islands;-parts of the work, which however important and essential to its merit, supply but little that could be compressed within the limits of a review: we thought it best, therefore, to lose no time in communicating a brief outline of the voyage itself, as comprized within the two volumes that have come to our hands. And we cannot but take some credit to ourselves for our exertions in obtaining from Berlin the only copy, we have every reason to believe, which has yet reached England. The only remaining part of the voyage which can be considered as at all interesting, is the account of the reception of the Russians in China, and of this we happen to have some authentic information. On their arrival at Canton, about the end of 1805, they announced their wish to dispose of their cargoes of skins and furs. Permission was immediately granted, and they had nearly finished their business, when all proceedings were suddenly suspended, and they were told that they must wait patiently for the Emperor's orders from Pekin. The monsoon being nearly exhausted, and the whole conduct of the Chinese bearing on the face of it a discreditable character, the Committee of the English Factory remonstrated strongly with the principal merchants, representing the disgrace and impropriety of laying an embargo on the trade of a friendly nation, under such circumstances, and without the slightest imputation against them. This had the desired effect; their cargoes were completed, and they lost no time in quitting the river of Canton. Scarcely, however, had they passed the Bocca Tigris, when an imperial mandate arrived at Canton to stop them. It stated that the Hoppo Yen had informed the court of the arrival of two Russian ships with two foreign merchants, named Krusenstern and Lisianskoy, having on board a cargo of specie and furs; that the said Hoppo, with the approbation of the Viceroy Ho, and the Sub-viceroy Sun, had allowed the Hong merchants to trade with them on fair and honest terms; it stated that this was a very negligent and summary mode of proceeding; that the Hoppo was very culpable, and that Ho and Sun were highly censurable for their concurrence; and the more so as the name of Russia had never before reached the court, which however they considered to be no other than the foreign pronunciation of Go-lo-sé. The Viceroy and Hoppo were therefore directed immediately to inquire whether these Russians really came from the nation of Go-lo-sé, and if so, how they, who had hitherto always traded by way of Ha-ke-hta (Kiachta) in Tartary, had now been able to find their way to Canton. They were to inquire also whether they had visited any kingdoms in their way thither; and whether they had not received information from some of them how to proceed to China. Also, whether the cargoes of the ships were on their own account, or that of their sovereign-the result was to be transmitted to Pekin by express--but if the ships should have already departed, then it was directed that no foreign vessel in future, belonging to any other nation than those which have been in the habit of frequenting Canton, should on any account be permitted to trade, until the orders of the court were received on the subject. After such a reception at the ports of the two great empires contiguous to the dominions of Alexander in the east, we do not expect to hear of the Russian flag again flying either in China or Japan. We cannot take leave of Capt. Krusenstern without expressing the satisfaction which we have derived from the perusal of his very clear and intelligent account of a voyage round the world, concluded apparently with great good temper, discretion and judgment, and narrated in a style of modesty and candour which cannot fail to secure the approbation of the most fastidious; and although we cannot subscribe generally to the sentiment expressed in the former part of the motto, from De Brosses, which he has prefixed to his book, when we call to our recollection the narrative of Capt. Cook, and the dispatches of the late Lords Nelson and Collingwood, yet we have no hesitation in pronouncing him justly entitled to the full praise conveyed in the concluding part, Les marius écrivent mal, mais avec assez de candeur.' ART. III. Traité où l'on expose ce que l' Ecriture nous apprend de la Divinité de Jésus Christ. Par feu Monsieur Pierre François le Courayer, Docteur en Théologie de l'Université d'Oxford; Auteur de la Dissertation sur la Validité des Ordinations Anglicanes;-De la Déclaration de mes Derniers Sentimens sur les différens Dogmes de la Religion;-Et Traducteur de l'Historie du Concile de Trente, par Fra-Paolo Sarpi; et de l'Historie de la Réformation, par Jean Sleidan. A Londres. 8vo. pp. 307. White et Cochrane. 1811. THE mixture of good and evil is experienced by all. From Homer we learn the machinery by which this is contrived. Δοιοι γαρ τε πιθοι καλαμεικται εν Διο αδει Ὧι μεν καμμίξας δωῇ Ζευς τερπικεραυνος Αλλοτε μεν τε κακῳ όγε κυρεται, άλλοτε δ' εσθλμ. Dr. Bell lately excited our admiration by his munificent endowment at Cambridge; but while our hearts were yet warm with so rare an instance of pious liberality, the alloy from the ' evil tub' descended upon us. He has, in short, equally surprised and distressed us by the spontaneous publication of the present treatise, a treatise written by a deceased friend indeed, but contrary, as we believe, and as Dr. Bell himself must believe, to the doctrine of Scripture, and unquestionably hostile to the establishment under which he holds a conspicuous situation. We have looked round to discover, if possible, some tolerable reason for so strange and unexpected an act, but the search has been fruitless. From an attentive perusal of the book itself indeed, as well as from the advertisement prefixed to it, we are compelled to conclude that some violence must have been done to the wishes of the author, by the publication of opinions such as these opinions which Mr. le Courayer must have been conscious would be followed by the reprobation of the country that had afforded him an asylum. We suspect too, that Dr. Bell does but tamper with his own mind in his statement of the motives by which he would fain suppose himself to be actuated.-L'écrit, dont il s'agit ici, n'a point été fait pour être rendu public. This is the very first sentence of the preface of M. le Courayer, which is confirmed by numerous passages occurring in the body of the work. Mon unique objet n'ayant été que de m'instruire, il a fallu renoncer à toute autre vue. Il suffit de lui (Dieu) faire approuver ma foi, sans entreprendre de juger de celle des autres,' &c. &c. It appears then, that the satisfaction of his own mind was the whole object of the writer in the first instance. If his intention was afterwards changed, and if he deemed his opinions too important to be withheld from the public, we can learn it only from Dr. Bell. The manuscript of the following work was given to me by her Royal Highness, the late Princess Amelia,* at the same time with that of the Tract, by the same author, entitled "Declaration de mes Derniers Sentimens sur les différens Dogmes de la Religion;" which I published in the year 1787. And these manuscripts, fairly written in the author's own hand, were given to the Princess by Dr. le Courayer himself, with this request only; that, if they were made public, it might not be till after his own death. A strong dislike to being the editor of a controversial work, upon the subject of that now before us above all others, in which the doctrine concluded upon is very widely different from that adopted by the Church of England, was the real cause of my not publishing the present Treatise immediately after the former Tract. That dislike still continues. But I am not able to satisfy my own mind, that it would not be an act of highly blameable presumption in me, finally to suppress a work of so very respectable an author; which, it is manifest, he took particular care to preserve; and plainly signified his consent to its being published after his own decease. 'Daughter of our late sovereign, King George the Second. In addition to this consideration, there is, in other hands, an imperfect copy of this work; which, if I should suppress the manuscript which came so honourably into my possession, may very probably be printed after my death. And, certainly, a due regard to the memory of the distinguished author requires that it should be given to the world from that copy, from which, it is beyond question certain, he meant it should be published.'-Pref. pp. iii, iv. What are the feelings of the reader from this statement ? Does he discover any thing but a forced and unnatural conclusion from Dr. Bell's own premises? Is he prepared to admit that plain and cogent reason which is pleaded by Dr. Bell for the present act of editorship, in the cautious, timid, and apparently reluctant mission of the author? It is evident, that Mr. le Courayer perhad a secret unwillingness that his treatise should be generally known for this indeed there was sufficient reason; and the probability is, that some private solicitation was used, before he gave that sort of modified consent which Dr. Bell has so faithfully recorded, and at the same time so strangely contrived to misunderstand. The author was afraid to meet in person the obvious consequences of such a publication, and only stipulated, that when the disclosure was made, he should be beyond the reach of our just reproaches. The recollection is an odious one; but the name of Bolingbroke starts up before us. Dr. Bell (a better Mallet) steps forward to gratify the doubtful will of the dead, at the expense of the best feelings of the living; he pulls the trigger, and with an impartiality which might be amiable, were it not utterly pernicious, discharges the contents against the church establishment of his own country! If any thing can add to our amazement, it is that part of Dr. Bell's advertisement which notices his publication some years ago, of the last sentiments' of Mr. le Courayer. The only consolation which we could derive from that treatise was, that it would close our acquaintance with the author. But we mistook; and have now to lament the absurdity as well as the noxiousness of these later than the latest opinions of Mr. le Courayer on the subject of religion. By this time perhaps the reader will feel some curiosity concerning the history of the distinguished author,' whose merits dwell so strongly on Dr. Bell's fancy, that he cannot withhold even his mischief from us. He was a regular monk, and librarian of the Abbey of St. Genevieve at Paris, and quitted France about the year 1727. The objections of the Romish Church to our English ordinations from the time of the Reformation, are well known. He wrote in defence of their validity, and was obliged, in cousequence to quit his country: his exile was therefore connected with an important question in our own ecclesiastical history; and hence arose VOL. VI. NO. XII. 51 and distressed us by the spontaneous publication of the present treatise, a treatise written by a deceased friend indeed, but contrary, as we believe, and as Dr. Bell himself must believe, to the doctrine of Scripture, and unquestionably hostile to the establishment under which he holds a conspicuous situation. We have looked round to discover, if possible, some tolerable reason for so strange and unexpected an act, but the search has been fruitless. From an attentive perusal of the book itself indeed, as well as from the advertisement prefixed to it, we are compelled to conclude that some violence must have been done to the wishes of the author, by the publication of opinions such as these-opinions which Mr. le Courayer must have been conscious would be followed by the reprobation of the country that had afforded him an asylum. We suspect too, that Dr. Bell does but tamper with his own mind in his statement of the motives by which he would fain suppose himself to be actuated.-L'écrit, dont il s'agit ici, n'a point été fait pour être rendu public. This is the very sentence of the preface of M. le Courayer, which is confirmed by numerous passages occurring in the body of the work. Mou unique objet n'ayant été que de m'instruire, il a fallu renoncer à toute autre vue. Il suffit de lui (Dieu) faire approuver ma foi, sans entreprendre de juger de celle des autres,' &c. &c. It appears then, that the satisfaction of his own mind was the whole object of the writer in the first instance. If his intention was afterwards changed, and if he deemed his opinions too important to be withheld from the public, we can learn it only from Dr. Bell. first The manuscript of the following work was given to me by her Royal Highness, the late Princess Amelia,* at the same time with that of the Tract, by the same author, entitled "Declaration de mes Derniers Sentimens sur les différens Dogmes de la Religion;" which I published in the year 1787. And these manuscripts, fairly written in the author's own hand, were given to the Princess by Dr.le Courayer himself, with this request only; that, if they were made public, it might not be till after his own death. A strong dislike to being the editor of a controversial work, upon the subject of that now before us above all others, in which the doctrine concluded upon is very widely different from that adopted by the Church of England, was the real cause of my not publishing the present Treatise immediately after the former Tract. That dislike still continues. But I am not able to satisfy my own mind, that it would not be an act of highly blameable presumption in me, finally to suppress a work of so very respectable an author; which, it is manifest, he took particular care to preserve; and plainly signified his consent to its being published after his own decease. * Daughter of our late sovereign, King George the Second. |