ministratrations; and that whoever omits them, offends God. I wish to such more humility, and to you health and happiness; being Your friend and servant, To DR. PRIESTLEY. London, September 19, 1772. DEAR SIR, occur, they are difficult chiefly because, while we have them under consideration, all the reasons pro and con, are not present to the mind at the same time; but sometimes one set present themselves; and at other times another, the first being out of sight. Hence the various purposes or inclinations that alternately prevail, and the uncertainty that perplexes us. To get over this, my way is, to divide half a sheet of paper by a line into two columns; writing over the one pro, and over the other con: then during three or four days consideration, I put down under the different heads, short hints of the different motives that at different times occur to me, for or against the measure. When I have thus got them all together in one view, I endeavour to estimate their respective weights, and where I find two, (one on each side) that seem equal, I strike them both out. If I find a reason pro equal to some two reasons con, I strike out the three. If I judge some two reasons con, equal to some three reasons pro, I strike out the five; and thus proceeding I find at length where the balance lies; and if after a day or two of farther consideration, nothing new that is of importance occurs on either side, I come to a determination accordingly. And though the weight of reasons cannot be taken with the precision of algebraic quantities; yet, when each is thus considered separately and comparatively, and the whole lies before me, I think I can judge better, and am less liable to make a rash step; and in fact I have found great advantage from this kind of equation, in what may be called moral or prudential algebra. Wishing sincerely that you may determine for the best, I am ever, my dear friend, Your's most affectionately, To DR. PRICE, LONDON. I RECEIVED but very lately your kind favour of October 14th. IN the affair of so much impor- Dr. Ingenhousz, who brought it, tance to you, wherein you ask my having staid long in Holland. I sent advice; I cannot for want of sufficient the enclosed directly to Mr. L. It premises, counsel you what to determine; but if you please, I will tell you how. When those difficult cases gave me great pleasure to understand that you continue well. Your writings, after all the abuse you and they have met with, begin to make serious B. F. To DR. PRIESTLEY. DEAR SIR, land. I always rejoice to hear of your being still employed in experimental researches into nature, and of the success you meet with. The rapid progress true science now makes, occasions my regretting sometimes that I was born so soon: it is impossible to imagine the height to which may be carried in a thousand years, the power of man over matter; we may perhaps learn to deprive large masses of their gravity, and give them * Supposed to allude to a club at the London Coffee-bouse. absolute levity, for the sake of easy transport. Agriculture may diminish its labour and double its produce: all diseases may by sure means be prevented or cured, (not excepting even that of old age) and our lives lengthened at pleasure even beyond the antediluvian standard. O that moral science were in as fair a way of improvement, that men would cease to be wolves to one another, and that human beings would at length learn what they now improperly call hu manity! I am glad my little paper on the Aurora Borealis pleased. If it should occasion farther inquiry, and so produce a better hypothesis, it will not be wholly useless. I am ever, with the greatest and most sincere esteem, dear Sir, &c. B. F. [Inclosed in the foregoing Letter; being an answer to a separate paper received from Dr. Priestley.] I have considered the situation of that person very attentively; I think that with a little help from the Moral Algebra, he might form a better judgment than any other person can form for him. But since my opinion seems to be desired, I give it for continuing to the end of the term, under all the present disagreeable circumstances: the connection will then die a natural death. No reason will be expected to be given for the separation, and of course no offence taken at reasons given; the friendship may still subsist, and in some other way be useful. The time diminishes daily, and is usefully employed. All human situations have their inconveniences; we feel those that we find in the present, and we neither feel nor see those that exist in another. Hence we make frequent and troublesome changes without amendment, and often for the worse. In my youth I was passenger in a little sloop, descending the River Delaware. There being no wind, we were obliged when the ebb was spent, to cast anchor, and wait for the next. The heat of the sun on the vessel was excessive, the company strangers to me, and not very agreeable. Near the river side I saw what I took to be a pleasant green meadow, in the middle of which was a large shady tree, where it struck my fancy |