« AnteriorContinuar »
The Screech owl, ftartled at the morning light,
After defcribing the first appearance of the Sun, above our horizon, he proceeds to draw a lively picture of the various objects that prefented themselves to his view. The whole poem is a series of landscapes, wherein is beautifully painted, firft the dawning, then the fun-rifing, after that a piece confifting of corn fields, meadows and groves; and laftly, a defcription of the effects of spring on the feveral orders of animals.
Having already given an example of his defcription of the dawn, we fhall next fubjoin a specimen of the other parts. And firft of the fun-rifing.
While fhortly with the blazing torch of day
The refplendance of the fun's beams on the fea, and the fporting of the fish, are next defcribed; after which the landscape of meadows and corn-fields follows.
The fair creation fwell'd upon the eye;
Lo! by foft zephyrs wak'd and gentle showers,
Some red, pale, purple, yellow, brown, or blue;
Like Paradife appear'd each blissful scene
The effects of the Spring on Animals.
Some live in hope, and fome thro' fad despair
Such is the moody genius of their mind.
ART. XXXII. Reflexions on the expediency of a law for the naturalization of Foreign Proteftants, &c.
By Jofiah Tucker, M. A. 8vo. 1 §. A Trye.
TOtice has already been taken of the first Part, do we see any reason to deny the fame recommendation to Part the fecond, now under our confideration. It is written by way of queries, poffibly in imitation of the Bifhop of Cloyne's Queriftts between which and the present tract, there feems to be a very great correfpondence, and that in regard to the matter as well as method.
In a prefatory difcourfe, the reverend author has fet forth the various hardfhips fuffered by the proteftants abroad, in a very concife, clear, and affecting manner; the conclusion of which is in these words: "Let the candid and benevolent reader conceive himself in the fituation of these unhappy fufferers, helpless and diftreffed, forced to abandon all his poffeffions, his dearest relations, and his native country, and flying from his perfecutors into a land of strangers, where he only defires a secure retreat, with an exclufion from all public employments, and from parliament, and upon his giving the strongest affurances of fidelity to the government, to be received as a faithful fubject; and may the Almighty direct him to form fuch a judgment concerning the treatment due to perfons in these circumftances as becomes a christian and a proteftant!'.
Though we have a strong defire to declare our fentiments on this fubject, we choose rather to be filent, that the charitable may have the pleasure of determining for themselves. No arguments are neceffary to convince them, that to do good and relieve the diftreffed are indifpenfible chriftian duties. It is the avaricious part of mankind, who stand in need of felf-interefted motives to induce them to practise thofe virtues, which the truly benevolent exercise with pleasure, merely on account of their intrinfic excellence. Our author, therefore, takes a good deal of pains to convince the former, that the naturalization of foreign protestants, inftead of being detrimental, would really be for the advantage, and true interest of Great Britain. As this is a matter of the greatest importance, the reader will no doubt
* See Review for December laft, p. 523. + Review for March, 1750. p. 355.
be pleased to see it cleared up by the following queries, taken from page 31. feq.
1. Was there any clause ever offered in a naturalization bill to deprive the freemen of towns corporate of their rights and privileges? And was it not always declared by the promoters of fuch bills, that freemen fhould preferve thefe (Suppofed) privileges, as long as they themselves would chufe to keep them, and till they would petition to be released from them?
2. What are the privileges of freemen? are they real or imaginary? Would the inhabitants of Birmingham, Manchefter, and Leeds, accept such privileges if they were offered them?
3. Are the tradefmen in Westminster the poorer for being without, or the tradesmen in London the richer for being within the liberties of the city?
4. If a tradesman fells the dearer by excluding those who are not free, doth he not buy the dearer of other tradesmen for the like reafon? If his intention is only to exclude rivals, do not the freemen of other trades exclude their rivals upon the fame motives? And when other tradesmen exclude their rivals, do not they in fact exclude such as might be his customers?
5. Is not every tradefman willing to buy as cheap, and fell as much as may be? but how can he do either where trade is not free?
6. "If there will and must be rivals either at home or abroad, which is the moft detrimental to the kingdom? To have competitors at home? or, to be out-rivalled a-broad?
7. What is the public good? Is it not, for the most part, the refult of emulation among the members of the fame fociety? And what would become of induftry, temperance, frugality, and the defire of excelling, if there were no emulation?
8. Which is the best for the public? to have emulations among tradesmen and manufacturers, or combinations? And which of these hath the strongest tendency to heighten the price of exportable goods, and impoverish our country?
1 In answer to the objection, that foreigners would take the bread out of the mouths of the natives, he has the following queries, p. 34.
1. Which fort of foreigners are most to be dreaded, as
taking the bread out of the mouths of the natives? Thofe without the kingdom? or those within?
2. If the good people of England could fee through a telescope those merchants and manufacturers in the several parts of Europe, who out rival them, and prevent the fale of their manufactures, would they not rather fay, thefe are the people who take the bread out of our mouths ? But will the refusal of a naturalization bill be a means to cure this evil?
3. Who are those who have carried the mysteries of trade out of the kingdom?- Foreigners or Englishmen? And whether there are not Englishmen fettled very lately in moft kingdoms in Europe, who teach the natives of thofe countries the particular trades in which we most excell? Whether also there are not undeniable proofs of their having folicited charters to exclude goods of the fame kind coming from England?
In order to expofe the bad policy of denying foreigners the privilege of fettling in this kingdom, he has, among o thers, the following queries, p. 36.
I. Whether the kingdom of Spain would have been depopulated by the Spanish fettlements in America, if all the manufactures fent to that country had been worked up in old Spain?
2. As great multitudes of French, English, Dutch, Italians, and other nations, are now employed in the making of manufactures for the Spanish Weft-Indies, Would not old Spain be a very populous country, if these people, with their wives and children, were tranfplanted there?
3. Whether the Spainiards, from a fenfe of this truth, are not now inviting foreigners to fettle among them? And do not the English feem inclined to run into the oppofite error?
4. • Whether it is not prudent to keep open two doors in a ftate, one for fuch perfons to go out to our colonies, as may have their reasons for fuch departure, and the other to admit those persons in, as are inclined to live among us?'
This fpecimen, we prefume, will, not only justify the character already given, but likewife excite the reader's curiofity to peruse the piece itself.