of the Church, he thought he deserved, he concludes his excellent observations thus, (which I have thought it my duty to transcribe, for the sake of shewing the opinion entertained by so deep read a layman of the Articles and Liturgy of our Church.) "Our author," says Mr. Stevens, "sums up the whole with a petition, which he wishes to be preferred to the Bishops; and I will conclude with what I wish the real friends of the Church may present to them by way of counter-petition. That the present set of Articles, which, for the soundness of their doctrine, are the glory and ornament of our Church, and cannot aggrieve any but its open or secret enemies, may be preserved to us whole and entire: for we have no objection to subscribing them fairly, as they contain nothing but what is read in Holy Scripture, or may be proved thereby; and we verily think they are our best security against the Papist, the Infidel, and the Heretic. That our Liturgy, compiled from the Liturgies of the first and purest ages of the Church, not only as to the form, but as to the matter and expressions, and composed with such simplicity and majesty, as to be adapted to the capacities of the ignorant and unlearned, and edifying and instructive to the most enlightened, may be continued to us in its present perfection, without addition, and without mutilation. That our Church may still be, what it always hath been, the honour of the Reformation, the strongest bulwark of the Gospel against Popery, and the brightest star in the Christian firmament. The terms of our communion are pure and scriptural; and if they, who now dissent from us, will continue to do so, the fault is theirs, not ours: we have done our duty, and they are to see, whether separation from such a Church does not involve them in the guilt of Schism." But, strenuous as Mr. Stevens was, in defending the Doctrines, Articles, and Liturgy of our venerable Church, and sharply as he treated the work above mentioned, yet his generous conduct to the individual was just what might have been expected from one, who knew, that to do to others as you would wish them to do to you, was a prominent command in that Gospel, which he made the guide of his life. An enemy of this Clergyman, finding Mr. Stevens to be the author of the "Cursory Observations," wished to furnish him with some personal reflections on that Reverend Gentleman; but he was dismissed by the good-humoured and kindhearted man, telling him, that the faults of the book, and not of the man, were the objects of his attack. Many years afterwards, by the kind instrumentality of a mutual friend, these two literary combatants became very sociable. Mr. Stevens certainly never altered his opinions; whether the Clergyman ever changed his, I know not; but as many years have now elapsed, since he published his Address, which was the object of our author's remarks, and he must then have been a young man, it is fair to presume that he saw reason for changing the opinions he entertained when he published that pamphlet. In the year 1776, Mr. Stevens published "A Discourse on the English Constitution, extracted from a late eminent writer, and applicable to the present times." His motive for this publication was to counteract the dangerous absurdities which, about that time, were published in factious newspapers, to answer the purposes of a party, and to throw every thing into confusion, by furnishing people with a few rational principles concerning the nature of civil power, the necessities of society, and the positive laws of their own country. His object, therefore, in publishing this tract, was, to convince his deluded fellow-subjects that there was no liberty without law, no security without obedience. In the year 1777, he published two distinct works: the one, entitled, "Strictures on a Sermon, entitled, 'The Principles of the Revolution Vindicated preached before the University of Cambridge, on Wednesday, May 29th, 1776; by Richard Watson, D.D. F.R.S. Regius Professor of Divinity in that University;'" and the other, entitled, "The Revolution Vindicated, and Constitutional Liberty asserted; in answer to the Rev. Dr. Watson's Accession Sermon, preached before the University of Cambridge, on October 25, 1776." In both these works, which may well be considered together, he takes severe notice of some of the learned Doctor's topics; and contends, that the Doctor and his friends endeavour to support doctrines, in their political creed, which, if followed, would destroy, and not preserve the constitution, grounding all authority in the power of the people; while Mr. Stevens insists, that the revolution intended to preserve, and did preserve, the constitution, in its pristine state and vigour; and that this is manifest from the convention, founding the revolution entirely on the abdication and vacancy of the Throne. It is certainly quite clear, that many persons, who wish to support the wildest doctrines of democracy, have been very happy to lay hold of expressions of writers, such as Dr. Watson, to give, as it were, a colour to their absurd notions; notions which such writers would fly from with abhorrence. Mr. Stevens, on the other hand, endeavours to make the Scriptures the standard of his politics as well as morals; and certainly argues with great force and ability. Prior, in point of time, to any of these latter works on political subjects, he had proved his intimate knowledge of, and his critical acquaintance with, the Hebrew language, by a work, entitled, "A new and faithful Translation of Letters from M. L'Abbé de Hebrew Professor in the to the Rev. Dr. Benjamin Whether the letters were translated from the French, as the title-page imports, or were the work of Mr. Stevens himself, it is not material to enquire. The object of this publication was to offer some observations on the Doctor's proposals, and to point out the supposed evil tendency of the plan. Some severe animadversions upon Dr. Kennicott's plan had been drawn from the pen of Dr. Horne, under the title of, "A View of Mr. Kennicott's Method of Correcting the Hebrew Text, &c. humbly submitted to the consideration of the Learned and Christian World." These particulars are noticed, to shew that Mr. Stevens (if de did err) did not err alone in his judgment upon the points at issue; but that he thought on them with persons of profound erudition and skill in biblical researches, who, from their knowledge of the Hebrew, were competent to form an opinion on the subject; and who apprehended, on mature reflection, that much evil might accrue to the cause of revealed religion, much dishonour be cast on the sacred writings, and much advantage, however unintentionally, be given to infidelity, by an indiscriminate reference to every manuscript copy of the Hebrew Bible, that could be procured. The design of substituting a new text from the mass of such heterogeneous materials, for the one now in use, which it was well known had ever been preserved with scrupulous fidelity, under the special Providence of the Almighty, was thought of by Mr. Stevens, as fraught with imminent disservice, not to say with extreme danger, to the cause of religion. But whatever may be the sentiments of men of learning, and particularly of those who are more conversant in He : brew than I profess myself to be; or, however they may differ on the question, as to the integrity and corruption of the Hebrew text, Dr. Kennicott's work has been now many years in the hands of the Hebrew scholar and certain it is, that Mr. Stevens, by the part he took in the controversy, has not disgraced either the cause or himself; but has displayed a perfect acquaintance with the subject, a profound veneration for the Bible, and a most anxious solicitude to preserve its purity. If sometimes there appear to be a severity, there is no sourness in the censure; and even in his honest indignation against whatever to him seemed hostile to the interests of Christianity, there is no personal animosity; and his natural vivacity is ever friendly to religion, and often visibly restrained by a sound judgment and a serious heart. These were all the works Mr. Stevens published between the years 1777 and 1800, excepting the sketch of Mr. Calverley's character, which I have already given, as printed in the Gentleman's Magazine; and he could not be prevailed on to announce himself as the author of any of them. But, at the earnest solicitation of his friends, he collected them into a volume, which, with his characteristic humility, he styled, Oudevos epya, the works of Nobody and by the appellation of Nobody he was ever afterwards known amongst his friends. This collection he gave to several; and, to the books of some of his friends, he added, in the blank leaf at the beginning of the volume, this sketch of himself, the justness of which, though extremely well drawn, will not be acknowledged in all its parts: "Never was person better described by proper name, than the writer of the following sheets. View him in what light you will, he is NOBODY, a mere cypher, a blank in creation. "Even in these papers, suggested possibly more |