HE honourable gentleman may the cause of it is no more. It is not in my nature to bear malice or to live in ill-will.. My friendships are perpetual, my enmities are not so. Amicitia sempiternæ, inimicitiæ placabiles. I Ttalk of the durability of peace, disdain to keep alive in my busom the said Mr. Fox, but I can never think, it wise to pay much regard to that prospect. The inconsistency, the weakness and the passions of human governments will in all time continue to tear asunder the bands of civil concord; and no gratification, no accession, no dismemberment of empire, no good fortune, no calamity, will induce kings to sit down contented with what they have acquired or patient under their loss, but after a little breathing time they will again rise into outrage, offence and war. 8. His Coalition with Lord North. (Feb. 17, 1783.) I now come, said Mr. Fox, to take notice of the most heinous charge of all. I am accused of having formed a junction with a noble person, whose principles I have been in the habit of opposing for the last seven years of my life. I do not think it at all incumbent on me to make any answer to this charge: first, because I do not think that the persons who have asked the question, have any right to make the inquiry; and secondly, because if any such junction was formed, I see no ground for arraignment in the matter. That any such alliance has taken place, I can by no means aver. That I shall have the honour of concurring with the noble lord in the blue ribbon on the present question is very certain; and if men of honour can meet on points of general national concern, I see no reason for calling such a meeting an unnatural junction. It is neither wise nor noble to keep up animosities for ever. It is neither just nor candid to keep up animosity when enmities which I may bear to men, when the cause of those enmities is no more. When a man ceases to be what he was, when the opinions which made him obnoxious are changed, he then is no more my enemy but my friend. The American war was the cause of the enmity between the noble lord and myself. The American war and the American question is at an end. The noble lord has profited from fatal experience. While that system was maintained, nothing could be more asunder than the noble lord and myself. But it is now no more; and it is therefore wise and candid to put an end also to the ill-will, the animosity, the rancour and the feuds which it occasioned. I am free to acknowledge, that when I was the friend of the noble lord in the blue ribbon, I found him open and sincere; when the enemy, honourable and manly. I never had reason to say of the noble lord in the blue ribbon, that he practised any of those little subterfuges, tricks and stratagems which I found in others; any of those behind-hand and paltry manoeuvres which destroy confidence between human beings and degrade the character of the statesman and the man. 9. Mr. Pitt's Motion for a Reform in Parliament. (May 7, 1783.) Mr. Secretary Fox rose, and remarked to the House, that he made no doubt there were some persons present who would attribute what he said to lukewarmness and not to zeal; however, regardless of their censure, he would freely deliver his sentiments, and assure the House that he most heartily Charles James Fox. 472 concurred with the right honourable gentleman who made the motion, that the constitution required some reform, and so far from its being absurd to make any innovation on it, he was certain that the nature of our constitution required innovation and renovation; for the beauty of the constitution did not consist, as some people imagined in theory, but in practice. He knew it was the common and the popular opinion, that our constitution was beautiful in theory, but all corrupt in practice. Singular as his sentiment might be upon the subject, he made no scruple to avow that he looked to the reverse as the true description of our constitution, and thought it admirable in practice but imperfect and very faulty in theory. The theory was in its nature found by experience to be absurd in several parts; for, as it rous composed of three estates, King, Lords and Commons, it was absurd to think that one man should have an equal power to the whole multitude; therefore, in the practical part, that power was wisely curtailed, and not left in the breast of one man, but in a government consisting of several ministers. He regarded it as one of its chief excellencies, that it involved a renovating principle in itself, and by being capable of repeated improvement, admitted the possibility of its being from time to time carried to a degree of perfection beyond which no human idea could go. 10. Votes and Wishes. (Westminister Scrutiny, May 25, 1784.) He took notice that a learned friend of his, speaking of the partiality of the electors towards him, had carried the paradox rather too far, and declared that the votes for him had been almost universal; he would not venture to say this; but though he had not a majority of votes, yet it might fairly be said that when a candidate like him, a known object of the enmity and persecution of government, ventured to stand for Westminster, to obtain an equality of votes, he must have a majority of wishes. He observed that the Latin word votum admitted of two translations, both of which applied to his case; for he might be said to have enjoyed the majority of the voices of his constituents, or he could not have been honoured with an equality of their votes. 11. Long Speeches. (May 30, 1785.) Before I touch upon the charges to which I allude, I cannot help ohserving, with what special grace the right honourable gentleman (Mr. Pitt) ridicules long speeches with what a singular propriety he, of all the members in this House, attempts to correct others for occupying much of the time of the House. I do not intend to deny the right honourable gentlemen the merit of great abilities, great eloquence and great powers of pleasing his hearers; but of all the crimes to be urged against any person within these walls, the last, undoubtedly, for the right honourable gentleman to venture upon is, to charge the long duration of his speech as a fault against any member. The right honourable gentleman, like myself, is under the necessity of troubling this House much oftener and for a much longer time than is perhaps agreeable; and it ill becomes either of us to reprobate others for as practice we ourselves so frequently fall into. Grateful for the indulgence we are favoured with, we should certainly be the last to condemn that in which we ourselves are the greatest transgressors. And I shall drop this part of the subject, with only remarking, that if an almost uniform deviation from the immediate subject in discussion,-if aban doning liberal argument for illiberal declamation, if frequently quitting sound sense for indecent sarcasms, and preferring to rouse the passions and inflame the prejudices of his auditory to the convincing their understandings and informing their judgments, tended to diminish the title of any member of this House to a more than common portion of its temper and endurance I do not know one gentleman who would have so ill-founded a claim upon it for such favours, as the right honourable gentleman himself. 12. English and Irish Patriot. (Irish Commercial Propositions. May 30, 1785.) Although the right honourable gentleman charges upon me (concluded Mr. Fox) that I have not not heretofore opposed this proposition, he might surely have recollected that a noble lord near him (Lord Mahon) had attempted to ridicule me when this question was before under discussion, as being now an English, now an Irish patriot; and to that ridicule, impotent and awkward though it fell, I beg leave to plead guilty. I wish to appear what I really feel, both an English and an Irish patriot; only let it be recollected that I am not so now, merely for the exigency of the moment. Let it be recollected, that if, in defending the liberties of Ireland and discovering a jealousy for her constitution, I deserve the name of an Irish patriot, to that honour I am entitled ever since the first day of the session, when I could not foresee the events of the present day, and long before I knew that any commercial treaty with Ireland had been talked of. I embraced the first opportunity afforded by the meeting of the House, to declare my execration of the conduct of the King's ministry in their proceedings in Ireland, where I saw the fundamental and most sacred principles of the constitution daringly overturned, and doctrines advanced and measures adopted, in my judgment, utterly subversive of every trace of civil liberty; and all this in the zeal of the right honourable gentleman to suppress the reform of Parliament in Ireland. Upon the opening of the proposed arrangements in this House, I repeated the same arguments, and was convinced that Ireland never called for this system, nor ever thought of it, but was seriously occupied with other objects. I added, that I considered the whole plan as a lure to divert the Irish from constitutional points, by throwing the trade of Ireland at their feet; and to reconcile them to the violation of the laws of the land and of the constitution, by the enchanting prospect of the commercial benefits held out by this system. In this opinion I am strengthened every day, and the eager part acted by those who surround the right honourable gentleman, would confirm to me my fears for the constitution of Ireland. If this conduct, Sir, constitute an Irish patriot, then am I one; and if to struggle to save the trade of England from annihilation, gives any claim to the appellation of an English patriot, I possess that claim. I did not invite the mer. chants and manufacturers to an opposition to this scheme. If I were capable of making them instruments in this business, they were incapable of becoming my instruments: they did not follow me; I followed them. To the right honourable gentleman's (Mr. Pitt's) government they were exceedingly partial; and not quite recovered from the insanity of the times, they were absolutely prejudiced against me and my friends. They are as discerning and respectable a body of men as any in Europe, and merited, I think, better treatment than they experienced from the right honourable gentleman. No man was ever more indebted to the protection of the people than that right honourable gentleman; and no people I believe ever so soon began to repent of their predilection. Every act of his government has tended to open their eyes; they are, I believe, completely cured of the popular infection, but I fear their conviction comes a little too late. I shall now relinquish this subject, perhaps for ever, with repeating a sentiment that I have before thrown out during the discussions upon this business: I will not barter English commerce for Irish slavery; that is not the price I would pay, nor is this the thing I would purchase. 474 Essay on the Apocryphal Book of Wisdom. it may be sublime and elegant, if a moral treatise, it may be correct, perspicuous and impressive-although it cannot with truth be ascribed to the writer whose name it bears, or even although it should be anonymous. In judging, however, from whose pen it proceeded, internal testimony deserves our attention. There are cases in which this kind of testimony will soon determine the question affirmatively there are many in which it will for ever set it at rest negatively. Authors who do not mean to deceive us, and who, with this view, do not adopt the style and manner and sentiments of a remote age and country, will usually exhibit marks of the time, the spot and the circumstances in which they arise. In proportion, too, as sound criticism is cultivated, an attempt to impose on the world, by personating, as it were, some illustrious poet, historian or moralist, will become more impracticable. It is evident, therefore, that a serious com, position may contain signs of truth and nature which will direct us-if not to the framer of it, yet-to the period and the scene of its origin, Let us apply these general observations to the book entitled the Wisdom of Solomon. That it makes no part of the Jewish canon, is an uncontradicted and indisputable fact. Now if it were the production of Solomon, can we believe that his countrymen would not have classed it together with the Proverbs and the Ecclesiastes, that they would not have placed considerable value on a work of their wise and favourite monarch? Will it be pretended that they were not better judges of the question than modern critics? This were too much to concede. Yet, even could the concession be fairly demanded and made, criticism, whether ancient or modern, must pronounce, on internal evidence, that the book of wisdom was written in an age long sub. sequent to Solomon's.* If we may argue (as we, assuredly, may) from the composition itself, we must conclude that its author lived after the captivity in Babylon. Dur ing their exile there, the Jews seem Gray's Key to the Old Testament and Apocrypha, (Ed. vi) 576. Eichhorn's Einleit: in die apukryph: Schriften des A. T. 163, 164. to have borrowed some parts of what I am entitled to call the mythology of their conquerors: manifest traces of it present themselves in the book of wisdom† and hence there can be no difficulty in overthrowing the hypothesis of its early date. By some commentators it has been assigned to Philo of Alexandria. If this opinion be correct, the book was written subsequently to the birth of Christ; an inference which certain modern adventurers in literature and theology are eager to admit. Where, nevertheless, shall we find any proof, either direct or presumptive, of the celebrated Philo being the author of the Wisdom? Eichhorn, in his valuable remarks on it, has brought together not a few instances of dissimilarity between passages in that writer's acknowledged works, and others in the composition which is the subject of the present inquiry. I Now his The conjecture (for it is nothing more) that this composition was framed by some Christian, with whose name we are unacquainted, takes its origin from an erroneous reference of two or three parts of the Wisdom to the founder and the doctrines of the Gospel. It is assumed that the author has purposely drawn a portrait of Jesus Christ in his representation of a righteous character; that he adverts to the Christiau doctrine of a life to come; and that the moral spirit of his book proclaims his knowledge of Christianity. picture of a good man is, in truth, much too general to have been copied from any individual, or to be thus confined in its application: nor does it exhibit features specifically resembling those of our Saviour. Although a future existence, moreover, be brought to light by the Christian dispensation, yet the Jews of a former period were not ignorant of the tenet: obvious traces of it may be seen in their canonical writings; and the grand distinction of the religion of Jesus is the establishment of the assurance of the resurrection of the dead upon the fact of his own. In this treatise nothing occurs which is inconsistent with the creed of a Jew; nothing which necessarily implies that it is the production of a Christian. Indeed, if we suppose following reasons for uniformly exit to have been framed by a believer tending the name in question to all in Jesus Christ, we must ask ourselves, Christians who, in opposition to the Why its allusions to the evangelical prevailing doctrine of three co-equal history and doctrines are not at once and co-eternal persons in the Godhead, more numerous and more direct? Nor maintain that the Father is the Only will it be easy to return a satisfactory True God, and cousequently that our answer to the question. There will Lord Jesus Christ is a created, subalso be equal difficulty in assigning a ordinate and dependant being. solid reason for the person of a Jewish writer being borrowed by a member of the new dispensation. We can scarcely err if we place the date of the Book of Wisdom somewhere in the interval between the Babylonian captivity and the birth of Christ-not long perhaps before the latter of those events. It would seem, however, that we have no means of ascertaining the author. A highly valuable critic has remarked, that the book divides itself into two parts;' one comprchending ch. i-xi. 2, the other, the remaining chapters. And these appear to be distinct fragments, in which the care. ful reader will perceive some considerable variations, both of style and thought. The Wisdom, it is most probable, was written originally in Greek. Three ancient translations of this treatise are extant the Syriac, the Arabic and the Latin. The last will be found in the Vulgate, and is older than the age of Jerom, by whom however it was not revised and improved: so that it is disgraced by numerous obscurities and barbarisms of expression. Athanasius, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory Nazianzen, Epiphanius and Jerom speak of this book as apocryphal, Many ecclesiasfical councils have stamped it with canonical authority. N. Mr. J. Yates on the Term Unitarian. SIR, Glasgow, July 6, 1815. ALTHOUGH hold in high esti mation the intellectual and moral attainments of Mr. Belsham, and consider him as a great ornament to the cause of evangelical truth, yet I am decidedly adverse to his confined application of the term UNITARIAN Thinking the subject of much importance towards the promotion of those objects which he, in common with all zealous Unitarians, is pursuing, I beg leave to offer to him and to the readers of your Repository the * Eichhorn, 90162. I. In the first place, the term was so understood by those to whom it was originally applied. In my Sermon on the Grounds of Unitarian Dissent, (p. 13, note,) I referred in proof of this fact to Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History, cent. 16, sec. 3, part 2. Since publishing that Sermon, I have paid some attention to the use of the title among the theological writers who preceded Lardner. I have found that its original and proper ac. ceptation is exactly what I had stated. All these writers, so far as I have ob. served, employ the name UNITARIAN as a generic term, including under it all Christians, whether Arians or Socinians, who believe that there is only one person in the Godhead. The term was intended to distinguish them from Trinitarians, who assert that there are three persons in the Godhead. It was consequently viewed as synonymous with Anti-trinitarian. It was not conceived to denote a disbelief of the preexistence of Christ, or of his agency, as a subordinate instrument, in creat ing the material world. Nevertheless we find the names Unitarian and Socinian sometimes used as synonymous. Many of your readers will recollect an example in the titlepage of the "Brief History of the UNITARIANS, CALLED ALSO SOCINIANS." The occurrence of such expressions probably arose from the fol lowing cause. The greater part of the Unitarians being Socinians, the com mon people, who are not accurate fich mologists, used the title Socinian, which properly belonged to most Unitarians, in so great latitude as to apply it to all. A circumstance which supports this conjecture, is, that the specific terin Arian was also used with a similar freedom. Thus we find in Sandius's Bibliotheca Anti-trinitariorum (p. 178) the title of a book which may be con trasted with that above quoted: "A Brief History of the UNITARIANS, COMMONLY CALLED ARIANS." Other examples might be produced of the extensive application of the name. Arian |