the disputation complimented him with "Probè me exercuisti:" and the learned hearers departed full of admiration, that after an absence of so many years, and a long course of other occupations, he had conducted himself, with regard both to force of argument and purity of expression, as if this species of academical exercise had been his constant employment. Mr. Whiston informs us, in the words of an unknown admirer of Dr. Clarke, who was present at this celebrated Act, that "every creature was rapt up into silence and astonishment, and thought the performance truly admirable."*.

In 1710, he published, in folio, a beautiful edition of Cæsar's Commentaries, dedicated to the Duke of Marlborough. In the printing of it, he took particular care of the punctuation, or proper distribution of each sentence into it's constituent members; an exactness too much neglected by learned men, though absolutely necessary for preserving the perspicuity, and even the beauty of language. In the Annotations, he selected what appeared the most judicious from other editors, interspersing occasionally corrections and emendations of his own.' ‡

* The same year, he revised and corrected Whiston's translation of the Apostolical Constitutions,' at the writer's par ticular request.

+ In this compliment, from the military character of the work, though the illustrious Dedicatee could not read a syllable of it, there was some propriety. But where was the suitableness in inscribing with the same great name a book, whose lyre pertinaciously refused to hymn the Atridæ,' and the labours of Hercules?' Yet Barnes dedicated to Marlborough his Ana

creon.'

This publication Mr. Addison panegyrises in the following

terms:

"The new edition, which is given us of Cæsar's Comment2 A

VOL. V.

Soon afterward, he was involved in a warm controversy, occasioned by the publication of his Scripture-Doctrine of the Trinity,' in 1712, against which complaint was made by the Lower House of Convocation in 1714; but the affair terminated, on the members of the Upper House declaring themselves satisfied with the explanations offered by the author.*

This work is divided into three parts: 1. A Collection and Explication of all the Texts in the New Testament, relating to the Doctrine of the Trinity; 2. An Explanation of the foregoing Doctrine in particular and distinct propositions; and 3. A consideration of the principal Passages in the Liturgy of the Church of England relating to it.

"He knew (remarks Bishop Hoadly) and all men agreed, that it was a matter of mere revelation: he

aries, has already been taken notice of in foreign gazettes, and is a work that does honour to the English press. It is no wonder that an edition should be very correct, which has passed through the hands of one of the most accurate, learned, and judicious writers this age has produced. The beauty of the paper, of the character, and of the several cuts with which this noble work is illustrated, makes it the finest book that I have ever seen; and is a true instance of the English genius, which though it does not come the first into any art, generally carries it to greater heights than any other country in the world." (Spectator, No. 367.)

*The most authentic account of this business we have in a piece entitled, An Apology for Dr. Clarke; containing an Account of the late Proceedings in Convocation upon his Writings concerning the Trinity. London, 1714, 8vo.' With this sacrifice to human prudence, which some have (perhaps, too strongly) represented as a retractation, Whiston's unaccommodating zeal was highly offended; and Dr. Clarke himself, there is reason to believe, was not perfectly satisfied with his own conduct upon the occasion.

did not, therefore, retire into his closet, and set himself to invent and form a plausible hypothesis, which might sit easily upon his mind; he had not recourse to abstract and metaphysical reasonings, to cover or patronise any system he might have embraced before, but as a Christian he laid open the New Testament before him. He searched out every text, in which mention was made of the three Persons, or of any one of them. He accurately examined the meaning of the words used about every one of them; and by the best rules of grammar and critique, and by his skill in language, he endeavoured to fix plainly what was declared about every person, and what was not.

"I am far from taking upon me (he adds) to determine, in so difficult a question, between Dr. Clarke and those who made replies to him. The debate soon grew very warm, and in a little time seemed to rest principally upon him and one particular adversary, very skilful in the management of a debate, and very learned and well versed in the writings of the ancient Fathers.'

*

"This I hope I may be allowed to say, that every Christian divine and layman ought to pay his thanks to Dr. Clarke for the method, into which he brought this dispute; and for that collection of the texts of the New Testament, by which at last it must be decided, on which side soever the truth may be supposed to lie.

"And let me add this one word more, that since men of such thought and such learning have shown the world, in their own example, how widely the most honest inquirers after truth may differ upon such subjects, this methinks should a little abate our

Dr. Waterland, Master of Magdalen College, Cambridge.

mutual censures, and a little take off from our positiveness about the necessity of explaining, in this or that one determinate sense, the ancient passages relating to points of so sublime a nature.”

Some time before the appearance of the volume, he was informed by Lord Godolphin and other members of the ministry, that the affairs of the public were with difficulty retained in the hands of those who were friendly to liberty; and that, therefore, it was an unseasonable time for such a publication. To this message he paid no regard, but proceeded according to the dictates of his conscience.*

In 1715 and 1716, he entered into a dispute with the celebrated Leibnitz relating to the principles of Natural Philosophy and Religion; and a Collection of the papers, which passed between them, was published in 1717. To this are added, Letters to Dr. Clarke concerning Liberty and Necessity, from a Gentleman (Richard Bulkeley, Esq.)† of the University of Cambridge, with the Doctor's Answers to them; also Remarks upon a Book, entitled, A Philosophical Inquiry concerning Human Liberty (by Antony Collins, Esq.)'. The volume was inscribed to Queen Caroline, then Princess of Wales,† who

* A great number of books and pamphlets presently came out upon the subject, of which the names may be found in a pamphlet entitled, An Account of all the considerable Books and Pamphlets that have been written on either Side in the Controversy concerning the Trinity since the Year 1712; in which is, also, contained an Account of the Pamphlets written this last Year on either Side by the Dissenters to the end of the Year 1719.' London, 1720, 8vo.

† Author of a Poem, entitled The Last Day.' He died in 1718, aged twenty four.

* Dr. Clarke was a great favourite with her Royal Highness, and the placing of his bust in her hermitage gave rise to a

was pleased to have the whole controversy pass through her hands, and was the witness and judge of every step of it.' Dr Clarke, indeed, frequently declared, that she displayed great sagacity and judgement in several parts of the debate.'

In the course of it, as Whiston observes, "Leibnitz was pressed so hard by his opponent, from matter of fact, known laws of motion, and the discoveries of Sir Isaac Newton, who heartily assisted the Doctor, that he was forced to have recourse to metaphysical subtilties, and to a pre-established harmony of things in his own imagination (which he stiles, a 'superior reason') till it was soon seen that his 'superior reason' served to little else, but to confirm the great superiority of experience and mathematics above all such metaphysical subtilties whatsoever. And I confess," he adds, "I look upon these letters of Dr. Clarke, as among the most useful of his per formances in Natural Philosophy."

"

In 1718, a dispute arose concerning the Primitive Doxologies, in consequence of an alteration made by Dr. Clarke in those of certain Select Hymns and Psalms, reprinted that Year for the Use of St. James' Parish.' The new readings were:

And,

To God, through Christ, his only Son,

Immortal Glory be, &c.

To God, through Christ, his Son, our Lord,
All Glory be therefore, &c.

A considerable number of these little books having

sarcasm of Pope's, as if the situation were not quite suitable to a court-divine.'

* Newton once pleasantly told Clarke, that he had broken Leibnitz' heart with his reply to him.'