class of phenomena; he forms no anticipations ;* he has no antecedent conceptions; his conclusions rest on the authority of established facts, and are founded on a sufficiently extensive induction. He considers the opposition in question, as resulting solely from his limited and partial knowledge; and if, in his attempts to generalise and classify the subjects of his investigation, he discovers a principle which reconciles and harmonizes every seeming contrariety, he willingly adopts it. What well authenticated facts are to the philosopher, the assertions of Scripture are to the religious inquirer who has just views of the evidence and authority of revelation. Whether the one can satisfactorily explain the facts, or the other, the assertions, are questions which ought not to affect the admission of either. But in another part of this article we intend to enter more fully into the ultimate grounds of religious belief; we shall therefore proceed in our analysis of Mr. W.'s discourses on the Divinity of Christ.

Having stated the principle to which we have adverted, he illustrates, at some length, an argument founded on the general scope and tenour of scriptural language, and exhibiting an indirect, though powerful testimony on this subject. He considers,

The views which are uniformly given in the scriptures, of the unparalleled and inexpressible love of God, in the gift of his only be gotten Son;-the marvellous condescension and grace of Jesus Christ himself, which the strongest possible terms are employed to express; the depth of interest, the warmth of admiring transport and adoring gratitude, excited in the bosoms of the New Testament writers, by the contemplation, and even by the passing thought of the love of Christ ;-the representations given of the height of glory and honour, dominion and power, to which Jesus is exalted, as the consequence and reward of the work finished by him when on earth; -and, finally, the singular claims of Jesus on the love and obedience of all his followers.'

The language used on these subjects, Mr. W. proves to be utterly extravagant and unaccountable on the hypothesis that our blessed Redeemer was no more than a mere human prophet, commissioned, like other prophets, to impart to mankind the will of God. The more we contemplate this argument, the greater importance it acquires in our estimation.

Rationem humanam, qua utimur ad Naturam; anticipationes Natura, (quia res temeraria est et præmatura); at illam rationem, quæ debitis modis elicitur a rebus interpretationem Natura, docendi gratia, vocare consuevimus. Nov. ORG. xxvi. How applicable is this Baconian aphorism to theological inquiries! Ed.

Incidental passages often assist us in forming a more accurate conception of a writer's feelings and sentiments, than formal and elaborate confessions. They are striking indications of the sincerity and ardour of those feelings; they prove them to be interwoven with all the texture of his thoughts; and by their connexion with subjects apparently remote from the train in which they might be systematically introduced, they are clearly evinced to be in his view of predominant interest and importance. In such cases it is evident the feelings are not factitious, nor the sentiments merely professional; and we can appreciate the honesty as well as the force of his convictions. While this criterion, had we leisure to expand and illustrate its principle, might apply to the evidence of Christian character in general, and the true style and tone of Christian preaching in particular, it becomes peculiarly interesting in its application to the writings and discourses of inspired apostles. By enabling us to ascertain the fact in reference to them, we are instructed as to our individual duty, unless we deem the example and belief of primitive Christians of no consequence; and we can feel no hesitation in determining which class of sentiments is most consonant to the records of such example and belief-that which this volume opposes, or that which it defends. The little use Socinianism makes of the New Testament-the terms of depreciation which it applies to the epistolary parts of it in particular-the frequent necessity to which it is reduced of lowering the tone of apostolic feeling-and the absence and rejection of overy thing like devotional sentiment in this frigid zone of nominal Christianity-leave us no cause for doubt in our conclusions.

In the third and fourth discourses, Mr. W. expatiates at large on the direct proof of the Divinity of Christ from the așcription to him of the names, the attributes, the works, and the worship, belonging exclusively to the only true God: and here the evidence is most satisfactory and complete. Every text which the piercing scrutiny of modern criticism renders ambiguous or doubtful, is cautiously omitted; not because in each instance he admits the propriety of such doubts, but because he is anxious to prove that the authority of truth is not confined to a few insulated passages, and to adduce unquestionable and decisive testimonies. Nor is Mr. W. contented with bare citations, and a dogmatic application of them; he discusses each testimony minutely; and his argument is critical as well as theological. He meets fairly and ingenuously the objections of the most subtle Socinians; occasionally adopts even the reading of what they call the Improved Version;' and detects with admirable skill the latent sophistry of the most refined and complicated reasonings. We were particularly pleased with

the remarks on Rom. ix. 5; and as they afford an ordinary specimen of Mr. W.'s ability in refutation, we shall insert the whole of his observations on the text.

• Rom ix. 5. "Of whom (the Israelites) as concerning the flesh, "the Christ came, who is over all, GOD blessed for ever." (εξ ὧν ὁ χριστὸς, τὸ κατὰ σάρκα, ὁ ὢν ἐπὶ πάντων θεὸς, εὐλογητὸς εἰς τὰς αἰῶνας. This seems abundantly plain; so plain, and so decisive, that if there were not another text in the whole Bible, directly affirming this great truth, I know not how I should satisfy myself in rejecting its explicit testimony. It has accordingly been put upon the rack, to make it speak, by dint of torture, a different language.

It might, perhaps, be enough to say, respecting this passage, that according to the order of the original words, the received translation is the most direct and natural rendering. This, so far as I know, no one has ventured to deny. All that has been affirmed is, that it is capable of bearing a different sense. And this accordingly has been attempted in no fewer than five different ways:

Of whom, by natural descent, the Christ came. God, who is over all be blessed for ever."*-Whose are the fathers, and of ⚫ whom the Christ came, who is above them all (the Fathers). God be blessed for ever!'-' Of whom the Christ came who is over all things. God be blessed for ever!'+-' Of whom the 'Christ came, who is as God, over all, blessed for ever!'-And by a conjectural emendation, Of whom the Christ came, (and) whose, or of whom is the Supreme God, blessed for ever.'§

With regard to the last of these various modes of evading this troublesome text, the severest terms of reprobation are not too strong. Conjectural emendation of the original text, is an expedient which all critics are agreed, nothing but indispensable necessity can in any case justify. In the present instance, the alteration is not only a most unwarrantable liberty with the sacred text, but even if on this ground it were admissible, it is liable to other objections, on principles of syntax, and of propriety as to sense. These, however, it is needless to state; because the emendation itself, although still suggested, as in its nature most happy and plausible,' and spoken of in terms that shew evident reluctance to part with it, is acknowledged to be unsupported by a single manuscript, version, or authority, and is not insisted on. I must be allowed, however, to add, without questioning the ingenuity of its inventor, that its plausibility can only be felt by a mind strongly prepossessed in favour of the meaning which it is designed to support.

The translation again, which qualifies the meaning of the term God, and to mark its being used in an inferior sense, introduces a

Placing the full stop after capxa.

In this and the preceding, it is placed after eri avv.

The received punctuation is retained.

is the conjectured reading here for v.

Belsham's Calm Inquiry, p. 224.

by a philosophical correspondent, who merely stated, that it was a combination of azote and chlorine.

Sir H. had made many unsuccessful attempts to combine these substances, before this fact came to his knowledge; but on renewing his efforts after he had been made acquainted with it, he had the satisfaction of accomplishing his object; and of producing a compound, which, from its properties, there can be no doubt was the same as that made at Paris.

The combination, however, appears to have been made, in this country, in the first instance, by Jno. James Burton, jun. in the course of some experiments on the action of chlorine on nitrate of ammonia; but he did not examine it, and it was not until Sir H. was reminded of this circumstance by his friend Mr. Children, that the compound was directly formed, and its properties were examined. Sir H. D. found that the combination was formed equally well by exposing a solution of oxalate of ammonia, or a weak solution of pure ammonia, to the action of chlorine, as by a solution of the nitrate; but the combination was less permanent in the solution of ammonia, than in the others. Its preparation, under any circumstances, requires the utmost caution.

This compound has the colour and transparency of olive oil, but it is less viscid. Its smell is extremely offensive, and its effect on the eyes is pungent and distressing. When introduced under water into the receiver of an air pump, the receiver being afterwards exhausted, it assumes the elastic form, and in this state it is rapidly absorbed or decomposed by water. If warm water is poured upon it in a glass vessel, it expands into a globule of elastic fluid, of an orange colour, and which diminishes as it passes through the water.

It explodes at sa low a temperature that even the heat of the band is sufficient for that purpose; and such is the force of its explosion, that a globule not larger than a grain of mustard seed, when warmed by a spirit lamp, broke the glass tube which contained it, into very minute fragments. A vivid light, and a sharp report, accompany its explosion. A minute globule of it thrown into a glass of olive oil, oil of turpentine, or naphtha, exploded with great violence, and shattered the glass into fragments. Its action with ether is slight, a small quantity of gas being disengaged, and a substance resembling wax formed. The action of alcohol converts it into a white, oily substance, destitute of explosive properties. A particle of it brought into contact with a small portion of phosphorus under water, produces a brilliant light, with disengagement of azotic gas; but if the quantity of the new compound exceed the bulk of a mustard seed, the vessel is uniformly broken. With mercury it forms a substance resembling corrosive sublimate, a portion of

gas being at the same time disengaged. It has no action on tin, zinc, sulphur, or resin. It detonated most powerfully when it was thrown into a solution of phosphorus, in alcohol, or ether. In muriatic acid it disappears without explosion, elastic fluid being rapidly disengaged. It exhibits no particular action with dilute sulphuric acid, but it disappears in the liquor of Libavius, to which it imparts a yellow tinge.

From these facts Sir H. Davy concludes, that it is a combination of chlorine and azote, and is probably precisely the same as that discovered at Paris. The extraordinary circumstance of its expansion into an elastic fluid being attended with heat and light, which stands alone among chemical phenomena, Sir H. thinks has the nearest aualogy with the evolution of light in the discharge of an air gun, and both have probably the same cause. The mechanical power produced by the detonation of this remarkable compound, and the velocity of its action, appear to be greater than those of any other body yet known.

II. Observations relative to the near and distant Sight of different Persons. By James Ware, Esq. F. R. S.

The observations contained in this paper, are rather of a miscellaneous nature, and do not involve the investigation of any particular point of inquiry connected with the subjects to which it relates. Some of the facts, however, are curious, and may admit of useful application.

Considerable pains have been taken by Mr. Ware, to ascertain the proportion of persons, in the different classes of society, who are affected by near-sightedness; and he finds reason to conclude, that it is very considerably greater in the higher classes, than in the lower. This peculiarity of vision is rarely met with in early life; and, in these cases, Mr. W. condemns the early use of concave glasses, as they have a tendency to fix the imperfection, and render it permanent, while the natural efforts of the eye, unaided by glasses, are frequently capable of correcting the slighter degrees of it. He remarks also, that when the aid of a concave glass is first resorted to, it is important to select the lowest number which is suited to the eye; for, though the number above that, may afford the most perfect vision, yet, after sometime, it becomes necessary to change it for one still higher, until at last it may become difficult to procure one sufficiently concave to afford the correction requisite for distinct vision.

Mr. Ware gives an account of some experimen.s with Belladonna, made to determine its effects on the range of distinct vision, the results of which agreed with those obtained by Dr. Wells; these experiments, however, shed no light on the means by which the eye is enabled to accommodate itself, with such