429, 
credulous, fuperftitious, and, through zeal, 
even knavifh; what credit, they afked, can 
be given to their teftimony ? And then, 
what credit can be given even to the mi- 
races of Chrift and his apoitles, feeing 
their very exiftence depends, according 
to Dr. Middleton, on teftimonies which 
ought not to be admitted ? 
But our limits forbid us to advance. 
We cannot, however, forbear copying the 
following paflage from the Preface to the 
Free Inquiry, which, for the exquifitely 
beautiful turn of the numbers, but more 
for the weight and dignity of the fenti- 
ment, deferves to be written in letters of 
gold. “I look on the difcovery of any 
thing that is true, as a valuable acquift- 
tion to fociety, which cannot poflibly 
hurt, or obftruct, the good effet of any 
other truth whatfoever ; for they all pol- 
fefs one common effence, and neceflarily 
coincide with each other, and like the 
drops ef rain, which fall feparately into 
the river, mix themfelves at once with the 
fiream, and ftvengthen the general cur- 
rent.”* 
NO. CXIX. DR. LONG. 
Dr. Long, formerly mafter of Pembroke 
Hall, is celebrated for his Treatife on AL 
tronomy, and his invention of a large tin 
f{phere, placed in’ his own college, to thew 
the places, appearances, and motions of 
the heavenly bodies. He was a Diffentient 
againft the Univerfity, on a particular 
occafion, of the humorous kind. The 
Jadies of Cambridge, it feems, had been 
permitted, time immemorial, to fit in the 
gallery. at the commencement. The 
Vice-chancellor, however, and heads hav- 
img. ordered that the fair-ones fhould no 
Jonger occupy that high fituation, and 
having appointed them their places in the 
aifles below ; a little bulile was excited a- 
mong the Cambridge ladies, and.a fub- 
je& for a few jokes was afforded the mem- 
bers of the Univerfity. In the year 1714, 
Dr. Long delivered the mufic fpeech at 
the commencement. ‘The galant aftro- 
mnomer took for his fubjeét the complaint 
of the Cambridge fair at their hard treat- 
ment. It is in verfe of a mot fingularly 
odd kind, and the fentimenis are full of 
.drollery and quaintnefs, As this foeech- 
as, however, very {carce, and, perhaps, 
in the poffeflion only of a few members of 
the Univerfity, a fpecimen of it, on a pro- 
per occalion, may not be unacceptable. 
It is pleafant to feca great man defcend 
from his heights. 
His humble province was, to guard the fair, 
Pope, 
Sed nunc non erit his locus, 
Cantabrigiants 
(Decal, 
NO. CXX. BISHOP LAW... 
Bifhop Law was formerly fellow of 
Chrit’s, Author of the Theory of Natu- 
ral and Revealed Religion—a diiinguithed 
netaphyfician. 
While at Chrift’s, he publifhed his 
Tranflation of King’s Origin of Evil, 
with notes, and, in 3734, his Inquiry 
into the Ideas of Space, Time, Immen- 
fity, &c. being an attack onthe a PRIORE 
argumentation of Dr. Clarke’s Démon- 
{tration of the Being and Attributes of 
God. Believers, as well as unbelievers, 
agree in accufing Dr. Clarke, d’Innova- 
tion & de defervir la caufe, én employant 
une methode inufitée, rejettée, & peu propre 
a rien prouver. ‘Thefe are the words of 
the celebrated Mirabeau in his Sy/feme de 
la Nature, who has given a critical and 
elaborate examination both of Newton’s 
and Clarke’s proofs of a deity ; he adds, 
gut voudront connoitre les raifons dont on 
S eft fervi contre les demgnftrations de 
Clarke, les trouwveront dans un ouvrage 
Angloife, qui a pour un titre, An In- 
quiry, &c. 
In the year 1777, Law publithed Locke’s 
Works in four volumes. From this 
great man’s writings he imbibed a ftrong _ 
tincture of herefy, political, metaphyfical, 
and theological; previoufly to which, he 
had been engaged ina corre{pondence with 
Archdeacon Blackburne, the acute author 
of the Confeffional ,the Subject being againft 
Sub{cription to Articles of Faith; and - 
even fix years after he was made a bifhop, 
he ventured to publifh “* Confiderations 
on the Propriety of requiring thefe Sub- 
{criptions;~ and on thefe erouile we place 
him among the Cambridge Diffentients. 
But, befide this declaration of diffent in 
general, in protefting againft fub{cription 
to Articles, he was known to be a diflen- 
tient ina great variety of particulars. He 
profeffed the doftrine of the intermediate 
ftate of the foul, or of its fleep from the 
time of death till the refurreétion ; and 
notwithfianding the alarm: excited, he 
defended the opinion, on taking his doc- 
tor’s degree, in the divinity-{chools. The 
doétrine of original fin,, alfo; he repro- 
bated, and even ridiculed, calling it ‘‘ the 
fin of being born,’? 1 Cor.xv,2m ‘*As 
in Adam all die, even fo in Chrift fhall 
all be made alive,”’ he interpreted literally, 
maintaining that Chrift would recal to lite 
all mankind, who for Adam’s tranfgref- 
fion would otherwife have been left ina 
ftate of infenfibility and death; a doc- 
trine that goes not half the length of 
“every child’s being born deferving Gad’s 
wrath 
ee 
