Mr. URBAN,

Feb. 1.

SEND you for insertion two small

first is a romantic view between two and three miles Westward from Bristol, on the North bank of the Avon, with Cook's Folly on the summit of the precipice. That gentleman, who built this imitation of part of a Castle in 1693, evidently intended to have a pleasing object,suited to its situation, for contemplation on approaching, and a considerable elevation whence to observe with greater effect a most interesting distant prospect of England and the Principality of Wales. The Vulgar, who perceived no advantages to be derived to them from the structure, stigmatized it with the term of the Folly, and invented the following ridiculous story, detailed in the Bristol Guide: "This building, which greatly embellishes these parts and prospects, is called Cook's Folly, from a story current thereabout, that one Cook dreamed that he should die by the bite of a viper, and therefore built and confined himself in this place. But all his caution could not avert his destiny for, as he was sitting by the fire, a viper sprung from some faggots, and bit him so effectually as to occasion what he had been at so much expence to avoid."

Many of your Readers must be familiarised to the other view, which shews the West end of the Church, the ascent of the bridge, and the hills beautifully covered with woods, Eastward of Henley upon Thames. It was taken from the bow-window of the adjacent Inn at Henley.

Yours, &c. A TRAVELLER.

LETTERS TO A FRIEND.

LETTER II.

DEAR SIR, Stonor Park, Oct. 20. IT Tis with some apprehension of my former Letter's having exhausted your patience, that I venture on another.

During my stay with you, I have perused with great attention, Mr. Blair's late publication of "THE CORRESPONDENCE ON THE FORMATION, OBJECTS, AND PLAN OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC BIBLE SOCIETY," and I take the liberty of troubling you with some Observations on the following parts of it-I. His charges against GENT. MAG. February, 1814.

us of not noticing his First Circular, and of my with-holding information Committee: II. His Assertion, that the Editions of the Bibles, authoritatively issued from the Catholic presses abroad, and named in Le Long's Catalogue, are either in the learned or foreign Languages, or burthened with notes: III. His Animadversions on the Harsh Expressions in the notes to the Original Rheimish version of the Bible, and in Dr. Challoner's notes to his edition of it: IV. The Charge of Duplicity, brought in his work, against the Roman Catholic Bible Committee: V. And his Misconcep tion of what is asserted by Roman Catholics, of the Unchangeable Nature of their Doctrine.

I. Mr. Blair seems displeased, that No notice was taken by the Catholics of his first Circular.

In answer to this charge, permit me to observe, 1st, that, in these days, when circular applications in print are so very common, a neglect in answering any one of them, cannot be justly construed by its Writer, as a want of civility in his regard.2dly, That Mr. Blair's first circular contained some expressions,---(as, where he mentions," our drinking turbid streams, and sitting in darkness and the shadow of death)", which would naturally make a Catholic suppose that it came from no friendly hand. This was my impression on reading it; 1 have not met with a single Catholick on whom it did not make a similar impression: - this was particularly noticed to Mr. Lefroy, both by Mr. Gandolphi and Mr. Blake.

--

As to his charge of my withholding information from him, or Mr, Lefroy, I can assure you, that there is not the slightest ground for it, as I possessed no information to give them. This, when Mr. Lefroy did me the honour to call on me, I mentioned to him.

I told him most explicitly, that, owing to the great weight of business, which then, and for some time past, had pressed upon me, I had not been able to give any atten tion to what the Roman Catholic Bible Committee was doing, in res spect to their intended publication of the New Testament; and that some time must elapse before I could attend to it ;" I therefore referred him, for

the

the information he wanted, to Mr. Blake, who had moved the Resolutions, which passed on this subject, at the Catholic, Board, as the person whom I thought most able to give him the information he wanted. My inability to attend to the concern in question, I also noticed in my Letter to Mr. Blair.

The fact is, that down to this moment, I have taken no part in the business, except by writing to Mr. Blair the letter which he has printed. I am aware of the assertion in print, that Dr. Poynter's Address was composed by me: but I can assure you, that this is altogether a mistake, as I nei ther wrote or suggested a word in it. The only meeting of our Bible-Committee which I attended, was, I believe, the last which the Committee held. My attendance at it was accidental, and the only part I took at it, was, to ask,why the intended Stereotype edition of Doctor Challoner's version, was printed from the edition of 1749, (the first edition of it), instead of be ing printed from that of 1777, which, I believe, was the last printed in his life-time, and which must naturally be supposed to have had his latest cares. To this, a satisfactory answer was given: It was replied, that, in every subsequent edition there was some alteration of the first, that there was no evidence of Doctor Challoner's having himself made, or approved of any of these alterations; that there was reason to suspect he was dissatisfied with some of them; and that the first was therefore the only edition, which it was quite safe to publish, as the authentic work of Dr. Challoner. I mention this circumstance, as, in our little Biblical history, it should be generally known.

With respect to my Letter to Mr. Blair, which that gentleman has published, the occasion of my writing it was, that, from various quarters I heard, that the conduct of the Roman Catholic Bible Committee had been represented to be highly reprehensible: a mine, it was said, was to be sprung under us, which would blow us up; and prove to the world, that we were wholly unworthy of the relief we were then soliciting. Other expressions of a similar import were communicated to me, by some of my respectable Protestant friends:-and it was on this occasion that I first heard

the assertion, adverted to in my former letter, that it was contrary to the principles of Roman Catholicks to print the Bible without notes.

Being a total stranger to every thing which had been done, or was doing, in the business, I applied, as soon as I received thiscommunication, for information concerning it to an active member of our Bible Committee, and received from him, the account which I transmitted to Mr. Blair. All the enquiries which I have since made have satisfied me of the perfect accuracy of every part of that letter. Whatever might be the opinions of individual members of the Committee, and however well-grounded might be their anticipation of its final determinations, it is most certain, that among the points, which in my letter to Mr. Blair I stated to be uncertain, there was not one, on which the Committee had then come to any resolution. This I accordingly intimated in my letter to him: I never expected to see it in print; but it will speak for itself. Its object was "to spread friendships and cover heats:" And such, I hope, the obvious tendency of it will be admitted to be by those who peruse it. At all events, I am quite sure that the facts mentioned in it will be found to be perfectly accurate.

II. In my letter, I observe in it, that we, (the Roman Catholicks,) had not been idle in the great and noble project of the propagation of the sacred Volume;" and, in proof of this assertion, I referred the gentleman to whom I was writing, to" Le Long's Bibliotheca Sacra," where he would find an account of the numberless editions of the whole Bible, or of the New Testament, which have issued from the Roman Catholic presses abroad. In answer to this, Mr. Blair says, that "he is not ignorant of one of those Biblical Works," and adds, that." if his memory does not deceive him, all the numberless editions authoritatively issued from the Roman Catholic presses abroad, and named in LeLong's Bibliotheca Sacra,are either in the learned and foreign languages, or burthened with Notes, and therefore unfit for the use of of monot.”

I wish Mr. Blair would again look into Le Long. The Edition before. me, is that published by Boerner, at Leipsic, in 2 Volumes 8vo, 1709. In the Second Volume of it, ch. V. Sect.

ii. p. 36, Mr. Blair will find an article, with the title, “Biblia Gallica à Catholicis Edita." He will see by it, that, before that work was printed, there had been in the French language Nine original versions of the whole Bible; that many editions of several of these versions are in 8vo, and the smaller sizes;-that there had been Twelve original French versions of the New Testament; that there had been several editions of most of those versions ;-that almost all these editions are in octavo, or in a smaller size; and that there had not been fewer than 200 editions, of different parts of the Old and New Testament, particularly the Four Gospels and the Psalms, from one or other of these versions. Which of these editions are, or are not burthened with notes, I cannot say; but it is evident, from the sizes of them, that far the greater part of them can have none: and it is fair to infer that the proportion of those, in which the notes can with any propriety be said to amount to a burthen, must be small indeed.---I must add, that all these versions and editions were anterior to the year 1709. Now, reading of no kind was, before that year, so common as it has since been. There is, consequently, no reason to suppose, that the versions subsequent to that period have been proportionably fewer, or the new editions of them proportionably less numerous, than those which preceded it. An equal number of versions and editions had not before that time been printed in England.

I also wish Mr. Blair to read what I have written in my former letter to you, on the Early Versions of the sacred text into the other vernacular languages of Modern Europe. Surely he will allow, that, what I have said in that Letter and what I say in the present, abundantly justifies what I mentioned in my letter to him, that "Roman Catholicks had not been idle in the great and noble project of propagating the sacred writings."

I beg leave to add, that, having lived long in France, and been inti mately acquainted with the literary and devotional habits of that people, I am perfectly convinced that the Bible was as much read, as much explained, and as well understood in France as it is in England. I will however admit, that it was not read at so

early an age in France, as it is among English Protestants. But (absit invidia verbo), I will presume to say, that, taking a Protestant boy of 10 years old, who has read the Bible, in the manner in which it is usually read, before that age in England, and a Catholic boy of the same age, who has been taught the French Catechism, and particularly Fleury's Historical Catechism, in the manner in which it was usually taught in France, I am quite confident, that the latter will be found to have quite as full and as clear a knowledge of the history, the morality, and the religion, of the Old and New Testament, as the former.

III. Lam far from attempting to defend any Harsh Expression, justly deserving that epithet, in the Notes to the Original Rheimish Version, or in Doctor Challoner's Notes, in his edition of it.

But when the harsh expressions of the Rheimish Annotators are brought forward, the dungeons too, the racks, the gibbets, the fires, the confiscations,and the various other modes of persecution, in every hideous form, which the Catholicks of those days endured, should not be forgotten. That these should have produced some expressions of bitterness from the writers in question, cannot be a matter of surprise; if something of the kind had not fallen from them, they would have been more than men. But permit me to ask, whether the language of their Protestant Adversaries, (who had no plea of this kind to urge,) were more courteous? To ascertain this, I wish you only to turn to the first and last pages of Doctor Fulke's "Texts of the New Testament:"--- In the first page of it, he tells the Rheimish Translators, that" they had perverted the Bible, by their partial translation, and poisoned it with their heretical and blasphemous annotations that they craftily begged of their favourers in England larger exhibition, upon colour of printing their translation of the Bible:" In the last page he tells them, that "the words of their prayer were good and godly; but that they proceeded not from a faithful heart, not only their wilful and obstinate maintaining of errors, against the most clear light of truth, with their intolerable licentiousness of lying and slandering the saints of

God,