The average degrees of Temperature, from observations made at eight o'clock in the morning, are 59-10 100ths; those of the corresponding month in the year 1911, were 60-90 100ths; in 1810, 61-32 100ths; in 1809, 61-44 100ths; in 1808, 63-17 100ths; in 1807, 63-52 100ths; in 1806, 62-22 100ths; in 1805, 63-33 100ths; and in 1804, 60-33 100ths. that The quantity of Rain fallen this month is equal to 97 100ths of an inch; of the corresponding month in the year 1811, was 2 inches 5 16ths; in 1810, 2 inches 66 100ths; in 1809, 4 inches 38 100ths; in 1808, 3 inches 6 100ths; in 1807, 2 inches 55 100ths; in 1806, 4 inches 27 100ths; in 1805, 2 inches 22 100ths; and in 1804, 2 inches 26 100ths. THE GENTLEMAN'S MAGAZINE, For SEPTEMBER, 1812. Mr. URBAN, Sept. 7. Lay not up for yourselves treasures WHEN I was, not long since, upon earth, &c. but lay up for your reading the late Mr. (Soame) Jenyns's Cursory Observations on several Passages of the New Testament," I paid some attention to his notice of Luke xvi. 9; which he considers as an ironical Reproof of the Pharisees, and not an Exhortation or serious direction for conduct. I rose from his book, fully agreeing with him in his previous observation, that "no Commentator, antient or modern, has YET been able to give us a satisfactory explanation of this passage." I have, since, been looking at the new Edition of Bowyer's Conjectures, and I there find that Professor Schultz also considers what is said as 66 ironical, and consequently negative."-But did Irony ever proceed from the mouth of the Divine Speaker? I believe, not. Be this as it may, I feel an inclination to examine if the passage will not admit another interpretation. I would premise, that xayw, in the words xxyw λsy, appears to me plainly adversative: it is Ego VERO dico vobis, &c. That it is often thus used, we have the strong authority of Leigh's Critica Sacra.-We may therefore expect the ra yoμs to contain a precept opposite, in tendency, to the example which it refers to. Looking thus at TonaTE ἑαυτοῖς φιλες ΕΚ τα μαμμωνα της αδιxx, I am tempted to understand it, "make to yourselves friends ELSEWHERE THAN FROM the mammon of unrighteousness," &c. &c. This plain exhortation (PERSONÆ loquenti omnino CONVENIENS) perfectly accords with numberless Texts of Scripture. I will instance two: selves treasures in Heaven, &c. &c. Mat. vi. 19, 20: And, The FRIENDSHIP of the world is ENMITY with God, &c. James iv. 4.. I may add a third Text, reported by St. Matthew, as built on the former of these, but connected, by St. Luke, with the passage we are considering: Ye cannot serve God and Mammon. How desirable then is the sense, "Make to yourselves friends altogether different from the Mammon of Unrighteousness;" i. e. Make God your friend, by faith and righteousness; make HIм your friend who goes before you to prepare a place for you in his Father's House, and there to receive you unto himself! John xiv. 3, 4.-But how is this desirable interpretation of the words ex rô Maμμavā x.T.λ. to be justified? No Commentator even glances at it: nor is it supported by any interpretation of the Preposition Ex in the Lexicon of Schoettgenius, Stockius, or Parkhurst.— Finding this to be so, I turned, rather hopeless, to Schleusner, and, præter spem, I found him speaking to the point. In his 19th interpretation of this Preposition, having explained ex by sine, and having thus applied it to James ii. 18. (Ex TWY YW 08, WITHOUT thy works) as simplicissima ratio locum explicandi ;" he proceeds to observe, nec desunt loca, e Græcis Scriptoribus, in quibus ex pro w ponitur.' Here then, I say, is ground for my construction of the passage. It may be asked, Has Luke thus used Ex upon any other occasion? I think he has. The same construction of the Preposition seems at least desirable, sirable, in another passage of the same Evangelist, ch. viii 27. He says, (according to our Version) that "when Jesus landed on the coast of the Gadarenes, there MET HIM OUT OF THE CITY, a certain man which had devils long time; while St. Mark says, that the Demoniac met him OUT OF THE TOMBS, c. v. 2. which St. Matthew confirms, speaking indeed of two Demoniacs, c. viii. 28.—This discrepancy, respecting the place whence the Demoniac came, is, indeed, well reconciled by connecting Ex της πόλεως with 7652 and rendering Luke's aung TIS EX TNS TOλews a man belonging to (or a native of) the city. But this description of him seems to be superfluously unnecessary and if we render υπήντησεν αυτῷ ανης τις εκ της πόλεως κ. τ. λ. “ there met him, WITHOUT THE CITY, a certain man who had devils," we read the narrative of the fact precisely as it must be acknowledged to have happened, and we most minutely reconcile, in this respect, the three Evangelists. Submitting these crude ideas, as mere hints, to your more learned and competent Correspondents, I remain, Mr. Urban, most truly, your faithful humble servant, SACERDOS RUSTICUS. Sept. 10. Mr. URBAN, I AM obliged to your new Correspondent A. O. B. (p. 630) for his friendly chastisement. I was not ig norant that "the component letters" of Aleim and Elohim " are precisely the same." In fact I consulted my Hebrew Bible before I wrote. But, in my view of the matter, much more is requisite, than the mere knowledge of the letters and Masoretic points (invented "probably not earlier than the eighth century"*), to constitute a just claim to "Hebrew literature." I therefore said, I had "no pretensions to" such " literature," hoping not to give offence by a confession of ignorance. I must still, however, be allowed to think, that St. Matthew *Bishop Lowth, Prelim. Dissert. p. xxi. He calls the Masoretes "wretched eriticks." On Isai, xlii. 20. may be Discourse on the Prophecies" at Not having Bishop Horsley's "last hand, I know not whether I able to satisfy "An anxious Inquirer," p. 634; but it appears to me that the learned Prelate has merely uttered a harmless paradox; the solution of but somewhat laughable, distinction which is to be sought in the common, aliquo modo non." The prophets, of the schools: “ Aliquo modo tenet, without doubt, perfectly understood the general sense and bearing of their own prophecies; but with regard to the precise time and minute circumstances of the events foretold, where such minule circumstances were not revealed to them, here probably they neither understood nor foresaw more than other men. An instance or two will explain my meaning: whether that meaning is well founded, and applicable to the difficulty which has been started, others will judge. The prophet Daniel well knew, that the denoted the King of Grecia," and rough goat," in one of his visions, that "the great horn" was "the first first King should be named Alexan King" (Dan. viii. 21); but that the der, that he should be King of Macedon, and that he should die suddenly in his strength at Babylon, were cir. cumstances unknown probably to the prophet, as well as to others, till time (if I may so speak) filled up the outlines of the sketch, which prophecy had drawn. Isaiah knew as certainly as we do, that the Messiah should be born of a Virgin of the house of David; but that the highly-favoured Virgin should be named Mary, and that she should be espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, we all know, though probably none of the prophets did. 66 Of " Evening Lectures," so strenuously recommended, 623–625, I can say little, as I never was present at any such performance. A Lecture or Sermon, whether in the Morning or Evening, if it conveys Christian doctrine, is a good thing; but Prayers are better: the one is talking about religion; the other is practising it. Your Correspondent knows, I presume, that when the nation had been surfeited T h surfeited with Lectures from morning to night (one of the most powerful engines in the hands of prosperous rebellion), among the first acts of the Legislature, on the recovery of its just and constitutional functions, was one which injoins, that no Sermon or Lecture shall be preached (except in the Universities), unless the Common Prayers first read, and the Lecturer for that time of the day shall be present at the reading thereof. 14 Car. II. c. iv. § 22. Yours, &c. Mr. URBAN, R. C. Old Town, Stratfordupon-Avon, Sept.10. NY literary relick of so great an A Antiquary as Sir William Dug dale must be interesting. For insertion, therefore, in your Magazine, I have transcribed, from the Original now before me, a Letter written by him to his friend Sir Simon Archer; from whom Dugdale acknowledges, in his Antiquities of Warwickshire, p. 581, to have derived considerable assistance in that laborious undertaking. It should be observed, that the manor of Codbarow, near Umberslade, was sold (10 July, 9 Jac.) by Sir Edward Mountfort, of Bescote, in Staffordshire, grandson of Francis Mountfort, esq. (whose wife is mentioned in the letter) to Sir Simon Archer. Perhaps, for William Sheldon (p. 581, in the Antiquities of Warwickshire), should be substituted Ralph Sheldon, agreeably to Dug dale's extract from Willington's Will, penes Sir Thomas Holt. Yours, &c. R. B. WHELER. [Superscribed]"For my much honoured freind Sr Simon Archer, Kt. at Warwick." "Honoured St.-I received your Letter whereby you desire a Copie of Willm Willington's Will, wch I should readily tend you, if I had it: but when I searcht the Registers in the Prerogative Office, I found it not, though I did earnestly endeavour soe to doe; wch makes me doubt that it was not registred there : Therefore I was constrayned to make use of that old Copie thereof, wch I found amongst St Thomas Holt's writings; of we have taken short notes; and wherein there is no more of Codbarow than these words, vt. The Mannour of Lodbarow purchased by me and Raphe Sheldon, of Sir John Norrys, to be to Anne Mountford my daughter, and her issue: wch will beareth date 28th of March 1555. (1 et 20 Ph. et Mariæ.) "On Munday next I goe, towards London, but shall not be there of ten days, in regard I am to make some stay in Northamptonshire; and so presenting my humble service to your selfe and your good Lady, I rest At your com'ands, "WILLM DUGDALE. "Blyth Hall, 9° Sept. 1657." Mr. URBAN, Sept. 16. Hontecessitated me to close AD accidental interrupabruptly my late Article on the literary character of Mr.Hasted, p.104, it was my intention to have anticipated, and entered more fully into the subject of your Editor's Note. It is very true, that that of which I complained as a deficiency in Hasted, has en supplied with uncommon indus try and extent of research by the Historian of Leicestershire. No spot, no collateral aid, has remained unexplored: and it adds greatly to the terials is in the very words of the orivalue, that a large portion of the maginals. It would be too much to expect the last and most lucid arrangebelongs rather to the leisure of him ment from the first Collector, which hands, than to one, whose time has who has the materials supplied to his been consumed in the immense toil of gathering them. The fault of Hasted is, that he has no variety: all is reduced to one dull narrative, consisting of little more than a dull deduction of the Propriewhich forms nothing like a style, but tors of Manors in a kind of language, savours most of the technicalities of an Attorney's office. Any thing curious in Nature or Art, any traits of Manners, or Iliustrations of the characters of individuals, never engage his remark or attention. With him, one man only differs from another by his name, the date of his birth, and death; and the family into which he married: unless we add his rent-roll, and the specification of the manors of which he was the owner. Mr. URBAN, Chelsea, Sept. 16. NCLOSED you will receive a pleasing. It is a strange sort of niggardliness denies the of ENView of the Tete de Pont' in genius to The Castle of Otranto. It Putney Fields, constructed by the Earl of Essex, General of the Parliament Army in the Civil Wars. During that boisterous period of our aunals, Fulham and Putney were the scenes of very interesting transactions. In November, 1642, the Earl of Essex marched into Fulham town, and quartered several of the general officers upon the inhabitants, whose names are mentioned in the newspapers of that time; the head-quarters were established at Putney. This was im mediately after the battle of Brentford; and the Parliament, being apprehensive that his Majesty would, in consequence of that victory, march directly to London, gave orders to their General to make every exertion in his power to stop the progress of the Royal army. In order, therefore, to facilitate the passage of the troops from Fulham to Putney, a bridge of boats was laid across the Thames; at each end forts were constructed to guard it against surprise; that on the Putney side is still in good preservation, and of which the above sketch, taken during the present summer, is a correct representation. This transaction will be mentioned more at large in the History of my native Parish of Fulham, now in a considerable state of forwardness. If any of Mr. Urban's Readers are acquainted with any facts relative to this parish, including the hamlet of Hammersmith, the communication thereof would be esteemed a particular faT. FAULKNER. vour. exhibits picturesque fancy, invention, and, I contend, even pathos. It is perhaps true, that his mind was too much employed in search of curiosities, and matters of artificial taste. And this would have been a charge proper to be insisted on, had his panegyrists usurped for him the seat and fame of a first-rate author; of Milton, Addison, Gray, Johnson, or Burke. I do not think that he ever obtained or sought credit for any other merits than he possessed; and hardly for those. It will not be denied that he was an exquisite judge of the Arts; and that he contributed most materially by his taste and his example to encourage the fashiou for them. But it may be said, that the attack is directed to his morals and his heart; and that it is the intention to give an instance of literary unhappiness, where a writer affects a disgust at distinctions, which he has not the powers, or will not pay the price, to obtain. To despise authors was an affectation, and a very bad affectation: but I doubt if it arose from the motives thus ascribed. It does not seem quite fair to try a man by the casual expressions of a few private letters, written perhaps in moments of illhumour: but even if we admit them, they go no farther than to express. contempt of those who are deemed to have attained only a mediocrity in literature. It is clear that this is the fair construction of the Letter which Mr. D. has given in vol. I. p. 121,when the whole is taken together, though the parts are not worded with sufficient precision. Mr. Gough is unjustly spoken of: but at that time only his Anecdotes of British Topography had appeared; and Wa,pole, it may fairly be presumed, altered his opinion when the Sepulchral Monuments and the Camden were published. Wal |
