Abbildungen der Seite

The Character of King Jattut 1. ill Jbut their influence cannot be denied may assist us in forEWSgogr de.G^ns.* by those who consider the nature of There is an equal dilplay of Diviae impulses made upon the human mind, Providence in the natural and »A not by any regular deductions of reaibn, but instantaneously, which impulses have been productive of the .greatest events. There is a diirjererice between the natural and moral government of God; with respect to the one he rules by an absolute power, with respect to the other he regulates things in a manner consistent' with 'free-agency. Plutarch well explains •the method whereby the Deity may

world, varied according to their different circumstances.

Having thus endeavoured to eflablisli the doctrine of a continual interposition of the Deity, as the isle disposer os all events, the fourth and last query will bs sufficiently answered by the foregoing observations: for if God presides over all events iudiscriiijlnately, and is continually exerting his attributes in the preservation

be supposed to influence the human os', the frame of nature, there will be mind in his comment upon afpassage no necessity of a criterion to deter

[ocr errors]

mine what events happen by chance, or by some sfUbliih/.a laws or rules.

Let us therefore receive, with al! due submission, all the dispensations

represent God as taking away, but of Providence; being fully convinced directing, our choice; neither is the that whatever happens under the goimmediate author of our designs, but vernneAt fas an infinitely wife aal as exciting in us ideas or hints that good'E-ing, ;nusl be right.

*fhe CharaBer of King J dines I. from BircKs Memoirs of the Reigit ef Queen Elizabeth. Vol. II. p. c 16.


IHave read the character of King James I. in the writings of the Scotch Historiographers, Toby Smollet, Hume, and Mrs. Catherine Macaulay; I shall not stop to inform the public, what opinion I have of this famous group; but beg leave to present your readers with the character of the fame monarch by a hand remarkable for historical verity, and singular industry, in his researches after authentic memorials. When I fay this, I need not inform the reader that I mean the late Dr. Birch. But I must premise, that the chief reason why I have troubled you on this occasion, is to request of the honourable Charles Yorke, that he would induce his relation to call those papers from the grave of oblivion, which the doctor fays, would add new disgrace to the character of king James, if

p. 51

the noble personage, in whose pot session they are, would sjfTer them tv be printed. The papers I mention, are the Letters of the Count de Bizxmont, the French Ambassador at the English court, from the bejinnin^ cf king James the First's reiga ta- October 1605. . A i'

From these letters of count ds Beaumont, it appears, that the king soon becanse very odious to the English nation. For in his journey from Scotland to England, he professed openly a great contempt for the female sex, not only suffering the ladies to present themselves to him on their knees, but even publicly condemning any passion for them; and reflecting, at his own table filled with company, upon Henry IV. of France, for 3i:s indulgence of that paffion. This discourse highly exasperated the <mme*

in in general, and opened their mouths government, by a confused and imON ENGLISH GRAMMAR.

against his majesty. He shewed great 'impatiences the concourse of people, who flocked to see him, where he was hunting, curfing all who came in his way, and threatening to leave England, if they would not let him enjoy his diversions in quiet. And when he visited his fleet at Chatham, in July 1604, he took so little notice of it, that not only the seamen, but likewise persons of all ranks, were much offended, and said, that he loved stags more than /hips, and the sound of hunting-horns more than that of cannon. This contempt of him was increased by his aversion to public business, his mean and iveai behaviour in private life, and the necessities into which he plunged himself and his

prudent prodigality, rather than a true and well-directed generosity, so that he was not able to maintain his household, but obliged to borrow money of all the rich men in the kingdom, and refused by many of them. In short, it is evident from these letters, and many other most authentic memorials, which have not yet been produced to the public light, that the reign of this king was a very unsuitable sequel to that of his illustrious predecessor; and that the real facts of it are an unanswerable confutation of that gross flattery, which was offered him, with so much profusion, during his life. Col. Nov.

[ocr errors]


'Testimony os the Excell,

*' H E meanest subject in the J. kingdom is intitled, by being born in this kingdom, to be tried hya jury, where .there are those just advantage's that cannoi be had in another case. There is a liberty of challenging thirty-five, without shewing any reason, and as many more, as he can any way object to with reason. The witnesses are upon oath, and all the proceedings are by certain known rules and methods, and net only by the statute of Magna Chr.rta, but by the common law of England, much more ancient than that statute; and though the proceedings therein are such as a criminal may sometimes escape, yet the just advantages are so much beyond any thing of that nature, that I hope v;e shall never complain of that ancient course of proceeding by jury. I am sure it is the honour of our government, the mark of our freedom, and envy of our neighbours; and I trust that method of trial will never be laid aside, though sometimes it

nCy os Trials by Jury. (

may not have the effect that is desired

"I would take notice to you, that in»a.caseof the greatest crime, and most notoriety of fact, yet the persons concerned in it, were brought to their trial. The Regicides, who did not fly, but were found upon the Restoration of king Charles II. tho' their treason had the worst effect, even in the murder of the king; yet, notwithstanding, though the fast was so notorious, those who were found upon the place, were admitted to their trials in the ordinary course of justice, although at the same time there was a bill pf attainder against some who fled, and some who were dead, and so could not be tried."

The above is part of the argument Sir Thomas Powys, knight, an eminent lawyer in king William's reign, msde use of in the house of commons on behalf of Sir John Fenwick, against the passing his act of attainder for high treason.

A Constitutional Lawyer.


ON account of the imperfect mannerin which the articled defines, the Greeks, who have no articles correspondent to it, supply its place by suppressing or omitting their definitive article. Agreeable to this doctrine is that observation of Apollonius. " Those things which are sometimes understood indefinitely, become definite as to their person, by the insertion of the Article."— But Gaza is more explicit; " the article, fays he, causes, a review within the mind, of something known le/ore in the texture of the discourse." Thus if any one fays, according to the Greek form, man came, which is the fame as when we fay in English A man came" it is not evident of whom he speaks: but if he fays, " The man came," then it is evident; for he speaks of some person known before."—Even in Englilh, where the article A cannot be used, as in plurals, its force is expressed by the omission of it as in the Greeks. "Those are The men," means that they are individuals of whom we have some knowledge. Those are men, without the Article, means no more than that they are so many vague and uncertain individuals.

But tho' the Greeks have no article equivalent to the English article A, yet nothing can be nearer related than their o, to our article The. This will appear from the attributes of the Greek article, as described by Apollonius. "The particular attribute of the article, fays our author, is that reference which implies some certain person already mentioned. For nouns of themselves imply not reference, unless they take to them the ArTicle, whose peculiar character is reference. And again, the article indicates a precsiallijhed acquaintance." Vol. I.

(Continued frem p. 180.)

In order to render both parts of speech equally definite, /. e. the adjective as well as the substantive, the adjective itself assumes an Article before it, that it may shew or intimate a reference to some single person or thing only. Thus we fay Trypho The Grammarian.

Even appellations, or common names, assume the force of proper names merely, by the help of the article. Thus, in English, City is a name common to many places; Speaker a name common to many men; and House a name common to many dwellings: but if you prefix the article, The city, means our metropolis; The speaker, a high officer in the British parliament; and Th$ house, the particular place wherein .the members of parliament assemble.

By an easy transition the article comes to denote eminence, as well as reference. Thus, among the Greeks, poet meant Homer, and Thi Stagyrite meant Aristotle; not because there were not other poet3 besides Homer, nor because there were not many Stagyrites besides Aristotle; but because none were equally illustrious for their poetry and philosophy.

On this principle Aristotle asserts, that it is not the fame thing to assert that " Pleasure is a good, or tin good." The first expression only makes it a common object of dcjire, upon a level with many others, which daily raise our wishes; the last supposes it, that supreme and sovereign good, the ultimate end of all our actions and endeavours.

It has already been said, that " the article has no meaning but when joined with some other word.'* To. what words may it then be joined?' To such as require difining j for it,if by nature a definitive. And what E e word* words ire these? Not those which are already as- definite as they can be; nor yet those, which, being indefinite, cannot properly be otherwise. It .follow1;, then, that the words must be those, which, tho' definite, are yet capable of becoming definite ly means of the ARTICLE.

On these principles we perceive the reason, why it, is absurd to say, The I, or The thou, because nothing can make those pronouns more definite, than they are. The fame may be said of proper names, when used according to their original design. For the same reason, we cannot say in English, The both, because these words, in their own nature, are each of them perfectly defined; so that to define them again, would be quite superfluous. Thus, if it be said, *' I have read Both poets;" this plainly indicates a definite pair, of whem some mention has been made already. On the contrary, if it be said, " I have read Two poets," this may mean any pair out of all that ever existed. And this numeral, being in this fense indefinite (as indeed all others are) is forced to assume the Article, when ever it would become definite. Thus it is, that the two means nearly the fame thing as


When the article is placed before an adjective, followed by a substantive, it extends its power as well thro' the substantive as the adjective, and equally contributes to define them both.

As some words admit no article, because they arc, by nature, as definite ess they can be, so there are other.5, which admit it not, because they are not to be defined at all. Of this sort are all interrogatives. If we question about substances, we cannot fay, "THE nvki is this? but, who is this?" Hence Apollonius stiles the interrogative who, the most contrary, »r Mcst sverfe to Articles. The

lame may be said with respect t» qualities and quantities of both kind). We say, without an Aktichi "What sort of? How many? How great?" The reason is, that the article the respects beings already knonm. Interrogatives respect beings about which we are ignorant; for interrogation is superfluous concerning what we know.

From what has been delivered it will appear, that the article A Is used in a vague sense to point out one single thing in other respects indefinite, and not known, or mentioned before. The determines what particular thing is meaned: and generally implies that it was mentioned before, ox is of some eminence. Instead of A we write an, before words beginning with k silent, and all the vowels excepting y and w. The reason why it is omitted before y and w, is, because those letters, as part of a diphthong at the beginning of a word, require such an effort in the pronunciation, as does not easily admit of an before them. In other cases, the article an coalesces with the vowel which it precedes; but in this the effort of pronouncing separates the article, and prevents the disagreeable consequence of a sensible hiatus.

A substantive without an article is taken in its widest sense; thus, man means all mankind. " Man that is born of a woman hath but a short time to live." A man means some one of that kind indefinitely; The man means that particular man who is spoken of: the former has therefore, in this sense, been called the indefinite, and the latter the definite Article. The translators of the New Testament render Acts xxii. 4. "Ipersecuted this way to The death." But a: the Apostle does not mean any particular sort of death, but death in general, the definite article should have been emitted; and we should read " unto death," without the article. On Engliji

fide. Again, we read Johnxvi. 13. "When he, the spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth" That is, according to this translation, into all truth whatsoever, or into all kinds of truth; but, according to the original, we should read with the definitive article, " into all The truth i" that is, into the moll eminent truth, or into that concerning which our blessed Saviour was discoursing, into all evangelical truth. The translation, " Truly this was The Son of God," Matth. xxvii. C4. supposes the Roman centurion to Aave had a proper idea of the divinity of our Lord; a sense which some have objected to. But when we consider, that the Centurion, by his residence among the Jews, might have arrived at the knowledge of the true God, might have been an auditor of the heavenly doctrines, and a spectator of the great miracles which our Lord wrought before his crucifixion, it is not at all improbable, that the last scene in which our Lord appeared unto him, might have wrought so powerful a conviction, that he owned him to be the Son of God, in the same sense as the Jews might have represented their Messiah to be.

We have said above, that both the articles are definitive, or that they determine or limit the signification of the word to which they are joined; but this they do in different manners. A, or An determines the word it precedes to be one single thing of the kind, leaving it vague and uncertain which: The determines which it is, or, of many which they are. An is derived from the Saxon en, or the Gothic ans, which signifies one, and therefore can only be joined to substantives in the singular number; but The may be joined to plurals also. As the English word meant has generally been used as if it had no singular number, the best writers kave the article A before it; thus

Grammar: -21, Atterbury, " A means of still doing further good." Bishop Lowth recommends the singular in this place, asking, Whether it ought to be A mean? But it should be remembered, that this singular has scarce any authority, and that there are a thousand instances in which grammatical analogy is not preserved.

Another remarkable exception to this rule is, that a is used before the adjectives few and many, even when joined with substantives plural: thut Shakespear writes, A many thousand French; and we fay, both A sew men, and A great many men- The reason of this use of the article A, appears from the effect which it has in these phrases; it signifies a small or greater number taken collectively, and therefore gives the idea of a whole, that is of unity. Thus, likewise, A thousand, A hundred, is one whole number, or an aggregate of many taken collectively; and therefore still retains the article A, though joined, as an adjective, to a plural substantive, as A hundred years, A thousand doors. But when two or three are prefixed t» the word thousand, we look upon it as a barbarism; for no polite ear can bear " A three thousand men" though they can endure " A thousand men" very well. The reason is, that the word thousand, like a dozen, or a score, is considered as one collective idea; but the word three separates and divides the parts of which it is composed, and will not any longer suffer it to be considered as a single collective idea, but as divided into many. Hence we may see the want of grammatical propriety, in this sentence of Swift, " How many a message would he send?" The word how seems to destroy the unity or collective nature of the idea; and therefore the sentence should have been written without the Article, thus, "How many messages? For the fame reason the following expression in the £ c 2 English

« ZurückWeiter »