them, ought we not to have a still greater form to general customs and commonly received opinions; and what impartiak man can doubt the sincerity of the Deists in their religious professions more than any other class of people? persons as The reason why the mass of mankind doubt whether there be such fervent Deists, is because they are not aware of their mode of reasoning; or, if they are, they do not feel its force; and, SIR, HELVETIUS remarks "That Governments are the judges of actions, "and not of opinions. If FAITH (says he) "be a gift of Heaven, they who have it not, deserve to be pitied; and not pu"nished ;" and adds, "it is the excess of "inhumanity to persecute an unfortunate 26 person." Every age and country furnish us with proofs, that it is possible for persons of opposite opinions to live in har-likely to be in earnest than they who conmony together, and with abundant testimonies that people entertaining the greatest diversity of tenets have been alike good husbands, fathers, children, and citizens.-Governments are instituted for the preservation of social order, consequently they have a right to look to our conduct, which, if they are wise, they can sufficiently regulate by proper civil laws founded on the nature of man, his interests, and his wants. If we deport our-like the Deists, cannot draw the same conselves in a manner compatible with the clusions from the same premises that they good of society, neither legislatures nor do. Deism has had nearly as long standindividuals have a just pretence, authori- ing in this country, as the Reformation. tatively, to interfere with our opinions, let It was first promulgated in the reign of them be ever so ridiculous or absurd. As Queen Elizabeth, and is said to have to Faith, I would say the same of it as La been imported from Italy, perhaps from Rochefoucault says of Love, it is perfectly the circumstance of this country being involuntary, and therefore it is no more in about that time honoured by the visit of our power to believe or disbelieve, than it several eminent Italian philosophers, among is to love or to let it alone. Why, then, per- whom we can name the celebrated Doctors secute a person for a defect in the under-Lucilio Vanini and Giordano Bruno, both standing, or a bias he cannot help ?-Will any reasonable person assert that man ever chooses evil for the sake of evil? or embraces error because it is error? No! we make choice of bad through our depraved taste, and we receive false doetrine because we think it true. If this be admitted, ought not those who deem others wrong, and conceive themselves to be blessed with a knowledge of what is right, to have compassion for such as have the misfartune to be deladed with mistaken notions? and if their faculties should be so benumbed with prejudice that we cannot convince of whom were ultimately led to the stake and received the crown of martyrdom; the first at Toulouse, through the good offices of an Attorney-General, and the last at Venice, from the hands of Inquisitors, for stedfastly adhering to the Doctrines they had broached.* The first English writer upon the subject was Lord Herbert, of Cherbury, whose book, “De Ventate,” was published in 1624; since which they have had among their number many of the greatest * See the Lives of Bruno, Vanini, Spinoza, Rodin, and Campanella, in Bayle's General Dietionary. a 66 66 plain. A little further Mosheim says, The Christians persecuted by the priests, "and the people set on to persecute them "in the most vehement manner."-The Deists may, for aught I know, rank some of our priests with the savages of those days; but I should be sorry to go so far myself. and best men this country has produced. Į“ ism, and bring on the ruin of their pomp-Within the last twenty years Deists gus ceremonies."When we consider have become very numerous; probably the change which time makes in every more so than is generally suspected, as thing; when we reflect upon what Chrismany thousands of them do not openly tianity then was, and what Deism is now, avow their convictions on account of the shall we wonder if the Deists, at the preprejudices excited against them by the sent day, apply these passages, in their priesthood, who, of course, cannot be much schools, to their own unfortunate case. attached to persons whose opinions are op- They, like the early Christians, are moral· posed to their interests. But whether they and sincere; but their morality and sinmake a public profession of their sentiments, cerity is no protection., Who shall decide or only impart them to the liberal minded, in matters of opinion? Not the law: it I have generally found them to have a will justify the Jews against the Chrisstricter sense of justice, honour, and motians, and they will have cause to comrality, than, I am sorry to say, the grea' r part of my fellow-Christians possess.— Whether their general good conduct arises from their consciousness that the Philistines keep a jealous cye upon them, and would take a malignant pleasure in magnifying their indiscretions; or whether it is consequence of the morality taught by the religion of NATURE being unsophisticated In the same chapter he tells us, that by dogmas, creeds, or the mysterious Nero was the first Roman Emperor who wonders of faith, I will not pretend to de-enacted laws against the Christians, and termine; but merely, as an humble aspirer says, "The principal reason why the Roto the charity of Jesus, bear witness of "mans persecuted the Christians, seems the fact, and doubt not of my testimony "to have been the abhorrence and conbeing corroborated by every unbiassed obtempt with which the latter regarded the server of man. religion of the empire, which was so intimately connected with the form, and, indeed, with the essence of its political constitution."-The Jews and the Romans, like us, had costly temples, altars, sculptures, paintings, solemn forms, grand ceremonies, sublime mysteries, innumerable priests with fine garments, expensive offerings, tythes, and rates; but the early Christians, like our simple Deists, did not know the inestimable value and important advantages of these things, which the Romans seemed duly to appreciate, as appears by the following:"Another circumstance which irritated 66 แ Having said thus much, and having in my last given a slight sketch of the plain and simple tenets of these people, might I not ask, whether the conduct of Christian States in persecuting the Deists, does not subject them to the same reproaches which they have bestowed on those who persecuted their predecessors? To illustrate this question, I shall occasionally make a few extracts from the pious and learned Dr. Mosheim, late Chancellor of the University of Gottingen, who stands without a competitor as a writer of ecclesiastical history. When treating of the calamitous events which happened to the Church," the Romans against the Christians, was during the first century, he has these remarkable words: *" The innocence and "virtue that distinguished so eminently "the lives of Christians, and the spotless "purity of the doctrine they taught, could "not defend them against the virulence "and malignity of the Jews ;" and again, "This odious malignity of the Jewish "doctors was undoubtedly owing to a secret "apprehension that the progress of Chris"tianity would destroy the credit of Juda-" Vol. I. cent 1. part 1. chap. v. " the simplicity of their worship, which re"sembled in nothing the sacred rites of any "other people. The Christians had neither 66 sacrifices nor temples, nor images, nor "oracles, nor sacerdotal orders; and this was sufficient to bring upon them the reproaches of an ignorant multitude, who "imagined that there could be no religion' "without them: thus they were looked upon as a set of Atheists."" But this was not all; (continues Mosheim) the "sordid interests of a multitude of selfish "and lazy priests, were immediately con 66 "nected with the ruin of the Christian "cause."He then goes on to tell us, that "to accomplish the more speedy ruin "of the Christians, those whose interests were incompatible with the progress of "the Gospel loaded them with most oppro"brious calumnies; and these (adds he) 66 were the only arms they had to oppose "the TRUTH." 66 designated Unbelievers, the latter, in pro- CEDIPUS JUDAICUS. MR. CORBETT,-One of your Corres thought proper to introduce a defence of tract of violent, and, as I think, most un- conceive the statement which VARRO has How sorry I am, in reading the history of my own church, to find in its infancy such a strong parallel between the beha-pondents, who signs himself VARRO, has viour of the Romans towards the Christians, and the conduct of by far too many professors of our holy religion, in the present day, towards those unfortunate people whom we stigmatize with the name of DEISTS OF THEISTS, because they acknowledge but one God, in opposition to us who are Tritheists. How many books have we inserted in your REGISTER a rather full exthis country wherein these unhappy persoas are branded with every odious epithet that the imagination can devise, and charged with conspiring against the eternal peace and happiness of their fellow creatures, when we know their works breathe nothing but the most unbounded philanthropy and benevolence. The general tener of their writings approaches auch nearer to the mildness and charity of our blessed Saviour than the sermons of many of the most eminent divines. Have not philosophers, whose labours have been devoted to the improvement of mankind, whose dispositions have been most amiable, and whose lives most exemplary, been held up to the execration of the public as impious wretches, unworthy of existence? I grieve for the injury the cause of Christ has sustained by those who profess to be his ministers or disciples, descending to such unworthy measures, and promise, if God is pleased to spare me, and bless me with health and resolution, to vindicate genuine Christianity from the disgrace it has incurred from weak and wicked pretenders; but, at the same time, for the hoaour of my faith, to prove to the world, that an humble follower of Jesus is capable of writing "An impartial, biographical, and critical ac"count of all those persons denominated "infidels, who have flourished since the "birth of our Lord;" a work for which I have been collecting materials during the last twenty years; and I have little doubt I shall be able to shew, that if the numbers of those calling themselves Christians eculd be analysed and compared with those conveyed to you to be extremely unfair, I venture to trouble you with what I conceive to be a far more just and true reI trust to presentation of the matter. your candour to take the earliest opportunity of making this letter public, in com pliance with your avowed wish, on every occasion, of letting both sides of the question be fairly heard. It is pretty well known that, two or three years ago, Sir William Drummond priuted, and privately circulated, his book, entitled EDIPUS JUDAICUS, in which he endeavoured to prove the Bible to contain nothing but fable, allegory, and romance; and treated it with as profane and blasphemous ribaldry, as had ever been done by the most inveterate of infidels. Although this book was not publicly sold, yet it was clear that the author's forbearance did not proceed from tenderness to the Bible, but from his prudent regard to his own safety, and his desire of sheltering himself from animadversion; for he, and others acting for him, distributed the work at first without scruple, whenever they deemed the quarter a safe one, and even took singular pains, in some instances, to extend its circulation. Thus the book passed into a number of hands, became of public notoriety, and was, in some instances, the more eagerly sought for, from the secret manner of its distribution. Under these ircumstances, what was to be done? Was Sir W. Drummond to be allowed | unfounded; but he also shewed, what to taiat the public mind with such matter, seems to have touched the author quite as without a syllable of answer or animad- nearly, that, under an ostentatious display version? Was the Bible not to be heard of deep crudition, he is one of the most even in its defence? Was this novel method shallow of men; that he has used terms of discovering truth to be adopted, that without any knowledge of their meaning, one side of the question only should be has heaped blunder upon blunder, comheard, and a complete bar put upon the mitted inaccuracy after inaccuracy, and mouths of all opponents, because the book asserted the boldest falsehoods without the which required an answer was unpublished? slightest excuse; and that, during all this Was it to become an allowed and esta- time, he has stolen a great part of his matblished privilege of wealth, to circulate opi- ter from preceding infidel writers, while nions of every description, no matter how he endeavoured to assume to himself the noxions to society, in full security from credit of all the learning which he proanimadversion or contradiction, by the sim- duced. Thus Mr. D'Oyly not only deple expedient of writing a book and dis-feated the opposer of revelation, in his tributing it gratuitously? I guess, no man purpose, but stripped the vain jack-daw of in his senses will maintain so wild a po- his stolen plumes; and shewed that the sition as this. In the case then of Sir W. imposing appearances of deep tradition, Drummond, what was to be done? It is which the CEDIPUS JUDAICUS conveyed, true, that he might have been prosecuted in were of the most hollow and fallacious dea court of law for blasphemy; for, there scription. I wish neither, you nor any one is no doubt, that, in the contemplation of else to take all this on my assertion, but the law, a book gratuitously circulated, is call upon every one to enquire for himself, no less a publication than one which is by reading the CEDIPUS JUDAICUS, and sold at the booksellers shops; and, if this the remarks which have been made upon course had been taken, it is tolerably cer- it. Your correspondent tells you, that tain that this Sicilian Knight, and British three anonymous writers have started up Privy Councillor, would have been raised in defence of the CEDIPUS JUDAICUS, and to more public notoriety than he had yet have shewn the ignorance and malice of attained, by the pillory. But as you, Mr. the person who wrote against it. These Cobbett, I observe, contend very strenu three anonymous writers, it is pretty well ously against any use of legal prosecutions known, are no other than Sir W. D. towards persons who write against the himself in disguise. They have written, Bible, you must be the last person to it is true, a very bulky volume in professed maintain that such a proceeding ought to defence of the EDIPUS JUDAICUS, but have been adopted towards Sir W. Drum-have almost entirely substituted railing mond. Thus, then, unless the free license and scurrilous invective for sound arguwas to be granted to him, of saying what he pleased against the Bible, unnoticed and unchastised, it was absolutely necessary that some literary opponent should enter the lists against him, and examine a little the truth of his assertions, and the soundness of his pretensions. Accordingly, the clergyman, whose name your corres-writers (of whose mode of argument, by pondent mentions, came forward for that purpose, and addressed, in the first place, some letters of remonstrance to the author, on the nature of his attack on revelation, and followed these up by an enquiry into the truth, accuracy, and learning which he displayed. I perceive your correspondent to affirm, that the CEDIPUS JUDAICUS of Sir W.Drummond "displays a fund of prodigious " erudition!!!" On the contrary, Mr. D'Oyly not only shewed, in every point, that his attempts to impeach the truth of the biblical histories were most futile and ments; and instead of defending Sir W. D.'s blunders, have indicted whole reams of personal abuse against his opponent.→ An anonymous pamphlet, signed J. R. has since appeared, in which it has been most fully shewn, that, notwithstanding all which is boldly affirmed by these virulent the way, your correspondent gives no very unfair specimen), Mr. D'Oyly's charges and proofs against Sir Wm. Drummood remain good in every essential part. I must repeat, that I wish not any single person to believe what I here affirm, solely on my assertion; but as you have thought it right to publish an ex-parte statement from one correspondent, it seems but fair that you should give equal publicity to the opinion of another respecting this matter. Your's, &c. JUSTUS. Dec. 30, 1814, 66 66 No one who reads this description of Lettres de Cachet, will be able to discover any resemblance to these in the proceedings against General Excelmans. He was not put under arrest to gratify the caprice of any Minister, Deputy Governor, Mistress, or Monk. He was, in the first instance, ordered to remove from Paris, by command of the King, for an offence, real or LETTRES DE CACHET. "Signet, lie in the hands of the Ministers, SIR,-Your recent remarks on the un- as well as in those of the Under Governors handsome and illiberal newspaper abuse of" of Provinces, to be used at their discrethe people of France, and the measures of "tion, frequently to gratify their own their Government, are fully corroborated vengeance. Is an Intendant piqued by the manner in which the Morning against any man of quality; or a MinisChronicle, of last week, adverted to the "ter against a President of Parliament ? proceedings against General Excelmans," Such a letter is straight sent to him, and who had been ordered under arrest by the" he instantly sent from home, sometimes King of France. Of this officer the" into a remote province. Is the GoChronicle observed, that he had "petition-"vernor's Lady, or daughter, disgusted at "ed both Chambers for redress, and has "another lady in the place, finer and more "stated his willingness to surrender him- "admired than herself, her punishment is "self the moment a trial is promised him, “decreed, and the poor rival sent a wan"and his reasons for withdrawing himself" dering; a crime is easily forged, and "momentarily from the oppression which the sufferer has no remedy. The smallest "this renewed system of Lettres de Cuchet "affront to a Monk in favour (and Monks, "had inflicted on him."-- -Either the “God knows, are soon offended), finds the writer of this article is entirely ignorant of" same compassion; a victim must be ofthe nature of Lettres de Cachet, or he "ferred to his holy rage." must have been influenced by motives of the worst kind, to compare the order given in this case to that terrible instrument.In the justly celebrated answer to the Bourbon proclamation, published in your REGISTER of the 15th January, I observe some very pertinent remarks on the subject of Lettres de Cachet, extracted from Mr. Arthur Young's Survey of France. To these may be added the following more de-supposed, against the State. Had there tailed account by Gordon, an able writer in the cause of freedom, whose works were published about the beginning of last contury:"The French Government, though "a mild one for an arbitrary one, is yet a "very terrible one to an Englishman. All "the advantages in it are not comparable "to one single advantage in ours: I mean "the Act of Habeas Corpus, which secures, at least rescues, from all wanton "and oppressive imprisonment. In France, "by the word of a Minister, the greatest,a crime, and be dealt with accordingly. "the most innocent, subject, may, from The order to leave Paris was dated "caprice, or a whisper, or the pique of a the 10th. On the 14th he had not "mistress, be committed to a dungeon for gone to his place of destination, which "his life, or the best part of it, or as long led the Minister to put a guard on his as the Minister, er his mistress or mi-house. In this stage of the business, and "nion pleases. Some have been there shut in place of sending him to prison, or even up in dismal durance and solitude for securing his person, the order was renewed, years together, though no harm was and twenty-four hours allowed him to re"meant them; not for any offence real move himself. Still be continued refrac"or imaginary, but only through mistake tory. It was, therefore, considered expe"and likeness of names. Thus a Minister dient to place him under arrest; but no at"has sometimes commit his favorites, tempt having been made to convey him "and useful agents, who in misery for from his house, an opportunity was thus afyears, and might have perished in it, had [ forded the General to make bis escape. "not accident contributed to undeceive] Such being the well authenticated nature **bim. Such orders, called Letters of the of the Lettres de Cachet, and such the true 66 been any intention to revive the Lettres de Cachet, the General would have been seized and sent to prison, without any ceremony, instead of giving him an opportunity to remove himself. But did he obey the order of his Sovereign? On the contrary, he remonstrated against it, and persisted in continuing at Paris. Even then, no violence was used, though, if he had been previously innocent, his disobedience might have been converted into |