Page images
PDF
EPUB

When the celebrated controversy was excited by Dr. Priestley respecting man's free agency; and the knotty point of moral and philosophical necessity was agitated by a great variety of writers, some of whom, with that restless disputant at their head, openly espoused the dangerous notions of fatalism and materialism, Dr. Horsley. then recently preferred to a prebend in the cathedral of St. Paul's, discussed the question in a sermon delivered in that church, April 17th, being Good Friday, in the year 1778. In this sensible and liberal discourse he maintained that qualified doctrine which hath been generally asserted by the Arminians; and which unites the freedom of the human will with the certainty of divine prescience, and the accountableness of man with the agency of divine providence. This sermon soon afterwards appeared in print, and was quickly replied to by Dr. Priestley, who always wrote much faster than he either read or thought. But no farther controversy was carried on between these two parties for the present. It was not, however, from any consciousness of Priestley's superior powers in metaphysical enquiries that made Dr. Horsley decline a contest at this time; but a thorough conviction of the uselessness of such a discussion. He was well aware that it tended rather to perplex the minds of believers with doubtful speculations, and to encourage a spirit of scepticism in others, than to answer any one good purpose. He also knew full well the conceited and restless temper of his opponent; and was persuaded that it was not truth but victory which animated him in all his disputations.

In this year Dr. Horsley resigned his situation as one of the secretaries of the Royal Society, though he still continued an active member of that learned body, particularly as one of the reading committee.

(To be continued.)

MISCELLANIES.

VINDICATION OF CHARLES I.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCHMAN'S

I

SIR,

MAGAZINE.

HAVE lately been reading a new Life of MILTON, in which the author, Dr. Charles Symmons, is not content with endeavouring to white-wash the political character of that celebrated man, but he indulges himself in the most rude and illiberal attacks upon some of the best characters this country has produced.

In the highest tone of dogmatism, he deals out his virulent invectives against all who have ventured to form an opinion of Milton's conduct and principles different from his own.

His zeal in behalf of a favourite writer would have been commendable, if it had been tempered with judgment and candour; but Dr. Symmons goes beyond the bounds of a biographer and an apologist; he becomes a partizan; and in the plenitude of his admiration of republican principles, he imbibes all the fierceness and uncharitableness of the zealots of 1641.

I am much mistaken, if the doctor has not by his intemperance injured the very cause he undertook to defend; and placed Milton's political character in a very disgusting point of view.

Milton was at first the warm, I may say fiery champion of the Presbyterians, whom the doctor condemns in strong terms as a set of consummate hypocrites; afterwards Milton joined the ascendant party of Independents, whose favour he secured by anathematizing his quondam friends. Always a professed republican, he yet became the supple sycophant of Oliver Cromwell, and his only consist ency lay in his rooted animosity to the Royal Family, to whose misfortunes he had contributed almost as much as any man of his time, by the powers of his pen.

After all, the political character of Milton might have remained, and Dr. Symmons would have enjoyed the pleasure of his admiration of the man and his principles, Vol. XI. Churchm. Mag. for Oct. 1806. Kk without

without any observation of mine, had he not chosen to calumniate the memories of persons who were illustrious by their merits and their sufferings.

I cannot here dismiss the consideration of Milton, as drawn by the doctor, without remarking, that the bitterness of Milton's spirit as manifested in his prose works, must in every cool and impartial mind raise à doubt with regard to the justness of what is here said of him, 'that he was a man in whom were illustriously combined all the qualities that could adorn, or could elevate the nature to which he belonged,” (p. 526,)

[ocr errors]

Among those qualities which are necessary to constitute so elevated a character as this, I apprehend every reasonable man will be led to place humanity and christian charity in the first rank. How far Milton was adorned by these virtues, the following invective against the Bishops of the Church of England, at the time when they were exposed to the outrages of a fanatic rabble, will sufficiently shew.

"But they, that by the impairing and dimunition of the true faith, the distresses and servitude of their country, aspire to high dignity, rule, and promotion hère, after a shameful end in this life, (WHICH GOD CRANT THEM!) shall be thrown down eternally into the darkest and deepest gulph of Hell; where under the despiteful controul, the trample and spurn of all the other damned, who, in the anguish of their torture, shall have no other ease than to exercise a raving and beastial tyranny over them as their slaves and negroes, they shall remain in that state for ever, 'the basest, the lowermost, the most dejected, most underfoot, and down-trodden vassals of perdition*

The spirit which could dictate so horrible an anathema as this, wherein not only the speedy death of the objects of its hatred is prayed for, but their eternal damnation is absolutely determined, and made the subject of descriptive triumph, is the very reverse of that spirit which cometh down from above.

[ocr errors]

I proceed now to a consideration of some of the numerous partialities and perversions of truth which abound in this new life of Milton, especially such as relate to the prime and uniform objects of Milton's virulent hate and persecution, (as far as he could persecute) the CROWN and the CHURCH.

After just noticing the victory of Naseby, Dr. Symmons * Milton's Treatise on Reformation, fol. ed. vol i. p. 274.

says,

says, that the civil war, which may be considered as hereby terminated, was honourably distinguished from every other, by the general benignity of its spirit, and the admirable moderation of the victor," (page 241.)

Among the acts of benignity and moderation which distinguished the righteous parliament who declared war against and defeated their sovereign, might be enumerated the introduction of an arbitrary weekly excise upon all property, the extortion of loans, and the sequestration of at least one half of the goods and chattels in the kingdom. To these acts of benignity and moderation Dr. Symmons, perhaps, will have no difficuly in adding the treatment which the conscientious and loyal clergy experienced, many hundreds of whom were not only ejected from their livings, but even their private property was taken away, and their families turned out of doors. Numbers of the most learned and exemplary divines in the kingdom, were imprisoned in loathsome jails, and in the holds of ships, without being permitted to see their friends, or to hold any correspondence with them. But republican rapine, oppression, and cruelty are, it seems, to be accounted benignity and moderation, while charges which rest upon very equivocal authority, are brought forth against the King, not only as undoubted facts, but in the most studied and invidious language of exaggeration. Indeed, what is particularly deserving of censure in this biography, which abounds so much with extravagant praise and intemperate reproach, is the frequent omission of authorities in the most important cases, and a reference to very partial and incorrect sources in others.

The Republican Rushworth and the Puritan Neal are cited with as much confidence, on points which involve many doubtful questions, as if their veracity and candour had never been suspected or disproved. It is not a little remarkable, that writers of the period, and especially those on the Royalists' side, are all along studiously omitted; from which it is not uncharitable to infer, that in the compilation of this volume, more regard has been had to the vindication of Milton, than to the general interests of historical truth.

Dr. Symmons says, that "Ireton and Cromwell, uncertain of their contest with the Presbyterians, made an offer to Charles, while he was in their power at Hampton-Court, to reinstate him in his royalties on certain conditions, for which they stipulated for themselves

Kk2

and

and their friends. But the infatuated prince, under the influence of weak or interested advisers, and elated by a strange opinion of his own great importance amid this violent conflict of parties, rejected the proffers of his fortune; and even offended those by whom they were made, with his haughtiness, his fluctuation, and his duplicity. When they found by his secret correspondence with the queen that no reliance was to be placed on his good faith, Ireton and Cromwell seem to have determined on his destruction; and withdrawing their protection, they compelled him for his immediate preservation to fly from Hampton-Court in quest of another asylum," (p. 243.)

A general reference is here made to Rushworth, whose character is sufficiently known not to be relied on, except as a collector of public papers, and not always then. But fortunately we have an evidence on this very case, which so far from supporting this calumnious statement, and of reflecting upon the character of Charles, proves that the objects of the doctor's praise, Ireton and Cromwell, were in the whole of this transaction a couple of infamous knaves, who carried on this negociation, not as it is here represented, for the restoration, but the ruin of the King.

These villains, after many fair professions and promises, obtained from Charles an answer to the parliament's proposals, in which they made some alterations, which were adopted by his Majesty, who then sent a fair copy of the same in his own hand to the House of Commons. Instead, however, of recommending and supporting in the house this answer, as they had promised to do, Ireton and Cromwell reprobated it in the most virulent manner, and caused it to be rejected. This abominable treachery so irritated Major Huntington, who was Cromwell's principal officer, and had been privy to the whole of the negociation, that he severely reproached the hypocrite to his face, and immediately threw up his commission*.

In another part of his volume, Dr. Symmons advocates the character of Ireton, as being "one of those honest patriots, who fancied that by the trial and the execution of a guilty king, they could establish a commonwealth on the basis of equal right, and of general advantage," (p. 245.)

But how is this to be reconciled with the circumstance of his negociating with this guilty king to the disadvantage of the Presbyterians? If Ireton really thought

Dugdale's Short View of the Troubles, p, 264, Clarendon's Hist. vol jii, p, 491,

« PreviousContinue »