578 Retrofpec? of Domeftic Literature—Ecclefiaftical Eiftory, Se, 
extant in our own or any language. 
Like the Faft-fermon of Cappe, or the 
Militia-fermon of Walker, or the Om- 
niprefence-fermon of Fawcett, it will 
be quoted by the future Prieftleys, in 
their lectures on oratory and criticifm, 
as a monument of the eloquence of the 
foul. 
«¢ Gopwin’s Strictures on Parr’s 
Sermon, 28. 6d." | 
For what reafon can Mr. Godwin 
have thought it neceflary to publith 
Strictures on a Sermon, in which he is 
not apparently noticed, and in the 
notes to which his writings are quoted 
with politenefs? There is‘a want of 
that equanimity, which is fuppofed to 
characterife the philofopher,and which 
as the beft fupport of his dignity, in 
thus wincing at every gall, and an- 
nouncing now a conce‘lon, and now a 
reply. The Political Juftice was pro- 
bably as much over-vaiued at firit, as 
it has been under-valued fince. It was 
not immediately perceived, that many 
of the trains of argument pre-exilted 
in Hartley, in- Edwards, in Wallace, 
and in Hume; in Rouffeau, Diderot, 
and Helvetius ; and in Plato’s Repub- 
Nic. It has lately been overlooked, that 
to have read and culled the {yliogifins 
of fuch mafters implies in Mr. God- 
win no mean attainments of mind; 
and that although, like Bayle, he has 
re-ftated fuphifms, which, if received 
2s irrefragable, would anarchize mora- 
lity, he often propofes them with ana- 
logous fcepticifm, temper, and peripi- 
cuity. His publication was a tome of 
cafuiftry, which the Pafcals of Anti- 
jacobiniim have diffefted into heinouf- 
nefs : it would have been more courte- 
cus, but lefs courtly, to reproach leis, 
and to reply more. Mr. Godwin in- 
fuficiently diftinguifhes between per- 
tonal and pubiic duty, and, in his fits 
of voluntary tranfmigration, often 
makes his automaton reafon as a citi- 
zen, a magiltrate, or a ftatefman, when 
it ought to reafon asa father, a brother, 
or a neighbour. If Fenelon and his 
valet are about to be executed, let the 
sninifer of the interior preferably re- 
commend Fenelon to mercy, even if 
thé valet be the minitter’s brother ;, but, 
if Fenelon and his valet fall into the 
Seine, let the minifter preterably fave 
his brother from drowning. In his 
public capacity, he 1s to confult the 
advantage of rhe country: in bis pri- 
vate capacity, the tie of relationfhip. 
Jn the doctrine of promife and grati- 
tude, Mr. Godwin has this way mifled 
himfelf ; his fubjeét, however, is poli- 
tical, not individual, duty. That por- 
tion of his work, which has excited 
moi outcry, is the theory of agamy, 
or of exempting matrimony from the 
notice of the magiftrate. The plan is, 
no doubt, incompatible with inheri- 
tance, probably with the feparatior of 
property ; if is ungrateful to the fex, 
whofe age would be forfaken, and un- 
feelingly eradicatory of the domettic 
Charities; yet, furely the individual, 
who offers it for difcuffion, and who is 
fo little the fanatic of his fyftem as to 
have married immediately after, does 
not deferve all-that punifhment of in- 
famy which it is attempted to inflid. 
Plato, in the fifth book of his Repub- 
lic, propofes this very fyitem, with ac- 
companiments of licence and of cru- 
elty, towhich Mr. Godwin invites not; 
yet bifhops do not bluth to quote 
Piato with attachment, and moralifts 
have not fhuddered to name him with 
applaufe. Plato addreffes the beaft in 
human nature: he tickles the humour 
at the expence of religion; he wor- 
fhips the courage at the expence of in- 
dependence; he flatters the fenfuality 
at the expence of morals; he abfolves 
debauchery from the cares of parenta- 
lity; and feduces intellect by the pro- 
{pect of power. Mr. Godwin addreffes 
only the reafon, which is ufually an- 
gered when it is not convinced. 
Inftead of adopting fo apologetic a 
manner, Mr. Godwin, if he will reply 
at all, would do well to afflume that 
higher tone to which his principled 
(if erroncoufly principled) charaéter, 
and his difinterefted independence, is 
entitled. Let himcarry his attack into 
the camp of Anti-jacobinifm, and bring 
the pofitions of his adverfaries into the 
publicity which they want, and the 
moral indignation which they merit. 
The author of Strictures on Eyre’s 
Charge is no contemptible analyit of 
the arguments of others. He may 
find among his numerous antagonifts 
men, whe have denied the greateft 
good to be the right obje@t of aétion: 
men*, who have publithed fatires on 
fenfibility and philanthropy ;—men 
who, becauie we are born felfith, ac- 
quire next an attachment to our kin- 
dred and neighbours, next a partiality 
cee ene MSM ae Wile SE 
; 
* The bef fatire fince Dryden and Pope : 
its tendency will be regretted for ages to 
cceme, } - 
for 
