صور الصفحة
النشر الإلكتروني

most effectually purifying houshold goods or apparel which are supposed to harbour infection. This is performed by long fu. migation in a close place; and the linen, before it is put into hot water, should steep for some time in cold soap lees.

We shall now proceed to give a succinct account of the Doctor's second paper; in which we are favoured with his method of treating those who have received infection. In general the first fymptoms are a shivering and sickness at the stomach. In this ftate a gentle vomit must be immediately exhibited, which will often entirely prevent the fever. Let me add, says our Author, that a loose stool or two should at this time be procured, either by means of the emetic or of clyfters. The patient should afterwards, when put to bed, take a sweating and quiet. ing draught, containing 5 grains of salt of hartshorn, and from 15 to 20 drops of Thebaic tincture. At other times we have given 5 grains of camphire every four hours, with large draughts of vinegar whey. But if symptoms of a fever remain after the adıninistration of the vomit, clysters, &c. or should the exhi. bition of an emetic have been altogether neglected, or unluckily delayed too long; or the patient injudiciously treated with sweating medicines, and bleeding, where the proof of infectio", is evident ; recourse must speedily be had to blisters; these are to be applied to the back, if the head or limbs are affected; and to the breast, should the pain have feized that part. When the infection by these means hath been removed, in 24 or 36 hours after the operation of the blister, the intestinal canal should a

fecond time be gently cleansed, by giving rhubarb with a small " quantity of vitriolated tartar.' "These observations, continues

the Doctor, claim the more attention, as not being a few remarks made in private, or on any one particular fever, which might prove an exception to a general established principle in practice. They are the result of an attention to some thoufand patients, whose cases are still preserved in the hospital.'

The morbid appearances after death in such bodies as were opened, were these. In a patient who died of the yellow fever was found in the left cavity of the thorax, near a quart of yel. lowish water, in which were many large fakes of yellowish gluten; other cakes of the same nature, but in a purulent state, adhered to the pleura and lungs. In one who died on the tenth day of the fever, without having been yellow, a quantity of pus and purulent crufts were found within the pericardium, and be heart in different places excoriated. In a third, who died on the 13th day of the fever, above two quarts of pus and purulent jelly were found in the cavity of the abdomen,

Thus we have endeavoured to select from these two sensible papers, such observations as may be of most general utility.

Upon Upon the whole, we think they will deserve the attention of all Practitioners (to use a word we very much dislike) and that the Doctor's method of treating his patients, is extremely rational and judicious'; but before we take our leave, he must permit us to say that we should have read his papers with more pleafure, if the language had been more correct, and scientific; caul, guts, belly, are not more intelligible to medical readers, than omentum, intestines, and abdomen. We are by no means fond of a pedantic use of technical terms, yet there ought certainly to be a difference between the language of the shambles, and that of the anatomist.


A Letter to the Reverend Vicar of Savoy : To be left at 7. F. Roulfeau's

. Wherein Mr. Rousseau's Emilius, or Treatise on Education, is humorously examined and exploded. Translated from the German of Mr. J. Moser, Councellor of the High Court of Justice at Osnabruck, &c. &c. By J. A. F. Warnecke, LL. C. a Native of Osnabruck. 8vo. . IS. Dodfley,

MONG a number of impertinent and fruitless attempts

to depreciate the character, and ridicule the sentiments, of Mr. Rousseau, we might have passed over the letter before us, with a very cursory animadversion, were it not ushered into the world with the name of a writer equally respectable in his political and literary capacity. Not that a more material reason is wanting for expatiating pretty largely on some particular passages of this performance; its ingenious author appearing to take advantage of the present disputes between the divines and philosophers, to represent religion as a political device; in which human prudence is more concerned than either conscience or truth.

truth. But, , as we cannot help thinking that both the present and future happiness of mankind depend greatly on the propagation of truth and the preservation of a due regard to the dictates of conscience, so we can, by no means, approve of such arguments as tend to establish religion and morals solely on a mere prudential and political foundation. This, however, seems to be the prevailing notion of the times, nor is it to be wondered at that the expounders of human laws should become advocates for political religions, when we have fo recently seen even preachers of the gospel adopt the like sentiments. It may poffibly admit of some excuse in a civilian, that his religion is absorbed in the ideas of civil policy ; but what can excuse a divine for his eagerness to render the dictates of truth and conscience fubordinate to political expedients; to fubject the will of his God to that of his Prince ? In justice to our Author, it must be confefled, that, though a lawyer, and, as such, merely a fervant to the state, he doth not seem to give up the cause of God so entirely as hath been done by some of his priests. He admits, indeed, that religion is a political engine, but then, he says, it is such an one as is framed and employed by God, in his terrestrial dominions ; and when we worship, extol, or praise him, then we promote his honour, and the honour of God is the happiness of his creatures.'

As to the manner in which this political engine hath been introduced to the world; the Letter-writer endeavours to prove it perfectly confiftent with the divine wisdom apparent in the ordinary dispenlations of providence. On this head, he throws out some threwd and ingenious remarks, tending to thew the insufficiency of natural religion and the expediency and utility of revelation. But we shall pass over his arguments on these subjects; and proceed to the exceptionable passage above hinted at. After inculcating the necellity of an established religion in every civilized state, our Authorasserts, that the oeconomy of every religion absolutely requires this public assertion, that there is no salvation out of it. It seems to me, says he, that a religion without this axiom cannot produce its proper effects in civil society ; at least I think that if the following doctrine was inserted in capital letters in a public catechilm, that ONE MIGHT BE SAVED IN ALL RELIGIONS, such a doctrine would very much lessen that enthusiasın which is neceffary to be kept up. 1, for instance, in my thoughtless puerile days, should certainly have reasoned thus : “ Let my mind have its full fcope, and if it does not bring forth truths, it will at least produce fancies, and every religion is acceptable to God." So certainly I should have argued, unless my father had concealed from my view a little longer the important doctrine of the indifferency of all religions, and had first inspired me with a prejudice against this opinion you have adopted. When I had attained to riper years and more discretion, I might perhaps have been reasonable enough not to suffer myself to be put out of the way by it. But the world of children, who never arrive to the age of manly understanding, I should always have pitied. Such an indifferency would, in my humble opinion, have deprived every religion of the power of laying hold of the conscience, which, however, is necessary for obtaining the purposes of an oath, which, though so awful and tremendous a thing, is yet absolutely requisite in civil society. This induces me to believe, that every religion, in its public doctrine, muft exclude all others, and leave to the philosopher alone a salutary uncertainty for the subject of his speculation.'

Now, with due deference to this learned councellor, we conceive that enthusiasm, which he thinks so necessary to be kept

[ocr errors]

up, to be of the most dangerous consequence to civil society, and that the spirit of toleration which admits that 'one may be saved in all religions,' ought to be universally propagated, as conducive to the peace of states and happiness of mankind. We are also so far from being convinced that oaths are, as he says, absolutely requisite in civil society, that we think it better they should be entirely abolished, than that the horrid principles of intolerance and persecution should be cherished, in order to render them of use.

The next extraordinary affertion our Author ventures to make is that Religion dares not depend on argument.' The reason which he gives in support of this affertion is curious ; " for this, says he, cannot be done without allowing every man's reason to be a judge.'-But why should not every man's reason be his judge ? Will this Writer pretend to say that moral virtue is less practised, or that religion hath a lefs good effect on the minds of men, in those countries where every man is at liberty to chuse his religion, than in those where all are compelled to adopt the religion of the Prince? Are the Dutch or English more wicked and licentious people than the Italians, Spaniards or Portuguese? Our Author may lament the loss of that influence, which the Clerical character once had over the minds of men; but we are persuaded that every sensible man, who is a friend to Liberty, will think the gradual suppression of ecclefiaftical tyranny one of the greatest blessings that distinguish modern times. Mr. Moser, on the contrary, thinks it absolutely necessary that truth and prejudice, or any thing else, muft join together in order to keep up this political fanétity, this divine mark of infallibility, and to preserve the greater reverence for this order.' those states and countries, continues he, out of which a part of this truth, or this important prejudice, has been banished by Thomasius, or his fucceffors. The bishops, canons and other ecclefiaftics, have cast off with their black robes the character of their order. They are not feared more than other men.' Thus we see this curious politician is not content with placing the fear of God before our eyes; but we must also stand in like fear of the priest. Imprudent politicians, says Mr. Moser, have in fome countries invested the sovereign even with the administration of the ecclesiastical revenues, and not only rendered him master of all the benefices, but also deprived the ecclesiastics of their right of voting. The sanctity of common sense, by which the secular states were supported, is vanished away, and it is but meer chance that the sovereign is juft; if he be not, no body can oblige him to be fo. Come on now with your natural religion, and transform all the clergy into ordinary men, lessen the opinion of the common people concerning them, and say, that the Holy Ghost does no longer in a particular manner dwell

« View only


tary force.

in them, fortify therewith the sovereign against heaven and hell, against tumulis and insurrections; what advantage do you think would arise from that ? Indeed the Reformation was of great fervice to a Riman Catholic Prince, but the Roman Catholic Religion is still at present of great service to Protestant Subjects ; in this religion the political fanality of the Clergy is much better preserva ed. It has not yet been suppressed by the double-edged conclulion, That no STATE within a STATE ought to be endured; which in its undeterminate compass may as well be dangerously as usefully employed. - It is true, that the episcopal rights are now juitiy united, under one head, with those of the prince of the coantry, but m it happily not so mixed together, but one may distinguish the various places and charges, or the office of High Steward from the Sovereign himself.--All those who robbed the Clergy of their political santiity, which cannot be sufficiently founded upon any thing else but a divine revelation ; all those, I say, brought upon mankind a very great calamity; for we need not have been afraid, that the clergy would have abused their pow. er, given by us, since the Sovereign keeps up a perpetual mili

i Never, (faid once a Turkish statesman to me) never mind the Mufti's being ever so bad a man, do but kneel before him in the dust, if thou art a subje&t to the Grand Sultan ; for he and his clergy are the only sacred rocks behind which thou canst screen thyself, if the tyrant should be seeking after thee. Does God Almighty grant thee, in his wrath, thy demand, allowing thee to venerate the worthy clergvman alone, and to despise the unworthy one publickly; then doft thou destroy the political farctity of this Order, and the tyrant will readily accept of this thy distinction, and that priest who is to justify and vindicate thy caufe, he will call an unworthy advocate, and for this reason condemn him to be killed, and then he will afterwards kill thee also.

"So reafoned a Turk, who was not a Donatift, and who did not afirm, That the force of the word of God depended only upon the behaviour of the prieits." What would become of Spain and Portugal, since they lost their laws, if the ecclefiaftics did not prevent the exorbitant use of the sovereign power*"-This is what Montisquieu fays, and I don't urge any more but this, that natural religion cannot affect so great an advantage, and that there are in fome countries such political regulations established,

Hid the natives the spirit to shake off ecclefiaftical tyranny, they might easily restrain the Monarchical, obtain new laws, and become a happy file peuple.- Probatum eft : Witness England and Holland ; countries once labouring under the severest yoke both of regal and ecclesiastical tyranny.


« السابقةمتابعة »