they had lived fifty years earlier, would have shrunk from them with undissembled fear.211

Thus it was that, in England, theology was finally severed from the two great departments of ethics and of government. As, however, this important change was at first not of a practical, but solely of an intellectual character, its operation was, for many years, confined to a small class, and has not yet produced the whole of those results which we have every reason to anticipate. But there were other circumstances which tended in the same direction, and which, being known to all men of tolerable education, produced effects more immediate, though perhaps less permanent. To trace their details, and point out the connexion between them, will be the business of part of the future volumes of this work: at present, I can only glance at the leading features. Of these, the most prominent were: The great Arian controversy, which, rashly instigated by Whiston, Clarke, and Waterland, disseminated doubts among nearly all classes;212 the Bangorian controversy, which, involving matters of ecclesiastical discipline hitherto untouched, led to discussions dangerous to the power of the church;213 the great work of Black

211 The repeal of the Test Act, the admission of Catholics into parliament, and the steadily increasing feeling in favour of the admission of the Jews, are the leading symptoms of this great movement. On the gradual diffusion among us of the doctrine of expediency, which, on all subjects not yet raised to sciences, ought to be the sole regulator of human actions, see a remarkable, but a mournful letter, written in 1812, in the Life of Wilberforce, vol. iv. p. 28. See also the speech of Lord Eldon in 1828, in Twiss's Life of Eldon, vol. ii. p. 203.

212 From a curious passage in Hutton's Life of Himself, p. 27, we learn that, in 1739, the scepticism of the anti-Trinitarians had penetrated among the tradesmen at Nottingham. Compare, respecting the spread of this heresy, Nichols's Lit. Anec. vol. viii. p. 375; Priestley's Memoirs, vol. i. pp. 25, 26, 53; Doddridge's Correspond. and Diary, vol. ii. p. 477 note; and on Peirce, who took an active part, and whom Whiston boasts of having corrupted, see Whiston's Memoirs, pp. 143, 144. Sharp, who was Archbishop of York when the controversy began, foresaw its dangerous consequences. Life of Sharp, edited by Newcome, vol. ii. pp. 7, 8, 135, 136. See further Maclaine's note in Mosheim's Ecclesiast. Hist. vol. ii. pp. 293, 294; Lathbury's Hist. of Convocation, pp. 338, 342, 351; and a note in Butler's Reminisc. vol. i. pp. 206, 207.

213 Mr. Butler (Mem. of the Catholics, vol. iii. pp. 182-184, 347-350) notices with evident pleasure the effect of this famous controversy in weakening the

burne on the Confessional, which at one moment almost caused a schism in the Establishment itself;214 the celebrated dispute respecting miracles between Middleton, Church, and Dodwell, continued, with still larger views, by Hume, Campbell, and Douglas 215 the exposure of the gross absurdities of the Fathers, which, already begun by Daillé and Barbeyrac, was followed up by Cave, Middleton, and Jortin; the important and unrefuted statements of Gibbon, in his fifteenth and sixteenth chapters; the additional strength conferred on those chapters by the lame attacks of Davis, Chelsum, Whitaker, and Watson;

.216

Anglican Church. Compare Bogue and Bennett's Hist. of the Dissenters, vol. iii. pp. 135-141. Whiston (Memoirs, p. 244) says: " And, indeed, this Bangorian controversy seemed for a great while to engross the attention of the public." See more about it in Lathbury's Hist. of Convocation, pp. 372-383; Nichols's Lit. Anec. vol. i. p. 152, vol. ix. pp. 433, 434, 516; Nichols's Illustrations, vol. i. p. 840; Bishop Newton's Life of Himself, pp. 177, 178.

214 The Confessional, a most able attack on the subscription of creeds and articles, was published in 1766; and, according to a contemporary observer, "it excited a general spirit of inquiry." Cappe's Memoirs, pp. 147, 148. The consequence was, that in 1772 a society was instituted by Blackburne and other clergy of the Church of England, with the avowed object of doing away with all subscriptions in religion. Nichols's Lit. Anec. vol. i. p. 570; Illustrations, vol. vi. p. 854. A petition against the Articles was at once drawn up, signed by 200 clergy (Adolphus's George III. vol. i. p. 506), and brought before the House of Commons. In the animated debate which followed, Sir William Meredith said that "the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England were framed when the spirit of free inquiry, when liberal and enlarged notions, were yet in their infancy." Parl. Hist. vol. xvii. p. 246, He added, p. 247: "Several of the Articles are absolutely unintelligible, and, indeed, contradictory and absurd." Lord George Germain said: "In my apprehension, some of the Articles are incomprehensible, and some selfcontradictory." p. 265. Mr. Sawbridge declared that the Articles are strikingly absurd;" Mr. Salter that they are "too absurd to be defended;" and Mr. Dunning that they are "palpably ridiculous." p. 294. For further information on this attempt at reform, see Disney's Life of Jebb, pp. 31-36; Meadley's Mem. of Paley, pp. 88-94; Hodgson's Life of Porteus, pp. 38-40; Memoirs of Priestley, vol. ii. p. 582; and a characteristic notice in Palmer's Treatise on the Church, vol. i. pp. 270, 271.

215 Hume says, that on his return from Italy in 1749, he found "all England in a ferment on account of Dr. Middleton's Free Inquiry." Hume's Life of Himself, in his Works, vol. i. p. vii. See also, on the excitement caused by this masterly attack, Nichols's Illustrations of the Eighteenth Century, vol. ii. p. 176; which should be compared with Doddridge's Correspond. vol. iv. pp. 536, 537: and on the "miraculous controversy" in general, see Porteus's Life of Secker, 1797, p. 38; Phillimore's Mem. of Lyttleton, vol. i. p. 161; Nichols's Lit. Anec. vol. ii. pp. 440, 527, vol. iii. pp. 535, 750, vol. v. pp. 417, 418, 600; Hull's Letters, 1778, vol. i. p. 109; Warburton's Letters to Hurd, pp. 49, 50.

216 Gibbon's Decline and Fall has now been jealously scrutinized by two

while, not to mention inferior matters, the century was closed amid the confusion caused by that decisive controversy between Porson and Travis, respecting the text of the Heavenly Witnesses, which excited immense attention,217 and was immediately accompanied by the discoveries of geologists, in which, not only was the fidelity of the Mosaic cosmogony impugned, but its accuracy was shown to be impossible.218 These things, following each other in rapid and startling succession, perplexed the faith generations of eager and unscrupulous opponents; and I am only expressing the general opinion of competent judges when I say, that by each successive scrutiny it has gained fresh reputation. Against his celebrated fifteenth and sixteenth chapters, all the devices of controversy have been exhausted; but the only result has been, that while the fame of the historian is untarnished, the attacks of his enemies are falling into complete oblivion. The work of Gibbon remains; but who is there who feels any interest in what was written against him?

217 On the effect produced by these matchless letters of Porson, see Harford's Life of Bishop Burgess, p. 374; and as to the previous agitation of the question in England, see Calamy's Own Life, vol. ii. pp. 442, 443; Monk's Life of Bentley, vol. ii. pp. 16-19, 146, 286-289; Butler's Reminiscences, vol. i. p. 211. Compare Somers Tracts, vol. xii. p. 137, vol. xiii. p. 458.

218 The sceptical character of geology was first clearly exhibited during the last thirty years of the eighteenth century. Previously, the geologists had for the most part allied themselves with the theologians; but the increasing boldness of public opinion now enabled them to institute independent investigations, without regard to doctrines hitherto received. In this point of view, much was effected by the researches of Hutton, whose work, says Sir Charles Lyell, contains the first attempt "to explain the former changes of the earth's crust by reference exclusively to natural agents.' Lyell's Principles of Geology, p. 50. To establish this method was, of course, to dissolve the alliance with the theologians; but an earlier symptom of the change was seen in 1773, that is, fifteen years before Hutton wrote: see a letter in Watson's Life of Himself, vol. i. p. 402, where it is stated that the "free-thinkers" attacked the "Mosaic account of the world's age, especially since the publication of Mr. Brydone's Travels through Sicily and Malta." According to Lowndes (Bibliographer's Manual, vol. i. p. 279), Brydone's book was published in 1773; and in 1784 Sir William Jones notices the tendency of these inquiries: see his Discourse on the Gods of Greece, Italy, and India, in which he observes (Works, vol. i. p. 233) with regret, that he lived in "an age when some intelligent and virtuous persons are inclined to doubt the authenticity of the accounts delivered by Moses concerning the primitive world." Since then, the progress of geology has been so rapid, that the historical value of the writings of Moses is abandoned by all enlightened men, even among the clergy themselves. I need only refer to what has been said by two of the most eminent of that profession, Dr. Arnold and Mr. Baden Powell. See the observations of Arnold in Newman's Phases of Faith, p. 111 (compare pp. 122, 123); and the still more decisive remarks in Powell's Sermons on Christianity without Judaism, 1856, pp. 38, 39. For other instances, see Lyell's Second Visit to the United States, 1849, vol. i. pp. 219, 220.

of men, disturbed their easy credulity, and produced effects on the public mind, which can only be estimated by those who have studied the history of that time in its original sources. Indeed, they cannot be understood, even in their general bearings, except by taking into consideration some other circumstances with which the great progress was intimately connected.

For, in the mean time, an immense change had begun, not only among speculative minds, but also among the people themselves. The increase of scepticism stimulated their curiosity; and the diffusion of education supplied the means of gratifying it. Hence, we find that one of the leading characteristics of the eighteenth century, and one which pre-eminently distinguished it from all that preceded, was a craving after knowledge on the part of those classes from whom knowledge had hitherto been shut out. It was in that great age, that there were first established schools for the lower orders on the only day they had time to attend them,219 and newspapers on the only day they had time to read them.220 It was then that there were first seen, in our country, circulating libraries;221 and it was then, too, that the art of printing,

219 It is usually supposed that Sunday-schools were begun by Raikes, in 1781; but, though he appears to have been the first to organize them on a suitable scale, there is no doubt that they were established by Lindsey, in or immediately after 1765. See Cappe's Memoirs, pp. 118, 122; Harford's Life of Burgess, p. 92; Nichols's Lit. Anec. vol. iii. pp. 430, 431, vol. ix. p. 540; Chalmers' Biog. Dict. vol. xxv. p. 485; Journ. of Stat. Soc. vol. x. p. 196, vol. xiii. p. 265; Hodgson's Life of Porteus, p. 92. It is said, in Spencer's Social Statics, p. 343, that the clergy of the Church of England were, as a body, opposed to the establishment of Sunday-schools. (Compare Watson's Observations on Southey's Wesley, p. 149.) At all events, they increased rapidly, and by the end of the century had become common. See Nichols's Lit. Anec. vol. v. pp. 678, 679; Nichols's Illustrations, vol. i. p. 460; Life of Wilberforce, vol. i. p. 180, vol. ii. p. 296; Wesley's Journals, pp. 806, 897.

220 Mr. Hunt (Hist. of Newspapers, vol. i. p. 273) makes no mention of Sunday newspapers earlier than a notice by Crabbe in 1785; but, in 1799, Lord Belgrave said, in the House of Commons, that they first appeared "about the year 1780." Parl. Hist. vol. xxxiv. p. 1006. In 1799, Wilberforce tried to have a law enacted to suppress them. Life of Wilberforce, vol. ii. pp. 338, 424.

221 When Franklin came to London, in 1725, there was not a single circulating library in the metropolis. See Franklin's Life of Himself, vol. i. p. 64; and, in 1697, "the only library in London which approached the nature of a public library, was that of Sion College, belonging to the London

instead of being almost confined to London, began to be generally practised in country-towns.222 It was also in the eighteenth century, that the earliest systematic efforts were made to popularize the sciences, and facilitate the acquisition of their general principles, by writing treatises on them in an easy and untechnical style;2 ;228 while, at the clergy." Ellis's Letters of Literary Men, p. 245. The exact date of the earliest circulating library I have not yet ascertained; but, according to Southey (The Doctor, edit. Warter, 1848, p. 271), the first set up in London was about the middle of the eighteenth century, by Samuel Fancourt. Hutton (Life of Himself, p. 279) says, "I was the first who opened a circulating library in Birmingham, in 1751." Other notices of them, during the latter half of the century, will be found in Coleridge's Biographia Literaria, vol ii. p. 329, edit. 1847; Leigh Hunt's Autobiography, vol. i. p. 260; Nichols's Lit. Anec. vol. iii. pp. 648, 682; Nichols's Illustrations, vol. i. p. 424; Whewell's Hist. of Moral Philosophy, p. 190; Sinclair's Correspond. vol. i. p. 143. Indeed, they increased so rapidly, that some wise men proposed to tax them, " by a license, at the rate of 2s. 6d. per 100 volumes per annum." Sinclair's Hist. of the Revenue, vol. iii. p. 268.

222 In 1746, Gent, the well known printer, wrote his own life. In this curious work, he states, that in 1714 there were "few printers in England, except London, at that time; none then, I am sure, at Chester, Liverpool, Whitehaven, Preston, Manchester, Kendal, and Leeds, as for the most part now abound." Life of Thomas Gent, pp. 20, 21. (Compare a list of country printing-houses, in 1724, in Nichols's Lit. Anec. vol. i. p. 289.) How this state of things was remedied, is a most important inquiry for the historian; but in this note I can only give a few illustrations of the condition of different districts. The first printing-office in Rochester was established by Fisher, who died in 1786 (Nichols's Lit. Anec. vol. iii. p. 675); the first in Whitby, was in 1770 (Illustrations, vol. iii. p. 787); and Richard Greene, who died in 1793, 66 was the first who brought a printing-press to Lichfield" (Ibid. vol. vi. p. 320). In the reign of Aune, there was not a single bookseller in Birmingham (Southey's Commonplace Book, 1st series, 1849, p. 568); but, in 1749, we find a printer established there (Hull's Letters, Lond. 1778, vol. i. p. 92); and, in 1774, there was a printer even in Falkirk (Parl. Hist. vol. xvii. p. 1099). In other parts the movement was slower; and we are told, that, about 1780, "there was scarcely a bookseller in Cornwall." Life of Samuel Drew, by his Son, 1834, pp. 40, 41.

66

223 Desaguliers and Hill were the two first writers who gave themselves up to popularizing physical truths. At the beginning of the reign of George I., Desaguliers was the first who read lectures in London on experimental philosophy." Southey's Commonplace Book, 3d series, 1850, p. 77. See also Penny Cyclopædia, vol. viii. p. 430; and, on his elementary works, compare Nichols's Lit. Anec. vol. vi. p. 81. As to Hill, he is said to have set the example of publishing popular scientific works in numbers; a plan so well suited to that inquisitive age, that, if we believe Horace Walpole, he "earned fifteen guineas a week." Letter to Henry Zouch, January 3d, 1761, in Walpole's Letters, vol. iv. p. 117, edit. 1840.

In the latter half of the eighteenth century, the demand for books on the natural sciences rapidly increased (see, among many other instances which might be quoted, a note in Pulteney's Hist. of Botany, vol. ii. p. 180); and, early in the reign of George III., Priestley began to write popularly on phy