126 
tion would, ere this, in all probability, 
have been fettled : and it would have been 
acknowledged, that THE s¥YSTEM OF 
IDEALISM, ~ WHEN DISTINCTLY AND 
FULLY STATED, 1S SATISFACTORY 3 
and that no other is fo. 4 
~ [have kept all advantages of this fyf- 
tem out. of view, till I’ had eftablithed 
what appears to me to be the proof of it: 
that the argument might proceed as far as 
poffible, without prejudice or prepoffef- 
fion. But I now fay, zo advantage is 
Joft: the SENSIBLE UNIVERSE undoubt- 
edly exifts ; for its exiftence is IN PERCEP-- 
TION. The order, beauty, and harmo- 
ny of that univerfe perfectly exift? for 
thefe depend only on the Laws of our 
perception being fuch, as that the more 
we multiply, combine, and csmpare our 
perceptions, thefe refults are more nu- 
Merous, convincing and complete, and 
muft be eternally. And by feeing, to a 
full convition, that minpb alone exifts, 
and that neither matter nor fpace exitt 
otherwife than as its voluntary modifica- 
tions, our admiration of the suPREME 
MIND, our confidence in the omnipotent, 
omnifcient, and all-beneficent direction of 
that mind, is entirely confirmed. Decay 
and Death become merely phenomena. 
MIND being aLL, eternity and progref- 
five gradations of power, activity, good- 
nefs, and happinefs for ever, manifeft 
themfelves in unlimited energy, and un- 
clouded {plendour. GOD is thus, un- 
queftionably, ALL IN ALL: and every 
percipient being has to depend for its pre- 
fent and future exiftence, not on orgazi- 
zations of infenfible matter, not on a con- 
ict of fuppoled percipient atoms, not on 
an union between dead and living fub- 
ftance, but on the certainty, .if thefe con- 
clufions be juft and neceffary, that, MIND 
being the fole exiftence, the relation of all 
to the eternal and all-perfeé&t mind will 
ultimately be manifefted in the moft per- 
feé& flate of all percipients: and THE FE- 
LICITY OF THE UNIVERSE will be un- 
bounded and univerfal: a:l that exifts 
being finally exalted to its higheft poffible 
good; and nothing exifting which, as im- 
ercipient, can be incapable of happinefs, 
or, as eflentially vicious, can be irrever- 
foly milerable. ‘That DEALISM, confe- 
quently, includes the fulleft reliance, of 
the conftitution of the prefent fyftem being 
fuch as that MIND folely cemprizing all 
EXISTENCE, confcioufnefs of good and 
happinefs, perfect and univerfal, muft be 
the COMMUNICATION to which the UNI- 
VERSE is neceffarily tending, and in 
which every order of being, every indi- 
Pope's ‘January and May. 
[March 1, 
vidual exiftence, will affuredly be efta- 
blifhed. I am, Sir, ae 
Trofton, near Bury, Your’s, &c. 
Fan. 6,1803. CaPEL LoFFT, 
To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR, 
HAT Mr. Pope's ‘§ Faxuary and 
May,’ or the ‘* Merchant’s Tale,” 
was borrowed from Chaucer, is well 
known; but thofe who are fond of tracing 
our ancient romances and ftories to an 
Eaftern fource, will be pleafed to learn 
that fome incidents in this tale are found, 
with a very flight variatiqn, ina Perfian 
Poem of the thirteenth century. The in- 
cidents I allude to are the Lady's ‘* firug- 
gling with a man upow a tree,” in the 
prefence of her hufband; her perfuading 
him of her innocence in oppofition to 
the teftimony of his eyes; and attri- 
buting the appearance of her infidelity 
to magic: the tree in which fhe ftrug- 
gled -with her lover being a pear-iree, 
&c.—All thefe (as I can affirm, on the 
authority of Sir William Oufeley) occur 
in the fourth fection of the Majfzavi, a 
celebrated work compofed by Gelaleddin 
Rumi, about the year 1260 of the Chrif- 
tian era. 
Dee. 30; 1802. fi! Q. 
ee ; 
For the Monthly Magazine. 
IMPERFECTION OF THE FRENCH RE- 
- PUBLICAN. CALENDAR. 
Danifh writer, Paftor MourreEr, 
A of Copenhagen, has lately pub- 
lifhed, in a paper intitled ‘* The 
Danifn Minerva,” a critical attack on the 
French Republican Calendar. The argu- 
ments,which are chiefly levelled againft the 
bafis, or two principal points of the ca~ 
lendar, that is to fay, the era which has 
been fixed upon, and the feafon at which 
the year 1s made to commence, are not 
deftitute of a conclufive weight and plau- 
ibility, and are, at leaft, well worthy of 
due attention. ‘* And firft (fays the au- 
thor) the choice of the 22d day of Sep- 
tember, whereon the republic was pro- 
claimed, is, methinks, contrary to the 
extenfive views of a general polity, which 
never dwells on the confideration of any 
one people in particular. Befides, there 
is an almoft indifpenfible neceffity, that 
all nations which have any fort of mutual 
relations, fhould have a common era; at 
leaft, this gives a fingular facility to their 
calculations. But wherefore fhould the 
reft of Europe agree to adopt the French 
era, which is not fufficiently Se 
Fail oF 
