The Project Gutenberg eBook of Memoirs of Dr. Joseph Priestley
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this ebook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.
Title: Memoirs of Dr. Joseph Priestley
To the year 1795, written by himself: with a continuation, to the time of his decease, by his son, Joseph Priestley: and observations on his writings, by Thomas Cooper, President Judge of the 4th. district of Pennsylvania: and the Rev. William Christie.
Author: Joseph Priestley
Contributor: William Harvey Christie
Thomas Cooper
Release date: January 14, 2025 [eBook #75111]
Language: English
Original publication: Northumberland: John Binns, 1806
Credits: The Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This book was produced from images made available by the HathiTrust Digital Library.)
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK MEMOIRS OF DR. JOSEPH PRIESTLEY ***
MEMOIRS
OF
JOSEPH PRIESTLEY, L. L. D. F. R. S. &c.
MEMOIRS
OF
Dr. Joseph Priestley,
TO THE YEAR 1795,
_WRITTEN BY HIMSELF_:
WITH A CONTINUATION, TO THE TIME OF HIS DECEASE,
BY HIS SON, JOSEPH PRIESTLEY:
_AND OBSERVATIONS ON HIS WRITINGS_,
BY THOMAS COOPER, PRESIDENT JUDGE OF THE
4TH. DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA: AND THE
REV. WILLIAM CHRISTIE.
NORTHUMBERLAND:
_PRINTED BY JOHN BINNS_.
1806.
_District of Pennsylvania, to wit_:
Be it remembered, that on the twenty-eighth of December in the
thirtieth year of the Independence of the United States of America, A.
D. 1805, Joseph Priestley, of the said district, hath deposited in this
Office the Title of a Book, the right whereof he claims as Proprietor,
in the Words following, to wit:
“Memoirs of Dr. Joseph Priestley, to the year 1795, written by
himself, with a continuation, to the time of his decease, by his Son
Joseph Priestley, and observations on his writings, by Thomas Cooper,
President Judge of the 4th district of Pennsylvania, and the Rev.
William Christie.”
In conformity to the Act of the Congress of the United States, intitled
“An Act for the encouragement of learning by securing the copies of
Maps, Charts, and Books to the authors and proprietors of such copies
during the times therein mentioned.” And also to the Act entitled “An
Act supplementary to an Act entitled “An Act for the encouragement
of learning by securing the copies of Maps, Charts, and Books to
the authors and proprietors of such copies during the times therein
mentioned.”” And extending the benefits, thereof to the Arts of
designing, engraving, and etching, historical and other prints.
D. CALDWELL,
_Clerk of the District
of Pennsylvania_.
TABLE OF CONTENTS,
OF
VOLUME I.
PREFACE, PAGE i
Memoirs with Notes, 1
Continuation of the Memoirs, 129
Appendix No. I. An Account of Dr. Priestley’s Discoveries in Chemistry,
and of his writings on that, and other Scientific subjects, 223
-- -- No. 2 An Account of his Metaphysical writings, 294
PREFACE.
My father, Dr. Priestley, having taken the trouble of writing down the
principal occurrences of his life, to the period of his arrival in this
country, that account is now presented to the public in the state in
which he left it, one or two trifling alterations excepted. The simple
unaffected manner in which it is written, will be deemed, I have no
doubt, far more interesting, than if the narrative itself had been made
the text of a more laboured composition.
Independent of the desire, so universal among mankind, to know somewhat
of the private as well as the public history of those who have made
themselves eminent among their fellow citizens, the life of my father
is likely to be more useful as well as more interesting than those of
the generality of literary men; not only as it is an account of great
industry combined with great abilities, successfully exerted for the
extension of human improvement, but because it affords a striking proof
of the value of rational Christianity, adopted upon mature reflection
and practiced with habitual perseverance.
Few men have had to struggle for so many years with circumstances more
straitened and precarious than my father; few men have ventured to
attack so many or such inveterate prejudices respecting the prevalent
religion of his country, or have advanced bolder or more important
opinions in opposition to the courtly politics of the powers that be;
few have had to encounter more able opponents in his literary career,
or have been exposed to such incessant and vindictive obloquy, from
men of every description, in return for his unremitting exertions
in the cause of truth; yet none have more uniformly proceeded with
a single eye, regardless of consequences, to act as his conviction
impelled him, and his conscience dictated. His conduct brought with it
its own reward, reputation and respect from the most eminent of his
contemporaries, the affectionate attachment of most valuable friends,
and a cheerfulness of disposition arising in part from conscious
rectitude which no misfortunes could long repress. But to me it seems,
that conscious rectitude alone would hardly, of itself, have been
able to support him under some of the afflictions he was doomed to
bear. He had a farther resource, to him never failing and invaluable,
a firm persuasion of the benevolence of the Almighty towards all his
creatures, and the conviction that every part of his own life, like
every part of the whole system, was preordained for the best upon the
whole of existence. Had he entertained the gloomy notions of Calvinism
in which he was brought up, this cheering source of contentment
and resignation would probably have failed him, and irritation and
despondency would have gained an unhappy ascendancy. But by him the
deity was not regarded as an avenging tyrant, punishing, for the sake
of punishing his weak and imperfect creatures, but as a wise and kind
parent, inflicting those corrections only that are necessary to bring
our dispositions to the proper temper, and to fit us for the highest
state of happiness of which our natures are ultimately capable.
With these views of the present and the future, it is no wonder that he
submitted with perfect resignation to the inevitable vicissitudes of
human life, and looked forward to futurity, as a period of existence
when his capacity for receiving happiness would be greater because his
capacity for communicating it would be enlarged.
My father’s narrative closing with his arrival in this country, where
he has done so much for the promotion of useful knowledge of all
kinds, I have compleated the account of his life from that period to
the termination of it. The Notes have been added to the narrative as
desireable illustrations of the passages to which they refer.
I have likewise thought it proper to add a review of my father’s
literary labours, in order to give the reader a knowledge of his
opinions on many important subjects, likewise, of the share in
the increase of human knowledge, which may be justly ascribed to
his exertions. The Appendices giving an account of his Chemical,
Philosophical, Metaphysical, Political and Miscellaneous writings, as
well as the Summary of his religious opinions, are written by my friend
Judge Cooper, formerly of Manchester in England. For the Appendix
containing an analysis of my father’s Theological writings, I am
indebted to the Rev. W. Christie, formerly of Montrose in Scotland.
The work might have been made more interesting as well as entertaining,
had I deemed myself at liberty to have published letters addressed
to my father by persons of eminence in this country, as well as in
Europe. But those communications that were intended to be private,
shall remain so; as I do not think I have a right to amuse the public
either against, or without, the inclinations of those who confided
their correspondence to his care.
I regret, that more of the present work is not the production of
my father’s pen; and I hope the reader will make allowance for the
imperfection of that portion of it, for which I have made myself
responsible.
JOSEPH PRIESTLEY.
NORTHUMBERLAND, PENNSYLVANIA,
May 1st, 1805.
_MEMOIRS_
OF
DR. JOSEPH PRIESTLEY.
[WRITTEN BY HIMSELF.]
Having thought it right to leave behind me some account of my _friends_
and _benefactors_, it is in a manner necessary that I also give some
account of _myself_; and as the like has been done by many persons, and
for reasons which posterity has approved, I make no farther apology for
following their example. If my writings in general have been useful
to my cotemporaries, I hope that this account of myself will not be
without its use to those who may come after me, and especially in
promoting virtue and piety, which I hope I may say it has been my care
to practice myself, as it has been my business to inculcate them upon
others.
My father, Jonas Priestley, was the youngest son of Joseph Priestley, a
maker and dresser of woollen cloth. His first wife, my mother, was the
only child of Joseph Swift, a farmer at Shafton, a village about six
miles south east of Wakefield. By this wife he had six children, four
sons and two daughters. I, the oldest, was born on the thirteenth of
March, old style 1733, at Fieldhead about six miles south west of Leeds
in Yorkshire. My mother dying in 1740, my father married again in 1745,
and by his second wife had three daughters.
My mother having children so fast, I was very soon committed to the
care of her father, and with him I continued with little interruption
till my mother’s death.
It is but little that I can recollect of my mother. I remember,
however, that she was careful to teach me the Assembly’s Catechism, and
to give me the best instructions the little time that I was at home.
Once in particular, when I was playing with a pin, she asked me where
I got it; and on telling her that I found it at my uncle’s, who lived
very near to my father, and where I had been playing with my cousins,
she made me carry it back again; no doubt to impress my mind, as it
could not fail to do, with a clear idea of the distinction of property,
and of the importance of attending to it. She died in the hard winter
of 1739, not long after being delivered of my youngest brother; and
having dreamed a little before her death that she was in a delightful
place, which she particularly described, and imagined to be heaven, the
last words she spake, as my aunt informed me, were “Let me go to that
fine place.”
On the death of my mother I was taken home, my brothers taking my
place, and was sent to school in the neighbourhood. But being without
a mother, and my father incumbered with a large family, a sister of my
father’s, in the year 1742, relieved him of all care of me, by taking
me entirely to herself, and considering me as her child, having none of
her own. From this time she was truly a parent to me till her death in
1764.
My aunt was married to a Mr. Keighly, a man who had distinguished
himself for his zeal for religion and for his public spirit. He was
also a man of considerable property, and dying soon after I went to
them, left the greatest part of his fortune to my aunt for life, and
much of it at her disposal after her death.
By this truly pious and excellent woman, who knew no other use of
wealth, or of talents of any kind, than to do good, and who never
spared herself for this purpose, I was sent to several schools in the
neighbourhood, especially to a large free school, under the care of a
clergyman, Mr. Hague, under whom, at the age of twelve or fifteen, I
first began to make any progress in the Latin Tongue, and acquired the
elements of Greek. But about the same time that I began to learn Greek
at this public school, I learned Hebrew on holidays of the dissenting
minister of the place, Mr. Kirkby, and upon the removal of Mr. Hague
from the free school, Mr. Kirkby opening a school of his own, I was
wholly under his care. With this instruction I had acquired a pretty
good knowledge of the learned languages at the age of sixteen. But from
this time Mr. Kirkby’s increasing infirmities obliged him to relinquish
his school, and beginning to be of a weakly consumptive habit, so
that it was not thought adviseable to send me to any other place of
education, I was left to conduct my studies as well as I could till I
went to the academy at Daventry in the year 1752.
From the time I discovered any fondness for books my aunt entertained
hopes of my being a minister, and I readily entered into her views.
But my ill health obliged me to turn my thoughts another way, and with
a view to trade, I learned the modern languages, French, Italian,
and High Dutch without a master; and in the first and last of them I
translated, and wrote letters, for an uncle of mine who was a merchant,
and who intended to put me into a counting house in Lisbon. A house was
actually engaged to receive me there, and every thing was nearly ready
for my undertaking the voyage. But getting better health my former
destination for the ministry was resumed, and I was sent to Daventry,
to study under Mr. Ashworth, afterwards Dr. Ashworth.
Looking back, as I often do, upon this period of my life, I see the
greatest reason to be thankful to God for the pious care of my parents
and friends, in giving me religious instruction. My mother was a woman
of exemplary piety, and my father also had a strong sense of religion,
praying with his family morning and evening, and carefully teaching
his children and servants the Assembly’s Catechism, which was all the
system of which he had any knowledge. In the latter part of his life
he became very fond of Mr. Whitfield’s writings, and other works of a
similar kind, having been brought up in the principles of Calvinism,
and adopting them, but without ever giving much attention to matters
of speculation, and entertaining no bigotted aversion to those who
differed from him on the subject.
The same was the case with my excellent aunt, she was truly Calvinistic
in principle, but was far from confining salvation to those who thought
as she did on religious subjects. Being left in good circumstances,
her home was the resort of all the dissenting ministers in the
neighbourhood without distinction, and those who were the most
obnoxious on account of their heresy were almost as welcome to her, if
she thought them honest and good men, (which she was not unwilling to
do) as any others.
The most heretical ministers in the neighbourhood were Mr. Graham of
Halifax, and Mr. Walker of Leeds, but they were frequently my Aunt’s
guests. With the former of these my intimacy grew with my years,
but chiefly after I became a preacher. We kept up a correspondence
to the last, thinking alike on most subjects. To him I dedicated my
_Disquisitions on Matter and Spirit_, and when he died, he left me his
manuscripts, his Polyglot bible, and two hundred pounds. Besides being
a rational Christian, he was an excellent classical scholar, and wrote
Latin with great facility and elegance. He frequently wrote to me in
that language.
Thus I was brought up with sentiments of piety, but without bigotry,
and having from my earliest years given much attention to the subject
of religion, I was as much confirmed as I well could be in the
principles of Calvinism, all the books that came in my way having that
tendency.
The weakness of my constitution, which often led me to think that I
should not be long lived, contributed to give my mind a still more
serious turn, and having read many books of _experiences_, and in
consequence believing that a _new birth_ produced by the immediate
agency of the Spirit of God, was necessary to salvation, and not
being able to satisfy myself that I _had_ experienced any thing of
the kind, I felt occasionally such distress of mind as it is not in
my power to describe, and which I still look back upon with horror.
Notwithstanding I had nothing very material to reproach myself with,
I often concluded that God had forsaken me, and that mine was like
the case of Francis Spira, to whom, as he imagined, repentance and
salvation were denied. In that state of mind I remember reading the
account of the man in the iron cage in the Pilgrim’s Progress with the
greatest perturbation.
I imagine that even these conflicts of mind were not without their
use, as they led me to think habitually of God and a future state.
And though my feelings were then, no doubt, too full of terror, what
remained of them was a deep reverence for divine things, and in time
a pleasing satisfaction which can never be effaced, and I hope, was
strengthened as I have advanced in life, and acquired more rational
notions of religion. The remembrance, however, of what I sometimes felt
in that state of ignorance and darkness gives me a peculiar sense of
the value of rational principles of religion, and of which I can give
but an imperfect description to others.
As _truth_, we cannot doubt, must have an advantage over _error_, we
may conclude that the want of these peculiar feelings is compensated
by something of greater value, which arises to others from always
having seen things in a just and pleasing light; from having always
considered the Supreme Being as the kind parent of all his offspring.
This, however, not having been my case, I cannot be so good a judge of
the effects of it. At all events, we ought always to inculcate just
views of things, assuring ourselves that _proper feelings and right
conduct_ will be the consequence of them.
In the latter part of the interval between my leaving the grammar
school and going to the academy, which was something more than two
years, I attended two days in the week upon Mr. Haggerstone, a
dissenting minister in the neighbourhood, who had been educated under
Mr. Maclaurin. Of him I learned Geometry, Algebra and various branches
of Mathematics, theoretical and practical. And at the same time I read,
but with little assistance from him, Gravesend’s Elements of Natural
Philosophy, Watt’s Logic, Locke’s Essay on the Human Understanding, &c,
and made such a proficiency in other branches of learning, that when I
was admitted at the academy (which was on Coward’s foundation) I was
excused all the studies of the first year, and a great part of those
of the second.
In the same interval I spent the latter part of every week with Mr.
Thomas, a baptist minister now of Bristol but then of Gildersome,
a village about four miles from Leeds, who had had no learned
education. Him I instructed in Hebrew, and by that means made myself a
considerable proficient in that language. At the same time I learned
Chaldee and Syriac, and just began to read Arabic. Upon the whole,
going to the academy later than is usual, and being thereby better
furnished, I was qualified to appear there with greater advantage.
Before I went from home I was very desirous of being admitted a
communicant in the congregation which I had always attended, and the
old minister, as well as my Aunt, were as desirous of it as myself,
but the elders of the Church, who had the government of it, refused
me, because, when they interrogated me on the subject of the _sin of
Adam_, I appeared not to be quite orthodox, not thinking that all the
human race (supposing them not to have any sin of their own) were
liable to the wrath of God, and the pains of hell for ever, on account
of that sin only; for such was the question that was put to me. Some
time before, having then no doubt of the truth of the doctrine, I
well remember being much distressed that I could not feel a proper
repentance for the sin of Adam; taking it for granted that without
_this_ it could not be forgiven me. Mr. Haggerstone above mentioned,
was a little more liberal than the members of the congregation in
which I was brought up, being what is called a _Baxterian_;[1] and
his general conversation had a liberal turn, and such as tended to
undermine my prejudices. But what contributed to open my eyes still
more was the conversation of a Mr. Walker, from Ashton under line, who
preached as a candidate when our old minister was superannuated. He was
an avowed Baxterian, and being rejected on that account his opinions
were much canvassed, and he being a guest at the house of my Aunt, we
soon became very intimate, and I thought I saw much of reason in his
sentiments. Thinking farther on these subjects, I was, before I went to
the academy, an Arminian, but had by no means rejected the doctrine of
the trinity, or that of atonement.
[1] BAXTERIANS, The famous Non-conformist Richard Baxter who flourished
about the middle of the last Century, attempted a Coalition between the
doctrines of Calvin and Arminius. The former of these held that God
from the beginning had elected a few of the human race to be saved,
without reference to their good actions in this life, and had left the
rest of mankind in a state of final and inevitable reprobation. The
latter was of opinion that the Christian dispensation furnished the
means of final Salvation to all men, though the merits of the death
of Christ would be ultimately advantageous to believers only. Baxter,
thought with Calvin that some among mankind were from the beginning
elected unto eternal life, and gifted from above with the saving grace
necessary in the first instance to the several steps of a believer’s
christian character; but he thought also with Arminius that all men
had common grace imparted to them, sufficient to enable them if they
chose, to attain unto final Salvation by using the means ordained by
Christ and his Apostles. Calvin also held the final perseverance of the
Saints, or as it has since been expressed that a believer might fall
foully but not finally, whereas Baxter seems to have thought that not
every one who had saving grace imparted to him would persevere to the
end, or as the Arminian Methodists quaintly express it, he held that a
believer may fall both foully and finally. The compromising doctrine of
Baxter may be seen in his very learned and unintelligible work entitled
Catholick Theology. He used to be an annual communicant in the Church
of England by way of exemplying his accommodating opinions.
T. C.
Though after I saw reason to change my opinions I found myself
incommoded by the rigour of the congregation with which I was
connected, I shall always acknowledge with great gratitude that I owe
much to it. The business of religion was effectually attended to in
it. We were all catechized in public ’till we were grown up, servants
as well as others: the minister always expounded the scriptures with
as much regularity as he preached, and there was hardly a day in the
week, in which there was not some meeting of one or other part of the
congregation. On one evening there was a meeting of the young men for
conversation and prayer. This I constantly attended, praying extempore
with others when called upon.
At my Aunt’s there was a monthly meeting of women, who acquitted
themselves in prayer as well as any of the men belonging to the
congregation. Being at first a child in the family, I was permitted to
attend their meetings, and growing up insensibly, heard them after I
was capable of judging. My Aunt after the death of her husband, prayed
every morning and evening in her family, until I was about seventeen,
when that duty devolved upon me.
The Lord’s day was kept with peculiar strictness. No victuals were
dressed on that day in any family. No member of it was permitted to
walk out for recreation, but the whole of the day was spent at the
public meeting, or at home in reading, meditation, and prayer, in the
family or the closet.
It was my custom at that time to recollect as much as I could of the
sermons I heard, and to commit it to writing. This practice I began
very early, and continued it until I was able from the heads of a
discourse to supply the rest myself. For not troubling myself to commit
to memory much of the amplification, and writing at home almost as
much as I had heard, I insensibly acquired a habit of composing with
great readiness; and from this practice I believe I have derived great
advantage through life; composition seldom employing so much time as
would be necessary to write in long hand any thing I have published.
By these means, not being disgusted with these strict forms of
religion as many persons of better health and spirits probably might
have been (and on which account I am far from recommending the same
strictness to others) I acquired in early life a serious turn of mind.
Among other things I had at this time a great aversion to _Plays
and Romances_, so that I never read any works of this kind except
Robinson Crusoe, until I went to the academy. I well remember seeing
my brother Timothy reading a book of Knight Errantry, and with great
indignation I snatched it out of his hands, and threw it away. This
brother afterwards, when he had for some time followed my father’s
business (which was that of a Cloth-dresser) became, if possible, more
serious than I had been; and after an imperfect education, took up
the profession of a minister among the Independents, in which he now
continues.
While I was at the Grammar School I learned _Mr. Annet’s Short hand_,
and thinking I could suggest some improvements in it, I wrote to
the Author, and this was the beginning of a correspondence which
lasted several years. He was, as I ever perceived, an unbeliever in
Christianity and a necessarian. On this subject several letters,
written with care on both sides, passed between us, and these Mr.
Annet often pressed me to give him leave to publish, but I constantly
refused. I had undertaken the defence of Philosophical Liberty, and
the correspondence was closed without my being convinced of the
fallacy of my arguments, though upon studying the subject regularly,
in the course of my academical education afterwards, I became a
confirmed Necessarian, and I have through life derived, as I imagine,
the greatest advantage from my full persuasion of the truth of that
doctrine.
My Aunt, and all my relations, being strict Calvinists, it was their
intention to send me to the academy at _Mile-end_, then under the
care of Dr. Cawder. But, being at that time an Arminian, I resolutely
opposed it, especially upon finding that if I went thither, besides
giving an _experience_, I must subscribe my assent to ten printed
articles of the strictest calvinistic faith, and repeat it every six
months. My opposition, however, would probable have been to no purpose,
and I must have adopted some other mode of life, if Mr. Kirkby above
mentioned had not interposed, and strongly recommended the academy of
Dr. Doddridge, on the idea that I should have a better chance of being
made a scholar. He had received a good education himself, was a good
classical scholar, and had no opinion of the mode of education among
the very orthodox Dissenters, and being fond of me, he was desirous
of my having every advantage that could be procured for me. My good
Aunt, not being a bigotted Calvinist, entered into his views, and Dr.
Doddridge being dead, I was sent to Daventry, and was the first pupil
that entered there. My Step-mother also, who was a woman of good sense,
as well as of religion, had a high opinion of Dr. Doddridge, having
been sometime housekeeper in his family. She had always recommended his
Academy, but died before I went thither.
Three years, viz. from September 1752 to 1755, I spent at Daventry with
that peculiar satisfaction with which young persons of generous minds
usually go through a course of liberal study, in the society of others
engaged in the same pursuits, and free from the cares and anxieties
which seldom fail to lay hold on them when they come out into the world.
In my time, the academy was in a state peculiarly favorable to the
serious pursuit of truth, as the students were about equally divided
upon every question of much importance, such as Liberty and Necessity,
the Sleep of the soul, and all the articles of theological orthodoxy
and heresy; in consequence of which all these topics were the subject
of continual discussion. Our tutors also were of different opinions;
Dr. Ashworth taking the orthodox side of every question, and Mr. Clark,
the sub-tutor, that of heresy, though always with the greatest modesty.
Both of our tutors being young, at least as tutors, and some of the
senior students excelling more than they could pretend to do in
several branches of study, they indulged us in the greatest freedoms,
so that our lectures had often the air of friendly conversations on
the subjects to which they related. We were permitted to ask whatever
questions, and to make whatever remarks, we pleased; and we did it with
the greatest, but without any offensive, freedom. The general plan of
our studies, which may be seen in Dr. Doddridge’s published lectures,
was exceedingly favourable to free enquiry, as we were referred to
authors on both sides of every question, and were even required to give
an account of them. It was also expected that we should abridge the
most important of them for our future use. The public library contained
all the books to which we were referred.
It was a reference to Dr. Hartley’s Observations on Man in the
course of our Lectures, that first brought me acquainted with that
performance, which immediately engaged my closest attention, and
produced the greatest, and in my opinion the most favourable effect
on my general turn of thinking thro’ life. It established me in the
belief of the doctrine of Necessity, which I first learned from
Collins; it greatly improved that disposition to piety which I brought
to the academy, and freed it from that rigour with which it had been
tinctured. Indeed, I do not know whether the consideration of Dr.
Hartley’s theory contributes more to enlighten the mind, or improve the
heart; it effects both in so super-eminent a degree.
In this situation, I saw reason to embrace what is generally called
the heterodox side of almost every question.[2] But notwithstanding
this, and though Dr. Ashworth was earnestly desirous to make me as
orthodox as possible, yet, as my behaviour was unexceptionable, and as
I generally took his part in some little things by which he often drew
upon himself the ill-will of many of the students, I was upon the whole
a favourite with him. I kept up more or less of a correspondence with
Dr. Ashworth till the time of his death, though much more so with Mr.
Clark. This continued till the very week of his melancholy death by a
fall from his horse at Birmingham, where he was minister.
[2] It will be seen in the course of these memoirs that from time to
time as deeper reflection and more extensive reading incited him,
he saw reason to give up almost all the peculiar theological and
metaphysical opinions which he had imbibed in early youth; some of them
with considerable difficulty, and all of them at the evident risk of
considerable obloquy from those whom he highly respected, as well as
from those on whom his interest appeared to depend.
T. C.
Notwithstanding the great freedom of our speculations and debates, the
extreme of heresy among us was Arianism; and all of us, I believe, left
the academy with a belief, more or less qualified, of the doctrine of
_atonement_.
Warm friendships never fail to be contracted at places of liberal
education; and when they are well chosen are of singular use; Such was
mine with Mr. Alexander of Birmingham. We were in the same class, and
during the first year occupied the same room. By engagements between
ourselves we rose early, and dispatched many articles of business
every day. One of them, which continued all the time we were at the
academy, was to read every day ten folio pages in some Greek author,
and generally a Greek play in the course of the week besides. By this
means we became very well acquainted with that language, and with the
most valuable authors in it. This exercise we continued long after we
left the academy, communicating to each other by letter an account of
what we read. My life becoming more occupied than his, he continued
his application to Greek longer than I did, so that before his death
he was, I imagine, one of the best Greek scholars in this or any
other country. My attention was always more drawn to mathematical and
philosophical studies than his was.
These voluntary engagements were the more necessary, in the course
of our academical studies, as there was then no provision made for
teaching the learned languages. We had even no compositions, or
orations, in Latin. Our course of lectures was also defective in
containing no lectures on the scriptures, or on ecclesiastical history,
and by the students in general (and Mr. Alexander and myself were no
exceptions) commentators in general and ecclesiastical history also,
were held in contempt. On leaving the academy he went to study under
his uncle Dr. Benson, and with him learned to value the critical study
of the scriptures so much, that at length he almost confined his
attention to them.
My other particular friends among my fellow students were Mr. Henry
Holland, of my own class, Messrs. Whitehead, Smithson, Rotherham, and
Scholefield in that above me, and Mr. Taylor in that below me. With all
these I kept up more or less of a correspondence, and our friendship
was terminated only by the death of those who are now dead, viz. the
three first named of these six, and I hope it will subsist to the same
period with those who now survive.
All the while I was at the academy I never lost sight of the great
object of my studies, which was the duties of a christian minister,
and there it was that I laid the general plan which I have executed
since. Particularly I there composed the first copy of my _Institutes
of Natural and Revealed Religion_, Mr. Clark, to whom I communicated my
scheme, carefully perusing every section of it, and talking over the
subject of it with me.
But I was much discouraged even then with the _impediment in my
speech_, which I inherited from my family, and which still attends
me. Sometimes I absolutely stammered, and my anxiety about it was the
cause of much distress to me. However, like St. Paul’s _thorn in the
flesh_, I hope it has not been without its use. Without some such check
as this, I might have been disputatious in company, or might have
been seduced by the love of popular applause as a preacher: whereas
my conversation and my delivery in the pulpit having nothing in them
that was generally striking, I hope I have been more attentive to
qualifications of a superior kind.
It is not, I believe, usual for young persons in dissenting academies
to think much of their future situations in life. Indeed, we are
happily precluded from that by the impossibility of succeeding in any
application for particular places. We often, indeed, amused ourselves
with the idea of our dispersion in all parts of the kingdom after
living so happily together; and used to propose plans of meeting at
certain times, and smile at the different appearance we should probably
make after being ten or twenty years settled in the world. But nothing
of this kind was ever seriously resolved upon by us. For my own part,
I can truly say I had very little ambition, except to distinguish
myself by my application to the studies proper to my profession; and I
cheerfully listened to the first proposal that my tutor made to me, in
consequence of an application made to him, to provide a minister for
the people of Needham Market in Suffolk, though it was very remote from
my friends in Yorkshire, and a very inconsiderable place.
When I went to preach at Needham as a candidate, I found a small
congregation, about an hundred people; under a Mr. Meadows, who was
superannuated. They had been without a minister the preceding year,
on account of the smallness of the salary; but there being some
respectable and agreeable families among them, I flattered myself that
I should be useful and happy in the place, and therefore accepted the
unanimous invitation to be assistant to Mr. Meadows, with a view to
succeed him when he died. He was a man of some fortune.
This congregation had been used to receive assistance from both the
Presbyterian and Independent funds; but upon my telling them that I
did not chuse to have any thing to do with the Independents, and
asking them whether they were able to make up the salary they promised
me (which was forty pounds per annum) without any aid from the latter
fund, they assured me they could. I soon, however, found that they
deceived themselves; for the most that I ever received from them was in
the proportion of about thirty pounds per annum, when the expence of my
board exceeded twenty pounds.
Notwithstanding this, every thing else for the first half year appeared
very promising, and I was happy in the success of my schemes for
promoting the interest of religion in the place. I catechised the
children, though there were not many, using Dr. Watt’s Catechism; and
I opened my lectures on the theory of religion from the _institutes_,
which I had composed at the academy, admitting all persons to attend
them without distinction of sex or age; but in this I soon found that
I had acted imprudently. A minister in that neighbourhood had been
obliged to leave his place on account of Arianism, and though nothing
had been said to me on the subject, and from the people so readily
consenting to give up the independent fund, I thought they could not
have much bigotry among them, I found that when I came to treat of
the _Unity of God_, merely as an article of religion, several of my
audience were attentive to nothing but the soundness of my faith in the
doctrine of the Trinity.
Also, though I had made it a rule to myself to introduce nothing that
could lead to controversy into the pulpit; yet making no secret of my
real opinions in conversation, it was soon found that I was an Arian.
From the time of this discovery my hearers fell off apace, especially
as the old minister took a decided part against me. The principal
families, however, still continued with me; but notwithstanding this,
my salary fell far short of thirty pounds per annum, and if it had not
been for Dr. Benson and Dr. Kippis, especially the former, procuring
me now and then an extraordinary five pounds from different charities,
I do not believe that I could have subsisted. I shall always remember
their kindness to me, at a time when I stood in so much need of it.
When I was in this situation, a neighbouring minister whose intimate
friend had conformed to the church of England, talked to me on that
subject. He himself, I perceived, had no great objection to it, but
rejecting the proposal, as a thing that I could not think of, he never
mentioned it to me any more.
To these difficulties, arising from the sentiments of my congregation,
was added that of the failure of all remittances from my aunt, owing in
part to the ill offices of my orthodox relations; but chiefly to her
being exhausted by her liberality to others, and thinking that when I
was settled in the world, I ought to be no longer burdensome to her.
Together with me she had brought up a niece, who was almost her only
companion, and being deformed, could not have subsisted without the
greatest part, at least, of all she had to bequeath. In consequence
of these circumstances, tho’ my aunt had always assured me that,
if I chose to be a minister, she would leave me independent of the
profession, I was satisfied she was not able to perform her promise,
and freely consented to her leaving all she had to my cousin; I had
only a silver tankard as a token of her remembrance. She had spared no
expence in my education, and that was doing more for me than giving me
an estate.
But what contributed greatly to my distress was the _impediment in my
speech_, which had increased so much as to make preaching very painful,
and took from me all chance of recommending myself to any better place.
In this state, hearing of the proposal of one Mr. Angier to cure
all defects of speech, I prevailed upon my aunt to enable me to pay
his price, which was twenty guineas; and this was the first occasion
of my visiting London. Accordingly, I attended him about a month,
taking an oath not to reveal his method, and I received some temporary
benefit; but soon relapsed again, and spoke worse than ever. When I
went to London it was in company with Mr. Smithson, who was settled at
Harlestown in Norfolk. By him I was introduced to Dr. Kippis and Dr.
Benson, and by the latter to Dr. Price, but not at that time.
At Needham I felt the effect of a low despised situation, together
with that arising from the want of popular talents. There were several
vacancies in congregations in that neighbourhood, where my sentiments
would have been no objection to me, but I was never thought of. Even my
next neighbours, whose sentiments were as free as my own, and known to
be so, declined making exchanges with me, which, when I left that part
of the country, he acknowledged was not owing to any dislike his people
had to me as heretical, but for other reasons, the more genteel part
of his hearers always absenting themselves when they heard I was to
preach for him. But visiting that country some years afterwards, when
I had raised myself to some degree of notice in the world, and being
invited to preach in that very pulpit, the same people crowded to hear
me, though my elocution was not much improved, and they professed to
admire one of the same discourses they had formerly despised.
Notwithstanding these unfavorable circumstances, I was far from being
unhappy at Needham. I was boarded in a family from which I received
much satisfaction, I firmly believed that a wise providence was
disposing every thing for the best, and I applied with great assiduity
to my studies, which were classical, mathematical and theological.
These required but few books. As to Experimental Philosophy, I had
always cultivated an acquaintance with it, but I had not the means of
prosecuting it.
With respect to miscellaneous reading, I was pretty well supplied by
means of a library belonging to Mr. S. Alexander, a quaker,[3] to which
I had the freest access. Here it was that I was first acquainted with
any person of that persuasion; and I must acknowledge my obligation
to many of them in every future stage of my life. I have met with the
noblest instances of liberality of sentiment and the truest generosity
among them.
[3] QUAKERS. That instances of liberality of sentiment with respect to
religious opinion are frequently to be found among the Quakers there
can be no doubt, but this is certainly no part of their character as a
Sect. Thomas Letchworth one of the most acute and ingenious of their
preachers at Wandsworth near London, who from the writings of Dr.
Priestley had become a firm convert to his Unitarian opinions, informed
me that the expression of those opinions would be attended with certain
expulsion from the Society. Very lately Hannah Bernard, a female public
friend who went from America to England, was prohibited from preaching
by the Society, on account of her Unitarian doctrines.
Thomas Letchworth has been dead many years. In the short contest on the
question of liberty and necessity which was occasioned by Toplady’s
life of Jerome Zanchius, he wrote a good defence of the doctrine
of necessity signed Philaretes in answer to one from a disciple of
Fletcher’s of Madely, under the signature of Philaleutheros. There is
a trifling account of him containing no information, by one William
Matthews.
T. C.
My studies however, were chiefly theological. Having left the academy,
as I have observed, with a qualified belief of the doctrine of
_Atonement_, such as is found in Mr. Tomkin’s book, entitled, _Jesus
Christ the Mediator_, I was desirous of getting some more definite
ideas on the subject, and with that view set myself to peruse the
whole of the old and new testament, and to collect from them all the
texts that appeared to me to have any relation to the subject. This
I therefore did with the greatest care, arranging them under a great
variety of heads. At the same time I did not fail to note such _general
considerations_ as occurred to me while I was thus employed. The
consequence of this was, what I had no apprehension of when I began the
work, viz. a full persuasion that the doctrine of Atonement, even in
its most qualified sense, had no countenance either from scripture or
reason. Satisfied of this, I proceeded to digest my observations into a
regular treatise, which a friend of mine, without mentioning my name,
submitted to the perusal of Dr. Fleming and Dr. Lardner. In consequence
of this, I was urged by them to publish the greater part of what I had
written. But being then about to leave Needham, I desired them to do
whatever they thought proper with respect to it, and they published
about half of my piece, under the title of the _Doctrine of Remission,
&c._
This circumstance introduced me to the acquaintance of Dr. Lardner,
whom I always called upon when I visited London. The last time I saw
him, which was little more than a year before his death, having by
letter requested him to give me some assistance with respect to the
history I then prepared to write of the Corruptions of Christianity,
and especially that article of it, he took down a large bundle of
pamphlets, and turning them over at length shewing me my own; said,
“This contains my sentiments on the subject.” He had then forgot that
I wrote it, and on my remarking it, he shook his head, and said that
his memory began to fail him; and that he had taken me for another
person. He was then at the advanced age of ninety one. This anecdote is
trifling in itself, but it relates to a great and good man.
I have observed that Dr. Lardner only wished to publish a part of
the treatise which my friend put into his hand. The other part of it
contained remarks on the reasoning of the apostle of Paul, which he
could not by any means approve. They were, therefore, omitted in this
publication. But the attention which I gave to the writings of this
apostle at the time that I examined them, in order to collect passages
relating to the doctrine of atonement, satisfied me that his reasoning
was in many places far from being conclusive; and in a separate work
I examined every passage in which his reasoning appeared to me to be
defective, or his conclusions ill supported; and I thought them to be
pretty numerous.
At that time I had not read any commentary on the scriptures, except
that of Mr. Henry when I was young. However, seeing so much reason
to be dissatisfied with the apostle Paul as a reasoner, I read _Dr.
Taylor’s paraphrase on the epistle to the Romans_; but it gave me no
sort of satisfaction; and his general _Key to the epistles_ still less.
I therefore at that time wrote some remarks on it, which were a long
time after published in the _Theological Repository_ Vol. 4.
As I found that Dr. Lardner did not at all relish any of my
observations on the imperfections of the sacred writers, I did not put
this treatise into his hands; but I shewed it to some of my younger
friends, and also to Dr. Kippis; and he advised me to publish it under
the character of an unbeliever, in order to draw the more attention
to it. This I did not chuse, having always had a great aversion to
assume any character that was not my own, even so much as disputing
for the sake of discovering truth. I cannot ever say that I was quite
reconciled to the idea of writing to a fictitious person, as in my
_letters to a philosophical unbeliever_, though nothing can be more
innocent, or sometimes more proper; our Saviour’s parables implying
a much greater departure from strict truth than those letters do.
I therefore wrote the book with great freedom, indeed, but as a
christian, and an admirer of the apostle Paul, as I always was in other
respects.
When I was at Nantwich I sent this treatise to the press; but when nine
sheets were printed off, Dr. Kippis dissuaded me from proceeding, or
from publishing any thing of the kind, until I should be more known,
and my character better established. I therefore desisted; but when
I opened the theological Repository, I inserted in that work every
thing that was of much consequence in the other, in order to its being
submitted to the examination of learned christians. Accordingly these
communications were particularly animadverted upon by Mr. Willet of
Newcastle, under the signature of W. W. But I cannot say that his
remarks gave me much satisfaction.
When I was at Needham I likewise drew up a treatise on the doctrine
of _divine influence_, having collected a number of texts for that
purpose, and arranged them under proper heads, as I had done those
relating to the doctrine of atonement. But I published nothing relating
to it until I made use of some of the observations in my _sermon_ on
that subject, delivered at an ordination, and published many years
afterwards.
While I was in this retired situation, I had, in consequence of much
pains and thought, become persuaded of the falsity of the doctrine of
atonement, of the inspiration of the authors of the books of scripture
as writers, and of all idea of supernatural influence, except for the
purpose of miracles. But I was still an Arian, having never turned my
attention to the Socinian doctrine, and contenting myself with seeing
the absurdity of the trinitarian system.
Another task that I imposed on myself, and in part executed at Needham,
was an accurate comparison of the Hebrew text of the hagiographa
and the prophets with the version of the Septuagint, noting all
the variations, &c. This I had about half finished before I left
that place; and I never resumed it, except to do that occasionally
for particular passages, which I then began, though with many
disadvantages, with a design to go through the whole. I had no Polyglot
Bible, and could have little help from the labours of others.
The most learned of my acquaintance in this situation was Mr. Scott of
Ipswich, who was well versed in the Oriental languages, especially the
Arabic. But though he was far from being Calvinistical, he gave me no
encouragement in the very free enquiries which I then entered upon.
Being excluded from all communication with the more orthodox ministers
in that part of the country, all my acquaintance among the dissenting
ministers, besides Mr. Scott, were Mr. Taylor of Stow-market, Mr.
Dickinson of Diss, and Mr. Smithson of Harlestone; and it is rather
remarkable, that we all left that country in the course of the same
year; Mr. Taylor removing to Carter’s lane in London, Mr. Dickinson to
Sheffield, and Mr. Smithson to Nottingham.
But I was very happy in a great degree of intimacy with Mr. Chauvet,
the rector of Stow-market. He was descended of French parents; and
I think was not born in England. Whilst he lived we were never long
without seeing each other. But he was subject to great unevenness of
spirits, sometimes the most chearful man living, and at other times
most deplorably low. In one of these fits he at length put an end to
his life. I heard afterwards that he had at one time been confined for
insanity, and had even made the same attempt some time before.
Like most other young men of a liberal education, I had conceived
a great aversion to the business of a schoolmaster, and had often
said, that I would have recourse to any thing else for a maintenance
in preference to it. But having no other resource, I was at length
compelled by necessity to make some attempt in that way; and for
this purpose I printed and distributed _Proposals_, but without any
effect. Not that I was thought to be unqualified for this employment,
but because I was not orthodox. I had proposed to teach the classics,
mathematics, &c. for half a guinea per quarter, and to board the pupils
in the house with myself for twelve guineas per annum.
Finding this scheme not to answer, I proposed to give lectures to
grown persons in such branches of science as I could conveniently
procure the means of doing; and I began with reading about twelve
lectures on the _use of the Globes_, at half a guinea. I had one course
of ten hearers, which did something more than pay for my globes; and I
should have proceeded in this way, adding to my apparatus as I should
have been able to afford it, if I had not left that place, which was in
the following manner.
My situation being well known to my friends, Mr. Gill, a distant
relation by my mother, who had taken much notice of me before I
went to the academy, and had often lent me books, procured me an
invitation to preach as a candidate at Sheffield, on the resignation
of Mr. Wadsworth. Accordingly I did preach as a candidate, but though
my opinions were no objection to me there, I was not approved. But
Mr. Haynes, the other minister, perceiving that I had no chance at
Sheffield, told me that he could recommend me to a congregation at
Nantwich in Cheshire, where he himself had been settled; and as it was
at a great distance from Needham, he would endeavour to procure me
an invitation to preach there for a year certain. This he did, and I
gladly accepting of it, removed from Needham, going thence to London
by sea, to save expence. This was in 1758, after having been at Needham
just three years.[4]
[4] It is about sixty miles from Needham to London, so that the roads
must have been in a bad state to render a water passage more eligible
than by land. The first turnpike in England was authorized by an act
of Ch. II. 1663 but the system was not adopted with spirit until
near the middle of the last century. The manufacturing inland towns
of Great Britain, such as Manchester, Leeds, Halifax, &c. chiefly
carried on their business through the medium of travelling pedlars, and
afterwards on pack horses. The journey in this manner from Manchester
to London occupied a fortnight; and it was not unusual for a trader
going the first time himself on this expedition to take the prudent
precaution of making his will. At present the mail stage performs the
journey in about a day and a half. In the beginning of this century
(as Dr. Aikin in his history of Manchester observes) it was thought
a most arduous undertaking to make a public road over the hills that
separate Yorkshire and Lancashire; now, they are pierced by three
navigable canals. Indeed the prosperous state of British manufactures
and commerce, seems to have originated and progressed with the adoption
of turnpikes and canals. They facilitate not merely the carriage and
interchange of heavy materials necessary to machinery, but they make
personal intercourse cheap, speedy and universal; they thus furnish
the means of seeing and communicating improvements, and of observing
in what way one manufacture may be brought to bear upon another widely
different in its kind. We are not yet sufficiently aware of their
importance in America, even to the interests of agriculture.
T. C.
At Nantwich I found a good natured friendly people, with whom I lived
three years very happily; and in this situation I heard nothing
of those controversies which had been the topics of almost every
conversation in Suffolk; and the consequence was that I gave little
attention to them myself. Indeed it was hardly in my power to do it,
on account of my engagement with a school, which I was soon able
to establish, and to which I gave almost all my attention; and in
this employment, contrary to my expectations, I found the greatest
satisfaction, notwithstanding the confinement and labour attending it.
My school generally consisted of about thirty boys, and I had a
separate room for about half a dozen young ladies. Thus I was employed
from seven in the morning untill four in the afternoon, without any
interval except one hour for dinner, and I never gave a holiday on
any consideration, the red letter days, as they are called, excepted.
Immediately after this employment in my own school rooms, I went to
teach in the family of Mr. Tomkinson, an eminent attorney, and a man of
large fortune, whose recommendation was of the greatest service to me;
and here I continued until seven in the evening. I had therefore but
little leisure for reading or for improving myself in any way, except
what necessarily arose from my employment.
Being engaged in the business of a schoolmaster, I made it my study
to regulate it in the best manner, and I think I may say with truth,
that in no school was more business done, or with more satisfaction,
either to the master, or the scholars, than in this of mine. Many of my
scholars are probably living and I am confident that they will say that
this is no vain boast.
At Needham I was barely able with the greatest economy to keep out of
debt (though this I always made a point of doing at all events) but at
Nantwich my school soon enabled me to purchase a few books, and some
philosophical instruments, as a small air pump, an electrical machine,
&c. These I taught my scholars in the highest class to keep in order,
and make use of, and by entertaining their parents and friends with
experiments, in which the scholars were generally the operators, and
sometimes the lecturers too, I considerably extended the reputation of
my school; though I had no other object originally than gratifying my
own taste. I had no leisure, however, to make any original experiments
until many years after this time.
As there were few children in the congregation (which did not consist
of more than sixty persons, and a great proportion of them travelling
scotchmen) there was no scope for exertion with respect to my duty as
a minister. I therefore contented myself with giving the people what
assistance I could at their own houses, where there were young persons;
and I added very few sermons to these which I had composed at Needham,
where I never failed to make at least one every week.
Being boarded with Mr. Eddowes, a very sociable and sensible man,
and at the same time the person of the greatest property in the
congregation, and who was fond of music, I was induced to learn to play
a little on the English flute, as the easiest instrument; and though I
was never a proficient in it, my playing contributed more or less to my
amusement many years of my life. I would recommend the knowledge and
practice of music to all studious persons; and it will be better for
them, if, like myself, they should have no very fine ear, or exquisite
taste; as by this means they will be more easily pleased, and be less
apt to be offended when the performances they hear are but indifferent.
At Nantwich I had hardly any literary acquaintance besides Mr.
Brereton, a clergyman in the neighbourhood, who had a taste for
astronomy, philosophy, and literature in general. I often slept at his
house, in a room to which he gave my name. But his conduct afterwards
was unworthy of his profession.
Of dissenting ministers I saw most of Mr. Keay of Whitchurch, and Dr.
Harwood, who lived and had a school at Congleton, preaching alternately
at Leek and Wheelock, the latter place about ten miles from Nantwich.
Being both of us schoolmasters, and having in some respect the same
pursuits, we made exchanges for the sake of spending a Sunday evening
together every six weeks in the summer time. He was a good classical
scholar, and a very entertaining companion.
In my congregation there was (out of the house in which I was boarded)
hardly more than one family in which I could spend a leisure hour with
much satisfaction, and that was Mr. James Caldwall’s, a scotchman.
Indeed, several of the travelling Scotchmen who frequented the place,
but made no long stay at any time, were men of very good sense; and
what I thought extraordinary, not one of them was at all Calvinistical.
My engagements in teaching allowed me but little time for composing
any thing while I was at Nantwich. There, however, I recomposed my
_Observations on the character and reasoning of the apostle Paul_, as
mentioned before. For the use of my school I then wrote an _English
grammar_[5] on a new plan, leaving out all such technical terms as were
borrowed from other languages, and had no corresponding modifications
in ours, as the future tense, &c. and to this I afterwards subjoined
_Observations for the use of proficients in the language_,[6] from
the notes which I collected at Warrington; where, being tutor in the
languages and Belles Letters, I gave particular attention to the
English language, and intended to have composed a large treatise on
the structure and present state of it. But dropping the scheme in
another situation, I lately gave such parts of my collection as I had
made no use of to Mr. Herbert Croft of Oxford, on his communicating to
me his design of compiling a Dictionary and Grammar of our language.
[5] Printed in 1761.
[6] Printed in 1772 at London. His lectures on the Theory of Language
and Universal Grammar were printed the same year at Warrington. David
Hume was made sensible of the Gallicisms and Peculiarities of his
stile by reading this Grammar; He acknowledged it to Mr. Griffith the
Bookseller, who mentioned it to my father.
The academy at Warrington was instituted when I was at Needham, and Mr.
Clark knowing the attention that I had given to the learned languages
when I was at Daventry, had then joined with Dr. Benson and Dr. Taylor
in recommending me as tutor in the languages. But Mr. (afterward Dr.)
Aikin, whose qualifications were superior to mine, was justly preferred
to me. However, on the death of Dr. Taylor, and the advancement of
Mr. Aikin to be tutor in divinity, I was invited to succeed him. This
I accepted, though my school promised to be more gainful to me. But
my employment at Warrington would be more liberal, and less painful.
It was also a means of extending my connections. But, as I told
the persons who brought me the invitation, viz. Mr. Seddon and Mr.
Holland of Bolton, I should have preferred the office of teaching the
mathematics and natural philosophy, for which I had at that time a
great predilection.
My removal to Warrington was in September, 1761, after a residence
of just three years at Nantwich. In this new situation I continued
six years, and in the second year I married a daughter of Mr. Isaac
Wilkinson, an Ironmaster near Wrexham in Wales, with whose family
I had became acquainted in consequence of having the youngest son,
William, at my school at Nantwich. This proved a very suitable and
happy connection, my wife being a woman of an excellent understanding,
much improved by reading, of great fortitude and strength of mind, and
of a temper in the highest degree affectionate and generous; feeling
strongly for others, and little for herself. Also, greatly excelling
in every thing relating to household affairs, she entirely relieved
me of all concern of that kind, which allowed me to give all my time
to the prosecution of my studies, and the other duties of my station.
And though, in consequence of her father becoming impoverished, and
wholly dependent on his children, in the latter part of his life, I had
little fortune with her, I unexpectedly found a great resource in her
two brothers, who had become wealthy, especially the elder of them. At
Warrington I had a daughter, Sarah, who was afterwards married to Mr.
William Finch of Heath-forge near Dudley.
Though at the time of my removal to Warrington I had no particular
fondness for the studies relating to my profession then, I applied to
them with great assiduity; and besides composing courses of _Lectures
on the theory of Language_, and on _Oratory and Criticism_, on which
my predecessor had lectured, I introduced lectures on _history and
general policy_, on the _laws and constitutions of England_, and on
the _history of England_. This I did in consequence of observing that,
though most of our pupils were young men designed for situations in
civil and active life, every article in the plan of their education was
adapted to the learned professions.
In order to recommend such studies as I introduced, I composed an
_essay on a course of liberal education for civil and active life_,
with _syllabuses_ of my three new courses of lectures; and Dr. Brown
having just then published a plan of education, in which he recommended
it to be undertaken by the state, I added some _remarks on his
treatise_, shewing how inimical it was to liberty, and the natural
rights of parents. This leading me to consider the subject of civil
and political liberty, I published my thoughts on it, in an _essay on
government_, which in a second edition I much enlarged, including in it
what I wrote in answer to Dr. Balguy, on church authority, as well as
my animadversions on Dr. Brown.
My _Lectures on the theory of language and universal grammar_ were
printed for the use of the students, but they were not published. Those
on _Oratory and Criticism_ I published when I was with Lord Shelburne,
and those on _History and general policy_ are now printed, and about to
be published.[7]
[7] This work has been reprinted in Philadelphia with additions,
particularly of a chapter on the government of the United States.
Finding no public exercises at Warrington, I introduced them there,
so that afterwards every Saturday the tutors, all the students, and
often strangers, were assembled to hear English and Latin compositions,
and sometimes to hear the delivery of speeches, and the exhibition of
scenes in plays. It was my province to teach elocution, and also Logic,
and Hebrew. The first of these I retained; but after a year or two I
exchanged the two last articles with Dr. Aikin for the civil law, and
one year I gave a course of lectures in anatomy.
With a view to lead the students to a facility in writing English, I
encouraged them to write in verse. This I did not with any design to
make them poets, but to give them a greater facility in writing prose,
and this method I would recommend to all tutors. I was myself far from
having any pretension to the character of a poet; but in the early part
of my life I was a great versifier, and this, I believe, as well as my
custom of writing after preachers, mentioned before, contributed to the
ease with which I always wrote prose. Mrs. Barbauld has told me that it
was the perusal of some verses of mine that first induced her to write
any thing in verse, so that this country is in some measure indebted
to me for one of the best poets it can boast of. Several of her first
poems were written when she was in my house, on occasions that occurred
while she was there.
It was while I was at Warrington that I published my _Chart of
Biography_, though I had begun to construct it at Nantwich. Lord
Willoughby of Parham, who lived in Lancashire, being pleased with the
idea of it, I, with his consent, inscribed it to him; but he died
before the publication of it: The _Chart of History_, corresponding to
it, I drew up some time after at Leeds.
I was in this situation when, going to London,[8] and being introduced
to Dr. Price, Mr. Canton, Dr. Watson, (the Physician,) and Dr.
Franklin, I was led to attend to the subject of experimental philosophy
more than I had done before; and having composed all the Lectures
I had occasion to deliver and finding myself at liberty for any
undertaking, I mentioned to Dr. Franklin an idea that had occurred to
me of writing the history of discoveries in Electricity, which had
been his favourite study. This I told him might be an useful work, and
that I would willingly undertake it, provided I could be furnished
with the books necessary for the purpose. This he readily undertook,
and my other friends assisting him in it, I set about the work,
without having the least idea of doing any thing more than writing a
distinct and methodical account of all that had been done by others.
Having, however, a pretty good machine, I was led, in the course of my
writing the history, to endeavour to ascertain several facts which were
disputed; and this led me by degrees into a large field of original
experiments, in which I spared no expence that I could possibly furnish.
[8] He always spent one month in every year in London which was of
great use to him. He saw and heard a great deal. He generally made
additions to his library and his chemical apparatus. A new turn was
frequently given to his ideas. New and useful acquaintances were
formed, and old ones confirmed.
These experiments employed a great proportion of my leisure time; and
yet before the complete expiration of the year in which I gave the plan
of my work to Dr. Franklin, I sent him a copy of it in print. In the
same year five hours of every day were employed in lectures, public or
private, and one two months vacation I spent chiefly at Bristol, on a
visit to my father-in-law.
This I do not mention as a subject of boasting. For many persons have
done more in the same time; but as an answer to those who have objected
to some of my later writings, as hasty performances. For none of my
publications were better received than this _History of Electricity_,
which was the most hasty of them all. However, whether my publications
have taken up more or less time, I am confident that more would not
have contributed to their perfection, in any essential particular; and
about anything farther I have never been very solicitous. My object was
not to acquire the character of a fine writer, but of an useful one. I
can also truly say that gain was never the chief object of any of my
publications. Several of them were written with the prospect of certain
loss.
During the course of my electrical experiments in this year I kept
up a constant correspondence with Dr. Franklin, and the rest of my
philosophical friends in London; and my letters circulated among them
all, as also every part of my History as it was transcribed. This
correspondence would have made a considerable volume, and it took up
much time; but it was of great use with respect to the accuracy of my
experiments, and the perfection of my work.
After the publication of my Chart of Biography, Dr. Percival of
Manchester, then a student at Edinburgh, procured me the title of
Doctor of laws from that university; and not long after my new
experiments in electricity were the means of introducing me into the
Royal Society, with the recommendation of Dr. Franklin, Dr. Watson, Mr.
Canton, and Dr. Price.
In the whole time of my being at Warrington I was singularly happy in
the society of my fellow tutors,[9] and of Mr. Seddon, the minister of
the place. We drank tea together every Saturday, and our conversation
was equally instructive and pleasing. I often thought it not a little
extraordinary, that four persons, who had no previous knowledge of each
other, should have been brought to unite in conducting such a scheme as
this, and all be zealous necessarians, as we were. We were likewise all
Arians, and the only subject of much consequence on which we differed
respected the doctrine of atonement, concerning which Dr. Aikin held
some obscure notions. Accordingly, this was frequently the topic of our
friendly conversations. The only Socinian in the neighbourhood was Mr.
Seddon of Manchester; and we all wondered at him. But then we never
entered into any particular examination of the subject.
[9] At Warrington he had for colleagues and successors, Dr. John
Taylor, author of the Hebrew Concordance and of several other works, on
Original Sin, Atonement, &c. Dr. Aikin the Elder, Dr. Reinhold Forster
the Naturalist and traveller, Dr. Enfield and Mr. Walker.
Receiving some of the pupils into my own house, I was by this means
led to form some valuable friendships, but especially with Mr. Samuel
Vaughan, a friendship which has continued hitherto, has in a manner
connected our families, and will, I doubt not, continue through life.
The two eldest of his sons were boarded with me.
The tutors having sufficient society among themselves, we had not
much acquaintance out of the academy. Sometimes, however, I made an
excursion to the towns in the neighbourhood. At Liverpool I was always
received by Mr. Bentley, afterwards partner with Mr. Wedgwood, a man of
excellent taste, improved understanding, and a good disposition, but an
unbeliever in christianity, which was therefore often the subject of
our conversation. He was then a widower, and we generally, and contrary
to my usual custom, sat up late. At Manchester I was always the guest
of Mr. Potter, whose son Thomas was boarded with me. He was one of
the worthiest men that ever lived. At Chowbent I was much acquainted
with Mr. Mort, a man equally distinguished by his chearfulness and
liberality of sentiment.
Of the ministers in the neighbourhood, I recollect with much
satisfaction the interviews I had with Mr. Godwin of Gataker, Mr.
Holland of Bolton, and Dr. Enfield of Liverpool, afterwards tutor at
Warrington.
Though all the tutors in my time lived in the most perfect harmony,
though we all exerted ourselves to the utmost, and there was no
complaint of want of discipline, the academy did not flourish. There
had been an unhappy difference between Dr. Taylor and the trustees,
in consequence of which all his friends, who were numerous, were our
enemies; and too many of the subscribers, being probably weary of the
subscription, were willing to lay hold of any pretence for dropping it,
and of justifying their conduct afterwards.
It is possible that in time we might have overcome the prejudices
we laboured under, but there being no prospect of things being any
better, and my wife having very bad health, on her account chiefly I
wished for a removal, though nothing could be more agreeable to me at
the time than the whole of my employment, and all the laborious part
of it was over. The terms also on which we took boarders, viz. 15 £.
per annum, and my salary being only 100 _£_. per annum with a house,
it was not possible, even living with the greatest frugality, to make
any provision for a family. I was there six years, most laboriously
employed, for nothing more than a bare subsistence. I therefore
listened to an invitation to take the charge of the congregation of
Mill-hill chapel at Leeds, where I was pretty well known, and thither I
removed in September 1767.
Though while I was at Warrington it was no part of my duty to preach,
I had from choice continued the practice; and wishing to keep up the
character of a dissenting minister, I chose to be ordained while I
was there; and though I was far from having conquered my tendency to
stammer, and probably never shall be able to do it effectually, I had,
by taking much pains, improved my pronunciation some time before I left
Nantwich; where for the two first years this impediment had increased
so much, that I once informed the people, that I must give up the
business of preaching, and confine myself to my school. However, by
making a practice of reading very loud and very slow every day, I at
length succeeded in getting in some measure the better of this defect,
but I am still obliged occasionally to have recourse to the same
expedient.
At Leeds I continued six years very happy with a liberal, friendly,
and harmonious congregation, to whom my services (of which I was not
sparing) were very acceptable. Here I had no unreasonable prejudices
to contend with, so that I had full scope for every kind of exertion;
and I can truly say that I always considered the office of a christian
minister as the most honourable of any upon earth, and in the studies
proper to it I always took the greatest pleasure.
In this situation I naturally resumed my application to speculative
theology, which had occupied me at Needham, and which had been
interrupted by the business of teaching at Nantwich and Warrington. By
reading with care Dr. _Lardner’s letter on the logos_, I became what is
called a Socinian soon after my settlement at Leeds; and after giving
the closest attention to the subject, I have seen more and more reason
to be satisfied with that opinion to this day, and likewise to be more
impressed with the idea of its importance.
On reading Mr. _Mann’s Dissertation on the times of the birth and death
of Christ_, I was convinced that he was right in his opinion of our
Saviour’s ministry having continued little more than one year, and
on this plan I drew out a _Harmony of the gospels_, the outline of
which I first published in the Theological Repository, and afterwards
separately and at large, both in Greek and English, with Notes, and
an occasional Paraphrase. In the same work I published my _Essay on
the doctrine of Atonement_, improved from the tract published by Dr.
Lardner, and also my animadversions on the reasoning of the apostle
Paul.
The plan of this _Repository_ occurred to me on seeing some notes that
Mr. Turner of Wakefield had drawn up on several passages of scripture,
which I was concerned to think should be lost. He very much approved of
my proposal of an occasional publication, for the purpose of preserving
such original observations as could otherwise probably never see the
light. Of this work I published three volumes while I was at Leeds, and
he never failed to give me an article for every number of which they
were composed.
Giving particular attention to the duties of my office, I wrote
several tracts for the use of my congregation, as two _Catechisms_, an
_Address to masters of families on the subject of family prayer_,
a _discourse on the Lord’s Supper_, and on _Church discipline_, and
_Institutes of Natural and Revealed religion_. Here I formed three
classes of Catechumens, and took great pleasure in instructing them in
the principles of religion. In this respect I hope my example has been
of use in other congregations.
The first of my controversial treatises was written here in reply
to some angry remarks on my discourse on the Lord’s Supper by Mr.
Venn, a clergyman in the neighbourhood. I also wrote remarks on Dr.
_Balguy’s sermon on Church authority_, and on some paragraphs in
Judge _Blackstone’s Commentaries_ relating to the dissenters. To the
two former no reply was made; but to the last the judge replied in
a small pamphlet; on which I addressed a letter to him in the St.
James’s Chronicle. This controversy led me to print another pamphlet,
entitled _The Principles and Conduct of the Dissenters with respect to
the civil and ecclesiastical constitution of this country_. With the
encouragement of Dr. Price and Dr. Kippis, I also wrote an _Address to
Protestant Dissenters as such_; but without my name. Several of these
pamphlets having been animadverted upon by an anonymous acquaintance,
who thought I had laid too much stress on the principles of the
Dissenters, I wrote a defence of my conduct in _Letters addressed to
him_.
The methodists being very numerous in Leeds, and many of the lower sort
of my own hearers listening to them, I wrote an _Appeal to the serious
professors of Christianity_, an _Illustration of particular texts_, and
republished the _Trial of Elwall_, all in the cheapest manner possible.
Those small tracts had a great effect in establishing my hearers in
liberal principles of religion, and in a short time had a far more
extensive influence than I could have imagined. By this time more than
thirty thousand copies of the Appeal have been dispersed.
Besides these theoretical and controversial pieces, I wrote while
I was at Leeds my _Essay on Government_ mentioned before, my
_English Grammar_ enlarged, a _familiar introduction to the study of
electricity_, a _treatise on perspective_, and my _Chart of History_,
and also some anonymous pieces in favour of civil liberty during the
persecution of Mr. Wilkes, the principal of which was _An Address to
Dissenters on the subject of the difference with America_, which I
wrote at the request of Dr. Franklin, and Dr. Fothergil.
But nothing of a nature foreign to the duties of my profession engaged
my attention while I was at Leeds so much as the prosecution of my
experiments relating to _electricity_, and especially the doctrine of
_air_. The last I was led into in consequence of inhabiting a house
adjoining to a public brewery, where I at first amused myself with
making experiments on the fixed air which I found ready made in the
process of fermentation. When I removed from that house, I was under
the necessity of making the fixed air for myself; and one experiment
leading to another, as I have distinctly and faithfully noted in
my various publications on the subject, I by degrees contrived a
convenient apparatus for the purpose, but of the cheapest kind.
When I began these experiments I knew very little of _chemistry_, and
had in a manner no idea on the subject before I attended a course
of chemical lectures delivered in the academy at Warrington by Dr.
Turner[10] of Liverpool. But I have often thought that upon the whole,
this circumstance was no disadvantage to me; as in this situation I
was led to devise an apparatus, and processes of my own, adapted to
my peculiar views. Whereas, if I had been previously accustomed to
the usual chemical processes, I should not have so easily thought of
any other; and without new modes of operation I should hardly have
discovered any thing materially new.[11]
[10] Dr. TURNER was a Physician at Liverpool: among his friends a
professed Atheist. It was Dr. Turner who wrote the reply to Dr.
Priestley’s letters to a philosophical unbeliever under the feigned
name of Hammon. He was in his day a good practical chemist. I believe
it was Dr. Turner who first invented, or at least brought to tolerable
perfection, the art of copying prints upon glass, by striking off
impressions with a coloured solution of silver and fixing them on the
glass by baking on an iron plate in a heat sufficient to incorporate
the solution with the glass. Some of them are very neatly performed,
producing transparent copies in a bright yellow upon the clear glass.
Dr. Turner was not merely a whig but a republican. In a friendly
debating society at Liverpool about the close of the American war, he
observed in reply to a speaker who had been descanting on the honour
Great Britain had gained during the reign of his present Majesty, that
it was true, we had lost the _Terra firma_ of the thirteen colonies in
America, but we ought to be satisfied with having gained in return,
by the generalship of Dr. Herschel, a terra incognita of much greater
extent _in nubibus_.
T. C.
[11] This necessary attention to economy also aided the simplicity
of his apparatus, and was the means in some degree of improving it
in this important respect. This plainness of his apparatus rendered
his experiments easy to be repeated, and gave them accuracy. In this
respect he was like his great Cotemporary Scheele, whose discoveries
were made by means easy to be procured and at small expence. The French
Chemists have adopted a practice quite the reverse.
T. C.
My first publication on the subject of air was in 1772. It was a small
pamphlet, on the method of impregnating water with fixed air; which
being immediately translated into French, excited a great degree
of attention to the subject, and this was much increased by the
publication of my first paper of experiments in a large article of the
Philosophical Transactions the year following, for which I received the
gold medal of the society. My method of impregnating water with fixed
air was considered at a meeting of the College of Physicians, before
whom I made the experiments, and by them it was recommended to the
Lords of the Admiral (by whom they had been summoned for the purpose)
as likely to be of use in the sea scurvy.
The only person in Leeds who gave much attention to my experiments
was Mr. Hay, a surgeon. He was a zealous methodist, and wrote answers
to some of my theological tracts; but we always conversed with the
greatest freedom on philosophical subjects, without mentioning any
thing relating to theology. When I left Leeds, he begged of me the
earthen trough in which I had made all my experiments on air while I
was there. It was such an one as is there commonly used for washing
linnen.
Having succeeded so well in the History of Electricity, I was
induced to undertake the history of all the brandies of experimental
philosophy; and at Leeds I gave out proposals for that purpose,
and published the _History of discoveries relating to vision light
and colours_. This work, also, I believe I executed to general
satisfaction, and being an undertaking of great expence, I was under
the necessity of publishing it by subscription. The sale, however, was
not such as to encourage me to proceed with a work of so much labour
and expence; so that after purchasing a great number of books, to
enable me to finish my undertaking, I was obliged to abandon it, and to
apply wholly to original experiments.[12]
[12] Many of the subscriptions remained unpaid.
In writing the History of discoveries relating to vision, I was
much assisted by Mr. Michell, the discoverer of the method of making
artificial magnets. Living at Thornhill, not very far from Leeds, I
frequently visited him, and was very happy in his society, as I also
was in that of Mr. Smeaton, who lived still nearer to me. He made me a
present of his excellent air pump, which I constantly use to this day.
Having strongly recommended his construction of this instrument, it is
now generally used; whereas before that hardly any had been made during
the twenty years which had elapsed after the account that he had given
of it in the Philosophical Transactions.
I was also instrumental in reviving the use of large electrical
machines, and batteries, in electricity, the generality of electrical
machines being little more than play things at the time that I began
my experiments. The first very large electrical machine was made by
Mr. Nairne in consequence of a request made to me by the Grand Duke of
Tuscany, to get him the best machine that we could make in England.
This, and another that he made for Mr. Vaughan, were constituted on a
plan of my own. But afterwards Mr. Nairne made large machines on a more
simple and improved construction; and in consideration of the service
which I had rendered him, he made me a present of a pretty large
machine of the same kind.
The review of my history of electricity by Mr. Bewley, who was
acquainted with Mr. Michell, was the means of opening a correspondence
between us, which was the source of much satisfaction to me as long
as he lived. I instantly communicated to him an account of every new
experiment that I made, and, in return, was favoured with his remarks
upon them. All that he published of his own were articles in the
_Appendixes_ to my volumes on air, all of which are ingenious and
valuable. Always publishing in this manner, he used to call himself my
_satellite_. There was a vein of pleasant wit and humour in all his
correspondence, which added greatly to the value of it. His letters
to me would have made several volumes, and mine to him still more.
When he found himself dangerously ill, he made a point of paying me a
visit before he died; and he made a journey from Norfolk to Birmingham,
accompanied by Mrs. Bewley, for that purpose; and after spending about
a week with me, he went to his friend Dr. Burney, and at his house he
died.
While I was at Leeds a proposal was made to me to accompany Captain
Cook in his second voyage to the south seas. As the terms were very
advantageous, I consented to it, and the heads of my congregation had
agreed to keep an assistant to supply my place during my absence. But
Mr. Banks informed me that I was objected to by some clergymen in the
board of longitude, who had the direction of this business, on account
of my religious principles; and presently after I heard that Dr.
Forster, a person far better qualified for the purpose, had got the
appointment. As I had barely acquiesced in the proposal, this was no
disappointment to me, and I was much better employed at home, even with
respect to my philosophical pursuits. My knowledge of natural history
was not sufficient for the undertaking; but at that time I should by
application have been able to supply my deficiency, though now I am
sensible I could not do it.
At Leeds I was particularly happy in my intercourse with Mr. Turner of
Wakefield, and occasionally, with Mr. Cappe of York, and Mr. Graham
of Halifax. And here it was that, in consequence of a visit which in
company with Mr. Turner I made to the Archdeacon Blackburne at Richmond
(with whom I had kept up a correspondence from the time that his son
was under my care at Warrington) I first met with Mr. Lindsey, then of
Catterick, and a correspondence and intimacy commenced, which has been
the source of more real satisfaction to me than any other circumstance
in my whole life. He soon discovered to me that he was uneasy in his
situation, and had thoughts of quitting it. At first I was not forward
to encourage him in it, but rather advised him to make what alteration
he thought proper in the offices of the church, and leave it to his
superiors to dismiss him if they chose. But his better judgment,
and greater fortitude, led him to give up all connexion with the
established church of his own accord.
This took place about the time of my leaving Leeds, and it was not
until long after this that I was apprized of all the difficulties
he had to struggle with before he could accomplish his purpose. But
the opposition made to it by his nearest friends, and those who
might have been expected to approve of the step that he took, and to
have endeavoured to make it easy to him, was one of the greatest.
Notwithstanding this he left Catterick, where he had lived in
affluence idolized by his parish, and went to London without any
certain prospect; where he lived in two rooms of a ground floor, until
by the assistance of his friends, he was able to pay for the use of the
upper apartments, which the state of his health rendered necessary. In
this humble situation have I passed some of the most pleasing hours of
my life, when, in consequence of living with Lord Shelburne, I spent my
winters in London.
On this occasion it was that my intimacy with Mr. Lindsey was much
improved, and an entire concurrence in every thing that we thought
to be for the interest of christianity gave fresh warmth to our
friendship. To his society I owe much of my zeal for the doctrine of
the divine unity, for which he made so great sacrifices, and in the
defence of which he so much distinguished himself, so as to occasion a
new æra in the history of religion in this country.
As we became more intimate, confiding in his better taste and judgment,
and also in that of Mrs. Lindsey, a woman of the same spirit and views,
and in all respects a help meet for him, I never chose to publish
any thing of moment relating to Theology without consulting him; and
hardly ever ventured to insert any thing that they disapproved, being
sensible that my disposition led to precipitancy, to which their
coolness was a seasonable check.
At Leeds began my intercourse with Mr. Lee of Lincoln’s Inn. He was a
native of the place, and exactly one week older than myself. At that
time he was particularly connected with the congregation, and before he
was married spent his vacations with us. His friendship was a source of
much greater satisfaction and advantage to me after I came to reside in
London, and especially at the time of my leaving Lord Shelburne, when
my prospects wore rather a cloudy aspect.
When I visited London, during my residence at Leeds, commenced my
particular friendship for Dr. Price, to whom I had been introduced
several years before by Dr. Benson; our first interview having been
at Mr. Brownsword’s at Newington, where they were members of a small
literary society, in which they read various compositions. At that time
Dr. Benson read a paper which afterwards made a section in his _Life
of Christ_. For the most amiable simplicity of character, equalled
only by that of Mr. Lindsey, a truly christian spirit, disinterested
patriotism, and true candour, no man in my opinion ever exceeded Dr.
Price. His candour will appear the more extraordinary, considering
his warm attachments to the theological sentiments which he embraced
in very early life. I shall ever reflect upon our friendship as
a circumstance highly honourable, as it was a source of peculiar
satisfaction, to me.
I had two sons born to me at Leeds, Joseph and William, and though I
was very happy there, I was tempted to leave it after continuing there
six years, to go into the family of the Earl of Shelburne, now the
Marquis of Lansdowne; he stipulating to give me 250 £. per annum, a
house to live in, and a certainty for life in case of his death, or of
my separation from him; whereas at Leeds my salary was only one hundred
guineas per annum, and a house, which was not quite sufficient for the
subsistence of my family, without a possibility of making a provision
for them after my death.
I had been recommended to Lord Shelburne by Dr. Price, as a person
qualified to be a literary companion to him. In this situation, my
family being at Calne in Wiltshire, near to his Lordship’s seat at
Bowood, I continued seven years, spending the summer with my family,
and a great part of the winter in his Lordship’s house in London. My
office was nominally that of _librarian_, but I had little employment
as such, besides arranging his books, taking a catalogue of them, and
of his manuscripts, which were numerous, and making an index to his
collection of private papers. In fact I was with him as a friend,
and the second year made with him the tour of Flanders, Holland, and
Germany, as far as Strasburgh; and after spending a month at Paris,
returned to England. This was in the year 1774.
This little excursion made me more sensible than I should otherwise
have been of the benefit of foreign travel, even without the
advantage of much conversation with foreigners. The very sight of new
countries, new buildings, new customs, &c. and the very hearing of an
unintelligible new language, gives new ideas, and tends to enlarge the
mind. To me this little time was extremely pleasing, especially as I
saw every thing to the greatest advantage, and without any anxiety or
trouble, and had an opportunity of seeing and conversing with every
person of eminence wherever we came; the political characters by
his Lordship’s connections, and the literary ones by my own. I was
soon, however, tired of Paris, and chose to spend my evenings at the
hotel, in company with a few literary friends. Fortunately for me,
Mr. Magellan[13] being at Paris, at the same time, spent most of the
evenings with me; and as I chose to return before his Lordship, he
accompanied me to London, and made the journey very pleasing to me; he
being used to the country, the language, and the manners of it, which
I was not. He had seen much of the world, and his conversation during
our journey was particularly interesting to me. Indeed, in London,
both before and after this time, I always found him very friendly,
especially in every thing that related to my philosophical pursuits.
[13] JOHN HYACINTH DE MAGELLAN a descendant of the famous Navigator
Magellan, was a Portuguese Jesuit, but far more attached to Philosophy
than Christianity. He was much employed by his rich and noble
correspondents abroad to procure philosophical Instruments from the
Artists of Great Britain. He was a good judge of these, and being
of a mechanical turn as well as a man of Science, he improved their
construction in many instances. He was member of and attendant on
almost all the philosophical Clubs and Meetings in London, and
was generally furnished with early intelligence of philosophical
discoveries from the continent. On the 17th of September 1785 he made
a donation of 200 guineas to the American Philosophical Society, the
interest whereof was to be appropriated annually as a premium for
the most useful discoveries or improvements in navigation or natural
philosophy, but to the exclusion of mere natural history. He died a
few years ago, leaving Mr. Nicholson and the late Dr. Crawford his
Executors. T. C.
As I was sufficiently apprized of the fact, I did not wonder, as I
otherwise should have done, to find all the philosophical persons
to whom I was introduced at Paris unbelievers in christianity, and
even professed Atheists. As I chose on all occasions to appear as a
christian, I was told by some of them, that I was the only person they
had ever met with, of whose understanding they had any opinion, who
professed to believe christianity. But on interrogating them on the
subject, I soon found that they had given no proper attention to it,
and did not really know what christianity was. This was also the case
with a great part of the company that I saw at Lord Shelburne’s. But
I hope that my always avowing myself to be a christian, and holding
myself ready on all occasions to defend the genuine principles of it,
was not without its use. Having conversed so much with unbelievers at
home and abroad, I thought I should be able to combat their prejudices
with some advantage, and with this view I wrote, while I was with
Lord Shelburne, the first part of my _Letters to a philosophical
unbeliever_, in proof of the doctrines of a God and a providence, and
to this I have added during my residence at Birmingham, a second part,
in defence of the evidences of christianity. The first part being
replied to by a person who called himself Mr. Hammon, I wrote a reply
to his piece, which has hitherto remained unanswered. I am happy to
find that this work of mine has done some good, and I hope that in due
time it will do more. I can truly say that the greatest satisfaction
I receive from the success of my philosophical pursuits, arises from
the weight it may give to my attempts to defend christianity, and
to free it from those corruptions which prevent its reception with
philosophical and thinking persons, whose influence with the vulgar,
and the unthinking, is very great.
With Lord Shelburne I saw a great variety of characters, but, of our
neighbours in Wiltshire, the person I had the most frequent opportunity
of seeing was Dr. Frampton, a clergyman, whose history may serve as a
lesson to many. No man perhaps was ever better qualified to please in a
convivial hour, or had greater talents for conversation and repartee;
in consequence of which, though there were several things very
disgusting about him, his society was much courted, and many promises
of preferment were made to him. To these, notwithstanding his knowledge
of the world, and of high life, he gave too much credit; so that he
spared no expence to gratify his taste and appetite, until he was
universally involved in debt; and though his friends made some efforts
to relieve him, he was confined a year in the county prison at a time
when his bodily infirmities required the greatest indulgences; and he
obtained his release but a short time before his death on condition of
his living on a scanty allowance; the income of his livings (amounting
to more than 400 £. per annum) being in the hands of his creditors.
Such was the end of a man who kept the table in a roar.
Dr. Frampton being a high churchman, he could not at first conceal
his aversion to me, and endeavoured to do me some ill offices. But
being a man of letters, and despising the clergy in his neighbourhood,
he became at last much attached to me; and in his distresses was
satisfied, I believe, that I was one of his most sincere friends. With
some great defects he had some considerable virtues, and uncommon
abilities, which appeared more particularly in extempore speaking.
He always preached without notes, and when, on some occasions, he
composed his sermons, he could, if he chose to do it, repeat the whole
_verbatim_. He frequently extemporized in verse, in a great variety of
measures.
In Lord Shelburne’s family was Lady Arabella Denny, who is well known
by her extensive charities. She is (for she is still living) a woman of
good understanding, and great piety. She had the care of his Lordship’s
two sons until they came under the care of Mr. Jervis, who was their
tutor during my continuance in the family. His Lordship’s younger son,
who died suddenly, had made astonishing attainments both in knowledge
and piety, while very young, far beyond any thing that I had an
opportunity of observing in my life.
When I went to his Lordship, I had materials for one volume of
_experiments on air_, which I soon after published, and inscribed to
him; and before I left him I published three volumes more, and had
materials for a fourth, which I published immediately on my settling in
Birmingham. He encouraged me in the prosecution of my philosophical
enquiries, and allowed me 40 £. per annum for expences of that kind,
and was pleased to see me make experiments to entertain his guests, and
especially foreigners.
Notwithstanding the attention that I gave to philosophy in this
situation, I did not discontinue my other studies, especially in
theology and metaphysics. Here I wrote my _Miscellaneous Observations
relating to education_, and published my _Lectures on Oratory and
Criticism_, which I dedicated to Lord Fitzmaurice, Lord Shelburne’s
eldest son. Here also I published the third and last part of my
_Institutes of Natural and Revealed religion_; and having in the
Preface attacked the principles of Dr. Reid, Dr. Beattie, and Dr.
Oswald, with respect to their doctrine of _Common Sense_, which they
made to supercede all rational inquiry into the subject of religion,
I was led to consider their system in a separate work, which, though
written in a manner that I do not intirely approve, has, I hope, upon
the whole been of service to the cause of free inquiry and truth.[14]
[14] This reply of Dr. Priestley to the Scotch Doctors, though not
written in a manner that his maturer reflection approved, compleatly
set at rest the question of Common Sense as denoting the intuitive
evidence of a class of moral and religious propositions capable of
satisfactory proof, or of high probability from considerations _ab
extra_. But Dr. Reid ought hardly to be classed with coadjutors so
inferior as the Drs. Oswald and Beattie. The latter wrote something
which he meant as a defence of the christian religion; but such
defenders of christianity as Dr. Beattie and Soame Jenyns, are well
calculated to bring it into contempt with men of reason and reflection.
T. C.
In the preface I had expressed my belief of the doctrine of
_Philosophical Necessity_, but without any design to pursue the
subject, and also my great admiration of Dr. Hartley’s theory of
the human mind, as indeed I had taken many opportunities of doing
before. This led me to publish that part of his _observations on
man_ which related to the doctrine of association of ideas, detached
from the doctrine of vibrations, prefixing _three dissertations_,
explanatory of his general system. In one of these I expressed some
doubt of the immateriality of the sentient principle in man; and the
outcry that was made on what I casually expressed on that subject can
hardly be imagined. In all the newspapers, and most of the periodical
publications, I was represented as an unbeliever in revelation, and no
better than an Atheist.
This led me to give the closest attention to the subject, and the
consequence was the firmest persuasion that man is wholly material, and
that our only prospect of immortality is from the christian doctrine
of a resurrection. I therefore digested my thoughts on the subject,
and published my _Disquisitions relating to matter and spirit_, also
the subjects of _Socinianism_ and _necessity_ being nearly connected
with the doctrine of the materiality of man, I advanced several
considerations from the state of opinions in antient times in favour
of the former; and in a separate volume discussed more at large what
related to the latter, dedicating the first volume of this work to Mr.
Graham, and the second to Dr. Jebb.
It being probable that this publication would be unpopular, and might
be a means of bringing odium on my patron, several attempts were made
by his friends, though none by himself, to dissuade me from persisting
in it. But being, as I thought, engaged in the cause of important
truth, I proceeded without regard to any consequences, assuring them
that this publication should not be injurious to his Lordship.
In order, however, to proceed with the greatest caution, in a business
of such moment, I desired some of my learned friends, and especially
Dr. Price, to peruse the work before it was published; and the remarks
that he made upon it led to a free and friendly discussion of the
several subjects of it, which we afterwards published jointly; and it
remains a proof of the possibility of discussing subjects mutually
considered as of the greatest importance, with the most perfect good
temper, and without the least diminution of friendship. This work I
dedicated to our common friend Mr. Lee.
In this situation I published my _Harmony of the gospels_, on the idea
of the public ministry of Jesus having continued little more than one
year, a scheme which I first proposed in the Theological Repository;
and the Bishop of Waterford having in his _Harmony_ published a defence
of the common hypothesis, viz. that of its having been three years, I
addressed a _letter to him_ on the subject, and to this he made a reply
in a separate work. The controversy proceeded to several publications
on both sides, in the most amicable manner, and the last _Postscript_
was published jointly by us both. Though my side of the question was
without any advocates that I know of, and had only been adopted by
Mr. Mann, who seemed to have had no followers, there are few persons,
I believe, who have attended to our discussion of the subject, who are
not satisfied that I have sufficiently proved what I had advanced. This
controversy was not finished until after my removal to Birmingham.
Reflecting on the time that I spent with Lord Shelburne, being as a
guest in the family, I can truly say that I was not at all fascinated
with that mode of life. Instead of looking back upon it with regret,
one of the greatest subjects of my present thankfulness is the change
of that situation for the one in which I am now placed; and yet I was
far from being unhappy there, much less so than those who are born
to such a state, and pass all their lives in it. These are generally
unhappy from the want of _necessary_ employment, on which account
chiefly there appears to be much more happiness in the middle classes
of life, who are above the fear of want, and yet have a sufficient
motive for a constant exertion of their faculties; and who have always
some other object besides amusement.
I used to make no scruple of maintaining, that there is not only
most virtue, and most happiness, but even most true politeness in the
middle classes of life. For in proportion as men pass more of their
time in the society of their equals, they get a better established
habit of governing their tempers; they attend more to the feelings
of others, and are more disposed to accommodate themselves to them.
On the other hand, the passions of persons in higher life, having
been less controlled, are more apt to be inflamed; the idea of their
rank and superiority to others seldom quits them; and though they
are in the habit of concealing their feelings, and disguising their
passions, it is not always so well done, but that persons of ordinary
discernment may perceive what they inwardly suffer. On this account,
they are really intitled to compassion, it being the almost unavoidable
consequence of their education and mode of life. But when the mind is
not hurt in such a situation, when a person born to affluence can lose
sight of himself, and truly feel and act for others, the character is
so godlike, as shews that this inequality of condition is not without
its use. Like the general discipline of life, it is for the present
lost on the great mass, but on a few it produces what no other state
of things could do.[15]
[15] The account here given of Dr. Priestley’s connection with Lord
Shelburne must be gratifying to every friend of science and literature,
notwithstanding the subsequent separation. To such persons the
character of a nobleman who like Lord Shelburne, devotes so much of
his time, and so much of his income to the pursuits of knowledge,
and the encouragement of those who eminently contribute to enlighten
mankind, cannot but be interesting. Had he behaved dishonourably
or disrespectfully to a man of Dr. Priestley’s high station in the
literary world, it would have been an argument that science and
literature were ineffectual to soften the pride of titled opulence and
hereditary rank. But Ovid has observed justly, (_ingenuas didicisse
fideliter Artes, emollit mores nec sinit esse feros_.)
It is right to mention an anecdote highly honourable to Lord Shelburne,
on the authority of Dr. Priestley. At the conclusion of the treaty
of peace in 1783, negotiated by Lord Shelburne while he was in the
ministry, a strong opposition was expected, particularly from his
former coadjutors who soon after the death of Lord Rockingham had
seceded from Lord Shelburne’s administration. It was suggested to this
nobleman, that it was customary for the minister for the time being
to let it be understood among the mutes of the ministerial members,
that they might expect the usual douceur for their votes on such an
occasion. Some light might be thrown on the nature and quantum of
this douceur, by the list of ministerial rewards distributed at the
close of each session, as stated publicly to the house of Commons
by the late Sir George Saville. Lord Shelburne without hesitation
refused compliance; and declared that if his peace could not obtain
the unbought approbation of the house, it might take its chance. The
consequence was that although the address was carried in the Lords by
72 to 59 it was lost in the Commons by 224 to 208.
T. C.
The greatest part of the time that I spent with Lord Shelburne I passed
with much satisfaction, his Lordship always behaving to me with uniform
politeness, and his guests with respect. But about two years before I
left him, I perceived evident marks of dissatisfaction, though I never
understood the cause of it; and until that time he had been even lavish
on all occasions in expressing his satisfaction in my society to our
common friends. When I left him, I asked him whether he had any fault
to find with my conduct, and he said _none_.
At length, however, he intimated to Dr. Price, that he wished to give
me an establishment in Ireland, where he had large property. This gave
me an opportunity of acquainting him, that if he chose to dissolve the
connexion, it should be on the terms expressed in the writings which we
mutually signed when it was formed, in consequence of which I should
be entitled to an annuity of an hundred and fifty pounds, and then
I would provide for myself, and to this he readily acceded. He told
Dr. Price that he wished our separation to be amicable, and I assured
him that nothing should be wanting on my part to make it truly so.
Accordingly, I expected that he would receive my visits when I should
be occasionally in London, but he declined them.
However, when I had been some years settled at Birmingham, he sent
an especial messenger, and common friend, to engage me again in his
service, having, as that friend assured me, a deep sense of the loss
of Lord Ashburton (Mr. Dunning) by death, and of Colonel Barre by
his becoming almost blind, and his want of some able and faithful
friend, such as he had experienced in me; with other expressions more
flattering than those. I did not chuse, however, on any consideration,
to leave the very eligible situation in which I now am, but expressed
my readiness to do him any service in my power. His Lordship’s
enemies have insinuated that he was not punctual in the payment of my
annuity; but the contrary is true: Hitherto nothing could have been
more punctual, and I have no reason to suppose that it will ever be
otherwise.
At Calne I had another son born to me, whom, at Lord Shelburne’s
request, I called Henry.
It was at the time of my leaving Lord Shelburne that I found the
great value of Mr. and Mrs. Lindsey’s friendship, in such a manner as
I certainly had no expectation of when our acquaintance commenced;
especially by their introducing me to the notice of Mrs. Rayner, one of
his hearers, and most zealous friends.
Notwithstanding my allowance from Lord Shelburne was larger than that
which I had at Leeds, yet my family growing up, and my expences, on
this and other accounts, increasing more than in proportion, I was
barely able to support my removal. But my situation being intimated to
Mrs. Rayner, besides smaller sums, with which she occasionally assisted
me, she gave me an hundred guineas to defray the expence of my removal,
and deposited with Mrs. Lindsey, which she soon after gave up to me,
four hundred guineas, and to this day has never failed giving me every
year marks of her friendship. Her’s is, indeed, I seriously think,
one of the first christian characters that I was ever acquainted
with, having a cultivated comprehensive mind, equal to any subject
of theology or metaphysics, intrepid in the cause of truth, and most
rationally pious.
Spending so much of my time in London was the means of increasing my
intimacy with both Mr. Lindsey and Mr. Lee, our common friend; who
amidst the bustle of politics, always preserved his attachment to
theology, and the cause of truth. The Sunday I always spent with Mr.
Lindsey, attending the service of his chapel, and sometimes officiating
for him; and with him and Mrs. Lindsey I generally spent the evening of
that day at Mr. Lee’s who then admitted no other company, and seldom
have I enjoyed society with more relish.
My winter’s residence in London was the means of improving my
acquaintance with Dr. Franklin. I was seldom many days without seeing
him, and being members of the same club, we constantly returned
together. The difference with America breaking out at this time, our
conversation was chiefly of a political nature; and I can bear witness,
that he was so far from promoting, as was generally supposed, that
he took every method in his power to prevent a rupture between the
two countries. He urged so much the doctrine of forbearance, that for
some time he was unpopular with the Americans on that account, as too
much a friend to Great Britain. His advice to them was to bear every
thing for the present, as they were sure in time to out grow all their
grievances; as it could not be in the power of the mother country to
oppress them long.
He dreaded the war, and often said that, if the difference should come
to an open rupture, it would be a war of _ten years_, and he should
not live to see the end of it. In reality the war lasted near eight
years but he did live to see the happy termination of it. That the
issue would be favorable to America, he never doubted. The English,
he used to say, may take all our great towns, but that will not give
them possession of the country. The last day that he spent in England,
having given out that he should leave London the day before, we passed
together, without any other company; and much of the time was employed
in reading American newspapers, especially accounts of the reception
which the _Boston port bill_ met with in America; and as he read
the addresses to the inhabitants of Boston from the places in the
neighbourhood, the tears trickled down his cheeks.[16]
It is much to be lamented, that a man of Dr. Franklin’s general good
character, and great influence, should have been an unbeliever in
christianity, and also have done so much as he did to make others
unbelievers. To me, however, he acknowledged that he had not given
so much attention as he ought to have done to the evidences of
christianity, and desired me to recommend to him a few treatises on
the subject, such as I thought most deserving of his notice, but not
of great length, promising to read them, and give me his sentiments
on them. Accordingly, I recommended to him Hartley’s evidences of
christianity in his Observations on Man, and what I had then written
on the subject in my Institutes of natural and revealed religion. But
the American war breaking out soon after, I do not believe that he ever
found himself sufficiently at leisure for the discussion. I have kept
up a correspondence with him occasionally ever since, and three of his
letters to me were, with his consent, published in his Miscellaneous
Works, in quarto. The first of them, written immediately on his landing
in America, is very striking.
[16] For two letters written by my father relating to Dr. Franklin and
Mr. Burke see appendix No. 4.
About three years before the dissolution of my connection with Lord
Shelburne, Dr. Fothergill, with whom I had always lived on terms of
much intimacy, having observed, as he said, that many of my experiments
had not been carried to their proper extent on account of the expence
that would have attended them, proposed to me a subscription from
himself and some of his friends, to supply me with whatever sums I
should want for that purpose, and named a hundred pounds per annum.
This large subscription I declined, lest the discovery of it (by the
use that I should, of course, make of it) should give umbrage to Lord
Shelburne, but I consented to accept of 40 £. per annum, which from
that time he regularly paid me, from the contribution of himself, Sir
Theodore Jansen, Mr. Constable, and Sir George Saville.
On my leaving Lord Shelburne, which was attended with the loss of
one half of my income, Dr. Fothergill proposed an enlargement of my
allowance for my experiments, and likewise for my maintenance, without
being under the necessity of giving my time to pupils, which I must
otherwise have done. And, considering the generosity with which this
voluntary offer was made by persons who could well afford it, and who
thought me qualified to serve the interests of science, I thought it
right to accept of it; and I preferred it to any pension from the
court, offers of which were more than once made by persons who thought
they could have procured one for me.
As it was my wish to do what might be in my power to shew my gratitude
to my friends and benefactors that suggested the idea of writing
these Memoirs, I shall subjoin a list of their names. Some of the
subscriptions were made with a view to defray the expence of my
experiments only; but the greater part of the subscribers were persons
who were equally friends to my theological studies.
The persons who made me this regular annual allowance were Dr. Watson
and his son, Mr. Wedgwood, Mr. Moseley, Mr. S. Salte, Mr. Jeffries, Mr.
Radcliffe, Mr. Remington, Mr. Strutt of Derby, Mr. Shore, Mr. Reynolds
of Paxton, Messrs. Galton, father and son, and the Rev. Mr. Simpson.
Besides the persons whose names appear in this list, as regular
subscribers, there were other persons who, without chusing to be known
as such, contributed no less to my support, and some considerably more.
My chief benefactress was Mrs. Rayner, and next to her Dr. Heberden,
equally distinguished for his love of religious truth, and his zeal
to promote science. Such also is the character of Mr. Tayleur of
Shrewsbury, who has at different times remitted me considerable sums,
chiefly to defray the expences incurred by my theological inquiries and
publications.
Mr. Parker of Fleet street very generously supplied me with every
instrument that I wanted in glass, particularly a capital burning
lens,[17] sixteen inches in diameter. All his benefactions in this way
would have amounted to a considerable sum. Mr. Wedgwood also, besides
his annual benefaction, supplied me with every thing that I wanted
made of pottery, such as retorts, tubes, &c. which the account of my
experiments will shew to have been of great use to me.
[17] Though his sight was not much worse than before during the last ten
years of his life it had been much injured by his experiments with the
burning Lens of which he made much use in summer time.
On my removal to Birmingham commenced my intimacy with Mr. William
Russell, whose public spirit, and zeal in every good cause, can hardly
be exceeded. My obligations to him were various and constant, so as not
to be estimated by sums of money. At his proposal I doubt not, some of
the heads of the congregation made me a present of two hundred pounds,
to assist me in my theological publications.
Mr. Lee shewed himself particularly my friend at the time that I left
Lord Shelburne, assisting me in the difficulties with which I was
then pressed, and continuing to befriend me afterwards by seasonable
benefactions. By him it was hinted to me during the administration of
Lord Rockingham, with whom he had great influence, that I might have
a pension from the government, to assist in defraying the expence of
my experiments. Another hint of the same kind was given me in the
beginning of Mr. Pitt’s administration by a Bishop in whose power
it was to have procured it from him. But in both cases I declined
the overture, wishing to preserve myself independent of every thing
connected with the court, and preferring the assistance of generous and
opulent individuals, lovers of science, and also lovers of liberty.
Without assistance I could not have carried on my experiments at all,
except on a very small scale, and under great disadvantages.
Mr. Galton, before I had any opportunity of being personally
acquainted with him, had, on the death of Dr. Fothergill, taken up his
subscription. His son did the same, and the friendship of the latter
has added much to the happiness of my situation here.[18] Seldom, if
ever, have I known two persons of such cultivated minds, pleasing
manners, and liberal dispositions, as he and Mrs. Galton. The latter
had the greatest attachment imaginable to my wife.
[18] Birmingham.
Mr. Salte was zealous in promoting the subscriptions to my experiments,
and moreover proposed to take one of my sons as an apprentice without
any fee. But my brother-in-law making the same offer, I gave it the
preference: Mr. Wedgwood, who has distinguished himself by his
application to philosophical pursuits, as well as by his great success
in the improvement of his manufactory, was very zealous to serve me,
and urged me to accept of a much larger allowance than I chose.
The favours that I received from my two brothers-in-law deserve my most
grateful acknowledgments. They acted the part of kind and generous
relations, especially at the time when I most wanted assistance. It was
in consequence of Mr. John Wilkinson’s proposal, who wished to have us
nearer to him, that, being undetermined where to settle, I fixed upon
Birmingham, where he soon provided a house for me.
My apology for accepting of these large benefactions is, that besides
the great expence of my philosophical and even my theological studies,
and the education of three sons and a daughter, the reputation I had,
justly or unjustly, acquired brought on me a train of expences not
easy to describe, to avoid or to estimate; so that without so much as
keeping a horse (which the kindness of Mr. Russel made unnecessary) the
expence of housekeeping, &c. was more than double the amount of any
regular income that I had.
I consider my settlement at Birmingham as the happiest event in
my life, being highly favorable to every object I had in view,
philosophical or theological. In the former respect I had the
convenience of good workmen of every kind, and the society of persons
eminent for their knowledge of chemistry, particularly Mr. Watt, Mr.
Keir, and Dr. Withering. These with Mr. Boulton, and Dr. Darwin, who
soon left us by removing from Litchfield to Derby, Mr. Galton, and
afterwards Mr. Johnson of Kenelworth and myself dined together every
month, calling ourselves the _lunar society_, because the time of our
meeting was near the full moon.
With respect to theology, I had the society of Mr. Hawkes, Mr. Blyth,
and Mr. Scholefield, and his assistant Mr. Coates, and, while he lived
Mr. Palmer, before of Macclesfield. We met and drank tea together,
every fortnight. At this meeting we read all the papers that were sent
for the Theological Repository, which I revived some time after my
coming hither, and in general our conversation was of the same cast as
that with my fellow tutors at Warrington.
Within a quarter of a year of my coming to reside at Birmingham,
Mr. Hawkes resigned, and I had an unanimous invitation to succeed
him, as colleague with Mr. Blyth, a man of a truly christian temper.
The congregation we serve is the most liberal, I believe, of any in
England; and to this freedom the unwearied labours of Mr. Bourne had
eminently contributed.
With this congregation I greatly improved my plan of catechizing
and lecturing, and my classes have been well attended. I have also
introduced the custom of expounding the scriptures as I read them,
which I had never done before, but which I would earnestly recommend to
all ministers. My time being much taken up with my philosophical and
other studies, I agreed with the congregation to leave the business
of baptizing, and visiting the sick, to Mr. Blyth, and to confine my
services to the Sundays. I have been minister here between seven and
eight years, without any interruption of my happiness; and for this I
am sensible I am in a great measure indebted to the friendship of Mr.
Russell.
Here I have never long intermitted my philosophical pursuits, and I
have published two volumes of experiments, besides communications to
the Royal Society.
In theology I have completed my friendly controversy with the Bishop
of Waterford on the duration of Christ’s ministry, I have published a
variety of single sermons, which, with the addition of a few others,
I have lately collected, and published in one volume, and I am now
engaged in a controversy of great extent, and which promises to be of
considerable consequence, relating to the person of Christ.
This was occasioned by my _History of the Corruptions of Christianity_,
which I composed and published presently after my settlement at
Birmingham, the first section of which being rudely attacked in
the Monthly Review,[19] then by Dr. Horsely, and afterwards by Mr.
Howes, and other particular opponents, I undertook to collect from
the original writers the state of opinions on the subject in the age
succeeding that of the apostles, and I have published the result
of my investigation in my _History of early opinions concerning
Jesus Christ_, in four volumes octavo. This work has brought me more
antagonists, and I now write a pamphlet annually in defence of the
unitarian doctrine against all my opponents.
[19] Written by Mr. Badcock. Mr. Badcock was originally a dissenting
minister. He came to pay his respects to my father at Calne, at which
time he agreed with him upon most subjects. He afterwards found reason
to change his opinions, or at least his conduct, connecting himself
with the Clergy of the Church of England, and became my father’s bitter
enemy.
My only Arian antagonist is Dr. Price, with whom the discussion of the
question has proceeded with perfect amity. But no Arian has as yet
appeared upon the ground to which I wish to confine the controversy,
viz. the state of opinions in the primitive times, as one means of
collecting what was the doctrine of the apostles, and the true sense of
scripture on the subject.
Some years ago I resumed the _Theological Repository_ in which I first
advanced my objections to the doctrine of the miraculous conception of
Jesus, and his natural fallibility and peccability. These opinions gave
at first great alarm, even to my best friends; but that is now in a
great measure subsided. For want of sufficient sale, I shall be obliged
to discontinue this Repository for some time.
At present I thank God I can say that my prospects are better than they
have ever been before, and my own health, and that of my wife, better
established, and my hopes as to the dispositions and future settlement
of my children satisfactory.
I shall now close this account of myself with some observations of a
general nature, but chiefly an account of those circumstances for which
I have more particular reason to be thankful to that good being who has
brought me hitherto, and to whom I trust I habitually ascribe whatever
my partial friends think the world indebted to me for,
I. Not to enlarge again on what has been mentioned already, on the
fundamental blessings of a religious and liberal education, I have
particular reason to be thankful for a happy temperament of body and
mind, both derived from my parents. My father, grand father, and
several branches of the family, were remarkably healthy, and long
lived; and though my constitution has been far from robust, and was
much injured by a consumptive tendency, or rather an ulcer in my lungs,
the consequence of improper conduct of myself when I was at school
(being often violently heated with exercise, and as often imprudently
chilled by bathing, &c.) from which with great difficulty I recovered,
it has been excellently adapted to that studious life which has fallen
to my lot.
I have never been subject to head-achs, or any other complaints that
are peculiarly unfavourable to study. I have never found myself less
disposed, or less qualified, for mental exertions of any kind at one
time of the day more than another; but all seasons have been equal to
me, early or late, before dinner or after, &c. And so far have I been
from suffering by my application to study, (which however has never
been so close or intense as some have imagined) that I have found my
health improving from the age of eighteen to the present time; and
never have I found myself more free from any disorder than at present.
I must, however, except a short time preceding and following my leaving
Lord Shelburne, when I laboured under a bilious complaint, in which I
was troubled with gall stones, which sometimes gave me exquisite pain.
But by confining myself to a vegetable diet, I perfectly recovered;
and I have now been so long free from the disorder that I am under no
apprehension of its return.
It has been a singular happiness to me, and a proof, I believe, of a
radically good constitution, that I have always slept well, and have
awaked with my faculties perfectly vigorous, without any disposition
to drowsiness. Also, whenever I have been fatigued with any kind of
exertion, I could at any time sit down and sleep; and whatever cause of
anxiety I may have had, I have almost always lost sight of it when I
have got to bed; and I have generally fallen asleep as soon as I have
been warm.[20]
I even think it an advantage to me, and am truly thankful for it, that
my health received the check that it did when I was young; since a
muscular habit from high health, and strong spirits, are not, I think,
in general accompanied with that sensibility of mind, which is both
favourable to piety, and to speculative pursuits.[21]
[20] My father was an early riser. He never slept more than six hours.
He said he did not remember having lost a whole night’s sleep but once,
though when awake he often had to suffer much from pain and sickness as
well as from other circumstances of a very afflictive nature.
[21] Though not a muscular man he went through great exertion at
various times of his life with activity. He walked very firmly, and
expeditiously.
To a fundamentally good constitution of body, and the being who gave
it me, I owe an even chearfulness of temper, which has had but few
interruptions. This I inherit from my father, who had uniformly better
spirits than any man that I ever knew, and by this means was as happy
towards the close of life, when reduced to poverty, and dependent upon
others, as in his best days; and who, I am confident, would not have
been unhappy, as I have frequently heard him say, in a workhouse.
Though my readers will easily suppose that, in the course of a life so
full of vicissitude as mine has been, many things must have occurred to
mortify and discompose me, nothing has ever depressed my mind beyond
a very short period. My spirits have never failed to recover their
natural level, and I have frequently observed, and at first with some
surprize, that the most perfect satisfaction I have ever felt has been
a day or two after an event that afflicted me the most, and without any
change having taken place in the state of things. Having found this to
be the case after many of my troubles, the persuasion that it _would_
be so, after a new cause of uneasiness, has never failed to lessen the
effect of its first impression, and together with my firm belief of
the doctrine of necessity, (and consequently that of every thing being
ordered for the best) has contributed to that degree of composure
which I have enjoyed through life, so that I have always considered
myself as one of the happiest of men.
When I was a young author, (though I did not publish any thing until I
was about thirty) strictures on my writings gave me some disturbance,
though I believe even then less than they do most others; but after
some time, things of that kind hardly affected me at all, and on
this account I may be said to have been well formed for public
controversy.[22] But what has always made me easy in any controversy
in which I have been engaged, has been my fixed resolution frankly
to acknowledge any mistake that I might perceive I had fallen into.
That I have never been in the least backward to do this in matters of
philosophy, can never be denied.
[22] Though Dr. Priestley has been considered as fond of controversy
and that his chief delight consisted in it, yet it is far from being
true. He was more frequently the defendant than the assailant. His
controversies as far as it depended upon himself were carried to with
temper and decency. He was never malicious nor even sarcastic or
indignant unless provoked.
T. C.
As I have not failed to attend to the phenomena of my own mind, as
well as to those of other parts of nature, I have not been insensible
of some great defects, as well as some advantages, attending its
constitution; having from an early period been subject to a most
humbling failure of recollection, so that I have sometimes lost all
ideas of both persons and things, that I have been conversant with.
I have so completely forgotten what I have myself published, that in
reading my own writings, what I find in them often appears perfectly
new to me, and I have more than once made experiments the results of
which had been published by me.
I shall particularly mention one fact of this kind; as it alarmed
me much at the time, as a symptom of all my mental powers totally
failing me, until I was relieved by the recollection of things of a
similar nature having happened to me before. When I was composing the
_Dissertations_ which are prefixed to my _Harmony of the gospels_,
I had to ascertain something which had been the subject of much
discussion relating to the Jewish passover (I have now forgotten what
it was) and for that purpose had to consult, and compare several
writers. This I accordingly did, and digested the result in the compass
of a few paragraphs, which I wrote in short hand. But having mislaid
the paper, and my attention having been drawn off to other things, in
the space of a fortnight, I did the same thing over again; and should
never have discovered that I had done it twice, if, after the second
paper was transcribed for the press, I had not accidentally found the
former, which I viewed with a degree of terror.
Apprized of this defect, I never fail to note down as soon as possible
every thing that I wish not to forget. The same failing has led me to
devise, and have recourse to, a variety of mechanical expedients to
secure and arrange my thoughts, which have been of the greatest use to
me in the composition of large and complex works; and what has excited
the wonder of some of my readers, would only have made them smile if
they had seen me at work. But by simple and mechanical methods one man
shall do that in a month, which shall cost another, of equal ability,
whole years to execute. This methodical arrangement of a large work
is greatly facilitated by mechanical methods, and nothing contributes
more to the perspicuity of a large work, than a good arrangement of its
parts.
What I have known with respect to myself has tended much to lessen
both my admiration, and my contempt, of others. Could we have entered
into the mind of Sir Isaac Newton, and have traced all the steps
by which he produced his great works, we might see nothing very
extraordinary in the process. And great powers with respect to some
things are generally attended with great defects in others; and these
may not appear in a man’s writings. For this reason it seldom happens
but that our admiration of philosophers and writers is lessened by a
personal knowledge of them.
As great excellencies are often balanced by great, though not apparent,
defects, so great and apparent defects are often accompanied by
great, though not apparent, excellencies. Thus my defect in point of
recollection, which may be owing to a want of sufficient coherence in
the association of ideas formerly impressed, may arise from a mental
constitution more favourable to new associations; so that what I have
lost with respect to memory, may have been compensated by what is
called invention, or new and original combinations of ideas. This is
a subject that deserves attention, as well as every thing else that
relates to the affections of the mind.
Though I have often composed much in a little time, it by no means
follows that I could have done much in a given time. For whenever I
have done much business in a short time, it has always been with the
idea of having time more than sufficient to do it in; so that I have
always felt myself at ease, and I could have done nothing, as many can,
if I had been hurried.
Knowing the necessity of this state of my mind to the dispatch of
business, I have never put off any thing to the last moment; and
instead of doing that on the morrow which ought to be done to day,
I have often blamed myself for doing to day what had better have
been put off until to morrow; precipitancy being more my fault than
procrastination.
It has been a great advantage to me that I have never been under the
necessity of retiring from company in order to compose any thing. Being
fond of domestic life, I got a habit of writing on any subject by the
parlour fire, with my wife and children about me, and occasionally
talking to them, without experiencing any inconvenience from such
interruptions. Nothing but reading, or speaking without interruption,
has been any obstruction to me. For I could not help attending (as
some can) when others spoke in my hearing. These are useful habits,
which studious persons in general might acquire, if they would; and
many persons greatly distress themselves, and others, by the idea that
they can do nothing except in perfect solitude or silence.
Another great subject of my thankfulness to a good providence is my
perfect freedom from any embarrassment in my circumstances, so that,
without any anxiety on the subject, my supplies have always been
equal to my wants; and now that my expences are increased to a degree
that I had no conception of some years ago, I am a richer man than
I was, and without laying myself out for the purpose. What is more,
this indifference about an increase of fortune has been the means of
attaining it. When I began my experiments, I expended on them all the
money I could possibly raise, carried on by my ardour in philosophical
investigations, and entirely regardless of consequences, except so far
as never to contract any debt; and if this had been without success,
my imprudence would have been manifest. But having succeeded, I was in
time more than indemnified for all that I had expended.
My theological studies, especially those which made it necessary for
me to consult the Christian Fathers, &c. have also been expensive to
me. But I have found my theological friends even more liberal than my
philosophical ones, and all beyond my expectations.
In reflecting on my past life I have often thought of two sayings of
Jacob. When he had lost one of his sons, and thought of other things
that were afflictions to him, he said, “all these things are against
me,” at the same time that they were in reality making for him. So
the impediment in my speech, and the difficulties of my situation at
Needham, I now see as much cause to be thankful for, as for the most
brilliant scenes in my life.
I have also applied to myself what Jacob said on his return from Padan
Aram. “With my staff I went over this Jordan, and now I am become
two bands;” when I consider how little I carried with me to Needham
and Nantwich, how much more I had to carry to Warrington, how much
more still to Leeds, how much more than that to Calne, and then to
Birmingham.
Yet, frequently as I have changed my situation, and always for the
better, I can truly say that I never wished for any change on my own
account. I should have been contented even at Needham, if I could have
been unmolested, and had bare necessaries. This freedom from anxiety
was remarkable in my father, and therefore is in a manner hereditary
to me; but it has been much increased by reflection; having frequently
observed, especially with respect to christian ministers, how often it
has contributed to embitter their lives, without being of any use to
them. Some attention to the improvement of a man’s circumstances is,
no doubt, right, because no man can tell what occasion he may have for
money, especially if he have children, and therefore I do not recommend
my example to others. But I am thankful to that good providence which
always took more care of me than I ever took of myself.
Hitherto I have had great reason to be thankful with respect to my
children, as they have a prospect of enjoying a good share of health,
and a sufficient capacity for performing the duties of their stations.
They have also good dispositions, and as much as could be expected
at their age, a sense of religion. But as I hope they will live to
see this work, I say the less on this subject, and I hope they
will consider what I say in their favour as an incitement to exert
themselves to act a christian and useful part in life; that the care
that I and their mother have taken of their instruction may not be lost
upon them, and that they may secure a happy meeting with us in a better
world.
I esteem it a singular happiness to have lived in an age and country,
in which I have been at full liberty both to investigate, and by
preaching and writing to propagate, religious truth; that though the
freedom I have used for this purpose was for some time disadvantageous
to me, it was not long so, and that my present situation is such that
I can with the greatest openness urge whatever appears to me to be
the truth of the gospel, not only without giving the least offence,
but with the intire approbation of those with whom I am particularly
connected.
As to the dislike which I have drawn upon myself by my writings,
whether that of the Calvinistic party, in or out of the church of
England, those who rank with rational dissenters (but who have been
exceedingly offended at my carrying my inquiries farther than they
wished any person to do) or whether they be unbelievers, I am thankful
that it gives less disturbance to me than it does to themselves; and
that their dislike is much more than compensated by the cordial esteem
and approbation of my conduct by a few, whose minds are congenial to my
own, and especially that the number of such persons increases.
[_Birmingham_, 1787.
_A Continuation of the Memoirs, written at Northumberland in America
in the beginning of the year 1795._
When I wrote the preceding part of these Memoirs I was happy as must
have appeared in the course of them, in the prospect of spending the
remainder of my life at Birmingham, where I had every advantage for
pursuing my studies, both philosophical and theological; but it pleased
the sovereign disposer of all things to appoint for me other removals,
and the manner in which they were brought about were more painful to me
than the removals themselves. I am far, however, from questioning the
wisdom or the goodness of the appointments respecting myself or others.
To resume the account of my pursuits where the former part of the
Memoirs left it, I must observe that, in the prosecution of my
_experiments_, I was led to maintain the doctrine of phlogiston against
Mr. Lavoisier and other chemists in France, whose opinions were adopted
not only by almost all the philosophers of that country, but by those
in England and Scotland also. My friends, however, of the lunar society
were never satisfied with the Anti-phlogistic doctrine. My experiments
and observations on this subject were published in various papers
in the Philosophical Transactions. At Birmingham I also published a
new edition of my publications on the subject of _air_, and others
connected with it, reducing the six volumes to three, which, with his
consent, I dedicated to the prince of Wales.
In theology I continued my _defences of Unitarianism_, until it
appeared to myself and my friends that my antagonists produced nothing
to which it was of any consequence to reply. But I did not, as I had
proposed, publish any address to the bishops, or to the legislature,
on the subject. The former I wrote, but did not publish. I left it,
however, in the hands of Mr. Belsham when I came to America, that he
might dispose of it as he should think proper.
The pains that I took to ascertain the state of early opinions
concerning Jesus Christ, and the great misapprehensions I perceived
in all the ecclesiastical historians, led me to undertake a _General
History of the christian church to the fall of the Western empire_,
which accordingly I wrote in two volumes octavo, and dedicated to Mr.
Shore. This work I mean to continue.
At Birmingham I wrote the _second_ part of my _Letters to a
philosophical Unbeliever_, and dedicated the whole to Mr. Tayleur
of Shrewsbury, who had afforded me most material assistance in the
publication of many of my theological works, without which, the sale
being inconsiderable, I should not have been able to publish them at
all.
Before I left Birmingham I preached a funeral sermon for my friend Dr.
Price, and another for Mr. Robinson of Cambridge, who died with us on a
visit to preach our annual charity school sermon. I also preached the
last annual sermon to the friends of the college at Hackney. All these
three sermons were published.
About two years before I left Birmingham the question about the _test
act_ was much agitated both in and out of parliament. This, however,
was altogether without any concurrence of mine. I only delivered, and
published, a sermon on the 5th of November 1789, recommending the
most peaceable method of pursuing our object. Mr. Madan, however, the
most respectable clergyman in the town, preaching and publishing a
most inflammatory sermon on the subject, inveighing in the bitterest
manner against the Dissenters in general, and myself in particular,
I addressed a number of _familiar letters to the inhabitants of
Birmingham_ in our defence. This produced a reply from him, and other
letters from me. All mine were written in an ironical and rather a
pleasant manner, and in some of the last of them I introduced a farther
reply to Mr. Burn, another clergyman in Birmingham, who had addressed
to me _letters on the infallibility of the testimony of the Apostles
concerning the person of Christ_, after replying to his first set of
Letters, in a separate publication.
From these small pieces I was far from expecting any serious
consequences. But the Dissenters in general being very obnoxious to
the court, and it being imagined, though without any reason, that I
had been the chief promoter of the measures which gave them offence,
the clergy, not only in Birmingham, but through all England, seemed to
make it their business, by writing in the public papers, by preaching,
and other methods, to inflame the minds of the people against me.
And on occasion of the celebration of the anniversary of the French
revolution on July 14th, 1791, by several of my friends, but with which
I had little to do, a mob encouraged by some persons in power, first
burned the meeting house in which I preached, then another meeting
house in the town, and then my dwelling house, demolishing my library,
apparatus, and, as far as they could, every thing belonging to me. They
also burned, or much damaged, the houses of many Dissenters, chiefly
my friends; the particulars of which I need not recite, as they will
be found in two _Appeals_ which I published on the subject written
presently after the riots.
Being in some personal danger on this occasion, I went to London; and
so violent was the spirit of party which then prevailed, that I believe
I could hardly have been safe in any other place. There, however, I
was perfectly so, though I continued to be an object of troublesome
attention until I left the country altogether. It shewed no small
degree of courage and friendship in Mr. William Vaughan to receive me
into his house, and also in Mr. Salte, with whom I spent a month at
Tottenham. But it shewed more in Dr. Price’s congregation at Hackney,
to invite me to succeed him, which they did, though not unanimously,
some time after my arrival in London.
In this situation I found myself as happy as I had been at Birmingham,
and contrary to general expectation, I opened my lectures to young
persons with great success, being attended by many from London; and
though I lost some of the hearers, I left the congregation in a better
situation than that in which I found it.
On the whole, I spent my time even more happily at Hackney than ever
I had done before; having every advantage for my philosophical and
theological studies, in some respect superior to what I had enjoyed
at Birmingham, especially from my easy access to Mr. Lindsey, and my
frequent intercourse with Mr. Belsham, professor of divinity in the
New College, near which I lived. Never, on this side the grave, do
I expect to enjoy myself so much as I did by the fire side of Mr.
Lindsey, conversing with him and Mrs. Lindsey on theological and other
subjects, or in my frequent walks with Mr. Belsham, whose views of most
important subjects were, like Mr. Lindsey’s, the same with my own.
I found, however, my society much restricted with respect to my
philosophical acquaintance; most of the members of the Royal Society
shunning me on account of my religious or political opinions, so that I
at length withdrew myself from them, and gave my reasons for so doing
in the Preface to my _Observations and Experiments on the generation of
air from water_, which I published at Hackney. For, with the assistance
of my friends, I had in a great measure replaced my Apparatus, and had
resumed my experiments, though after the loss of near two years.
Living in the neighbourhood of the New College, I voluntarily undertook
to deliver the lectures to the pupils on the subject of _History and
General policy_, which I had composed at Warrington, and also on
_Experimental Philosophy and Chemistry_, the _Heads_ of which I drew up
for this purpose, and afterwards published. In being useful to this
Institution I found a source of considerable satisfaction to myself.
Indeed, I have always had a high degree of enjoyment in lecturing to
young persons, though more on theological subjects than on any other.
After the riots in Birmingham I wrote _an Appeal to the Public_ on
the subject, and that being replied to by the clergy of the place, I
wrote a _second part_, to which, though they had pledged themselves
to do it, they made no reply; so that, in fact the criminality of the
magistrates, and other principal High-church men at Birmingham, in
promoting the riot, remains acknowledged. Indeed, many circumstances,
which have appeared since that time, shew that the friends of the
court, if not the prime ministers themselves, were the favourers of
that riot; having, no doubt, thought to intimidate the friends of
liberty by the measure.
To my Appeal I subjoined various _Addresses_[23] that were sent to me
from several descriptions of persons in England, and abroad; and from
them I will not deny that I received much satisfaction, as it appeared
that the friends of liberty, civil and religious, were of opinion that
I was a sufferer in that cause. From France I received a considerable
number of Addresses; and when the present _National Convention_ was
called, I was invited by many of the departments to be a member of it.
But I thought myself more usefully employed at home, and that I was
but ill qualified for a business which required knowledge which none
but a native of the country could possess; and therefore declined the
honour that was proposed to me.
[23] Many of these addresses have been published already. In the
appendix to the present life (No. 7.) will be given an arranged list
of the addresses to Dr. Priestley from various bodies of men at
various times of his life; they illustrate the following positions so
honourable to his character, and so necessary to a just view of it.
1st That wherever he officiated as a dissenting minister, he never
quitted his situation but with the sincere regrets of those among whom
he had resided, and with parting testimonies of their affectionate
approbation of his conduct. 2dly. That the riots at Birmingham called
forth such abundant testimonies in favour of his moral conduct and
eminent usefulness; that the promoters of those riots whether in church
or state can have no palliation in the eye of a discerning public for
their proceedings, so far as he was the object of them. Those only use
violence in opposition to argument who have no argument to use. 3dly.
That his quitting England for America, was regarded as a national loss
to Great Britain, and the circumstances which induced it, a national
disgrace. 4thly. That his reception in this country was as honourable
as his friends had reason to expect: And his demeanour since his
residence here, has been such as to gain him encreased reputation and
respect, among those who knew nothing of him personally before his
arrival.
T. C.
But no addresses gave me so much satisfaction as those from my late
congregation, and especially of the young persons belonging to it, who
had attended my lectures. They are a standing testimony of the zeal and
fidelity with which I did my duty with respect to them, and which I
value highly.
Besides congratulatory addresses, I received much pecuniary assistance
from various persons, and bodies of men, which more than compensated
for my pecuniary losses, though what was awarded me at the Assizes
fell two thousand pounds short of them. But my brother-in-law, Mr.
John Wilkinson, from whom I had not at that time any expectation, in
consequence of my son’s leaving his employment, was the most generous
on the occasion. Without any solicitation, he immediately sent me
five hundred pounds, and afterwards transferred to me ten thousand
pounds which he had deposited in the French funds, and until that be
productive, he allows me two hundred pounds per annum.
After the riots, I published my _Letters to the Swedenborgian Society_,
which I had composed, and prepared for the press just before.
Mr. Wakefield living in the neighbourhood of the College, and
publishing at this time his objections to _public worship_, they made
a great impression on many of our young men, and in his Preface he
reflected much on the character of Dr. Price. On both these accounts
I thought myself called upon to reply to him, which I did in a series
of _Letters to a young man_. But though he made several angry replies,
I never noticed any of them. In this situation I also answered Mr.
Evanson’s _Observations on the dissonance of the Evangelists_ in
a _second set of Letters to a young man_. He also replied to me,
but I was satisfied with what I had done, and did not continue the
controversy.
Besides the _sermon_ which I delivered on my acceptance of the
invitation to the meeting at Hackney, in the preface to which I gave a
detailed account of my _system of catechizing_, I published two _Fast
sermons_ for the years 1793 and 1794, in the latter of which I gave my
ideas of antient prophecies compared with the then state of Europe, and
in the preface to it I gave an account of my reasons for leaving the
country. I also published a _Farewell sermon_.[24]
But the most important of my publications in this situation were a
series of _Letters to the Philosophers and Politicians of France on the
subject of Religion_. I thought that the light in which I then stood
in that country gave me some advantage in my attempts to enforce the
evidence of natural and revealed religion. I also published a set of
_sermons on the evidences of revelation_, which I first delivered by
public notice, and the delivery of which was attended by great numbers.
They were printed just before I left England.
[24] These reasons, as shewing the progress and state of his mind that
induced this new æra of his life, will be inserted hereafter.
As the reasons for this step in my conduct are given at large in the
preface to my Fast sermon, I shall not dwell upon them here. The
bigotry of the country in general made it impossible for me to place
my sons in it to any advantage. William had been some time in France,
and on the breaking out of the troubles in that country he had embarked
for America, where his two brothers met him. My own situation, if
not hazardous, was become unpleasant, so that I thought my removal
would be of more service to the cause of truth than my longer stay in
England. At length, therefore, with the approbation of all my friends,
without exception, but with great reluctance on my own part, I came to
that resolution; I being at a time of life in which I could not expect
much satisfaction as to friends and society, comparable to that which
I left, in which the resumption of my philosophical pursuits must be
attended with great disadvantage, and in which success in my still more
favourite pursuit, the propagation of unitarianism, was still more
uncertain. It was also painful to me to leave my daughter, Mr. Finch
having the greatest aversion to leave his relations and friends in
England.
At the time of my leaving England my son in conjunction with Mr.
Cooper, and other English emigrants, had a scheme for a large
settlement for the friends of liberty in general near the head of
the Susquehanna in Pennsylvania. And taking it for granted that it
would be carried into effect, after landing at New-York, I went to
Philadelphia, and thence came to Northumberland, a town the nearest to
the proposed settlement, thinking to reside there until some progress
had been made in it. The settlement was given up; but being here, and
my wife and myself liking the place, I have determined to take up my
residence here, though subject to many disadvantages. Philadelphia
was excessively expensive, and this comparatively a cheap place; and
my son’s, settling in the neighbourhood, will be less exposed to
temptation, and more likely to form habits of sobriety and industry.
They will also be settled at much less expence than in or near a
large town. We hope, after some time, to be joined by a few of our
friends from England, that a readier communication will be opened with
Philadelphia, and that the place will improve, and become more eligible
in other respects.
When I was at sea, I wrote _some observations on the cause of the
present prevalence of infidelity_, which I published, and prefixed to
a new edition of the _Letters to the Philosophers and Politicians of
France_. I have also published my _Fast and Farewell sermons_, and
my _small tracts_ in defence of unitarianism, also a _Continuation
of those Letters_, and a _third part of Letters to a Philosophical
Unbeliever_, in answer to _Mr. Paine’s Age of Reason_.
The observations on the prevalence of infidelity I have much enlarged,
and intend soon to print; but I am chiefly employed on the Continuation
of my History of the christian church.
Northumberland, March 24, 1795, in which I have completed the sixty
second year of my age.
A
CONTINUATION
OF THE
_MEMOIRS_
OF
DR. JOSEPH PRIESTLEY.
[_Written by his Son Joseph Priestley._]
Thus far the narrative is from my father’s manuscript, and I regret
extremely, with the reader, that it falls to my lot to give an account
of the latter period of his valuable life.
I entertained hopes at one time, that he would have continued it
himself; and he was frequently requested to do so, by me and many of
his friends in the course of the year preceding his death. He had then
nearly compleated all the literary works he had in view, he had arrived
at that period of life when, in imitation of his friend Mr. Lindsey,
he had determined not to preach again in public, and beyond which he
probably would not have ventured to publish any work without first
subjecting it to the inspection of some judicious friend.
He was requested also, in imitation of Courayer, to add at the close
of his Memoirs a summary of his religious opinions. This would have
counteracted the suspicions entertained by some, that they had
undergone a considerable change since his coming to America; and it
was thought by his friends, that such a brief and simple statement
of all that appeared to him essential to the christian belief, and
the christian character, would attract the attention of many readers
previously indisposed to religion altogether, from not understanding
its real nature, and judging of it only from the corrupt, adulterated,
and complicated state, in which it is professed in all countries called
christian. Unbelievers in general have no conception of the perfect
coincidence of christianity with rational philosophy, of the sublime
views it affords of the divine benevolence, and how powerfully it acts
to promote the pleasures and lessen the evils of the present life, at
the same time that it holds out to us a certain prospect of a future
and endless state of enjoyment. It was suggested to him also, that as
his society through life had been singularly varied and extensive, and
his opportunities of attaining a general knowledge of the world, and
a particular knowledge of eminent political and literary characters,
very great, it would contribute much to the instruction and amusement
of those into whose hands his Memoirs should fall, if they were
accompanied with anecdotes of the principal characters with whom he
had been acquainted. For he had a fund of anecdote which he was never
backward to produce for the amusement of his friends, as occasions
served for introducing it. But his relations were never sarcastic or
ironical, or tended to disparage the characters of the persons spoken
of, unless on subjects of manifest importance to the interests of
society.
He meant to have complied with the above suggestions, but being at
that time very busily employed about his Comparison, and thinking his
Memoirs of little value compared with the works about which he was then
engaged, he put off the completion of his narrative, until his other
works should be ready for the press. Unfortunately this was too late.
The work he had in hand was not compleated until the 22d January, when
he was very weak and suffered greatly from his disorder, and he died on
the 6th of February following:
The reader will therefore make allowance for the difference between
what these Memoirs might have been, and what they now are; and
particularly for the part which I venture to lay before the public as a
continuation of his own account.
The reasons that induced him to quit England, and the progress of his
opinions and inclinations respecting that last important æra in his
life, have been but briefly stated in the preceding pages by himself.
But as many may peruse these Memoirs, into whose hands his appeal to
the public, occasioned by the riots at Birmingham, and his Fast sermon,
in which he assigns at length his reasons for leaving his native
country, are not likely to fall; I think it right to present to the
readers, in his own words the history of the motives that impelled him
to exchange his residence in England for one in this country.
The disgraceful riots at Birmingham were certainly the chief cause that
first induced my father to think of leaving England, though at the
time of his writing the second part of the Appeal, in August 1792, he
had not come to any determination on the subject. This appears from the
following passage which as it shews the progress of his discontent,
and likewise the true state of his political opinions, particularly in
relation to the English form of government I shall quote.--
“In this almost universal prevalence of a spirit so extremely hostile
to me and my friends, and which would be gratified by my destruction,
it cannot be any matter of surprise, that a son of mine should wish to
abandon a country in which his father has been used as I have been,
especially when it is considered that this son was present at the riot
in Birmingham, exerting himself all the dreadful night of the 14th
of July, to save what he could of my most valuable property; that in
consequence of this his life was in imminent danger, and another young
man was nearly killed because he was mistaken for him. This would
probably have been his fate, if a friend had not almost perforce kept
him concealed some days, so that neither myself nor his mother knew
what was become of him. I had not, however, the ambition to court the
honour that has been shewn him by the national assembly of France,
and even declined the proposal of his naturalization. At the most,
I supposed it would have been done without any _eclat_; and I knew
nothing of its being done in so very honourable a way until I saw the
account in the public newspapers. To whatever country this son of mine
shall choose to attach himself, I trust that, from the good principles,
and the spirit, that he has hitherto shewn, he will discharge the
duties of a good citizen.”
“As to myself, I cannot be supposed to feel much attachment to a
country in which I have neither found protection, nor redress. But
I am too old, and my habits too fixed, to remove, as I own I should
otherwise have been disposed to do, to France, or America. The little
that I am capable of doing must be in England, where I shall therefore
continue, as long as it shall please the supreme Disposer of all things
to permit me[25].
[25] “Since this was written, I have myself, without any solicitation on
my part, been made a citizen of France, and moreover elected a member
of the present Conventional Assembly. These, I scruple not to avow, I
consider as the greatest of honours; though, for the reasons which are
now made public, I have declined accepting the latter.”
It might have been thought that, having written so much in defence of
revelation, and of Christianity in general, more perhaps than all the
clergy of the church of England now living; this defence of a _common
cause_ would have been received as some atonement for my demerits in
writing against civil establishments of christianity, and particular
doctrines. But had I been an open enemy of all religion, the animosity
against me could not have been greater than it is. Neither Mr. Hume nor
Mr. Gibbon was a thousandth part so obnoxious to the clergy as I am; so
little respect have my enemies for christianity itself, compared with
what they have for their emoluments from it.”
“As to my supposed hostility to the principles of the civil
constitution of this country, there has been no pretence whatever for
charging me with any thing of the kind. Besides that the very catalogue
of my publications will prove that my life has been devoted to
literature, and chiefly to natural philosophy and theology, which have
not left me any leisure for factious politics; in the few things that I
have written of a political nature, I have been an avowed advocate for
our mixed government by _King, Lords, and Commons_; but because I have
objected to the ecclesiastical part of it, and to particular religious
tenets, I have been industriously represented as openly seditious, and
endeavouring the overthrow of every thing that is _fixed_, the enemy of
all order, and of all government.”
“Every publication which bears my name is in favour of our present
form of government. But if I had not thought so highly of it, and had
seen reason for preferring a more republican form, and had openly
advanced that opinion; I do not know that the proposing to free
discussion a system of government different from that of England, even
to Englishmen, is any crime, according to the existing laws of this
country. It has always been thought, at least, that our constitution
authorises the free proposal, and discussion, of all theoretical
principles whatever, political ones not excepted. And though I might
now recommend a very different form of government to a people who had
no previous prejudices or habits, the case is very different with
respect to one that _has_; and it is the duty of every good citizen
to maintain that government of any country which the majority of its
inhabitants approve, whether he himself should otherwise prefer it, or
not.”
“This, however, is all that can in reason be required of any man. To
demand more would be as absurd as to oblige every man, by the law of
marriage, to maintain that his particular wife was absolutely the
handsomest, and best tempered woman in the world; whereas it is surely
sufficient if a man behave well to his wife, and discharge the duties
of a good husband.”
“A very great majority of Englishmen, I am well persuaded, are friends
to what are called _high maxims of government_. They would choose to
have the power of the crown rather enlarged than reduced, and would
rather see all the Dissenters banished than any reformation made in the
church. A dread of every thing tending to _republicanism_ is manifestly
increased of late years, and is likely to increase still more. The very
term is become one of the most opprobrious in the English language.
The clergy (whose near alliance with the court, and the present royal
family, after having been almost a century hostile to them, is a
remarkable event in the present reign) have contributed not a little
to that leaning to arbitrary power in the crown which has lately been
growing upon us. They preach up the doctrine of passive obedience
and non-resistance with as little disguise as their ancestors did in
the reign of the Stuarts, and their adulation of the king and of the
minister is abject in the extreme. Both Mr. Madan’s sermon and Mr.
Burn’s reply to my Appeal discover the same spirit; and any sentiment
in favour of liberty that is at all bold and manly, such as, till of
late, was deemed becoming Englishmen and the disciples of Mr. Locke, is
now reprobated as seditious.”
“In these circumstances, it would be nothing less than madness
seriously to attempt a change in the constitution, and I hope I am
not absolutely insane. I sincerely wish my countrymen, as part of the
human race (though, I own, I now feel no particular attachment to
them on any other ground) the undisturbed enjoyment of that form of
government which they so evidently approve; and as I have no favour to
ask of them, or of their governors, besides mere protection, as to a
stranger, while I violate no known law, and have not this to ask for
any long term, I hope it will be granted me. If not, I must, like many
others, in all ages and all nations, submit to whatever the supreme
Being, whose eye is upon us all, and who I believe intends, and will in
his own time bring about, the good of all, shall appoint, and by their
means execute.” [_Appeal part II page 109. &c._]
The rising disinclination which the preceding passage shews had taken
place in my father’s mind towards a longer residence in England, became
confirmed by various circumstances, particularly the determination of
his sons to emigrate to America. These, together with other reasons,
that finally influenced his conduct on the subject of removing to this
country, are stated at large as I have before observed in the preface
to his Fast sermon for the year 1794 and I cannot so properly give them
as in his own words.
“This discourse, and those on the _Evidences of Divine Revelation_,
which will be published about the same time, being the last of my
labours in this country, I hope my friends, and the public, will
indulge me while I give the reasons of their _being_ the last, in
consequence of my having at length, after much hesitation, and now
with reluctance, come to a resolution to leave this kingdom.
After the riots in Birmingham, it was the expectation, and evidently
the wish, of many persons, that I should immediately fly to France,
or America. But I had no consciousness of guilt to induce me to
fly my country[26]. On the contrary, I came directly to London, and
instantly, by means of my friend Mr. Russell, signified to the king’s
ministers, that I _was_ there, and ready, if they thought proper, to
be interrogated on the subject of the riot. But no notice was taken of
the message.
[26] If, instead of flying from lawless violence, I had been flying
from public justice, I could not have been pursued with more rancour,
nor could my friends have been more anxious for my safety. One man,
who happened to see me on horseback on one of the nights in which I
escaped from Birmingham, expressed his regret that he had not taken me,
expecting probably some considerable reward, as he said, it was so easy
for him to have done it. My friends earnestly advised me to disguise
myself as I was going to London. But all that was done in that way was
taking a place for me in the mail coach, which I entered at Worcester,
in another name than my own. However, the friend who had the courage to
receive me in London had thought it necessary to provide a dress that
should disguise me, and also a method of making my escape, in case the
house should have been attacked on my account; and for some time my
friends would not suffer me to appear in the streets.
Ill treated as I thought I had been, not merely by the populace of
Birmingham, for they were the mere tools of their superiors, but by
the country in general, which evidently exulted in our sufferings, and
afterwards by the representatives of the nation, who refused to inquire
into the cause of them, I own I was not without deliberating upon the
subject of emigration; and several flattering proposals were made me,
especially from France, which was then at peace within itself, and with
all the world; and I was at one time much inclined to go thither, on
account of its nearness to England, the agreeableness of its climate,
and my having many friends there.
But I likewise considered that, if I went thither I should have no
employment of the kind to which I had been accustomed; and the season
of active life not being, according to the course of nature, quite
over, I wished to make as much use of it as I could. I therefore
determined to continue in England, exposed as I was not only to
unbounded obloquy and insult, but to every kind of outrage; and after
my invitation to succeed my friend Dr. Price, I had no hesitation
about it. Accordingly I took up my residence where I now am, though
so prevalent was the idea of my insecurity, that I was not able to
take the house in my own name; and when a friend of mine took it in
_his_, it was with much difficulty that, after some time, the landlord
was prevailed upon to transfer the lease to me. He expressed his
apprehensions, not only of the house that I occupied, being demolished,
but also a capital house in which he himself resides, at the distance
of no less than twenty miles from London, whither he supposed the
rioters would go next, merely for suffering me to live in a house of
_his_.
But even this does not give such an idea of the danger that not only
myself, but every person, and every thing, that had the slightest
connection with me, were supposed to be in, as the following. The
managers of one of the principal charities among the Dissenters applied
to me to preach their annual sermon, and I had consented. But the
treasurer a man of fortune, who knew nothing more of me than my name,
was so much alarmed at it, that he declared he could not sleep. I
therefore, to his great relief, declined preaching at all.
When it was known that I was settled where I now am, several of my
friends, who lived near me, were seriously advised to remove their
papers, and other most valuable effects, to some place of greater
safety in London. On the 14th of July, 1792, it was taken for granted
by many of the neighbours, that my house was to come down, just as
at Birmingham the year before. When the Hackney association was
formed, several servants in the neighbourhood actually removed their
goods; and when there was some political meeting at the house of Mr.
Breillat, though about two miles from my house, a woman whose daughter
was servant in the house contiguous to mine, came to her mistress,
to entreat that she might be out of the way; and it was not without
much difficulty that she was pacified, and prevailed upon to let her
continue in the house, her mistress saying that she was as safe as
herself.
On several other occasions the neighbourhood has been greatly alarmed
on account of my being so near them. Nor was this without apparent
reason. I could name a person, and to appearance a reputable tradesman,
who, in the company of his friends, and in the hearing of one of my
late congregation at Birmingham, but without knowing him to be such,
declared that, in case of any disturbance, they would immediately come
to Hackney, evidently, for the purpose of mischief. In this state of
things, it is not to be wondered at, that of many servants who were
recommended to me, and some that were actually hired, very few could,
for a long time, be prevailed upon to live with me.
These facts not only shew how general was the idea of my particular
insecurity in this country; but what is of much more consequence, and
highly interesting to the country at large, an idea of the general
disposition to rioting and violence that prevails in it, and that the
Dissenters are the objects of it. Mr. Pitt very justly observed, in
his speech on the subject of the riots at Birmingham, that it was “the
effervescence of the public mind.” Indeed the effervescible matter
has existed in this country ever since the civil wars in the time of
Charles I. and it was particularly apparent in the reign of Queen Anne.
But the power of government under the former princes of the House of
Hanover prevented its doing any mischief. The late events shew that
this power is no longer exerted as it used to be, but that, on the
contrary there prevails an idea, well or ill founded, that tumultuary
proceedings against Dissenters will not receive any effectual
discouragement. After what has taken place with respect to Birmingham,
all idea of much hazard for insulting and abusing the Dissenters is
entirely vanished; whereas the disposition to injure the Catholics was
effectually checked by the proceedings of the year 1780. From that time
_they_ have been safe, and I rejoice in it. But from the year 1791, the
Dissenters have been more exposed to insult and outrage than ever.
Having fixed myself at Clapton; unhinged as I had been, and having lost
the labour of several years; yet flattering myself that I should end my
days here, I took a long lease of my house, and expended a considerable
sum in improving it. I also determined, with the assistance of my
friends, to resume my philosophical and other pursuits; and after an
interruption amounting to about two years, it was with a pleasure that
I cannot describe, that I entered my new laboratory, and began the most
common preparatory processes, with a view to some original inquiries.
With what success I have laboured, the public has already in some
measure seen, and may see more hereafter.
But though I did not choose (notwithstanding I found myself exposed to
continual insult) to leave my native country, I found it necessary to
provide for my sons elsewhere. My eldest son was settled in a business,
which promised to be very advantageous, at Manchester; but his partner
though a man of liberality himself, informed him, on perceiving
the general prevalence of the spirit which produced the riots in
Birmingham, that, owing to his relationship to _me_, he was under the
necessity of proposing a separation, which accordingly took place.
On this he had an invitation to join another connexion, in a business
in which the spirit of party could not have much affected him; but he
declined it. And after he had been present at the assizes at Warwick,
he conceived such an idea of this country, that I do not believe any
proposal, however advantageous, would have induced him to continue in
it; so much was he affected on perceiving his father treated as I had
been.
Determining to go to America, where he had no prospect but that of
being a farmer, he wished to spend a short time with a person who had
greatly distinguished himself in that way, and one who from his own
general principles, and his friendship for myself, would have given him
the best advice and assistance in his power. He, however, declined it,
and acknowledged some time after, that had it been known, as it must
have been, to his landlord, that he had a son of _mine_ with him, he
feared he should have been turned out of his farm.
My second son who was present both at the riot, and the assizes, felt
more indignation still, and willingly listened to a proposal to settle
in France; and there his reception was but too flattering. However, on
the breaking out of the war with this country, all mercantile prospects
being suspended, he wished to go to America. There his eldest and
youngest brother have joined him, and they are now looking out for a
settlement, having as yet no fixed views.
The necessity I was under of sending my sons out of this country,
was my principal inducement to send the little property that I had
out of it too; so that I had nothing in England besides my library,
apparatus, and household goods. By this, I felt myself greatly
relieved, it being of little consequence where a man already turned
sixty ends his days. Whatever good or evil I have been capable of, is
now chiefly done; and I trust that the same consciousness of integrity,
which has supported me hitherto, will carry me through any thing that
may yet be reserved for me. Seeing, however, no great prospect of doing
much good, or having much enjoyment, here, I am now preparing to follow
my sons; hoping to be of some use to them in their present unsettled
state, and that Providence may yet, advancing in years as I am, find me
some sphere of usefulness along with them.
As to the great odium that I have incurred, the charge of _sedition_,
or my being an enemy to the constitution or peace of my country, is
a mere pretence for it; though it has been so much urged, that it is
now generally believed, and all attempts to undeceive the public with
respect to it avail nothing at all. The whole course of my studies,
from early life, shews how little _politics_ of any kind have been my
object. Indeed to have written so much as I have in _theology_, and to
have done so much in _experimental philosophy_, and at the same time
to have had my mind occupied, as it is supposed to have been, with
factious politics, I must have had faculties more than human. Let any
person only cast his eye over the long list of my publications, and he
will see that they relate almost wholly to theology, philosophy, or
general literature.
I did, however, when I was a younger man, and before it was in my
power to give much attention to philosophical pursuits, write a
small anonymous political pamphlet, on the _State of Liberty in this
Country_, about the time of Mr. Wilkes’s election for Middlesex, which
gained me the acquaintance, and I may say the friendship, of Sir George
Savile, and which I had the happiness to enjoy as long as he lived.
At the request also of Dr. Franklin and Dr. Fothergill, I wrote an
address to the Dissenters on the subject of the approaching rupture
with America, a pamphlet which Sir George Savile, and my other friends,
circulated in great numbers, and it was thought with some effect.
After this I entirely ceased to write any thing on the subject of
politics, except as far as the business of the _Test Act_, and of
_Civil Establishments of Religion_, had a connection with politics. And
though, at the recommendation of Dr. Price, I was presently after this
taken into the family of the Marquis of Landsdowne, and I entered into
almost all his views, as thinking them just and liberal, I never wrote
a single political pamphlet, or even a paragraph in a newspaper, all
the time that I was with him, which was seven years.
I never preached a political sermon in my life; unless such as, I
believe all Dissenters usually preach on the fifth of November, in
favour of _civil and religious liberty_, may be said to be political.
And on these occasions, I am confident, that I never advanced any
sentiment but such as, until of late years, would have tended to
recommend, rather than render me obnoxious, to those who direct the
administration of this country. And the doctrines which I adopted when
young, and which were even popular then (except with the clergy, who
were at that time generally disaffected to the family on the throne)
I cannot abandon, merely because the times are so changed, that they
are now become unpopular, and the expression and communication of them
hazardous.
Farther, though I by no means disapprove of societies for political
information, such as are now every where discountenanced, and generally
suppressed, I never was a member of any of them; nor, indeed, did I
ever attend any public meeting, if I could decently avoid it, owing to
habits acquired in studious and retired life.
From a mistake of my talents and disposition, I was invited by many of
the departments in France, to represent them in the present National
Convention, after I had been made a citizen of France, on account of my
being considered as one who had been persecuted for my attachment to
the cause of liberty here. But though the invitation was repeated with
the most flattering importunity, I never hesitated about declining it.
I can farther say with respect to politics, concerning which I believe
every Englishman has some opinion or other (and at present, owing to
the peculiar nature of the present war, it is almost the only topic of
general conversation) that, except in company, I hardly ever think of
the subject, my reading, meditation, and writing, being almost wholly
engrossed by theology, and philosophy; and of late, as for many years
before the riots in Birmingham, I have spent a very great proportion of
my time, as my friends well know, in my laboratory.
If, then, my real crime has not been _sedition_, or _treason_, what
has it been? For every _effect_ must have some adequate _cause_, and
therefore the odium that I have incurred must have been owing to
something in my declared sentiments, or conduct, that has exposed me to
it. In my opinion, it cannot have been any thing but my open hostility
to the doctrines of the established church, and more especially to all
civil establishments of religion whatever. This has brought upon me the
implacable resentment of the great body of the clergy; and they have
found other methods of opposing me besides _argument_, and that use
of the _press_ which is equally open to us all. They have also found
an able ally and champion in Mr. Burke, who (without any provocation
except that of answering his book on the French Revolution) has taken
several opportunities of inveighing against me, in a place where he
knows I cannot reply to him, and from which he also knows that his
accusation will reach every corner of the country, and consequently
thousands of persons who will never read any writings of mine[27].
They have had another, and still more effectual vehicle of their
abuse in what are called the _treasury newspapers_, and other popular
publications.
[27] Mr. Burke having said in the House of Commons, that “I was made
a citizen of France on account of my declared hostility to the
constitution of this country,” I, in the public papers, denied the
charge, and called upon him for the proofs of it. As he made no reply,
I said, in the preface to my Fast Sermon of the last year, p. 9, that
“it sufficiently appeared that he had neither ability to maintain his
charge, nor virtue to retract it.” A year more of silence on his part
having now elapsed, this is become more evident than before.
By these and others means, the same party spirit which was the cause
of the riots in Birmingham, has been increasing ever since, especially
in that neighbourhood. A remarkable instance of this may be seen in
a _Letter_ addressed, but not sent, to me from _Mr. Foley, rector
of Stourbridge_, who acknowledges the satisfaction that he and his
brethren have received from one of the grossest and coarsest pieces
of abuse of me that has yet appeared, which, as a curious specimen of
the kind, I inserted in the _Appendix of my Appeal_, and in which I am
represented as no better than Guy Fawkes, or the devil himself. This
very Christian divine recommends to the members of the established
church to decline all commercial dealings with the Dissenters, as an
effectual method of exterminating them. This method has been actually
adopted in many parts of England. Also great numbers of the best
farmers and artizans in England have been dismissed because they
would not go to the established church. _Defoe’s Shortest Way with
the Dissenters_[28] would have taught the friends of the church a more
effectual method still. And yet this Mr. Foley, whom I never saw, and
who could not have had any particular cause of enmity to me, had, like
Mr. Madan of Birmingham, a character for liberality. What, then, have
we to expect from others, when we find so much bigotry and rancour in
such men as these?
Many times, by the encouragement of persons from whom better things
might have been expected, I have been burned in effigy along with Mr.
Paine; and numberless insulting and threatening letters have been sent
to me from all parts of the kingdom.[29] It is not possible for any
man to have conducted himself more peaceably than I have done all the
time that I have lived at Clapton, yet it has not exempted me not only
from the worst suspicions, but very gross insults. A very friendly
and innocent club, which I found in the place, has been considered as
_Jacobin_ chiefly on my account; and at one time there was cause of
apprehension that I should have been brought into danger for lending
one of Mr. Paine’s books. But with some difficulty the neighbourhood
was satisfied that I was innocent.
[28] A tract written in a grave ironical stile, advising to hang them
all.
[29] In one of these I was threatened with being burned alive before a
slow fire.
As nothing had been paid to me on account of damages in the riot,
when I published the second part of my _Appeal_ to the public on the
subject, it may be proper to say, that it was paid some time in the
beginning of the year 1793, with interest only from the first of
January of the same year, though the injury was received in July, 1791;
when equity evidently required, that it ought to have been allowed from
the time of the riot, especially as, in all the cases, the allowance
was far short of the loss. In my case it fell short, as I have shewn,
not less than two thousand pounds. And the losses sustained by the
other sufferers far exceeded mine. Public justice also required that,
if the forms of law, local enmity or any other cause, had prevented
our receiving full indemnification, it should have been made up to us
from the public treasury; the great end of all civil government being
protection from violence, or an indemnification for it. Whatever we
might in equity claim, the country owes us, and, if it be just, will
some time or other pay, and with interest.
I would farther observe, that since, in a variety of cases, money is
allowed where the injury is not of a pecuniary nature, merely because
no other compensation can be given, the same should have been done with
respect to me, on account of the destruction of my manuscripts, the
interruption of my pursuits, the loss of a pleasing and advantageous
situation, &c. &c. and had the injury been sustained by a _clergyman_,
he would, I doubt not, have claimed, and been allowed, very large
damages on this account. So far, however, was there from being any
idea of the kind in _my_ favour, that my counsel advised me to make no
mention of my manuscript _Lectures on the Constitution of England_,
a work about as large as that of Blackstone (as may be seen by the
syllabus of the particular lectures, sixty-three in all, published in
the first edition of my _Essay on a Course of liberal Education for
civil and active Life_) because it would be taken for granted that they
were of a seditious nature, and would therefore have been of disservice
to me with the jury. Accordingly they were, in the account of my
losses, included in the article of so much _paper_. After these losses,
had I had nothing but the justice of my country to look to, I must have
sunk under the burden, incapable of any farther exertions. It was the
seasonable generosity of my friends that prevented this, and put it in
my power, though with the unavoidable loss of near two years, to resume
my former pursuits.
A farther proof of the excessive bigotry of this country is, that,
though the clergy of Birmingham resenting what I advanced in the first
part of my _Appeal_, replied to it, and pledged themselves to go
through with the enquiry along with me, till the whole truth should
be investigated, they have made no reply to the _Second Part of my
Appeal_, in which I brought specific charges against themselves, and
other persons by name, proving them to have been the promoters and
abettors of the riot; and yet they have as much respect shown to them
as ever, and the country at large pays no attention to it. Had the
clergy been the injured persons, and Dissenters the rioters, unable to
answer the charges brought against them, so great would have been the
general indignation at their conduct, that I am persuaded it would not
have been possible for them to continue in the country.
I could, if I were so disposed, give my readers many more instances of
the bigotry of the clergy of the church of England with respect to me,
which could not fail to excite, in generous minds, equal indignation
and contempt; but I forbear.[30] Had I, however, foreseen what I am now
witness to, I certainly should not have made any attempt to replace
my library or apparatus, and I soon repented of having done it.
But this being done, I was willing to make some use of both before
another interruption of my pursuits. I began to philosophize, and make
experiments, rather late in life, being near forty, for want of the
necessary means of doing any thing in this way; and my pursuits have
been much interrupted by removals (never indeed chosen by myself, but
rendered necessary by circumstances) and my time being now short, I
hoped to have had no occasion for more than one, and that a final,
remove. But the circumstances above mentioned have induced me, though
with great and sincere regret, to undertake another, and to a greater
distance than any that I have hitherto made.
[30] At a dinner of all the Prebendaries of a cathedral church, the
conversation turning on the riots in Birmingham, and on a clergyman
having said that if I were mounted on a pile of my publications, he
would set fire to them, and burn me alive, they all declared that they
would be ready to do the same.
I profess not to be unmoved by the aspect of things exhibited in this
discourse. But notwithstanding this, I should willingly have awaited my
fate in my native country, whatever it had been, if I had not had sons
in America, and if I did not think that a field of public usefulness,
which is evidently closing upon me here, might open to more advantage
there.
I own also that I am not unaffected by such unexampled punishments
as those of Mr. Muir and my friend Mr. Palmer, for offences, which,
if, in the eye of reason, they be any at all, are slight, and very
insufficiently proved; a measure so subversive of that freedom of
speaking and acting, which has hitherto been the great pride of
Britons. But the sentence of Mr. Winterbotham, for delivering from
the pulpit what I am persuaded he never did deliver, and which,
similar evidence might have drawn upon myself, or any other dissenting
minister, who was an object of general dislike, has something in it
still more alarming[31]. But I trust that conscious innocence would
support me as it does him, under whatever prejudiced and violent men
might _do_ to me, as well as _say_ of me. But I see no occasion to
expose myself to danger without any prospect of doing good, or to
continue any longer in a country in which I am so unjustly become the
object of general dislike, and not retire to another, where I have
reason to think I shall be better received. And I trust that the same
good Providence which has attended me hitherto, and made me happy in my
present situation, and all my former ones, will attend and bless me in
what may still be before me. In all events, _The will of God be done_.
[31] I trust that the friends of liberty, especially among the
Dissenters, will not fail to do every thing in their power to make
Mr. Winterbotham’s confinement, and also the sufferings of Mr. Palmer
and his companions, as easy to them as possible. Having been assisted
in a season of persecution myself, I should be very ill deserving
of the favours I have received, if I was not particularly desirous
of recommending such cases as theirs to general consideration. Here
difference in religious sentiment is least of all to be attended to.
On the contrary, let those who in this respect differ the most from
Mr. Winterbotham, which is my own case, exert themselves the most in
his favour. When men of unquestionable integrity and piety suffer in
consequence of acting (as such persons always will do) from a principle
of _conscience_, they must command the respect even of their enemies,
if they also act from principle, though they be thereby led to proceed
in an opposite direction.
The case of men of education and reflection (and who act from the best
intentions with respect to the community) committing what only _state
policy_ requires to be considered as _crimes_, but which are allowed
on all hands to imply no moral turpitude, so as to render them unfit
for heaven and happiness hereafter, is not to be confounded with that
of common felons. There was nothing in the conduct of Louis XIV. and
his ministers, that appeared so shocking, so contrary to all ideas of
justice, humanity and decency, and that has contributed more to render
their memory execrated, than sending such men as Mr. Marolles, and
other eminent Protestants, who are now revered as saints and martyrs,
to the galleys, along with the vilest miscreants. Compared with this,
the punishment of death would be mercy. I trust that, the Scots in
general will think these measures a disgrace to their country.
I cannot refrain from repeating again, that I leave my native country
with real regret, never expecting to find any where else society so
suited to my disposition and habits, such friends as I have here (whose
attachment has been more than a balance to all the abuse I have met
with from others) and especially to replace one particular Christian
friend, in whose absence I shall, for some time at least, find all
the world a blank. Still less can I expect to resume my favourite
pursuits, with any thing like the advantages I enjoy here. In leaving
this country I also abandon a source of maintenance, which I can but
ill bear to lose. I can, however truly say, that I leave it without
any resentment, or ill-will. On the contrary, I sincerely wish my
countrymen all happiness; and when the time for reflection (which my
absence may accelerate) shall come, they will, I am confident, do me
more justice. They will be convinced that every suspicion they have
been led to entertain to my disadvantage has been ill founded, and
that I have even some claim to their gratitude and esteem. In this
case, I shall look with satisfaction to the time when, if my life be
prolonged, I may visit my friends in this country; and perhaps I may,
notwithstanding my removal for the present, find a grave (as I believe
is naturally the wish of every man) in the land that gave me birth.”
On the 8th day of April 1794, my father set sail from London, and
arrived at New-York on the 4th of June, where he staid about a
fortnight. Many persons went to meet him upon his landing, and while
he staid at New-York he received addresses from various Societies, and
great attention from many of the most respectable persons in the place.
From thence he proceeded to Philadelphia, where he received an address
from the American Philosophical Society. Independent of the above marks
of respect, he was chosen by an unanimous vote of the Trustees of the
University of Philadelphia, professor of Chemistry. He was likewise
invited to return and stay at New-York, and open an Unitarian place
of worship, which was to have been provided for him, and also to give
Lectures on Experimental Philosophy to one hundred subscribers at ten
dollars each. These invitations indeed he did not receive until he had
been settled some little time at Northumberland. These are sufficient
proofs that the citizens of this country were not insensible to his
merit as a Philosopher, and that they esteemed him for the part he took
in the politics of Europe. That he was not invited immediately on his
arrival to preach either at New-York or Philadelphia, was not from any
want of respect for his character, but because Unitarianism was in a
manner unknown, and by many ignorantly supposed to have some connection
with infidelity. The proper evidences of christianity, the corruptions
it has suffered, the monstrous additions that have been engrafted
on its primitive simplicity, and the real state of the opinions of
christians in the first ages of the church, were subjects that had
hardly ever been discussed in this country. The controversies that
had been carried on in England had not awakened attention here, and
therefore though my father was known as having suffered in consequence
of his opposition to the established religion of his country, yet his
particular opinions were little understood. As his religious tenets
became more known, these prejudices wore away, and independent of the
proposal to open a place of Unitarian worship at New-York, mentioned
above, I shall have occasion to state the great reason he had to be
satisfied with the testimonies of respect paid to him, by the most
eminent persons in the country, not merely in his character as a
Philosopher, but as a preacher of the Gospel.
About the middle of July 1794 my father left Philadelphia for
Northumberland, a town situated at the confluence of the North-East
and West branches of the Susquehanna, and about 130 miles North-West
of Philadelphia. I, and some other English gentlemen, had projected a
settlement of 300,000 acres of land, about fifty miles distant from
Northumberland. The subscription was filled chiefly by persons in
England. Northumberland being at that time the nearest town to the
proposed settlement, my father wished to see the place, and ascertain
what conveniencies it would afford should he incline either to fix
there permanently, or only until the settlement should be sufficiently
advanced for his accommodation; he was induced likewise to retreat, at
least for the summer months, into the country, fearing the effects of
the hot weather in such a city as Philadelphia. He had not, as has been
erroneously reported, the least concern in the projected settlement. He
was not consulted in the formation of the plan of it, nor had he come
to any determination to join it had it been carried into effect.
The scheme of settlement was not confined to any particular class or
character of men, religious, or political. It was set on foot to be
as it were a rallying point for the English, who were at that time
emigrating to America in great numbers, and who it was thought, would
be more happy in society of the kind they had been accustomed to, than
they would be, dispersed, as they now are, through the whole of the
United States. It was farther thought, that by the union of industry
and capital, the wilderness would soon become cultivated and equal to
any other part of the country in every thing necessary to the enjoyment
of life. To promote this as much as possible, the original projectors
of that scheme reserved only a few shares for themselves, for which
they paid the same as those who had no trouble or expence either in
forming the plan, or carrying it into execution. This they did, with a
view to take away all source of jealousy, and to increase the facility
of settlement, by increasing the proportion of settlers to the quantity
of land to be settled. Fortunately for the original proposers, the
scheme was abandoned. It might and would have answered in a pecuniary
point of view, as the land now sells at double and treble the price
then asked for it, without the advantages which that settlement would
have given rise to; but the generality of Englishmen come to this
country with such erroneous ideas, and, unless previously accustomed
to a life of labour, are so ill qualified to commence cultivation in a
wilderness, that the projectors would most probably have been subject
to still more unfounded abuse than they have been, for their well meant
endeavours to promote the interests of their countrymen.
The scheme of settlement thus failing, for reasons which it is not
necessary now to state, my father, struck with the beauty of the
situation of Northumberland, which is universally allowed to be equal
if not superior to any in the state; believing that, from the nature of
its situation, it was likely to become a great thoroughfare, and having
reason to consider it as healthy as it was pleasant, the intermittents
to which it has latterly been subject being then unknown, determined
to settle there. Before he came to this resolution however, he had
the offer of the Professorship of Chemistry in the University of
Pennsylvania, before mentioned, which would probably have yielded him
3000 dollars per annum, there being generally about 200 students in
Medicine of whom about 150 attend the Chemical Lectures; as likewise
the offer of a situation as Unitarian Preacher and Lecturer in Natural
Philosophy as I have likewise mentioned before. At that time he had no
inducement to settle at Northumberland contrary to his inclination,
as his books and apparatus were still at Philadelphia, his sons had
not fixed upon any place of settlement for themselves, and neither
he, nor they, had purchased a single foot of land in the town or the
neighbourhood of it.
The following reasons among others induced him to prefer a country to a
city life. He thought that if he undertook the duties of a professor,
he should not be so much at liberty to follow his favourite pursuits
as he could wish, and that the expence of living at Philadelphia
or New-York would counterbalance the advantages resulting from his
salary; and indeed, at that time he had no occasion to attend to any
pecuniary considerations, as he believed his income, calculating upon
his property in the French funds (which however from circumstances not
necessary to be stated in this place, never produced him any thing,)
to be more than equal to his wants; but what had greater weight with
him than any thing else was that my mother, who had been harrassed in
her mind ever since the riots at Birmingham, thought that by living in
the country, at a distance from the cities, she should be more likely
to obtain that quiet of which she stood so much in need.
Soon after his settlement at Northumberland, many persons, with a
view that his qualifications as an instructor of youth should not be
wholly lost to the country, concurred in a plan for the establishment
of a college at Northumberland. To this scheme several subscribed from
this motive alone. Many of the principal landholders, partly from the
above and partly from motives of interest, contributed largely both
in money and land, and there was a fair prospect, from the liberal
principles upon which it was founded, that it would have been of very
great advantage to the country. My father was requested to draw up a
plan of the course of study he would recommend, as well as the rules
for the internal management of the institution, and he was appointed
President. He however declined receiving any emolument, and proposed
giving such lectures as he was best qualified for, _gratis_; in the
same manner as he had done at Hackney, and he meant to have given
to the institution the use of his library and apparatus, until the
students could have been furnished with them by means of the funds
of the college. In consequence of the unexpected failure of some of
the principal contributors, the scheme fell through at that time, and
little more was done during my father’s life time than to raise the
shell of a convenient building.
I shall in this place state, though I shall anticipate, in so doing,
that in the year 1803 a vacancy occurred in the University of
Pennsylvania, by the death of Dr. Euen, Principal of that institution.
It was intimated to my father by many of the Trustees, that in
case he would accept of the appointment, there was little doubt of
his obtaining it; Mr. M’Kean, the present governor of the State of
Pennsylvania, being among others particularly anxious that he should
accept of it. In addition to the reasons that had induced him to
decline the offer of the Professorship of Chemistry were to be added
the weak state of his health, which would have made the idea of his
having any serious engagement to fulfil, very irksome to him; he
accordingly declined it.
He had frequent intimations of other proposals of a similar nature that
would have been made to him, had it not become generally known, that he
could not accede to them from their being inconsistent with the plan of
life he had laid down for himself.
I have been thus particular in the account of his reasons for settling
at Northumberland, and of the different inducements offered to him to
fix elsewhere, to do away the erroneous reports respecting the former,
and likewise to counteract the idea that has been so industriously
circulated in England, that his abilities were undervalued, that the
bigotry and prejudice he had to encounter in this country, were greater
than were opposed to him in England; that his life was in consequence
rendered uncomfortable, and that if he could, he would have been
glad to have returned to his native country, but was restrained by
a sense of shame. Some colour was given to these reports by many of
his countrymen who, from motives best known to themselves, perhaps
thinking thereby to excuse the inconsistency of their own conduct,
corroborated the accounts, though many of them had never seen my
father in this country, and had no authority whatever for assertions
which were entirely calumnies. Some currency was also given to the
statement, by the false and injurious accounts published by the Duke de
Liancourt, whose book if I may judge of it by that part which treats of
Pennsylvania, and of this neighbourhood in particular, is not entitled
to the least credit, being false in almost every particular. This my
father himself has stated in a letter addressed to him.
The writer, understanding the language of the country but very
imperfectly, must necessarily have been liable to many mistakes; nor
is it to be wondered at that a man who details all the tittle tattle
of every table to which he is invited, and who can basely convert the
hospitable reception he meets with in a strange country, into the means
of turning into ridicule those who shewed him attention and meant to
serve him, should be even capable of fabricating and circulating gross
and injurious falsehoods respecting individuals. I should disgrace
myself, in my opinion, and still more should I disgrace the high
situation which my father held in the esteem of the public, were I in
this work to enter into any further consideration of his attack on
my father’s character, satisfied that it is beyond the reach of his
falsehoods and unprovoked malevolence.
My father would, no doubt, have been glad to have returned to England,
and have enjoyed the society of his old and much valued friends; he
would have rejoiced to have been nearer the centre of the Arts and
Sciences; to have been joined again to his congregation and resumed his
duties as a Christian Preacher; he would have been glad at the close of
life, as he expresses himself, “to have found a grave in the land that
gave him birth;” but this was impossible: and no person can read the
preface to his Fast Sermon, quoted above, but must be convinced of it.
Though he raised the credit of his native country by the brilliancy,
the extent and the usefulness of his discoveries in different branches
of science; though during his whole life he inculcated principles
of virtue and religion, which the government pretended at least to
believe were necessary to the well being of the state; though in no
one single act of his life had he violated any law of his country or
encouraged others to do so, what was the treatment he met with in that
land of boasted civilization, and at the close of the 18th Century?
It is sufficiently known, and will, as it ought to do, affect the
character of the nation at large. Therefore, though he could have
forgotten and forgiven all that was past, though the above mentioned
motives would have had great weight in inducing him to return, yet
there was no reason to expect that he should meet hereafter with better
treatment than he had already experienced; and in consequence of this
fixed persuasion he never entertained the idea of returning to live
in England. He frequently talked indeed of returning to visit his
friends; but when peace took place and he could have gone with safety,
so comfortably was he settled in this country, and such was his opinion
of the state of things in England, that he abandoned even the idea of a
temporary journey thither, altogether.
But supposing the above obstacles had not existed to his return to his
native country, he had no reason to be, nor was he, dissatisfied with
his reception here. Independent of the attentions paid to him upon
his first arrival in this country, he continued to receive marks of
respect from bodies of men, and from individuals of various opinions in
religion and politics, to whom he had been all his life before an utter
stranger. Little reason therefore have his countrymen to represent
his reception in America as unequal to his merits, or to calumniate
the general character of the people here. His discoveries did not add
to the credit of America as they had done to that of England, yet he
was not obliged to withdraw his name from its Philosophical Society,
disgusted with its illiberal treatment of himself and his friends.
The Americans, comparatively speaking, had little opportunity of
judging of his zeal for the real interests of religion, yet he was
suffered to live in peace; and this country has not been disgraced by
the destruction of a library and apparatus uniformly dedicated to the
promotion of Science, and the good of mankind. It will be said that
there were not such interests to oppose in America as in England. It
is true, and it proves that the Americans have done well not to create
such interests, and that the placing all the religious sects upon
the same footing with respect to the government of the country, has
effectually secured the peace of the community, at the same time that
it has essentially promoted the interests of truth and virtue.
Being now settled at Northumberland with his mind at peace, and at ease
in his circumstances, he seriously applied himself to those studies
which he had long been compelled to desist from, and which he had but
imperfectly attended to while he resided at Hackney. It is true that
he spent his time there very agreeably, in a society of highly valued
friends; but he did little compared to what he effected while he was at
Birmingham, or what he has done during his residence here, owing to his
time being very much broken in upon at Hackney by company. To prove how
much he did in this country it is only necessary to refer to the list
of the publications which he presented to the world in various branches
of science, in theology and general literature. Here as in England,
though more at leisure than formerly, he continued to apportion his
time to the various occupations in which he was engaged, and strictly
adhered to a regular plan of alternate study and relaxation, from which
he never materially deviated.
It was while my father was at the academy that he commenced a practice
which he continued until within three or four days of his death, of
keeping a diary, in which he put down the occurrences of the day; what
he was employed about, where he had been, and particularly an exact
account of what he had been reading, mentioning the names of the
authors, and the number of pages he read, which was generally a fixed
number, previously determined upon in his own mind. He likewise noted
down any hints suggested by what he read in the course of the day. It
was his custom at the beginning of each year to arrange the plan of
study that he meant to pursue that year, and to review the general
situation of his affairs, and at the end of the year he took an account
of the progress he had made, how far he had executed the plan he had
laid down, and whether his situation exceeded or fell short of the
expectations he had formed.
This practice was a source of great satisfaction to him through life.
It was at first adopted as a mode of regulating his studies, and
afterwards continued from the pleasure it gave him. The greater part
of his diaries were destroyed at the riots at Birmingham, but there
are still extant those for the year 1754, 1755 and several of the
subsequent years.
As it will serve to shew the regularity with which he pursued his
studies, and may possibly be instructive as well as amusing to the
reader, I shall give a specimen of the manner in which he spent a year
while he was at the academy, at Daventry, and for that purpose shall
select his diary for the year 1755 when he was in his 22d year. The
diary contains a particular account of what he read and wrote each
day, and at different periods of the year he sums up in the following
manner, the progress he had made in improvement, which I give as
entered at the end of the diary.
* * * * *
Business done in January, February and March.
_Practical._
Howe’s blessedness of the righteous; Bennet’s pastoral care; Norris’s
letters and some sermons.
_Controversial._
Taylor on Atonement; Hampton’s Answer; Sherlock’s discourses Vol. 1;
Christianity not founded in Argument; Doddridge’s Answer; Warburton’s
divine legation; Benson on the first planting of Christianity; King’s
Constitution of the Primitive Church.
_Classics._
Josephus, Vol. 1, from page 390 to 770; Ovid’s Metamorphoses to page
139; Tacitus’s History, Life of Agricola, and Manners of the Germans.
_Scriptures._
John the Evangelist, the Acts of the Apostles, the Epistles to the
Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, 1st and 2d Corinthians, in Greek; Isaiah
to the 8th chapter, in Hebrew.
_Mathematics._
Maclaurin’s Algebra to part 2d.
_Entertaining._
Irene; Prince Arthur; Ecclesiastical characters; Dryden’s fables;
Peruvian tales; Voyage round the world; Oriental tales; Massey’s
travels; Life of Hai Ebn Yokdam; History of Abdallah.
_Composition._
A Sermon on the Wisdom of God; An Oration on the means of Virtue; 1st
Vol. of the Institutes of Natural and Revealed Religion.
Business done from April 1st to June 23d.
_Practical._
Watts’s Catechism, and discourses on Catechizing; Fenelon’s spiritual
works Vol. 1st and half of Vol. 2d; Saurin’s Sermons a few; Thomas a
Kempis Book 1st to ch. 21; Cotton Mather’s life; Jenning’s on preaching
Christianity.
_Controversial._
Towgood, Gill and Breckell on Baptism; Le Clerc on Inspiration;
Whiston’s Historical preface; Emlyn’s narrative and humble enquiry;
Apostolical Constitutions; Newton on the prophecies; Winder’s History
of knowledge; Hoadly on the Sacrament; Lowman on the Revelation; Moral
Philosopher; Hume’s Political discourses; Middleton’s fathers of the
four first centuries; Middleton and Waterland’s controversy. ---- on
the Demoniacs; Goodrich’s display of Human Nature.
_Classics._
Cicero’s 1st. Phillippic.
_Historical._
Universal History Vol. 15 and 16 and to page 488 of the 17th.
_Composition._
Second Vol. of the Institutes of Natural and Revealed Religion; wrote
an article on Edwards’s translation of the Psalms for the review.
From June 23d to September 1.
_Practical Writers._
Thomas a Kempis from Ch. 21 of Book 1st; Hartley on Man vol. 2d. May’s
Prayers. Holland’s Sermons.
_Scriptures._
From the 1st Epistle of Timothy to the Revelations, and the Gospels of
Matthew, Mark, and Luke, in the Greek Testament; The books of Genesis,
Exodus, and Leviticus, in the Hebrew Bible.
_Classics._
Ovid from Book 9th; Demosthenes 1st Phillippic and 3 Olynthiacs;
Herodotus Book 1st; Homer’s Iliad, Book 1, 2, 3; Sallust.
_History._
Universal History from Vol. 17 p. 488 to the end of Vol. 18. Neal’s
History of the Puritans 4 Volumes.
_Philosophy._
The Anatomical Articles in the Universal Dictionary, several principal
Algebraic ones, and all the letter A.
_Composition._
12 Sermons.
Business done in September.
_Practical._
Holland’s Sermons, Vol. 2d; Doddridge’s family Expositor Vol. 1.
_Scriptures._
John the Evangelist, in Greek.
Numbers, and to the 16th Chapter in Deuteronomy in Hebrew.
_Classics._
Homer’s Iliad, 12 books.
_Mathematical._
Euclid, Lib. 1, 2, 3.
_History._
Universal History, Vol. 19th.
_Miscellaneous._
Mason’s Student; One of Shakespeare’s plays.
_Composition._
4 Sermons.
Business done in October.
_Practical._
Doddridge’s Expositor Vol. 2d; Common Prayer Book; Fordyce’s Sermons on
public Institutions.
_Scriptures._
Deuteronomy from Ch. 16 to the end; Ecclesiastes and Solomon’s Song in
Hebrew and Greek.
_Classics._
Homer’s Iliad, Book P to the end.
_Mathematical._
Euclid, Lib, 4, 5, 6.
_Historical._
Universal History, Vol. 20th.
_Miscellaneous._
5 Shakespeare’s Plays.
_Composition._
3 Sermons.
Business done in November.
_Practical._
Abernethy’s Practical Sermons.
_Scriptures._
Job, in Hebrew and the Septuagint.
_Philosophy, Mathematics and Chemistry._
Euclid Lib. 11 and 12 slightly; Boerhave’s Theory of Chemistry a good
part of Vol. 1st; Rowning’s Philosophy half of Vol. 1st.
_Classics._
Francis’s Horace, Odes 4 books.
_History._
Universal History part of Vol. 3d; Jewish Antiquities. History of the
Council of Trent to page 133. Anson’s voyage by Walter.
_Plays._
4 of Shakespeare’s plays.
_Composition._
2 Sermons.
Business done in December.
_Practical._
Abernethy’s Posthumous sermons Vol. 2d; Clarke’s sermons Vol. 1st.
Patric on Ecclesiastes.
_Scriptures._
Psalms, in the Hebrew and Septuagint.
_Philosophy._
Rowning’s Philosophy part 2d and 3d.
_Classics._
Francis’s Horace Vol. 2 and 3.
_Miscellaneous and Entertaining._
Malcolm on Music, half; 4 Shakespeare’s plays.
Half of the 1st Vol. of the Rambler.
Popes Ethic Epistles, a few.
_History._
Paul’s Council of Trent, to page 476; Life of the Duke of Marlborough.
_Composition._
4 Sermons.
It will be seen by this extract from his diary, that his studies were
very varied, which, as he was always persuaded, enabled him to do
so much. This he constantly attended to through life; his chemical
and philosophical pursuits serving as a kind of relaxation from his
theological studies. His miscellaneous reading, which was at all
times very extensive, comprizing even novels and plays, still served
to increase the variety. For many years of his life, he never spent
less than two or three hours a day in games of amusement, as cards and
backgammon; but particularly chess--at which he and my mother played
regularly three games after dinner, and as many after supper. As his
children grew up, chess was laid aside for whist or some round game at
cards, which he enjoyed as much as any of the company. It is hardly
necessary to state that he never played for money, even for the most
trifling sum.
To all these modes of relieving the mind, he added bodily exercise.
Independent of his laboratory furnishing him with a good deal, as he
never employed an operator, and never allowed any one even to light a
fire, he generally lived in situations which required his walking a
good deal, as at Calne, Birmingham and Hackney. Of that exercise he was
very fond. He walked well, and his regular pace was four miles an hour.
In situations where the necessity of walking was not imposed upon him,
he worked in his garden as at Calne, when he had not occasion to go to
Bowood; at Northumberland in America, he was particularly attached to
this exercise.
But what principally enabled him to do so much was regularity, for it
does not appear that at any period of his life he spent more than six
or eight hours per day in business that required much mental exertion.
I find in the same diary, which I have quoted from above, that he
laid down the following daily arrangement of time for a minister’s
studies: Studying the Scriptures 1 hour. Practical writers 1-2 an hour.
Philosophy and History 2 hours. Classics 1-2 an hour. Composition 1
hour--in all 5 hours. He adds below “All which may be conveniently
dispatched before dinner, which leaves the afternoon for visiting and
company, and the evening for exceeding in any article if there be
occasion. Six hours not too much, nor seven.”
It appears by his diary that he followed this plan at that period of
his life. He generally walked out in the afternoon or spent it in
company. At that time there was a society or club that assembled twice
a week, at which the members debated questions, or took it in turn to
deliver orations, or read essays of their own composition. When not
attending these meetings, he most generally appears to have spent the
evening in company with some of the students in their chambers.
It was by the regularity and variety of his studies, more than by
intenseness of application, that he performed so much more than even
studious men generally do. At the time he was engaged about the
most important works, and when he was not busily employed in making
experiments, he always had leisure for company, of which he was fond.
He never appeared hurried or behind hand. He however never carried
his complaisance so far as to neglect the daily task he had imposed
upon himself; but as he was uniformly an early riser, and dispatched
his more serious pursuits in the morning, it rarely happened but that
he could accomplish the labours assigned for the day, without having
occasion to withdraw from visitors at home, or society abroad, or
giving reason to suppose that the company of others was a restraint
upon his pursuits.
This habit of regularity, extended itself to every thing that he read,
and every thing he did that was susceptible of it. He never read a
book without determining in his own mind when he would finish it. Had
he a work to transcribe, he would fix a time for its completion. This
habit increased upon him as he grew in years, and his diary was kept
upon the plan I have before described, till within a few days of his
death.
To the regularity and variety of his studies, must be added a
considerable degree of Mechanical contrivance, which greatly
facilitated the execution of many of his compositions. It was however
most apparent in his laboratory, and displayed in the simplicity and
neatness of his apparatus, which was the great cause of the accuracy
of his experiments, and of the fair character which he acquired as an
experimental chemist. This was the result in the first instance of a
necessary attention to œconomy in all his pursuits, and was afterwards
continued from choice, when the necessity no longer existed. I return
from this digression which I thought necessary to give the reader a
general view of my father’s occupations, and his manner of spending his
time, to the circumstances attending the remaining years of his life.
At his first settling at Northumberland, there was no house to be
procured that would furnish him with the conveniencies of a library and
laboratory in addition to the room necessary for a family. Hence in
the beginning of the year 1795, being then fixed in his determination
to move no more, he resolved upon building a house convenient for his
pursuits. During the time the house was building, he had no convenience
for making experiments more than a common room afforded, and he was
thereby prevented from doing much in this way. Still, he ascertained
several facts of importance in the year 1795 on the Analysis of
Atmospheric Air, and also some in continuation of those on the
generation of air from water.
He had however leisure and opportunity for his other studies and in
1795 he published observations on the increase of infidelity and he
continued his Church History from the fall of the Western Empire to the
reformation.
In the spring of 1796 he spent three months at Philadelphia and
delivered there a set of discourses on the Evidences of Revelation,
which he composed with a view to counteract the effect produced by the
writings of unbelievers, which, as might be expected, was very great
in a country where rational opinions in religion were but little known,
and where the evidences of revelation had been but little attended to.
It was a source of great satisfaction to him, and what he had little
previous reason to expect, that his lectures were attended by very
crowded audiences, including most of the members of the congress of
the United States at that time assembled at Philadelphia, and of the
executive officers of the government. These discourses which, in a
regular and connected series, placed Christianity, and the evidences
of its truth, in a more clear and satisfactory point of view than it
had been usually considered in this country, attracted much attention,
and created an interest in the subject which there is reason to believe
has produced lasting effects. My father received assurances from many
of the most respectable persons in the country, that they viewed the
subject in a totally different light from what they had before done,
and that could they attend places of worship, where such rational
doctrines were inculcated, they should do it with satisfaction.
As my father had through life considered the office of a Christian
minister as the most useful and honourable of any, and had always
derived the greatest satisfaction from fulfilling its duties,
particularly from catechizing young persons, the greatest source of
uneasiness therefore to him at Northumberland was, that there was no
sufficient opportunity of being useful in that way. Though he was
uniformly treated with kindness and respect by the people of the place,
yet their sentiments in religion were so different from his own, and
the nature and tendency of his opinions were so little understood, that
the establishment of a place of Unitarian worship perfectly free from
any calvinistic or Arian tenet, was next to impossible. All therefore
that he could do in that way was, for the two or three first years,
to read a service either at his own or at my house, at which a few
(perhaps a dozen) English persons were usually present, and in time, as
their numbers increased he made use of a school room near his house,
where from twenty to thirty regularly attended, and among them some of
the inhabitants of the place, who by degrees began to divest themselves
of their prejudices with respect to his opinions. However small the
number of persons attending, he administered the Lord’s supper, a rite
upon which he always laid particular stress.
In the Autumn of 1795 he had the misfortune to lose his youngest son,
of whom being much younger than any of his other children, and having
entertained the hopes of his succeeding him in his Theological and
Philosophical pursuits he was remarkably fond. He felt this misfortune
the more severely as it was the first of the kind he had experienced,
and particularly as it had a visible effect upon my mother’s health and
spirits. He was however so constantly in the habit of viewing the hand
of God in all things, and of considering every occurrence as leading
to good, that his mind soon recovered its accustomed serenity, and his
journey to Philadelphia mentioned above and the success which attended
his first exertions in the cause of, what he deemed, pure and genuine
christianity, led him to look forward with cheerfulness to the future,
and gave him an energy in his pursuits, which was never exceeded in any
part of his life. It was the same habit of viewing God as the author of
all events, and producing good out of seeming evil, that enabled him
to support himself so well under the greatest affliction that could
possibly have befallen him, viz. the loss of his wife, my mother; who
through life had been truly a help meet for him; supporting him under
all his trials and sufferings with a constancy and perseverance truly
praise worthy, and who as he himself, in noting the event in his diary,
justly observes, “was of a noble and generous mind and cared much for
others and little for herself through life.”
In the period between the above very afflicting events, though his
conveniences for experimenting were not increased, owing to his house,
and particularly his laboratory not being finished, he wrote a small
treatise in defence of the doctrine of Phlogiston, addressed to the
Philosophers in France. He likewise composed a second set of discourses
of a similar kind to those delivered in Philadelphia the preceding
winter. He preached and printed a sermon in defence of Unitarianism,
and printed the first set of discourses; he compleated his Church
History; he made additional observations on the increase of infidelity
chiefly in answer to Mr. Volney; and drew up an Outline of all the
Evidences in favour of Revelation.
In the spring of 1797 he again spent two or three months in
Philadelphia, and delivered a second set of discourses, but partly from
the novelty of the thing being done away, partly from the prejudices
that began to be excited against him on account of his supposed
political opinions, (for high-toned politics began then to prevail in
the fashionable circles) and partly owing to the discourses not being
so well adapted for a public audience, though necessary to set the
comparative excellence of Christianity in its true light, they were but
thinly attended in comparison to his former set. This induced him to
give up the idea of preaching any more regular sets of discourses. He
however printed them, as likewise a sermon he preached in favour of the
Emigrants. He also composed at this time a third and enlarged edition
of his Observations on the increase of infidelity, a controversy with
Mr. Volney, a tract on the Knowledge of a Future state among the
Hebrews, which, with the works he composed the year before, he printed
as he found means and opportunity. He revised his Church History, began
his Notes on the Scriptures, and his Comparison of the Institutions of
Moses with those of the Hindoos.
Towards the end of 1797 and not before, his library and laboratory were
finished. None but men devoted to literature can imagine the pleasure
he derived from being able to renew his experiments with every
possible convenience, and from having his books once more arranged. His
house was situated in a garden, commanding a prospect equal, if not
superior, to any on the river Susquehanna, so justly celebrated for
the picturesque views its banks afford. It was a singularly fortunate
circumstance that he found at Northumberland several excellent workmen
in metals, who could repair his instruments, make all the new articles
he wanted in the course of his experimenting, as well as, he used to
say, if not in some respects better than, he could have got them done
in Birmingham; and in the society of Mr. Frederick Antis, the brother
of Mr. Antis in England, and uncle of Mr. Latrobe the engineer, he
derived great satisfaction. Mr. Antis was a man of mild and amiable
manners, he possessed a very good knowledge of Mechanics the result
of his own observation and reflection, and a fund of knowledge of
many things which my father frequently found useful to resort to. The
situation of Northumberland became abundantly more convenient than it
was when he first came to the place. From there being no regular public
post, there was now established a post twice a week to Philadelphia,
and answers could be received to letters within a week, and the
communication so much increased between the two places, that the price
of the carriage of goods was reduced from 11_s._-3_d._ to 6_s._ per
Cwt. the distance being 132 miles.
Thus conveniently situated, he resumed the same kind of life he led
at Birmingham, experimenting the greater part of the day, the result
of which he published in the Medical repository of New-York. Having
compleated his Church History, he finished his Comparison of the
Institutions of Moses with those of the Hindoos. He likewise proceeded
as far as Leviticus in the design he had formed of writing Notes on
all the books of Scripture, and made some remarks on the origin of all
religions by Dupuis, but the greater part of the time that he spent
in theology this year, was employed in recomposing the Notes on the
New-Testament, which were destroyed at the riots.
In the course of the year 1799, he finished his Notes on all the books
of Scripture, he published his Comparison of the Institutions of Moses
with those of the Hindoos, he likewise printed his Defence of the
doctrine of Phlogiston above mentioned, and the greater part of each
day in the summer was employed in making the additional experiments he
had projected.
It was in the year 1799, during Mr. Adams’s administration, that my
father had occasion to write any thing on the subject of politics in
this country. It is well known to all his friends, that politics were
always a subject of secondary importance with him. He however took part
occasionally in the conversations on that subject; which every person
has a right to do, and which, about the time my father left England, no
person could avoid doing, as the subject engrossed so large a part of
the conversation in almost every company. He always argued on the side
of liberty. He was however in favour only of those changes that could
be brought about by fair argument, and his speculations on the subject
of British politics did not go further than a reform in Parliament, and
no way tended, in his opinion, to affect the form of government, or the
constitution of the kingdom, as vested in Kings, Lords and Commons. He
used frequently to say, and it was said to him, that though he was an
Unitarian in Religion he was in that country a Trinitarian in politics.
When he came to America, he found reason to change his opinions, and
he became a decided friend to the general principles and practice of a
compleatly representative government, founded upon universal suffrage,
and excluding hereditary privileges, as it exists in this country.
This change was naturally produced by observing the ease and happiness
with which the people lived, and the unexampled prosperity of the
country, of which no European, unless he has resided in it some time,
and has observed the interior part of it, can be a competent judge.
But with respect to England, he still remained anxious for its peace
and prosperity, and though he had been so hardly used, and though he
considered the administration of the country, if not instigating at
least conniving at the riots, no resentment existed in his breast
against the nation. In his feelings he was still an Englishman. Though
he might speculatively consider that the mass of evil and misery had
arisen to such a height in England, and in other European countries,
that there was no longer any hope of a peaceable and gradual reform,
yet, considering at the same time that the great body of the people,
like the Negroes in the West-Indies, were unprepared for the enjoyment
of liberty in its full extent, and contemplating the evils necessarily
attendant upon a violent change, he dreaded a revolution.
With respect to America he had never interfered publicly in politics,
and never wrote an article that could be considered in that light in
any respect, except one published in a newspaper called the _Aurora_,
signed a _Quaker in Politics_, published on the 26th and 27th of
February, 1798, and entitled Maxims of Political Arithmetic,[32] and
so little did he interest himself in the politics of this country,
that he seldom if ever perused the debates in Congress, nor was he
much acquainted with any of the leading political characters except
three or four, and with these he never corresponded but with Mr. Adams
prior to his being chosen president, and Mr. Jefferson. He never
was naturalized, nor did he take part directly or indirectly in any
election. He persevered in the same sentiments even when he was under
reasonable apprehension that he should be banished as an Alien: and
though he advised his sons to be naturalized, saying it was what was
daily done by persons who could not be suspected of wishing any ill to
their native country, yet he would not; but said, that as he had been
born and had lived an Englishman, he would die one let what might be
the consequence.
[32] See Appendix, No. IV.
About the year 1799, the friends of liberty in America were greatly
alarmed by the advancement of principles disgraceful to America, and
by a practice less liberal in many respects than under the monarchical
form of the British government. Nothing else was the subject of
conversation and my father who though never active in politics, at
the same time never concealed his sentiments, uttered them freely in
conversation, and they were of course opposed to the proceedings of the
administration at the time. Added to this Mr. Thomas Cooper formerly
of Manchester, and who at that time had undertaken for a short period,
at the request of the printer, to edit a newspaper then printed at
Northumberland, had published some very severe strictures on the
conduct of the administration, which were soon after published in a
pamphlet, under the title of Political Essays.
By many my father might be ignorantly supposed as the prompter on the
occasion, as Mr. Cooper lived at that time with my father, and by those
who knew better, it was made the ostensible ground of objection to my
father, to conceal the real one. In truth he saw none of the essays
until they were printed, nor was he consulted by Mr. Cooper upon any
part of them. The consequence was, that all the bigotry and party zeal
of that violent period was employed to injure him, and misrepresent
his words and actions. He was represented as intriguing for offices
for himself and his friend, and as an enemy to the government which
they said protected him, while men who were themselves but newly
naturalized, or the immediate descendants of foreigners, bestowed
upon him the epithet of Alien, an epithet then used by the government
party as a term of reproach, though the country was principally
indebted to the capital, industry and enterprize of foreigners for the
many improvements then carrying on. Such was the effect of all these
slanderous reports, and such was the character of the administration,
that it was intimated to my father, from Mr. Adams himself, that he
wished he would abstain from saying any thing on politics, lest he
should get into difficulty. The Alien law which was passed under that
administration, was at that time in operation, and a man without being
convicted of, or even positively charged with, any offence, might have
been sent out of the country at a moment’s warning, not only without a
trial, but without the right of remonstrance. It was likewise hinted
to my father as he has himself stated, that he was one of the persons
contemplated when the law was passed, so little did they know of his
real character and disposition. This occasioned my father to write
a set of letters to the inhabitants of Northumberland; in which he
expressed his sentiments fully on all the political questions at that
time under discussion. They had the effect of removing the unfavourable
impressions that had been made on the minds of the liberal and candid,
and procured him many friends. Fortunately however the violent
measures then adopted produced a compleat change in the minds of the
people, and in consequence of it in the representation, proving by the
peaceableness of it, the excellence of this form of government, and
proving also that my father’s sentiments, as well as Mr. Cooper’s, were
approved of by nine tenths of the people of the United States.
It is but justice however to mention that in the above remarks which
have been made to represent my father’s political character in its true
light, and to account for his writing on the subject of politics, I do
not mean to reflect on all the federalists, and that though my father
considered them all as in error, yet he acknowledged himself indebted
to many of that party for the most sincere marks of friendship which he
had received in this country, and that not only from his opponents in
politics, but likewise from many of the principal clergymen of various
denominations in Philadelphia, and particularly during his severe
illness in that city, when party spirit was at the highest, it being at
the time of Mr. Jefferson’s first election to the presidency.
As my father has given an account of those friends to whose kindness
and generosity he was principally indebted from the commencement of
his literary career, to the time of his coming to America, I think
it my duty to follow his example, and to make on his part those
acknowledgements which had he lived, he would have taken pleasure in
making himself. To the Revd. Theophilus Lindsey, independent of the
many marks of the most sincere friendship, which he was constantly
receiving, he was occasionally indebted for pecuniary assistance at
times when it was most wanting. Independent of 50 £. per annum, which
Mrs. Elizabeth Rayner allowed him from the time he left England, she
left him by her will £2000 in the 4 per cents. Mr. Michael Dodson who
is well known as the translator of Isaiah left him £500, and Mr. Samuel
Salte left him 100 £. The Duke of Grafton remitted him annually 40
£. Therefore though his expences were far greater than he expected,
and though his house cost him double the sum he had contemplated, the
generosity of his friends made him perfectly easy in his mind with
respect to pecuniary affairs; and by freeing him from all care and
anxiety on this head contributed greatly to his happiness, and to his
successful endeavours in the cause of truth. Besides these instances
of friendly attention, the different branches of his family have been,
in various ways, benefited, in consequence of the respect paid to my
father’s character, and the affectionate regard shewn by his friends to
all who were connected with him.
But what gave my father most real pleasure was the subscription, set
on foot by his friends in England, to enable him to print his Church
History, and his Notes on all the Books of Scripture. The whole was
done without his knowledge, and the first information he received on
the subject was, that there was a sum raised sufficient to cover the
whole expence.
About the time he died, some of his friends in England understood that
he was likely to suffer a loss in point of income of £. 200 per annum.
Without any solicitation, about forty of them raised the sum of £.
450, which was meant to have been continued annually while he lived.
He did not live to know of this kind exertion in his favour. It is my
duty however to record this instance of generosity, and I do it with
pleasure and with gratitude. It likewise proves that though my father
by the fearless avowal of his opinions, created many enemies, yet that
the honesty and independence of his conduct procured him many friends.
The first year’s subscription has been transmitted to America, to
defray the expence of publishing his posthumous works.
In the year 1800 he was chiefly employed in experiments, and writing
an account of them for various publications. In this year also he
published his treatise in defence of Phlogiston, he revised his
Church History, the two first volumes of which are now reprinted with
considerable additions, and he added to and improved his Notes on the
Scriptures.
He spent some time in the spring of 1801 in Philadelphia, during
his stay there he had a violent attack of fever which weakened
him exceedingly, and from the effects of which he never perfectly
recovered. Added to this the fever and ague prevailed at Northumberland
and the neighbourhood, for the first time since his settlement at the
place. He had two or three attacks of this disorder; which though they
were not very severe, as he had never more than three fits at a time,
retarded his recovery very much. He perceived the effect of his illness
in the diminution of his strength, and his not being able to take as
much exercise as he used to do. His spirits however were good, and he
was very assiduous in making experiments, chiefly on the pile of Volta,
the result of which he sent an account of to Nicholson’s Journal and
the Medical Repository.
In 1802 he began to print his Church History, in consequence of the
subscription raised by his friends in England as before stated.
Besides printing three volumes of that work, he wrote and printed a
treatise on Baptism, chiefly in answer to the observations of Mr.
Robinson on the subject. He likewise made some experiments, and replied
to some remarks of Mr. Cruikshank in defence of the Antiphlogistic
theory.
I am now to describe the last scene of his life, which deserves the
reader’s most serious consideration, as it shews the powerful effect
of his religious principles. They made him, not resigned to quit a
world in which he no longer had any delight, and in which no hope of
future enjoyment presented itself, but chearful in the certainty of
approaching dissolution, and under circumstances that would by the
world in general have been considered as highly enviable. They led
him to consider death as the labourer does sleep at night as being
necessary to renew his mental and corporeal powers, and fit him for a
future state of activity and happiness. For though since his illness
in Philadelphia in 1801 he had never recovered his former good state
of health, yet he had never been confined to his bed a whole day by
sickness in America until within two days of his death, and was never
incapacitated for any pursuit that he had been accustomed to. He took
great delight in his garden, and in viewing the little improvements
going forward in and about the town. The rapidly increasing prosperity
of the country, whether as it regarded its agriculture, manufactures,
and commerce, or the increasing taste for science and literature, were
all of them to him a source of the purest pleasure. For the last four
years of his life he lived under an administration, the principles and
practice of which he perfectly approved, and with Mr. Jefferson, the
head of that administration, he frequently corresponded, and they had
for each other a mutual regard and esteem. He enjoyed the esteem of
the wisest and best men in the country, particularly at Philadelphia,
where his religion and his politics did not prevent his being kindly
and cheerfully received by great numbers of opposite opinions in both,
who thus paid homage to his knowledge and virtue. At home he was
beloved; and besides the advantages of an excellent library, to which
he was continually making additions, and of a laboratory that was amply
provided with every thing necessary for an experimental chemist,
he was perfectly freed, as he had happily been through life, in
consequence of my mother’s ability and attention, from any attention to
worldly concerns; considering himself, as he used to express himself,
merely as a lodger, having all his time to devote to his theological
and philosophical pursuits. He had the satisfaction of witnessing the
gradual spread of his religious opinions, and the fullest conviction
that he should prevail over his opponents in chemistry. He looked
forward with the greatest pleasure to future exertions in both these
fields, and had within the last month or six weeks been projecting many
improvements in his apparatus, which he meant to make use of upon the
return of warm weather in the spring. Notwithstanding, therefore, the
many trials he underwent in this country, he had still great sources of
happiness left, unalloyed by any apprehension of any material defect
in any of his senses, or any abatement of the vigour of his mind.
Consistent with the above was his declaration that, excepting the want
of the society of Mr. L, Mr. B. and two or three other particular
friends, which however was made up to him, in some, though in a small
degree by their regular correspondence, he had never upon the whole
spent any part of his life more happily, nor, he believed, more
usefully.
The first part of his illness, independent of his general weakness,
the result of his illness in Philadelphia in 1801, was a constant
indigestion, and a difficulty of swallowing meat or any kind of solid
food unless previously reduced by mastication to a perfect pulp. This
gradually increased upon him till he could swallow liquids but very
slowly, and led him to suspect, which he did to the last, that there
must be some stoppage in the œsophagus. Latterly he lived almost
entirely upon tea, chocolate, soups, sago, custard puddings, and the
like. During all this time of general and increasing debility, he was
busily employed in printing his Church History, and the first volume
of the Notes on Scripture; and in making new and original experiments,
an account of which he sent to the American Philosophical Society in
two numbers, one in answer to Dr. Darwin’s observations on Spontaneous
generation, and the other on the unexpected conversion of a quantity
of the marine acid into the nitrous. During this period, likewise, he
wrote his pamphlet of Jesus and Socrates compared, and re-printed his
Essay on Phlogiston. He would not suffer any one to do for him what he
had been accustomed to do himself; nor did he alter his former mode of
life in any respect, excepting that he no longer worked in his garden,
and that he read more books of a miscellaneous nature than he had been
used to do when he could work more in his laboratory, which had always
served him as a relaxation from his other studies.
From about the beginning of November 1803, to the middle of January
1804, his complaint grew more serious. He was once incapable of
swallowing any thing for near thirty hours; and there being some
symptoms of inflammation at his stomach, blisters were applied, which
afforded him relief; and by very great attention to his diet, riding
out in a chair when the weather would permit, and living chiefly on
the soft parts of oysters, he seemed if not gaining ground, at least
not getting worse; and we had reason to hope that if he held out until
spring as he was, the same attention to his diet with more exercise,
which it was impossible for him to take on account of the cold weather,
would restore him to health. He, however, considered his life as very
precarious, and used to tell the physician who attended him, that if
he could but patch him up for six months longer he should be perfectly
satisfied, as he should in that time be able to complete printing
his works. The swelling of his feet, an alarming symptom of general
debility, began about this time.
To give some idea of the exertions he made even at this time, it is
only necessary for me to say, that besides his miscellaneous reading,
which was at all times very great, he read through all the works quoted
in his comparison of the different systems of the Grecian Philosophers
with christianity, composed that work, and transcribed the whole of
it in less than three months. He took the precaution of transcribing
one day in long hand what he had composed the day before in short
hand, that he might by that means leave the work complete as far as it
went, should he not live to complete the whole. During this period he
composed in a day his second reply to Dr. Linn.
About this time he ceased performing divine service, which he said he
had never before known himself incapable of performing, notwithstanding
he had been a preacher so many years. He likewise now suffered me to
rake his fire, rub his feet with a flesh-brush, and occasionally help
him to bed. In the mornings likewise he had his fire made for him,
which he always used to do himself, and generally before any of the
family was stirring.
In the last fortnight in January he was troubled with alarming fits of
indigestion; his legs swelled nearly to his knees, and his weakness
increased very much. I wrote for him, while he dictated, the concluding
section of his New Comparison, and the Preface and Dedication. The
finishing this work was a source of great satisfaction to him, as he
considered it as a work of as much consequence as any he had ever
undertaken. The first alarming symptom of approaching dissolution
was his being unable to speak to me upon my entering his room on
Tuesday morning the 31st of January. In his Diary I find he stated his
situation as follows: “Ill all day--Not able to speak for near three
hours.” When he was able to speak he told me he had slept well, as he
uniformly had done through the whole of his illness; so that he never
would suffer me, though I frequently requested he would do it, to sleep
in the same room with him; that he felt as well as possible; that he
got up and shaved himself, which he never omitted doing every morning
till within two days of his death; that he went to his laboratory, and
then found his weakness very great; that he got back with difficulty;
that just afterward his grand-daughter, a child of about six or seven
years old, came to him to claim the fulfilment of a promise he had
made her the evening before, to give her a fivepenny bit. He gave her
the money, and was going to speak to her, but found himself unable.
He informed me of this, speaking very slowly a word at a time; and
added, that he had never felt more pleasantly in his whole life than
he did during the time he was unable to speak. After he had taken his
medicine, which was bark and laudanum, and drank a bason of strong
mutton broth, he recovered surprizingly, and talked with cheerfulness
to all who called upon him, but as though he was fully sensible that
he had not long to live. He consented for the first time that I should
sleep in the room with him.
On Wednesday, February 1, he writes, “I was at times much better in
the morning: capable of some business: continued better all day.” He
spake this morning as strong as usual, and took in the course of the
day a good deal of nourishment with pleasure. He said, that he felt a
return of strength, and with it there was a duty to perform. He read a
good deal in Newcome’s Translation of the New Testament, and Stevens’s
History of the War. In the afternoon he gave me some directions how to
proceed with the printing his work in case he should die. He gave me
directions to stop the printing of the second volume, and to begin upon
the third, that he might see how it was begun, and that it might serve
as a pattern to me to proceed by.
On Thursday, the 2d, he wrote thus for the last time in his Diary:
“Much worse: incapable of business: Mr. Kennedy came to receive
instructions about printing in case of my death.” He sat up, however,
a great part of the day, was cheerful, and gave Mr. Cooper and myself
some directions, with the same composure as though he had only been
about to leave home for a short time. Though it was fatiguing to him to
talk, he read a good deal in the works above mentioned.
On Friday he was much better. He sat up a good part of the day reading
Newcome; Dr. Disney’s Translation of the Psalms; and some chapters
in the Greek Testament, which was his daily practice. He corrected a
proof-sheet of the Notes on Isaiah. When he went to bed he was not so
well: he had an idea he should not live another day. At prayer-time
he wished to have the children kneel by his bedside, saying, it gave
him great pleasure to see the little things kneel; and, thinking he
possibly might not see them again, he gave them his blessing.
On Saturday, the 4th, my father got up for about an hour while his
bed was made. He said he felt more comfortable in bed than up. He
read a good deal, and looked over the first sheet of the third volume
of the Notes, that he might see how we were likely to go on with it;
and having examined the Greek and Hebrew quotations, and finding them
right, he said he was satisfied we should finish the work very well. In
the course of the day, he expressed his gratitude in being permitted
to die quietly in his family, without pain, with every convenience and
comfort he could wish for. He dwelt upon the peculiarly happy situation
in which it had pleased the Divine Being to place him in life; and the
great advantage he had enjoyed in the acquaintance and friendship of
some of the best and wisest men in the age in which he lived, and the
satisfaction he derived from having led an useful as well as a happy
life.
On Sunday he was much weaker, and only sat up in an armed chair while
his bed was made. He desired me to read to him the eleventh chapter
of John. I was going on to read to the end of the chapter, but he
stopped me at the 45th verse. He dwelt for some time on the advantage
he had derived from reading the scriptures daily, and advised me to
do the same; saying, that it would prove to me, as it had done to
him, a source of the purest pleasure. He desired me to reach him a
pamphlet which was at his bed’s head, Simpson on the Duration of
future Punishment. “It will be a source of satisfaction to you to read
that pamphlet,” said he, giving it to me. “It contains my sentiments,
and a belief in them will be a support to you in the most trying
circumstances, as it has been to me. We shall all meet finally: we
only require different degrees of discipline, suited to our different
tempers, to prepare us for final happiness.” Upon Mr. ---- coming
into his room, he said, “You see, Sir, I am still living.” Mr. ----
observed, he would always live. “Yes,” said he, “I believe I shall; and
we shall all meet again in another and a better world.” He said this
with great animation, laying hold on Mr. ----’s hand in both his.
Before prayers he desired me to reach him three publications, about
which he would give me some directions next morning. His weakness would
not permit him to do it at that time.
At prayers he had all the children brought to his bed-side as before.
After prayers they wished him a good night, and were leaving the room.
He desired them to stay, spoke to them each separately. He exhorted
them all to continue to love each other. “And you, little thing,”
speaking to Eliza, “remember the hymn you learned; ‘Birds in their
little nests agree,’ &c. I am going to sleep as well as you: for death
is only a good long sound sleep in the grave, and we shall meet again.”
He congratulated us on the dispositions of our children; said it was
a satisfaction to see them likely to turn out well; and continued for
some time to express his confidence in a happy immortality, and in a
future state, which would afford us an ample field for the exertion of
our faculties.
On Monday morning, the 6th of February, after having lain perfectly
still till four o’clock in the morning, he called to me, but in a
fainter tone than usual, to give him some wine and tincture of bark.
I asked him how he felt. He answered, he had no pain, but appeared
fainting away gradually. About an hour after, he asked me for some
chicken broth, of which he took a tea-cup full. His pulse was quick,
weak, and fluttering, his breathing, though easy, short. About eight
o’clock, he asked me to give him some egg and wine. After this he lay
quite still till ten o’clock, when he desired me and Mr. Cooper to
bring him the pamphlets we had looked out the evening before. He then
dictated as clearly and distinctly as he had ever done in his life the
additions and alterations he wished to have made in each. Mr. Cooper
took down the substance of what he said, which, when he had done, I
read to him. He said Mr. Cooper had put it in his own language; he
wished it to be put in his. I then took a pen and ink to his bed-side.
He then repeated over again, nearly word for word, what he had before
said; and when I had done, I read it over to him. “That is right; I
have now done.” About half an hour after he desired, in a faint voice,
that we would move him from the bed on which he lay to a cot, that he
might lie with his lower limbs horizontal, and his head upright. He
died in about ten minutes after we had moved him, but breathed his last
so easy, that neither myself or my wife, who were both sitting close to
him, perceived it at the time. He had put his hand to his face, which
prevented our observing it.
The above account, which conveys but a very inadequate idea of the
composure and chearfulness of his last moments deserves the attention
of unbelievers in general, particularly of Philosophical Unbelievers.
They have known him to be zealous and active in the pursuit of
Philosophical truths and to be ever ready to acknowledge any mistakes
he may have fallen into. By the perusal of these Memoirs they have
found that he gradually, and after much thought and reflection
abandoned all those opinions which disgrace what is usually called
christianity in the eyes of rational men and whose inconsistency
with reason and common sense has most probably been the cause of
their infidelity and of their total inattention to the evidences of
christianity. These opinions he abandoned, because he could not find
them supported either in the Scriptures or in the genuine writings of
the early Christians. They must be sensible that the same desire for
truth and the same fearless spirit of enquiry and the same courage in
the open avowal of the most obnoxious tenets would have led him to have
discarded religion altogether had he seen reason so to do, and there is
little doubt but that he would have been subject to less obloquy by so
doing than by exposing the various corruptions of christianity in the
manner he did. They have seen however that in proportion as he attended
to the subject his faith in christianity increased and produced that
happy disposition of mind described in these Memoirs. The subject is
therefore well deserving of their attention and they should be induced
from so fair an example, and the weight due to my father’s opinions,
to make themselves fully acquainted with the arguments in favour of
christianity before they reject it as an idle fable.
Many unbelievers have, no doubt, borne with great patience severe
calamities; they have suffered death with great fortitude when engaged
in a good cause, and many have courted death to serve their friends
or their country. It must however be allowed that there is no great
merit in meeting death with fortitude when it cannot be avoided, and
likewise that the above cases cannot be absolutely calculated upon, as
there is no sufficient motive to account for their conduct. But upon a
truly practical christian there is the greatest dependance to be placed
for acting well in all the situations in which he may be found, his
highest interest being connected with the performance of the greatest
duties; and even supposing that many persons, who are not christians,
from favourable circumstances attendant upon their birth and education,
and from a naturally happy temperament of body and mind, may, and, it
must be allowed do acquire a habit of disinterested benevolence and may
in general be depended upon to act uniformly well in life, still the
christian has a decided advantage over them in the hour of death, as
to consider death as necessary to his entering upon a new and enlarged
sphere of activity and enjoyment, is a privilege that belongs to him
alone.
APPENDIX, NO. 1.
_Of the discoveries in factitious Airs before the time of Dr.
Priestley, and of those made by himself._
Dr. Priestley has given a general though brief account[33] of what
had been done by his predecessors in this department of experimental
Philosophy, and Sir John Pringle in his discourse before the Royal
Society on occasion of presenting Dr. Priestley with the Copley Medal
in 1772[34] has entered expressly, and more fully into the history of
pneumatic discoveries. The same subject was taken up about three years
after by Mr. Lavoisier still more at large, in the introduction to his
first Vol. of Physical and Chemical Essays, of which a translation was
published by Mr. Henry of Manchester in 1776. It is unnecessary to
detail here what they have written on the history of these discoveries.
It may be observed that no mention is made by any of these gentlemen
of an experiment of Mr. John Maud, in July 1736[35], who procured (and
confined) inflammable air from a solution of Iron in the vitriolic
acid. Inflammable air had been procured from the White Haven coal
mines, and exhibited to the Royal Society by Mr. James Lowther, but
I do not recollect any notice of its having been collected from a
solution of metals in acids, and its character ascertained before Mr.
Maud’s experiment; for Hales, though he procured both inflammable and
nitrous air, did not examine their properties. But it is much more
extraordinary that neither Sir John Pringle who was a Physician, or
Mr. Lavoisier who was so much occupied under government, respecting
the Theory of the formation, and the practice of manufacturing
Saltpetre from Nitre beds, should not have known, or have noticed the
five treatises of Mayow on chemical, phisiological and pathological
subjects, published a century preceding. Mayow is quoted by Hales,[36]
by Lemery,[37] and by Brownrigg,[38] but though they appear to have
read his work, it is evident that they knew not how to appreciate, or
to profit by it. Haller[39] also refers to him, and he is respectfully
quoted by Blumenbach[40]: but his book nevertheless long remained
in comparative obscurity. From their time Mayow has been neglected
until his writings were noticed by Dr. Forster, in 1780,[41] and again
announced as almost a discovery in the chemical world, by Dr. Beddoes
in the year 1790. His doctrines touch so nearly on the subsequent
discoveries of Priestley, Scheele, Lavoisier, Crawford, Goodwin, &c.
that it seems absolutely necessary to discuss his pretensions, before
those of his successors can be accurately admitted. As I am acquainted
with Dr. Beddoes’s pamphlet on Mayow, from the analytical review of it
only, (V. vi.) and have no opportunity here of consulting it, I shall
take up Mayow’s book, and give an account of his tenets, from the work
itself.
[33] In the beginning of his first vol. of experiments: it is an
abridgment of Sir J. Pringle’s discourse.
[34] Discourses p. 4.
[35] Martyn’s abridgment of the Philosophical transactions v. 9. p. 396.
I think Maud’s experiment in 1736 likely to have suggested those of Mr.
Cavendish in 1766.
[36] Vegetable Statics v. 2. p. 234.
[37] Mem. de l’Acad. Royale 1717 p. 48. On ne dit pourtant point
trop sous quelle forme ce nitre se contient dans l’air, et Mayou,
Auteur Anglois et grand defenseur du Nitre-Aèrien voulant èclaircir
cette difficultè, suppose l’air impregnè par tout d’une espece de
nitre metaphysique, qui ne merite pas trop d’ètre refutè, quoi-qu’il
l’àit cependant ètè suffisamment par Barchusen et par Schelhamer. Le
fondement de l’opinion du Nitre aèrien, c’est comme le rapporte Mayou
lui mème, qu’apres avoir enlevè à une terre tout le Nitre qu’elle
contenoit, si on l’expose ensuite à l’air pendant un certain tems
elle en reprend de nouveau: il est vrai que si l’observation ètoit
parfaitement telle qu’elle vient d’ètre rapportèe, on auroit une plus
grande raison qu’on n’en a, de supposer dans l’air une très-grande
quantite de nitre, et de mettre sur le compte de ce nitre aèrien un
grand nombre d’effets auquels il n’a certainement aucune part.
The experiment of Lemery mentioned in Dr. Watson’s Essay on Nitre, is
in p. 54 of the Mem. de l’acad. royale for 1717 not for 1731.
It sometimes happens to men whose genius far transcends the level of
their day, to be from that very circumstance neither understood nor
believed by their contemporaries. Until the discoveries of modern
chemistry, who would have given Sir Isaac Newton credit for his
conjecture that the Diamond was an inflammable substance? The fact
which Lemery sneers at, the reproduction of nitre in the earth, is
established beyond contradiction by the authors quoted by Dr. Watson
(Chem. Ess. v. 1. p. 318-321) and in Bowle’s account of the nitre
earths in Spain, and in Andreossi’s memoir on the Saltpetre of Egypt.
Though it is far from improbable that after lixiviation these earths
may again become gradually impregnated with putrefying animal or
vegetable matter to serve for the future crops of nitre.
[38] Philosophical transactions v. 55 p. 232.
[39] Dr. Priestley in his preliminary account of the discoveries and
theories on respiration (Exp. on air v. 3 p. 356. abridged edit.)
quotes Haller’s great work on Physiology. Haller quotes Mayow in three
or four places; but it is no wonder the quotations did not strike
Dr. Priestley with any curiosity to examine Mayow’s book, for Haller
certainly did not understand his theory. For instance Lib. 8. § 13.
Nitrum aereum. Si ad verum sensum nitri aerei hypothesis revocata
fuisset parum utique ab eà differt quam novissimè proposuimus.
Nitrum quidem ipsum incautiosius olim Physiologi in aere obvolitare
scripserunt, et ex pluvià et nive colligi; idemque passim ex rupibus
efflorescere (Sprat ex Henshaw p. 264 major cal. hum.) exque plantis et
stercoribus educi (Fludd Niewentydt, 563-4. Mayow de nitro aereo. Lower
de Corde c. 3. Thurston 52. 53. Besse Analyse tom 1 et en lettre en
reponse à M. Helvet. 114.) id nitrum aiunt in pulmonibus ad sanguinem
venire, et ab eo ruborem illum elegantem, et fermentationem (Mayow,
Thurston penult. ess. T. 3 p. 265) et calorem sanguinis accedere aut
vicissim sanguinem condensari.
Certainly the id nitrum, is not Mayow’s. M. Rosel seems first to have
ascertained the existence of nitre in plants. A late experiment of Dr.
Priestley’s, of which he gave an account in a letter to Dr. Wistar,
seems to make it probable that there may be nitre in snow.
[40] Blumenbach’s Physiology, Caldwell’s translation, Philadelphia,
1795. § 162. Speaking of the theories of animal heat, “But all these
hypotheses are embarrassed with innumerable difficulties; whereas on
the other hand the utmost simplicity, and an entire correspondence with
the phenomena of nature combine in recommending and confirming that
doctrine in which the lungs are considered as the focus or fire place
where animal heat is generated, and the deplogisticated part of the air
which we breathe as the fuel that supports the vital flame. That justly
celebrated character Jo. Mayow sketched out formerly the leading traces
and the first great outlines of this doctrine which in our times has
been greatly improved, extended and farther elucidated by the labours
of the illustrious Crawford.”
Dr. Darwin however is certainly right in supposing that heat is evolved
in many other processes of the animal economy, beside inspiration.
[41] See the translation of Scheele by Dr. John Reinhold Forster 1780 p.
XIII.
In p. 437 of v. 5 of the analytical review of Hopson’s Chemistry,
before Dr. Beddoes’s account of Mayow in 1790 the latter is stated as
the author of discoveries that might have given rise to the present
system of pneumatic Chemistry.
Two of Mayow’s Essays, viz. de Respiratione and de Rachitide, appear
to have been published at Leyden, in 1671, the author who died at the
age of 34, being then 26 years old. The propositions which I have
thought it necessary to extract from Mayow’s work, (ed. of 1674,
Oxford,) and which I shall insert, will give a concise, but faithful
view of his discoveries and conjectures in pneumatic Chemistry.[42]
The abridgements of Beddoes and Fourcroy, I have no opportunity to
consult, and as Mayow’s book is far from being common, I have deemed
it by no means an unnecessary labour to give the reader an opportunity
of judging for himself, what is the precise extent of the claim, which
the patrons of Mayow’s reputation may fairly set up. It is also, of the
more importance in a history of this subject, to notice the pretensions
of this writer, as it appears that Boyle’s experiments on artificial
air, in his physico-mechanical experiments were not made until the
year 1767 et seq. Though the first edition of that treatise repeatedly
quoted by Mayow was in 1661. Mayow’s experiments therefore ought to
have been, and probably were known to Boyle at the publication of his
last edition.[43]
[42] I believe Dr. Beddoes gives no more than the heads of each chapter
and, a brief analysis of the contents. Dr. Beddoes in his remarks on
Fourcroy’s account of Mayow, Ann. de Chimie. No. 85, Nich. Jour. v. 3
quarto p. 108 states Mayow at the time of his death to have been only
27 and 28: but he was born in 1645 and died in 1769. Biog. Dict. 8vo.
ed. of 1798.
[43] I do not find that Boyle quotes Mayow, though their labours in the
same field were contemporary. But Boyle in his hidden qualities of the
air published in 1674 has an observation that looks as if derived from
Mayow. “And this undestroyed springiness of the air, with the necessity
of fresh air to the life of hot animals, suggests a great suspicion of
some vital substance if I may so call it, diffused through the air,
whether it be a volatile nitre or rather some anonymous substance,
sidereal or subterraneal, though not improperly of kin to that which
seems so necessary to the maintenance of other flames.”
The following is an analysis of Mayow’s essays, so far as relates to
his chemical Philosophy.
CHAP. _1st. Of Nitre._ The air is impregnated with a vital, igneous,
and highly fermentative spirit of a nitro-saline nature, p. 1.
Nitre is a salt consisting of an acid and an alkaline part, as appears
by the Analysis, and by the generation of nitre; for if this salt be
deflagrated with sulphur, the acid spirit will fly off, and may be
collected by means of a tubulated retort and a receiver: and so if it
be deflagrated with tartar, the residuum will be equal in weight to the
tartar employed, though much of that, is of a fœtid oily nature. This
appears also from the composition of nitre, by the addition of spirit
of nitre to an alcali, p. 2-4. The fixed part of nitre is obtained from
the earth; pure earth being probably a compound of salt and sulphur.
p. 8.
CHAP. _2d. On the aereal and fiery spirit of nitre._
The air seems to contain an acid, as appears from the regeneration
of vitriolic acid after the calcination of Vitriol, and from the
rusting of steel filings in a moist air; p. 10. A component part of
the acid of nitre, is derived from the air, which evidently contains
something necessary to the support of flame. But this aereal pabulum of
flame, is not air itself, for air remains when the confined taper is
extinguished: nor is it as vulgarly supposed, the salt called nitre, p.
12. But that these fire-air particles exist also in nitre is evident,
since this salt will support the combustion of sulphur in vacuo. Fill a
tube with gunpowder slightly moistened, and it will burn out in vacuo,
or with its mouth inverted over water. Hence the aereal part of nitre,
is the same with the fire-air particles of the atmosphere, and is one
component part of the acid spirit of nitre: the other being (like the
fixed part) obtained from the earth, p. 17. 18. The fiery particles
thus common to nitre and to the air, he denominates nitro-aereal. It
is these that give causticity to spirit of nitre, and occasion the
red fumes observed in distilling it, p. 18. They do not take fire of
themselves in nitre, because they are inveloped with moisture; but when
combined with salt of tartar, and thrown on the fire in a dry state
they inflame, p. 20.
CHAP. _3d. Of the nature of the nitro-aereal and fiery spirit._ Fire
he conceives to consist of these nitro-aereal particles set in violent
motion by means of sulphureous bodies, in the cases of culinary fire:
but by some other means, in the cases of the solar rays collected by a
burning glass, and of the celestial fires. The corrosive and caustic
nature both of fire and nitrous acid, seems to argue that it proceeds
in both from the nitro-aereal particles they contain, 22-24. That fire
is not of a sulphureous nature is evident, for nitre will not take fire
in an ignited crucible; but oil thrown in, takes fire immediately. So
if a piece of metal be held over a candle, the fire particles pass
through the metal, but the sulphureous smoke adheres to the under side.
p. 27.
That the heat occasioned by a burning glass, consists of these
nitro-aereal particles is evident, for diaphoretic antimony may be
made, either first by calcination with a lens, or secondly, by the
repeated affusion of nitrous acid, or thirdly, by the deflagration
of nitre on the antimony. Diaphoretic antimony made by calcination,
increases on weight,[44] by means of the nitro-aereal particles fixed in
it by the process. p. 28, 29.
[44] It was first observed by John Rey in 1630 that metals calcined,
gain weight by the absorption of air. See an account of his book by M.
Bayen Journ. de Rozier 1775 v. 1 p. 48. There are also some experiments
by Boyle that shew the accession of weight on the calcination of
metals, but he does not seem aware of the theory. Shaw’s Boyle, Fire
and Flame weighed v. 2 p. 394, &c.
CHAP. _4th. On the origin of acid liquors, and the earthy part of
Spirits of nitre._ From p. 34, it appears that he knew nothing of
the absorption and combination of his nitro-aereal particles in the
vitriolic acid, during the combustion of sulphur, but explains the
whole mechanically by the saline portion of the sulphur being broken
down into minute pointed particles, by the violent attrition of the
nitro-aereal particles, and so becoming fluid and sharpened. He seems
too, not to know that the colcothar of martial vitriol is no component
part of sulphur, p. 37. The same mechanical explanation he applies
to the formation of the ligneous acids, and to the impregnation
of the caput mortuum or colcothar of vitriol, with fresh acid by
exposure of air. In the succeeding paragraph, p. 39, he supposes that
marchasite (martial pyrites) imbibes the nitro-aereal particles from
the atmosphere, and thus acid is formed. In like manner he explains the
formation of acids produced by fermentation, by the collision between
the nitro-aereal, and the sulphureo-saline particles of the mass. p.
41. So also he supposes nitrous acid to be produced by the detention
of his nitro-aereal particles by the terrene saline particles found
in the earth, p. 43. Hence he concludes generally, p. 43, that acid
salts are formed from a saline basis brought into fusion or fluidity
by the nitro-aereal part of the air: and sums up his theory of nitre,
by stating it to be a triple salt, composed of nitro-aereal particles,
united to a terrene basis forming the acid, which then unites to the
fixed basis, supplied also by the earth.
CHAP. _5th. On Fermentation._ He gives in this chapter his theory
of fermentation, as arising from the conflict of his nitro-aereal
principle which he thinks may be termed mercury, and the sulphureous
principle: evidently meaning by the latter, the Phlogiston of Stahl:
and he states broadly, p. 60. that pure sulphur can never admit of
accension, but by means of the nitro-aereal particles obtained from the
atmosphere. The rest of his reasoning in this chapter, does not seem
deserving of further notice.
CHAP. _6th. On the nitro-aereal spirit as the cause of rigidity and
elasticity._ These he explains by the fixation and state of his
nitro-aereal particles in bodies endowed with these properties. In p.
69 he endeavours to account why boiled water freezes sooner than that
which has not been boiled; a fact which Dr. Black has made the subject
of a paper in the 45th vol. of the Philosophical transactions. But his
reasonings throughout this chapter are not calculated to add to his
reputation, or to the mass of knowledge of the present day.
CHAP. _7th. The elastic force of the Air depends on its nitro-aereal
particles. In what way exhausted air is reimpregnated with them. Of the
elements of Heat and Cold._ This chapter contains experiments to shew
that the elasticity of the air is owing to the nitro-aereal particles
contained in it: which may be destroyed by the burning of a candle or
other combustible substances, and also by the breathing of animals.
When the atmospheric air contained in a glass jar inverted over water,
will no longer support flame or animal life, the water rises in the
jar, owing to the diminished elasticity of the air, not being able to
counteract the pressure of the surrounding atmosphere on the water p.
100. He finds p. 101 that the diminution by burning a taper in a given
quantity of the air, is about one thirtieth of the whole, and by the
breathing of mice and other animals about one fourteenth. Thence he
concludes p. 106 that by means of respiration the elastic part of the
air enters into the blood, and that the sole use of the lungs is not as
some suppose, to break down the blood in its passage into very minute
particles. That combustion and respiration have similar effects on
atmospherical air, he concludes, p. 108, from the fact, that a candle
and a small animal inclosed together in a glass jar over water, the one
will not burn, nor the other remain alive above half the time that they
would if alone. Mayow however, did not consider his nitro-igneous and
elastic particles to be either pure air, or even a component part of
the common air, as air, notwithstanding the ambiguity of the passages
in p. 114 and 118; but as particles of a different nature, attached
to and fixed in the atmospheric particles; and detached (_excussas_)
by the means above mentioned, p. 118 and 121. His explanation of
elasticity generally in this chap. and of the difficulty arising from
the obvious resistance to the Atmosphere, and the expansibility of the
air in which a taper has been extinguished, or an animal died, seem
too obscure and unintelligible to merit transcribing. It is evident
however upon the whole from p. 123 compared with p. 100 and 135 that
he conceived the diminution of such air to arise from diminished
elasticity, but he supposes it to be denser than common air 123. In a
subsequent part of this chapter p. 128 et seq. he states his theory
of the manner in which deteriorated air recovers its loss, viz. that
the nitro-aereal particles being lighter than the atmospherical, float
abundantly in the higher regions; and that the part of the atmosphere
deprived of them below, being forced upward by the pressure of the
atmosphere above, obtains a renewal of these particles by mixture with
the strata where they abound.
The element of fire, he supposes to reside in the body of the Sun,
which is no other than a mass of nitro-aereal particles driven in
perpetual gyration with immense velocity. Cold, which he considers as
some thing positive (p. 130) he thinks consists in these particles
assuming a pointed form, and moving not in gyration but strait forward.
Much of his reasoning indeed throughout the book, savours greatly of
the mechanical and corpuscular philosophy prevalent in his day.
CHAP. _8th. On the nitro-aereal spirit as inspired by animals._
Formerly he thought that in respiration the nitro-aereal particles
were rubbed or shaken off (_atterere_, _excutere_ 146) from the common
air by the action of the lungs, at present he thinks the air itself
enters the mass of the blood, is there deprived of these particles,
and of part of its elasticity. To prove this he produces an experiment
of the diminution of air by the vapours from iron dissolved in nitrous
acid: but the beautiful deductions of Dr. Priestley from a similar
experiment, never occurred to him; on the contrary he expressly states
that it is an Aura, but not Air p. 145 and though afterward in chap. 9
p. 163, 164 he inclines to doubt, yet again in p. 168 he denies it that
character.
In p. 146 he proceeds to state the uses of these nitro-aereal
particles, which (147) he considers as the principle of life and
motion both in animals and vegetables. By the mutual action of the
nitro-aereal, with the sulphureo-saline particles contained in the
blood, a fermentation is excited necessary to animal life, and to
the warm fluid circulation of the blood (_ad sanguinis æstum_.) To
these particles imbibed from the air, he attributes the difference
in colour between the venous and arterial blood; and he shews this,
from the numerous air bubbles arising in an exhausted receiver from
warm arterial blood: but his experiment to illustrate the difference,
from the colour produced by the nitrous acid with vol. alk. seems very
little to the purpose p. 150.
To the fermentation arising from this mixture of nitro-aereal particles
with the blood, he ascribes animal heat, and accounts satisfactorily
for the increased heat of the body during strong exercise, from the
more frequent inspirations occasioned by the exertion (p. 152, 306:)
but his replies to the objections of Dr. Willis, drawn from the
phenomena of fermenting mixtures, are very inconclusive.
CHAP. _9th. Whether air can be generated anew._ He repeats the
experiment of dissolving iron in dilute nitrous acid, and finds
that though some of the vapour be absorbed, a portion still remains
uncondensible even by severe cold. On substituting dilute vitr. for
nitr. acid he finds an aura which is hardly absorbed or condensed
at all. Hence he doubts whether these auræ be not entitled to the
appellation of air, especially as by subsequent experiment he shews
that they are equally expansible with common air. In making this last
experiment he exhibits the method of transferring air from one vessel
to another (Tab. 5. Fig. 5.) much in the manner afterwards described
by Mr. Cavendish in 1766.[45] From the inability of these auræ to
support animal life (Tab. 5. Fig. 6.) he concludes finally that they
are not air, though not very dissimilar p. 171. The succeeding five
chapters do not seem to contain any facts or conjectures that can add
to Mayow’s reputation. His Hypotheses are completely superceded by
the more accurate knowledge of the present day. In his tract on quick
lime p. 225 he seems to have forestalled the acidum pingue of Dr. Meyer
published exactly a century afterward. It may be noted that in his
treatise on the Bath waters p. 259, he describes fishes as collecting
vital air from the water, and respiring like land animals. (Aereum
aliquod vitale ab aquà, veluti aliàs ab aurà secretum et in cruoris
massam trajiciatur.) The air bladder he considers rather as a reservoir
of air to be inspired, than a receptacle for excreted air; though the
latter opinion is made probable by Dr. Priestley.[46]
[45] Boyle had invented an apparatus for transferring air from one
receiver of an air-pump to another, but not under water.
[46] See Nich. Journ. v. 3 p. 119 on the probability of fishes
separating oxygen from the water they inhabit.
The first part of his _Treatises on Respiration_ is chiefly anatomical.
In p. 300 et seq. he states more fully his opinion, that vital air,
is of a nitro-saline nature: that it is the principle of life, both
in Animals and Vegetables: that combined with the sulphureo-saline
particles in the blood, it is the stimulus to the muscular fibre, and
of course to the heart as a muscle, p. 305; but that the fermentation
occasioned by the introduction of these particles into the blood, is
not confined to the left ventricle of the heart, but commences, in the
passage of the blood through the lungs, and continues in the Arteries.
This evidently approaches the theory, advanced by Dr. Goodwyn in his
tract on the Connection of life with respiration about sixteen years
ago, viz. that the pure air combined with the blood is the stimulus
to the left ventricle of the heart, and produces the alternate
contraction, and dilation on which the circulation depends. Dr. Lower,
in his treatise de motu sanguinis, and Fracassati, and Dr. Frederick
Slare attributed the change of the colour of venous blood into a florid
red, to the combination of the air with it. Lower I believe preceded
Mayow, who quotes him, p. 148; the date of Fracassati’s and Dr.
Slare’s’ observations I have not been able to ascertain, but they must
have been near the time of Mayow. Lowth. Ab. v. iii. p. 237.
In his third treatise on respiration, he explains the Animal œconomy
of the fœtus in utero, by suggesting that the fœtus is supplied by
the placenta, not with venous, but with arterial blood brought
by the umbilical Arteries; so that the required stimulus of the
nitro-aereal particles being thus conveyed, supercedes the necessity
of the lungs for the purpose. This he ingeniously illustrates by the
known experiment, that a dog into whom arterial blood is infused,
though respiring with great difficulty before, hardly respires at all.
A similar theory he applies to the life of the chick in ovo. This
treatise seems to have suggested Dr. Beddoes’s illustration of his
theory of consumption from the state of pregnancy.
In a subsequent Essay on animal spirits, he conceives them to be, if
not the same with the nitro-aereal part of the atmosphere, yet to
consist of this, so far as they are necessary to the production of
muscular motion, which he attributes entirely as before to nitro-aereal
particles, p. 24 and 40, of chap. 4, on the animal spirits.
I do not observe any thing else in Mayow’s book worth noting on the
present occasion; or sufficiently connected with pneumatic Chemistry.
From the analysis thus given of[47] what Mayow has advanced, it
appears, that he clearly comprehended the atmosphere to consist of
a mixture of two parts, the one the efficient cause of life and of
combustion, the other not of itself necessary to either.
[47] At the time this was written neither Dr. Bostock’s treatise on
respiration or the books therein quoted p. 200 had arrived here. Nor
have I had an opportunity of consulting the references there made to
Prof. Robinson, Dr. Thompson, Dr. Yeates, or Fourcroy’s account of
Mayow.
That the vital part of the air, was also a constituent part of nitre,
the effects of both being in essential particulars the same.[48]
That the vital part of the atmosphere entering the blood through the
vessels in the lungs, is conveyed to the left ventricle of the heart,
and becomes the stimulus to the contractions of that muscle, and is
equally essential to the whole system of muscular contraction.
[48] Mr. Ray wrote “A dissertation (in 1696) about respiration,” in
which he supposes the air to pass from the bronchia and lungs into
the substance of the blood, and there (pabuli instar) it foments and
maintains the vital flame which he supposes to be in the sulphureous
parts of the blood, as the air foments the common flame of a candle,
and that the nitre has nothing to do with it. See Durham’s collection
of Ray’s letters.
That the vital part of the atmosphere thus combined with the blood
becomes also the source of animal heat.
That this vital part is equally necessary to the fœtus in utero as
to the adult, and that the use of the lungs in the former case is
superceded by the functions of the umbilical artery and placenta;
by means of which, blood already impregnated with the vital air, is
conveyed to the fœtus.
That the respiration of fishes, is dependant on the particles of air
mixed with watery element they inhabited.
That heat, flame, and combustion, depend on two universal principles,
and the gentleness or violence of their mutual conflict: the one being
a principle of inflammability universally diffused in combustible
bodies, and the other the vital or igneous part of the atmosphere.
These propositions evidently touch upon the most brilliant of the
pneumatic discoveries of the authors already quoted; and not a little
extraordinary it is, that they should have remained so long unknown,
unnoticed, and not understood.
The sulphur of Mayow is decidedly the Phlogiston of Stahl; the fire
air of the former is the fire air of Scheele, the dephlogisticated air
of Priestley, and the Oxygen of Lavoisier.
The combination of oxygen with the blood by means of respiration, first
discovered as was thought by Lavoisier, is clearly stated by Mayow; who
has also forestalled the elaborate theories of Crawford on animal heat,
of Goodwyn, on muscular stimulus, and of Beddoes on the succedaneum for
respiration in the fœtus.
Boyle, though he must certainly have known of Mayow, neither quotes
him, nor uses, or improves on his experiments; though as I have
already remarked, he seems to have had notions of the atmosphere much
like those adopted by Mayow. Whether this neglect arose from the
pride of birth, or the pride of knowledge, or the pride of age, (for
Boyle was almost twice the age of Mayow) or from jealousy of Mayow’s
abilities, cannot now be ascertained. From that time until Hales
published his statics in 1726, pneumatic experiments were neglected,
and the mathematical philosophy which Newton’s discoveries rendered
fashionable, absorbed for many years the attention of men of Science,
particularly in England. The way in which Lemery, Hales and Brownrigg
speak of Mayow, evidently shews that his theories were not understood,
nor his merits appreciated.
That Mayow was unknown to Black and Cavendish until of late years, is
highly probable at least, if not absolutely certain. Neither these
philosophers, nor Dr. Priestley, could have passed over Mayow’s book,
without being struck with his ideas, and publicly referring to them in
their chemical works.
That Dr. Priestley was unacquainted with Mayow is certain, from the
limited extent of his reading at the early period of his experiments
(from 1770 to 1776 or 1777,) in books of chemistry and theoretic
physiology: from Mayow, not being quoted by any of the writers whose
works Dr. Priestley would be likely to consult except Hales and
Brownrigg, and not by them in a manner to induce any farther curiosity:
from their being unnoticed by Black, Cavendish, Sir John Pringle,
and Lavoisier, in particular: from the custom that Dr. Priestley had
of acknowledging the sources of his ideas in all cases where they
originated from the discoveries of others, as in his references to
Hales, Brownrigg, Cavendish, &c; and from his making no mention of
Mayow in his express account of the labours of his predecessors on the
subject of animal respiration. That both he and Sir John Pringle before
the Royal Society in 1772 and 1776 should expressly treat the _history_
of discoveries in which Mayow bore so distinguished a part, and omit
noticing him altogether, had they known of his works, is incredible. It
is evident that he was then an obscure writer, and not in repute, or
he would have occurred to them; or some of their philosophical friends
would have suggested the propriety of referring to his publications.
Neither is it likely that Scheele would have been acquainted with
Mayow’s writings, though it is singular that he escaped the notice
of Lavoisier who I believe was employed under government in the
collection of essays on the theory and manufacture of saltpetre and
in the superintendance of the saltpetre works, especially as Mayow
was mentioned though disrespectfully by Lemery, in his paper on nitre
before referred to. But there certainly is no evidence that Lavoisier
obtained his ideas of oxygen and its combination with the blood from
Mayow, or his theory of metallic calcination from Jean Rey, though his
obligations to Dr. Priestley have not been always acknowledged with the
candour and liberality that men of science would expect from Lavoisier.
Mayow had more than ordinary discernment in comparing known facts,
and drawing conclusions from them, but he does not appear to have had
the talent of imagining decisive experiments, of varying them, of
observing and noting all the natural phenomena attendant upon them,
or sufficient industry in pursuing them. It is one thing to make
a plausible conjecture, and another to verify it. Those alone are
entitled to the honour of discoveries who not merely start the theory,
but take the pains of pursuing it by experiments and resting it on the
basis of well conceived and accurately ascertained facts, sufficiently
numerous and varied to obviate the most prominent objections. Mayow
has reasoned with great acuteness and conjectured with singular
felicity, but he added little to the mass of philosophical KNOWLEDGE
in his day. He composed and decomposed nitre and ascertained the
existence of vital air in this substance as well as in the atmosphere,
but he did not collect, exhibit, and examine it. He knew how to make
artificial air from nitrous acid and iron, but all the extraordinary
properties of this gas, remained unobserved by him as well as by others
until collected and imprisoned by Dr. Priestley, and exposed to the
question under his scrutinizing eye. Indeed as an experimentalist Dr.
Priestley stands unrivalled. The multiplicity of his experiments,
their ingenuity, their bearings upon the point in question, their
general importance, and their fidelity, were never equalled upon the
whole, before or since. Nor is it any detraction from their merit
with those who are accustomed to experiment, that they hold out no
pretensions to that suspicious accuracy, which has too often depended
more upon arithmetical calculations than upon actual weight and
measure. The many kinds of aeriform fluids discovered by Dr. Priestley,
the many methods of procuring them, the skilfull investigation of
their properties, the foundation he laid for the labours of others,
the simplicity, the novelty, the neatness, and the cheapness of his
apparatus, and his unequalled industry, have deservedly placed him at
the head of pneumatic Chemistry. Nor should it be forgotten that while
he thus outstripped his predecessors and contemporaries in the field
of experiment, it formed not as with them the business of his life,
but (among other branches of literature and philosophy successfully
cultivated) the occupation of his leisure hours, the relaxation from
what he deemed more important, more laborious, and more obligatory
pursuits.
Before his time (excluding Mayow) Boyle had discovered that air
might be generated, fatal to animal life. It was known that common
air would only serve a certain time for the purposes of combustion
and respiration. The mephitic exhalations from natural Grottoes had
been remarked. Inflammable air both natural and artificial had been
exhibited before the royal society. Hales had ascertained the presence
of air in a great number of substances where it was not commonly
suspected though he had not the skill to examine the properties of
the air produced. Black had ascertained the presence of fixed air in
limestone, and Brownrigg, Lane, and Venel had illustrated the theory
of mineral waters. But it was the paper of Cavendish in 1766 on fixed
and inflammable air produced from various substances by means of
acids, fermentation and putrefaction, that first introduced a stile
of experimenting in pneumatic chemistry, more neat, more precise, and
scientific than had hitherto been known.
The attention of Dr. Priestley, however to these subjects was not
originally excited by the works of his predecessors, but by the
_accident_ of his proximity to a brew-house at Leeds, where of course
fixed air (a subject that had attracted much attention about that time)
would be produced in a large way. It was thus that one experiment led
to another, until the fruits of his amusements were the discoveries on
which his philosophical reputation is principally founded. It is no
more than justice to his character to mention in this place, that of
all men living he was the freest from literary deception and the vanity
of authorship. He never claims the merit of profound investigation or
great foresight, for discoveries that might easily have been so stated
as if they had been the pure result of those qualifications, but which
were in reality the offspring of accident and circumstance. He excites
others to patient labour in the field of experiment, from observing
that success does not depend so much on great abilities or extensive
knowledge, as on patient attention, and perseverance; and that much of
his own reputation was owing to the discovery of facts that arose in
the course of his pursuits, the result of no previous theory, unlooked
for and unexpected. In v. 3 p. 282 of his experiments on air he says
“Few persons I believe have met with so much unexpected good success as
myself in the course of my philosophical pursuits. My narrative will
shew that the first hints at least of almost every thing that I have
discovered of much importance have occurred to me in this manner. In
looking for one thing I have general found another, and sometimes a
thing of much more value than that which I was in quest of. But none of
these unexpected discoveries appear to me to have been so extraordinary
as that I am about to relate (viz. the spontaneous emission of
dephlogisticated air from water containing a green vegetating matter)
and it may serve to admonish all persons who are engaged in similar
pursuits, not to overlook any circumstance relating to an experiment,
but to keep their eyes open to every new appearance and to give due
attention to it however inconsiderable it may seem.”[49] To this
candour of disposition, and the readiness with which he acknowledged
his mistakes and his oversights, even those who opposed his opinions
bear honourable testimony. “The celebrated Priestley himself (says M.
Berthollet in his reply to Kirwan on Phlogiston p. 124 of the Eng.
translation) often sets us the example, by rectifying the results of
some of his numerous experiments.”
[49] See also the 1st, vol. of his early edition of experiments on air
p. 29.
Numerous indeed those experiments were as well as important: far too
numerous to be particularised here; though it may not be improper to
call to the recollection of the reader some of the more interesting
facts which we owe to Dr. Priestley, and the times of their discovery
and communication.
The first of his _publications_ on pneumatic chemistry was in 1772,
announcing the method of impregnating water with fixed air, and on
the preparation and medicinal uses of artificial mineral waters; a
discovery that domesticated much of the knowledge that had heretofore
been disclosed only in the works of learned societies; and that
beautifully exemplified how much of the health and the pleasure of
common life, might depend on the ingenious researches of men of
science. Though this was the first publication of Dr. Priestley on
the chemistry of the airs, he had certainly commenced his experiments
in this branch of Science, soon after his arrival at Leeds, and as
early at least, as 1768. In the year 1771 he had already procured good
air from saltpetre; he had ascertained the use of agitation, and of
vegitation as the means employed by nature in purifying the atmosphere
destined to the support of animal life, and that air vitiated by animal
respiration was a pabulum to vegetable life; he had procured factitious
air in a much greater variety of ways than had been known before, and
he had been in the habit of substituting quicksilver in lieu of water,
for the purpose of many of his experiments. In his paper before the
Royal Society, in the spring of 1772, which deservedly obtained him the
honour of the Copley Medal, he gives an account of these discoveries.
In the same paper he announces the discovery of that singular fluid
nitrous air,[50] and its beautiful application as a test of the purity
or fitness for respiration of airs generally. In the same paper he
shews the use of a burning lens in pneumatic experiments, he relates
the discovery and properties of marine acid air; he adds much to
the little of what had been heretofore known of the airs generated
by putrefactive processes, and by vegetable fermentations, and he
determines many facts relating to the diminution and deterioration of
air, by the combustion of Charcoal, and the calcination of metals.
[50] Honestly referring to Dr. Hales and Mr. Cavendish for any idea that
might have remotely led to this discovery (See Obs. on air 1st ed. v. 1
p. 108) the discovery however was completely his own.
Dr. Priestley seems always to have thought nitrous air as convenient
a substance for eudiometrical experiments as any of the later
substitutes, viz. the liquid sulphurets and the combustion of
phosphorus. The foundation of Mr. Davy’s substitute, muriat or sulphat
of iron saturated with nitrous air, was as Mr. Davy acknowledges first
discovered by Dr. Priestley himself. See Nich. Journ. for Jan. 1802
p. 41. The different states of the solutions of iron in vitriolic
acid have been ingeniously applied to the analysis of mixed gasses by
Humboldt and Vauquelin.
Soon after this, in confirmation of Sir John Pringle’s theory of
intermittents and low fevers being generally owing to moist miasma
when people are exposed to its influence, he ascertained by means of
his nitrous test that the air of marshes was inferior in purity to the
common air of the atmosphere.[51]
He had obtained very good air from saltpetre in 1771, but his full
discovery of dephlogisticated air, seems not to have been made until
June or July, 1774,[52] when he procured it from precipitate per se,
and from red lead. This was publicly mentioned by him at the table
of Mr. and Madame Lavoisier, at Paris, in October 1774, to whom the
phenomena were until then unknown. The experiments on the production of
dephlogisticated air, he made before the scientific chemists at Paris
about the same time, at Mr. Trudaine’s. This hitherto secret source
of animal life and animal heat, of which Mayow had but a faint and
conjectural glimpse, was certainly first exhibited by Dr. Priestley,
and about the same time, (unknown to each other) by Mr. Scheele of
Sweden. For the honour of science, it were much to be wished that the
pretensions of Mr. Lavoisier were equally well founded. He has done
sufficient and been praised sufficiently for what he has done, to
satisfy a mind the most avaricious of fame; he is deservedly placed
in the first rank among the philosophers of his day, and he ought not
to have thrown a shade over his well earned reputation, by claiming
for himself the honour of those discoveries which he had learned from
another.
[51] Phil. trans. v. 54 p. 92.
[52] See Doctrine of Phlog. established p. 119.
From this brief account of the first stage of Dr. Priestley’s chemical
labours, it appears that during the short period of two years, he
announced to the world more facts of real importance, and extensive
application, and more enlarged and extensive views of the œconomy of
nature, than all his predecessors in pneumatic Chemistry had made known
before.
In 1776 his observations on respiration were read before the Royal
Society; in which he clearly discovered that the common air inspired,
was diminished in quantity, and deteriorated in quality, by the action
of the blood on it _through the blood vessels of the lungs_; and that
the florid red colour of arterial blood, was communicated by the
contact of air through the containing vessels. His experiments on the
change of colour in blood confined in a bladder, took away all doubt
of the probability of this mode of action. I cannot help thinking
that the circumstance of Dr. Priestley’s mind being so much occupied
with the prevailing theory of Phlogiston, was the reason why he did
not observe that the diminution of the air, and the florid colour of
the arterial blood was owing to the absorption of the pure part of the
atmosphere, _rather_ than to any thing emitted from the blood itself.
This part of the theory of respiration Mr. Lavoisier has certainly
established; though it is by no means ascertained as yet whether the
vital part of the atmosphere inspired, is wholly and alone absorbed,
or whether in reality something is not contributed in the lungs to the
formation of the fixed air found after expiration.[53]
[53] That azote is absorbed during respiration as Dr. Priestley supposed
contrary to Mr. Lavoisier’s opinion, is made extremely probable by the
experiments of Mr. Davy, whose accuracy is well known. Researches,
p. 434. The formation of water in this process, is certainly no more
than conjecture as yet. Dr. Bostock has lately published a very useful
and laborious history of discoveries relating to respiration, both
anatomical and pneumatical.
In 1778 Dr. Priestley pursued his experiments on the property of
vegetables growing in the light to correct impure air, and the use
of vegetation in this part of the œconomy of nature. A discovery
which was announced to several men of science in England previous
to the publication of the same ideas by Dr. Ingenhouz.[54] Indeed
from its having been communicated to M. Magellan whose pleasure
and whose occupation it was, to give information of new facts to
his philosophical correspondents, and of this in particular to Dr.
Ingenhouz then engaged in similar researches, there is hardly a doubt
but the latter knew of the experiments then pending on the subject by
Dr. Priestley.
[54] Doctrine of Phlogiston established, p. 107, et. seq. The theory
of the amelioration of impure air by the absorption and excretion of
vegetables growing in the light, has been doubted by Dr. Darwin in his
Phytologia, and opposed by Count Rumford in a paper published in the
transactions of the Royal Society, for 1787: also by Dr. Woodhouse of
Philadelphia, Nicholson’s Journal, for July 1802, and by Mr. Robert
Harrup, Nicholson’s Journal, for July 1803.
It is painful to notice these aberrations from propriety in the conduct
of men highly respectable in the philosophical world, arising from an
over anxious avarice of literary fame, and an improper jealousy of
the reputation of another. Not that it derogates from the character
of a philosopher to wish for the applause of those who know how to
appreciate his merit, or who are benefited by his exertions; such
an anxiety is laudable when it does not lead to encroachments on
the literary rights of others; nor is it at all desireable under
the present circumstances of human nature, to expect from men of
science an attention to their pursuits arising from motives of pure
benevolence alone, and excluding all views, hopes, and expectations of
the gratifying tribute of public approbation. I believe no man ever
laboured with a more single eye to public utility than Dr. Priestley.
But consideration in society, and the respectability attendant upon
great talents, and great industry, successfully employed for the
benefit of mankind, is a motive to useful exertion so universal, so
honest, so laudable, and withal so powerful, that it is the common
interest, as well as the duty of society, to bestow it liberally where
it has been earned faithfully, and to concede it to those only, who
have really deserved this honourable reward.
From this period Dr. Priestley seems to have attended to his pneumatic
experiments as an occupation; devoting to them a regular portion of
his time. To this attention, among a prodigious variety of facts
tending to shew the various substances from which the gasses may be
procured; the methods of producing them; their influence on each other,
and their probable composition, we owe the discovery of vitriolic
acid air, of fluor acid air, of vegetable acid air, of alkaline air,
and of dephlogisticated nitrous air, or gazeous oxide of azote as
it has been called, the subject of so many curious experiments by
Mr. Davy. To these we may add the production of the various kinds of
inflammable air by numerous processes that had escaped the observation
of Mr. Cavendish; in particular the formation of it by the electric
spark taken in oils, in spirits of wine and in alkaline air; the
method of procuring it by passing steam through hot iron filings,
and the phenomena of that hitherto undetermined substance the finery
cinder, and its alliance to steel. To Dr. Priestley we owe the very
fine experiment of reviving metallic calces in inflammable air and
its absorption in toto, apparently at least, undecomposed. He first
ascertained the necessity of water to the formation of the gasses, and
the endless production of air from water itself.
Dr. Priestley’s experiments on this subject, to wit: the generation
of air from water, opened a new field for reflection, and deserves
more minute notice. No theory has yet been proposed adequate to the
explanation of the facts. He had before remarked that water was
necessary to the generation of every species of air, but the unceasing
product of air from water had never been before observed.
In his first set of experiments he procured air, by converting the
whole of a quantity of water into steam: then, to obviate the objection
to the water having imbibed air from the atmosphere he put the water
on mercury in long glass tubes immersed in mercury: in a third process
he used no heat, but merely took off the pressure of the atmosphere.
In all these cases a bubble of air was extricated from the water,
which being separated by inclining the tube, another bubble was again
produced on each repetition of the experiment. That this could not be
air imbibed from the atmosphere appeared from this, that though the
first portions were generally purer than atmospheric air, the next
became less pure, and at length wholly phlogisticated.
It did not appear that the addition of acids, enabled the water to
yield more air, nor did he succeed in attempting to convert the whole
of a given quantity of water into air, although exposing the water
confined over mercury to heat, and separating the air produced, it
still continued to produce more air for twenty or thirty repetitions
of the experiments. When a certain proportion of air was thus produced
at any one time, no continuance of the experiment would encrease the
quantity until it was separated. Hence he concludes that the longest
continuance of water in the state of vapour would not convert it
into air. The water used was pure distilled water previously boiled to
separate any adventitious air that might have been imbibed from the
atmosphere. The precautions he used, and the replies to such objections
as he foresaw the experiment would be liable to, are detailed in
the papers he published on the subject, to wit, a separate pamphlet
published in England in 1793, and a communication in the Am. Ph. trans,
v. IV. p. 11-20.
In the last mentioned paper, he proceeds also to give an account of
some experiments on the property of water to imbibe different kinds of
air, and the conversion of sp. of wine, into inflammable air.
This paper inserted in the American transactions, was read before that
society in Feb. 1796. In Ap. 1800 another paper was read before the
same society on the production of air by the freezing of water Am. Ph.
trans. v. V. p. 36. In this paper he recapitulates the general result
of his former experiments on the generation of air from water, namely
“that after all air had been extracted from any quantity of water by
heat or by taking off the pressure of the atmosphere, whenever any
portion of it was converted into vapour, a bubble of permanent air
was formed, and this was always phlogisticated. The process with the
Torricellian vacuum (he says) I continued for some years and found the
production of air equable to the last. The necessary inference from
this experiment is, that water is convertible into phlogisticated air,
or that it contains more of this air intimately combined with it than
can be extricated from these processes in any reasonable time.”
He proceeds to state his imperfect attempts to procure air from water
by freezing, until he procured cylindrical iron vessels seven or eight
inches high and near three inches wide at the bottom, the upper orifice
closed with a cork and cement, in the centre of which was a glass tube
about one fifteenth of an inch in diameter. In this apparatus the water
in the iron vessel was frozen by means of snow and salt, the vessel
being immersed in mercury, and the water contained over the mercury.
The quantity of water was about three ounces. The experiment was
repeated nine times without changing the water, and the last portion of
air procured in this manner was as great as any of the preceding; so
that there remained no reasonable doubt but that air might be produced
from the same water in this manner ad libitum. Having obtained near
two inches of air in the glass tube, Dr. Priestley put an end to the
experiment, and examining the air found it wholly phlogisticated, not
being affected by nitrous air, and having nothing inflammable in it.
The inference drawn by the Doctor from those experiments is, that
water when reduced by _any means_ into the state of vapour, is in part
converted into phlogisticated air; and this is one of the methods
provided by nature for keeping up the equilibrium of the atmosphere,
as the influence of light on growing vegetables is the means of
recruiting the other part; both of them being subject to absorption
and diminution in several natural processes. And he thinks that they
strengthen also the opinion, that water is the basis of every kind
of air, instead of being itself a compound of hydrogen and oxygen
according to the new theory. At all events the experiments themselves
must be considered as extremely curious, as well as new.
The water and the salt thus made use of gave rise to another experiment
of the most important nature to the present theory of chemistry, if it
should on future repetition be ultimately verified. This experiment
related by Dr. Priestley in a letter to Dr. Wiston is in substance
as follows. Having repeatedly used as above mentioned a freezing
mixture of common salt and snow, the experiment being finished, he
evaporated the snow water in an iron vessel and recovered the salt.
The salt thus recovered contained some calx of iron. He put it by in
a bottle and labelled it, according to his usual practice. In October
1803, he wanted to procure some marine acid, and took the salt thus
procured by evaporating the snow water, for the purpose. On commencing
the distillation, he was surprized to find the receiver full of the
characteristic red fumes of the nitrous acid. The vitriolic acid used
for the purpose was diluted with about an equal quantity of water. On
finishing the process, he took some of the acid in the receiver, and
dissolved copper in it, and thus procured good nitrous air. He was
himself perfectly persuaded that no nitre had been used in the freezing
mixture, nor had any by accident or design been mixed with the salt.
He was not unacquainted with the common mode of clearing black oil of
vitriol by the addition of nitre. So that no means of accounting for
this curious fact remained, but the snow or the iron: he seemed to
think that should this experiment be fully verified hereafter, it would
confirm the vulgar hypothesis of snow containing nitre, and account
for the fertilizing quality usually attributed to snow. He had no
opportunity in that winter of repeating the experiment as he died in
about three months after, and his previous illness had compelled him to
forsake his laboratory.
Of the almost discarded theory of Phlogiston Dr. Priestley to his death
remained the strenuous advocate, and almost the sole supporter; _ipse
Agmen_. Beautiful and elegant as the simplicity of the new doctrine
appears, many facts yet remain to be explained, to which the old
system will apply, and the French theory is inadequate. These are
collected with an ingenuity of arrangement, and a force of reasoning in
the last pamphlet published by the Doctor on the subject,[55] which no
man as yet unprejudiced can peruse, without hesitating on the truth of
the fashionable theory of the day.
[55] The doctrine of phlogiston established 1803.
Certainly, it has not yet been sufficiently explained on the new
theory, what becomes of the Oxygen from the decomposed water in the
solution of metals in acids; nor why inflammable air is produced
when one metal in solution is precipitated by another; nor why
dephlogisticated air is hardly to be procured from finery cinder, if at
all; nor why this substance so abounding in oxygen according to the new
theory, will not oxygenate the muriatic acid; nor why it should answer
all the purposes of water in the production of inflammable air from
charcoal; nor why water in abundance should be produced when finery
cinder is heated in inflammable air, and none when red precipitate is
exposed to the same process; nor what becomes of the oxygen of the
decomposed water when steam is sent over red hot Zinc, and inflammable
air is produced without any addition in weight to the Zinc employed;
nor why there should be a copious production of inflammable air when
hot filings of Zinc are added to hot mercury in a hot retort and
exposed to a common furnace heat, which I believe is an unreported
experiment of Mr. Kirwan’s; nor why sulphur and phosphorus are formed
by heating their acids in inflammable air without our being able to
detect the oxygen which on the new theory ought to be separated, nor
why water should be produced by the combustion of inflammable air
with ,47 of oxygen, and nitrous acid when ,51 of oxygen is employed,
for this experiment can now no more be doubted than explained; nor
why on the new doctrine the addition of phlogisticated air, should
make no alteration in the quantity of acid thus obtained; nor why red
hot charcoal slowly supplied with steam, should furnish inflammable
air only and not fixed or carbonic acid air; nor why nothing but pure
fixed air should be produced by heating the carbonated Barytes in the
same way; nor why fixed air should be formed under circumstances when
it cannot be pretended that Carbon is present, as when gold, silver,
platina, copper, lead, tin and bismuth are heated by a lens in common
air over lime water; or why the grey and yellow calces of lead should
furnish carbonic acid and azote, and no oxygen; nor why the residuum
of red lead when all its oxygen is driven off by heat should be either
massicot or glass of lead according to the degree of heat, and not
lead in its metalline state; nor why plumbago with steam should yield
inflammable and not fixed air; nor why minium and precipitate per se
heated in inflammable air should produce fixed air; nor why on the
evaporation of a diamond in oxygen, the fixed air produced should far
exceed the weight of the diamond employed, if some of the oxygen had
not entered into the composition of the carbonic acid so formed; nor
why there should be a constant residuum of phlogisticated air (or
azote) after the firing of dephlogisticated and inflammable airs, if it
be not formed in the process; nor why phlogisticated air if a simple
substance, should be so evidently formed in the various processes
enumerated by Dr. Priestley in the 13th section of the pamphlet of
which I have made the foregoing abstract? whether the doctrine of
phlogiston is still to be used as the key to the gate of chemical
theory, or whether it be properly thrown aside for the elegant
substitute of the French chemists, can hardly be ascertained, until the
preceding difficulties are cleared up on the new doctrine, for on the
old theory they are sufficiently explicable. The summary of arguments
in favour of Phlogiston, published by Dr. Priestley, in 1803, are
evidently too important, and too difficult of reply, to be slighted by
those who adopt the opposite opinions. _Non nostri est tantas componere
lites._ Should the old theory ultimately fall, it maybe fairly said of
its respectable supporter, _si Pergama dextra defendi potuit, etiam hac
defensa fuisset_.
This was almost the last of Dr. Priestley’s chemical publications,[56]
through all which, his characteristic talent as an author has been
eminently preserved, that of not only adding greatly to the existing
stock of knowledge, but exciting others to exertion and reflection in
the same line of pursuit. Nor can I help thinking that much of the
labours of the French philosophers in this department of science would
never have been undertaken, if they had not been called forth by the
previous discoveries, not of Lemery, Margraaf, Bayen, Macquer, and
Beaumè, but of Hales, Black, and Macbride; of Cavendish and Priestley
and Scheele.[57] Would to God there were no other object of contest
between the rival nations of Great Britain and France, but which should
add most to the sum of human knowledge, and contribute most to the
means of human happiness.
[56] To the end of this Appendix will be subjoined a list of the
scattered papers on Philosophical subjects which Dr. Priestley
published in periodical collections, besides those which are inserted
in the Philosophical transactions.
[57] I do not mean to deny the tribute of praise to Marriotte and Venel,
any more than to Brownrigg and Lane, and it is certain that Lavoisier
was engaged in pneumatic experiments, previous to 1774.
It is impossible to conclude the preceding account better than by the
following extract of a letter to Mr. Lindsey from a man[58] well able
to appreciate the labours of Dr. Priestley; and the late testimony in
favour of his discernment by Dr. Bostock. “To enumerate Dr. Priestley’s
discoveries, would in fact be to enter into a detail of most of those
that have been made within the last 15 years. How many invisible fluids
whose existence evaded the sagacity of foregoing ages has he made
known to us? The very air we breathe, he has taught us to analyze,
to examine, to improve: a substance so little known, that even the
precise effect of respiration was an enigma until he explained it.
He first made known to us the proper food of vegetables, and in what
the difference between these and animal substances consisted. To him
Pharmacy is indebted for the method of making artificial mineral
waters, as well as for a shorter method of preparing other medicines;
metallurgy for more powerful and cheap solvents; and chemistry for such
a variety of discoveries as it would be tedious to recite: discoveries
which have new modelled that science, and drawn to it and to this
country, the attention of all Europe. It is certain that since the year
1773, the eye and regards of all the learned bodies in Europe have been
directed to this country by his means. In every philosophical treatise,
his name is to be found, and in almost every page. They all own that
most of their discoveries are due either to the repetition of his
discoveries, or to the hints scattered through his works.”[59]
[58] Richard Kirwan, Esqr.
[59] Vindiciæ Priestlianæ, p. 68.
“This is not the only instance” (says Dr. Bostock,[60] speaking of Mr.
Jurin’s opinion that azote was generated, instead of being absorbed,
in the process of respiration as Dr. Priestley, and after him Mr. Davy
had supposed,) “in which, after the conclusions of Dr. Priestley have
been controverted by his contemporaries, a more accurate investigation
of the question, has ultimately decided in his favour. The complicated
apparatus, and imposing air of minuteness which characterize the
operations of the French chemists, irresistibly engage the assent of
the reader, and scarcely permit him to examine the stability of the
foundation upon which the structure is erected. The simplicity of the
processes employed by Dr. Priestley, the apparent ease with which his
experiments were performed, and the unaffected conversational stile
in which they are related have, on the contrary been mistaken for the
effects of haste and inaccuracy. Something must also be ascribed to the
theoretical language which pervades, and obscures the chemical writings
of this Philosopher, in consequence of his unfortunate attachment to
the doctrine of Phlogiston.”
[60] Essay on respiration, p. 208.
When the operose experiment of the French chemists on the formation
of water, shall have been sufficiently repeated, and verified by
other experiments to the same point, less complex, less tedious, less
expensive, and easy to be repeated; when the water thus supposed to
be formed is sufficiently distinguished from the water absolutely
necessary to the generation of all airs, and attendant upon them[61]
both in a state of mixture and combination; and when the difficulties
enumerated a page or two back, as attendant on the modern theory shall
be explained on the new system, as well as on that of Stahl, then, and
not until then, will it be time to lament Dr. Priestley’s unfortunate
attachment to the doctrine of Phlogiston.
[61] Mr. Kirwan found that common inflammable air from iron, and
vitriolic-acid, contained about 2-3 of its weight of water mixed with
it; which might be separated from the air by means of concentrated
vitriolic-acid in a watch glass over mercury, without diminishing the
quantity or altering the characteristic properties of the air thus
treated.
_Of Dr. Priestley’s other Scientific Works._
The other philosophical labours of Dr. Priestley consist of his history
of electricity, his history of the discoveries relating to light and
colour, and his popular introductions to perspective, electricity and
natural philosophy.
It appears that after the publication of his history of electricity,
he intended to have pursued the plan, by composing similar histories
of every branch of science: a magnificent idea, and which none but
a man conscious of uncommon powers could have contemplated. Few men
indeed were so capable of such an undertaking as Dr. Priestley; for
independant of his habits of patient and regular industry in his
literary pursuits, and the wide field of his attention to scientific
objects, he had a facility of perusing, abstracting, and arranging the
works of others, not commonly attendant even upon equal abilities in
other respects. This great undertaking of Dr. Priestley to embrace
the various departments of philosophy, appears a labour sufficient
for one life; and had due encouragement been afforded, this projected
series of histories would in all probability have been compleated,
usefully to the world, and reputably to himself. But he proposed this
undertaking laborious as it was, without designing that it should
occupy the whole or the principal portion of his time, but his leisure
hours only; for at no period did he postpone his professional duties,
or his theological studies, to any other object whatever. The life of
Dr. Priestley is almost a perpetual illustration of a seeming paradox,
respecting mental energy, that men of talents, uncommonly laborious,
and who appear to get through more business than one person could be
supposed equal to, have usually more leisure time at their disposal,
than those who have little to do: so much does the habit encrease
the power of exertion. Nor was any man less averse to the innocent
pleasures of social enjoyment than Dr. Priestley, or better calculated
as well as more inclined to contribute to the common stock of amusing,
and instructive conversation. It cannot indeed be truly said of him,
as Dr. Johnson[62] once related of himself, that he had never refused an
invitation to dinner on account of business but once in his life, yet
no man more readily found leisure for social intercourse. This arose
from his habit of dividing his time into certain portions appropriated
to his respective pursuits, and determining to perform a certain
quantity of literary duty, within the assigned period.
[62] On that day, (Dr. Johnson said) as it was an unusual deprivation,
he found himself disinclined, and unable to attend steadily to the work
that led him to refuse the invitation. He walked about his library
occasionally looking over first one book and then another until about
four o’clock when weary of staying within he went to a tavern to dine.
Dr. Johnson had for a long time a dislike to Dr. Priestley who bore two
of the characters most in disrepute with Dr. Johnson, that of a whig
and a dissenter. Dr. Priestley’s pursuits also consisting so largely
of heterodox theology, which Dr. Johnson abominated, and experimental
philosophy which he heartily despised, they had hardly a common point
of union. Toward the latter part of Johnson’s life, they met; and upon
the friendly terms that ought to obtain between two men, who, each in
their way, deserved so well of the republic of letters.
The first edition of his history of Electricity, was in 1767: it
went through another edition in 1769, and a third in 1775. It was
published at a very happy time, when electricity was a favourite object
of attention to many respectable men of science then living, and it
contributed in a great degree to turn the public attention toward
the study of these phenomena. Very much of what has been done since
may be fairly attributed to the popularity given to this branch of
experimental philosophy by Dr. Priestley. Nor did he confine himself to
a mere narration of the labours of others; the second volume contains
many new experiments of his own, and some of them form very curious
and important additions to the stock of electrical knowledge.[63]
The discoveries of the last thirty years, particularly including
those of Galvanic Electricity, are so numerous, and so dispersed in
volumes difficult to be procured, that a continuation of this history
is a desideratum in the scientific world; at one time there was an
expectation of seeing it from the pen of Mr. Nicholson, whose general
knowledge, and industry, as well as his attention to this branch of
philosophy in particular, render him peculiarly qualified for the task.
But the proposals he communicated to Dr. Priestley, on the subject,
were not pursued to effect.[64]
[63] Dr. Priestley among his other experiments on electricity first
ascertained the conducting power of charcoal and the calcination and
vitrification even of the most perfect metals by the electric spark. He
seems first to have used large batteries, which M. Van Marum and his
associates have carried to such extent.
The solutions of the metals, the gasses produced and the circumstances
which accelerate and prevent these effects in Galvanic processes with
the pile of Volta, as detailed by Dr. Priestley in his paper on this
subject in Nich. Journ. for March 1802 p. 198 form very important
additions to the mass of knowledge respecting the Galvanic fluid. Nor
are his discoveries in pneumatic electricity, of the conversion of
oils, spirit of wine and the alkaline gass into inflammable air or
hydrogen of less moment.
[64] Dr. Bostock, who seems to have many requisites to qualify him as
the historian of particular branches of science, has published a good
attempt toward the history of Galvanism in Nicholson’s Journal.
These histories of detached branches of Science, would not only be
highly useful, but they may be considered as in some measure necessary
to the accurate pursuit, and advancement of science itself. They are
not only useful for the purpose of shewing the discoveries that have
been made, and the time of their publication, the ideas that appear to
have suggested them, the persons to whom we are indebted for them, and
their effect on the spirit of enquiry at the time, but they prevent a
man of science from being led into mistakes, from doing what has been
already done, from suggesting what has been already published, and
from ignorantly claiming to himself the merit due to the labours of
a predecessor. Books are now so multiplied, in languages so various,
obtained with so much difficulty, and at an expence so far exceeding
the usual means of scientific men, that those who like Dr. Priestley
fully and faithfully execute a work of this description are real
benefactors to mankind.[65]
[65] The transactions of the various academies and philosophical
societies in Europe amount at least to 1000 volumes in quarto. The
royal society of England in 1665 led the way to similar institutions.
The history of ELECTRICITY was composed by Dr. Priestley in one year.
The three editions of the work in less than eight or nine years
sufficiently shew that, in the opinion of men of science, it was well
composed: otherwise the celerity of its composition, would no doubt
derogate from, instead of adding to, the well earned reputation of
the author; and rather tend to shew that he was too careless or too
conceited to take the necessary pains and employ the necessary time to
make it fit for public inspection. Every man owes to the public, that
if he professes to instruct them, he should dedicate as much labour as
the subject demands, or at least as much time as it is in his power to
devote to it. I fully accede to the ingenious correction of the _nonum
prematur in Annum_, suggested by the witty Dr. Byrom of Manchester; but
something of the _Limæ Labor_, respect for the tribunal of the public
demands of every man who appears before them in the character of an
author. Dr. Priestley has in more instances than one, been accused of
unnecessary if not of culpable rapidity in his literary compositions:
but he never professed to be a fine writer; he never sought after the
beauties of stile; and his common language was sufficiently neat and
expressive, to communicate the facts and the arguments upon which
it was employed. It is also to be remarked, that the facility of
composition which he acquired from long practice, made that labour
light to him, which would have been too much for a less skilful and
a less experienced composer. In many instances indeed of his rapid
publications, he had not to _seek_ for arguments, but to express in his
unornamented and unaffected manner, the ideas that forced themselves
upon him relating to a subject previously considered and upon which he
had long made up his mind.
The History of Discoveries respecting LIGHT and COLOURS published
in 1772 was a more difficult task, nor did it meet with equal
encouragement. Sir Isaac Newton’s important labours in this branch
of science, could not be fully comprehended without a portion of
mathematical knowledge not even then so common as formerly, among
the philosophers of the day. Mathematical studies seem to have in
themselves very little to interest, compared with other literary
pursuits; although by long attention and habit, that interest may be
excited and kept up. It was about this time that the popular phenomena
of chemistry and electricity more decidedly took their stand in the
field of science, and irresistably seized hold on the attention of the
world: phenomena, highly amusing in themselves, strongly attractive
from their novelty, of evident and immediate application, and that
promised an incalculable harvest of honourable and useful discovery,
to such as would become their votaries. Little had been done in this
department of philosophy, little previous knowledge was required to
comprehend all that was known, and those who were unable to read a
page of Sir Isaac Newton with profit, could easily mix an acid and an
alkali, or turn the wheel of an electrical apparatus.
By this time too, it had been discovered, that there were other powers
in nature that must be called in to explain appearances, which the
mechanical and corpuscular philosophy had endeavoured to elucidate in
vain. Such were magnetism, electricity and chemistry. It began to be
found out, that the science of calculation, was but an aukward handmaid
to their sister branches of natural philosophy, while physiology,
laughed outright at the clumsy addresses of her mathematical admirers,
from Borelli to Keill.
The discoveries therefore relating to light and colours, at the time
when Dr. Priestley proposed his history, being intimately associated
with the study of the mathematics, and the profound investigations
of Sir Isaac Newton, were out of the beat of the less laborious, but
more fashionable philosophy of the day; and were not so generally
interesting to the Sciolists and Amateurs. Hence the work in question,
though treated in a very entertaining and popular manner, and by no
means crouded with reference to Diagrams or abstruse discussions, was
not popular even among that class of readers, who might reasonably be
calculated on, as the purchasers of such a performance. The subscribers
indeed were sufficiently numerous, and respectable, but by far the
majority were defaulters in respect of payment. It did not pay the
bookseller: and of course still less did it recompence Dr. Priestley in
a pecuniary point of view, especially as he had gone to considerable
expence with a view to the completion of his extended plan. To him
indeed, though pecuniary loss was a serious evil, pecuniary profit
was a consideration of small importance: his motives to literary
labour seem uniformly to have arranged themselves as follows, utility,
reputation, profit.
The work in question is certainly too brief, considering the importance
of the subject: many parts of it, the theory of Huygens, Euler, and
Franklin for instance, seem to have merited more discussion. That all
the phenomena of light depend on the Sun, as the reservoir, whence all
the emanations of that fluid to the various parts of the system are
supplied, the lighting of a candle is alone sufficient to refute. The
facts discovered to us by modern Chemistry will suggest a great many
other doubts of the doctrines respecting light, which were regarded
as well established when Dr. Priestley’s book was written. But it was
a faithful account of the knowledge of the day, and an unprejudiced
tribute to the reputation of those philosophers who had from time to
time extended the boundaries of science on the subjects treated of.
Not a little has been added to the mass of facts then published, by
the subsequent experiments of Dr. Priestley himself, and his fellow
labourers in the Chemistry of the Gasses: and notwithstanding the
experiments of Sir Isaac Newton and his predecessors, the theory of
light and colours is not yet rested upon facts sufficiently numerous,
and decisive to satisfy the enquiries dictated by the present state of
knowledge.
But with all these disadvantages, the work has nevertheless maintained
its ground, for we have no where else so systematic, and compleat,
though brief an account of what had been made known to the world on
this important branch of scientific inquiry. It will always remain a
valuable performance; and to the author an honourable one, from the
knowledge and ability required in its compilation, from the fairness
of the account it gives, and the entertaining statement of facts and
suggestions interspersed through the book.
It is greatly indeed to be wished, that these histories should be
continued on the plan which Dr. Priestley has adopted. So that all the
prominent facts should be collected in the order of their discovery,
and a full view be given of the ground already gone over. Abridgments,
do not answer this purpose; the theories that dictated the experiments
are not detailed, their truth or their fallacy cannot be judged of, and
sufficient merit is not attributed to the labours of the discoverer,
or the bearings of his facts on his theory, sufficiently explained. To
attain gradually to the summit of the temple of science, we must not
only build on the foundations of our predecessors, but know somewhat of
their intentions at the time of laying them.
The minor treatises of Dr. Priestley on electricity, perspective and
natural philosophy, have this discrimination of character, that they
are more calculated to allure young people to the study of those
subjects than almost any of the introductions which have either
preceded or succeeded. Philosophy is made, not an abstruse science, but
a delightful amusement. Indeed it was the fort of Dr. Priestley to make
knowledge intelligible and popular, and treat it in such a way, as to
invite rather than deter, those who were inclined to enter upon these
delightful pursuits. The plainness and simplicity of his syllabus,
the amusing complexion of the Phenomena, by which he illustrates his
doctrines, and the facility with which the one can be made, and the
other comprehended, affords a very useful example to those who may have
the same object hereafter in view. This was doubtless, owing to his
long experience as a teacher: and his success in that capacity among
his pupils, with the electrical machine, and the air pump, is full
evidence of the practical utility of his plans of instruction.
_Catalogue of Dr. Priestley’s smaller pamphlets and uncollected papers
on philosophical subjects._
_Nicholson’s_ }
_Journal._ }
_new series._ }
V. 1 p. 181. Reply to Mr. Cruikshank’s.
Ibid 198. Experiments on the Pile of Volta.
V. 2 p. 233. On the conversion of iron into steel.
V. 3 p. 52. On air from finery cinder and charcoal.
V. 4 p. 65. Farther reply to Mr. Cruikshank’s.
_Amer. Trans._
V. 4 p. 1. Experiments and observations relating
to the analysis of atmospherical
air.
V. 4 p. 11. Farther experiments relating to the
generation of air from water.
Ibid p. 382. Appendix to the above articles.
_Ib. Vol._ V. {p. 1. Experiments on the transmission
{ of acids and other liquors in the
{ form of vapours over several substances
{ in a hot earthen tube.
Republished {
{p. 14. Experiments on the change of
{ place in different kinds of air
{ through several interposing substances.
{ 21. Experiments relating to the absorption
{ of air by water.
{
{ 28. Miscellaneous experiments relating
{ to the doctrine of phlogiston.
together. {
{ 36. Experiments on the production of
{ air by the freezing of water.
{
{ 42. Experiments on air exposed to
{ heat in metallic tubes.
_New-York Med. Repos._ _Title and Date._
Vol. 1 p. 221. Considerations on the doctrine of
Phlog. and the Decomp. of water.
(Pamphlet) 1796.
Ibid p. 541. Part 2d of do. (Pamphlet 1797.)
Vol. 2 p. 48. (Pamphlet) to Dr. Mitchell.
Ibid p. 163. (Pamphlet) on Red Precipitate of
Mercury as favourable to the doctrine
of Phlogiston, July 20, 1798.
Ibid p. 263. Experiments relating to the calces of
metals communicated in a fifth letter
to Dr. Mitchell. October 11,
1798. (Pamphlet.)
Ibid p. 269. Of some experiments made with
ivory black and also with diamonds.
(Pamphlet) 11 October, 1798.
Ibid p. 383. On the phlogistic theory, January 17,
1799. (Pamphlet.)
Ibid p. 388. On the same subject. February 1,
1799.
Vol. 3 p. 116. A reply to his antiphlogistian opponents,
No. 1.
Vol. 4 p. 17. Experiments on the production of
air by the freezing of water.
Ibid p. 135. Experiments on heating Manganese
in inflammable air.
Ibid p. 247. Some observations relating to the
sense of hearing.
Vol. 5 p. 32. Remarks on the work entitled “A
brief history of epidemic and pestilential
diseases,” May 4, 1801.
Ibid p. 125. Some thoughts concerning dreams.
Ibid p. 264. Miscellaneous observations relating
to the doctrine of air, July 30,
1801.
Ibid p. 390. A reply to Mr. Cruikshank’s observations
in defence of the new system
of chemistry, 5 Vol. Nicholson’s
Journal p. 1, &c.
Vol. 6 p. 24. Remarks on Mr. Cruikshank’s experiments
upon finery cinder and
charcoal.
Ibid p. 158. Observations on the conversion of
iron into steel.
Ibid p. 271. Additional remarks on Mr. Cruikshank’s
experiments on finery cinder
and charcoal, November 15
1802.
APPENDIX, NO. 2.
_Of Dr. Priestley’s Metaphysical Writings._
The principal source of objection to Dr. Priestley in England,
certainly arose from his being a dissenter; from his opposition to the
hierarchy, and to the preposterous alliance, between Church and State:
an alliance, by which the contracting parties seem tacitly agreed to
support the pretensions of each other, the one to keep the people in
religious, and the other in civil bondage. His socinian doctrines in
theology, and the heterodoxy of his metaphysical opinions, though they
added much to the popular outcry raised against him, were not less
obnoxious to the generality of Dissenters, than to the Clergy of the
Church of England. Nor is it a slight proof of the integrity of his
character, and his boldness in the pursuit of truth, that he did not
hesitate to step forward the avowed advocate of opinions, which his
intimate and most valuable friends, and the many who looked up to him
as the ornament of the dissenting interest, regarded with sentiments of
horror, as equally destructive of civil society and true religion.
The extreme difference observable between the apparent properties of
animal and inanimate matter, easily led to the opinion of something
more as necessary to thought, and the phenomena of mind, than mere
juxta position of the elements, whereof our bodies are composed.
The very antient opinion also of a state of existence after death,
prevalent in the most uncivilized as well as enlightened states of
society, confirmed this opinion of a separate and immortal part of the
human system: for it was sufficiently evident, that no satisfactory
hopes of a futurity after death, could be founded on the perishable
basis of the human body. It is only of late days, and from the
extension of anatomical and physiological knowledge, that the theory,
and the facts of animal organization have been at all understood; and
without the conjunction of physiology with metaphysics, the latter
would have remained to eternity, as it has continued for ages, a mere
collection of sophisms, and a science of grammatical quibbling. The
doctrine of a future state, and that of an immaterial and immortal
soul, became therefore mutual supports to each other; and herein the
civil power willingly joined in aid of the dogmas of metaphysical
theology, from observing the convenience that might arise in the
government of civil societies, from inculcating a more complete
sanction of rewards and punishments for actions in this life, by means
of the dispensations in a life to come. Other causes also gave an
universal preponderance to the theory of the human soul. It became,
for the reasons above mentioned, not only a favourite doctrine with
churchmen and statesmen, but the self delusions among the vulgar,
respecting supposed appearances after death, rendered it also a
_popular_ doctrine. Indeed, in every age, and in every country, the
priesthood have found it so powerful an engine of influence over the
minds of the people, and in too many cases, so, fruitful a source of
lucrative imposture, that its prevalence is not to be wondered at,
wherever artificial theology has been engrafted on the simplicity of
true religion, and supported by an established clergy. Of Popery,
which yet remains the prevailing system of the christian world, it
is doubtless the corner stone; and even under every form of ignorant
and idolatrous worship throughout the globe, it is the main source
of power and profit to that class of society, which regulates the
religious opinions, rites and ceremonies of the country. Not that
I would insinuate, that the belief of a separate soul, like some
other opinions that might be mentioned, has been generally taught by
professors who disbelieve it; for plausible arguments are not wanting,
to give it that currency which it has so long received among the wisest
and the best of men: nor that an established priesthood of any age or
country, or of any religion, is a mere compound of fraud and imposture,
for I well know that the wise and the good are abundant in this class
of society, as well as in others. But even such men are liable to the
common infirmities of human nature; they cannot be indifferent to their
rank in society, or the means of their subsistence; it is not every
college youth, that is able or willing to weigh “the difficulties and
discouragements attending the study of the Scriptures,” so forcibly
pointed out in the melancholy pamphlet of Bishop Hare: nor is it
every professor of Christianity, who doubts of the doctrines he has
undertaken to teach, that has fortitude enough to follow the noble
example of Theophilus Lindsey, and John Disney. Hence we may take
for granted, that those opinions will be admitted the most readily,
and enforced the most willingly, which contribute to the influence
of that order, which the professors have been induced by choice, or
compelled by necessity, to wed for life. Choice indeed, at least that
kind of choice, which depends on a well-grounded conviction of the
object chosen being the means of superior usefulness, has little to
do in this business. For though the clergy of the church of England
severally declare that they are moved by the Holy Ghost to take upon
them the clerical character, is there one among them in the present
day (Bishop Horsely perhaps excepted) who would venture to defend this
declaration in the sense originally intended? It is a fact notorious,
that the candidates for holy orders, regard the profession of Divinity
as they would that of Physic or Law, a fair and reputable means of
gaining a livelihood, by performing those duties which are considered
as necessary to the well being of society. It is a fact too, equally
notorious, that wherever theological opinions (like that of the human
soul) have been fit and liable to be made subservient to the temporal
profit or influence of the clergy, that use has been so made of them
by the ambitious and designing part of the profession, and the rights
of the people have been encroached upon, to serve the interest of the
Hierarchy. Nor is it the established clergy alone that some of the
preceding remarks will apply to: much bigotry among the clergy of the
dissenting interest, may fairly be ascribed to similar causes, though
by no means operating in the same degree.
But important as this doctrine is to the clerical order in political
societies, some latitude of doubt and even of denial, has been conceded
in England to the known friends and adherents of the established system
in that country. This is the more to be wondered at, as they have
generally considered a dissonance of opinion among their own order,
more fatal to the common interest, than the attacks of their avowed
enemies. Thus, more notice was taken of the Arian heterodoxy of Dr.
Clarke, than of the avowed infidelity of Collins, Tindal, Toland,
Coward, and other writers of that class, who published about the same
period.
The learned Mr. Henry Dodwell as he is usually called, and who is
a pregnant instance that learning does not always persuade good
sense to inhabit the same abode, took great pains to shew that the
soul was naturally mortal, but might be immortalized by those who
had the gift of conferring on it this precious attribute. This power
he ascribed to the Bishops. Dodwell, though he would not at first
join the establishment, changed his opinion and his conduct in this
respect afterward. Bishop Sherlock denied that the existence of the
soul could be made evident from the light of nature. (Disc. 2 p.
86. disc. 3 p. 114) Of the same opinion was Dr. Law who quotes him.
Archbishop Tillotson declares (v. 12 serm. 2.) that he cannot find
the doctrine of the immortality of the soul expressly delivered in
scripture. Dr. Warburton wrote his “Divine legation” to prove that
Moses and the Jews neither believed in, nor knew of a future state.
Dr. Law, afterward Bishop of Carlisle, in the appendix to the third
edition of his “Considerations on the theory of religion,” compleatly
overthrows the whole doctrine of a separate soul as founded on the
scripture, by a critical examination of every text usually adduced in
its support. Dr. Watson the present Bishop of Landaff in the preface
to his collection of theological tracts dedicated to young divines
for whose use it was compiled, expressly declares that the question
respecting the materiality or immateriality of the human soul, ranks
among those subjects on which the _academicorum_ εποχη may be admitted,
without injuring the foundations of religion. It should seem therefore,
that it is not heterodoxy in mere speculative points of theology,
that constitutes the sin against the holy Ghost with an established
clergy, but heterodoxy on the subject of church authority and the grand
alliance. It is in this spirit that the then Archdeacon of St. Albans,
Dr. Horsely complains of Dr. Priestley’s history of the corruptions of
christianity. “You will easily conjecture (says the Archdeacon in his
animadversions on that work p. 5) what has led me to these reflections,
is the extraordinary attempt which has lately been made to _unsettle
the faith and break up the constitution of every ecclesiastical
establishment in Christendom_. Such is the avowed object of a recent
publication which bears the title of a history of the corruptions of
christianity, among which the catholic doctrine of the trinity holds a
principal place.”
This is an unfortunate exposure of the cloven foot of Hierarchy. It was
not the wish to detect error or to establish truth--it was not from
anxiety to fix upon a firm footing, some great and leading principle
of christianity--it was not the benevolent design of communicating
useful information on a litigated topic of speculative theology--it
was not the meek and gentle spirit of sincere and patient enquiry
that dictated those animadversions--all these motives would not only
have borne with patience, but would have welcomed and exulted in a
temperate discussion of unsettled opinions, before the tribunal of
the public; for by such discussions alone, can the cause of truth be
permanently and essentially promoted. No: these were not the motives
that influenced the Archdeacon of St. Albans. It was the nefarious
and unpardonable attempt to unsettle the faith of established creeds;
however founded that faith might be, on ignorance or prejudice, on
pardonable misapprehension, or culpable misrepresentation, on fallacy,
on falsehood, or on fraud. These “Animadversions,” proceeded from the
morbid irritability of an expectant ecclesiastic; from a prudent and
a prescient indulgence of the _esprit de corps_; from a dread too
perhaps, lest the tottering structure of church establishment, with all
its envied accompaniments of sees and benefices, of deaconries and
archdeaconries, and canonries, and prebendaries, and all the pomp and
pride of artificial rank, and all the pleasures of temporal authority,
and lucrative sinecure connected with it, might be too rudely shaken
by sectarian attacks. But enough for the present, respecting these
learned labours of the Archdeacon of St. Albans; which like those
of Archdeacon Travis may well be considered as having sufficiently
answered the _main_ purpose of their respective authors, in spite of
the wicked replies of Priestley and Porson. Let us say with the public,
_requiescant in pace_.
To return however to the more immediate subject of the present section.
Hobbes seems to have been the first writer of repute (in England at
least) who denied the doctrine of an immaterial and naturally immortal
soul. This was a necessary consequence of his faith being apparently
confined to corporeal existence, an opinion deducible in fact from
the old maxim of the antients and of the schools, _nil unquam fuit
in Intellectu, quod non prius erat in Sensu_. Hobbes’s Leviathan was
published about 1650 or 1651. Spinosa who published after Hobbes was
rather an Atheist than a Materialist, a character to which though
Hobbes’s opinions might lead, he does not assume. In 1678 Blount sent
forward to the public his “_Anima Mundi_”, or an historical narration of
the “opinions of the antients concerning man’s soul after this life
according to unenlightened nature,” which met with much opposition and
some persecution; as was likely, for it is by no means destitute of
merit.
In 1702 appeared a book entitled “second thoughts concerning the
human soul, demonstrating the notion of a human soul as believed to
be a spiritual and immortal substance united to a human, to be an
invention of the heathens and not consonant to the principles of
philosophy, reason, or religion by E. P. or Estibius Philalethes.” The
year following a supplement was published entitled “Farther Thoughts,
&c.” The author, Dr. Coward, preoccupies a path subsequently taken by
Dr. Law and Dr. Priestley, and endeavours to shew at length that the
notion of an immaterial, immortal soul, is not countenanced by the
texts of scripture usually adduced in favour of that opinion. These
texts he criticises individually with a reference to the original words
used. The author appears in the character of a sincere Christian. A
second edition of this book was published 1704. In 1706 Mr. Dodwell
before mentioned, a learned and laborious but weak man, and bigotted
to the hierarchy, published his “Epistolary discourse proving from the
scriptures and the first fathers that the soul is a principle naturally
mortal, but immortalized actually by the pleasure of God, to punishment
or reward; by its union with the divine baptismal spirit. Wherein is
proved that none have the power of giving this divine immortalizing
spirit since the apostles, but only the bishops.” This gave rise to
the controversy between Clarke and Collins on the immortality of the
soul. Dodwell’s book was attacked by Chishull, Norris and Clarke. He
replied in three several publications, 1st. “A preliminary defence
of the epistolary discourse concerning the distinction between soul
and spirit, 1707. 2nd. The scripture account of the eternal rewards
or punishments of all that hear of the gospel, without an immortality
necessarily resulting from the nature of souls themselves that are
concerned in those rewards and punishments, 1703. 3d. The natural
mortality of human souls clearly demonstrated from the holy scriptures
and the concurrent testimonies of the primitive writers.” 1708.
About this time Toland in his letters to Serena, (1704) gives an “Essay
on the history of the soul’s immortality among the Heathens,” deducing
that doctrine from popular traditions supported by poetical fictions,
and at length adopted and defended among the philosophers. Concluding
from hence, (preface) that divine authority was the surest anchor of
our hope and the best if not the only demonstration of the soul’s
immortality; an indirect denial of the whole doctrine as coming from
Toland, who was certainly no friend to christianity and no believer in
the divine authority of the scriptures.
In the same year (1704) but somewhat previous to Toland, Dr. Coward had
published his “Grand Essay, or a vindication of reason and religion
against impostures of philosophy; proving according to those ideas and
conceptions of things human understanding is capable of forming itself.
1st. That the existence of an immaterial substance is a philosophic
imposture and impossible to be conceived. 2ndly That all matter has
originally created in it, a principle of internal or self motion.
3rdly That matter and motion must be the foundation of thought in men
and brutes.” Dodwell and Toland had learning enough and so had Blount
to throw some light on the history of this question, and the author of
second thoughts has many observations well adapted to the question he
discusses, but very little is to be gained from a perusal of Coward’s
book.
Dr. Hartley’s great work, (great, not from the bulk, but the importance
of it) was first published in 1749. The direct and manifest tendency of
the whole of his first volume is to destroy the common hypothesis of
an immaterial soul: and this he does with a mass of fact and a force
of reasoning irresistible. He shews clearly how all the faculties
ascribed to the soul, thought, reflection, judgement, memory, and
all the passions selfish and benevolent, may be resolved into one
simple undeniable law of animal organization, without the necessity
of any hypothesis such as that of a separate soul. Yet he does not
appear distinctly to have seen the full weight and tendency of his own
reasoning, and he adopts a theory on the subject, loaded with more
difficulties and absurdities, than even the common hypothesis.
In 1757 was published a philosophical and scriptural inquiry into
the nature and constitution “of mankind considered only as rational
beings, wherein the antient opinion asserting the human soul to be an
immaterial, immortal and thinking substance is found to be quite false
and erroneous, and the true nature state and manner of existence of the
power of thinking in mankind is evidently demonstrated by reason and
the sacred scriptures.” Author J. R. M. I. Who this author really was
I know not. But from the perusal of his book it is probable that he
was a physician, and had been travelling. The above work he terms the
philosophic or first part, and refers to a longer work of his own in
manuscript which it seems he could not procure to be published. There
is very little new in the book so far as I could judge.
I do not recollect any other treatise relating to the subject that
excited public attention in England. In France and Holland La Mettrie
began the controversy by his Histoire naturelle de L’Ame, published at
the Hague in 1745 as a translation from the English of Mr. Charp;[66]
it is a book containing many forcible remarks, and did credit to the
side of the question which La Mettrie had adopted. Soon after this La
Mettrie published L’Homme machine which was burnt in Holland in 1748.
This was an honour not due to the formidable character of the work
itself, which though it contains some of the common arguments drawn
from the physiology and pathology of the human system, is by no means
of first rate merit. He whimsically attributes the fierceness of the
English, to their eating their meat more raw than other nations. This
book was translated and published in London in 1750.
[66] This is probably one of the innumerable instances of the
carelessness of French authors in quoting English names. La Mettrie
most likely meant to ascribe this to Mr. Sharp the Surgeon, with whose
reputation he must have been acquainted. I remember Arthur Young
Esq. in one of his annals of agriculture complains that a paper of
his translated into French was given to Artor Jionge ecuier. Some
years ago Mr. Charles Taylor of Manchester (lately secretary to the
society of Arts in London) was requested by Lord Hawkesbury to make
some experiments to ascertain the value of East India Indigo when
compared with the Spanish. Mr. Taylor did ascertain that the former
yielded more colour for the same money at the current prices than the
latter by above one fourth. In a paper I believe by M. D’Ijonval these
experiments are quoted in a note as made by Le Chevalier Charles Tadkos
celebre manufacturier de Manchester.
From Mr. Hallet’s discoveries the last volume of which was published
in 1736 Dr. Priestley has extracted for himself and quoted what he
deemed necessary on this question. I do not notice as part of the
history of the question Materialism in England, the foreign atheistical
publications, such as _Le Systeme de la nature_ attributed to Mirabeau
the father, _Le vrai sens du Systeme de l’univers_ a posthumous work
ascribed to Helvetius, _Le Bon Sens_ by Meslier, and others whose
titles do not now occur to me, because until within these few years,
they were hardly known in England, and excited no discussion of
the subject there, previous to the work of Dr. Priestley now under
consideration.
The Doctor himself says in his preface to the disquisitions on matter
and spirit, first published in 1777, that though he had entertained
occasional doubts on the intimate union of two substances, so entirely
heterogeneous as the Soul and the Body, the objections to the common
hypothesis, did not impressively occur to him, until the publication
of his treatise against the Scotch Doctors, which was in 1774. Those
doubts indeed could hardly avoid occurring to any person who had
carefully perused Hartley’s Essay on Man, first published in 1749, and
Dr. Law’s appendix before mentioned in 1755.
Dr. Hartley has shewn with a weight of fact and argument amounting
to demonstration, that all the phenomena of mind, may be accounted
for from the known properties and laws of animal organization;
and notwithstanding, that for some reason or other he has so far
accommodated his work to vulgar prejudice, as to adopt the theory of
a separate Soul, though in a very objectionable form, it is evidently
a clog upon his system, and unnecessary to any part of his reasoning.
Substitute PERCEPTION, and his theory is compleat. Nor indeed is it
possible to reject this. Constant concomitance is the sole foundation
on which we build out; inference of necessary connection: we have _no_
evidence of the latter, but the former. Perception manifestly arises
from, and accompanies animal organization; the facts are of perpetual
occurrence, and the proof from induction is compleat.
Hartley having laid a sufficient foundation to conclude (as Dr.
Priestley has done) that the natural appearances of the human system
might be fully explained by means of Perception and Association,
without the redundant introduction of the common hypothesis, Dr. Law
a few years afterward compleatly proved to the christian world that
though Life and Immortality were brought to light by the christian
dispensation, the common theory of a separate immaterial and immortal
soul, was not necessary to, or countenanced by the christian doctrine.
Dr. Law seems by his preface, to have been fearful of the consequences
of expressing the whole of his opinion on this abstruse subject, and
confines himself in his appendix to the examination of the passages
of Scripture usually referred to in favour of the Soul’s immortality.
This appendix I believe was first added to the _third_ edition of his
Considerations on the Theory of Religion, published in 1755.
Against Dr. Priestley, any ground of popular obloquy would be eagerly
laid hold of by the Bigots of the day. The doubts expressed in the
examination of Drs. Reid, Oswald, and Beattie, excited so much obloquy,
as to render it necessary for Dr. Priestley to review his opinions, and
renounce or defend them. The result was, the disquisition on matter and
spirit, the first volume containing a discussion of the question of
materialism, the second that of liberty and necessity.
In discussing the former hypothesis, Dr. Priestley denies not only the
existence of spirit as having no relation to extension or space, but
also the common definition of matter, as a substance possessing only
the inert properties of extension, and solidity or impenetrability. The
latter he defines in conformity with the more accurate observations of
later physics, a substance possessing the property of extension and
the active powers of attraction and repulsion. With Boscovich and Mr.
Michell, he admits of the penetrability of matter, and replies to the
objections that may be drawn from this view of the subject.
It must be acknowledged that highly curious as this preliminary
disquisition is, it is not only unnecessary to the main argument, but
leaves the definition of matter open to the question whether there be
any substratum or subject in which the essential properties or powers
of attracting and repelling inhere. That these powers really belong to
matter, whatever else matter may be, is evident from the reflection
of light, previous to contact with the reflecting substance and its
inflection afterward from the electric spark, visible along a suspended
chain, from the phenomena of the metallic pyrometers, from the rain
drop on a cabbage leaf, &c. And that matter is permeable, at least to
light, is sufficiently evident from every case of tranparency. Still
however it cannot consist of properties alone; a property must be the
property of something. But the proper and direct train of argument in
favour of materialism is, that every phenomenon from which the notion
of a soul is deduced, is resolveable into some affection of the brain,
perceived. That all thought, reflection, choice, judgment, memory, the
passions and affections, &c. consist only of ideas or sensations,(i.
e. motions within that organ) perceived at the time. Though, judgment,
memory, being words, denoting different kinds of internal perceptions,
relating only to, and consisting of, ideas and sensations.[67] That
sensations and ideas themselves, arise only in consequence of the
impressions of external objects on our senses, which impressions are
liable to be recalled afterward by the recurrence of others with
which they were originally associated, agreeably to the necessary and
inevitable law of the animal system. That this is evident in as much as
there can be no ideas peculiar to any of the senses where there is a
want of the necessary bodily organ, as of hearing, sight, &c. inasmuch
as all these ideas commence with the body, grow with its growth,
and decrease with its decline. That they can be suspended, altered,
destroyed, by artificial means, by accident, by disease. That all these
properties of mind, viz. thought, judgment, memory, passions, and
affections, are as evident in brutes as in men; and though the degree
be different, it is always accompanied with a proportionate difference
of organization. That perception is clearly the result of organization,
being always found with it, and never without it: as clearly so in
other animals as in the human species; and probably in vegetables
though in a still lower degree.[68] That as all the common phenomena of
mind, can be accounted for from the known facts of organized matter
without the souls, and as none of them can possibly be attributed
to the soul without the body, there is no necessity to recur to any
gratuitous theory in addition to the visible corporeal frame. That the
doctrine of the soul originated in ignorance, and has been supported
by imposture; that it involves gross contradictions and insuperable
difficulties, and is no more countenanced by true religion than by true
philosophy.
[67] A _Sensation_ is an impression made by some external object on the
Senses; the motion thus excited is propagated along the appropriate
nerve, until it reaches the Sensory in the Brain, and it is there and
there only, felt or _perceived_.
An _Idea_, is a motion in the Brain, excited there either by the laws
of association to which that organ is subject, or by some accidental
state of the system in general, or that organ in particular, without
the intervention of an impression on the Senses ab extra as the cause
of it. Such a motion being similar to a sensation formerly excited, and
being also felt or perceived is the correspondent _Idea_.
[68] Dr. Percival, Dr. Bell in the Manchester Transactions, and Dr.
Watson in the last volume of his essays, have made this opinion highly
probable. Many additional observations are to be found in Dr. Darwin’s
works. I consider it as a theory established.
All this has been shewn with great force of argument and ingenuity
by Dr. Priestley in these disquisitions, to which it may safely be
affirmed nothing like a satisfactory answer has yet been given, or is
ever likely to be given. True metaphysics, like every other branch of
philosophy can only be founded on an accurate observation of facts,
and as these become gradually substituted for mere names, our real
knowledge will improve. It is to physiology perhaps that the question
of the materiality of the human soul, and even that of liberty and
necessity will owe the compleatest elucidation. Until medical writers
brought into view the _facts_ relating to animal life, the metaphysical
disquisitions on these subjects were involved in an endless confusion
of words without precise meaning, and almost always including in their
definition a _petitio principii_. Indeed we are not yet fully apprized
either in Law, Physic or Divinity any more than in Metaphysics, that
the _species intelligibiles_ of the old schoolmen, and the whole class
of abstract ideas of the new schoolmen with Locke at their head,
are not things, but names. They are not even either sensations or
ideas; they are words, convenient indeed for classification, and used
artificially like the signs of Algebra, but they have no archetype.
This is a subject which will probably be better understood ere long by
the labours of Mr. Horne Tooke.
Dr. Priestley therefore considered the question of a future state,
as now rested on the basis which to a christian is or ought to be
perfectly satisfactory; on the promises and declarations of our
Saviour, exemplified by his own resurrection from the dead. Indeed the
circumstances of the whole question of futurity depending on the truth
of the christian scriptures and on them alone, is calculated to give
them a peculiar and inestimable value in the eyes of those who look
forward with anxious hope[69] to a continued and more perfect state of
existence after death. Nor is it of any consequence to the christian,
that the manner how this will be effected is not plainly revealed;
for it is sufficient that the Being who first gave animation to the
human frame, will at his own time and in his own manner for the wisest
and best of purposes, again exert the same act of almighty power in
favour of the human race, and in fulfillment of his promise through
Jesus Christ. Such at least was the view of the subject habitually
entertained by our author.
[69] There are some persons who do not seem to entertain this anxious
hope. Mr. Gray the poet seems an instance, from the following passage
in his ode Barbaras Ædes aditure mecum (Letters V. 2 p. 44) though I do
not recollect that the sentiment has been noticed before.
Oh ego felix, vice si (nec unquam
Surgerem rursus) simili cadentem
Parca me lenis sineret quieto
Fallere Letho.
Multa flagranti radiisque cincto
Integris, ah quam nihil inviderem,
Cum Dei ardentes medius quadrigas
Sentit Olympus!
I wonder whether Gray ever perused the following lines written by his
friend and Biographer the Revd: Mr. Mason.
‘Is this the _Bigot’s_ rant? Away ye vain!’
Your hopes your fears, in doubt, in dulness steep!
Go sooth your souls in sickness, grief, or pain,
With the sad solace of, _eternal sleep_.
Yet know ye Sceptics, know, the Almighty mind
Who breath’d on man a portion of his fire,
Bad his free soul by earth nor time confin’d
To heav’n, to immortality aspire.
Nor shall the pile of hope his mercy rear’d,
By vain philosophy be e’er destroy’d;
Eternity! by all or wish’d or fear’d,
Shall be by all, or suffer’d or enjoy’d.
_Mason._
It is still more singular that Dr. Beattie with all his professions of
christianity, should not have been aware of the atheistical complexion
of the following passage in his “Hermit.”
Nor yet for the ravage of winter I mourn,
Kind nature the embryo blossom shall save;
But when shall spring visit the mouldering urn!
Oh, when shall it dawn on the night of the grave!
Indeed, the natural evidences of a future state were never conceived
by any reasonable defender of the doctrine, to be of themselves
satisfactory and conclusive.[70] They were never deemed of more value
than to produce a _probable expectation_ of a state of future rewards
and punishments, and they are certainly contradicted by the known facts
relating to the origin, the growth, and decline of the human faculties.
Bishop Porteus has collected these arguments, and stated them with
as much force as his moderate abilities would permit; but by far the
best summary of what has been urged on this as well as on almost every
important question of morals and metaphysics, will be found in Mr.
Belsham’s Elements of the Philosophy of Mind. An excellent compendium,
by a gentleman, to whom next to Mr. Lindsey, Dr. Priestley appears to
have been more attached than to any other.
[70] Dr. Priestley in his observations on the increase of infidelity
published at Northumberland, has a passage which would seem to intimate
that a future state might be clearly made out by the light of nature
(p. 59, 60) but this is certainly inadvertency, and by no means
conformable to his constant, deliberate, sentiments on that subject as
expressed particularly in his Institutes.
The SECOND part of the Disquisitions on Matter and Spirit, contains a
discussion of the long contested and confused question of Liberty and
Necessity.
Dr. Priestley is right in his opinion that this question was not
understood by the ancients, nor perhaps before the time of Hobbes: Long
ago it appeared to me, that the only writer among the schoolmen who
had touched upon it, was Bradwardine in his Book De causà Dei, which
I regret that I have no opportunity of consulting here. Many of his
observations are extracted by Toplady in his treatise on Liberty and
Necessity, and in his life of Zanchius; but Toplady like Edwards, did
not completely understand the question; they connected the doctrine of
necessity with all the bigotry of Calvinism.
Hobbes in his Leviathan, and in his reply to Bramhall on liberty and
necessity in his Tripos, first truly stated the subject, and shewed
that the question was, not whether we can do what we will, but whether
the will itself, (i. e. choice, preference, inclination, desire,
aversion,) is not inevitably determined by motives not in the power or
controul of the agent.
Hartley’s book, however, shews, or rather leads to the conclusion,
that these motives are twofold, _ab extra_ and _ab intra_. The action
depending on the compound force of the motives ab extra, and the
physical state of the animal organs at the moment. For the latter is
frequently of itself an immediate cause of voluntary action.
But previous to Dr. Hartley’s great work, the question of liberty and
necessity had been discussed between Collins and Clark, and Clark
and Leibnitz.[71] Collins’s Philosophical inquiry into human liberty,
first published in 1715 was the only book on the subject worth reading
between the times of Hobbes and Hartley, and a masterly and decisive
work it is. This appears to have been translated and repeatedly
printed on the continent; Dr. Priestley, who republished it in London,
mentioning a second edition in 1756 at Paris, and a third edition when
he was there in 1774. The controversy was kept alive in Collins’s
life time by Leibnitz; but he like Dr. Edwards who afterwards wrote
in defence of the same side of the question in his treatise on Free
will, was too much given to expand his ideas, and obscure the sense
by the multiplicity of words which he used to express it. The letters
of Theodicèe contain many passages well conceived, but the book
is insupportably tedious. Hobbes could condense more argument and
information in a page, than would serve Leibnitz for a volume.
[71] I do not find that the controversy about the Soul occasioned by the
publications of Blount, Coward, Dodwell, &c. involved the question of
Liberty and Necessity, though they touch so nearly. It escaped me a few
pages back, that Dr. Coward, was also the author of “Second Thoughts
concerning the human Soul.” (Estibius Psycalethes) as well as of the
Grand Essay.
To this treatise of Collins, plainly and popularly written, no
sufficient answer was or could be given. It must have satisfied the
mind of every reader capable of understanding the question, though it
omitted to notice many objections which were afterwards taken up and
fully answered by Dr. Priestley. Collins in his preface takes pains to
have it understood that he writes in defence of _moral_ necessity only,
and not of _physical_ necessity. A distinction without a difference,
though taken by all who have succeeded him.
I do not dwell on the controversy between Jackson on the one side in
defence of human liberty, and Gordon and Trenchard in Cato’s letters,
because little was added to the sum of knowledge, on either side.
Jackson had learning and industry, but he did not understand the
question, and had no pretensions to that species of distinguishing
acuteness, so necessary to a good metaphysician.
Dr. Priestley, following the enlarged and cheering views of the
future happiness of all mankind, first connected by Hartley with this
question, shews completely that the doctrine under consideration
has nothing to do with the strict calvinistic hypothesis. That it
is sufficiently conformable to popular opinion. That it is the only
practical doctrine which in fact is, or indeed can be acted upon with
respect to the application of reasoning and argument, reward and
punishment. That the formation of character and disposition, the actual
inferences we make from, and the dependence we place upon them, rest
entirely on the truth of this opinion. That from the nature of cause
and effect, every volition must be the necessary result of previous
circumstances. That the _scientia contingentium_, the great and
insuperable difficulty of God’s pretended foreknowledge of uncertain
events, can on no other hypothesis be avoided, and that the doctrine
of necessity is perfectly consistent with the great plan of divine
benevolence, in the present state, and future destination, of the human
race.
These subjects called forth remarks by Dr. Price, Mr. Palmer, Mr.
Bryant, Dr. Kenrick, Mr. Whitehead, Dr. Horsely and others; to all of
whom, answers were given by Dr. Priestley.
The controversy with Dr. Price is a pleasing specimen of the manner
in which an important subject can be amicably discussed between two
friends, and made interesting too, by the manner as well as the matter,
without any thing of that “seasoning of controversy” which Dr. Horsely
afterward thought so necessary to keep alive the public attention, and
which he strews over his polemics with so unsparing a hand. The Bishop
had not yet however adopted that stile of arrogance by which he has
since been so disgracefully distinguished; and it is to be regretted
for the sake of his own character as a gentleman and as a writer,
that he adopted it at all. Dr. Horsely should recollect, that those
who emulate the insolence of Warburton ought at least to give proofs
of equal learning and acuteness; and that bigotry and intolerance in
defence of opinions which, though a man may profess to believe, he can
hardly profess to understand, will do no credit to his religious, his
moral, or his literary character in the present state of knowledge. But
character as a writer, may be a secondary consideration, to one who is
determined to verify the saying, that godliness is great gain.[72]
[72] Dr. Horseley’s polemic strictures on Dr. Priestley’s writings,
exhibit a singular compound of insolence and absurdity. But he is
contented, I presume, if he rises in the church, as he sinks in
reputation. Some of his opinions are truly diverting. His theory of
divine generation by the Father contemplating his own perfections,
and his grave suggestion of the three persons of the Godhead meeting
together in consultation, stand a fair chance of being noticed by some
wicked wit, who may wish to expose the infirmities of orthodoxy real or
pretended.
It has been a misfortune to this question, that it has seldom been
treated by persons who knew any thing of the organization or physiology
of the human frame; and that it has been complicated with all the
prejudice arising from the theological tenets of those who opposed the
doctrine of necessity. Every physician knows, though metaphysicians
know little about it, that the laws which govern the animal machine,
are as certain and invariable as those which guide the planetary
system, and are as little within the controul of the human being
who is subject to them. Every sensation therefore, and every idea
dependent on, or resulting from the state of the sensory, is the
necessary effect of the laws of organization by which that state was
produced. But we neither have nor can have any sensation or any idea,
but what is so dependent, or but what thus results; for we can neither
feel nor think without the brain. The words we use for the Phenomena
termed mental, are mere terms of classification and arrangement of the
sensations and ideas thus produced, and their combinations. Hence it
follows, that all these phenomena depend on the laws which regulate
the animal system, and are the necessary, inevitable result of those
laws. The obscurity which has enveloped this question, has arisen from
want of due attention to that state of mind (or rather of body) which
we call, the will; and from the power that animals seem to have over
the voluntary muscles. But every Physiologist knows that the state of
the system which calls into action the voluntary muscles, that is, a
state of want, desire or inclination, whether to act or to abstain, is
the result of previous circumstances to which the animal is exposed;
and the action of the voluntary muscles, is equally the result of
necessary laws, as those of the involuntary.
The great object of terror to the Divines in this question about
Necessity, was the consequence resulting, that God is the author of
Sin. Many and subtile were the distinctions made upon this subject
by the necessarian theologists among the schoolmen, and down to the
middle of the seventeenth century. Richard Baxter the peace-maker, in
his Christian Directory, his Catholic Theologie and some other works,
has briefly reviewed them all, and as usual distinguished upon them so
acutely, that what was not quite clear before, he has most effectually
obscured. The prevailing opinion, however, seems to have been, not that
God permitted the sinful act (for the reply was unanswerable, that God
must be considered, as willing that which he does not prevent when he
can,) but that God, in the common course of nature as pre-ordained
by him, permitted the action itself to come to pass, but not the
intention or quo animo of the actor, in which the sin consists; or as
Gale expresses it in the quaint language of the time, it is “God’s
pre-determinate concurse to the entitative act.”
Indeed, I do not see with the orthodox notions then prevalent, how it
was possible on the hypothesis of God’s foreknowing and pre-ordaining
all that comes to pass, to avoid considering God Almighty as the author
of Sin; and to feel repugnance toward a system, which makes the deity
inflict eternal punishment on a creature, whose actions he might have
controuled, and whose existence he could have prevented. Such manifest
injustice might be viewed without horror, by the brutal bigotry of
Calvin, but the tenets that drew after them such a consequence, could
not be adopted without hesitation and regret, by any, but the most
thorough going, unfeeling zealot.
_Origen’s_ doctrine of Universal Restitution, was first advanced in
England (so far as I know) by Rust, Bishop of Dromore, and Jeremy
White, who I believe had been Chaplain to Cromwell. Since that, the
labours of Stonehouse, Petitpierre, Newton, Winchester, Chauncey
and Simpson, have furnished ground enough for us to adopt it as the
doctrine of scripture as well as of common sense. By connecting
this doctrine with that of necessity, Dr. Hartley and Dr. Priestley
have been enabled to give a full and satisfactory reply to all the
objections that can be drawn from the theory of necessity, making God
the author of Sin. Indeed, unless God’s foreknowledge be denied, the
same difficulty must occur on either scheme: for he has knowingly and
voluntarily adopted a system, in which the existence of evil if not
necessary, is at least undeniable.
Granting the goodness of God, it follows according to Dr. Priestley,
that he has adopted that system which is most conducive to general, and
individual happiness upon the whole; and that the moral evil of which
for the best purposes he has permitted human creatures to be guilty,
and the physical evil, which here or hereafter will be the inevitable
consequence of that conduct, are necessary to produce the greatest sum
of good to the system at large, and to each human being individually,
considering the situation in which he has been necessarily placed
in respect to the whole system. Indeed, moral evil is of no farther
consequence than as it produces physical evil to the agent, or to
others. And as we see in the system of inanimate nature, that general
good is the result of partial and temporary evil, and that though the
one follows necessarily from general laws as the result of the other,
the good manifestly predominates, so in the moral system, we have a
right from analogy to predict, that good will be the ultimate result
of the apparent evil we observe in it: that we shall be the wiser for
knowing what is to be avoided; the better for corrected dispositions;
and that the power, and the wish to receive and communicate happiness,
will be enlarged through each successive stage of our existence, by
the experience of those that have preceded. So at least thought Dr.
Priestley.
Leibnitz states some of these ideas with great force in the following
passage, which I am tempted to transcribe entire from his _Essais de
Theodicèe; sur la Bontè de Dieu, la libertè de l’homme, et l’origine du
mal_, first published in 1710. (Prem. partie Sec. 7, 8, 9.)[73]
[73] _Dieu_ est _la premiere Raison des choses_: car celles qui
sont bornèes, comme tout ce que nous voyons et experimentons,
sont contingentes, & n’ont rien en elles qui rende leur existence
necessaire; ètant manifeste que le tems, l’espace & la matière
unies & uniformes en elles-mèmes, & indifferentes à tout, pouvoient
recevoir de tout autres mouvemens & figures, & dans un autre ordre.
Il faut donc chercher _la raison de l’existence du monde_, qui est
l’assemblage entier des choses _contingentes_; & il faut la chercher
dans _la substance qui porte la raison de son existence avec elle_, &
laquelle par consequent est _necessaire_ & éternelle. Il faut aussi
que cette cause soit _intelligente_; car ce Monde qui existe étant
contingent, & une infinitè d’autres Mondes étant également possibles
& également prétendans à l’existence, pour ainsi dire, aussi bien que
lui, il faut que la cause du monde ait eu égard ou relation à tous ces
Mondes possibles pour en déterminer un. Et cet égard on rapport d’une
substance existante à de simples possibilités, ne peut etre autre
chose que _l’entendement_ qui en a les idées; & en déterminer une, ne
peut etre autre chose que l’acte de _la volonté_ qui choisit. Et c’est
_la puissance_ de cette substance qui en rend la volonté efficace.
La puissance va à l’_etre_, la sagesse ou l’entendement _au vrai_, &
la volonté _au bien_. Et cette cause intelligente doit etre infinie
de toutes les manieres, & absolument parfaite _en puissance_, en
_sagesse_ & en _bonté_, puisqu’elle va à tout ce qui est possible. Et
comme tout est lié, il n’y a pas lieu d’en admettre plus d’_une_. Son
entendement est la source des _essences_, & sa volonté est l’origine
des _existances_. Voilà en peu de mots la preuve d’un Dieu unique avec
ses perfections, & par lui l’origine des choses.
8. Or cette suprême sagesse jointe à une bonté qui n’est pas moins
infinie qu’elle, n’a pu manquer de choisir le meilleur. Car comme un
moindre mal est une espece de bien; de même un moindre bien est une
espece de mal, s’il fait obstacle à un bien plus grand: & il y auroit
quelque chose à corriger dans les actions de Dieu, s’il y avoit moyen
de mieux faire. Et comme dans les Mathématiques, quand il n’y a point
de _maximum_ ni de _minimum_, rien enfin de distingué, tout se fait
également; ou quand cela ne se peut, il ne se fait rien du tout; on
peut dire de même en matière de parfaite sagesse, qui n’est pas moins
reglée que les Mathématiques, que s’il n’y avoit pas le meilleur
(_optimum_) parmi tous les Mondes possibles, Dieu n’en auroit produit
aucun. J’appelle _Monde_ toute la suite & toute la collection de toutes
les choses existantes, afin qu’on ne dire point que plusieurs Mondes
pouvoient exister en differens temps & differens lieux. Car il faudroit
les compter tous ensemble pour un Monde, ou si vous voulez pour un
_Univers_. Et quand on rempliroit tous les tems & tous les lieux; il
demeure toujours vrai qu’on les auroit pu remplir d’une infinité de
manières, & qu’il y a une infinité de Mondes possibles, dont il faut
que Dieu ait choisi le meilleur; puisqu’il ne fait rien sans agir
suivant la suprême Raison.
9. Quelque adversaire ne pouvant répondre à cet argument, répondra
peut-être à la conclusion par un argument contraire, en disant que le
Monde auroit pu être sans le péché & sans les souffrances: mais je nie
qu’alors il auroit été _meilleur_. Car il faut savoir que tout est
_lié_ dans chacun des mondes possibles: l’Univers, quel qu’il puisse
être, est tout d’une pièce, comme un Océan; le moindre mouvement y
étend son effet à quelque distance que ce soit, quoique cet effet
devienne moins sensible à proportion de la distance, de sorte que
Dieu y a tout réglé par avance une fois pour toutes, ayant prévu les
prières, les bonnes & les mauvaises actions, & tout le reste; & chaque
chose a contribué _idéalement_ avant son existence a la resolution qui
a été prise sur l’existence de toutes les choses. De sorte que rien ne
peut être changé dans l’Univers (non plus que dans un nombre) sauf son
essence, ou si vous voulez, sauf son _individualité numérique_. Ainsi,
si le moindre mal qui arrive dans le Monde y manquoit, ce ne seroit
plus ce Monde; qui tout compteé, tout rabattu, a été trouvé le meilleur
par le Créateur qui l’a choisi.
According to this opinion of Leibnitz, the operative motive in the
choice of the present system being the attribute of Benevolence in the
Almighty, the existence of all that we term _evil_, is with respect
to him, and his preordination of it, _good_; for the whole intention
and motive of its permission is founded in perfect goodness guided
by perfect wisdom. With respect to the finite beings, by whom evil is
permitted to take place, there can be no doubt on this scheme, but the
balance of existence will be happiness even to them, whenever by proper
discipline they are fitted to enjoy it. Perhaps it may be doubted
without infringing on the reverence due to the supreme disposer of all
events, whether it would be consistent with his justice, knowingly and
voluntarily to bring into existence, a sentient being, destined to be
permanently miserable.
The question of Materialism, has been discussed since the disquisition
of Dr. Priestley, by Mr. Cooper, who adopts the same side. Dr. Ferriar
of Manchester, has rendered it dubious how far the sentient principle
ought to be confined to the brain, though the facts he adduces, apply
with equal force against the common hypothesis of a separate soul,
acting by means of the body. The doctrine of Necessity has been opposed
by Dr. Gregory of Edinburgh, but with a weakness of argument, and a
petulance of language, that places his work in the lowest rank among
the writers who have adopted the same side of the question. It hardly
deserved the notice of so good an advocate as Dr. Crombie, who has been
the latest author on the subject.
Indeed, the question must now be considered as settled; for those who
can resist Collins’s philosophical enquiry, the section of Dr. Hartley
on the Mechanism of the mind, and the review of the subject taken by
Dr. Priestley and his opponents, are not to be reasoned with. _Interest
reipublicæ ut denique sit finis litium_, is a maxim of technical law.
It will apply equally to the republic of letters; and the time seems
to have arrived, when the separate existence of the human soul, the
freedom of the will, and the eternal duration of future punishment,
like the doctrines of the Trinity, and Transubstantiation, may be
regarded as no longer entitled to public discussion.
It is for this reason that I have paid no attention to the hypothesis
of the Scotch Doctors, Reid, Beattie and Oswald, and have given no
detailed account of Dr. Priestley’s examination of their writings.
Indeed the perfect oblivion into which these writers have fallen, and
the utter insufficiency of such young gentlemen and lady’s philosophy
as they have adopted, has secured them from further animadversion.
The facility with which ignorance can refer all difficulties relating
to the phenomena of mind, to instinctive principles and common sense,
might answer the purpose of popular declamation for a while, but it
could not last; and these writers have fallen into merited obscurity,
notwithstanding the national prejudice in favour of each other, so
prevalent among the Literati of North Britain.
Some passages in Dr. Reid, however ought to exempt him from the
contempt which is due to the common system advanced by him and his
coadjutors: and his last book on the Active powers of man, is a work
of undeniable merit on a very important subject, which has not yet
been discussed with half the labour it so eminently deserves. The
Synthesis and Analysis of our ideas, the history and process of their
formation, and the detail of facts attending and connected with their
rise and progress, is comparatively a new subject. Des Cartes, Buffier
and Condillac among the French, Locke, Berkeley and Hartley among the
English, and Hume, Reid, and Adam Smith among the Scotch, are almost
the only authors worth notice who have treated it expressly, and most
of them only partially.[74] Something may be found to the purpose in
Hobbes, and in the first part of Dr. Priestley’s examination of Reid,
Oswald and Beattie, and more in the first volume of Zoonomia, § 14 and
15.[75] The common sense of Dr. Reid and Co. seems to have been employed
as the _clavis universalis on_ this subject by Buffier, in his “First
Truths.” Hutcheson’s theory of the Moral Sense hardly merits notice,
nor does that of Dr. Price promise to add much to the stock of real
knowledge. We have had enough (_sat superque_) of occult principles,
innate principles, and instinctive principles, which illustrate
nothing, but the ignorance of those who employ them.
[74] Dr. Dugal Stewart in Scotland, and the Revd. Mr. Belsham in
England, have published Elements of the Philosophy of the mind, the
first inclining to the Scotch School of Metaphysics, the latter to the
System of Hartley; both of them of merit in their way, particularly (as
I think that of Mr. Belsham).
[75] I cannot help thinking Dr. Darwin’s obligations to Dr. Hartley
and Dr. Brown ought to have dictated more acknowledgement than he has
condescended to make.
For my own part, I am persuaded that no Theory of the mind can be
satisfactory, which is not founded on the history of the Body. I
know of no legitimate passport to Metaphysics but Physiology. Hence
I cannot estimate highly the writings of the Scotch Metaphysicians.
There is one other feature also common to this School, which satisfies
me of their incompetence to this subject; their slight notice, and
ambiguous approbation of a man so superior as Dr. Hartley, and their
utter ignorance or neglect of the theory he has advanced. On every
subject relating to the phenomena of mind, Dr. Hartley’s book must be
adopted as the ground work of the reasoning, or his principles must be
previously and distinctly confuted.[76]
[76] Dr. Reid in his last work has given a critique on Dr. Hartley’s
theory without understanding it, or even touching on the important
points. That theory in substance is this: an external object (a peach
for instance) makes an impression at once, on our organs of feeling,
of sight, and of taste. The impression thus made on the extreme end
of the appropriate nerve, is propagated by some species of motion
along the course of nerve up to the brain, and there, and there only,
perceived; for if the nerve be cut, or tied, or palsied, in any part of
its course, the impression is not perceived. Motions in the brain thus
produced, and perceived, are _sensations_: similar motions arising, or
produced without the impression of an external object, are _ideas_.
These impressions being in the instance given, simultaneous or nearly
so, are associated, so that the sensation produced by the sight of a
peach, will give rise to motions in the brain similar to those produced
at first by the taste and the touch of it: i. e. it will suggest the
_ideas_ of taste and touch, and excite the inclination to reach and to
eat the object of them. Hence sensations, ideas, and muscular motions
are associated together and mutually suggest and give rise to each
other. What species of motion it is, with which the nervous system is
affected in this process, or whether Sir Isaac Newton’s Æther, or its
modern substitute the electric fluid, has any thing to do with it or
not, is no essential part of the theory, and may be adopted or rejected
without prejudice to the main system. Some kind of motion there
manifestly is; I think it _demonstrable_ that it is vibratory; but of
whatever kind it be, its existence in the brain is unquestionable;
and the association and catenation of individual motions in the brain
according to certain laws, is equally so. This is matter of fact,
and it was Dr. Reid’s business if he could, to shew that neither the
motions, the perceptions, or the associations took place in that organ.
The general law is expressed by Hartley Prop. 20. Cor. 7.
The Metaphysics of the present day require also, a more accurate
attention to the Theory of Grammar than has hitherto been paid by
writers on the subject. Perhaps I do not assert too much in saying
that we have had no grammarians worth notice, none who have thrown
light on the principles of Grammar, but Locke and Horne Tooke. What
dreadful confusion has arisen from treating words denoting what are
called abstract ideas, as if they were the exponents of real individual
existence? Whereas they are merely signs of artificial classification
without any individual archetype. For instance in relation to the
present subject, what volumes of laboured and learned trifling have
been written on the _Will_, the _Judgment_, the _Understanding_ and
the other faculties as they are called, of the soul! Yet nothing is
more certain than that the will, the judgment, the understanding,
&c. have no existence: they are words only, the counters employed in
reasoning, convenient signs of arrangement, like the _plus_ the _minus_
and the _unknown quantity_ in Algebra, but no more. The time however is
approaching, when Metaphysics will take rank among the Sciences that
lay claim, if not to absolute demonstration, yet to an approximation to
certainty sufficient for all the purposes of ethical reasoning, and all
the practical duties of human life.
_ERRATA._
PAGE, LINE.
23 10 from the top, For deliverery, read delivery.
84 14 -- -- ” Actes, ” Artes
” ” -- -- ” _pecsinit_, ” _nec sinit_.
90 bottom line, ” No. 6, ” No. 4.
160 2 -- -- ” Bur, ” But.
172 3 -- -- ” Biancount, ” Liancourt.
188 1 -- -- ” determing, ” determining.
” 8 -- -- ” he ” her.
214 1 -- -- For wall, read well.
218 3 from the bottom ” immorality, ” immortality.
229 2 -- -- ” 1679, ” 1767.
269 3 -- -- ” fort, ” forte.
304 8 from the bottom after, the Author, ” Dr. Coward.
” 1 from the top, ” predomininates, ” predominates.
333 7 from the top of the note for disc, ” dire.
357 12 from the top For is, ” it.
Transcriber Notes
Obvious punctuation errors and ommissions have been corrected.
The errata have been corrected, except for the one listed as on page
357, which does not exist.
Page 4 “My mother dying in in” changed to “My mother dying in”
Page 23 “my deliverery” changed to “my delivery”
Page 25 “that neighbourghood” changed to “that neighbourhood”
Page 44 “English grammer” changed to “English grammar”
Page 45 “justly prefered” changed to “justly preferred”
Page 58 “occured to me” changed to “occurred to me”
Page 77 “well knowh” changed to “well known”
Page 84 “Actes, emollit mores pecsinit” changed to “Artes, emollit
mores nec sinit”
Page 88 “constantly returnned” changed to “constantly returned”
Page 94 “in the difficuties” changed to “in the difficulties”
Page 114 “the number of such person” changed to “the number of such
persons”
Page 120 “air fram water” changed to “air from water”
Page 121 “af enjoyment” changed to “of enjoyment”
Page 126 “I thonght my” changed to “I thought my.” “without exceprion”
changed to “without exception”
Page 158 “respect ro me” changed to “respect to me.” “would bo ready”
changed to “would be ready”
Page 160 “Bur the sentence” changed to “But the sentence”
Page 172 “Duke de Liancount” changed to “Duke de Liancourt”
Page 181 “principal Agebraic” changed to “principal Algebraic”
Page 188 “without determing” changed to “without determining”
Page 211 “some symtoms” changed to “some symptoms”
Page 214 “as wall as” changed to “as well as.” “just aftorward” changed
to “just afterward”
Page 217 “read that pampnlet” changed to “read that pamphlet”
Page 218 “a happy immorality” changed to “a happy immortality”
Page 220 “chearfulnees of” changed to “chearfulness of”
Page 223 “is unnecsssary” changed to “is unnecessary”
Page 227 “recommending and comfirming” changed to “recommending and
confirming”
Page 241 “is is chiefly” changed to “is chiefly”
Page 244 “A dissertatson” changed to “A dissertation”
Page 253 “eandour of disposition” changed to “candour of disposition”
Page 256 “of of metals” changed to “of metals.” “Dr. Priesley” changed
to “Dr. Priestley”
Page 264 “of of water” changed to “of water”
Page 280 “Nich. Jonrn.” changed to “Nich. Journ.”
Page 290 “aon philosophical subjects” changed to “on philosophical
subjects.” “from of vapours” changed to “form of vapours”
Page 295 “from the extention” changed to “from the extension”
Page 308 “one of the inumerable” changed to “one of the innumerable.”
“Authore J. R. M. I.” changed to “Author J. R. M. I.”
Page 314 “snd it is there” changed to “and it is there”
Page 325 “anwers were given” changed to “answers were given” “Dr.
Horseley” changed to “Dr. Horsely”
Page 331 “manifestly predomninates” changed to “manifestly predominates”
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK MEMOIRS OF DR. JOSEPH PRIESTLEY ***
Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.
Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may
do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
license, especially commercial redistribution.
START: FULL LICENSE
THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.
Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person
or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual
works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily
comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when
you share it without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear
prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work
on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed,
performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws
of the country where you are located before using this eBook.
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is
derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works
posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method
you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has
agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™
works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than
are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right
of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
without further opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.
The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state
visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
