ernment, towards the fupport of which they cheerfully contribute, in proportion to their ability. This people confift of different claffes, difperfed in various places, and approximating in different degrees to perfection. The fettlement in New Lebanon, as it is the most ancient, is alfo confidered as the venerable mother of all the churches, and forms the first clafs. It confifts of about one hundred and fifty members of both fexes, who have one common stock. When a perfon forfakes parents, wife, and children, adds his property to the funds of the fociety, fubmitting to their manner of life, and to their difcipline, he is regarded as a perfect man, and not far from the kingdom of heaven. I am told, they are declining in numbers, which has leafened their manufactures. The females of this fociety are watched with a fevere and ferutinizing eye. Whilft walking in the garden, we faw feveral of them standing at a door, and inclining to gaze at us. As we approached to them, we observed jealoufy, in the form of one of their old men, call them into the houfe, and clofe the door. We were however fufficiently near, to obferve their pale and emaciated countenances. That religion, Carlos, cannot be true, which would clothe the fairest human form in the garments of despair. We were made for focial, happy beings; and furely it is right, that our eye fparkle with pleafure, and our countenance glow with health. This is all I know of them at prefent. On Sunday, we mean to attend their publick worship, which, I am told, is very fingular. Your friendship for my brother claims both mine and his gratitude. Tell him to imitate none but the good, to fear nothing but difhonour, and to with for rothing but the approbation of the excellent. Sunday, Sept. 28. Thus much I wrote laft Friday; this forenoon, I attended the meeting of the Shakers, and my curiofity was amply gratified by their religious ceremonies. They affemble in a spacious hall, about fixty feet in length, proportionably wide, and neatly painted. The men and women enter at different doors; no one, not even a franger, is permitted to infringe this rule. They are dreffed in uniform. in white cap and handkerchief, fhort ftriped gown, brown skirt, and check apron, all of their own manufacture: the men, in drefs equally plain, but not fo uniform. The women, Having fat one half hour, they formed into two feparate bodies, confifling of five rows with twelve in each, men on the right, and women on the left. Thefe two bodies diverged from each other, leaving in the centre a small vacant space of about four feet. They then fang a hymn, fome of whofe notes refembled part of Old Hundred, but without words. The mufick had no variety of parts; its harmony refulted from voices in different octaves, but all preferving perfect time. One of the elders, an old gentleman, then advanced into the centre, and addressed the audience for ♣ Mr. Elitor, ***** ** FOR THE ANTHOLOGY. few moments, but in a voice fo this and the preceding to the low, that I could not understand friendship of him. It feemed to confift of a few fentences difconnected. They then formed into two deep fquare bodies, ranged with military exactnefs, and began to labour, as they call it. It is fomething between dancing and walking, accompanied with vocal mufick, which I know not how to defcribe. They then refumed their feats. After fitting one quarter of an hour, they ranged themfelves as at firft, fang another hymn, fome parts of which were very high, producing an unpleafant effect. This concluded the ceremony. About one hundred and thirty were prefent. Of the females three or four were handfome, the rest resembled despair rather than humility. I have now given you an imperfect account of this curious mode of worship, which feems almost too unmeaning to be ferious. But the human mind delights in vagaries, and to this fource you must attribute the origin of this fect. It tends to confirm the old remark, that enthusiasm cannot form a religion ever fo abfurd, which will not find votaries. But becaufe the world is full of falfe religion, it docs not follow, that none is true. Truth is modeft, unaffuming, but not from fear, and gains more by the charms of her mind, and by long acquaintance, than by the rofe of her complexion, or the fplendour of her drefs. Some write long letters from vanity, and fome from impertinence; but I hope you will attribute IN reply to Minutius in your laft number I beg leave to obferve, that from S**** B*****, a diftinguifhed friend at Nantucket, I learned, that the young woman, Jenny H,, in Mrs. Knowles' dialogue with Dr. Johnfon, was fent from the W. Indies to England for education, and placed under the care of Mrs. Knowles. This is all that I can now recollect of the information of friend B***** *; nor can I remember for what reafon Dr. J. claimed any control or direction in her education. piece in Poulfon's Daily Advertifer, of Oct. 8, 1803, which I fend you for publication, feems to give fome further hints of the character of Mrs. Knowles. Her hufband was a phyfician. A "In the American Daily Advertifer of the 10th of Auguft laft, we inferted an extract from the Charleston Courier refpecting the Vision and Death of LORD LYTTLETON. Having fince feen feveral manufcript accounts of the fame events, differing materially from that publication, but which appeared to be very incorrectly copied, we have fought for, and obtained, the original writing from which they had been tranfcribed, and now prefent a faithful copy of it to our readers.The original (at prefent in our poffetlion) is in the hand writing He IN No. 10 of your work is a paper, containing remarks upon a difcourfe of Dr. Howard, before the Humane Society. We know not who the author is; but think him worthy attention. appears to be a man of medical experience, and well informed in the theories of refpiration and animal heat. But we think he has mistaken the theory of Dr. Howard, or does not understand it. The pleafure which I received from the performance myfelf will, I hope, ferve as apology for fome obfervations. In the first remark there is appearance of a little want of candour. The words of the author are: The origin of animal heat is by him (Dr. Howard) believed to be quite diftin&t from the refpiratory procefs, and depend. ant upon a fubtle, incomprehenfible, and unintelligible princi 'ple.' Dr. Howard does not appear to believe or to fay any fuch thing. He does not fay, animal heat is independent of, if that be what you mean by diftin& from, the refpiratory procefs. If I underftand him rightly, he says, that animal heat is not produced by evolution of caloric from oxygen to the blood in the lungs ; but that animal heat is produced and preferved by animal action, animal action by respiration, and refpiration by evaporation of the galles from the fkin and lungs. We do not say this theory is true; but we think it fimple, ingenious, and philofophick. Dr. Howard does not fay, that animal heat is dependant upon a fubtle, incom 'prehenfible, and unintelligible 'principle.' His meaning ap pears to be, that, when the integral corpufcles of an animal fibre are made to vibrate, they, like other matter, grow hot, and com. municate calorick to bodies in contact; and is not this beat animal heat? It is next afferted, that there is no reason, why the diaphragm and abdominal mufcles thould not be contracted by the propagation of the external ftimulus, (air) as well as by the internal ; and as the former exists first, it muft operate firft.' There is great difference between faying there is no reafon,' and there is no visible reafon. Why the contact of air fhould contract the intercoftal muscles, and not the abdominal at the fame time, may be difficult to explain. But it is a fact, that no part of the human furface can be touched with cold air, or cold water, without producing immediate inspiration. and enlage the thorax. We mufttion does not commence of it therefore grant, that either the mechanism is fuch, that the thorax would be enlarged, though the abdominal and intercoftal mufcles were to contract together, or, if the intercoftals alone contract, that this partial affection depends upon fome fympathy of mechanism or nerves, which anatomy nor philofophy has yet elucidated. As for the diaphragm, I do not myself believe it contracts at all. But if it do contract, it is, as Dr. Howard fays, its elevation, and not, as anatomical authors fay, its depreffion. For if the diaphragm contract, while the ribs diftend, they must counteract each other. But, fince no contraction of the diaphragm feems necessary, we think it does not happen. Elevation of the ribs must depress it to a plane, and contraction of the abdominal muscles prefs it to a cone. Whether Dr. Howard means that the contraction of the abdominal muscles is in confequence folely of the propagation of any ftimulus, or only from mechanical diftention, is difficult to comprehend from the expreflion. It has not that remarkable clearnefs, fo confpicuous in the rest of his difcourfe. 6 felf, it is fometimes promoted folely by plunging the infant under warm water, where no evaporation can take place. Sir, as you are so fond of facts, let me fprinkle your face, first with cold, and then with warm water, and you will feel the difference. • If an infant,' you say, be covered, at the inftant it emerges into the air, it will not the lefs infpire.' This experiment is tried too late. You fhould cover the infant, before it emerges into the air, to know whether it would inspire or not without contact of air. Walk out of doors in a winter day, naked, and afterwards with your clothes on, and fee if the fatt be true or not. Put but your nofe abroad in cold air, and is not involuntary inspiration immediately produced? Let me touch a piece of ice to your toes, and fee whether you can help catching your breath. Is it true, that a child was born with coat, jacket, and breeches on, and in every part infulated from the air, and yet this child did not the lefs infpire'? I fee nothing in the fact, Sir, but dereliction from all principle. If any part of the body be left expofed, the contac of cold air, or cold water, to that part will raife the cheft and produce infpiration. Fact,' you fay, fhows that evaporation is not the caufe of the first contraction of the ribs. The words are Is it true, that Another of your objections is: 'evaporation is the caufe of the That, as heat promotes evapo'first contraction of the ribs ?ration, hot air fhould be better Fact fhows, that it is not. For, if an infant be covered, at the inant it emerges into the air, for refpiration, than cold air.' For my part, I fhould think, that hot air would heat the lungs faft er than cold air, and that cold air would cool the lungs fafter than hot air. According to the modern theory, hot air fhould be preferable to cold air, because it would heat the lungs fafter; but, if the intention be to cool the lungs, which is according to Dr. Howard's theory, cool air muft be preferable to hot air. Dr. Howard obferves, that the diftinctions of latent and fenfible heat were invented for the exigences of their employers. You lament for the fcientifick repu'tation of our country, that fuch expreffions thould be put forth by a literary and medical character.' We think it is to his bonour. What though many philofophers and the whole body of modern chemills agree in the doctrine of latent and jenfible, Is there an abfurdity in philofophy, medicine, religion, or politicks, which authorities have not fupported? Your lamentations, Sir, if tincere, are foolish. Heat is a fenfation, and fenfation is never latent; it is always fenfible. If there be latent and fenfible heat, why not latent and fenfible found, latent and fentible light, latent and fenfible pain? Latent heat is, in plain words, cold heat, and fenfible heat is, in plain words, hot beat. This is the doctrine fo much contended for. the fame quantity of water, in a ftate of vapour, could re-enter the fame veffel. Through the whole of the paragraph from which this queftion is taken, there is confufion and mifreprefentation. You fpeak of numberleis cafes of new born infants, who have been recovered by inflation from the human lungs. Many of them,' you fay, would have perithed, if left for a few minutes to prepare a better apparatus.' Inftead of attempting to blow air into the lungs of a child, who never refpired, I can, from the beit authorities, advife you to pour cold water upon its cheft, to irritate the membrane of the note, or even to whip the child, rather than force air where no cavity is yet formed, and where none can be formed, until the intercoftals are made to contract. Ought not ev. ery phyfician, now a days, to be alhamed of this practice? But, Sir, you are mistaken in the fact. You cannot inflate the lungs of an infant, who never refpired, unless you put a cannula under the epiglottis. There is no cav ity there. If you blow air into the mouth of a child, who never refpired, the air muft pafs, where nothing refifts, into the child's ftomach; and, when the ftomach and bowels are blown up, if you can lift up the epiglottis, a little air may enter the trachea, or if you blow hard enough, into the lungs ; but not before. Aiter all, I cannot but think it would pafs off a posteriore. lament for the fcientifick repu One question you afk is-Why 'fhould carbon and hydrogen pafs out more easily than oxygen can pals in? The antwer is, becaufe the carbon and hydrogen in the veffels are not in an acriform ftate; the oxygen infpired is. Thetation of our country, that fuch fame carbon and hydrogen, after they have paffed out, could no more re-enter the fame veffels,than We expreffions fhould be put forth by a literary and medical chaiafter.' We appeal to the pro |