across the table, "Say no more, the court have admitted your claims ;" and one of the Sheriffs made a like observation : we therefore withdrew. At ten o'clock on Monday morning we again entered the Court, and in about an hour afterwards, when the Lord Mayor and Judges had taken their seats, the Recorder demanded the names and places of abode of those who waited to be sworn. These being again given, he then ordered the oath to be administered to two of them who lived in the city, and the remainder to withdraw. It was in vain we urged the sacred promise of the Court made to all, when they were equally well acquainted with our places of residence as they were now. We then addressed his lordship the Mayor, assuring him, that although as a civil magistrate, we disclaimed his right to demand our religious opinions, as a ground of censure, or approbation, of our teaching them, yet as those opinions (as it appeared from circumstances) had been misrepresented, to enable his lordship to judge of the men and their minds, we offered to present his lordship with a list of the subjects we had treated on for the last six months, and the manner in which they had been discussed; that if his lordship would but peruse it, if by it he should find us to be bad men, or bad subjects, we were willing to abide the consequences, without attempting to shelter ourselves under secrecy, subterfuge, or evasion. His lordship seemed to assent, and the paper was handed towards him; but when it had nearly reached his lordship, it was ordered to be returned. Having again taken this paper, we left the court, and immediately went to Hicks's Hall, where after the business of the Court was over, we made our demand: Mr. Mainwaring, the chairman, heard us with attention, and as a man who regarded the laws of his country, immediately complied with our demand. The following Sunday morning, through the goodness of God, we met at eleven o'clock, free from every human interruption, and surrounded by an additional number of friends and enquirers after truth; we then examined into the distinguishing differences between Judaism and Christianity, shewing that the national and ceremonial religion of Moses could not be performed out of the land of Canaan, but that its moral precepts still remained, and were the precepts of Christianity, and binding upon all; having to increase our obedience to them, added to every Jewish inducement for their observance, the certain knowledge of our resurrection from the dead, and a future judgment, confirmed and demonstrated by the resurrection of Jesus, now made known as our future judge. At six o'clock in the evening of the same day, we assembled again, and such numbers attended, that crouds went away for want of room: amongst others who assembled, was Mr. Sibly, the short-hand writer, sent by the Lord Mayor to take down our discourses, and Mr. Nalder, the City Marshal, to judge of our orthodoxy, besides apparently many more sent to spy into the exercise of our Christian liberty, demonstrating that the great serpent, the devil, who for ages past accused our brethren, the servants of Jesus, before the throne of God, is not yet cast out; nevertheless, nothing intimidated, we were enabled with boldness to declare, that after the way in which they called heresy, so we worshipped the God of our fathers. As many misrepresentations of these transactions are abroad, we deem it a matter of justice to all parties, to give a simple relation of the facts, without comment. With regard to ourselves we know not what may be the intentions of Providence concerning us, but this we do know, that however dear may be the purchase, it is wisdom and duty to buy the truth, and sell it not; convinced that whoever professes to be the disciple of Jesus, and is ashamed of him, or of his authority, before men, of that person will he also be ashamed when he cometh in the glory of his father, attended by all his holy messengers." ON THE RESURRECTION. To sleep-perchance to dream.--Hamlet. To the Editor of the Freethinking Christians' Magazine, THE SIR, HE subject of the resurrection is interesting to every mind that looks before and after. The first question to be answered is-Does man die? There is every reason to believe that he does. Man is a being compounded of body and ideas, and feelings are dependant upon the body; they are modifications of its existence; when the body is decomposed, or when its structure is essentially disordered, ideas and feelings are annihilated. This state is that which we call death or nihility. Here then is the finis of man. Hallet says "I see a man move, and hear him speak; from his speech, I infer, that he thinks as I do. I see, then, that man is a being who thinks and acts. After some time the man falls down in my sight, grows cold and stiff. He speaks and acts no more. Is it not then reasonable to conclude, that he thinks no more? As the only reason I had to believe that he did think, was his motion and speech, so, now that his motion and speech cease, I have lost the only way of proving that he had a power of thought. Whence can I infer that the man consists of two parts, and that the inward part continues to live and think, when the outward part ceases to live and move? His motion and thought die together, as far as I can discern." But what is the meaning of the resurrection?. It signifies to rise again, i. e. in fact to move again, to think, and to feel again. How can this effect be produced? It is evident that it can be produced, by the immediate will or power of God alone. It is then a perfectly new creation ? Exactly so. As to identity, there is no such thing, except it be in God. It is an absurdity. Nothing is the same for two moments together. Our bodies are continually changing by food and drink, and by their own internal operations. Our ideas and feelings follow each other in rapid succession. But will this event of the resurrection ever take place? The answer to this question is necessarily a matter of pure faith, and faith depends upon evidence, and evidence is weak or strong, according to the previous structure of the mind to which it is addressed. After all, I think the subject is involved in great mystery. Your's, &c. Sandon, Jan. 3, 1812. ON PULPIT PREACHING. G. G. F. To the Editor of the Freethinking Christians' Magazine. EN SIR, NCOURAGED by a sentence in your Prospectus, "we do not promise a display of great literary talents, nor even at all times grammatical correctness," I venture to offer a few thoughts for the consideration of your readers. My design, like that of your correspondent in his excellent paper on justi fication (No. 2), is not "to wage a war of words," but to obtain information;-not to oppose, but to assist, as far as juvenile ability is capable. I must express my joy at your undertaking: "may your la bour not be vain!" May our youthful minds be instructed in the truth, as it is in Jesus, and our feet guided in the pleasant paths of wisdom! May the aged be freed from every hurtful error and mistaken opinion, and may the spread of pure and undefiled religion be greatly increased! Yet, Sir, permit me also to express my regret, that such harsh expressions should be used by some of your correspondents, calculated, in my humble opinion, rather to disgust than to invite-rather to prevent attention being paid, than to lead persons to examine their arguments. The subject on which I beg to submit a few remarks is pulpit preaching. You will not wonder, Sir, that I should be an advocate for the practice, when I inform you, my family has year been notorious for supplying the pulpit, for many years, and that I have occasionally addressed companies from the same place; yet, Sir, I would have you know that they have not been hired for the work. An aged relation, now in his 80th (who has exerted himself in his master's cause for more than half a century), was, a few years ago, summoned before the commissioners of the property tax; one of them, a gentleman of the lawn sleeves, or more properly a despot arrayed in his proper colours, the sable dress, informed him, he had forgotten to insert, in his return, the salary he received for preaching; to which he replied," I do not preach for gain, or divine for lucre." No, Sir, he can sing the glorious anthem-" come, buy wine and milk, without money and without price." Your correspondent, on "the manner in which Jesus and his Apostles taught in the synagogue," &c. lays down as a truth that pulpit preaching "is founded on the precepts of Jesus and his Apostles, or it is absolute rebellion against their authority."-In this, Sir, I must beg to differ from him; I am ready to grant that no man at the present day is authorized to preach by any particular command of our lawgiver, or by the precepts and example of Jesus and his Apostles; but that our conduct is absolute rebellion against their authority, I cannot yet see. The Apostles, you remember, Sir, forbad one casting out demons, in the name of Christ, because he followed not with them; but the reply of Jesus was, "forbid him not, for he that is not against us is for us." Though he did not act according to the directions given them, yet having in view the good of his fellow-creatures, he was in a measure promoting the same cause. Is the converse of this reply false, he that is for us is not against us? If it be not, I think we do not act in rebellion to the authority of our master, since we have the same thing in view-the present and future welfare of man. On this ground, I would rest the propriety of pulpit preaching-if it be sand, let the fabric sink! Truth is calculated to promote the happiness of man, and whatever is productive of such an effect ought to be propagated. If it be the duty of a Christian to instruct his brother, it must be his duty to instruct five or ten brethren; and if ten, fifty or five hundred, if they desire it; and what just reason why five hundred may not be instructed or exhorted, at the same time, as well as fifty or five? If I may stand and admonish at a table, on a level with my fellow creatures, why may I not stand on a stool, if an elevation would be more convenient? If on a stool in a small company, why not on a pulpit of wood where the company is larger? This may, and, I grant, ought to be done, without attaching sacredness to the place, or supremacy to the speaker. It may be said, "Truth ought not to be propagated at the expence of truth; that we are departing from truth, and therefore destroying truth, when we depart from the method laid down by the apostles to speak one by one, &c. But, Sir, why may we not consider this as a local direction, suited to the persons addressed? Were the Apostle now alive, would he disclaim any honorable way to promote the real influence of virtue and piety, or treat pulpit preachers, as "Pagan Christian instructors" and lecturers" to astonish the ignorant and bewilder the fearful," when he knew that many were turned from the dominion of sin to the liberty of the gospel, through the means of exhortation ? I prefer the mode you esteem right, where circumstances are suitable; but where it cannot yet be effected, and the other mode is calculated to promote moral virtue, I think we are justified in practising it, and are not deserving of such opprobrious terms and disgraceful language. That many, under the pretence of instructing the poor and unlearned, secretly aim at their own elevation, may be too true; and in exposing the baseness of such conduct, I wish you success. I say, such conduct, not the person; but is this abuse of a thing to be considered as a reason against the thing itself? Why may not a person lecture on theology, and the moral virtues, as well as on astronomy or mathematics, without acting in rebellion to Jesus, or pretending to act in obedience to his commands? Is not the moral utility of the thing a suf ficient authority, since no direct prohibition of it is recorded; for I cannot yet see that Paul's advice to the Corinthian church is to be considered as a rule for every nation, every situation, and every age? 1 shall be happy to hear farther remarks on this subject, and hope to free myself from any prejudice that may prevent the reception of truth. Cranbrook, Jan. 9, 1812. JUVENIS. ON THE STABILITY OF THE LAWS OF NATURE. To the Editor of the Freethinking Christians' Magazine. SIR, REQUEST that you will print a few lines, chiefly in explanation of some parts of my last letter, which I perceive are not clearly understood. 1. Mr. Teulon is informed, that, by the "point at issue," I mean the general question-the stability of the laws of nature; and that the subordinate proposition, namely, that the resurrec tion of a particular man strictly involves an infraction of that |