state of his will? This doctrine has been applied to various purposes by Spinosa to the support of Atheism, and by Edwards and his followers to the support of Calvanism. Lord Kaimes could find in this theory a defence of Deism, and Dr. Priestley a strong-hold of Universalism. In general, however, ethical teachers have not in troduced it into their lectures on human duties; and few or no christian preachers have ever appeared to think it could be made intelligible or useful to the mass of their hearers, except a numerous sect in this country, and chiefly in New England, who, as Plato placed over the door of his school "Let no one who is unacquainted with geometry enter here," may inscribe on their pulpits "Let no one who wants skill in metaphysicks presume to expect admis sion into the school of Christ."

Appendix No. 3, contains the account of the political works and opinions of Dr. Priestley.

The complexion of the editor's mind respecting these subjects, may be conceived, from his observation, that while society exists, the Rights of Man, and Common Sense, of Thomas Paine, will be classick books on the theory of government; from his commendation of the writings of Barlow, on the same topicks, and especially from the following impudent and wicked' proscription of Mr. Adams's administration Of that ad ministration,' says he, weak, wick ed, and vindictive, what real repub lican can speak well? The his tory of the federal administration of our country does indeed bring a reproach upon the republican system, and countenance the doubt, whether such a system can stand the test of experiment' in this country. This administration was Vol. IV. No. 7. 3B

commenced under the most favourable auspices, when the spirit: of party was comparatively asleep; and it was committed to the con duct of the greatest and best men, and the most tried patriots, of the, country-first with Washington, and then with Adams at its head. Probably it never fell to any other government to contribute so much to the general prosperity, and to produce such a favourable change in the condition and prospects of a people. The United States were raised from a state of the utmost depression, weakness, disunion, and insecurity, and in a few years placed in the possession or expectation of all that a good man ought to wish for his country. After the experiment of twelve years, "a majority of the American people". were made to believe, or professed to believe, that they had been illgoverned; and men who had opposed every leading measure of the federal government, and who promised to abolish and new-model every thing in the political machine, were brought into power. If the administration of Washington and Adams, and their coadju tors, was as corrupt or weak as the democrats, who succeeded them, averred, what security have the people for obtaining wise and upright rulers? These were persons who had rendered the greatest services to their country in the most difficult times; who, if there be any men of principle, of integrity, of patriotism, in America, were in that class of characters, and who were chosen when elections were much purer than they can ever be again. On the other hand, if the administration, during the period mentioned, was as wise, as virtuous, and as successful, as there is every reason to believe it was, where is the good sense, where

the virtue of the people, to put themselves under the guidance of their flatterers, and to withdraw all confidence from their friends; to put down patriots, for the sake of raising demagogues. That the That the reader may be able to make allow ance for the prejudices and passions of the editor, it is proper they should recollect that this Thomas Cooper, who has come from Manchester, in his great condescension, to inform us that Mr. Adams,

'a patriot from his youth, Whose deeds are honour, and whose words are truth,”

who was among the first to propose, and assert at every hazard, our national independence; and who has had a principal concern in all our republican institutions, is not a republican. It is proper they should recollect, that this Mr. Cooper was in April, 1800, after an impartial trial, convicted of publishing a false, scandalous, and malicious writing against the President of the United States, with an intent to make him the object of publick hatred and contempt; for which libel the said Cooper was sentenced to pay a fine of four hundred dollars, to be imprisoned for six months, and at the end of that period to find surety for his good behaviour. It is in human nature to hate those, whom we have injured and insulted. It is common for criminals to dislike the law, and those by whom it is executed.

The editor professes to give an account of the writers on government before the French revolution. In this enumeration he purposely omits Mr. Adams' Defence of the American Constitutions. This work, consisting of 3 vols. 8vo. was written within the space of fourteen months, to expose and confute the extravagant doctrines upon the structure of government,

which the philosophical reformers in France, and the anarchists in this country, were aiming to dif fuse. It is a specimen of that kind of reading and reasoning, which produced the American constitutions.' Dr. Priestley himself, in his address to the inhabitants of Birmingham, professes to adopt Mr. Adams' leading ideas upon the best form of government. It was not decent nor fair for Mr. C. to indulge his spleen so far, as to withhold from the readers of Dr. P.'s life, the information, that such an important actor in the affairs of this country, and one so much concerned in the production of our constitution, as Mr. Adams, had given his sentiments upon civil polity to the world. Malthus on Population,' stands in the way of that perfectibility, which floats before the imagination of Mr. C., and he employs several pages to show the fallacy of the doctrines in that book. The sect of perfec tionists had a parallel in the everlasting sect, which sprung up fifty or sixty years ago in a part of New-England. They maintained that man was naturally immortal, and would never die, if he would never transgress. Their faith was not shaken by the successive mortality of the brethren. Whenever any one of the number fell sick and died, his death was ascribed not to his inherent frailty, but to the unfortunate mischance of his having transgressed.

Under the impression of the perfectibility or at least its continually. increasing tendency to improvement and to happiness, Dr. P. sat down to investigate the principles on which governments ought to be founded, and by which their claims to publick support and approbation ought to be tried.' His leading principle is, that the good

and happiness of the members, that is the majority of the members of any state, is the great standard by which every thing, relating to that state, must be determined.' This principle Mr. C. represents as almost the peculiar discovery of Dr. P., when certainly it is known that the advocates of every system have professed to have the publick good in view. There is not all the precision in the statement which language admits. The end of government is not merely the welfare of the majority of members of a state-the minority have their rights. Mr. Adams states it more accurately, when he says,the object of all civil institutions is the 'greatest happiness of the greatest number. A republican majority is often found to be as tyrannical, as selfish, as cruel, and as profligate as the most absolute single despotism that ever existed. By this principle, Dr. P. says the editor, tests the expediency of hereditary sovereignty, of hereditary rank and privilege, &c. with an evident tendency to those opinions which later experience has sufficiently confirmed.' These opinions appear to be such as these, that society is instituted not for the governours, but the governed, (which every body admits); that the interests of the few shall in all cases give way to the many; that all hereditary distinction is in all cases and all countries useless and hurtful; that entrusted authority shall be liable to frequent recalls, &c. The sovreignty of the people, written constitutions,' universal suffrage, seem to be represented as means to the greatest good. It may be so-but the benefit of these things depends on circumstances. It often happens that the sovereignty of the people amounts to no more than the sovereignty of demagogues,and

those the worst of the people; and written constitutions are many times found to be no obstacles to the views of factious and violent men. What care they for paper restrictions? And universal suffrage, which allows the voice of the ignorant, the vicious, and the vile, the needy and the desperate to be heard, may easily prove, instead of the safeguard, the betrayer of liberty.

ART. 43.

Address, delivered before the R. W. masters and brethren of the lodges of St. John, St. Peter, and St. Mark, at the episcopal church in Newburyport, on the anniversary festival of St. John the Baptist. By Joseph Dana. Newburyport. 1807.

WE have so frequently been told that masonry was 'the secret haunt of sedition, rebellion, and infidelity; and read books to prove that it was, especially, a conspiracy against all the governments and religion of Europe,' that we are glad to see it vindicated from the foul aspersion, and represented, on the contrary, as having for its leading object, the cultivation of benevolent affections, and the performance of beneficent actions,' cordially co-operating with the holy religion of the Redeemer in spreading universal philanthropy, and in promoting personal purity. and honour. 1

As we are not of the order ourselves, we are uninfluenced by the prejudice of its enemies, and the overstrained partiality of its friends.

We have no doubt that it is a harmless institution, where men agree to be cheerful; and a commendable one, where they unite to be beneficent.

ed as aliens from God, and pests of society; and nothing but the tolerant spirit of our government has kept them from the sword and the faggot. We have seen a sermon, delivered no longer than three years ago, in the same desk, and on the same occasion, which boldly maintained, that some christians know they are right, whilst other christians only think they are so; and that consequently the former have a right to blame those who think differently from them on religious subjects. And if a right to blame, then a right undoubtedly, to censure, excommunicate, imprison, scourge, and crucify! We leave to persons holding such sentiments to show with what consistency they reject the popish doctrine of infallibility, and also how they reconcile their teaching with the candour,forbearance, and brotherly affection which the gospel uniformly inculcates.

The author of the discourse before us attacks this dogmatizing spirit with a cool and manly courage, and drives it from its strong holds. From Matt. xxiii 8, 9, 10, he asserts that, although christians are not in all respects equal, having been educated in different families, and by different instructers; their natural abilities, advantages, age, improvements in general, and religious attainments in particular being different, and consequently differing in their prejudices and opinions, they have, however, but one and the same father,

even God; but one and the same master, even Christ; but one and the same rule of faith and practice, even the book of inspiration ;that each brother has the same equal right to investigate and understand this rule according to his own judgment and conscience; that he is not permitted to impose his interpretation or creed upon others, as a lord over Christ's heritage that our Saviour hath reserved to himself the right of judging his own servants;-and that censoriousness is a great and dangerous crime.'. These are the important doctrines and truths, which Dr. R. believes are implied in his text, and which he establishes, illustrates, and enforces with the talents of a good scholar and an excellent divine.

The length of this sermon reminds us of the good old times, when our spiritual fathers preached by the hour-glass. Long as it is, however, it ought to have been so much longer, as to have noticed the ravages of death upon the convention in the preceding year, and to have adverted to the charitable design connected with the service. Its style is as it should be, unornamented and nervous. In p. 21. 1. 16. the verb conduct which is transitive, is used as though it were intransitive. This is a common errour, and in common writers may pass without reprehension; but in so logical a page, as that of Dr. Reed, it never fails of disgusting a correct taste.

NEW WORKS.