While joining heartily in the general admiration of the eloquence, learning, and industry, displayed in other portions of the work, the friends of religion and morality were preparing faithfully to do their duty, in detecting the sophistry, and exposing the tendency of these two chapters. But the method which most of the objectors had resolved to pursue, as appeared from their subsequent productions, turned chiefly upon discussions which required elaborate investigation. Meanwhile, time was passing, and an injurious impression had begun to fix itself upon the minds of many, that the historian's reasonings could not be impugned. At this crisis, Dr Watson's attention was directed to Mr Gibbon's chapters by the late Sir Robert Graham, as unanswered, and in the latter's opinion unanswerable.

On this hint the reverend champion buckled on his armour, and in one month, during the summer vacation of 1776, produced the "Apology for Christianity," the first and the best refutation which has yet appeared of the most artful attack to which Christianity in these days has been exposed. "My answer," modestly remarks its author, "had a great run, and is still sought after, though it was only a month's work in a long vacation. But if I had been longer about it, though I might have stuffed it with more learning, and made it more bulky, I am not certain that I should have made it better." The work was published in autumn, but before it actually appeared, a copy, by the author's directions, was sent to Mr Gibbon. The latter acknowledged this mark of courtesy in the following note: --

"Mr Gibbon takes the earliest opportunity of presenting his compliments and thanks to Dr Watson, and of expressing his sense of the liberal treatment which he has received from so candid an adversary. Mr Gibbon entirely coincides in opinion with Dr Watson, that as their different sentiments on a very important point of history are now submitted to the public, they both may employ their time in a manner much more useful, as well as agreeable, than they can possibly do by exhibiting a single combat in the amphitheatre of controversy. Mr Gibbon is therefore determined to resist the temptation of justifying, in a professed reply, any passages of his History which it might perhaps be easy to clear from censure and misapprehension. But he still reserves to himself the privilege of inserting in a future edition, some occasional remarks and explanations of his meaning. If any calls of pleasure or business should call Dr Watson to town, Mr Gibbon would think himself fortunate in being permitted to solicit the honour of his acquaintance." "BENTINCK STREET, Nov. 2, 1776.

To this letter Dr Watson replied in course of post, expressing the pleasure he should have in cultivating Mr Gibbon's personal acquaintance, and concluding with the following wellexpressed compliment, which, nevertheless, elegantly implies the possibility of improving the work in the very points at issue: -“It would be very extraordinary if Mr Gibbon did not feel a parent's partiality for an offspring which has justly excited the admiration of all who have seen it; and Dr Watson would be the last person in the world to wish him to conceal any explanation which might tend to exalt its beauties."

The mutual courtesy which these two eminent men thus manifested towards each other personally, appears to have been so far misunderstood by "some doughty polemics," as Dr Watson calls them, that they even affected to doubt the sincerity of the apologist, from the verbal suavity of the Apology, "and were angry with him for not having bespattered Gibbon with a portion of that theological dirt, which the preceding age had so liberally thrown at antagonists." Invective never aided the cause of truth, more particularly religious truth. In this, therefore, Dr Watson does not indulge: he writes like a gentleman addressing his equal; but with a fervency of argumentation, an earnestness of interrogatory, occasionally with a keenness of elegant sarcasm, which leave little room for complaint on the score of forbearance towards an adversary, himself a most dexterous master of the same weapons, and trained, too, in a school of fence, whose science wanted only a good cause to render its pupils invincible; but, wanting this, with all their skill they are vulnerable.

Lausanne! and Ferney! ye have been the abodes
Of names, which unto you bequeathed a name :
Mortals who sought and found, by dangerous roads,
A path to perpetuity of fame.

They were gigantic minds, and their steep aim
Was, Titan-like, on daring doubts to pile
Thoughts which should call down thunder and the flame
Of Heaven-again assail'd,-if Heaven the while,

On man, and man's research, could deign do more than smile.

Of Gibbon individually, the coequal with Voltaire in "this bad eminence," the same poet has, with admirable discrimination, thus delineated the intellectual character:

The other deep and slow, exhausting thought,
And hiving wisdom with each studious year,
In meditation dwelt, with learning wrought,
And shaped his weapon with an edge severe,
Sapping a solemn creed with solemn sneer,-
The lord of irony

To such an assailant on the citadel of faith, Watson stood forward, just such an opponent as the good would have wished, and the bad must have feared. He, too, had drained the springs of thought- had, with untiring industry, gathered in almost every field the treasures of a various learning, and could "shape his weapons" of defence with an edge as trenchant as his adversaries. But while thus similar in preparation, he was different in temperament; for though "deep," he is "clear," and so far from "slow," that he rushes like an avalanche upon the unawed intruder on the sublimities of revelation, overwhelming him amid the brightness of those truths to which he is stubbornly blind. From the admission in the opening of the first letter, "Yes, sir, we are agreed, that the zeal of the Christians was inflexible," to the closing line in the last, he does not permit his antagonist once to escape him. We are throughout made to feel, that the cause is mighty, and the advocate able. Not for a moment are we suffered to be in apprehension as to the issue. When the argument is direct, it is demolishing, breaking down at once the premises and conclusions of the sceptic. Or, as is frequently the case, if the principles are admitted, it is only to reverse the inferences with a clearness which no sophistry may elude, and with a simplicity which scarcely any mind can fail to apprehend. In the execution of this task, in the work now before the reader, Dr Watson adopted what has been termed the popular statement of the argument. But in speaking thus of the "Apology for Christianity," we must be careful to remember, that its plan is popular only as it exhibits the result, without the ostentation of profound learning. It is the production of a vigorous mind rapidly but clearly unfolding its habitual convictions on points of great research and intricacy, without perplexing the reader with the remoter steps, or more abstract demonstrations, by which these conclusions had been attained. It is a generous display of wealth, without any congratulatory accompaniment of the self-denials, cares, labours, and anxieties, undergone in realizing this opulence. His successors in the same controversy have generally adopted an opposite method, but not, we think, with a similar success, as regards at least the great body of Christians. They have generally addressed themselves to points of erudition, and, it must be acknowledged, have succeeded in establishing the charges brought against Mr Gibbon, of misquoting or misrepresenting his authorities, by loose commentaries, false glosses, and insidious notes. Still the force of these erudite performances, as Dr Chelsum's, Mr Burgh's, Mr Davis's, and other "Examinations," is weakened, from deficiency of that masterly combination of details into condensed conclusions, for which Dr Watson's work is so remarkable. Most of them, too, indulge in a severity of personal observation, respecting the plagiarisms and shallow learning of their opponent, foreign to the question. The inquiry is not-Are the sentiments Gibbon's own? but-Are they true? not-Are his quotations at second hand? but-Are they correct and to the purpose? Among these learned answers to the historian, the work of Sir David Dalrymple Lord Hailes, is honourably distinguished for research and firm yet polished refutation. The reader who has attentively perused both Watson and Hailes, will be abundantly provided against the cavillings of infidelity, whether they come in the shape of popular declamation, or assume the form of learned objection. The success attending the very first appearance of his defence of that Christianity, which he loved in principle, and whose charities he exemplified in his treatment even of its opponents, must have afforded great satisfaction to our author. He had

answered a gainsayer, without making an enemy, and men of all parties united in approving his performance. Of these expressions of approbation, we select the following from Dr Jebb, as at once just yet discriminating: -"I am delighted with your Apology beyond measure; various parts suggested to me new lights, which have guided my mind with respect to some difficulties, which I never expected to have seen so completely removed It will no doubt increase your already high reputation; but it will do more; it will, I trust, remove the prejudices of many well disposed Deists, and be the happy means of converting them to the truth. The liberal sentiments which every where prevail in it do you the highest credit. The elegance, simplicity, and accuracy of the style, give myself, and all I converse with, great pleasure."

We have said that Dr Watson refuted an antagonist without making an enemy. Mr Gibbon shewed this about three years afterwards, when he published his reply to those who had assailed his History. The severity towards every other, and the marked courtesy of his notices of the work before us, were so conspicuous, that Dr Watson felt himself called upon to acknowledge the politeness in the following note:

SIR,-It will give me the greatest pleasure to have an opportunity of becoming better acquainted with Mr Gibbon: I beg he would accept my sincere thanks for the too favourable manner in which he has spoken of a performance, which derives its chief merit from the elegance and importance of the work it attempts to oppose.

I have no hope of a future existence, except that which is grounded on the truth of Christianity; I wish not to be deprived of this hope; but I should be an apostate from the mild principles of the religion I profess, if I could be actuated by the least animosity against those who do not think with me upon this, of all others, the most important subject. I beg your pardon for this declaration of my belief; but my temper is naturally open, and it ought assuredly to be without disguise to a man whom I wish no longer to look upon as an antagonist, but a friend.-I am, &c. R. WATSON.

EDWARD GIBBON, Esq.

Seventeen years afterwards, this letter was published in the miscellaneous works of Gibbon, which appeared in 1796. It is a proof of the acuteness of George III. that he alluded to the passage marked in italics, when the author next appeared at the levee, in such a way, but without offence, as naturally induced Dr Watson to offer this explanation: -" I have frequently," said the prelate, " met with respectable men, who cherished an expectation of a future state, though they rejected Christianity as an imposture; and I thought my publicly declaring that I was of a contrary opinion might perhaps induce Mr Gibbon, and other such men, to make a deeper investigation into the truth of the religion than they had hitherto done." His Majesty expressed himself satisfied both with the explanation and the motive. The passage, however, can appear "odd," for such was the King's remark, only on a hasty perusal, while the error which it combats is by no means singular. The disbelief of Christianity, indeed, does not, nay, cannot, obliterate the impress of immortality wrought into the very being of the soul by its Creator. But without the facts of Christianity — facts which it alone can ascertain, of what value is that natural principle? An eye without light- an ear amid everlasting silence a glorious instinct throbbing under the dark impulse of unascertained desire: and, as respects the conscience, at best but an opinion floating between the extremes of bare probability and absolute denial, as moody passion or intellectual pride impels. In ethics, the principle is a theory unsupported by a single induction, and contradicted by sense; a contingency which, as in a position in physics unsupported by experiment, may unsettle and retard, but never advance or generate, knowledge. In morals, it is a baseless vision, serving only to render the best men the most unhappy; for they would feel most keenly, that without the assurances exhibited in the Gospel promises of reconciliation and renewed nature, a future life would be more an object of dread than of desire. Hence the force of Dr Watson's proposition if we reject the revelations of Christianity, we must renounce also the rational hope of immortality.

In the spring of 1782, having been left in a minority of nineteen on the American question, Lord North's administration went out of office. A sort of Whig coalition ministry was then formed, with the Marquis of Rockingham as one leader, and Lord Shelburne as the other, representing respectively the two extremes into which the party were then divided. To this accession of his political friends to power, Dr Watson's elevation to the episcopal bench has been ascribed. It probably was the immediate cause; though in thus mixing up the professional advancement of a distinguished philosopher and divine with the changing interests of mere partisanship, injustice, we hope, is done to all parties. Nor, indeed, can his extreme political admirers claim the merit of his appointment. By the unexpected death of the Marquis of Rockingham, to whom our author was personally known, the patronage of the crown devolved upon Lord Shelburne, the see of Salisbury being then vacant. "This minister's constitutional principles and enlarged views of public policy," it is admitted, "allied him as much to one party as to another in the state." For his moderation, in fact, he was preferred, as the less of two evils, by the king; but for the same reason he was deserted by Fox, Cavendish, and Burke. From this nobleman, on the solicitation it seems of the Dukes of Grafton and Rutland, Dr Watson received the mitre, Dr Barrington being translated from Landaff to Salisbury. In justice to all, we quote the following from our author's diary::-" On Sunday, July 21st, I received an express from the Duke of Rutland, informing me that he had seen Lord Shelburne, who had anticipated his wishes, by mentioning me for the vacant bishoprick before he had asked it. I kissed hands on the 26th of that month, and was received, as the phrase is, very graciously this was the first time I had ever been at St James's."

We have gone into this explanation, because one party has been praised when, as evidently appears, they little deserved commendation, and because another has been blamed for overlooking one whom, unwillingly, they were thus compelled to regard as a partisan bishop, one of the most ungracious objects that lend some diversity to the monotonous and dreary selfishness of the political landscape. How much, also, his own feelings have been disregarded in this exhibition of his onesided attachments, and how little reason the party who seized him can shew in support of their assumed right, appear from his own reflections at the time. "In this manner did I acquire a bishopric. But I have no reason to be proud of the promotion; for I think I owed it not to any regard which he who gave it me had to the zeal and industry with which I had, for many years, discharged the functions, and fulfilled the duties, of an academic life; but to the opinion which he had erroneously entertained, that I was a warm, and might become an useful partisan. Lord Shelburne, indeed, had expressed to the Duke of Grafton his expectation, that I would occasionally write a pamphlet for their administration. The duke did me justice in assuring him, that he had perfectly mistaken my character; that though I might write on an abstract question concerning government, or the principles of legislation, it would not be with a view of assisting any administration. I had written in support of the principles of the Revolution, because I thought those principles useful to the state, and I saw them vilified and neglected. I had taken part with the people in their petitions against the influence of the crown, because I thought that influence would destroy the constitution, and I saw it was increasing. I had opposed the supporters of the American war, because I thought that war to be not only inexpedient but unjust. But all this was done from my own sense of things, and without the least view of pleasing a party. I did, however, happen to please a party, and they made me a bishop."

With the bishopric, the poorest see in the church, Dr Watson obtained a dispensation to hold his professorship, the archdeaconry of Ely, and other preferments. Thus his exertions were rather increased than diminished by this elevation, and a practical proof was given, that his reforms, like those of many others, were only theoretical propositions when the question actually comes home to their own circumstances. It must be admitted, however, that his duties were as faithfully performed as, under the pressure of so many engagements, they could be discharged. The system, not the man, was to blame. It ought to be remembered also, that one great object of his life, an object of

which he started in pursuit almost from the first day of his elevation, was to obtain a legislative review of this system. The principles of his ecclesiastical reform are thus stated by himself to Lord Shelburne in a note, which was to have been the basis of a motion in Parliament.

"There are several circumstances respecting the doctrine, the jurisdiction, and the revenue of the Church of England, which would probably admit a temperate reform. If it should be thought right to attempt making a change in any of them, it seems most expedient to begin with the revenue."

The two following hints may not be undeserving consideration:"First, A bill to render the bishoprics more equal to each other, both with respect to income and patronage, by annexing, as the richer bishoprics become vacant, a part of their revenues, and a part of their patronage, to the poorer. By a bill of this kind, the bishops would be freed from the necessity of holding ecclesiastical preferments in commendam, a practice which bears hard upon the rights of the inferior clergy. Another probable consequence of such a bill would be a longer residence of the bishops in their several dioceses; from which the best consequences, both to morality, the religion of the people, and to the true credit of the Church, might be expected; for the two great inducements to wish for translations, and consequently, to reside in London, namely, superiority of income, and excellency of patronage, would, in a great measure, be removed.

"Secondly, A bill for appropriating, as they became vacant, one half, or a third part of the income of every deanery, prebend, or canonry, of the churches of Westminster, Windsor, Canterbury, Christ Church, Worcester, Durham, Ely, Norwich, &c. to the same purposes, mutatis mutandis, as the first-fruits and tenths were appropriated by Queen Anne. By a bill of this kind, a decent provision would be made for the inferior clergy n a third or fourth part of the time which Queen Anne's bounty alone will require to effect. A decent provision being once made for every officiating minister in the Church, the residence of the clergy on their cures might more reasonably be required than it can be at present, and the licence of holding more livings than one be restricted."

These views, subsequently extended and matured, he published, in an admirable letter, addressed to the Archbishop of Canterbury. He found, however, that both ministers and the Church were against him, and as he did not choose to introduce the measure himself into Parliament, it fell to the ground, though never, throughout his life, lost sight of. One cause of failure in the attempt, when his personal and political friends were in power, is deserving, at this moment, of particular notice. It appears that, in some former interviews, the minister had asked the bishop, if nothing could be got from the Church towards alleviating the burdens of the State. Our author had profoundly studied the subject, and his reply should for ever silence the senseless outcry against the overgrown wealth of the Church of England. "The whole revenue of the Church," he observed on this occasion, "would not yield, if it were equally divided, which could not be thought of, above £150 a-year to each clergyman, a provision which, I presume, no one will think too ample. Any diminution, therefore, of the Church revenue, seems to me, not only highly unjust, but highly inexpedient in a political point of view, unless government would be contented to have a beggarly and illiterate clergy, an event which no wise minister would ever wish to see." Finding, however, that notwithstanding this remonstrance, there was & desire to be nibbling at the Church," our author was compelled to publish his plan before due preparation had been made for its reception in the minds of his brethren. The consequence was, that, of all the bench, only the Bishop of London, Porteous, had the courtesy even to acknowledge the receipt of his letter. Nor could these reverend fathers be blamed. They feared then, as the friends of the Church now do, that if the principle of allocation be granted, an unscrupulous or interested ministry would wrest the right of appropriation, if not alienation. In justice, however, to Bishop Watson, it must be conceded, that his intentions were pure; nor can we refuse the appeal with which he closes his account of these transactions," Thus, at the very outset of my episcopal life, did I endeavour to protect the Church, though my enemies have constantly represented me as desirous to injure it."

The coalition of the Whigs with the Tories, to turn Lord Shelburne out of office, merely because he would not travel so fast as the former wished to drive, seems thoroughly to have disgusted our author with the practice of his party, however much he must have been inclined to support the principles of a constitutional opposition. We find him henceforth more and more adhering to a personal and independent estimate of public measures. In all ecclesiastical matters he shewed himself a strong conservative reformer witness his unanswerable speech against "general bonds of resignation of benefices," which he justly characterized as a robbery of Church, carrying the previous question with all the bench, and a majority of the whole house. Again, when Fox's celebrated India bill, to transfer the patronage of that vast empire to seven directors, nominated by the House of Commons, consequently by the minister for the time, was proposed by his friends, our author, though solicited by official and private influence, refused his support, and consented only not to speak and vote against the bill, "as fraught with more seeds of corruption than any one measure which had been proposed since the revolution." Nor was the bishop less severe on Mr Pitt, for retaining office for several weeks in opposition to a majority of the House of Commons. "It was," said he, equally unconstitutional and unworthy of a minister of the crown." But then the nation was with Mr Pitt, and his want of popularity arose solely, as Dr Watson admits, from a "coalition with the whigs, who had thus contrived to force themselves upon the king." This clearly appeared by a subsequent appeal to the nation, to repeat this censure when a House of Commons was returned, who wrought with the minister when unencumbered of party aid. Mr Pitt being thus established in power on his own principles, the Bishop of Landaff wrote, urging upon him to accomplish the union of the third division of the empire. "Then would Britain and Ireland have but one interest; and it is rank absurdity in politics to expect any cordiality between them whilst their interests are separate."

66

These facts are sufficient to prove both our author's independence of opinion, and his consummate knowledge of public affairs. Parliamentary reform also engaged his attention at this time, and the conclusion at which he arrived then has been verified in our own days, namely, that he could discover no plan of reform" by which political degeneration could be stayed. The mode of corruption may be changed, but corruption itself will remain so long as there is so much public wealth to be distributed, and so many public honours to be disposed among the members of the House of Commons, and among their connections. Hence I am not one of those who stickle either for the extension of the right of voting, or for the restriction of the duration of Parliament. Other and better means of introducing honest and independent members into the House, and keeping them so whilst they sit there, may perhaps be discovered."

In the spring of 1785, Dr Watson published his Theological Tracts, (in six volumes,) an excellent collection of standard treatises on doctrinal and practical divinity, for the use of students, to whom the expense of books is an object. This work, though warmly received by the public, and still deservedly in repute, was not in cordial esteem with the bishops, who sought to discredit a publication which included the writings of dissenters. It is to be regretted when the orthodoxy of Christianity is thought to be different from the orthodoxy of a church. In this case, however, as we cannot reject the Gospel, we have the privilege of choosing between the standards of the Church, and the dogmas of her office-bearers. Which of these to prefer appears to have occasioned very little difficulty to our author, for he looked upon the latter as "filling the most respectable stations, not onerously, but inculpably."

Editing the writings of others seems to have awakened a feeling for his own; and he now set about a final examination of his manuscripts on chemistry. This produced a fourth and last volume of chemical essays, published in February, 1786, when he burned the remaining papers, "and bade adieu to a science, cultivated, for many years, with laborious and unceasing assiduity, and from the pursuit of which he had derived more pleasure, than from any other branch of philosophy."

While thus employed, his lordship sustained a severe private loss in the death of his early friend, and first pupil, Mr Luther of Essex. Dr Watson was left, by his friend's will, sole executor, and an estate in Sussex, which he soon afterwards sold to Lord

Egremont for £23,500 sterling. Those were solid proofs of the sincerity of that regard which his virtuous and manly character had inspired. But we have always lamented, that now, when personally independent, he did not practically set the example of a Church reform, of which, in theory, he had so strenuously advocated the necessity. "How shall I answer this" (holding pluralities)" at the tribunal of Christ. You saw the corruption of my Church; you had some ability to attempt a reform; but secular considerations choked your integrity? I accordingly publish." This was said in a letter to the Duke of Grafton; but publishing a pamphlet was an easier reform than resigning a living or two. Again, "Pluralities and non-residence are scandals in the Christian Church, as a Church, and injurious to those interests of the state, for the promotion of which it is at the expense of maintaining a clergy." These, and other denunciations, are strong as they are just; yet they come from one who, possessing a private fortune, continued to be a bishop on one side of the island, an archdeacon on the other, a professor in Cambridge, &c. &c. Alas! how easy, but how unavailing is it, to raise the cry of "Remove all-every abuse," (every proven abuse ought to be removed,) when the cry is understood with a reservation,-saving always and excepting some darling convenience, some right eye not to be plucked out, which the refomer would retain for self or party. On ordinary occasions, and with an ordinary man, this is only ludicrous, but

Who would not weep if Atticus were he ?

In the spring of 1787, after thirty-three years' connection with the university, Dr Watson took leave of Cambridge, obtaining, by special grace, that the professorship of divinity should be held by deputy, with £200 per annum. The cause of this resignation, which, from attachment to the university, he appears to have made with reluctance, was the return of a most severe indisposition, that three years before had brought him to the brink of the grave. The autumn of the same year was marked by the separation of another tie in the death of the Duke of Rutland, who had been the pupil and attached friend of Bishop Watson. The letters between this young nobleman, then Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, and the prelate, offer subjects of interesting reflection at the present time, were it only to shew how differently they both viewed the great political principles of Irish administration from those ministers who have since professed themselves whig legislators. On one of the great ecclesiastical problems, for instance, the bishop remarks, -"The White-boys, I understand, give you trouble about tithes. The clergy are hired by the state, and they are paid by tithes. Whether this be the best way of paying the clergy is not the question; it was the best when first established. Most men of fortune care little about religion, and they grudge the clergy what is due to them by laws which were made long before they, or any of their ancestors, possessed the estates which are now saddled with the encumbrance of tithes. It does not become any legislature to give way, on principles of equity, to the demands of these men; they are as manifestly founded on avarice and injustice, as if all the copyholders in the kingdom were to demand exemption from payment of the landlord's rents." Again, on another of these questiones vexatæ, "As to the Catholics, on the supposition that no relief can safely be granted to them, the hand of Government should be extended, with decided force, to the protection of the Protestants in all their rights; the insurgents should be speedily and effectually put down. No man will suspect me of a want of toleration in religious matters; yet I own I have looked upon the concessions to the Catholics, which have been made both here and in Ireland, with a jealous eye; and I shall ever think that Protestant Government unwise, which trusts power to the Catholics, till it shall be clearly proved, that, if they had the opportunity, they would not use it to the oppressing of the Protestants. There are some enlightened gentlemen among the Catholics; but the persecuting spirit of the Roman Church remains in the hearts of the generality of its members; and whilst it does remain, Popery must be watched, intimidated, restrained." These are not introduced as political extracts. In the biography of a prelate, not less distinguished for candour, moderation, and tolerance, than for the fearlessness and spirit of his defence of Christianity, these views are inseparable from the subject, and necessary, as exhibiting his undis

guised sentiments on the vital questions of an establishment and a Protestant ascendency, consequently on the final result among our posterity-Shall Britain be reformed-religious -free. Having formed the resolution of gradually retiring from public life, Bishop Watson now began to withdraw from all interference in lesser debates. In 1788, a convocation of bishops was called, to consider the question, Ought the test and corporation acts to be maintained." Our author and another were the only members of the right reverend assembly who voted in the negative. The question was subsequently lost also in the House of Commons. We have always regretted this. A healthy church has nothing to fear from dissent, and an establishment, if ricketty in itself, will never be sustained against a respectable dissent by oaths, or exclusive privileges. But in this instance the sacred cause of liberty of conscience was damaged by the violence of some dissenters themselves, especially by the anarchical writings of Priestley. Mr Pitt's commercial treaty with France was another measure in which Dr Watson took a lively interest; but in this case against the right. In the celebrated Regency Bill he likewise opposed the minister. In this, however, he took the side of justice and common sense; while it pleased God to afflict the father, what more natural, or more constitutional, than that the heir apparent should watch over the interests of the crown and the empire. The queen thought otherwise, and ministers joined her. Dr Watson's speech, January, 1789, was by far the best in favour of the prince's rights, and, doubtless, widened the breach between him and the court.

Pursuing his intention of still more completely retiring from public, the subject of this memoir laid the foundation of his house on his estate of Calgarth, on the banks of the Winandermere. While we shall continue the plan, in the remaining portion of this biography, to touch upon his more important labours, we may introduce here his own summary of his life, after many years' residence in a scene which he might be said almost to have created. "I have now spent npwards of twenty years in this delightful country; but my time has not been spent in field diversions, in idle visitings, in county bickerings, in indolence, or intemperance. No! it has been spent partly in supporting the religion and constitution of the country by seasonable publications; and principally in building farm houses, blasting rocks, enclosing wastes, in making bad land good, in planting larches, and in implanting in the hearts of my children principles of piety, of benevolence, and of selfgovernment. By such occupations I have much recovered my health, entirely preserved my independence, set an example of a spirited husbandry to the county, and honourably providea for my family."

Of all these virtues of the prelate and active citizen, it falls in with our present object to notice, in detail, his writings only. These were peculiarly adapted to the exigencies of the times. A moral pestilence, during many years, towards the close of the last century, as every one knows, through the innoculation of revolutionary and infidel principles from the Continent, threatened to overspread both the opinions and practice of a large portion of the population of this country. Dr Watson stood foremost among those enlightened philanthropists who opposed to this inroad on morality a moral remedy. His successive and seasonable publication of charges, tracts, sermons, and occasional discourses, was productive of the most beneficial effects, by recalling men's affections to the religion and the monarchy of their native land, and by encouraging all classes to bear the sacrifices and privations which a war, involving the existence of civil institutions throughout the world, called them to endure. These writings, published in a cheap form, and many of them reprinted by Government, and circulated by tens of thousands among that class whose situation exposes them first to suffering, and at all times most to unprincipled sophistry, were, doubtless, one great means of strengthening religious and British feelings in the hearts of our humble countrymen. At the same time, he did not maintain the necessity of continuing the contest; but in the house supported every measure brought forward against the minister for making peace with France. In humanity, this was right; in policy, it was wrong. Had the overtures from the temporary governors of that noble, but unhappy country, been sincere, the pacific proposals ought to have been entertained. But the fiat had gone forth from the Directory,

that Carthage must be destroyed, and a breathing space was sought, only to consider and prepare the best means of accomplishing this menace in the ruin of Britain.

Of the numerous attestations to the excellency and utility of these labours of Bishop Watson, from more than one Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, from legislators of all parties, and from many of the most conspicuous literary characters of the time, our limits do not permit more than the mention. Speaking on this subject, Lord Chancellor Thurlow said in his own peculiar way,"The writings of Dr Watson have done more for Christianity than all the bench of bishops together." George III, too, a sovereign whose practical good sense and real British firmness have risen and will rise in estimation with events, entertained a very high opinion of the Bishop's merit as a Christian writer. "On one occasion," says the Doctor, speaking of 1794, "when the king was praising what I had written, I said to him, -"I love to come forward in a moment of danger." His reply was so quick and proper, that I will put it down :-"I see you do, and it is a mark of a man of high spirit." "His majesty's reception of me," continues our author, "was always so complimentary, that notwithstanding the pestilent prevalence of court duplicity, I cannot bring myself to believe that he was my enemy; though he has suffered me to remain through life worse provided for than any bishop on the bench." The king was not exactly to blame in this, because he hated not a party man, but a party preacher, as he had been taught to regard our author. In truth, however, independence in politics stood in the way of the bishop's advancement. It had become the interest of no party to give him their protection. Belong to no party!" said the Duchess of Rutland to him, "and I predict, that with all your talents, you will be nobody.'

We come now to the publication of the most important of this class of Dr Watson's writings, -the clear, learned, and convincing treatise, now presented to the reader," An Apology for the Bible," "A little work," in the words of its author, "intended as a defence of that holy book, against the scurrilous abuse of Thomas Paine, and which I have reason to believe was of singular service in stopping that torrent of irreligion that had been excited by his writings." This is speaking with extreme modesty of production, whose utility was acknowledged by letters of thanks from public bodies not only through Britain, but in Ireland and America, and whose author had the singular satisfaction of knowing, from the grateful confessions of individuals, that it had been the blessed instrument of recalling many souls from the darkness of infidelity into the marvellous light of Gospel truth. In comparison with but one such testimony, what are all the mightiest triumphs of literary genius! The Convention of the Episcopal Church of Connecticut stated from their own experience, "Happy are we to find, that your excellent defence has in this country in a good degree strengthened the faithful, confirmed the doubtful, roused the indifferent, and silenced the gainsayer. It will, we have reason to believe, be a means of checking that spirit of infidelity amongst us, which has produced such horrid scenes of distress in a powerful nation in Europe." Many other public testimonies might be quoted; but we shall be satisfied with two individual instances of the value set upon this treatise. A Scottish manufacturer, Mr Dale of Paisley, having obtained permission of the author, published at his own expense an edition of three thousand copies, for gratuitous distribution among his workmen, with the most beneficial effect. The following, again, is an interesting proof of right feeling and truly kingly conversation in the late George IV. communicated in that taste which vindicated for the living sovereign the character of the most perfect gentleman in Europe. The letter is from the prince's private secretary to Bishop Watson:

CARLTON HOUSE, May 4, 1812. MY LORD, It affords me the greatest satisfaction to have it in command from the Prince Regent, to make known to your lordship a circumstance, which he is sure will on every account afford your lordship equal gratification to that which he has himself experienced from it. After dinner yesterday, at Carlton House, the conversation turned upon the general immorality and profligacy of the present day, when principles and opinions, subversive of all religion and morality, were not only held by many, but studiously endeavoured to be instilled

into the minds of others. One of the most violent of these, a Sussex baronet, was mentioned by a Mr Tyrwhitt, (who, I believe, is not unknown to your lordship,) as having uttered opinions in his hearing so infamous and atheistical, as to force him to leave the company, first, however, exacting from him a promise that he would attentively peruse a book, he should the next morning send him. That book was your lordship's Apology for the Bible." And yesterday the baronet's answer was produced and read, expressive of the greatest thankfulness for having had it put into his hands, as it not only had proved the error and fallacy of every opinion he had before entertained, but had afforded him a degree of tranquillity that his mind had previously been a stranger to. I have the honour, &c.

The work of whose success he had thus so many gratifying proofs, which," to use his own words, in replying to the above, "filled his heart with real joy," appeared in the spring of 1794. In the course of the two preceding years, the unhappy man, Paine, who, after having been dismissed from the excise, had acquired some political and literary notoriety, published separately, in three parts, his "Age of Reason." The object of this intended " Investigation of True and false Theology," is to prove Deism the "true," and Christianity the "false Theology." Irreverently as many portions of this performance are written, and detestable as its avowed purpose is, the plan does not want a certain malicious ingenuity, admirably calculated to work mischief in minds of unquiet and searching temperament, but whose information and resources do not enable them to distinguish between wilful error, plausibly urged, and unsuspecting truth, stated in its own unvarnished simplicity. Just, then, to those who stand most in need of truthful direction, and whose situation in life most requires the comforts of a settled Christianity, is Paine's book adapted to work the greatest sorrow,—

To filch from the poor his Saviour and God.

To quash such a nuisance in the very field of agument selected by the writer, was a duty well becoming any Christian teacher, and worthy of the talents of Dr Watson; and faithfully has he performed his task. The intention of his opponent may be described as in some degree an inverting of the internal evidence for the authenticity and genuineness of the books of Scripture. This proof, as is well known, apart from the conviction of their inspiration, mainly rests upon one of the most powerful forms of induction,-the concurrence of a great variety of isolated facts in the establishment of a general truth. Sensible of this, Paine has revived-for he did not originate -the idea of overturning this proof, by collecting from infidel and deistical writers, ancient as well as modern, the apparent discrepancies which occur among the sacred writers. Now, in so many narratives, composed by the same author at different intervals; or by several contemporaries, without communication; and still more, by writers living at the distance of centuries; or in cases yet more liable to misinterpretation, prediction and its fulfilment, there must occur seeming differences, opposed in appearance to the general harmony of inspired compositions. These, separated from their explanations, dissevered from the context, and viewed with no relation to circumstances, manners, times, or intentions, Paine, throwing together, has commented upon in a spirit contrived to distress the good, overset the unstable, and defile the carnal. In the strong and justly indignant remonstrance of Lord Erskine," Against all this concurring testimony of the virtuous and the wise, of science and genius, we find suddenly from the author of the Age of Reason,' that the Bible teaches nothing but lies, obscenity, cruelty, and injustice.' Had he ever read our Saviour's sermon on the mount? Let us but read that alone, and practise it, and lies, obscenity, cruelty, injustice, and all human wickedness, will be banished from the world."

The difficulty of refuting so pernicious a writer, lay not so much in his reasoning, for in that there is nothing for which the learning and powerful mind of his opponent are not far more than a match. But as the poison had been conveyed under a popular form, it was necessary that the antidote should be administered through a medium capable of reaching every intellect, and yet of satisfying every judgment. There is in Paine's argument a pomp and circumstance, and pretence of learning, which were to be met with a real erudition, satisfactory to the