The lines 1268-1437 are not in And chase a Change of Colours round the Sky. 'Tis all one Blush from East to West! And now, Behind the dusky Earth, He dips his Now half immers'd, and now a golden Gives one faint Glimmer, and then dis- The lines 1635-1642 were originally thus : "A sight of Horror! to th' ungodly The Hard, the Lewd, the Cruel, and the Who, all Day long, have made the Widow weep, And snatch'd the Morsel from her Orphan's Mouth, To give their Dogs: but to th' harmo- Who makes the hopeless Heart to sing Instead of the lines 1657-1662 the following paragraph appears only in the edition 1727: "Wild-wafting o'er the Lawn, the thistly Down Plays in the fickle Air, now seems to And now, high-soaring over Head, an Amusive, forms, then slanting down The Grasp of idle Swain. But should A little swell the Breeze, the woolly Blown, in a white Confusion, thro' the Falls o'er the Face unfelt, and, settling Mantles the Twilight Plain. And yet even here, As thro' all Nature, in her lowest Forms, Vales." the edition 1727, nor except the By this light Plumage, into distant episode of Damon and Musidora, (afterwards much enlarged,) in the edition 1730. The paragraph, lines 1619-1628, was in both the early editions thus: "Low walks the Sun, and broadens Just o'er the Verge of Day. The rising That shift, perpetual, in his vivid Train, In 1727, and with a slight variation, in 1730, instead of the lines 16751680, were the following: "But far about They wander from the Grave Of Him, whom his ungentle Fortune Against Himself, to lift the hated Hand Into the broad Way side. The ruin'd Tower is also shunn'd, whose unblest Chambers hold, Nightly, sole Habitant, the yelling Ghost." The following paragraph, after line 1680, appears only in the Edition, 1727: "Struck from the Roots of slimy Rushes, blue, The Wild-Fire scatters round, or, gather'd, trails A Length of Flame, deceitful, o'er the Moss, Whither, entangled in the Maze of Night, While the damp Desart breathes his Fogs around, The Traveller, decoy'd, is quite absorpt, Innoxious, on th' unstartling Horse's The Meteor sits, and shows the narrow path, That, winding, leads thro' Pits of Death, or else Directs Him how to take the dangerous Ford." Instead of lines 1698-1702, were the following in 1727 and 1730: Rowls a broad Slaughter o'er the Plains of Heaven. "As the mad People scan the fancy'd On all Sides swells the superstitious Din, Or painted hideous with ascending Of Blights, that blacken the white bosom'd Spring, And Tempest, shaking Autumn into Chaff, Till Famine, empty-handed, starves the Of Pestilence, and every great Distress, "Not so the Man of Philosophic Eye, And Inspect sage, the waving Brightness, He, Curious surveys, inquisitive to know "As thus, th' Effulgence tremulous, I The Causes, and Materials, yet unfix'd, drink, With fix'd Peruse, the lambent Lightnings shoot A-cross the Sky, or, horizontal, dart Conglob'd, or long. Astonishment suc ceeds, gins." Of this Appearance beautiful, and new." Instead of the last paragraph the following appeared in 1730: "The vulgar stare; amazement is their joy, And mystic faith, a fond sequacious herd! But scrutinous PHILOSOPHY looks deep, And silence, ere the various Talk be- With piercing eye, into the latent cause; Nor can she swallow what she does not see." Then follow, only in the first edition, these paragraphs: "That Instant, flashing, noiseless, from the North, A thousand Meteors stream, ensweeping first The concluding address to Philosophy, lines 1729, &c., has been subjected to scarcely any alteration; and the praise of poetry, lines 1752-1756, which is inscribed on Thomson's Monument in Poets' Corner, is now verbatim as in 1727. The only variation, not merely verbal, which remains, is in lines 17611769, substituted for the following, some of which are less worthy of the author of Liberty : "Nor Home nor Joy Domestick, mix'd of Tenderness and Care, Nor moral Excellence, nor social Bliss, To turn the Furrow, nor mechanic Hand Mother severe of infinite Delights!" Servant prompt is in the edition 1730, Sailor bold, an instance of the author's minute attention to the phra seology of his poem. 66 Such are the materials for comparing the first and later editions of Summer which are offered to any of your readers who have leisure and inclination for such pursuits. To borrow the language of a critic on the Seasons, whom I before quoted, they will, I think, easily perceive that most of the changes which the poem has undergone are happy improvements," that "the disposition of the parts has been altered for the better," and that "it has been improved in symmetry and grace, without losing any part of its original dignity and vigour." I am not aware that Thomson's great attention to the revision of the Seasons has been noticed by any of his biographers, except Dr. Johnson, who says, "These poems, with which I was acquainted at their first appearance, I have since found altered and enlarged by subsequent revisals, as the author supposed his judgment to grow more exact, and as books or conversation extended his knowledge and opened his prospects." Yet, though improved in general," he doubts "whether they have not lost part of what Temple calls their race; a word which applied to wines, in their primitive sense, means the flavour of the soil." Waller has somewhere said, that "Poets lose half the praise they would have got, Were it but known what they discreetly blot." However this praise may have been sparingly bestowed on Thomson, of a higher, and also a justly deserved reputation, he has not been defrauded. In the prologue to Coriolanus, acted after the author's death, in 1748, for the benefit of his sisters, the poet's friend, Lord Lyttleton happily says of Thomson's Muse, that she "employ'd her heav'n taught lyre, None but the noblest passions to inspire, SIR, VERMICULUS. Cheetwood, near Manchester, HAVING frequently found your pages devoted to the consideration of the inconveniences which attach to Unitarians in the solemnization of Marriage, on account of their being obliged to conform to the cere mony instituted by the Established Church on that occasion, I have presumed to address you upon that subject,-not indeed for the purpose of pointing out any farther objections to it, but to impress upon Unitarians in general, the propriety of adopting a method which I conceive would be the means of exciting more attention to the subject, and would have a favourable tendency in promoting the alteration which the Society for protecting the Civil Rights of Unitarians are endeavouring to obtain. It has been often said, that Unitarians in general are indifferent as to this matter, because they have hitherto (with a few exceptions) submitted in silence to that ceremony; and I must confess that the charge is apparently too well founded. I therefore conceive it to be the duty of all Unitarians, entering into the marriage state, solemnly to protest against the performance of a ceremony which inculcates doctrines directly opposed to the principles of Unitarianism. By thus publicly and firmly expressing their dissent to such a violation of their religious opinions, the Legislature will perceive the propriety and necessity of some alteration in the existing laws relating to Marriage. considerable portion of English subSurely, the consideration that thus a jects are compelled to submit to so great a degradation as that of openly admitting a doctrine the truth of which they deny, ought to have great weight with Parliament; but whilst so much indifference is manifested in silently submitting to such a proceeding, it is but reasonable for their opponents to infer, that to them it is a matter of but little importance. Therefore, when instances of individuals so protesting for, conscience' sake do occur, I think it is highly proper that they should be made known for the encouragement of others, and as an inducement to them to act in a similar manner. An instance of this kind having lately occurred where a friend of mine entered his protest against the Marriage ceremony, I have obtained from him his permission to transmit a copy thereof for insertion in your valuable publication, as also of a letter he previously wrote to the clergyman officiating, to gether with a brief statement of the interview that in consequence took place between them. Copy of the Letter. Manchester, June 14, 1822. SIR, As it is my intention, under the permission of Divine Providence, to enter into the Marriage state, in the course of this month, and as I am informed it will be your duty to perform the service on that occasion, I take this opportunity to request of you, that, in the solemnization of that event, such expressions may be omitted in the ceremony which at all inculcate a belief in or worship of the Trinity. Upon similar occasions, I am informed, such omissions have been made by ministers of the Established Church, when they have been requested by the parties concerned; as, indeed, expressions may be substituted that would not be offensive either to you as a Trinitarian, or to me as a Unitarian. I really cannot see the necessity of your rigorously adhering to certain words which may be omitted without injury to you, and with advantage to myself; nor am I aware that, by the laws of this country, Unitarians are compelled publicly to profess their belief in that doctrine which forms the main ground of their dissent from the Established Church. If my information relative to the Marriage Act be correct, the object of it is not to prescribe a set form of words which shall imply a belief in any particular doctrine, but was enacted for the purpose of having the contract of the parties publicly registered by the minister, so as to prevent illegal or improper Marriages, which object I conceive will be sufficiently answered by performing the ceremony in the way I wish, without compelling me to give either my tacit or verbal assent to a doctrine in which I do not believe. I sincerely trust that you will give the matter a serious and candid consideration; as it is not only to me, but also to the lady with whom I intend to be united, a matter of most serious importance. Should you wish any further information upon the subject, I am willing to wait upon you to afford any explanation in my power. If, however, upon such consideration, you should feel unable, or not inclined to if I am compelled to submit to the form allow me the indulgence I request, and of service as it is laid down in the Book of Common Prayer, or otherwise forego the advantages of matrimony, it is my intention to enter my solemn protest against those parts of the ceremony of which I disapprove, and which at all inculcate the belief and worship of the Trinity. Because, as a Unitarian, I believe such a doctrine to have no foundation in the Scriptures, and to be unsanctioned by their authority; and so believing, I should shew myself greatly wanting in a proper regard to religious independence and principles, silently to acquiesce in those parts of a service to which I cannot give the assent of my understanding, and of which my conscience disapproves. Your early answer will confer an obligation on Yours respectfully, (Signed) PETER ECKERSLEY. To the Rev. Mr. Fielding, Curate of St. John's Church, Manchester. the gentleman to whom it was adIn consequence of the above letter, dressed waited upon my friend in a few days afterwards, when a conversation ensued between them upon the subject. On being asked if he could comply with the request which the letter contained, he replied, that, as a minister of the Established Church, he could not conscientiously make any alteration in the ceremony as imposed by the Church; for that, by the oath taken by him at his ordination, he was compelled strictly to adhere to those forms which the Church had enjoined, otherwise he should be a perjured man. He disclaimed all bigotry, and expressed himself in terms of approbation of the course Mr. E. had pursued, and said it was that which all conscientious Dissenters from the doctrine of the Trinity ought to adopt. On Mr. E. learning the determination of the minister, he informed him that he should, in consequence of his refusal, be compelled, before the ceremony commenced, to deliver a protest against those objectionable parts of the service, which appeared to him diametrically opposed to the truths of the gospel. Mr. E., however, expresses himself as being highly pleased with the liberality displayed by Mr. Fielding throughout the conversation, and is desirous to add his testimony to the respectful and gentlemanly deportment which characterized his conduct on the occasion. The following is a copy of the Pro test: To the Rev. Mr. Fielding. You having expressed your utter inability conscientiously to comply with our request, by omitting or altering any part of the matrimonial service ordained by the Established Church, as set forth in the Book of Common Prayer, we feel it necessary, to the relief of our consciences, to protest against the doctrines which it contains. We regret that in a country peculiarly distinguished for religious toleration, a service should be insisted upon by the Established Church which, in order to enter the Marriage state, must be submitted to by those persons who disbelieve its doctrines, and which is therefore attended with a violation of their religious principles and the dictates of conscience. Surely a ceremony involving in it such painful consequences, calls aloud for reformation. As Unitarian Christians, we therefore most solemnly protest against the service : Because we are thereby called upon, not only tacitly to acquiesce, but to profess a belief in the doctrine of a Trinity of persons in the Godhead, which is a dogma (as we believe) totally unfounded upon the Scriptures, unwarranted by reason, and expressly contradicted by both natural and revealed religion. Because we are compelled to submit to the performance of a service which is in direct opposition to those views of Christianity which we have derived from the gospel of Jesus Christ, unshackled by the creeds of fallible men, or the deci sions of venal councils. Because we conceive, that if such a ceremony were submitted to by us in silence, it would be a dereliction from our duty as worshipers of one God the Fa ther, and as faithful disciples of his Son Jesus Christ. Because we conceive, that in the performance of so important and solemn a service as that of matrimony, every expression ought to be omitted which im poses a violence upon the consciences of the parties concerned. (Signed) PETER ECKERSLEY. ELIZABETH PENDLETON. The protest originally went further in objecting to the introductory part of the service, as being (to a mind correctly formed) offensive to the feelings of delicacy. But as the minister intimated his intention of omitting that part of the service, the protest against it would be unnecessary, and was therefore by his wish expunged. F. BOARDMAN. On the Book of Genesis. From Professor Eichhorn's Introduction to the Study of the Old Testament, Vol. II. § 416, a. The Book of Genesis was compiled from Ancient Scriptural Records. HE accounts contained in the book of Genesis carry us back to the very cradle of the whole human race, and refer to events which occurred partly several thousand, and partly several hundred years prior to the time of Moses, of which, therefore, (admitting him to be the author of this book,) Moses cannot speak as an eye-witness, but merely as an historian. Whence, then, may it be asked, did he gather the materials for his work? Was he favoured with an immediate revelation from the Deity? Is his narrative grounded on the records of antiquity, or is it an invention of his own brain? Ought the critic and historian to condemn him as an artful impostor; or to applaud him as a writer of the most unbounded veracity? Are his relations nothing but a series of amusing tales invented to portray the childhood of mankind in fascinating colours, for the success of which he trusted to the ignorance of his contemporaries? Or are they such as exhibit, in undeniable characters, the stamp of authenticity and truth? The book of Genesis no where contains even the most distant allusion to support the assertion that its contents are the immediate revelations of the Deity. Hence, as no peremptory autos da exists to silence inquiry, every one is |
