sions. In page 504, there appears a Latin letter with this address

66

Springeto Pennio, Liberalium Artium Studioso, Gulielmus Sevelius, S. D. P." and dated "Amstelodamo, I kalend, Novemb. clɔɔxc." In the running title and index, it is termed "Letter from Doctor Seveley to Springet Penn," of whose illness and death, in 1696, an interesting account is added in a long note (in English), extracted from a narrative written by William Penn, the father of this amiable young man. The practice that prevailed formerly of Latinizing surnames has given rise to many mistakes; and it is no wonder that a stranger to the parties and their connexions should substitute the supposititious appellation of "Dr. Seveley" for the real name of the writer of this letter, who was no other than William Sewel, of Amsterdam," known in this country as the author of an excellent Dictionary of the Low Dutch and English languages, and of the earliest genuine History of the People called Quakers, That he was a valued Correspondent of William Penn's, the eminent founder of the Province (now State) of Pennsylvania, is clearly evinced by an original letter which I have seen; and having been deservedly esteemed in his own country as an useful literary character, although certainly not of the first class, perhaps some little account of him, derived from his own occasional communications in his various writings, and from other authentic sources, may not be deemed altogether uninteresting, especially as nothing, in any detached form, has hitherto appeared respecting him in our language.

William Sewel was the son of Jacob Williamson Sewel, a free citizen (burgher) and surgeon of Amsterdam, by his wife Judith Zinspenning, and appears to have been born there about the year 1650. His paternal grandfather, William Sewel, was an Englishman, and had resided at Kidderminster; but, being one of those Brownists that left their native country to enjoy more religious liberty in Holland, married a Dutch wife at Utrecht, and settled there. Both the parents of the subject of this brief memoir died while he was young; but having instructed him in the principles of the people called Quakera, which they were amongst the

earliest professors of in Amsterdam, the religion of his education became that of his judgment; and, through the course of a long life, he continued to be a steady, useful member of the before-mentioned religious society. It is believed he had not much schoollearning, as it is known that the proficiency he attained to in the knowledge of the Latin, Greek, English, French, and High Dutch languages, was acquired, principally, whilst throwing the shuttle in the loom, during his apprenticeship to a stuff manufacturer. His natural abilities being good, his application unwearied, and his habits strictly temperate, he soon became noticed by some of the most respectable booksellers in Holland; and the translation of works of credit, chiefly from the Latin and English tongues, into Low Dutch, seems to have been one of the principal sources from which his moderate income was derived, in addition to the part he took, at different times, in several approved periodical publications. His modest unassuming manners gained him the esteem of several of that knot of literary men, for which Amsterdam was at that period distinguished; and there is reason to believe that their productions were, not unfrequently, revised and prepared for the press by him. His knowledge of his native tongue was profound; his Dictionary, Grammar, and other treatises thereon, having left very little room for succeeding improvement; and he assisted materially in the compilation of Halma's French and Dutch Dictionary. His History of the People called Quakers, written first in Low Dutch, and afterwards, by himself, in English (dedicated to King George I.) was a very laborious undertaking, as he was scrupulously nice in the se lection of his materials, which he had been during many years engaged in collecting. Of the English copy, it cannot be properly called a translation; it may be truly said, that as the production of a foreigner who had spent only about ten months in England, and that above 40 years before, the style is far superior to what could have been reasonably expected. One principal motive to his entering upon this work, was, a desire to endeavour to counteract the effects of the gross misrepresentations that had been widely disseminated by a Latin publication, intituled "Historia Qua

keriana,

keriana," written by Gerard Croese, a learned German, who, after soliciting and obtaining information from both friends and foes to this religious society, seemed to have taken no pains to make any proper discrimination; so that his history (as he calls it) is a strange compound of truth and falsehood; but, being written in elegant Latin, and the Learned, throughout Europe, having been long waiting for something in the form of an historical account of that singular people, it obtained a place in most university and other public libraries; and being afterwards adopted by the editors of a splendid French work, bearing, in the English translation, the title of " The Ceremonies and Religious Customs of the various Nations in the Known World," as the principal authority upon which their unfair representation of the Quakers is founded; this farrago of Croese's may be considered as the chief cause of those mistaken notions that have prevailed very extensively throughout the Continent, respecting the doctrines and practices of that class of Protestants.

The exact time of William Sewel's death does not appear; but, in a note of the editor's prefixed to the third edition of his Dictionary, in 1726, he is mentioned as being lately deceased. He left a son of the same name, of whom considerable hopes were entertained in his youth; but going to England with a view of attending the yearly meeting of the religious society before-mentioned, (whereof he was a member), in company

with a young man to whom he was strongly attached in the line of friendship; the vessel in which they had embarked was, in a violent storm, wrecked near the Texel. Sewel, being an excellent swimmer, undertook to endeavour to save his companion, who could not swim, by means of a rope fastened round their bodies; but, on reaching the shore, and drawing the rope, he found his friend was gone, This melancholy event had such an effect upon his brain, that a settled gloom clouded bis mental faculties during the whole remainder of his life,

To those who have been long wishing to see a biographical memoir of William Penu, upon a more extended scale than any that has hitherto appeared, it may be gratifying to

know that a considerable progress has been made in collecting materials for such a work, by a Member of the Established Church. It is said, strange as it may appear, that hardly a letter or paper formerly belonging to this truly great man is now in the possession of any one of his descendants. A FRIEND TO ACCURACY.

You

Mr. URBAN, April. YOUR Correspondent "Scrutator Oxoniensis," in your last number p. 219, has reduced Dr. Marsh's arguments against the Bible Society within the contracted span of a syllogism, which, in my opinion, by no means embraced the whole scope of his reasoning. That this subject, therefore, may have the justice done to it that is due to its importance, I beg your insertion of this letter, containing the result of cool deliberation on the point in question. When this matter was first proposed for public discussion, I, in common with many others, who look upon the Bible as dispensing light and life to mankind, hailed the approach of that day when the Gospel would be made known to all natious, and in all tongues; and, under that persuasion, was on the point of contributing my mite to its support, when the objections of Dr. Wordsworth first made me pause, and those of Dr. Marsh at length fixed in me the resolution to withhold my assistance from an institution which was, to say the least of it, so suspicious in its tendency. As I consider Dr. Marsh's to be the most lumninous production hitherto offered upon the subject, my intention, at present, is simply to condense within as few words as possible, what I conceive to be the substance of the Doctor's argument. I must premise what your Correspondent Scrutator certainly must have overlooked, that Dr. Marsh does not object to a Bible Society; on the contrary, he maintains, "that the more widely the Scriptures are disseminated, the great er in all respects must be the good produced;" but he objects to a Bible Society so constituted as to give away the Bible without the Prayer-book. His leading arguments, against such a Society, may be comprehended under three heads; namely, that it is unnecessary, it is unnatural, and it is hurtful. This Society is unnecessary; the

Bible may be distributed by Churchmen and Dissenters, separately, to as full an extent as conjointly. The Church contains, within itself, wealth, learning, and every requisite for forming the most powerful association, and needs no external aid to give efficiency to its plans. But even supposing that the distribution of the Bible were to a certain extent curtailed by the distinct operation of Churchmen and Dissenters; this consideration can never justify the Church for entering into so forced and unnatural a coalition. It is a coalition voluntarily entered into upon the most unequal terms by one party, who complaisantly renounces its grand characteristic tenets in order to meet the views of another. This is not accommodation upon the principle of Christian charity; it is the amalgamation of the one party with the other. Every Churchman, therefore, joining with this Society, ceases, by that act, to be a Churchman, and becomes a Dissenter. Nor is even the subordinate object obtained from this coalition, which is professedly held out, namely, that of destroying all distinctions in the Christian world; for in the very outset it establishes a distinction between Churchmen and Dissenters, by vesting the management of the Society in the hands of an equal number from each class; so that the door is open for much future dissention and ill-will, when the enthusiasm of the moment is subsided; or if not, it is much more to be feared that so complete a harmony will, in time, subsist between those remaining in the Society, who may still adhere to the forms of the Church, and the professed Dissenters, that they will all, in the end, opeuly join in their hostility against the Establishment. This brings me to the last and most important argument in Dr. Marsh's letter; namely, that such a coalition is injurious. The Professor has very ably shewn that the bare habit of neglecting to communicate the Prayer-book must, in the end, necessarily engender an indifference for it in the minds of all, in whom no such sentiment previously existed; and that inasmuch as an indifference for the Liturgy is awakened, so much are the interests of true religion endangered. This is the language of a Churchman who is consistent in his

belief, and openly avows what he believes. Are those Churchmen consistent, who attempt to disparage the Prayer-book, by bringing it into comparison with the Bible? Can such men really believe that the bare distribution of the Bible is ALL THAT is necessary to make men good? In that case churches, meetings, ministers, and forms of worship, are all superfluous; a result which no man in his sober senses will be willing to see realized. It may serve the purposes of a party, to preach up this universal religion equivalent to no religion; but every sober-minded man will see that religion must be supported in the world by an outward form, and every Churchman will admit that the form as set forth in the Common-prayer is the best possible; and consequently, while he holds this opinion, he cannot join with any religious community where this essential part of the Christian religion is slighted and neglected. Your Cor respondent Scrutator has manifestly fallen into confusion, and a miscon ception of Dr. Marsh's sentiments, when he attempts to prove, by quotations from the Bible and the Homilies of the Church, that the duty of searching the Scriptures was binding on all descriptions of persons, as if Dr. M. had disputed that which is the leading tenet of his Church. On the contrary, the Doctor labours to prove that the Bible is deficient in nothing; but that man is altogether imperfect, and will pervert his greatest good to the worst of purposes; that the Bible contains every thing necessary to salvation, but that the interpretations of men will often lead to destruction; and that, since men must and will interpret, and others will follow their interpretations, it is the duty of the Church to maintain what it conceives to be the purest interpretation, and in no wise to contribute to its downfall by co-operating with those who make a point of adopting an opposite form. "I am equally with the noble Earl," says the Doctor, note 6, p. 44. " and the whole army of my opponents, who are accustomed to say the same thing, unable to comprehend how 'the most extensive circulation of the Bible can possibly injure the Church.' The point on which I am at issue with them is, whether the Church of England may not possibly be injured

by

by AN EXTENSIVE OMISSION OF THE LITURGY." In another place, p. 45, he says, "The Liturgy is the criterion of the Churchman. The Liturgy, by the law of the land, is the test by which Churchmanship is tried. Whoever rejects the Liturgy, ceases to be a Churchman." He afterwards proceeds to show how important the rejection of the Liturgy has been at all times to Dissenters, who consider it as the prelude to the downfall of the Church; and how, in the same proportion, it ought to be prized by all Churchmen, who wish to uphold it, and the Establishment itself.

From all that I have now written, you will, doubtless anticipate my conclusion to be widely different from that of your Correspondent Scrutator."

Mr. URBAN,

P. Q.

April 4.

F there really exist such a mon

these innovations, in the whole or the part, or to disgust by a careless haste in the delivery of our admira ble forms of prayer. The person who has assumed the title of the "Chris tian of the Old School" is loudly called upon, by his whole church and neighbourhood, either boldly to substantiate his charge, or to confess a mistake which cannot easily be forgiven. If it be, as there is reason to suspect, an individual who is thus covertly aspersed (although the aspersion affects the character of the whole Church), and if that individual be found clear from the charge, and a charge thus pernicious the result of a careless report, I really should sigh for the old law, that the malicious accuser should be condemned to the same disgrace which he endeavours to bring upon another in a manner so very far from ingenuous.

I would suggest, however, a pro

omission' of the Litany and Communion Service by any Minister of the Church, in the performance of divine worship, your Correspondent of the 224th page owes it to himself, his religion, and his country, to stand up boldly and expose it. He says it is notorious in some of them: there can consequently be no difficulty in bring ing home the charge to one of the most obnoxious; and thus to lay an effectual restraint upon these unparalleled proceedings.

I must be permitted, however, to say, that it is an unparalleled accusation; an accusation that should never have been brought at all, or never brought in the place where it is. If it be true, and "notorious, and systematic," it loudly calls for exposure. If it be asserted on insufficient grounds; if on the usual inventive exaggeration of report, or on mere suspicion of probabilities; the charge is most indiscreet, if not in every respect worthy of severe censure. I cannot doubt, however, that the charge is absolutely false; and if not the mere product of envy and resentment, that it is the work of some Dissenter, designing to disparage those characters who, while they strenuously oppose him, emulate his zeal and activity. I cannot believe that any ministers, who have zeal enough to exert themselves in their profession, could either have the unconscientious hardihood to dare

There are many Clergymen who, whether from pecuniary or religious motives, undertake three full duties upon the Sunday. On alternate Sundays there are consequently two full morning services to be performed. The earliest hour of commencement may be ten in the morning; the latest hour to which the attendants would patiently suffer their Sunday dinner to be protracted might be half past one. If we allow half an hour in passage from church to church, there will remain three hours. Now I have known it often happen in such cases that there have been baptismal or burial occasions at each church: both the baptismal and burial services are long, and not of a nature to be shortened, or hurried over. In such a case (by no means an unfrequent one) I conceive that every Bishop, Court, and individual, would rather approve of the omission of the Litany (origi nally a service entirely distinct, and still in its nature remaining so), than that the whole should be hurried over with "disgusting haste;" this is the alternative. As to the omission of the Communion Service, in the course of some experience and much enquiry, I never knew an instance: I never heard of the charge until this coward friend, or this disguised enemy to the Church, most indiscreetly, if not improperly, advanced it. Let me ask of him whether, in any case, he has

made

made any proper enquiries among those who should be well informed of the substance of his accusation. Is the object conscious of the imputation and attack? Are there no gentlemen, or no respectable farmers, in the villages alluded to (I cannot conceive in what part of the country, or under what bishop), or has he been obliged to have recourse for information to a discarded servant, or to a publican incensed by the proper regulation of his disorderly house, and who, at the institution of Evening Lectures, whether on the Sabbath or weekly, complains that these Methodistical ways are unfair upon him? Upon my honour, I have heard this complaint seriously and angrily alleged; and it may be a set-off against the disgusting and indecent insinuation of "the deeds of darkness." It is well known by those who are in the habit of attending such pernicious nocturnal revels, as the evening worship of God, that no distant inhabitants ever appear. There is no such zeal among Churchmen. Perhaps this may be a matter of regret: Differing, I hope, from your Correspondent, toto cælo, I would hazard the possible evil for the certain good. Where there is a will to sin, there will be a way; but, really, I know none so unlikely as the way from Church.

66

a

It is not, however, my intention to enter upon the subject of Evening and Weekly Lectures; it suffices me that they are rapidly spreading among the Clergy in all quarters, and that the minds of most seem perfectly satisfied with respect to their propriety, as well as utility and absolute necessity. For my own part, as to the manner, I like nothing so well as connected written discourse delivered with impassioned feeling :" but I do not see the crying sin of an extemporary preacher. Extemporary discourses are almost always more intelligible to the poor, and consequently more pleasing. Few persons read even tolerably, how much fewer with impassioned feeling; and without good reading written discourses are seldom of much service. Johnson finely observes with respect to the kindred subject of action in the pulpit, that,"compared with the conversion of sinners, propriety and ele. gance are less than nothing." As on this point, however, I wish not to

contend with the Old School, I draw to a conclusion; feeling myself, however, once more under the necessity of complaining of the insinuation, that there are in his neighbourhood ministers, "who interlard their discourses with tremendous damnatory expressions, enslaving the mind; producing sometimes the most daring presumption, at others the most gloomy and deplorable despair." Is such the admirable constitution of our Church, and can these things be? If your Correspondent, Mr. Urban, had been indeed of the old reforming school, he would not have thus cast general reproaches upon his body, but would have stood up like a man and a Christian, and have brought these matters before the proper tribunals. Wide a circulation as your Magazine has, it might have seemed at least more probable, that the persons thus accused would never hear of the accu sation, or at least not until they had long been unconsciously labouring under much unmerited odium. Should the scandalized person be the last to know the situation in which he stands? An Apostle says, "Go, and tell thy brother his fault, tell it a second time with witnesses; then tell it to the Church." A man, who has borrowed the title of a Christian of the Old School, never tells it to the guilty person (at least so I must presume), and much less to his spiritual superiors; but cautiously conceals it from the man, troubles not himself to reveal it to the church, tattles of it to the world. For what end ?—To indulge, perhaps, some little passions; to blast a name among his friends; to give cause of complaint against the whole organization or administration of the Church; aud; by the obvious example of the entire impunity of a notorious crime, to encourage the actual existence of such indolent or pernicious innovations upon the ecclesiastical formularies; and such shameful infractions of the ministerial oaths. It is true that the Ministers of the Church have few exact means of knowing each other's mode of conduct in public worship, but weekly lectures give this opportunity, and if your Correspondent be sincere in his belief of any thing substantially wrong in a brother's public conduct, let him gain a certainty. Let him boldly attend (or, if he choose, in one

of