480 
P E I 
PEINT, a town of Plindooftan, inBaglana: twenty- 
eight miles north-weft of Nafl’uck. 
PEINT, a town of Hindooftan, in Guzerat: twenty 
miles fouth of Dungerpour. 
PEI'PUS LA'KE, or Tschud'skoe, a lake of Ruflia, 
which lies between the governments of Pfcove, Reval, 
Riga, and St. Peterfburg, extending in length to about 
So and in breadth to 60 verfts. By means of a very broad 
ftrait it is connected with the Pfcove-lake, the length of 
which is ftated to be 50, and the breadth, which is always 
decreafing, 40 verfts. This latter receives the river Ve- 
likaia. Out of the Peipus comes the Narova, which 
through the Embach has communication with the 
Vertz-erb lake ; out of this, on the other hand, flows the 
Fellin into the gulf of Riga ; and confequently a very 
beneficial water-paflage might be made between Riga and 
fome of the inland provinces, by way of the Peipus-lake. 
In this lake there are a few fmall iflands, none of which 
are fufficiently important to deferve notice except Perka 
or Bork, called by the Efthonians Porkafaar , which is not 
only inhabited, but furnifhed with forelts, and has no lefts 
than three villages upon it. Among the feveral brooks 
and rivers that flow into the Peipus, the Embach is the 
moft confiderable. The exit is through the Narva river 
into the gulf of Finland. The multitude of fifth that 
breed in this lake afford a lucrative occupation to the 
boors of thefte parts, and increafe the revenues of the ad¬ 
joining eftates, the owners of which let out the parts on 
which their lands abut at a certain rent. The fifh are 
principally rebj'e, a fpecies of herring, and barbel: be¬ 
tides thefte, here are pike, perch, a fpecies of carp, whi¬ 
ting, quebb, korufhki, gudgeons, &c. Lat. 58. to 59. 10. 
N. Ion. 27. to 27. 28. E. 
PEI'RAH, a town of Malacca, fituated on the weft 
coaft : 100 miles north-weft of Malacca. Lat. 3. 40. N. 
PEIRCE (James), a learned Englifh diflenting divine, 
was the fon of reputable parents, and born at London in 
the year 1673. Having had the misfortune to lofte both 
his father and mother while yet a-child,, he was taken 
under the care of his guardian, Mr. Matthew Mead, a 
celebrated minifter at Stepney, in whole houfe he was in- 
ftructed in the firft rudiments of learning by a private 
tutor. Afterwards he was placed in different grammar- 
fchools, till he was prepared for entering upon acourfe 
of academical ftudies, when he was lent to the univerfity 
of Utrecht. Here he conftantly attended the leCtures of 
Witfius, Leydecker, Graevius, Leuftden, and other emi¬ 
nent profeffors; and cultivated a friendfnip with fome of 
the moft diftinguiflied of his fellow lludents, particularly 
with Adrian Reland, who continued to be his correftpon- 
~dent after he attained to confiderable celebrity as a pro- 
feffor. From Utrecht Mr. Peirce removed to Leyden, 
where he had the opportunity of hearing Gronovius, 
Spanheim, and other profelfors of the higheft character 
in the republic of letters. Having ftpent between five 
and fix years in thefte feminaries, he returned to England, 
and lived for fome time with his relations in London; 
and then took private apartments at Oxford, where he 
procured accefs to the Bodleian Library. After this, at 
the requeft of his friends, he preached a Sunday-evening 
lecture at Miles’s lane in London, and occafionally in 
other places, without interefting himftelf with the dift- 
putes then exifling between the Prefbyterians and Inde¬ 
pendents. With the minifters of the former denomina¬ 
tion he became well acquainted, and at their earned feli¬ 
citations fettled at Cambridge, where he acquired the 
refpeCt and efteem of many members of the Univerfity. 
From Cambridge he removed to Newbury in Berkfhire, 
where he appeared to advantage, in the year 1707, in a 
controverfy with Dr. Wells, a clergyman of Leicefter- 
fthire. That gentleman, out of his zeal for the interefts of 
the Church of England, had publifhed and circulated 
with great activity, “A Letter to Mr. Peter Dowley,” a 
diflenting minifter, by which he laid himftelf open to ani- 
nujdverfion, in conftequence of the account which he 
P E I 
gave in it of the the principles and practices of the dif- 
ftenters. This Mr. Peirce undertook to controvert, and 
publifthed in fucceflion eight “ Letters” to the author, in 
which he convi&ed him, not only of various miftakes, 
but of unjuft and calumnious mifreprefentations. After 
the termination of this controverfy, Mr. Peirce publifhed, 
at different periods, various able polemical tracts, rela¬ 
ting to the rites impofted under the eftablifhment, the va¬ 
lidity of the diflenting miniftry and preftbyterian ordina¬ 
tion, and the imputed fin of ftchifm. 
Mr. Peirce’s next publication, was a work of much 
greater importance, and was called for by the appearance 
of “ A Defence of the DoCtrine and Difcipline of the 
Church of England,” written in the Latin tongue, and 
fubmitted to the judgment of foreign divines, by Dr. 
Nichols, Latin fecretary to the Society for the Propaga¬ 
tion of the Goftpel. In this work the author had given 
fuch a view of the controverfy between the Church and 
the Diffenters, as was intended to expofe the latter to 
the cenfure and condemnation of their foreign brethren ; 
on which account Mr. Peirce was earneftly folicited to 
undertake their vindication in the fame language, for the 
purpofte of counteracting the effeCts of Dr. Nichols’s 
performance. He accordingly publifhed his “ Vindicias 
Fratrum Diflentientium,” in which he gave a full and 
very fatisfaCtory anfwer to his antagonift. This w : ork 
was publifhed in 1717 in the Englifh language, with large 
additions, under the title of “A Vindication of the Dif¬ 
fenters, &c.” It confifted of three parts : the firft con¬ 
tains the hiftory of nonconformity ; the fecond treats of 
the doCtrine of the church of England ; and the third 
contains all the heads relating to difcipline and worfhip. 
It, in fact, prefents the reader with a view of almoft the 
whole controverfy between the eftablifhed church and the 
diffenters. 
In 1718, Mr. Peirce took part in the controverfy rela¬ 
ting to the Teft Aft, and publifhed “Letters” on the 
fubjeCt to a friend, and to Dr. Snape. He had previoufly 
to this removed from Newbury to Exeter, having had a 
general and moft unanimous invitation from the three 
united congregations of the diffenters in that city. In 
this fituation he gave the greateft fatisfaCtion in the dift- 
charge of the paftoral duties, till there arofte a controver¬ 
fy concerning the explication of the Trinity, which w>as 
productive of very difgraceful conftequences. He had 
been educated in the trammels of orthodoxy as it was 
called, but had, during his miniftry, learnt to fhake off 
all thofte unfcriptural phraftes which then, as well as now, 
were looked on as a kind of teft of a man’s religious opi¬ 
nions. Fie confidered the Scriptures as the only rule of 
faith, and from a very early period he took care to ufte 
their language in his fermens, when he introduced any 
doCtrinal topic; and as he advanced in years he grew more 
careful in his adherence to this practice. The doCtrine 
of the Trinity he looked upon as a myftery , and was 
averfte from ftpeaking or even thinking upon it. But his 
attention was unavoidably drawn to it by the clamour 
which was railed concerning his friend Mr. Whifton, for 
whom he had a high efteem ; and at firft he was ex¬ 
ceedingly hurt to learn that Mr. Whifton had declared 
againft the current doCtrines of the day. He expoftulated 
with his friend ; but, inftead of convincing him of his er¬ 
ror, he himftelf became a convert to the herefty that he 
had been ready to condemn. “ The reader,” fays Mr. 
Peirce, “ will eaftily imagine that this muft have been a 
terrible Ihock to me ; and that I muft have had a great 
concern upon my mind, wdien I found myfeif at a lofts 
about a doCtrine of which I had been all along fond, to a 
degree of uncharitablenefs. However, this caufted me to 
read the Bible with more care, and make it more my 
prayer to God, that I might be led into the truth.” It 
was not long before he was fully fatisfied that the com¬ 
mon opinion was not accordant with the doCtrines held 
forth in Scripture. Being fufpeCted of holding heretical 
opinions, he was attacked in the moft hoftile manner; 
3 and 
