« PreviousContinue »
through which they wander. They are certainly a very remarkable people; and if there had been any prophecy (which there was not,) of their being thus dispersed, we might well have believed that such a prophecy must have come from inspiration. But in some remarkable points their condition differs from that of the Jews, and is less unaccountable. First, they do not (like the Jews) live in towns among other men, and in houses; but dwell in tents, by the road-sides, and on commons; leading the life of strolling tinkers, pedlars, and fortune-tellers. This roaming life, of course, tends to keep them separate from the people of the countries in which they are found. But the chief difference is, that the Gipsies are always ready, when required, to profess the religion of the country, whether Christian or Mohammedan, or any other; seeming to have no religion of their own, and to be quite indifferent on the subject. The Jews, on the contrary, always, when they are allowed, settle in towns along with other men; and are kept distinct from them by their religion, and by nothing else. They are the only people who are everywhere separated from the people of the country in which they live, entirely by their peculiar faith and religious observances; and that, too, though their religion is such (which is the strongest point of all) that the most important part of its ordinances, the sacrifices ordained in their law, cannot be observed by them. The Jews, therefore, in their present condition, are a kind of standing miracle; being a monument of the wonderful fulfilment of the most extraordinary prophecies that were ever delivered; which prophecies they themselves preserve and bear witness to, though they shut their eyes to the fulfilment of them. No other account than this of the present state and past history of the Jews ever has been, or can be given, that is not open to objections greater than all the objections put together that have ever been brought against Christianity.
This, then, as well as several other difficulties in our religion, such as have been formerly mentioned, will be found, on examination, to be, even when you cannot fully explain them,-not so much objections against the truth of your religion, as confirmations of it. And when you do meet with any objection which you are at a loss to answer, you should remember, (as has been above said,) that there are many things which all men must believe, in spite of real difficulties which they cannot explain, when there are much greater difficulties on the opposite side, and when sufficient proof has been offered. And in the present case, you have seen that it is not only difficult, but impossible, to account for the rise and prevalence of the Christian religion, supposing it not to have come from God. It certainly was introduced and propagated (which no other religion ever was) by an appeal to the evidence of miracles. Nothing but the display of supernatural powers could have gained even a hearing for the Apostles; surrounded as they were by adversaries prejudiced against their religion by their early education and habits of thought, and inclinations, and hopes. And these supernatural powers were, as you have seen, acknowiedged at the time by those adversaries; who were driven to attribute the Christian miracles to magic arts. And you have seen, too, that the religion itself, and the character of Jesus Christ as drawn in the
Christian Scriptures, and the whole of the narrative
of those books, are quite different, and, indeed, opposite to what might have been expected from impostors or enthusiasts, And lastly, you have seen that many of the difficulties that have been brought as objections against Christianity, turn out, on careful inquiry, to be an additional evidence of its truth. Among others, this is remarkably the case with the difficulties relating to the history and condition of the Jewish nation. Though you may not be able fully to explain all the circumstances relating to that wonderful People, you may learn from them, what they refuse to learn from themselves, a strong proof of the truth both of their Scriptures, and of the Gospel which they obstimately reject. It is so ordered by Providence that even that very obstimacy is made to furnish an additional proof of Christianity; by setting them forth before all the world as a monument of fulfilled prophecy. There are several other instructions and warnings, also, which you may learn from attentively reflecting on the case of the Jews; and I will conclude by shortly mentioning a few of these. First, you should remember that when you see the Jews, both formerly, and now, obstinately keeping to the faith of their forefathers, merely because it is what they were brought up in, and refusing to listen to any reasoning on the subject of religion, a Christian has no right to wonder at, or to blame, them, if he does the same thing himself; that is, if he is satisfied to take upon trust whatever he may have been told, and is resolved neither to seek nor to listen to any arguments that may enable him “to give a reason of the hope that is in him.” And the same may be said of Mohammedans and Pagans, as well as of Jews. Though the Christian happens to have a religion that is right, he is not more right than they, if he goes on the same plan that they do. At least, he is right only by chance, if he holds a faith that is true, not because it is true, but merely because it is that of his forefathers, Secondly,–You should remember that we are apt to make much less allowance for the unbelieving Jews than for Christians who lead an unchristian life; and that we ought to do just the contrary. It is difficult for us, of these days, to understand and fully enter into the great difficulty which the Jews had (and still have), in overcoming all the prejudices they had been brought up in, and which were so flattering to their own nation, as God's favoured People. It was a hard task for them to wean themselves from all the hopes and expectations of temporal glory and distinction to that nation; hopes which they and their ancestors had cherished for so many ages. No doubt it was a grievous sin in them to give way to those prejudices, and to reject the Christ as they did. But it is a greater sin to acknowledge Him, as some Christians do, as their Lord and Master, and to “believe that He shall come to be our judge," and at the same time, to take no care to obey his precepts, and copy the pattern of his life. This is more truly impiety than that with which an infidel is chargeable. For suppose two men each received a letter from his father, giving directions for his children's conduct; and that one of these sons, hastily, and without any good grounds, pronounced the letter a forgery, and refused to take any motice of it; while the other acknowledged it to be genuine, and laid it up with great reverence, and then acted without. the least regard to the advice and commands contained in the letter: you would say that both of these men indeed were very wrong; but the latter was much the
more undutiful son of the two.
Now this is the case of a disobedient Christian, as compared with infidels. He does not, like them, pronounce his father's letter a forgery; that is, deny the truth of the Christian revelation; but he sets at defiance in his life, that which he acknowledges to be the Divine command. 3. Lastly, you should remember that no argument you can bring against unbelievers, will have greater weight with most of them, than a Christian life; and nothing again, will be more likely to increase and confirm their unbelief, than to see Christians living in opposition to the precepts and spirit of the Gospel; and especially to see them indulging bitter and unkind and hostile and uncharitable feelings towards their fellow-creatures, and even their fellow-Christians. The objection thence raised against the Christian religion, is indeed (as has been above said) not a real and sound one; but still it will be raised: and therefore, you cannot too carefully consider how much you will have to answer for, if you contribute to bring an ill name on your Christian faith; and if you do not, on the contrary, endeavour to the utmost, “to adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour, in all things.”
Let the outer edge of each of these two circles be divided into any corresponding number of equal parts, with a small hole in the centre of each board to receive a pin, on which a thin piece of brass revolves; this piece of brass is divided, say into twenty-four parts, beginning at the centre, and reaching as far as the inner line of the index on the margin of the circular board. The other circle is furnished with several similar pieces of metal having also twenty-four equal divisions, beginning from the centre; in one case one-half of the distance from the centre to the outer index contains the whole of the twenty-four divisions, in another one-fourth contains the same number, and in another two-thirds.
In order to use this instrument, place the original design on the circle first described, and place the index in its place, the pin, of course, piercing the centre of the paper.
We are supposing now that the drawing is to be reduced, say to one-half its breadth and length. Place a piece of paper sufficiently large on the other circle, and the brass index, on which the twenty-four divisions occupy one-half of its length, in its place on the second circle. Suppose the object to be reduced is a head: Place the index on the circle which holds the original
drawing, so that it shall exactly cut some particular point in the design, for instance, the corner of the eye. Note which of the twenty-four divisions on the moveable index is opposite to it, and, at the same time, which of the divisions on the circular index is cut by the edge of the straight index. Place the straight edge in the same position on the circle which carries the blank paper. If the angle of the eye in the original design is opposite the ten on the moveable index, make a dot on the paper opposite the same number of the moveable index of the circle on which the blank paper is placed, and it will show the place of the angle of the eye in the reduced copy. In this manner find as many points as you think necessary for your guidance. If the copy is to be one-fourth the size of the original, use the index in which the twenty-four divisions occupy one-fourth of its length, and so on.
A carpenter having a piece of mahogany of a triangular form, see fig. 3, wished to know how he could cut it up to the best advantage. His first idea was to make an oblong-square table of it, but he found that, if he did so, the waste of the wood would be very great; after consideration, he discovered that the most economical method of using his wood would be to form it into an oval. To make this oval contain as much wood as possible, he proceeded in the following manner: Let B G D be the triangular piece of wood; take G. H., one-half of the base, and divide the triangle by drawing a line from H to B ; take GH in the compasses, and set it off on one of the sides from G to E, draw the line E F, and the point I will be the centre of the oval; draw K L, parallel to E F, and at the same distance from the centre as the base G D. The points A and c are found by dividing the line from E to K, and drawing. A c, or by drawing the dotted lines D A and G c through the centre at 1. These points being found, the oval must be completed by the eye of the draughtsman.
In the Saturday Magazine, Vol. X., p. 220, in describing the mode of forming a figure of twenty triangular sides, an error occurred in the engraving; two of the triangles forming the sides being omitted. Fig. 4 is a corrected outline.
THERE is hardly a circumstance connected with our existence, which, when examined with a little attention, does not yield abundant evidence of the wisdom and beneficence which preside over the universe. We have only to turn up the soil at our feet, to find in it innumerable seeds useful to man; we have only to look around us upon the surface of the earth, to see it stocked with a variety of animals, conducive not only to our subsistence, but to our convenience and recreation. The sea also, and the air, have their population at our command; and the more deeply we investigate the laws by which the whole system of vegetable and animal life is governed, the more clearly we shall perceive their complete and exclusive adaptation to the #. on which they carry on their operations—Quarterly eview.
THE ROYAL EXCHANGE, LONDON.
IN most large commercial cities, it has long been the custom that a particular place should be appropriated to the daily meetings of merchants. The name which was first generally applied to such places is Bourse, by which they are still known in Paris, Antwerp, St. Petersburg, and other large cities on the continent. The account given of the origin of the name of Bourse, as applied to a place of meeting for merchants, is this. In the city of Bruges there stood a large ancient building, which had been erected by the noble family of La Bourse, (signifying Purse in French and Flemish,) whose coat of arms on the walls was three purses. The merchants of Bruges made this old house the place of their daily assemblies; and when they afterwards went to the fairs of Antwerp and Mons, they called the place appropriated in those eities to similar purposes, by the same name as that which they had applied to the place of meeting in their own city, that is to say,+the Bourse. The French merchants also carried the name into the cities of their own country; and even in London the merchants' place of meeting was called Bourse or Burse, until Queen Elizabeth ordered it to be styled the Royal Exchange; and even afterwards retained the original name among foreigners, who styled it the Bourse Royale. The Bourse or Burse in London was built by the celebrated merchant, Sir Thomas Gresham *; and before its erection the merchants were accustomed to assemble in the open air in Lombard-street, where they transacted their business, subject to the many inconveniences of such an exposure. That these inconveniences were severely felt is proved by the fact that various schemes were suggested for remedying them; although no active steps appear to have been taken for that purpose until the year 1531. In that year, Sir Thomas Gresham's father, Sir Richard, who enjoyed the honourable distinction of being styled “the King's Merchant,” and who was then serving the office of sheriff, wrote to Sir Thomas Audley, the Lord Privy Seal, requesting him to move the king (Henry the Eighth) to direct a letter to be sent to Sir George Monoux, requiring him to sell certain houses in Lombard-street to the mayor and commonalty, for the purpose of erecting a Burse on the ground of the same for the use of the merchants. Three years after Sir Richard's application, the king sent a letter to the city, directing that a Burse should be built at Leadenhall; but as the Common Council voted that the place of meeting should not be removed from Lombard-street, no further measures were taken. Thirty years afterwards, when Elizabeth had been seated on the throne about six years, the scheme was revived with greater effect. Sir Thomas Gresham proposed to the corporation of London, in the year 1564– That if the city would give him a piece of ground in a commodious spot, he, at his own expense, would erect an Exchange, with large and covered walks, wherein the merchants and traders might daily assemble, and transact business at all seasons, without interruption from the weather, or impediments of any kind. This offer was accepted; and the foundation of the Exchange was laid by Sir Thomas Gresham on the 7th of June 1566. The superstructure was carried on with rapidity, and the whole covered in with slate by November 1567, soon after which the building was “fully finished.” The upper part of this edifice was divided into shops, which were let out by Sir Thomas at a yearly rent. These shops were seven feet and a half long
* See Saturday Magazine, Vol. II., p. 225.
and five feet broad; from the smallness of their size, it often happened that the same person rented more than one. There were likewise at first, other shops fitted up in the vaults below; but these being found very inconvenient by reason of their dampness and want of light, the vaults were soon let out to other uses. An entry in the Ward-book of Cornhill, under the year 1594, gives us some information as to the manner in which the vaults were then appropriated ; it runs thus, Presented William Grimbel for keping typlinge in the vaults under the Exchange, and for broyling of herringes, sprotts, and bacon, and other thinges in the same vaults noisome to the merchants and others resortinge to the Exchange. The number of the upper shops was one hundred and twenty; which, when the vaults had been detached from them, “paid, one with another, a rent of four pounds ten shillings a year, upon leases of twentyone years.” Ward, in his Life of Gresham, says, that the tenants placed in them by Sir Thomas were “chiefly young men of small fortunes, but industrious, who, by their diligence, brought great business to their shops, and employed some thousands of poor people in working our manufactures.” It would seem, however, that they were not at first very prosperous; for when Elizabeth visited the Exchange, three years after its erection, so many of the shops were unoccupied that Sir Thomas found it necessary to go round among the shopkeepers and entreat them “to furnish and adorne with wares and wax-lights, as many shoppes as they either coulde or woulde, and they should have all those so furnished, rent free for that year.” Some time afterwards, Stow's Continuator, speaking of this Exchange says, “it is as plenteously stored with all kinde of rich wares and fine commodities as any particular place in Europe; into which place many forraine princes daily send to be best served of the best sort.” The same authority enumerates among the tenants of the shops of that period, haberdashers, armourers, apothecaries, booksellers, goldsmiths, and globe-sellers. The visit mentioned above as having been paid by Queen Elizabeth to the Bourse in 1571, was the occasion of its obtaining the name of “Royal Exchange,” by which it has ever since been known. Her Majesty went into the city to dine with Sir Thomas Gresham, and on her return inspected it. The three and twentieth of Januarie, [1571, the Queene's Majestie, accompanied with her mobility, came from her house at the Strand, called Summerset-place, and entered the citie of London by Temple Bar, Fleet-street, Cheape, and so by the north side of the Bursse, to Sir Thomas Gresham's in Bishopsgate-street, where she dimed. After dinner, her Grace returning through Cornhill, entered the Bursse on the south side; and after her Highness had viewed every part thereof above ground, especially the Pawne, which was richlie furnished with all sorts of the finests wares in the citie, she caused the same Bursse by an herald to be proclaimed The Royal Exchange, so to be called from thenceforth and no otherwise. A curious tradition has been preserved relative to this visit, namely, that Sir Thomas, before the Queen came to his house, purchased of a foreigner a costly pearl, which, on account of its high price, had been refused by several persons of the first quality, that he caused it to be reduced to powder, and during the entertainment drank it up in a glass of wine. The tradition is embodied in an historical play in which Gresham thus speaks,— Here fifteen hundred pound at one clap goes, Instead of sugar Gresham drinkes this pearle Unto his queen and mistress : pledge it lords. This story, stays Dr. Ward,) has been handed down by tradition as a real fact, but as I find no historical proof of
it, I would not be thought to mention it as a thing probable, but only to show upon what evidence it depends; for it seems no way agreeable to the character of Sir Thomas, who always knew how to make the best use of his money.
Sir Thomas Gresham died on the 21st of November, 1579, and by his will bequeathed “the building called the Royal Exchange, with all the pawns and shops, cellars, vaults, messuages, tenements, and other hereditaments” belonging to it, after the determination of the particular uses, estates, and interest for life, and entail thereof, upon the Lady Anne his wife, “jointly for ever to the Corporation of London and the Company of Mercers;" upon trust that the citizens out of their moiety should pay salaries of 50l. per annum each to four professors, who should read public lectures gratuitously on Divinity, Astronomy, Geometry, and Music, at his Mansion-house between Bishopsgate-street and Broad-street, afterwards called Gresham College; 6l. 13s. 4d. per annum each, to eight alms-people living behind the said mansion; and 10l. annually to each of the prisons of Newgate, Ludgate, the Marshalsea, King's Bench, and Wood-street Compter:—and that the Mercers out of their moiety should pay annual salaries of 50l. to each of three persons who should read lectures on Law, Physic, and Rhetoric, at his Mansion-house; 100l. for four dinners quarterly, at their own hall, and 10l. yearly to Christ's, St. Bartholomew's, St. Thomas's, and Bethlem Hospitals, the Spital and the Poultry Compter.
Lady Gresham continued to receive the emoluments arising from the Royal Exchange, in rents, fines, &c., until her decease, in 1596, before which time they amounted to 75ll. 5s.
The Exchange built by Sir Thomas Gresham, was nearly destroyed in the Great Fire of 1666, not quite one century after its completion. Evelyn, in his account of this awful calamity, laments “the Sumptuous Exchange ;” he tells us also, that “Sir . Thomas Gresham's Statue, though fallen from its niche in the Royal Exchange, remained entire, when all those of the kings since the Conquest, were broken to pieces.” Another eye witness of the great fire, the Rev. T. Vincent, after remarking in his God's Terrible Voice in the City, that no stately building was so great as to resist the fury of the flames, continues:
The Royal Exchange itself, the glory of merchants, is now invaded with much violence: when the fire was entered, how quickly did it run round the galleries, filling them with flames: then descending the stairs, compasseth the walks, giving forth flaming vollies, and filling the court with sheets of fire; by and by the kings fell all down upon their faces, and the greatest part of the building after them (the Founder's statue only remaining), with such a noise as was dreadful and astonishing.
In an old work styled the “Burning of London in the year 1666, commemorated and improved in a CX. Discourses, Meditations, and Contemplations, by Samuel Rolle, Minister of the Word, and sometime Fellow of Trinity Colledge in Cambridge," we find some curious and interesting remarks upon this subject. In the third part which treats of “the most remarkable passages and circumstances of that dreadful fire,” Meditation IX. is Upon the burning of the Royall Erchange.
What a princely foundation (says the writer,) was that Royal Exchange! and of how great use ? Was not that the center in which those lines met that were drawn from all parts of Europe? rich merchants, I mean, and other eminent tradesmen and great dealers, not merely English but Spanish, French, Dutch, Portugueze, Danes, Swedes. Was not the place a little epitomie or rather representative of all Europe (if not of the greatest part of the trading world,) renewed every day, at such a time, and for so many hours?
As London was the glory of England, so was that Royals
Exchange one of the greatest glories and ornaments of London. There were the statues of the kings and queens of England set up, as in the most conspicuous and honourable place (as well receiving lustre from the place where they stood as giving lustre to it.) How full of riches was that Royall Erchange. Rich men in the midst of it, rich goods both above and beneath. There men walk’t upon the top of a wealthy mine; considering what Eastern treasures, costly spices, and such like things, were laid up in the bowels, (I mean the cellars,) of that place. As for the upper o of it, was it not the great storehouse whence the nobility and gentry of England were furnished with most of those costly things, wherewith they did adorn either their closets or themselves? About the space of nineteen months, was that Royall Exchange in building, viz., from June 7th till November in the year following. So that the sunne had finished his annual course once, and almost a second time, ere that work was finished; but was it so many hours in burning as it was months in building 2 When this Exchange was burned in 1666 the amount of funds belonging to the trust in the possession of the trustees was only £234. 8s. 2d.; yet they soon began the work of rebuilding. The plans and elevations were submitted to Charles the Second in September, 1667, and, on the 23rd of October, the king laid the base of the column on the west side of the north entrance, after which he and his suite were plentifully regaled, under a temporary shed upon the Scotch walk, “ with a chine of beef, fowls, hams, dried tongues, anchovies, cavaire, and wines.” On the 31st of the same month, the first stone of the column on the east side of the nortli entrance was laid by the Duke of York, afterwards James the Second, and on the 18th of November, the foundation-stone of the eastern column of the south entrance was laid by Prince Rupert. The architect employed was Mr. Edward Jerman, and not as has been often stated, Sir Christopher Wren; the work was diligently superintended by the joint committee of the Mercers' Company and the Corporation of London, appointed for that purpose by those bodies. The following official entry was inserted in the books by an order dated Dec. 16, 1667:— A letter from the Right Honourable the Earl of Manchester, recommending one Caius Gabriel Cibber to the making the statues for the Royal Exchange, and the rather in regard he hath shown his Majesty some models which have been well liked of, having been read; the committee called the gentleman in, and acquainted him that the business of making the statues is yet very much from their thought, having the whole Exchange to build first; and that a new committee will succeed before the main work be effected, to whom, when fitting time shall come, he may do well to apply himself. Cibber seems to have taken their advice, for he did execute most of the statues. During the period occupied by the rebuilding of this edifice, the merchants held their meetings at Gresham College, but when the works were sufficiently advanced, they took possession of the New Exchange, which was first publicly opened on the 28th of September, 1669. The whole cost of rebuilding the edifice was 58,9621. Considerable repairs have, at times, been made in this edifice. In the year 1767 Parliament voted 10,000l. for the purpose; and it was then found necessary almost to rebuild the western side. But the most extensive reparations and improvements which this fabric has ever undergone were made between the years 1820 and 1826, from the designs and under the superintendence of Mr. George Smith, architect to the Mercers' Company. These consisted of building a new stone tower on the north front, in place of a more lofty one of timber; constructing three new stone staircases of large dimensions; chipping, scraping, and repairing the o, surface 360—