Nov.1762. our fins, "He" is faithful and juff to for give us our fins,". Thele lat words ire generally las improperly read as t as the elt. The chief emphasis is here allo often placed on the word ins; which not nly mars the fenfe, but produces a fad acaphonia, very dilagreeable to the ear, y the three fucceffive emphafes on the vord fins in the fame fentence; as, " If ve fay we have no fin, we deceive our elves, &c.; but if we confefs our fins, le is faithful and just to forgive us our 'ns," &c. The want of laying the proer emphasis on the word confefs in the ormer part of the fentence, produces the ame mistake in not laying it right on the word forgive in the latter, as the one is confequence of the other: "If we onfe'is our fins, He will forgive our fins." The words faithful and just, by being urried over, lole their whole force and nport. When properly pronounced, there as implied in them by means of emphafis, hat God has entered into a covenant with man, that upon conteflion and reentance he will forgive him his fins; is faith and juftice therefore are both ngaged in the performance of this coenant: "He" is faithful, and juft, to orgive us our fins-and to cleanfe us om all unrighteousness." Here the mphasis on the word unrighteoufness is s unfortunately placed as any of the oers: for the emphafis ought to be strong both on the words cleanfe and all; e meaning of the tentence being. That od, upon our confeflion and penitence, ill not only forgive our fins, but like ile cleanfe us, not from umrighteoufnefs nly, but from a'll unrighteoufnefs. He ill purity us entirely, fo that no taint of ar former fins thall remain.

I thall now read the text in the two ays, first in the ufual manner, and aferwards in what I apprehend to be the ght way, in order that the difference be made more apparent.

ay If we fa'y that we have no fi'n, we eceive ourselves, and the truth is not 1 us; but if we confess our fi'ns, he is lithful and just to forgive us our fi'ns, and > cleante us from all unrighteouinefs." Now in the other way: "I'f we fay hat we have n'o fin, we deceive our' Ives, and the truth is not in us: But", we confe'ls our fins, "He" is faithful, nd juit, to forgive us our fins, and to lea'nte from all unrighteousnels.",

We could not forbear finiling at fome f thefe remarks, as very uncommon in

599 stances of critical fagacity. Our author's obfervations on the word fay in particu lar, are very quaint and puerile. This word is here evidently enough confined to ourselves; as, If we fay to ourselves, or flutter ourselves, that we have no fin, &c. His removing the emphalis from fay to if, therefore, in this fentence, is, in our opinion, wrong; and the reafons he gives for it far-fetched and groundless. The critical reader will not fail to obferve, that although our author has made fome emendation on the whole, yet he hath fallen into tome blunders equally abfurd with thofe he cenfures. For instance, if we allow what he fuppofes, that, for the reafons he alledges, the emphafis fhould be placed on the particle if, in the first member of the fentence, it fhould certainly, for fimilar reasons, be laid on the fecond if, in the fecond part of it The motive for his laying the emphafis on confefs in the fecond part, alfo, hould have induced him to lay it on fay in the firft. Again, Mr Sheridan omits laying any emphasis on the word deceive, where it ought to lie, and where he had the fame reafon for placing it, as for his laying it on truth; he only fhifts the falfely placed emphafis on felves to our; reading our felves instead of ourselves; an infignificant and ridiculous alteration. We would read this former part of the fentence thus: "If we fa'y we have no" si'n, we decei've ourselves, and the tru'th is not in us."

Our author proceeds next to give some inftances of improper etaphafis in theatrical declamation, with remarks thereon; in most of which we think him equally mistaken. There is a paffage, fays he, in Macbeth, which, as it has been gene. rally spoken on the stage, and read by moft people, is downright nonfenfe; which yet, in itself, is a very fine one, and conveys an idea truly fublime. This is the following expretion of Macbeth's, after. his having committed the murders Will all great Neptune's ocean wash this blood Clean from my hands? No-thele my hands The multitudinous fea incarnardine, [wili rather Making the green one, red.

"Now the laft line, pronounced in that manner, calling the fea, the green one," Mr Sheridan tays, makes flat nonfenfe of it. But if we read it with proper emphafis and ftop, and fay, making the green-one red," here is amoft fublime idea conveyed, that his hands dipped into the fea, would change the colour

of

of the whole ocean from green to red; making the green →→→→→ Que red." Nor, if we consider the disturbed state of his imagination at that time, will this thought, tryperbolical as it may leem at firft view, appear at all unnatural. For it is highly probable that his faney at that inftant prefented all objects about him as of that fanguine hue; nay, converted the very atmosphere that furrounded him, into a fea of blood." -Poor Shaketpear! how has it been thy fate to have thy immortal labours mangled and mitreprefented by ignorant players and bungling commentators! Thofe very abfurdities which either thon didft not commit, or waft cer#ainly afbamed of, are rendered ten times more abfurd, and admired for their fublinity. For our own parts, we must condefs, that we have always looked upon this pallage to be to hyperbolical, as to border a little upon the bombast. But fuppofing Mr Sheridan to have cleared it from the charge of excellive hyperbole, the impropriety of calling the fea a green one, or even the earth a round one, is not fo great as to talk of turning green, in the abstract, into red. It is poflible to change the colour of an object, by taking away its prefent hue, and giving it another; but to talk of changing one colour into another, is the height of abfurdity, and is an inftance rather of the profound than fublime.

"Particles," fays Mr Sheridan, "whenever they are emphatical, change the meaning of the words from that which belongs to them as pronounced in the common way. Thus, if we read this of Othello in the following manner. Put out the light, and then, put out the light; it is nonfenie. But by marking the par. ticle the, in the repetition of the fame words, a new idea and a new meaning is prefented to the mind :

allufion between the light of the candle and that of life, prefented itfelf to the mind of Othello before he began the line, is to fuppofe his mind fuficiently cal and unimbarraffed, to talk in metaphor and conceit: whereas it is not fo unnatu ral for that aliufion to trike him after he had mentioned putting out the candle; in which cafe nothing can be more natural than for him to paufe, and repeating his words by way of recollecting what he had faid, to addrefs the taper in the moralizing train that follows.

If I quench thee, thau flaming minifter, &c. M.

This expedient, of placing the emphatis on the, leaves the expreflion bold and indeterminate. There is another reading of the paffage, which, in our opinion, renders it much more characteristic. 10thello's rage breaks out into " Put out the light, and then

Here he makes a full paufe, as if afraid to truft even himself with his horrid par. pofe. His heart feems to fail him. But he recollects his fury, fuatches up, as it were, his defperate reflection which had like to have elcaped, and cries again Put out the light. At first he is checked by an emotion of tenderness; and now it is reinforced by an effort of reafon. He accordingly moralizes on the confequences : If I quench thee, thou flaming minifter, &c. C.

Again, in the following line Mr Sheridan fhews himself to be but a very im perfect corrector of erroneous declamation:

*

the emphasis on do, marks the vehemence of his affection much better than any emphafis on the verb love could. For when the emphafis is laid on the verb lavo, da becomes a mere expletive, being an unneceflary fign of the prefent tente. But when an emphasis is placed on do, it becomes an auxiliary verb, fignifying an act of the ftrongest affirmation."

We agree with Mr Sheridan, that an emphafis thould be laid on do; but not that it thould therefore be quite taken away from love: the auxiliary verb has no meaning without the principal, unless the principal had been before mentioned, and were here only understood which is not

the

the cafe. Mr Sheridan, as well as many other theatrical declaimers, feems to be not fufficiently aware, that the emphafis is frequently required to be continued, with a little variation, on two, and some times three words together. We are, in deed, conftantly offended, at our thea tres, by the immoderate emphasis laid on epithets, to the prejudice of their fucceeding fubftantives, on which their meaning in the fentence entirely depends.

Our lecturer's want of judgment in this particular, appears farther in his throwing away his remarks on the manner of reading fome paffages which were never fo written as to be read with propriety or grace. Nothing can be well read that is not well written; and this confideration may ferve to fhew the necellity of studying elocu tion, though with no other view than to be able to write what may be gracefully and emphatically read. No writer who was able to read, would have given Mr Sheridan the trouble to ftand up for the propriety of laying an emphafis upon the particle and.

After all, we must own the force of emphalis fo great, and the meaning of written language fo equivocal, that it is no wonder perfons who do not pronounce their own fentiments, fhould differ in their manner of repeating after other people. Our lecturer, indeed, appears very fenfible of the neceflity of making the fentiment and language our own, in order to read or repeat properly. His farther remarks on the fimple and complex emphafis are, therefore, very pertinent. He has this defect, however, in common with noft didactic writers, that after having fet forth in general terms the utility of bis art, his pupils are left to themselves, to proceed fecundum artem.

In the fifth lecture, Mr Sheridan treats of paufes or ftops; and gives fome directions for the proper management of the voice: in the two remaining lectures he attempts to lay open the principles that may ferve as guides to the public speaker in regard to tones and gesture; upon which, he fays, all that is pleasurable or affecting in elocution, chiefly depend. What he advances upon these fubjects is ingenious, and deferves the attentive perufal of every one who either is, or in: tends to be, a public fpeaker.

The fixth lecture treats of tones, and the feventh of gesture.

The lectures are followed by two differtations; in the first of which Mr SheVOL, XXIV.

бол

ridan traces the rife and progress of elò cution, in the country [Greece] where it first had its birth, and arrived at its ma turity; that we may be enabled to judge whether, if we apply to the fame methods ufed there, we may not hope to attain equal perfection

The fecond differtation, which treats of the state of language in other countries, but more particularly our own, is intended as an introduction to a course of lectures on the English language, not yet delivered. In both thefe differtatious the ingenious reader, though he will probably differ from Mr Sheridan in feveral points, will yet find much entertainment, and many uncommon observations, which fhew that the author has thought much upon his fobject, and is, in many respects, well qualified for the task he has underta ken.

The reader is likewife prefented with the heads of a plan for the improvement of elocution; and for promoting the stu dy of the English language; in order to the refining, afcertaining, and reducing it to a standard; together with tome arguments to enforce the neceility of carrying fuch a plan into execution.

We shall conclude this article with our fincere wishes that Mr Sheridan may meet with all due encouragement in the profe cution of the useful design in which he is engaged. M.

Though fome critics may look upon our author as too fanguine in his expectations, and on his scheme as too gigantic to be fulfilled, we think his defign equally practicable, and praise-worthy; and hope his arguments will have due weight with those who alone can enable him to profecute it in its full extent and efficacy. C.

[Our readers have feen [568.] that Mr Sheridan is not neglected.] A scheme of Scripture-divinity formed upon the plan of the divine difpenfations, with a vindication of the facred wri tings. By John Taylor, D. D. late Profeffor of Divinity and Morality at the academy in Warrington. 8°. 6 s. Waugh.

WHen the learned author of this work

entered upon the important fervice of directing the studies of young persons defigned for the ministry, he thought it requifite to draw up the best plan for their ufe and inftruction, which his long obfervation and experience, as well as

careful

હૈ સું

LONDON.

DIVINITY.

After the ftrictest revifal, the principles heren advanced, appeared to his own judgment just and fcriptural; but, as the editor obferves, he did not therefore prefume they were abfolutely free from error, much lets did he think himfelf au. thorifed, as a public tutor, to impole his fentiments on young minds with an overbearing band. That he might do justice to his pupils and himself, he always prefaced his lectures with the following fo lemn CHARGE; which, in the main, is o improper precedent for feminaries of learning.

I do folemnly charge you, in the name of the God of truth, and of our Lord Jelus Chrift, who is the way, the truth and the life, and before whole judgment-feat you must in no long time appeal, that in all your ftudies and inquiries of a religious nature, prefent or future, you do conftantly, carefully, im-. partially, and confcientioufly attend to evidence, as it lies in the holy fcriptures, or in the nature of things, and the dictates of reafon; cautiously guarding against the fallies of imagination, and the fallacy of ill-grounded conjecture.

The liturgy of the church of England in its ordinary fervice, reduced nearer to the standard of feripture 13. 6d. Millar 11

Remarks on Dr Chandler's original and reafon of the inftitution of the fabbath, 6 d. Hinxman. Sermons on various fojects, By Thomas Gibbons,&M. Act. 4 s. Ficha. 21 201 the late Rev. Mr William Welt. 5. §.ca Sermons on various important, fubjects. By Hen derfon

VPOLITICAL. ni sons."

The expediency of a peace, deduced fróm a candid comparison of the refpective (tares of G. Britain and he enemies. Psilo Corkeled d¶

A letter to a member of the house of Commons, on the prefent important crisis of national affairs 1 s. 6d. Morgan.) BolighHob A Some reafons for ferious candour in calation to vulgar dec.tions concerning peace or war. 6 d. Henderfon. do not probab A

An inquiry how far L Berits the exalted character given him by the Briton; and the politics and principles of the Briton and Auditor expofed and refuted. ks. PWilliams &

A letter to the Lord Mayor, &o. of London, concerning the peace. 6 d. Huxman, gola A letter to Wilham Pitt, Efq: on the prefent negotiations for a peace. 1 s.36 d. 2 Cobtezli Reflections on the domeftic policy proper to be obferved on the conclufion of a peace. I s. 6d. Millar.

*

An examination of the commercial principles of the late negotiation between G. Britam and France in 1761. I s. 6 d. Dodiles.

A prophecy of Merlin. 6 d. Niroheron A better to the Earl of H concerning a parlamentary peace. Is Henderson, asi? A fpeech without doors, by a lobby mem ber. 6 d.

Williams?

Political-contiderations on the prefent crifi I s. 6d. Hinxman.

A reply to Mr Heathcote's letter. I S Morgan vl 40 Prod Some cool thoughts on the prefent state of affairs. Cooke, Ly Lyd

DSATI

An inquiry into the merits of the fuppofed preliminaries peace, 6 d. Bird

parliament, upon the two tokowing questions The fentiments of an impatial member o

1. Whether G. Britain ought to be delirou of peace in the prefent fituation of her affats 2. What fort of a peace G. Britain has reafo to expics. Becket and De Hondt, MEDICIΜ B«q50Å

Ars medendi; five, Dofes et virest medica mentorum omnium, tam Galenicorum qua Chemicorum, in pharmacopoeia coltegli_regal medico um Londonienfis imprefla A. D. 174

Waugh. m si sot join A Medical commentaries, Patturo Containi a plain and direct answer to Prof. Monro junio Intes fper