nefs God had on earth. Kings xix. 1c. Once was the church of the New Teftament in such a low fituation, that the witneffes were reduced to two, and even these two were flain. Rev. xi. 7. The enemy, no doubt, thought he had accomplished his defign, and obtained his wifh. But, had the church become extinct? Was religion totally banished from the world? No. What the apoftle of the Gentiles faid with regard to the period in which he lived, the friends of religion in every age can fay, even at this present time there is a remnant according to the dection of grace. Rom. xi. 5. By a wonderful train of providential occurrences has the church been brought into great diftrefs; and by a series of providential events no lefs furpriting, has deliverance been wrought for her. Often has this bub burned, but never has been confumed. The very means which the enemy has ufed for the deftruction and ruin of the church, has an over-ruling providence rendered fubfervient to her edification and enlargement.'

Facts relating to the Rev. Dr. White's Bampton Lectures. By the Rev. R. B. Gabriel, D. D. 800. 1s. 6d. Bell. A Letter to R. B. Gabriel, in answer to Facts, relating to the Rev. Dr. White's Bampton Lectures, by a Member of one of zbe Univerfities. 8vo. 15. 6d. Gardner.

An Appeal to the Members of the Univerfity of Oxford, relating to Dr. White's Bampton Lectures, by No Academic. 8vo. 6d. Kearsley.

WHEN an author has obtained great honours and valuable emoluments as the reward of his genius, his industry, and learning, it is painful to hear that the honours were undeferved, and the emoluments unjustly beftowed. Deception is at all times difagreeable; and the mind is never left in fo uneafy a ftate as in that fufpence which intervenes between the fufpicion and proof of an impofition. Soon after Mr. Badcock's death, whispers were circulated that he had greatly affifted Dr. White in the compofition of the Bampton Lectures: these sufpicions were foon raifed to certainties; and, inftead of affiftance, the whole was next faid to be the work of Mr. Badcock. Paragraphs of a fufpicious tendency and an equivocal origin appeared in the newspapers; and Dr. Gabriel, feemingly drawn out by reflections, in this fhape, was induced to declare, that he had proofs in his poffeffion, to justify the opinion,' he had ⚫ ever entertained of Dr. White's particular obligations to Mr. Badcock.' This cautious expreffion might bear any interpretation, and it was confequently conftrued by each perfon accord ing to his opinions and connexions. At laft Dr. Gabriel, in the pamphlet before us, produces thofe proofs on which his

opinion

opinion was founded. But we muft premife, as literary men, a few reflections, to afcertain what degree of affiftance an author may obtain, without fufpicion of appropriating, too liberally, the thoughts of another.

There are probably very few works in which no one but the reputed author was concerned. Each perfon, we believe, shows his compofitions to a literary friend, either in their progrefs, or after their completion, and avails himself of his advice, and often of his affistance. The great question is, how much affiftance can be given without injuring the author's fame or his title to the compofition? and it can be only refolved in this way: if the author's own fhare be fo confiderable that the greater part is undifputed, his literary reputation cannot fuffer; if the arrangement, the original thoughts, the plan of the whole, and the execution of thefe undifputed parts be not unworthy of the character which the work has attained, the affiftance cannot be ftyled improper, or can any merit be detracted by the difcovery. If this criterion of judgment be allowed, and we think it perfectly accurate, on thefe grounds we fhall proceed to the examination of Dr. White's and Mr. Badcock's claims.

The first Letter, priated as a Fact,' fhows clearly that literary offtance only was required,' and this afliftance is exprefsly limited to Lecture 12, 7th, and 8th, or, as it stands in the printed copy, the 9th. It appears from the fecond Letter, that this language is inaccurate, for Dr. White only wanted an • introduction' to his Remarks,' (p. 26); and in the third Letter, p. 27. it appears that Dr. White wrote a great part of the fecond Lecture at Southmolton: is it probable that he would not have done foinething to the felt that they had not at least concerted it together, and that the whole plan was not finished, except the compliment to the univerûty? With thefe Facts in our hands, let us read the unit Sermon. It is an admirable one; and, indeed, what could not Mir. Badcock and Dr. White have effected with a masterly fuperiority? If we look nearer, there is an evident mixture of two different ftyles. We can trace Dr. White's more nervous and energetic language in different parts, but particularly from page 41*: Mr. Badcock's language flows with a more polished luxuriance. Of this Lecture, then, we cannot allow Mr Eadcock more than one half, or at most two thirds; and Dr. White's fhare is not inferior, in force of thought, judgment, or expreflion, to Mr. Badcock's.

The fecond Sermon is confefiedly Dr. White's; and, though we may trace the pen of his friend in occafionally rounding a

*We que te from the first edition of the Bampton Lectures, as it probably coincides more with the original form, to which the Letters refer.

period,

period, and perhaps in one or two separate paragraphs, yet the whole is fo much his own, as to be a fufficient foundation for establishing his character. It is animated and perfpicuous in its language; comprehenfive and able in its defign and execution.

The third Lecture seems to have been altered from the state in which it was preached; but it was probably altered by Dr. White. We have his express information (Facts, p. 28), that the latter part of the Sermon is written by Mr. Badcock. Where he certainly began is at the beginning of p. 113 of the Sermons. If the former Sermon is a lasting monument of Dr. White's abilities, this is no lefs a proof of the acuteness of Mr. Badcock's comprehenfion, the extent of his knowledge, and the force of his judgment. Dr. White drew, however, the outline recorded in the Facts, and it is fingularly able and comprehenfive. Mr. Badcock followed it, flightly varying the order. Different heads will be found enlarged on in pages 114, 117, 119, 118, 126, 132, and 133 refpectively. The obfervations on Mr. Gibbon are, as Dr. White requested, brilliant and masterly; but they have been often quoted, and are well known. Nothing more occurs in the correspondence except an acknowledgment (Let ter IV. p. 31.) of valuable communications during the course of the preaching. Some remarks on the Chriftian part of the work are requested in Letter V. p. 33, and friendly and effential fervices' spoken of in Letter VI. p. 35.

The fourth, fifth, and fixth Sermons are allowed to be Dr. White's; and we believe them to be exclufively fo, if we except a few parenthetical pages in the fifth. On these his charafter may, we think, be rested; and we hesitate not to conclude, on our former principles, that the author of these Sermons.merits the diftinguished rank in the republic of letters, which Dr. White by this volume had attained.

The feventh Sermon was certainly written by Mr. Badcock, with the exception of a few paragraphs, which appear to be added by Dr. White, though the fubftance, as appears from Letter I. was derived from the Profeffor. The eighth and ninth, whatever may have been the original intentions, were written apparently in conjunction. We cannot trace Mr. Badcock alone, through many fucceffive pages. It is certainly not the criterion of diftinction that the one wrote what related to Christianity; the other what respected Mahomet and his impofitions; fince, in Letter V. where Dr. White requests the affiftance of notes to the Chriftian part, he fends a marked copy: Mr. Badcock did not want that affiftance, if it were what he himself had written.

The circumftantial and fubordinate proofs are very trifling. Mr. Badcock, irritated by the Profeffor's neglect, and the trifling circumstance relating to a fermon, fpoke of his being Vol. LXIX. Jan. 1790.

F

the

the author of a very confiderable part of the Bampton Lecture, to Mr. Hutton, and to fir John Chichester. We all know the different impreffions which the manner of fpeaking, and the temper of the speaker, make: we know now alfo, from authent tic papers, that he fpoke with little reflection, or his words were recollected imperfectly. Those who were best acquainted with Mr. Badcock will be of the former opinion.

In this review we have allowed every thing which Dr. Gabriel has faid, and even added, from internal evidence, to hit • Facts.' Four What, then, must be our conclufions ? Sermons, the fecond, the fourth, the fifth, and the fixth are almost exclusively Dr. White's: of the first and third he wrote nearly one half in the eighth and ninth his fhare is very confpicuous. Of the Sermons written by Mr. Badcock, the plan originated from Dr. White, as appears from the same evi dence, which proves any affiftance, except in one instance. We think then we have fhown that the greater fhare of these Lectures is undifputed. The arrangement, the original thoughts, the plan of the whole, and the execution of thefe undisputed parts merit the highest character; and, if produced in another work, would not have been thought unequal to the general te nour of the Bampton Lectures. However blameable Dr. White may have been for his indolence, he deserves not the character of a plagiarist, or the lazy drone, who lives on the labours which he cannot perform. If affiftance be at all blameable, is Dr. Gabriel certain that the Sermon given to Dr. White; even the Sermon dictated in his prefence; the criticiíms on Thelypthora; and on the corruptions of Christianity, were the fole productions of Mr. Badcock? There are facts behind relating to each fubject, which would fhew that Dr. Gabriel knew but little of this gentleman.

While we do juftice to Dr. White, let us not leave a ftigma on the character of Mr. Badcock. We have heard that he was, perhaps, equal to the dull duty of a reviewer', but could not rife to the fpirit, the animation, the knowledge difplayed in thefe Lectures. The whole tenour of his undifputed writings fhow that "thefe infinuations are the effect either of the weakest prejudice, or the groffest injustice *.” "Whatever was his employment, he had a genius which foared above it; whatever was the tafk, his active mind pervaded every part of it, disco covered new relations, and gave it an original form. The brilliancy of his conception was only equalled by the force and fpirit of his language, which flowed with a luxuriance and a majesty that delighted and aftonished. On every fubject his

knowledge feemed almost intuitive; and he rose from the torpefying intricacies of school-divinity, to dazzle with his wit, to enliven with his fpirit, and to instruct by his knowledge. Such was the man whom Dr. White has fuffered to be degraded, without an exertion in his defence. Such was the man, whom his numerous acquaintance seem almost to have already forgotten *!"

One of the best inftances of Dr. White's judgment was the procuring an affociate so able and intelligent. It is no difcredit to the Profeffor that he wrote with energy, while his affociate was more animated and luxuriant. Together they have produced a work to which either, separately, might have been unequal. It has procured, to the Profeffor, honour and profit : to Mr. Badcock; the honour and profit unfortunately came too late. The note for a fum, seemingly difproportioned to affiftance only, has engaged much attention. That it was for former, as well as future aid, has been generally believed; but though we might fuppofe money to be given for a future share of the Egyptian Hiftory, it is not probable that a note, without interest, was of any fervice. Dr. White has fince abandoned that plea; and the memorandum, referred to in the latter correfpondence, seems not to be related to it, for Mr. Badcock promises never to make any ufe of it, living or dead. Dr. White, probably elated with the grandeur and magnificence of future profpects, in confequence of the fuccefs of the Bampton Lectures, thought no reward too great for his principal affiftant; and Mr. Badcock, with the confcioufnefs of deferving much, did not refufe what the other might offer. That Dr. White, by this liberality, might think he fecured his future affiftance is very probable; and his frequently confulting him about the Egyptian Hiftory, feems to prove it. There appears but one objection against our fuppofition, that a note, without interest, was not a proper compenfation for future services, and it arifes from the times appointed for payment: the whole was to have been cleared, within twelve months after the note was given.

These are nearly all the facts adduced by Dr. Gabriel: a great part of the pamphlet confifts of the provocations which induced him to divulge the fecret, and the account of the payment of the note in part, with a legal fecurity for the remainder. On thefe fubjects we shall not enlarge: we do not conftitute a court of honour, to decide on the force of the provocation which can excufe the difcovery of a fecret highly injurious. If Dr. Gabriel is satisfied with his own conduct, we

Our intelligent correfpondent, who gave us fome information on this subject, will excuse us for transcribing his animated enlogium on Mr. B.