Images de page
PDF
ePub

MISCELLANEOUS COMMUNICATIONS.

List of the Petitioning Clergy, 1772. SIR,

Dec. 24, 1817.

THE accompanying list of the Petitioning Clergy will, I apprehend, meet the wishes of your (literally nameless) Correspondent, Vol. X. p. 618, in the desire he has expressed to see the names of the " Clergymen of the Established Church," who signed the memorable Petition in 1772, for their Relief from Subscription to the Articles.

To render it, as I trust, the more acceptable, I have arranged the names under the counties in which their respective preferments were situated, rather than in the promiscuous form in which they are now blended in the copy before me. I cannot, at least at present, gratify your inquirer, by any further particulars of the individuals themselves. Many of them, no doubt, in after-life filled, and some few, per haps, are still honourably filling, different appointments in the Church, from those to which their names are here attached, as (of course) their situations at the period of their sig nature.

A copy of the petition itself will be found correctly transcribed in the 42d vol of the Gentleman's Magazine, p. 61, and in the preceding volume an account is given of the meeting held to carry it into execution. This manly and temperate petition, it will be recollected, after a spirited debate, in

which the cause of the subscribers

was most ably advocated by Sir Wm. Meredith and Lord John Cavendish, was rejected by a large majority *, on Lord North's urging, that "it would tend to revive the flames of ecclesias tical controversy." V. M. H. List of the Clerical Subscribers ↑ to the Petition presented to the House: of Commons, Feb. 6, 1772.

Cambridge.

William Benning, Vicar of Abington.

[blocks in formation]

Thomas Wagstaffe, M. A., Fellow of several other Lay Subscribers chiefly be

Christ's College.

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

longing to the two professions of Civil Law and Physic.

* I have some doubt whether this gen tleman was ever in orders.

He was also Greek Professor. After Vicar of Newcastle-upon-Tyne. And at the same time a Fellow of Queen's College, Cambridge.

James Brome, Rector of Great Henny.
John Caldow, clerk, * Witham.
Lilly Butler, Vicar of Witham.
John Cantley, M. A., Copford.
Roger Cocksedge, Rector of Waltham.
Thomas Cooch, LL.B., Malden.
Thomas Chappell, clerk, Witham.
John Cott, Rector of Great Braxted.
John Colman, Rector of Bradwell.
George Dutens, Vicar of Great Baddow.
William Grainger, Rector of Verley.
Charles Gretton, M. A., Rector of Spring-
field Bosvil.

William Gatton, M. A., Rector of Littlebury.t

John Haggard, M. A., Rector of Little

Birch.

P. Harvey, Ramsden Cray's. Robert Jegon, B. A., Kelvedon.

Richard Morgan, Curate of Northbourn. Anthony Temple, M. A., Vicar of Eastley. William Thomas, B. A., Curate of St. Mary's, Sandwich.

Lancashire.

Reginald Braithwaite, M. A., Minister of Hawkeshead.

J. Hest, Curate of Wharton.

Leicester.

George Coulton, Rector of Houghton. William Lloyd, M. A., Rector of Saddington.

George Mason, Leir, Lutterworth. *
Lincoln.

John Barr, B. A., Rector of Oumby.
John Bidgell, M. A., Rector of Wellborn.
Richard Brown, Rector of Aswardby.
Andrew Chambers, B. A., Curate of Ba-
singham.

Thomas Keighley, M. A., Vicar of Low John Disney, jun., LL.B., Vicar of Swin

Layton.

David Mustard, clerk, Colchester.

John James Neale, B. A., clerk, Billericay.

Charles Oulney, Rector of Fordham. George Pawson, Rector of Bradsell. William L. Phillips, clerk, Danbury George Shepherd, Rector of Markshall. Francis Stone, M. A. F. S. A., Rector of Cold Norton.

S. Summers, clerk, Kelvedon. William Treakell, B. A., Rector of Hadleigh.

George Watkins, Rector of Fairstead. William Williams, M. A., Vicar of Malden. Christopher Wyvill, LL.B., Rector of Black Notley.

Robert Younge, Rector of Little Thurrock.

Hants.

Henry Norman, Rector of Morested.
Henry Taylor, Vicar of Portsmouth.
Nicholas Tindal, Rector of Olverston.
Herts.

Edward Bourchier, M. A., Rector of Brentfield.

Anthony Trollope, M. A., Rector of Cot. terel.

Hunts.

B. Hutchinson, Vicar of Kimbolton.
J. Kippax, D. D., Rector of Brington.
Richard Reynolds, M. A., Paxton.
William Robinson, Rector of Hamerton.
Kent.

Nicholas Carter, D. D., Rector of Wood. church.

Richard Clarke, Rector of Hartley.
John Firebrace, B. A., Lecturer of St.
Paul's, Deptford.

George Hutton, M. A., Deptford.
William Lowth, Vicar of Lewisham.

*Many of the signatures were made in this way, the individuals signing (it is presumed) not being graduates.

+ Afterwards, I believe, D. D., Archdeacon of Essex, Head of Magdalen College, Cambridge.

derby. t

Sir John Every, Bart., Rector of Wad

dington.

Thomas Foster, LL.B., Rector of Dounley.

Charles Hope, M. A., Vicar of Weston.
J. Lafargue, M. A., clerk, Stamford.
William Murray, D. D., Vicar of Gains-
borough.

John Norton, M. A., Stamford.

John Parnell, LL.B., Rector of Rand. Joseph Simpson, Curate of North Searle. Thomas Wilberfoss, Rector of All Saints, Stamford.

[blocks in formation]

William Chambers, D. D., Rector of Thomas Paddon, M. A., clerk, Bungay.
Achurch.
Humphrey Primott, M. A., Minister of
Higham.

Edmund Dana, Vicar of Brightstock. John Ekins, Rector of Barton Seagrove. William Fonnereau, LL. B., Clapton. William Guest, Kector of Colliweston. Henry Knappe, M. A., Rector of Rockingham.

James Quincey, Vicar of Geddington. Anthony Sanderson, Rector of Barnwell St. Andrews.

William Sanderson, Vicar of Little Addington.

John Scriven, LL.B., Rector of Twywell.
John Skinner, B. D., Rector of Easton.
Richard Stough, M. A., Luffwick.
James Wardleworth, B. A., Tichmarsh.
Notts.

John Edwards, M. A., Bulston.
Robert Locke, B. A., Vicar of Farndon.
Timothy Wylde, Vicar of Beaston.
Oxford.

Samuel Benzeville, B. A., of St. John's
College.

James Phipps, M. A., of St. Mary Hall. Thomas Dalton, M. A., Fellow of Queen's College.

Robert Outlaw, Islip.

Rutland.

William Brereton, Rector of Cottesmore. Joseph Digby, LL.B., Rector of Tinwell. Thomas Harrison, D. D., Rector of Great Casterton.

Samuel Hunt, B. A., Curate of Great Cas

terton.

R. Wythers, Vicar of Greetham.

Salop.
Thomas Milner, B. D., Vicar of Stokesey.
Somerset.

Phil. Atherton, Vicar of Ninehead.
John Fue, D. D., Vicar of East Coker.
Suffolk.

John Boldero, B. A., Rector of Ampton.
John Carter, M. A., Rector of Hongrave.
Abraham Dawson, M. A., Rector of Ring-
field.

Benjamin Dawson, LL.D., Rector of Burgh.†

John Gent, B. A., Vicar of Stoke Nayland. Christopher Holland, LL.B., Rector of

Cavenham.

William Holmes, B. A., Curate of Holton. John Jebb, M. A., Rector of Homersfield. † Joseph Lathbury, jun., Rector of Liver

[blocks in formation]

A. L. Richardson, Rector of Hisham St. Peter's.

Surrey.

John Jennings, M. A., Master of St. Saviour's.

Owen Manning, B. D., Vicar of Godalmin
Sussex.

S. Carpenter, M. A., Rector of Bignorris.
Thomas Davies, Vicar of Glynd.
William Hopkins, B. A., Vicar of Bolney.*
Allan Robinson, B. A., Curate of Bas-
combe.
Wilts.

L. Eliot, M. A., Vicar of Steeple Ashton.
Yorkshire.

Daniel Addison, Curate of Thirsk.
Cuthbert Allenson, Rector of Wath.
John Armistead, Vicar of Easingwold.
Francis Blackburne, Rector of Rich-
mond. +

Thomas Cantley, Vicar of Great Usborne.
John Dent, Rector of Soothington.
Timothy Dickinson, Vicar of Grinton.
William Dixon, Curate of Trinity Chapel.
Gregory Elsley, Vicar of Burniston.
John Gray, Rector of Tanfield.

Thomas Harrison, Curate of Patin Bromp

[blocks in formation]

teric.

Thomas Nelson, Rector of Finghall. Allan Penny, Vicar of Thornton Steward. John Pigott, Vicar of Hornby.

R. Piper, B. D., Rector of South Kilvington.

Thomas Simpson, Curate of Catteric.
Isaac Wilson, Vicar of Brafferton.
Appendix.

H. Beveley, J. C.
Anthony Clarkson, B. A.
George Hartley, M. A., J. C.
David Simpson, B. A.
William Stables, J. C.
William Robertson, D. D.
Sidney Swinney, D. D.
John Wastle, LL.B.
B. Webb, clerk.
Daniel Wilson, M. A.
John Yorke, LL.B.

P. S. Respecting the individuals natned in the above Appendix, it does

* Also Master of Cuckfield endowed School.

↑ Archdeacon of Cleveland, the learned Author of the Confessional.

1

not appear what preferments they
held, or even where they resided, nor
do I exactly see what is designated by
the J. C. attached to some of them;
but this and any further information
relative to the character, writings or
history of the whole of this noble
phalanx of worthies, would doubtless
form an acceptable communication
to the readers of the Monthly Repo-
sitory.
V. M. H.

UPON

Dr. Cogan on his Ethical Questions. SIR, Dec. 12, 1817. PON looking into the Monthly Repository for April, [XII. 226 -236,] I perceive that there is an ample and candid review of my Ethical Questions; with which the self-love of an author is sufficiently gratified. But as I think that the writer's objections to some of my positions, may have a tendency to invalidate my arguments, in the opinion of many of your readers, upon subjects which I deem of the first importance, without coufuting them in reality, I beg leave to reply to his comments upon them, by the same channel through which they were communicated to the public. If, Sir, I know myself, my prime object is the discovery of truth. Truth, sacred truth, is of such infinite importance, that I am induced to respect a man who advances an ingenious error, the confutation of which introduces a just principle, or establishes it upon a more solid basis; and if my writings shall advance knowledge by the detection of my errors, I shall not have written in vain. I hope, therefore, to receive correction with the docility of a pupil who has mistaken his gram. mar-rules, or has misconstrued a passage, without being impertinently positive that he is always in the right. In the following strictures my sole object is to rectify what appear to me misapprehensions, and to prove that the positions upon which the writer has animadverted, perfectly correspond with the tenor of the principles I wish to establish, and to which he does not object.

In his review of the third Speculation, on the Existence of a Moral Sense, though he agrees with me upon the whole, he observes, in answer to my argument against its existence, from the imperfection of the analogy between the physical senses and this

supposed moral sense, that "the advocates for a moral sense never could intend to use the word in precisely the same meaning, as when it is applied to the faculty of perceiving external objects through the corporeal organs. They applied it analogically to the mental power of distinguishing between moral good and evil, and analogies do not require that the cases be perfectly parallel.”

To this I answer, many supporters of that doctrine have gone much further; they have spoken of a sixth sense, which they deemed equally instantaneous, and equally infallible in its perceptions with either of the five. But supposing this were not the case, I maintain, that in every argument from analogy, the analogy must be perfect, or the argument is inconclusive. Analogy may serve as a kind of conjectural solution of a difficulty, or as an illustration, a metaphorical illustration, of a subject, where there are but few points of resemblance; but it cannot be the basis of a theory, unless there be a concordance in every point, for the point of discrepancy may enfeeble or destroy the whole hypothesis. The minutest deviation from the right point of the compass, at first setting out, and persevered in during the whole of a voyage, will never conduct the mariner to the destined port, nor will the mathematician be able to solve his problem under the influence of the smallest error. Whoever maintains that the endowment of a moral sense is a guide to decision in moral sentiment and moral conduct, must believe that the faculty is equally accurate in its reports as the other senses, whether he retain the term of a sixth sense or not. He must suppose, that in its effects the analogy is perfect, though not in its physical construction, or that there is a peculiar organization in the brain destined to the purpose: and my object is to prove that the analogy is so defective, that all reasonings from it are inconclusive; and that we are not under the necessity of having recourse to so unsatisfactory a mode of solution, when it is not difficult to explain all the phenomena, upon which they found an hypothesis, by the common laws of human nature which are in daily operation.

On the Doctrine of Necessity, my

reviewer alleges, that the arguments I advance cannot be satisfactory to the advocates for human liberty: that "the method of reconciliation proposed is to evade, and not confront the difficulties of the question." He adds, "the objection of the libertarian is this, that, according to the hypothesis of his opponent, the state of the mind which immediately precedes, and indeed produces the physical or corporeal action, that state to which we give the name volition, is itself produced by causes, whether within or without the mind, over which the agent has no controul, and for which therefore, though he may be made accountable in fact, he cannot be responsible in equity:" and he thinks that my expatiating upon the extensive advantages derived to man from our always obeying the dictates of the will, does not remove the objection.

I shall observe in the first place, that to bring the controversy to this point, is of no small importance in the debate. It opposes that wantonness of will, for which the earlier advocates for humau liberty so strenuously contended; and which is still conspicuous in the writings of Madame de Stael and some of the German philosophers. Their favourite hypothesis asserts that the freedom of the will is paramount to all motives: that it is an inherent, independent power, over which motives have no controul. If we compel them to acknowledge the contrary, they must abandon one of the fortresses which they held with no small degree of confidence, though we may not have reduced the capital.

Again, to continue my allusion, the statement given of the universal, and also beneficial influence of the human will, has a tendency to draw the opponents out of another strong hold, where they always entrench themselves. Inattentive to all the advantage of right motives, they immediately place before us the dilemma respecting responsibility for immoral actions, as being of itself a complete confutation of the whole theory of the Necessarians. It cannot, therefore, be totally irrevelant to the subject, to remind them, that supposing an abuse of the doctrine should occasionally become the parent of vice, which, by the way, is very seldom the case, this disadvantage is counterbalanced by

the consideration that obedience to the impulse of motives is the parent of every thing useful, ornamental and pleasing in the natural and social world, and of every virtue in the moral world.

I shall further observe, that the habit of drawing the alarming inferences in order to annihilate the doctrine, so universal among them, is in reality a tacit acknowledgment that the Necessarian hypothesis is founded upon arguments which would render it totally unobjectionable, could this difficulty be surmounted. They will admit that they never rise from their beds in the morning, without some cause operating as a motive; and that every action of the day is under a similar influence, that is, under a motive which, although they may have the physical power, they never have the will to resist. But upon moraľ subjects they immediately revolt. It is immediately urged, with the utmost emphasis, that it would be unjust to punish the most nefarious actions, although they result from the most detestable propensities, because the propensities themselves were formed by causes which were not under the controul of the agent.

But, let it be observed, that under the operation of this grand law, which they are ready to admit in the common' concerns of life, it cannot be unjust to punish wicked actions, since the motives to punish were under an influence as compulsive, as those which induced" the offender to transgress. Should the villain act upon the principle so much redoubted, and think himself irresístibly impelled to be unjust and cruel, let him learn that the same impulsive force must inevitably raise, in every virtuous mind, a hatred and detestation of his conduct. If he be guilty of murder, it may be impossible for him to avoid remorse upon reflection, however irresistible the motive appeared at the time. His commitment to prison, his trial, his sentence of condemnation, his public execution, all take place under the same immutable law, ́ which influenced the culprit to comnit the deed. The conduct of his prosecutors was as inevitable as his own; and, therefore, according to his own principles, he cannot be unjustly treated. Prosecutors, witnesses, jury, judge, executioner, are exculpated by

« PrécédentContinuer »