called the Scottish style, has been zealously pursued for the last nine that no less than thirty-three years, volumes of this description have been published in London and DubKin, as will appear by the catalogues. Few of these are inferiour in size to that under review. We notice also seven volumes of Ancient Ballads. How many others may have escaped our search we cheerfully leave for the investigation of those, who have more time and better inclination than ourselves. Most of the articles which go to make this a volume, have been already reviewed in other publications, and some of them have been re-printed in this. They have generally received a favourable character; of which we are not willing to deprive them. But it is to be understood that this character was gained by reviews of the Minstrelsy of the Scottish Border, and the Tales of Wonder, in which they appeared. In that collection they passed most creditably to the authour, and were there entitled to much comparative praise. It seemed the best opportunity which the author could have found for introducing them to the world; and perhaps the only one which he should have adopted. But why must they be collected and printed in a separate volume ? There are not books enough; they must be multiplied, There are in this pamphlet eight ballads and five songs. We are a little surprised; that the ballads were not printed separately. The ballads and songs would make two very neat. volumes in 4to or 8vo, and a third volume of notes might be added; or if the editor pleases, he may print the title page separately. We look forward to the day when this plan will be virtually carried. into effect; when each of these

6

"

Although we are a little vexed with this superfluous multiplication of books-this imposition of bibliothical traffick-we are ready to acknowledge, that in some of these ballads and lyrical pieces, there are starts of fancy,' and ideas most poetically dressed.' Some of these, we will take the liberty to select, as much for the gratification of our readers, who do not possess the Minstrelsy of the Scottish Border in three volumes, and the Tales of Wonder in two, and the Musical Collections of Mr. George Thomson, and those of Mr. White, &c. &c. as in justice to Walter Scott, Esq. ·

In his ballad entitled the Grey Brother, there is this beautiful description:

By Eske's fair streams that run,
Sweet are the paths, oh, passing sweet!
O'er airy steep, thro' copse wood deep,
Impervious to the sun.

There the rapt poet's step may rove,
And yield the muse the day:
There beauty, led by timid love,
May shun the tell-tale ray;
From the fair dome, where suit is paid,
By blast of bugle free,
To Auchindinny's hazel glade,
And haunted Woodhouselee.
Who knows, &c,..

From the ballad of Cadyow Castle, addressed to the right honourable lady Anne Hamilton, we must extract two verses.

Thro' the huge oaks of Evandale, Whose limbs a thousand years have

their eye,

Then adieu, silver Teivi! I quit thy lov'd scene,

To join the dim choir of the bards who have been ;

With Lewarch, and Meilor, and Mer lin the old,

And sage Taliessin, high harping to hold.

VI.

And adieu, Dinas Emlinn! still green be thy shades, Unconquer'd thy warriors, and matchless thy maids!

And thou, whose faint warblings my weakness can tell, Farewell; my lov'd harp, my last treasure, farewell!

ARTICLE 23. (Continued.) Memoirs of Dr. Joseph Priestley, to the year 1795, written by himself; with a continuation to the time of his decease, by his son, Joseph: Priestley and observations on his writings, by Thomas Cooper, president judge of the 4th district of Pennsylvania: and the Rev. William Christie. Northumber land, Penn. printed by J. Binns. 1806.

THE first appendix contains a succinct account of the 'discoveries in factitious airs before the time of Dr. Priestley, and of those made by himself." On these has been founded the pneumatic theory, and the name of Priestley will always be associated with the new principles of chemistry. The simplicity of his experiments, and the accuracy of his inductions on the subjects which he has investigated, have left little room to his successors to doubt the former or correct the latter. It is remarkable, however, that this philosopher, who, with Cavendish and Scheele, has laid the foundation of most of the modern improvements in the

wallon shall die?"

continued, till his death, the only

solitary instance of a constant adherence to the exploded doctrine of Stahl. Dr. Priestley was early convinced of the apparently partial application of the new theory to the explanation of chemical phenomena, and this conviction induced him, perhaps too hastily, to reject its principles, and to advocate the doctrine of phlogiston. If we mistake not, however, he was more successful in opposing the theories of others, than in establishing his own. It is true, that there exist some phenomena, which do not admit of an easy solution on the principles of the new school. But these are by no means in direct contradiction to its general principles; and the difficulty of explaining their actions results rather from the imperfect state of the science, than from any positive failure in their application. It is only necessary to recollect the names of Cavendish, of Black, of Lavoisier, and of Fourcroy, to be convinced, that the new theory of chemistry is not merely the speculation of ingenious minds, but a fair induction from facts and the nature of things. To comprehend the extent, and appreciate the value of Dr. Priestley's discoveries, the editors have prefixed a short account of those of his predecessors. The claims of these men were forgotten with their writings, til more modern discoveries gave strength to the former, and currency to the latter. They were then sought after with avidity, for the labours of the pneumatic chemists were said to have been superceded by the experiments of Jean Rey, of Mayow, of Boyle, and of Dr. Hooke. The editors have given additional interest to the appendix, by the insertion of a concise account of the works of Mayow, which we do not recollect to have seen so complete

ly analysed by any other writer. From this it appears, that though he was evidently acquainted with the composition of the atmosphere, and of nitre; though he explained the uses of the air in respiration, and demonstrated the existence of the same gas, which was denominated dephlogisticated by Priestley, and oxygen by Lavoisier, he considered them rather as insulated facts, than a part of a great system, which his genius, though acute, was unable to develope. With these writings, say his biographers, Dr. Priestley was unacquainted, in consequence of the limited extent of his reading, at the early period of his experiments.' This philosopher commenced his chemical career in 1772, and two years afterwards announced at the table of Lavoisier the discovery, and demonstrated at Trudaines the existence of vital or dephlogisticated air, the oxygen of the French chemists. This fact is confirmed by Dr. Black. To him, therefore, and to the celebrated Scheele of Sweden, who obtained it about the same period, belongs the honour of this great discovery. Lavoisier has done much for the science of chemistry, but it is to be lamented, that his avarice of scientifick fame was such, as to induce him to appropriate to himself the literary property of another. The history of the claims of these chemists may be found in the writings of Dr. Black. The editors, after enumerating the many discovevies of Dr. Priestley in almost every species of air, finish their account of his chemical writings, by stating his arguments against the pneumatic theory. Beautiful and ele gant,' say they, as the simplicity of the new theory appears, many facts still remain to be explained, to which the old system will ap

ply, and the French theory is inadequate. These are collected with an ingenuity of argument, and a force of reasoning, in the last pamphlet published by the Doctor on the subject, which no man yet unprejudiced can peruse without hesitating on the fashionable doctrine of the day.' We consider this as a valuable collection, since it exhibits all the arguments, which a mind,so ingenious and scientifick as Dr. Priestley's, was capable of advancing against the truth of the pneumatic theory. We mean not to make any observations on these results of his experiments. To enter on their discussion would extend our paper far beyond the limits of a review. The reputation of Dr. Priestley, as a chemist and a philosopher, is great. We may observe in the language of his biographers, that he did more for chemistry in two years, than all his predecessors; that the many kinds of aëriform fluids discovered by him; the many methods of procuring them; the skilful investigation of their properties; the foundation he laid for the labours of others; the simplicity, the novelty,the neatness, and the cheapness of his apparatus, and his unequalled industry, have deservedly placed him at the head of pneumatic chemistry.

6

Appendix No. 2. gives an account of Dr. Priestley's Metaphysical Writings. The basis of his theory upon these subjects was Hartley on Man. Dr. P. is well known to have been a materialist and a necessarian. He maintain ed, that all sensations and ideas may be resolved into affections of the brain perceived, and that this perception is the result of organization; and that all acts of will or volitions are the necessary result

The doctrine of Phlogiston, estab. lished 1803.

of previous circumstances. choice is governed by motives, not within the control of the agent. In consequence of the former opinion, he considered the evidence of a future state, as resting almost entirely on revelation; and to meet one of the difficulties, arising from the latter, inasmuch as it makes God the author of sin, he joined to necessity the system of optimism; which teaches that all evil, physical and moral, is the means of good, and will result in good, to the whole and to the parts; and that all intelligent and moral beings will be conducted, through various stages of discipline, to happiness. These sentiments are suggested in his Examination of the Works of Drs. Reid, Beattie, and Oswald; and maintained and illustrated in his Disquisitions on Matter and Spirit, in his controversy with Dr. Price, and in his answers to the remarks made by Mr. Palmer, Mr. Bryant, Dr.Kenrick, Mr. Whitehead, Dr. Horseley, and others. Mr. Cooper professes to give a brief history of the rise and progress of these opinions; of the successive writers on the subjects, to which they relate; and a sketch of the reasonings employed to support them. He treats the adversaries of these doctrines with serene contempt, calling the system of the Scotch metaphysicians "young gentlemen and ladies' philosophy," unworthy the attention of a thinking man. The belief in a soul, distinct from the body, he ascribes to ignorance, prejudice, popular superstition, priestcraft, and state policy; though he admits, that many of the wisest and best men adopt it, and that plausible arguments are not wanting to give it currency.

Without any doubt, many persons, who think severely and acute

ly, find these arguments not only plausible but convincing. They cannot bring themselves to believe that their thoughts and affections are nothing more than agitations of the brain, or vibrations of the nerves. They deny that any juxta position, or combination of impercipient particles, can form a percipient being; that consciousness, reasoning, memory, all the phenomena of intellect, are composed of the dust of the ground. Thinking they have arguments for the existence of mind, as a distinct substance, they cannot admit that, because the mind and body are mutually dependent, they are one and the same; or, because some kind of organized body is necessary to the mind as an instrument, therefore the mind must be a system of matter. They would as soon assert, that the electrician and his apparatus, the musician and his instrument, the smith and his forge, are one and the same. It appears to them, that the property or the phenomenon of thought and sensation, is inconsistent with the disceptibility of matter; that figure, magnitude, and motion, however varied, can produce only figure, magnitude, and motion; or that, if matter be, as Dr. Priestley maintains, a more subtle thing, and almost not matter, consisting of centres of attraction and repulsion, yet these centres, multiplied and combined ever so often, can produce only more enlarged spheres of attraction and repulsion. Constant concomitancy, which is the alleged proof of materialism, in their view does not imply neces sary connection, except when reasons cannot be discovered to show the connection arbitrary. They believe therefore, that a sentient principle, or a substance or being, the subject of thought, is superin

duced to the organized body, in which the phenomena of thought are exhibited. As the belief in a soul may be promoted by prejudice, so may the belief of the contrary. i

Dr. P.'s position, that the leading and solitary end of Christianity was to establish the doctrine of a future state, would incline him to depreciate the arguments for the natural immortality of man....

Mr. Cooper considers the doctrine of philosophical necessity, or the invariable connection between motive and volition, by the labours of Dr. Priestley and his predecessors, as so far settled, as to be no longer a subject of discussion; applying, in this relation, the maxim of law, "Interes respublica ut denique sit finis litium." That the human mind is subject to laws, and especially to the law of association, cannot be denied. That the Supreme Being is the great substratum of the moral, as well as the physical world; that he foreknows all the operations of all causes; and that there is a determination of his will concerning every event, every motion of matter, and every exercise of mind, must be admitted, Still, so far as there is a right and a wrong, merit and demerit, in human actions, so far human beings must be the causes of those actions. As the doctrine of necessity is often stated, many of the arguments in its support are of difficult comprehension, and the doctrine infallibly liable to abuse. It makes but one agent in the universe. The springs of action are weakened, and conscience lulled into security and ease. If a man is convinced that he can do nothing, he will infer, that he has nothing to do. If a man think he has no power over the determinations of his will, how can he feel accountable for the