ment to receive their capital at a diftant time, except upon terms of a most extravagant nature.

To put the abfurdity of this plan in a ftill more striking point of view, let us fuppofe that this mode of conversion is adopted; let us alfo fuppofe that fome years hence, when the finking fund has confiderably increased, a war fhould break out, and continue eight years; that the ftocks are 15 per cent. under the price of converfion, and that 20 millions are discharged during these eight years of war; under these circumstances, none of which are of an improbable nature, there will in that fhort period be a lofs of three millions to the public. This may ferve as a fpecimen of lord Stanhope's œconomical plan of redemption.'

In treating of the comparison between Mr. Pitt's plan and earl Stanhope's, the author likewise makes fome just and forcible remarks. He obferves, that his lordship's first calculation is made upon the hypothesis of converting the three per cents at 75, without any bonus; and by fuppofing that his own plan pays off at 75, and that Mr. Pitt's pays off at 90, he fhews that the clear gain by his plan is 36,768,0461. His lordship's moderation, fays the author, has been very great in making this hypothefis; for he might as well have fuppofed a cafe, by which he would have gained 100 millions. He obferves, that earl Stanhope's plan does not in any degree tend to keep down the market-price of the threeper cents. that the circumftance of their not being in courfe of redemption will not have this effect; for if a holder of the three per cents. happens to want his money, he may fell his ftock in the market: that the fair comparison of the two plans would be, to fuppofe the fame price of stocks in the operation of both; and that on this hypothefis, the advantage must be in favour of Mr. Pitt's plan, as there must always be fome lofs attending the converfion. Earl Stanhope, he observes, seems to acknowledge, that this lofs would be about two per cent. which upon 186 millions, the quantity of the prefent three per cents. would amount to 3,720,000l. The author next enquires how far lord Stanhope's propofal will render the finking fund inalienable.

The principles of this plan being, fays he, admitted, its effect will be liable to cease at any time when the stock which has been actually fubfcribed fhall have been redeemed; for the legiflature may at any time enact, that no more stock shall be converted. I have before proved, that it could never happen that stock would be fubfcribed to a large amount, except when fuch a fubfcription would be exceedingly injurious to the public. It follows, therefore, that the free revenue is, by the principles of this plan, rendered inalienable to a very fmall degree; or if it were to be rendered inalienable to a confiderable extent, it would

When

would cause an enormous waste of public money. It will be fhewn hereafter, that if the new flock fhould be above par, which is probable in time of peace, this plan does not give the flighteft fecurity against the alienation of the finking fund. The chief danger, however, of alienation is in time of war. ever a war fhould break out, the stocks would naturally fall to a very confiderable degree; and fuppofing lord Stanhope's plan to have been previoutly established, the converfion would then be made at a very great lofs to the public. The minister would have this fubftantial reason, in addition to those mentioned by his lordship, for interrupting the progrefs of the finking fund, and applying the free revenue to the expences of the war. mifchiefs, therefore, which might befal this country by the alienation of the free revenue, are much more to be apprehended from the adoption of lord Stanhope's plan than of Mr. Pitt's; more especially as lord Stanhope directs that the free revenue fhould accumulate without limit, whereas Mr. Pitt's plan confines it to four millions per annum.

The

3

This argument, however, proceeds on the fuppofition, grounded on the arguments above ftated, that the whole of the per cent. ftock would not be immediately fubfcribed, nor indeed any confiderable part of it, except fo much as might infure the being paid on higher terms than the rate of stock at the time of fubfcribing.

I will, however, for the fake of argument, fuppofe that the whole is immediately fubfcribed. There will be no difficulty in proving that in this cafe the finking fund is fo far from being, made inalienable, that lord Stanhope has left it open, and that too immediately to the operation of the very fame caufes which. produced the alienation of the finking fund under the adminiftration of fir Robert Walpole.'

The limits of a Review will not permit us to give a minute detail of all the remarks which we think worthy of attention. On this account, we fhall only fubjoin, for the fatisfaction of our readers, thofe made by the author on lord Stanhope's affertion, that his plan is advantageous to the ftockholder. With a view to eftablifh the propofition, "that his plan is advantageous to the stockholders," he feems very anxious to refer his readers to the two tables contained in Appendix No. 21, and explained in Appendix No. 20. As thofe two tables are. formed upon the fuppofition that all the 3 per cents. will be converted at 75, and as it has been proved that stock to a confiderable amount will certainly not be subscribed upon thofe terms, all conclufions derived from fuch án hypothefis deserve no attention. If lord Stanhope had employed a very fmall part of that time, which he has wafted in these chimerical calculations, in afking perfons converfant in bufinefs of this fort, whether it was probable that the proprietors of 3 per cent. ftock would now enter into an agreement to have their stock redeemed at the

rate of 75 for every 100l. twenty or thirty years hence, he might have fpared himfelf the trouble of reafoning upon fuch groundiefs affumptions. Having however made this improbable hypothefis, he ftill feels himfelf under the neceffity of practifing a very curious manœuvre. Whilft he is difcharging the converted four per cents. he fuffers his free revenue to accumulate without limit: but this mode of proceeding will not anfwer the purpofe of the comparifon which he now wants to make; nor indeed will Mr. Pitt's limit of 4 millions per annum fuit his prefent defign. In fhort, any free revenue above two millions per annum will overturn his whole fyftem; there fore, fays he, I will limit the free, revenue to the fum of two millions per annum, when there are no converted four per cents. By this limitation in the cafe mentioned in Appendix No. 20, the national debt will not be difcharged in lefs than one hundred and feventeen years. In that cafe, by comparing the value of 751. added to its accumulated intereft to be received at the end of twenty years, with gol. added to its accumulated` interest to be received at the end of ninety-one years, he hopes to prevail upon the stockholders to accept his terms of converfion. The rest of his comparifons are formed upon hypothefes equally unfair and improbable.'

From the parts we have exhibited of this anfwer, our readers will perceive, that the author has clofely examined earl Stanhope's Obfervations, and has refuted, with much force of argument, the feveral propofitions of the noble author. We are totally unconcerned with the interefts and views of contending parties in the ftate; but cannot be indifferent to the fate of public meafures of the greateft confequence to the nation; and when there come before us fuch productions as are calculated to mislead the judgment, it is our duty to bring forward thofe obfervations which tend to remove the deception.

Memoirs of the Life and Writings of Arthur Ashley Sykes, D. D. By John Difney, D. D. F. S. A. 8vo. 5s. in Beards. John

fon.

HIS writer informs us that he did not undertake to

pay this partiality to his character, which is fometimes the refult of perfonal knowledge, or a perfect fimilarity of fentiment; but from an high and general regard for the great learning and zeal which appear in his defences of the religion of Chrift, the rights of Protestantism, and the civil liberties of his country. Nor does he, by any means, make himself refponfible for any particular opinions maintained by Dr. Sykes, either of a civil or religious nature; but, on the contrary, will be found to differ from him upon many very important fubjects, both in religion and politics

And

And I fcruple not, fays Dr. Disney, with a manly liberality, to declare myfelf to be above the little limitations of an exact agreement in opinion as the teft of my esteem and regard for any worthy character. I believe all the works of Dr. Sykes to have been defigned by him to advance fcriptural knowledge and the full liberty of profeffing our religious faith; or to ferve the caufe of our civil liberties.'

If, by the full liberty of profeffing our religious faith,' Dr. Disney means the most perfect toleration confiftent with an enlarged national establishment, he has probably not exceeded the liberality of Dr. Sykes's fentiments. It is not easy to imagine, when we confider the integrity of his character, that he could have reconciled notions lefs reftrained with his repeated subscription to the thirty-nine articles under any construction he himself can have allowed to this act.

Mr. Sykes is fuppofed to have been born in London, about the year 1684. He was inftituted at St. Paul's School in grammatical and claffical learning, and finished his education at Corpus Chrifti, or Benet college in Cambridge. He was for fome time engaged as one of the affiftants at St. Paul's fchool, but finding the confinement of this charge inconfiftent with the profecution of his private ftudies, he gave it up. He received his first ecclefiaftical preferment, the vicarage of Godmersham in Kent, from Dr. Tennifon, archbishop of Canterbury. After thefe circumftances, Dr. Difney proceeds, in his first chapter, to take notice of Mr. Sykes's earliest publications, theological and political; the diftinguished part he took in the Bangorian controversy; his next promotions in the church; his tracts in the cafe of Dr. Bentley, his Modest Plea for the Baptifmal and Scripture Notion of the Trinity, and Vindication of Scripture Doxologies.-The fecond chapter gives an account of his controverfy with Mr. Rogers, on Church-power; of his Letter to the Earl of Nottingham, occafioned by a motion made by the Archdeacon of London, at his Vifitation for the City-clergy, to return their thanks to his lordship for his answer to Mr. Whifton, concerning the Eternity of the Son and of the Holy Ghoft. Mr. Sykes's appointment to the morning preachership at King's-ftreet chapel; his controverfy with Dr. Waterland on Subscription; Letter on the Quaker's Bill; his preferments in the church of Salisbury, and notice of two Occafional Sermons, are the remaining fubjects treated in this chapter. In the next we are made acquainted with his appointment to the affiftant preachership at St. James's church; the publication of his Effay on the Truth of the Christian Religion; his taking the degree of doctor in divinity at Cambridge; his performance on the True Grounds of

the

the Expectation of the Meffiah; two Affize Sermons, and his Eulogium of Dr. Clarke.-The contents of the fourth chapter are, Dr. Sykes's Controverfy with Dr. Waterland, in Confequence of Dr. Clarke's Expofition of the Church Catechism; his Controverfy with Mr. Whifton, Mr. Chapman, and others, concerning the Eclipfe mentioned by Phlegon; two Tracts relating to Dr. Rundle's being refused the Bishoprick of Glocefter; and two others, on the Reasonablenefs of Repealing the Corporation and Teft Acts, and their Non-importance to the Church of England, and his Enquiry into the Meaning of the Demoniacs in the New Teftament, and Controverfy with Mr. Whifton, Mr. Twells, and others, in Confequence of it.

Dr. Sykes, following the opinion of the eminently learned Mr. Jofeph Mede, fhews, that demons," fignified fimply the fouls of departed men, who were no more mortal, being translated out of this life; and were names given, (from fuppofed invifible caufes,) to visible effects, which appeared in various fhapes, as epilepfy, madnefs, melancholy, and other diforders of the mind and body; and that this was equally the meaning of the Greeks and Romans. He then enquires into the meaning affixed to the word by the Jews, as found in the Old Testament, as alfo in Jofephus, which corresponds with thofe of both the Greeks and Romans. He afterwards proceeds to examine the feveral paffages in the Gospels and the Acts, where demons or demoniacs are spoken of, all of which he understands as meaning the fouls (pirits) of dead men, which were confidered as the caufe, the imaginary caufe; and epilepfy or madness the effect proceeding from that caufe. The general objections and difficulties in the way of this interpretation are very candidly produced, and arranged in five feparate arguments, with their ref pective answers annexed.'

In the fifth chapter is mentioned Dr. Sykes's promotion to the rural deanery of St. Burien, in Cornwall, and to a prebend of Winchefter. This is followed by fome account of his publication of the Principles and Connexion of Natural and Revealed Religion. His " Brief Difcourfes on Miracles." "Rational Communicant." Controverfy with Mr. Warburton on his Account of the Conduct of the Ancient Legifia. tors; of the double Doctrine of the Old Philofophers; of the Theocracy of the Jews; and of Sir Ifaac Newton's Chronology. Thefe, with two Tracts on the Toleration of the Papifts, and Thanksgiving Sermon at Winchester, on the Sup, preffion of Rebellion, form the contents of the fixth chapter, The seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth, give the Hiftory of his Effay on Sacrifices, and of the fhare he took in the controverfy which followed Dr. Middleton's Free Enquiry in VOL. LXI. May, 1786,