« ÎnapoiContinuați »
Aubert," to induce us to believe that Mr. Phillips was not then a christian. He attacks atheism, but evidently on the ground of Theism, and not Tritheism. When the reader marks the abhorrence in which he then spoke of the manner of carrying on the American war, and recollects that it was from the sole act and obstinacy of the late king that the war became so bloody and protracted, and contrasts it with his late panegyric on the same individual, by saying that "his ways were the ways of pleasantness and his paths the paths of peace," what can we think of Mr. Phillips? Were ever so many subjects of England destroyed under any other reign, as in that of George the Third? At what time we would retort on Mr. Phillips, were "his paths of the paths peace?" There has been a continual war in some part or other of the globe during the reign of George the Third. Peace has no sooner been made in Europe or America, than the bloody disposition of war has been carried to the East Indies. A panegyric could not have been made on the character of George the Third without the aid of falsehood, and we coincide with the warmth of feeling expressed by our correspondent, and say, that Mr. Phillips stands a self convicted liar and slanderer.
In taking a review of Mr. Phillips's political career of speech-making, we believe that his speech at Liverpool was the first to bring him into public and general notice in England, as his "Loves of Celestine and St. Aubert" were published at so extravagant a high price (10s. 6d.) that they were but little known even in London. His speeches in the courts of Ireland in seeking damages in cases of adultery and seduction have been generally admired, and have tended greatly to procure him applause in those quarters where his political principles would have been thought scarcely worth notice. His speech at the general election, as an unsuccessful candidate for the county of Sligo, in the year 1818, and his speech at the dinner given to General D'Evereux on his departure for South America, had so far established his popularity, as it has since appeared, to make him throw his abilities into the market for sale, and to support any cause for this or that party which would pay him best. It appears, that Mr. Phillips in his search for hire, was at Cheltenham in September and the beginning of October last, and that there he captivated some female that was a subscriber to the Bible Societies, by accompanying her to Gloucester (we believe) and making one of his rodomontades in support of the Bible and against those who considered it but as another book. In this trip he met with
a rival, who called him into the field for stealing away the affections of this pious lady, but it happened that a sham fight was a sufficient guarantee for the honour of both. Mr. Phillips and his lady come off to London and soon after we find him abusing his old and much admired favourite (Paine) at the Mansion House Bible Society Meeting not forgetting the Temple of Reason and the Editor of the Republican and Deist. We will now relate a circumstance that will place this gentleman's character in a still stronger light. In consequence of Mr. Phillips's ranting speech at the Mansion House, two persons called separately on Mrs. Carlile (in manners and appearance gentlemen) and expressed their abhorrence of his conduct in so abusing her husband, adding, that but two days before this Mansion House meeting, they dined with Mr. Phillips in some party, and that in a conversation about the late trial of her husband, he was asked his opinion of the verdict, to which he answered "if I had been on that Jury I would have acquitted that man." It appears from the report of his Mansion House speech that he was in the Court of King's Bench during the trial. We shall now take a final leave of Mr. Phillips and consider him no further worth our notice in whatever character he appears in future. We leave him to join those who have gone the same way, Robert Southey, Coleridge, Daniel Stuart of the Courier, and Doctor Stoddart of the New Times: cum mulris alus.
*** Can any of our readers inform us whether Mr. Phillips has commenced his practice as a barrister at the English bar, or whether the Mr. Phillips who has been engaged as counsel for Sir Francis Burdett, is or is not the celebrated Irish barrister? We are inclined to think that he aims at some place of profit in his profession, in spite of all his promises at Liverpool. There is a something in the present profession of the law that is certain to corrupt the mind of every man engaged in it. In looking quite through the bar, we cannot perceive an individual that is bold enough to support a popular cause as Lord Erskine did in his youth: but lamentable to state when Erskine was made a Lord, he put aside the title of a man, and it appears to be a necessary barter, or at least an implied understanding with the king when he imposes those idle nicknames. Mr. Serjeant Lens has so far shewn himself more incorruptible than any of his cotemporaries.
VOL. III. No. 9.
REVOLUTIONARY SYMPTOMS IN ENGLAND, IRELAND, AND FRANCE.
It appears that the healthful plague of revolution has broken out amongst those soldiers called the Foot Guards. Considerable agitation was excited last week in the city, in consequence of various rumours of the insubordination of the First Regiment of the Foot Guards, and an alleged conspiracy going on with all those soldiers now in London. That something serious was going on, there is not a doubt, but from the sudden manner in which those troops were marched off, no particulars can be reached. This much is certain, and acknowledged, that they for some time, refused to give up their arms and ammunition, and were endeavouring to prevail on the Coldstream Guards to act with them. The men will, no doubt, be sent off to Gibraltar, or some other rock, and every effort be made to suppress the particular cause of the commotion. When the first wing of the battalion was marched off, they passed the Horse Guards, and were openly and loudly cheered by those on duty; and the next day, the other wing had to follow them, it is said, in perfect spirits, good humour, and indifference. It is impossible that a system such as the present, can be carried on long, without opening the eyes, even of the soldiers, to the misery of their friends, and their own future prospects.
Ireland is bankrupt, and in indescribable distress in consequence of the quashing of the paper system. Thousands who a few weeks since were considered substantial persons are now reduced to beggary: trade is quite at a stand, and no man will trust his neighbour for necessary food, and there is no currency to purchase with. The blessed effects of the paper system are coming on thick and threefold, and happy will be those who, like the wise virgins of old, keep oil in their lamps, alias, metal instead of paper.
France displays some very feverish symptoms different to any thing that has occurred since the day of Buonaparte. The very first regiment that sides with the people will be the means of expelling the Bourbons within a few hours. Old Louis's throne was first built on bayonets, and now it dangles on wires. Tyranny cannot gasp much longer, it must sink before the energies of an intelligent nation. Hail, auspicious moment!
CONTINUATION OF REPLY TO THE REV. THOS. HARTWELL HORNE'S PAMPHLET, ENTITLED, "DEISM REFUTED," &c.-From p. 288.
In the commencement of this chapter, we find the "discontented rabble" of the Israelites, murmuring for want of bread. Their god seems to have been strangely negligent of his chosen people, or the people were strangely suspicious of their god. Perhaps both were in fault.
With respect to the miracle of the Manna, I must leave the reader to form his own judgment of it. I pass it by as a fiction, and so, in fact, I do every tale that we have yet met with in the Bible. I do not believe, that we have passed one historical fact, as yet. It is a pity but that the Jews had preserved the Manna-pot, which, I believe, they have no pretensions of the kind, although the Christians have occasionally found it in their search for relics. The following observations on this head, I borrow from Dr. Geddes's Critical Remarks on this chapter: With respect to the Manna-urn itself, we 'hear no more of it; nor is it any where said what be'came of it. When Solomon placed the Ark in his Temple, 'there was nothing in it but the two Tables of Stone, which < Moses, at Horeb, had placed in it. 1. Kings, 8, 9. The Jews say it was, together with the Ark, Aaron's Rod, and 'the Anointing Oil, buried by Josias in a secret excavation, ( prepared for the purpose by Solomon, who foresaw the de'struction of the Temple. On the other hand, the Samari6 tans will have it, that those same precious things were hid'den on Mount Garizzim, by the high priest Ozi; who, as Reland thinks, was contemporary with Samson. Both Jews ' and Samaritans confess that they have never since been discovered: but the Christians have been more fortunate; for, 'not a hundred years ago, the Manna-urn, at least, was 'found in three different places, Rome, Paris, and Bour'deaux." The same candid and judicious writer, who called himself a Catholic Christian, observes on the 32, 38, and 84th verses of this chapter:-" There is here an apparent parach'ronism; for neither Ark nor Testimonial Tables yet existed. "We must, therefore, refer it to some future period.' Facile intelligitur,' says Dathe, Moses, hoc loco temporis ordinem non servare: tunc erim nondum neque tentorium neque
arcafuit: sed complectitur Moses hoc loco omnia quæ de Manna memoriæ prodere voluit; ut supra fecit in historia de agno paschali. Be it so: yet surely this is a very odd and 'incorrect method of writing history; and one is naturally apt
to suspect that the compiler of the Pentateuch, whom I be'lieve not to have been Moses, committed here, as elsewhere, 'a small oversight.' It may be necessary to inform the reader who does not understand the Latin language, that the quotation above, is an attempt on the part of Dathe, to excuse the Parachronism, or false Chronology of those verses, by saying, that it was the object of Moses, in compiling the Pentateuch, to bring forward to this place, all subsequent circumstances that related to the Manna, and to condense them into one tale, the better to preserve it in memory, just as he had done before, with respect to the paschal lamb. But Jews and Christians, particularly, have never been at a loss for such paltry excuses as these, to clear up the most evident contradictions. If we bring the compilation of this book down to a later period, it will be all regular enough, as a collection of traditionary tales, but very irregular then as an history. Innumerable descriptions have been given by commentators, as to what the Quails and Manna consisted of, but scarce any two of them are alike. I do not pretend, nor wish to know.
I proceed with the seventeenth chapter :-
"And all the congregation of the children of Israel journeyed from the wilderness of Sin, after their journeys, according to the commandment of the Lord, and pitched in Rephidim; and there was no water for the people to drink. Wherefore the people did chide with Moses, and said, Give us water that we may drink. And Moses said unto them, Why chide ye with me? wherefore do ye tempt the Lord? And the people thirsted there for water; and the people murmured against Moses, and said, Wherefore is this that thou hast brought us up out of Egypt, to kill us and our children and our cattle with thirst? And Moses cried unto the Lord saying, What shall I do unto this people they be almost ready to stone me. And the Lord said unto Moses, Go on before the people, and take with thee of the elders of Israel; and thy rod, wherewith thou smotest the river, take in thine hand, and go. Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock in Horeb; and thou shalt smite the rock, and there shall come water out of it, that the people may drink. And Moses did so in the sight of the elders of Israel. And he called the name of the place Massah, and Meribah, because of the chiding of the children of Israel, and because they tempted the Lord, saying, Is the Lord among us, or not? Then came Amalek, and fought with Israel in Rephidim. And Moses said unto Joshua, Choose us out men, and