DEAN FOREST. CCORDING to Sir Robert At

Akyns and Mr. Camden, the name is

supposed to be derived from the small market-town of Dean, in the neighbourhood, or from the word Arden, which the Gauls and Britains used for a wood; two great forests, one in the Beigic provinces, the other in Warwickshire, being now called Arden.

The Forest of Dean lies in the Western part of Gloucestershire, between the rivers Wye and Severn, and first inhabited by the Silures, the most antient people of South Wales. Pormerly the Forest was so thick with trees, so very dark and terrible in its shades, that it rendered the inhabitants barbarous; and at one time was so infested with robbers, that in the reign of Henry the Sixth, an Act of Parliament was passed purposely to restrain them. In the great rebellion it was miserably destroyed. The whole is extraparochial, and now only contains 23,000 acres. It is inhabited by miners and colliers. In 1811, the return of the population

Mr. Procter, the present vicar of Newland, began his great work of moralizing the part of the Forest adjacent to him in 1804; and in June 1812, he laid the foundation-stone of a building (see Plate T.) to be appropriated for six days in the week to the education of children, and for Divine worship on the Sabbath-day., The building was opened on January 6th 1813-290 children have already been admitted on Dr: Bell's plan. It is episcopally liceused, and will be consecrated on a sufficient endowment being raised, which, for the sake of the numerous inhabitants, Mr. Procter is endeavouring to procure; and we hope that he will not make his appeal in vain. See our Magazine for May 1813, Vol. LXXXIII. p. 417.

EDIT.

June 2.

AM almost ashamed to request the favour of you to give a place in your Magazine to the Review of the second edition of a work,. of which I reviewed the first edition in another journal; but I know not how I can by any other means fulfil a promise which I gave gave to the Publick. The case is briefly this: 1 GENT. MAG. June, 1814.

pr

was engaged by the Editors of the first series of the "British Critic" to review for them M'Crie's "Life of John Knox," the Scottish Reformer; a task (if such it can be called) from which I derived both amusement and instruction; but, whilst I found in the work much entitled to praise, I found likewise not a little that called loudly for reprehension. The consequence was, that the Review swelled in my hands to a large bulk, furnishing three articles in the XLIId Volume of that Journal; and before any part of it was put to the press, a second e edition of "The Life of Knox" was published, containing a considerable quantity of additional matter, as well as some improvements of both the language and the arrangement. As I had exposed with freedom the author's partial quotations, and other modern arts of controversy, by which, in the first edition, he had, with rancour, attacked the constitution of our Church, I felt myself cailed on, by a principle of justice, to give some account of the second and improved edition, which had been given to the publick before my Review of the first. The British Critic, however, had in the mean time passed into the hands of other Editors, who commenced a New Series, with a determination (whether judicious or not time will shew) to make no reference whatever to the former series; and my supplementary article was returned to me as inadmissible on their plan! A promise of mine, therefore, is recorded in the XLIId Volume of the British Critic, which, without your assistance, I know not how to fulfil. 'As the article was not rejected by the present Editors of the Critic because they disapproved of it in any respect (for they expressed of it much higher approbation than its merit can justly claim), I trust you will find it convenient to oblige an old Correspondent, by giving it au early place in your Journal, where I flatter myself that such of your readers as are likewise readers of the "British Critic" will be glad to see it on various accounts. G-B

[See our Review, this Month, p. 569.]

Mr. URBAN, May 16. THE Curates' Bill, lately passéd Tinte a Law, is so complicated in

its

its operation, that its immediate and remoter consequences cannot possibly be calculated, without a very careful, and indeed a profound, examination of the subject. Yet are those consequences so important, both to Church and State, that I cannot resist the impulse which urges me to explain them; in hopes that, when they shall be rightly understood, even the Noble Mover of the Bill, whose motives were undoubtedly good, may be persuaded to admit of its repeal. I am firmly convinced that Lord H. himself does not see the real tendency of his own Law; otherwise he would have devised some other, and more effectual, method of serving the Church, for which he testifies so laudable a zeal. For, to copy the words of a most able writer, in a periodical work,

"I regard this statute (originating, I doubt not, in the very best motives, and in a sincere and anxious concern for the public good) as, in every way, A and, considered purely in its religious and spiritual operation, regard it as one of the most pernicious Acts which ever gained a place in the Statute-book."

COMPLETE FAILURE:

As the Author here quoted appears to have investigated the necessary effects of this Act in the most correct

and satisfactory manner, and in a method which cannot be improved, my object is to give a summary view of those consequences, in a shorter way; so as to make them clear to all your readers, and to induce those who may wish or have occasion to go more deeply into the subject, to refer to the original papers, which I here abridge, where they will obtain complete satisfaction. These papers appeared in two successive numbers of the British Critic (New Series), those for March and April 1814, and stand at or near the head of each. The author is to me unknown; but, before I take advantage of his labours for the benefit of the publick, I must offer him my hearty thanks for what he has done; assuring him that my earnest desire, in what I am now attempting, is not to diminish, but greatly to increase, the number of his readers.

The object of Lord Harrowby's Bill, now passed into a Law, was first, directly, to ameliorate the condition

of Stipendiary Curates; and next, indirectly, to diminish the number of Non-residents and Pluralities. But, what shall we say of it, with respect to the attainment of its objects, if it be made to appear, that, in the first place, it proceeds on a misapprehension of the situation and circumstances of Curates; and secondly, that, while it opens the way to a new and worse species of non-residence, it so operates, with respect to Pluralities, as to take away those which ought to be permitted, and to permit those which ought to be removed? If this be not

a complete failure in the objects of a Law, I know not what can be so considered.

1. Curates are regarded in the new Law as a distinct and an oppressed class of the Clergy. But the majority of them are young men in their way to and probation for preferment, and are better off in many respects than their Rectors. Free from tenths, taxes, the care of a family, and the charges of hospitality, they are welcome to every table, and considered with indulgence in every contribution.

Granting, however, that there are also many poor Curates, whose unfortunately, those condition requires amendment, yet, Incumbents whom this Act principally affects, are in general still poorer men.

"Multitudes of Clergymen, we are persuaded," says the B. C. "who have been Curates for many years, never felt themselves to be poor men till they be came Incumbents. In their former capa city their wants and burdens were few, but in the latter they are very many. We have no scruple to say, that there is not any description of men in the community, whose unavoidable pecuniary burdens, attached by law to their situation and revenue, bear so large a proportion to that revenue, as do those of the beneficed Clergy. For whilst they bear, in common with all others, their full share of the national, and often more than their full share of the parochial expenditure of the country, they have taxes and outgoings peculiar to themselves."

This writer then goes into the proof that the calculations of Lord H., respecting non-residents, are too large, by at least a thousand. But, as calculations cannot be abridged, I shall content myself with referring to this very sound part of the argument. Other calculations go to prove,

that

that his statement of the salaries of Curates, employed by non-resident Incumbents, is also erroneous. It is I then shown that, in many cases, the advantages given to the Curate by this Act will be nominal, rather than real. But this also is matter of calculation: the following remark, however, is too just and too important to be omitted.

"This Act does all it can to put an end to that liberal intercourse between Incumbent and Curate, which, we are persuaded, has hitherto very extensively subsisted between them, to the mutual comfort and benefit of both.-The new Statute has a strong tendency to blast and wither, at one look, every plant of that kindly growth. The Curate approaches the Incumbent to claim under the bare simple letter of the bond. The Incumbent, in like manner, is prompted, so far as a Statute can make him, to assume the defensive, and to say-' to the letter shalt thou go.'-On the whole view of this part of the subject, it appears that the Act was unnecessary, and must be productive of many evils, without effecting the good for which it was intended."

The Statute is next considered as designed, indirectly, to diminish Pluralities; and here it is clearly shewn, as above mentioned, that it does indeed abridge those that ought to be continued, while it leaves untouched those which might require diminution. The authority of Mr. Perceval is here directly against Lord H. who professes so much to stand upon his ground: for Mr. P. plainly saw, and declared, that an Act which should compel residence upon small livings, could not be attempted in the present state of Church property. The smallness of many benefices makes it absolutely necessary that two should be held, to produce what can properly be called a living. But Lord H.'s Act, by enlarging the pay to the Curates to the entire value of the living, or a large proportion towards it, must put an end to all such tenures: while of the opulent livings, which can afford to pay the highest sum for a Curate, and yet leave an ample revenue to the Incumbent, not one will ever be done away or prevented by this Act. The effect will be peculiarly pernicious (as is fully explained in the larger remarks) in the case of small livings

large towns, which are often,

"spiritually considered, the most important cures in the kingdom." These, which, it should not be forgotten, are extremely numerous, instead of being held by respectable Incumbents of country livings, for the sake of society, convenience, or education of children, will, by the operation of the new Act, become the single preferment of some man, perhaps but lately in orders, who would otherwise have been Curate in an unimportant village living; and, being totally inadequate to the respectable maintenance of a Clergyman, will bring with them all the evils of poverty, embarrassment, and probable degradation of character. The spiritual and moral character of the Clergy, which now stands, I firmly believe," at a much higher state than ever it did in this, or perhaps any other country, since the time of the Apostles, and their spiritual services to the country, will keep pace together in decay and degradation. Öld times will be brought back again. All that has been gained within the last hundred years will be thrown away. The Clergy will be taken very generally from the lower orders of the people; and they will bring the low vices and low habits of low life along with them.

We shall again have such men and such preachers as we had when Echard wrote his Causes of the Contempt of the Clergy."

But, while one species of Plurality is prevented by the Act, another, of a worse kind, will be introduced and established; there will be Pluralist Curates instead of Pluralist Incumbents. The temptation to seek two Curacies within a very moderate distance, with single duty on each, will then be too strong to be resisted by any persons so circumstanced. Two of the smallest Curacies, having single duty, will produce to the Cu rate 1007.-two of the largest kind, with single duty also, will give him 2401. "What a temptation will this be to the Curate to seek after single duties, and to co-operate in promot ing the existence of them to the best of his power!"-Another evil will be that such churches, being, according to the Statute, within five miles of each other, will, when once united, whether as two livings, a living and a curacy, or two curacies, hardly ever be disjoined again; and one of

the

it 1 Cor. xv. 35. But some man will say how are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?-V. 42. It is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption, &c.-V. 44. It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body-V. 49. As we have borne the image of the earthly, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly-Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.—V. 53. This corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality-therefore this frail body which dies, can never rise to a state of consciousness, but the soul must be cloathed with a glorified or celestial body, as v. 40. fit for its resurrection to immortality.—I do not agree with R. C. in his other conclusion that "when the body dies the soul survives in a state of perception or consciousness, and therefore of happiness or misery" this is not founded on any revealed doctrine, or passage on which our faith is commanded; and I think those passages to which I have before and now refer, are adverse to it, and to the conclusion drawn from the assertion-there can be no wisdom in the grave-Lazarus and those who were visibly raised, left no light to shew what their soul had either enjoyed or suffered since their deaths, which had occupied a space of several days-such good persons must have had felicity, of which they would have been glad and willing instruments for a revelation.-I thank R. C. for his referring me to another calm perusal of the passages which I cited before; as often as they are read, they excite the devoutest gratitude for such unspeakable gifts! Again we are agreed as to Mat. x. 28. for R. C. admits that the body which will be raised, will be a spiritual body that cannot therefore be the body which dies-it is true that a man who kills the body, kills the soul also for a season-until its resurrection-and this, though mysterious to us, will be understood probably in a future state. I do not think the cases of the Patriarchs and of Moses and Elias, are fitly to be drawn in, as authority for what is generally to befall the whole race of mankind, any more than that our blessed Lord's resurrection on the third day should lead us to an ex

pectation of our rising on the third day-or like Lazarus, on the fourth day for these were renowned and visible instances given for conviction to minds which required carnal evidence to support and receive a doctrine, or even a holy promise.Although Moses had died, yet his appearing at the transfiguration was a miraculous proof of his divine legation, which had typified the coming of our Lord, and was given to strengthen this faith, by Moses himself being seen to minister to the Saviour whom he had foretold.

The opinion which I have expressed, that neither misery nor happiness can precede the final judgment, to which your other Correspondent Oxoniensis objects, is founded on the scriptural allusion to temporal tribunals, in which sentence is pronounced as its last office.-Divine Mercy is herein greatly manifested, in assimilating to the human mind, the process of the Divine Councils we are best capable of understanding that with which our own institutions have rendered us familiar: nor will this learned Oxonian, even in his professorial chair, discover a mode of expression or interpretation so well suited to human capacity. The present dealings with the affairs of men are of a different description-for, not to enter upon the grand question of the origin of evil, whatever befalls us may best be received as either personal chastisements or as modes of probation. I readily admit that in mentioning 1 Cor. xv. 51. I used the word awakened instead of raised— but the whole passage cannot be read without its being evident that the Apostle meant to convey the idea that at the sound of the last trump those that were asleep should be awakened and his language in 1 Thess. iv. is the same: "The Lord himself shall descend from Heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God, and the dead in Christ shall rise first." Where is the use of this awful process if the spirits are not disembodied? for the same Apostle has revealed that it will not be this body but a glorified body that our corruptible will put on. Where, again, is the use of this process, if the soul be already in a state of happiness or misery? if the state has al

peady