- 
ticle in ‘the univerfe upon it. Try to 
ccnceive this upon any mechanical or 
“material principle. 
Mechanifin Su ppofes contiguity of parts. 
Chemical aliaz tuppofes indefinitely {mall 
Giltances. Gravitation infinitely dilagrees 
from cither, and is not reconcileable to 
any fuppofition which can be regularly de- 
duced or coniiftently inferred from any 
propertics afcribable to matter. What- 
ever, ia the refult, becomes ot materiali/m, 
either fimple or mixt, the Newronian Phi- 
lofophy, founded in the relations cf the 
phenomena, is not in the leaft fhaken cr 
affected by it. Tam, Sir, your’s, &c. 
CapeL Lorrt. 
Fanuar} 9, 1805. 
P.S: Tam’ grieved that a refpeéable 
Correfpondent fhould be diffatisfied with what 
¥ have faid refpecting Mr. Hoilis. I was 
not confcious of an arrangement waich could 
admit. of the mifconftruétion intimated with 
yegard to Mr. Wakefield. And refpecting 
Mec. Wakefieid, I {tated as 1 thought, and 
ftiill think, fubftantiaily, and I believe lite- 
sally, on the beit authority. 
—ee 
Yo the Editor of the M 
SIR; 
onte aby Magazine. 
7 OV will much cblige me by giving 
a place, in your next Number, to 
the following communication, which has 
been addreTd to me ‘by that Hone: re-’ 
fpeted character, Major Ca artwrigl nts “OF 
the value of whofe good opizicn f am by 
no means infenfible, and whofe undeviat- 
ing attachment to the great istereits of 
minkind moft of your readers muit have 
often witneffed. 
The note to whichthe letter refers, was 
written by Mr. Wakefield, on a pafiage 
ia the ‘© Imitation of Juvenal,” which 
forms a part of the Appendix to the Gon- 
tinuation of his Memoirs. As So perfon 
could be lefs difsofed to advance a good 
caufe by toe flighte% mifreprefentation 
than the author cf that not e, fo Ef can at 
fwer for-my friend, with whom I am pee 
ed, in the conduét of the late publication, 
as well as for myfelf, that we fhall be 
thankful for any correétions which may 
enable us to complete, as far as is in our 
power, his juft and honourable tntentions. 
I remain, Sir, Your’s, 
bRyvl Retr. 
Royjton, Fan. 10. 805. 
Chafe Green, Enfield, 
_. Dear Sir, Dec. 3°, 1804 
The Memoirs of the Life of Gilbert Wake- 
S34 Letter from Major Cartwright refpecting Holt. 
[Feb. t, 
fieid, in vindicating the fame of a perfecuted 
man, who fhone an honour to our age and na= 
tion, will gratify the feelings of every liberal 
mind; but in the teadency of thofe Memoirs 
to infpire the prefent and future generations 
with a tafte for literature, a reverence for 
truth and integrity, an enlightened and 
fteady attachment to liberty, and a conviction 
of the ferenity and happinefs refulting from 
yenuine religion, they are an ineftimable 
treafure. 
With thefe fentiments af that work, you 
will not be furprized at my communicating 
to you an error I laft night difcovered, in 
hopes that, in any future edRion, it may.be 
corrected. 
Jn the note, vol. 2, P. 433; it is faid, that 
‘* Holt, the publifher of the Newark aur 
nal, was imprifoned in Newgate, for reprint- 
ing, without alteration, a pamphlet by Major 
Cartwright; to which the minifter, (Mr. 
Pitt) as a member of a political fociety, had 
given countenance. and circulation, The 
ecnfequence to this young man was, the ruin 
of his affairs, and death in a ghort time after.” 
True, indeed, it is, that the paper (for it 
was a fingle fheet) had been written by me, 
and at my requeft publifhed in a Leeds Newf- 
paper.in 1793 ; true it is, that the profecu- 
tion proved the ruin of Rolt’s affairs; and 
no lefs true I hold it so. be, that nis imprifen- 
ment was the caufe cf his premature death: 
but, illas I have learned trom experience, to 
think of the Minifter that has been mention- 
ed, as I with not to fee added to the heavy 
accufations againft him, 4 grain of untrute, 
it is proper I fhould correét that part of the 
ftatement, which {peaks of the pablication of 
my paper having had his ** countenanme and 
circuiation.” Of its original appearance he 
certainly had no knowledge; and, for cogent 
reafons, Tam convinced he never could have 
promoted, in any way, its publication. 
The paper, Sir, wes an exhortation in fa- 
vour of parliamentary reformation; and con- 
tained not 2 fentiment in which, fo long as I 
_hold the ufe of reafon, 1 fhall net glory. In 
the year in which it was written, ¢ a politi- 
cai lociety” did indeed give it ‘* countenance 
and circulation” to a wide extent: I fpeak of 
the Scelety for Conftitutional Information ; 
but Mr. Pitt never was a member of that 
fociety, nor as 1 imagine of any other, hav-. 
ing fimilar obie&ts. 
Mr. Wakefield, in common with the pubs 
lic in general, had, as I conceive, heen led 
into the error I have noticed, by a fpeech 
made by one of the counfel of Mr. Hoit. 
Where that error really originated, 1 know 
not; but as often as’ it has been mentioned 
in my hearing, it has been contradi@ed; a 
circumftance which, had it been known to 
the fincere votary of truth, whofe lots we de- 
plere, would affuredly have prevented his 
adoption of the report, 
Holt had republified the paper in queftion 
without 
