Ameth, published by Dr Leslie, written in a very fair hand. On the preceding leaf are these remarks. "These are the original papers, which a cabal of Socinians in London offered to present to the Embassadour of the King of Fez and Morocco, when he was taking leave of England. August 1682. The said Embassadour refused to receive them, after having understood that they concerned religion. The agent of the Socinians was Monsieur Verze. Sir Charles Cottrell, Kn. Mr of the Cerem. then præsent, desired he might have them; which was graunted: and he brought them and gave them to me, Thomas Tenison, then Vicar of St Martin's in the Fields, Middl.

The second tract is in Latin, entitled, Epistola Ameth Benundula Mahometani ad Auriacum Principem Comitum Mauritium, et ad Emmanuelem Portugalliæ Principem.

The third tract is again in Latin, entitled, Animadversiones in præcedentem Epistolam. These two tracts are the Latin letter, and the remarks of the Unitarian divines upon it, which are mentioned in the English letter to Ameth Ben Ameth, and of which Dr Leslie, in his preface, says he had seen a printed copy.

The fourth tract I take to be the preface to the printed edition, or intended edition. This also is

in Latin, and is inscribed Theognis Irenæus Christiano Lectori salutem.

I do most solemnly aver, that I have this day, Jan. 15, 1789, compared the letter to Ameth Ben Ameth, as published by Dr Leslie, in his Socinian Controversy Discussed, with the manuscript in the Archbishop's Library, and find that the printed copy, with the exception of some trivial typographical errors, which in no way affect the sense, and are such as any reader will discover and correct for himself, is exactly conformable to the manuscript, without the omission or addition of a single word. I do moreover aver, that the remarks in the leaf at the beginning of the manuscript, giving an account of its contents, and of the manner in which these papers came into the possession of Dr Tenison, were this same day copied verbatim from the manuscript, by myself upon the spot.

If Dr Priestley should mistrust my veracity in these assertions, (which I think he will not,) I promise him that I will at any time use my endeavours to procure him a sight of the manuscript, that he may satisfy himself.

LETTER SEVENTEENTH

The archdeacon takes leave of the controversy.

DEAR SIR,

It might be but consistent with the pride, which you impute to me as a churchman, and with the contemptuous airs, which I am apt to give myself with respect to dissenters,* were I to close our present correspondence without any notice of your animadversions upon that part of my Charge, which regards the studies of the younger clergy, and what you are pleased to call my terms of communion. It might be a sufficient, and not an unbecoming reply, to remind you that I spoke ex cathedra, and hold myself accountable for the advice which I gave, to no human judicature, except the KING, the Metropolitan, and my Diocesan. This would indeed be the only answer, which I should condescend to give to any one for whom I retained not, under all our differences, a very considerable degree of personal esteem. But as Dr Priestley is my adversary, in some points I could

"If your pride as a churchman, and the contemptuous airs you give yourself with respect to dissenters, &c." Letters to Dr Horsley, p. 112.

wish to set him right, and in some I desire to explain.

2. If I have any where expressed myself contemptuously, the contempt is not of you, but of your argument upon a particular subject, upon which I truly think you argue very weakly; and of your information upon a point, in which I truly think you are ill informed. This hinders not, but that I may entertain the respect, which I profess, for your learning in other subjects; for your abilities in all subjects in which you are learned; and a cordial esteem and affection for the virtues of your character, which I believe to be great and amiable. Your attack being made upon those parts of the established faith, which I conceive to be fundamental principles of the Christian religion, I hold it my duty to shew the weakness of your reasoning; to expose your insufficiency in these subjects; and to bear my testimony aloud against your doctrine. Between duty to God and to his church, and respect for man, it were criminal to hesitate. Upon any occasion, wherein complaisance might be allowed to operate, you are the last person, whose feelings I would have wounded.

3. You seem to think that I secretly suspect you of artifices, which are incompatible with that purity of intention, which I would seem willing

to allow.* In your last pamphlet, you complain that I have charged you with several instances of gross disingenuity. I am sensible, that, in these letters, you will find more and stronger instances of charges, which you will be apt to interpret as unfavourably; and this, I fear, will heighten the suspicion which you express, that even the compliments I sometimes pay you, are ironically meant.‡

4. Indeed, Sir, in quoting ancient authors, when you have understood the original, which in many instances is not the case, you have too often been guilty of much reserve and management. This appears in some instances, in which you cannot pretend, that your own inadvertency, or your printer's, hath given occasion to unmerited imputations. I wish that my complaints upon this head had been groundless; but in justice to my own cause, I could not suffer unfair quotations to pass undetected. I am unwilling to draw any conclusion from this unseemly practice, against the general probity of your character. But you must allow me to lament, that men of integrity, in the service of what they think a good end, should indulge themselves so freely as they

*Letters to Dr Horsley, p. 12.

+ Remarks on Monthly Review, p. 12, note. Letters to Dr Horsley, p. 110.