for the American colonies, where two fects in particular, the quakers, and what we call the dissenters, may be ftiled the establishment. For if weak minds are caught by the external pomp and parade of religion, and by the affumed dignity and facredness of prelacy, is there not a danger that many of the unstable members of their church may be drawn afide, that the epifcopal party may in time grow to a formidable head, and by fowing the feeds of religious diffention among a people, who dwell together in unity and brotherly love, may diforder their whole conftitution, disturb their police, fubvert their particular regulations, calculated to promote induftry and frugality; and in fome future era, produce a more fatal divifion, and a more impolitic ftagnation of their commerce with the mother country, than what prevails at prefent through the mad-headed operations of an imbecile administration, molesting them in the enjoyment of their civil rights.

But confirmation, fays the archbishop, is an office of our church derived from the primitive ages, and when administered with due care, a very ufeful one. And if the Americans are denied it, unlefs they will come over to England for it; they are in effect prohibited the exercife of one part of their religion.

One would hardly imagine, that a proteftant archbishop should have been fo weak or bigotted, as to leave an order in writing for printing fo idle a letter in 1769: at a period when moderation in religious opinions, and an indifference about immaterial ceremonies, is the characteristic of the times, and even the church of Rome is making fome advances towards a reformation in these matters. Will the advocates for epifcopifing America, fupport this feeble argument of the late archbishop? I hope not: but left there fhould be fome among them fo abfurd: it may be neceffary to remark, that the archbishop himself only pleads for the antiquíty of the custom, and its utility, when properly administered. Now we will appeal to the clergy of the church of England at home, and fairly ask the question, if confirmation is not disused every day more and more, and if, notwithstanding, the people are prohibited the exercife of one part of their religion? We will take the liberty alfo to afk the rector and the curate of St. Martin's in the fields, if they ever once thought of afking the many grown-up lords and gentlemen, to whom they have administered the holy facrament, as a qualification for posts of honour and emolument If they had been confirmed by a bishop? Few rectors or curates would have the impertinence thus to catechife people of quality, and it cannot be doubted, that if the officiating prieft had asked lord W-y-h, Mr. R-R-g-y, or that finical hackney wit George As Sn, fuch a queftion, be would have been roafted to death at Betty's before one in the afternoon, and have been the ftanding jeft at Arthur's for a month. But we will carry the point a little farther; and venture to affirm, that one-half of the people, receiving the communion in the parish churches of London, have never been confirmed, and indeed how fhould they, unless advertisements for confirmation were as frequent, as for public entertainme

Z 2

tainments, in which cafe perhaps the right reverend fathers in God would complain bitterly of the fatigue of their holy offices, and of the expences attending fuch hard duty. St. Peter, if he really was a bishop, would not have been fo embarrassed, for he would neither have tired his horfes, ftrained the fprings, nor have worn out the wheels of his coach on fuch an occafion.

If then fo little attention is paid to the ceremony of confirmation at home, at a time when the morals of the people are totally relaxed, would it not be better to restore church difcipline in this country, where it is fo much wanted, than to be fo folicitous about it in a country where the people in general are of a fober, virtuous complexion, and may be very fafely admitted to the holy communion, though they have not been confirmed. Befides it may be prefumed, that the end of confirmation is anfwered, if the clergyman who adminifters the facrament to adults for the first time, fimply interrogates them upon the grand articles of the christian religion, and receives a folemn verbal acknowledgment at the altar of their belief in them, and of their readinefs to take upon them the vow made for them in baptifm.

In another part of this letter, the archbishop obferves," that if they have no ordinations in America, they muft either fend perfons hither to be ordained, or take fuch as come to them from hence." After having ftated the inconveniences attending the fending their fons to be ordained in England: he draws an inference, that they muit chiefly be fupplied from hence; and adds this curious remark, which it is furprizing he did not alter, as he lived to fee the Scotch devoted to government, though estranged from the public." Not many in proportion will go from hence, "but perfons of defperate fortunes, low qualifications, and bad or doubtful characters, who cannot answer as they ought, the "end for which they are designed; and it deferves obfervation, "that a great part of them are Scotch. I need not fay what chance "there is that epifcopal clergymen of that country may be dif "affected to the government."

Thanks to archbishop Secker, whofe pious memory will be undoubtedly held in veneration by the Scotch, we have now found out the original author of the odious national diftin&ions fo much complained of by our northern brethren: and by giving our imagination a little fcope, we may account for the propagation of them. The archbishop revived the dying embers which had been almost extinguished with the rebellion of 1745, by this letter to Mr. Walpole, written in 1750-1. John Wilkes and Charles Churchill; the first, from his connection with lords of the treasury, and of trade and plantations; and the latter on his private vifits to the archbishop, which were frequent; got fight of this curious letter, and following his pious example, they attacked the Scotch lords and commons, in the North-briton, and gave them much the fame character as the archbishop had given to the epifcopal clergy of Scotland emigrating to America. But how Dr. Secker could be fo out in his politics, or his editors, as to let fuch an obfervation be printed in 1769, is really astonishing. A very useful

hint to the public is thrown out by the archbishop, when treating of the limited powers to be granted to the propofed American bishops, he says, "that one grand objection to the scheme is, the danger of increafing church power by means of fuch an establish"ment," and adds-" for my own part, and I believe my brethen in general are of the fame opinion, I have no imagination that bishops are intitled to, or that it would be right to give them,, every where, the fame powers and privileges, that we happen, "by the particular conftitution of this country, to poffefs here. "Several parts of that conftitution might, perhaps, full as well "have been formed otherwife.-All our temporal powers and privileges are merely conceflions from the ftate; and the act of parliament for the fuffragan bishops, under which several were "made in the last century, and others may now, exemplifies fo fully the poffibility of bithops without peerages; and confiitory courts; that we need have no fear from appointing a few fuch "bishops in America."

66

As we do not remember that the bishops have ever stood up for the privileges of the people, or the defence of the protestant intereft against the inroads of popery (except the feven worthy prelates who were fent to the tower in the time of that fhallow tyrant James II.) it were to be wished, that the fuffragan bishops for the future, were without peerages, as they are in general paffive flaves to a- -n, and only to ferve increase the number of their tools.

As a proof of the archbishop's skill in politics, take the following paffage." If the fcheme thould be brought into par"liament, fome members may oppofe it, blinded by ill-will to the "ecclefiaftical part of our conftitution. But furely these will not "be many. Befides, the adminiftration will easily quiet fuch of "them as are their friends. Then the tories muit be for bifhops, "if it be only to preserve their credit, and the remainder will probably find themselves too inconfiderable to flir."

66

Upon the whole, the archbishop allows that the failure of fo many attempts in behalf of this fcheme, is prefumption more than enough of there being fome infuperable objection to it. Yet, notwithstanding, he advifes the favourers of it not to give up the caufe, because fome great men have continued as teadily to approve, as others to difapprove of the appointment of bithops for America, and because it is certain that many designs have been long frustrated, or postoned on one account or another, which at length have been executed, and found beneficial.

Till fome abler advocate than the late Dr. Secker fhall arife to prove that it will be the intereft of this kingdom to increase the unhappy divifions between Great Britain and her colonies, by as flagrant an invafion of their religious, as has been attempted of their civil freedom, this fcheme will not be encouraged, but will be conftantly rejected by those who have the management of the affairs of the colonies, as it was by the late lord Walpole, who appears to have taken infinite pains to afcertain the merits and demerits of the propofal; and to have put a negative upon it,: after the most candid enquiries and mature deliberation.

The

The Political Conduct of the Earl of Chatham. 8vo. is. Becket.

TH

HIS remarkable pamphlet is written by a ftaunch friend of the earl of Bute, and of the present adminiftration; the conduct of the former, who is the hero of the piece, is occafionally blamed, only with a view to make his character appear the more important, and the better to pave the way for his return to public employment, when the idle prejudices of the vulgar fhall have fubfided. The public may be affured that this is another production of the indefatigable Vindex, alias Mr. Richard Wn, author of the famous vindication of the d- of Gn, which, like the prefent work had the fupport of lord Bute's political character principally in view. That our readers may be enabled to trace the resemblance of the two pamphlets, we beg leave to refer them to our review of The Vindication of the Dof G page 123 and 369, vol. 4. and as a farther proof that Vindex, and the author of the piece now under confideration, are one and the fame person, we recommend the attentive perufal of the remarkable letter figned Vindex, already noticed in this number of Our work.

-n,

We should not have been fo particular in pointing out the writer of the Political Conduct of the Earl of Chatham, if some of our correfpondents had not given us a hint that they imagined it was written by Mr. Ry, whofe pen is equally devoted to the fervice of the miniftry. Our thanks are juftly due for the intelligence, and we are well affured that our candid friends will not. be offended at the pains we have taken to establish our opinion, though it differs from the judgment they had formed on this

occafion.

As the writer always difcovered himself to be an enemy to the civil liberties of mankind, it will not appear extraordinary that the prefent pamphlet should fet out with an oblique reflection on the revolution; or that he should degrade the true fpirit of liberty, which has occafionally rendered itself confpicuous in this land fince that happy era, into-a cry of liberty, which hath gone abroad in this country ever fince the revolution, fubjecting the people to every Species of political impofition. To this clamour or cry about liberty, though little understood, our author thinks that ambitious and artful men have flood indebted for the high offices of state they have held fince the acceffion of the house of Hanover, "for

arming themselves with the prejudices of the vulgar they have " often taken the cabinet by ftorm." His words are too remarkable to be omitted, and certainly deserve no thanks from his prefent majefty, whofe ancestors he reprefents as the groffeft dupes that ever wore a crown. "What facilitated this democratical "manner of rifing to the zenith of power, was the acceffion of a

foreign family to the throne. Unacquainted with the manners "and policy of this country, it was not difficult to work upon "their fears, and to veil from their eyes the power which the "crown had actually placed in their hands." Aware, however, that it was impoffible to find the least shadow of truth in this re

mark,

mark, during the reign of George the firft, whofe distinguished political abilities exempted him from the imputation of being the dupe of artful or ambitious men, he defignedly paffes over that period, though he builds his maxim on the æra of his acceffion; and comes directly to his favourite point, which is uppermost in all his writings, abuse of the late king, and of his minifters, to whom he applies his argument. We fhall now fee who were the artful and ambitious men, who on the cry of liberty, arming themselves with the prejudices of the vulgar, prefumed to force themselves into the cabinet, and held their ftation there by working on the fears of his late majefty, and veiling from his eyes the power which the crown had actually placed in his hands.

These were no other, according to our author, than Walpole, the Pelhams, and Mr. Pitt, so that he contrives to blacken all the friends of the revolution, and the old whig intereft, by this comprehenfive attack on those who rofe in a democratical manner to the zenith of power. "Walpole overawed the nation with the power of the crown, and he terrified the king with imaginary " and well contrived fictions of difaffection in the fubject. The "Pelhams trod in the fteps of Walpole, and by the acceffion of "family connections to the influence of the crown, reigned, if I may use the expreffion, with more fecurity than their predeceffors."

The audacity of this writer, whofe conftant aim is to establish the character of the prefent times, by vilifying the late king, and arraigning the measures of his faithful fervants, was never more apparent than in the citation we have juft given. If he has any fense of honour left, let him point out the inftances in which the people were vverawed with the power of the crown, during the late reign. Were any obfolete, vexatious claims revived to moleft the fubject in the quiet poffeffion of his property? Was the prerogative extended in any one cafe, where the public was conftitutionally interested? Was the difpenfing power once exercifed during that long reign? Was the power of the crown exerted to controul the operation of the laws, and screen the guilty? Was there any occafion given for petitioning the throne for a redrefs of grievances? Was there any motion made for petitions in any county in England, complaining that the people were overawed by the power of the crown? He will not dare to affert that this was the cafe: Is it not then the lowest degree of calumny and falfehood to charge the miniftry in the late reign, with overawing the people by the power of the crown? No lefs infulting and injurious is it to the memory of George the fecond, to say that his minifters terrified him with imaginary and well conceived fictions of difaffection in the fubject. Mr. Richard W- -n knows but too well, that difaffection and disloyalty characterised one period of the late reign, and till he can make it appear that the unnatural rebellion in 1745, was imaginary, and that the behaviour of the fecret abettors of a popish pretender at one of our univerfities, and in many of our capital cities, where his health and profperity to his caufe were publicly drank, attended with circumflances of folemnity, by

7

fome