REMARKS ON MR. LUKE's PAMPHLET. TO THE EDITOR OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCHMAN'S MAGAZINE. GENTLEMEN, YOUR OUR correspondent, Jonathan Drapier, says it will be some consolation to hear that the person, who stiles himself late Fellow of Sidney college, labours under a temporary derangement: that consolation it is in my power to afford, being informed, by a native of the city where Mr. Luke resides (Exeter) and who has known that unhappy gentleman many years, that "too much learning has made him mad." He was," (my friend's own words,)" till this dreadful malady seized him, as great a partizan of our church as the London Curate." Of the pamphlet itself, of which I had a cursory view, I entertain the same sentiments as J. Drapier. I am, Gentlemen, London, June 5. 66 Most respectfully, your's, THEODOSIUS, P.S. Will you permit me, Gentlemen, to hint, as a furtherance of the pious designs of our venerable diocesan, the great deficiency of hassocks in the pews; it can scarcely be expected that those, whose limbs are not very supple, will kneel on the bare boards. MR. THELLUSSON's MASQUERADE. TO THE EDITOR OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCHMAN'S SIR, WE E, who live in the country, often meet with passages in the London newspapers, giving accounts of London amusements, which excite in us no small degree of surprize, Nil admirari, is said to be the maxim of those who have seen much of the world; but it would be affectation in us to adopt it, who see the world only at second hand. For my own part, had I been ever so desirous of the honour which such an attainment in the science of life is supposed to confer, I should have for Eee2 feited feited all pretension to it, a day or two since, when I read, in my newspaper, the account of Mr. Thellusson's Masquerade; more especially when I read the following passage, which occurs in it. "On the stage erected for the grand coronation (i. e, the intended mock coronation of Bonaparte as Emperor of the Gulls) was a groupe of grotesque figures, intended to personify the members of the Society for the Suppression of Vice. Their harangues were chiefly directed against the immorality of masquerades, in a style of wit and hu mour that excited no small portion of merriment among the spectators."-Evening Mail, from May 30, to June 1. I must submit, however reluctantly, to take for granted that the members of the Society for the Suppression of Vice are in an error in supposing that masquerades ought to be discouraged; because I hear of so many truly respectable persons, who must know whether there be any thing reprehensible in masquerades, encouraging them by their presence. But though, with respect to this or other points, the Society may be in an error, I cannot bring myself to think that it can, with any pretence to propriety or decency, be exhibited to ridicule. It will be some confirmation of the justness of my opinion to observe, that, not many days before the 31st of May, when this Society was ridiculed at Mr. Thellusson's Masquerade, it was recommended to the patronage of the public by Bishop Watson, in a sermon preached before the members of it, at St. George's church, Hanover Square. For it will not easily be believed, that so eminent a judge of men and manners as Bishop Watson undoubtedly is, would give the sanction of his approbation to a Society which could be deservedly exposed to derision. It has long since been determined, that ridicule is not the proper test of truth. The same reasons will of course shew, that neither is it the proper test of respectability. There is scarcely any thing so respectable, so sacred, but that, by distortion and exaggeration, or even by partial representation, it may be rendered ridiculous. Among those, however, who are not accustomed to make due distinctions, that is, among by far the greater part of mankind, ridicule always operates as a drawback from respectability; because, as the ideas of respect and ridicule are incompatible, nothing can be respectable in that particular point in which it is ridiculous. Though, therefore, the members of the Society in question, having in view so important an object as the correction of public mauners, cannot, in the estimation of those who think justly, among whom I am willing to reckon many who joined in the laugh against them) lose any real respect by Mr. The lusson's ridicule of them, they may be degraded by it in the estimation of the public; by which means the effects of their laudable endeavours may be greatly impeded, if not entirely frustrated. Many Athenians, I doubt not, who were excited to laughter by the clouds of Aristophanes, still remained in the opinion that Socrates was a man of consummate wisdom, and Aristophanes a buffoon; but many more, I fear, were thence led to hold both the philosopher and his lessons in contempt. To say the truth, Mr. Editor, I cannot help considering Mr. T.'s attempt to ridicule the Society in much the same light as the attempt of Aristophanes to ridicule Socrates. For, though I would no more compare the Society to Socrates than Mr.Thellusson to Aristophanes, I consider the tendency of the proceeding, in both cases, to be very much the same, i. e. to diminish that idea of respect, to which the labours of those who are employed in meliorating the morals of the people, principally owe their effect. I cannot but feel indignant at Mr. T. for supposing, what is little less than libellous, that, while the Prince of Wales, whether from motives of humanity or policy, or both, would not tolerate the ridicule of Bonaparte, the open and avowed enemy of his country, he could endure to see held up to ridicule a number of loyal and respectable gentlemen of his own nation, who had associated with a view of putting the laws of it into more strict execution, and with the particular view of enforcing the Proclamation of his SOVEREIGN and his FATHER, SO often and so solemnly issued, for the "encouragement of piety and virtue, and for preventing and punishing vice, profaneness, and immorality *. It was possible, indeed, that the Prince of Wales would not be present at that part of the entertainment; but it was also possible that he would; and, if that had been the case, it was something more than possible, notwithstanding his wellknown attention to politeness, that he would express It was publicly announced, 'some time since, that the Proclamation Society and the Society for the Suppression of Vice acted in concert, and were, with respect to their objects, to be considered as one. his disapprobation in a manner which might cast a damp on all the other amusements of the evening. This proceeding appears to me the more inexcusable, from considering that only six days before the whole nation, in consequence of an invitation from the highest authority in it, were prostrating themselves before the Almighty, in "prayers and supplications, for obtaining pardon of their sins, and for averting those heavy judgments which their manifold provocations had most justly deserved." Had that solemn and seasonable invitation produced such an effect, that the people were going into the opposite extreme? Was an invitation of a contrary nature so soon become necessary? Or, is it true, that fasting and prayer, with their intended consequences of repentance and amendment of life, are necessary only for the lower orders of the people? Admitting this to be the case, it is still to be remembered, that it will be but of little avail, generally speaking, to recommend the duties of religion and morality to the lower orders of the people, while the higher orders appear to be regardless of them. On the whole, as he who cannot be witty without being profane ought to let jesting alone; so I leave it to be considered, whether he who cannot amuse his friends without offering an affront to the morals of the nation, had not better leave them to find amusement for themselves? in FAVING said something relative to Pulpits in your Hast G Suid, last number, I now do myself the honour to send you a letter on sounding-boards; which, nine years ago, I addressed to a worthy clergyman, who consulted me on the subject. If you think it worth inserting in your Miscellany, it is much at your service. I am, Gentlemen, June 5, 1804. Your most obedient servant, A LONDON CURATE. SIR, My notion of the effects which a Sounding-Board, erected over a pulpit, should produce, is this: that it should confine the sound of the voice from being dissipated in the air; that it should reflect the sound downwards, if there be no galleries in the church where it stands; or, if there be galleries, that it should cause the sound to spread itself laterally, as well as downwards; and that it should also, if possible, increase what may be termed, the volume and body of the speaker's voice. To produce these effects, it should be of a moderate size; not so large as to smother the sound. It should be as elastic as is consistent with a due degree of firmness, (or stiffness, as a carpenter would call it;) and its under surface should be smooth, nor should any mouldings project beyond its face, or under side*. Now, if I cut a block of wood into the form of a guitar, being solid, and string it, the sound of the strings will be lumpish and dull; not vibratory and brilliant. Let, therefore, the construction of a Sounding-Board be regulated by that of a musical instrument. Let the lower surface be made of thin, well-dried, and fibrous red deal; such as forms the belly of a violin: this, by means of a tinted varnish, may be made of any colour. Let the upper part, and the sides connecting it with the plain under surface, be made of thin wainscot, of thin mahogany, or any other elastic wood. Let the distance between the two surfaces not exceed three inches, that vibration may pervade both with more facility. Let the under surface be perforated with a star, or some ornamental and appro * The worst contrivance I know, is the Sounding-Board used at St. Paul's, at the Annual Meeting of the Charity Children, where the fringe round the board, and the cloth curtains behind the preacher, serve to absorb and deaden the sound of his voice. priate |