I believe, that the preceding statement is fufficiently correct, as far as it goes; except in one inftance, which is, that, instead of the words " upon these feveral grounds he had formed his opinion," " thefe were fome of the grounds, upon which he had formed his opinion," fhould be fubftituted. Oober 3, 1791. JAMES EYRE, Clerk. Except in the place of the word "dilated," the word "written" fhould have been ufed; and I did not understand, that Dr. P.'s ftatement contained the opinion, that, if Dr. Prieftley's letters "were of a dangerous tendency, he (i. e. Mr. C.) fhould think himfelf bound to fend them to government:" but that Mr. C. ufed them for the firft time on the 29th of September, in juftification of his own conduct: and with the objection as stated by Mr. Eyre, I believe this ftatement, as far as it goes, to be correct. W. MARSH, M. D. MR. CURTIS'S REPLY* to DR. PARR'S MEMORIAL. THE memorial Dr. P. has been pleased to read to the company, certainly does ftate grounds, and, I am *Whatever mistakes Mr. C. might commit in recollecting and reftating the fubftance of my memorial, he ought to have been more exact in communicating to the reader the words of his own reply. Indeed, there are veftiges of deliberation and effort in this firft fentence, and to me it fhould feem that the effects of both extend to what is not faid, as well as to what is faid, in this re-publication. The conceffions of Mr. C. about my memorial, and his denial about the anonymous letters, were more ftrong and more comprehenfive at the Coventry interview, than they appear in Mr. C.'s flatement. Here he does not, and there he did, admit the force of other circumftances, befides that of time,-here he does not, and there he did, difclaim all knowledge of the anonymous letters, as well as all concern in them. The objections which I here place in the niche of a note, will hereafter be brought into a fuller point of view. Mr. Curtis, indeed, fays generally, that I do ftate grounds, but fhrewdly declines faying, whether they be strong or weak. B 3 willing willing to fay, fo far as relates to the time of the receipt of the anonymous letters in queftion, fufficient grounds, for him to fufpect Mr. C. But I here call God to witnefs, and am willing to take the most folemn oath, that can be prefcribed, that I never did, directly or indirectly, by myfelf, or by any other perfon, write, or caufe to be written, the difgraceful anonymous letters, to which he alludes, and which have now been read. That, as to the letters in the St. James's, to which the anonymous writer has referred the Doctor, I, at this moment, am totally ignorant of what it fets forth. There is one part of the memorial, which ftates my having faid at the Solyhull Green," that, if Dr. Priest"ley's papers or letters came into my hands, I fhould "think myfelf juftified in perusing them; and, if, in "my opinion, they were of a dangerous tendency, I "fhould think myself bound to fend them to Govern"ment." This, Sir, requires an explanation. It was not meant by me, that, if I found any letter or paper directed for Dr. Priestley, that I fhould read them. No: but, if they came into my hands, that is, if fent to me, as Rector of Birmingham, (as was the cafe, though not then mentioned,) I then fhould, and did, think myself bound to read them, and fend them to Government: For two papers of Dr. P.'s actually had been inclosed to me under blank cover, and fent to me per poft, and are now, one of them, I believe, in the hands of Mr. Pitt, the other in the hands of a respectable gentleman under Government. * I now, Dr. P. again call God to witnefs, that I did not, directly or indirectly, by myself, or by any other perfon, write, or caufe to be written, the anonymous letters alluded to.-I cannot, therefore, but expect from you, a brother clergyman, an apology; for, in Again, Mr. Curtis in print does not difclaim knowing that the letters were written. the the first place, fufpecting me of writing thefe letters, and alfo for your having written one to me-which I would fooner have had my right hand cut off, than be the author of. The answer on the part of Dr. P. to Mr. C.'s first folemn affeveration, was, that, notwithstanding the folemn declarations I had made, he believed me to be the author of the letters. Upon my concluding with the fame folemnity, he faid, that he fhould make no apology; that he heard the affertions of Mr. C. with attention, and his folemn affeverations with awe*; that the denial conveyed in them might be true, but, that he was unconvinced. I believe * When I first read this pargraph, and compared it with fome of the preceding fentences, I was furprised at the regularity of the structure, the clearness of the expreffion, and the accuracy of the statement. But I have fince found, that both the matter and the manner were fupplied by a paper of Mr. Eyre, which will prefently be laid before the reader. Though Mr. Curtis in one of his newspaper effufions has been pleafed to fneer a little at the ingenuity of Mr. Eyre, he will hardly venture to oppose me, when I give that gentleman credit for a confiderable portion of natural fagacity, and of claffical learning. Mr. Curtis, I can affure the reader, does not profefs to be quite fo good a scholar as fome of his neighbours; but in converfing with Mr. Eyre, he has taken occafion, after the fashion of great men who avoid direct egotisms, to fay, that the "Rector can write English, and is no fool." I admit both this affirmations, because I have heard from Mr. Curtis one fermon, and read two of his private letters, in which the ftyle certainly was English, and the matter was certainly not foolish. But, independently of thefe proofs, I fhould believe Mr. Curtis an English writer and a No-fool," upon the folitary evidence of Mr. Curtis himself; and after paying this compliment to his modefty, to his veracity, to his compofitions, and to his understanding, I crave a little mercy from Mr. Curtis upon the score of my incredulity. 66 Τὸν οὔτε πρὶν νήπιον, Νῦν τ' ενόρκω μέγαν, Soph. in Æd. Tyr. All I have to lament is, that he would not condescend to exercise his talent of English-writing in communicating to the public the fubftance of my memorial. Perhaps this neglect arofe from his contempt of a B 4 pedant, I believe the above statement of Mr. C.'s answer, as delivered at Dr. Marfh's, to comprise the substance of it, as nearly as poffible, to the beft of my recollection. Oct. 3, 1791. RICHARD WILLIAM YATES, Clerk. I believe the preceding ftatement to be fufficiently correct, as far as it goes, except in these two instances, viz. that I have no recollection at all of the exception beginning with "fo far as relates" in the firft paragraph, nor any diftinct recollection of the earlier of the explanation in the third. Oct. 3, 1791. part JAMES EYRE, Clerk. With the exceptions of the words, from "if in my opinion" to "government," as made in Dr. P.'s memorial, and with the word "believed" (in the seventh line of page 7,) being explained, as was done, to mean Juspected, I do believe this statement of Mr. C.'s reply, as far as it goes, to be correct. W. MARSH, M. D. DR. PARR MR. CURTIS. TO THE PRINTER OF THE ST. JAMES'S CHRONICLE. SIR, WHEN, at the particular request of the Rev. Mr. C. (brother of Alderman Curtis) we affixed our fignatures to a statement, which we have seen with great furprise, in your paper of Saturday, Nov. 5th, we understood from Mr. C. himself, that he pedant, like myself, attempting to exprefs his thoughts in the Ver nacular language; and certain it is, that I am not prefumptuous enough to profefs the art of writing fuch English as Mr. Curtis writes, either in his fatement, or his letters. My habits of compofition, I fear, are too fixed to bend, if I fhould begin to reform my style upon the model which Mr. Curtis has exhibited. wifhed to keep and to use it only for the private information of his friends, but did not then conceive, that he meant to publish it in any form whatever. It has, however, been lately published in two forms, and in each without our concurrence. Though we have only faid in Mr. C.'s statement, that, with fome exceptions, it was correct, so far as it went: we must now de.. clare our further meaning to have been, that in order to become a fair and complete statement, it should have contained many particulars which were omitted; and, whether our learned friend, Dr. P. be right or not in retaining his fufpicions, we are bound to fay, that he behaved with the greatest moderation and politeness to Mr. C. during the whole of the interview at Coventry. Nov. 8, 1791. SJAMES EYRE, A.B. In the St. James's Chronicle of Thursday Nov. 24, appeared the following letter: DR. PARR AND MR. CURTIS. TO THE PRINTER OF THE ST. JAMES'S CHRONICLE. Mr. BALDWIN, WITHOUT my privity or confent, a ftatement of facts between me and the Rev. Dr. Parr, (to the truth of which the Rev. J. Eyre and Dr. Marsh, * by * The first exceptions of thefe gentlemen prove, that Mr. Curtis. had not quite spoken truth, and their fubfequent reply to this letter of Mr. Curtis will further prove, that he has not spoken the whole truth. In ftating facts, even my prolixity is more prudent and more fair, than Mr. Curtis's brevity. — Τὰ μακρὰ τῶν σμικρῶν λόγων Ἐπίπροσθεν ἐςι, και σαφῆ μάλλον κλύειν. Eurip. in Or, But, if that gentleman fhould expand for public ufe what he compreffed for the private perufal of his friends, I hope that he will acquire, or borrow, a better style, and, that he will collect, but not invent, better 1 |