1816.] Mr. Atkin on the Murderers of Sir Edmondbury Godfrey. 405 greater and more illustrious part of the light proceeding from the gods. In the last place, a union succeeds with the unity of the gods, restoring and establishing unity to the soul, and causing our energy to become one with divine energy; so that in this case we are no longer ourselves, but are absorbed as it were in the nature of the gods; and residing in divine light, are entirely surrounded with its splendour. THOS. TAYLOR. Manor-place, Walworth. (To be continued.) MR. EDITOR, TO beguile a leisure hour, I often amuse myself in reading history, biography, &c. in such publications as happen to come under my notice. One occurrence, recorded in Dr. Goldsmith's Abridgment of the History of England, respecting the murderers of Sir Edmundbury Godfrey, has often engaged my attention, and in which he appears to have been led into an error through imperfect information. He asserts (page 190) that "Hill, Green, and Berry, were tried upon the evidence of one Miles Prance, for the murder of Godfrey; but though Bedloe's narrative and Prance's information were totally irreconcileable, and though their testimony was invalidated by contrary evidence, all was in vainthe prisoners were condemned and executed." By this passage I was almost induced to believe the men to be innocent, and even to pity the fate of those unfortunates, and imagined that they being papists, were unjustly executed, through the turbulence of the times. But as at no succeeding period no other person was brought forward to acknowledge his own or any other's guilt, (as would undoubtedly have been the case,), I still thought them guilty of the crime for which they suffered. For some years the passage in question was entirely forgotten, till, on taking down the old part of my house, I discovered in holes of the thatch several interesting books and papers. Among the rest, I found the whole trial of Hill, Green, and Berry, printed in folio. I eagerly embraced the first opportunity that offered to read it over, and compared it with the passage above-mentioned, and then felt confident that Dr. Goldsmith's remarks were erroneous; as they appeared to be convicted on the clearest evidence. As I should very much wish to see their guilt substan tiated, or their innocence proved, in as clear a light as possible, I shall be ex tremely obliged to any of your readers who will have the goodness either to corroborate Dr. Goldsmith's assertions, or otherwise to prove them false. Such inquiries as these to some persons may appear trivial; but every man who possesses a history of his own dear native land would undoubtedly wish to be in possession of one which records Occurrences nearest the truth, and without partiality. I am, &c. J. ATKIN. North Muskham, Feb. 17, 1816. MR. EDITOR, I FEEL that I ought to apologize for taking up the pen upon a subject which doubtless has occupied the attention of some of your valuable correspondents; I cannot, however, refrain from briefly noticing the doctrines and reasonings of a correspondent in your 26th number, who signs PHILARCHEUS, respecting the "British system of education." Of the sentiments of the majority I shall make no use, as, were I to quote the names of the celebrated, the learned, and the philanthropic, in support of the question, I should have a most decided advantage. I shall content myself with examining the grounds of the argument contained in PHILARCHEUS's letter.This gentleman seems particularly anxious to perpetuate the "old horn-book system," because it was more slow in its operations, because months and years were required before the scholar could read the Testament, and because it opposed serious obstacles to the facility of learning!! This mode of education appears to have great charms in the eyes of PHILARCHEUS; he prefers that children should be years in acquiring what they now attain in as many months; he had rather that they should be subjected to a tedious process, than gain knowledge with facility; and then, as he himself admits with evident marks of satisfaction, "the extent of instruction is narrowed," education is impeded, and knowledge is confined to the opulent and the upper classes of society. This appears to me the main object of PHILARCHEUS: he does not wish instruction to spreadwhy not then decry it at once, and not support a system which is a mere mockery of what it professes to encourage? As to the assistance to be rendered to the father in manual labour, I am well convinced, that nine parents out of ten among the lower classes would rather have their offspring educated than receive their assistance in labour. But PHILARCHEUS has no objection to edu 406 British System of Education-Mr. Bourn on his Gazetteer. [June 1, cating the females, and gives us a series of flowery sentences in its support. Admit the advantages stated-do they not apply to the males also? are their minds to be uncultivated? Would he marry a young woman, enlightened with a decent education, to an ignorant brutish husband? Or does he wish the weaker sex to become the superior, and reverse the order of society? But this is trifling; I pass to the next objection. PHILARCHAUS urges that a single master can never become acquainted with the characters of 2 or 300 scholars. True;and, let me ask him, did the teachers under his favourite horn-book system acquire this knowledge? Are we to suppose that in large charity-schools or dayschools of at least fifty children of all ages the master studied the dispositions of his pupils? The answer is obvious. I assert that the neglect of discipline was much greater in this way-that it is impossible for any man, unassisted, to maintain order and regularity; and farther-to talk of moulding the passions of forty or fifty boys of different ages and stations is idle-how is it to be done? In the institution of monitors, PHILARCHEUS discerns many evils: the principal of which is-danger to the monarchy! Because a village schoolmaster employs his senior scholars in the education of the juniors, we are told that they are likely to rebel!-that a boy who has not been instructed by a master alone, will perhaps fail in his duty to his sovereign! But kings have ministers selected from the most deserving of their subjects-why should not a teacher take advantage of the talents of his pupils, by enabling them to instruct others? However, let PHILARCHEUS refer to any of the great schools of the empire, and he will find that the boys stand in as much fear of the monitors as the master, and would prefer their faults being told to the latter, instead of the foriner. This is a well authenticated fact, and needs no comment. Concerning rewards and punishments I have little to say. I think the influence of shame, and the excitements of ́emulation as likely to prove beneficial as any other method. They will of course produce different effects upon different minds, but they are less likely to be abused than the castigations of the "horn-book system." PHILARCHEUS is evidently unfriendly to extended education; I regret that he did not found his objections upon the broad basis at once, for to this point all his arguments tend: he is unwilling that the poor should receive instruction; but not choosing openly to avow this sentment, he recommends a tedious, defective, partial system, as the best means for preventing that national blessingthe education of the poor. I beg leave to assure him, in conclusion, that I entertain no apprehensions from the new mode, either for the happiness of the children, the morals of society, or even the monarchy itself! OMEGA. March 5, 1816. MR. EDITOR, PERMIT me to inform your correspondent V. M. H. that the greater part of my Gazetteer was printed twelve months before there was the least probability that France would be deprived of any of her conquests, and that nearly the whole was printed several months before its publication, which was delayed by a fire that consumed a part of it. For an answer to V. M. H.'s private communication I refer him to the titlepage: "A Gazetteer of the most Re markable Places ;" and should he be again disposed to favour me with further private observations, by obliging me with his name and address I shall be happy to afford him further information, post paid. Hackney, May 1, 1816. T. BOURN. MR. EDITOR, THE silence maintained by Joseph during so long a period of time as twenty years concerning his preservation, while an absent and fond parent was mourning for his supposed death, one of your correspondents appears to consider incompatible with that degree of filial affection which might have been imagined to have inhabited the breast of that distinguished patriarch. To him it is inconceivable that the pious descendant of Jacob should not have acted a very different part. Dr. Clarke (with whose explanation he is greatly dissatisfied) attributes the conduct of Joseph to the fear of his malicious brethren: he says that "his brethren, jealous and envious in the extreme, would soon have found other methods of destroying his life, had they again got him into their Therepower. fore, for his own personal safety, he chose rather to remain a bond-slave in Egypt than to risk his life by returning home. On this ground it is evident that he could not with any safety have discovered the place of his residence." Now were the conduct of Joseph to be judged of from an abstract consideration of L 1816.] Answer to a Query suggested by the Mosaic History of Joseph. 407 human nature as affected by external preserved as a people: " And God (says he) sent me before you to preserve you a posterity in the earth, and to save your lives by a great deliverance." The mercy of the Almighty was to be at once exhibited to Jacob in the two-fold blessing of the preservation of a beloved son, and of the salvation of himself and his family, in Egypt, from that calamity which was so grievously felt in the neigh bouring nations. It was to be shewn to him that the privation of his child, which seemed to him a misfortune too severe to admit of consolation, was pregnant with the happiest consequences to him and to the whole world. This story is full of instruction. The prophecy, too, which it pleased God to put into the mouth of Joseph, predicting his future elevation above his brethren, and which so highly incensed them against him, was to be fulfilled. But as their pride would not have permitted them to bend with prostrate reverence to him as their brother, they were to appear before him humble suitors for the immediate means of subsistence, and to make their lowly obeisance to him as the potent governor of Egypt. The whole of this statement, particularly the last mentioned occurrence, plainly shews that the continuance of Joseph in Egypt, his concealment there, and the ignorance of his family concerning his fate, were obviously conducive to the completion of the divine purposes, and that they originated in the will of God. This conclusion I think so evident, that to him who would deny its truth I should be almost inclined to exclaim "Nil intra est oleam, nil extra est in nuce duri." We must not, therefore, form our notions of the conduct of Joseph without any reference to his instrumentality in the accomplishment of these great plans. On the contrary, if the dispositions of men can, whenever it pleases the Supreme Lord of all, be moulded to his will; if it be admitted that Joseph's conduct certainly contributed to the advancement of God's purposes concerning his chosen people; and if it was in a very peculiar and striking manner adapted to verify the assurance conveyed in his dream; any disputation about his reasons for not acquainting his parents with his pre servation and honours, is, I believe, fitted "to minister questions rather than godly edifying." Every circumstance of his behaviour on record proves incontestably that he possessed the most exquisite sensibility, the warmest benevolence, and the most exalted and incor 408 Particulars concerning R. Suiset. ruptible virtue. We find, too, that he enjoyed, uninterruptedly, in a very high degree, the favour of the Almighty. We certainly learn from the Sacred History that the favourites of Heaven have been led astray by the violence of passion and the strength of temptation: but the want of filial affection is not an exception to general excellence, but a principle in dicative of a depraved disposition, which neither consists with the fact that he was especially beloved of God, nor with what we know of his character. Your correspondent may still find himself puzzled; if so, I trust that most of the readers of the New Monthly Magasine will accompany me in the opinion, that his perplexity is that of a man who would be wise beyond what is written. When we are once thoroughly convinced of the authenticity of the sacred volume, when we are fully satisfied of the truth of every part of the inspired writings, should any little apparent anomaly occur to our notice, we may very safely pass it by, under the persuasion, not that we have discovered something inconsistent, but that it appears so because our comprehension is feeble. The divine origin of a system being indisputable, that criticism is very shallow which searches for disagreements in its subordinate parts, which may be above, but most assuredly are not contrary to, Reason. Such minuteness has a close analogy to that of the ancient sculptor: "ungues Exprimet, ut molles imitabitur ære capillos Infelix operis summa." This artist took great pains about the nails and the hair of his figures, but of an expressive whole, it seems, he had no notion. Of that industry which resolutely presses forward to the attainment of sonie rational and accessible object too much cannot be said in praise. But it is too often counterfeited by a restless anxiety to acquire a knowledge of that which surpasses man's understanding. Considerable honours have been paid to the professors of craniology; but I do not know whether their productions ought not to yield the palm of glory to the learned cotemporary quarto which gravely setteth forth the hypothesis, that the mind is a "flexible spherule,” that its shape is that of an inflated bladder! It is amusing to see such frivolities pompously blazoned forth to the world, claiming the merit of grand discoveries, and dignified with the name of philosophy. We may rest assured, however, that when we endeavour to search with [June 1, an impertinent and morbid curiosity int the hidden works of God, the more s boriously we investigate, the more deeply shall we involve ourselves in the darknes of error. Having with great industry framed some novelty, the very labour which it has cost us serves to create an affection for it; we insensibly acquire an attachment to our own offspring, hos ever deformed and unsightly. Thes E may become, from the want of a little reflection, at the outset, upon the limits of our intelligence, the furious propaga tors of theories teeming with danger to the future welfare of our disciples and to the order and happiness of society. Pentonville, April 8, 1816. R. P.S. In No. 27 of the N. M. M. p. 204, col. 2, last line but one, for "a diction," read" and is a diction.” MR. EDITOR, YOUR correspondent Philomath (in your number for last Dec., p. 396) is not the only person who has made inquiry concerning SUISET. In Burrow's Diary for 1780, (published by the late Mr. Car nau,) is the following query: "Cardan, in his book De Subtilitate, gives a short eulogium on Archimedes, Euclid, Apollonius, Aristotle, and some few others of the most learned philosophers and mathematicians of antiquity; and among the rest he speaks of one Suisseth, or Swissett, an Englishman, as a person of the most extraordinary learning and abilities: the eldest Scaliger, also, in his book written against the above treatise of Cardan, Exercit. 314, p. 982, mentions him in the following terms: Calculatori Suiset qui pene modus excessit ingenii humani. Scaliger also speaks of him in another place with equal respect: and Bishop Wilkins does the same in one of his sermons: he is also several times mentioned with the highest approbation by Mons. Leibnitz, who represents him as the first person that applied mathematics to philosophy, and expresses a desire that his works were published.—Quere, When did this extraordinary person live, and what were the subjects he wrote upon?" And in the Diary for 1781 we have the following answer: "What the real name of the learned person here spoken of might be, is not very easy to determine with certainty, since in his own book he is called both Richard and Raymond: Vossius and Cardan call him John, and Bishop Tanner calls him Roger: there is the same uncertainty with respect to his country, 1816.] Defence of the Punishment of Flogging. for Vossius and Cardan make him a Scotchman; but Brucker, who seems to have spared no pains for information, positively asserts him to have been an Englishman. The different surnames of Suiseth, Swissett, Swincetus, Suicetus, and Suineshevedus, by which different authors distinguish him, seem all to owe their rise to his having been a monk, in the Abbey of Swineshead, in Hoyland, Lincolnshire; especially as he lived at a time when few names were patronymical, but mostly derived from circumstances of locality. He was fellow of Merton College in 1349; and became a monk the following year at Swineshead. The appellation of Calculator, by which he is often mentioned, arose from his writing a book called "Introductorum ad calculationem," or perhaps from his "Calculationes Astronomicas," according to Brucker, in whose work a list of his treatises may be seen, with some account of their contents." Some years ago I had occasion to consult the work alluded to (Bruckeri Hist. Critica Philosophia); but the only particular I remember concerning Suiset is, that his book, the Calculator, is said to be as rare as a white raven. May 9, 1816. MR. EDITOR, SENEX. THOUGH I conceive, with your correspondent, Dr. Roors, "the English nation to be in a continual state of advancement towards perfection, not only in its arts and sciences, but in every department that calls forth and requires the intellect of man;" yet I am induced to offer for your consideration a few remarks relative to that part of our jurisprudence, against which Dr. Roots seems so severely to inveigh. I am particularly happy to find that your correspondent, as a medical man, possesses a great share of feeling for bis fellow-creatures; and it follows, particularly for those who may be so unfortunate as to need his (I doubt not) able assistance, and to be placed under his care. But with respect to the public punishment which has excited his attention and abhorrence; permit me to express my humble opinion, that rather than it should be dispensed with as a punishment to be inflicted on those who infringe on the laws of their country, and on the rights of their fellow countrymen, I conceive it to be one productive of much general, and not only public but private good. The instance to NEW MONTHLY MAG.-No. 29. 409 which your correspondent was an eyewitness, certainly carries with it the appearance of undue severity. That "the severity or mildness of this punishment depends in a great mensure on the will and pleasure of the person who inflicts it," I trust I may be permitted generally to deny; and in doing this I would state, and rightly state, that on most of the occasions, if not on every one, that this public chastisement is inflicted, a medical gentleman under the appointment of the district in which it takes place is in attendance to witness the flagellation, and to judge of its force and duration. If this practice be not acted upon in every instance, I can only add that I conceive it ought to be. Under this consideration, therefore, the punishment is a fit and necessary one, as the shame and disgrace attending a public exposure and whipping is in general productive of good alike to the sufferer and to the spectators. I have known frequent instances of its having been inflicted, and indeed was myself an eyewitness to one, but a very short time since, at which there was the attendance of a medical man, and salutary measures succeeded the flagellation; and I can state of my own knowledge, in more instances than one, if it were necessary, that the person suffering this public correction has wholly reformed his conduct, and has become a good and useful member of society. I cannot omit to refer Dr. Roors to the communication of VERITAS, in page 206 of your magazine for April, wherein, amongst his proposed amendments of the laws for the protection of property in game, we find public whipping mentioned as a fit and necessary punishment: I heartily concur with VERITAS in every point of his communication, and I think his proposed amendments would be productive of general bent fit. I trust, therefore, Dr. Roors will be in some measure convinced, that it is not so reprehensible as he seems to think it. But if he were disposed to vent his displeasure against any particular mode of public exposure and punishment, I would heartily join him in banishing "altoge ther from the very code of our laws" one against which there seems to be an almost general abhorrence, the abolition of which has so often occupied the attention and endeavours of the Houses of Parliament, but which, though I believe it has not hitherto, yet I trust ere long will be accomplished. Ineed hardly say VOL. V. 3 G |