Sivut kuvina
PDF
ePub

THE GENTLEMAN'S MAGAZINE,

For MAY, 1819.

MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE.

Mr. URBAN,

May 8.

Perpetuity, however, being but a

COMPLAINTS of the want of Li vague term, her Government, in be

terary patronage are universal; but, like most other universal complaints, they are entirely without foundation: at least they are and have been so within these united kingdoms from nearly the commencement of the last century down to the present time *.

Since the introduction of printing, that era in which Authorship assumed, according to Parliamentary language, a tangible shape, the executive power has been successively placed in the hands of men and women, of widely varied dispositions and extent of ability. Some of these in early times were inclined to patronize literature, but from want of sufficient capacity they failed to produce any remarkable effect. It was reserved for the wisdom of Queen Anne, who reigned during the Augustan age of Britain, aided by the advice of her Privy Council, and seconded by the concentrated talents of her whole dominions, to discover and to correct the errors of former times.

Until the commencement of her reign, so glorious in Arms and Literature, it had been held, that by the Common Law, every Author possessed a perpetuity in his Works.

nevolent kindness to Literary men, determined to give them something more certain and defined. Accordingly, in a Statute of her 8th year it was enacted, FOR THE ENCOURAGEMENT OF LEARNING, that they should possess an absolute term of 14 years, with a renewal of an equal period, provided their natural life, no matter for their literary one, should survive the first term.

But on second thoughts this was considered by her Majesty's advisers as probably leading to plethora, and consequently to idleness, and therefore, in order to counteract that tendency, it was most graciously ordained, that every Author should give nine copies of the best paper of his work, to save opulent bodies of men from the expense of purchasing †, and also the Archbishop of Canterbury, &c. were authorized to put a proper price upon books, if any person should complain that they were too high.

Highly indeed ought Authors to esteem this very particular advan tage! which has never been extended to other inventors and makers, who have always been suffered to make the most of the whole of their inventions, and to cloy and ruin themselves

I hope and trust that my readers hold opinions totally different from this, as that is the only chance we can have of our ideas ever meeting. If they move in parallel lines they never can coincide; but if they diverge, they must, when the circle is completed, touch in some point or other.

+ The exquisite reason for this was not understood until the year 1817, when it was considerately supplied by a Memorial from one of the Scotch Universities. From that it may be learned, that it is a convenience to have English productions gratis, in order to leave the funds at liberty for the purchase of foreign publications. Now it is certain that nothing can be devised more encouraging to British Authors, nor could any thing have convinced the Committee of the absurdity of the Petitions against the Bill then before them for the promoting of British Literature, if this Scottish reasoning had failed of its effect. The sagacity of the Committee would not suffer it to fail; though some of the opposers attempted to turn it into ridicule, by declaring that it proved to them the veracity of Sir Callaghan O'Brallaghan in his famous boast, that little Terence Flaherty O'Brallaghan went over from Carrickfergus, and peopled all Scotland with his own hands.

with the profits, without the wisdom of the Legislature troubling itself about them, or their welfare. And, what is still more extraordinary, the welfare of the two Universities was in this respect unprovided for by the Act, and they were left to depend upon the vague perpetuity, to the great annoyance of the one, which, no doubt, would have been gratified by mathematical certainty, and probably with out any feeling of gratitude from the other, which must be incapable, on account of the nature of its pursuits, of understanding the extent of its loss from this neglect.

This indulgence to Authors was thought amply sufficient for the Encouragement of Literature, until the 41st of the King, which added the further guard against repletion, of two other copies, making the whole number eleven.

From the 8th of Queen Anne down to the year 1816, a period of more than 100 years, the Legislature dealt with Authors as a wise parent does with his children, when he suffers them to play with knives, that by cutting their fingers now, they may learn not to cut them hereafter. Thus incautious or obtuse men were permitted to prefer a perpetuity to a certain period if they thought fit, the only penalty inflicted upon them being the loss of a privilege, which many might absurdly conceive to be of no value. As the number of fools, however, even amongst Authors, always exceeds that of the wise, this was found to expose too many to the inconveniences of the perpetuity, and called, in course, for the watchful attention of a humane Legislature.

Accordingly the Parliament, now [in 1818] by the blessing of Providence, and the effects of a dissolution, at rest from its labours, enacted, that no one should have liberty to ruin himself by preferring a perpetuity to a certain and fixed length of time.

For this care of their property Authors are, or ought to be, highly grateful.

One circumstance, however, in the Statute, has occasioned a puzzle to those who are unacquainted with political arithmetic.

On looking into the Act they found that the definite term was enlarged; and from Cocker's Rule of Three direct, they learned that if 14 years ab

solute, with 14 other in posse, were better than a perpetuity, then 28 years absolute, with a reversion like. wise, must be twice as good at the least, as it must extend their interest so much further beyond the perpetuity.

So far all was clear; but this inquiry unfortunately led them to make some search into the meaning of perpetuity, and finding that it extended through the duration of the world, provided the British Government should so long exist, they began to question whether any advantage were really given; as their modesty would not permit them to hope that their works would make so near an approach to immortality; or if that could with reason be looked for, they had no means of ascertaining the future value of their copies, as they could have no precise knowledge how trade might be conducted after the perpetuity had ceased.

They were also much alarmed by a provision in the last clause of the Bill, which authorized an expectation that the Act might be repealed in the then present Session; as they could not understand why they were to be threatened with the possibility of such inestimable benefits being withdrawn from them.

Allowing the deductions to be made which this doubt and this alarm may seem to require, I boldly challenge all persons concerned to come forward, and, if they dare, to deny that the Legislature has granted to Lilerary characters every advantage which the utmost extent of its wisdom could possibly devise.

This, which was written in the course of the last year, has been called forth by a recent application to Parliament for the repeal of a Law which has given so much encouragement to learning, and has so notoriously benefited Authors and all persons connected with them.

Having the most perfect reliance on the wisdom of Parliament, I behold this attempt with profound composure, being confident that improvident men will not be permited to ruin themselves by their folly, and that they will not be suffered to resign invaluable privileges, through an absurd fondness for that which they consider as a natural right.

Yours, &c.

R. R.

Mr. URBAN,

May 10. medal, and the reading of the in

ACCORDING to the Public ascription, from several clerical mem

pers, the Report of the Bank Committee has been presented.

It contains, provided their statement be correct, a plan for paying for Bank Notes with Gold Bullion, preparatory to the resumption of Cash payments.

Mr. Baring, who approves of the plan, estimates that Ten Millions in Bullion will be sufficient for every payment which may be necessary, during the three years which are to pass previous to the return to cash.

If so large a quantity of Gold be required, from what source is it to be derived?

If the Bank have it already in its coffers, or if the Government have it to give in part of its debt, all is well; but if it be to be purchased, in what manner is it to be paid for?

To give Gold in exchange for Gold cannot be the intention; and the idea of purchasing it with paper is equally absurd, though the absurdity be not so apparent.

If Government cannot pay so large a proportion of the sum due to the Bank in Bullion, or if the Bank cannot with a part of that quantity from Government, and its own resources, make out ten millions of Bullion, it should seem that the Committee has overlooked a most essential part of the Plan, and that the payment in Bullion is as impracticable as the redemption of Bank Notes by Cash. Ease me of my doubts, Mr. Urban, et eris mihi mugnus Apollo. Yours, &c.

Mr. URBAN,

A

R. R.

Valebrook. LETTER written by me on the subject of the genuineness of the medal with a Hebrew inscription, found near Cork, appeared in the Morning Post newspaper of the 24th last December; an answer to this, dated Clonmel, was given in the same paper of the 23d Jan. which I replied to on the 30th. No attempt has been made to controvert the remarks of the last letter; but in a Memoir recently published at Longman's, (edited by the Rev. T. R. England, a Roman Catholic clergyman of Cork, and which, besides the remarks of the Rev. Gentleman, contains letters and dissertations on the question of the authenticity of the

bers of the Established Church) a very severe attack is made by the Rev. Dr. Hales of Killessendra, on my letter of the 24th December, which is very civilly pronounced ignorant and presumptuous (p. 40.); and the Editor ranks the opinions of those who doubt the authenticity of "so venerable and authentic a relique of his redemption" (page 10.) as "the cavils of scepticism, ignorance, or vanity" (page 54.) Dr. Hales thinks it probable that Pontius Pilate furnished the medal to the Emperor Tiberius, during his Government (of Judea), for Pilate thought favourably of Christ, and also understood Hebrew, as appears from his inscriptions on the cross, in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin (page 20.); and in triumphant confutation of my objection, that the Samaritan and Greek characters only are found on coins considered as genuine by Collectors, and therefore it was very improbable that the Hebrew should be used on the medal, the Dr. asserts, that "the silver shekels of David and Solomon's reign, are as exquisitely beautiful in their engraving, and elegance of the sacred character, as they are genuine," (page 40.) On these opinions and assertions I shall join issue with Dr. H. I question whether Dr. H. ever saw one of those pieces, purporting to be Jewish shekels, but rather think that he forms his opinion of their exquisite beauty, from bad engravings (and those of coins in Bibles we may rely on being such), by which we can no more decide on the execution of a coin, than on the colour of the metal. All that I have seen are of very coarse fabric, evidently cast, and subsequently repaired with the graver; and I have the authority of those most competent to decide on the question-persons who have studied and collected Coins from 20 to 50 years-that they never saw a Coin, supposed to be a Jewish shekel, which was not decidedly false; nor are they admitted into any good or great collection; such, for instance, as the British Museum; and I think this practical knowledge is not to be set aside by the conjectures of scholars, who, however learned in languages, have not had the opportu nity, supposing they possessed the inclination, to study coins themselves; and this distinction I have little doubt

will apply to all those very distinguished and respectable individuals (and for one of whom I would wish more particularly to express sentiments of personal respect and regard) who have condescended to become Commentators on the Cork Medal; who I believe to be as incompetent to decide on the genuineness of the medal, as I know myself to be, as to the reading of the inscription. This, however, may not satisfy Dr. H.; we will therefore try what proof or presumption may be brought against his shekels of David and Solomon by analogy. The oldest Greek coins, the date of which can be exactly ascertained, are those of Alexander the First, of Macedon, who began his reign 497 years before Christ. We may suppose that the earliest Greek coins were without dates; allow 300 years for this, and coinage commenced in Greece 800 years B. C. David died 1015 years B. C.; and is it credible, that a nation, who could not build a temple without employing masons from Tyre, should yet strike exquisitely beautiful coins 200 years before the Greeks? The very supposition appears to me the height of absurdity. My view of the supposition, I grant, is no proof: this I shall bring from another quarter. The prophet Amos, who is considered to have lived between the years 812 to 761 B. C. in the 8th chapter and the 5th verse, when reproving the wickedness of his countrymen, represents them as "saying, when will the new moon be gone, that we may sell corn? and the Sabbath, that we may set forth wheat, making the ephah small, and the shekel great, and falsifying the balances by deceit ?" That is, reducing the size of the measure, by which they sold their corn; and increasing that of the weight, by which they received payment, in contravention of the weight and measure as established by the laws of the land. I cannot imagine any other meaning that can be affixed to the passage in the 32d chapter of Jeremiah, verse 9, which is considered to have occurred B. C. 599; the prophet, when purchasing the field of Hanameel, says he weighed him the money, seventeen shekels of silver. Now, if the shekel was a weight at these latter periods, can we suppose it a coin in the reign of David?

The following extract from the celebrated work of Eckhel, “Doctrina Numorum Veterum," (vol.III. p.456,) bears equally on the question of the shekels and the medal. "Jewish coins are found with two sorts of characters; one called the Samaritan, the other the square Hebrew, also called the Assyrian, such as at this day appear in editions of the Bible. The genuine Jewish coins all have the first (or Samaritan) character; those with the second, or square character, of which there are many in all metals, (such as with the heads of Adam, David, and Christ,) are all the work of modern artists." In reference to this part of my subject, I may also netice, that coins of the Emperor Trajan are found, which have been restruck with Samaritan inscriptions (in the same manner as the Bank dollars

were

on the Spanish) which most probably occurred in the Jewish rebellion under Hadrian; and the use of the Samaritan to the last period at which the Jews struck coins, militates against the idea of their ever using the square Hebrew for a numismatic inscription; supposing, therefore, that a Jewish Christian had struck a medal of our Saviour, why are we to imagine he would have had recourse to a language, not then, (if ever) employed for that purpose? If we at this moment were to change our religious opinions, and become Infidels or Joannites, and strike medals to record the event, the probability I think is, that we should continue to employ English, and not go back to the Saxon, for any inscriptions we might place on them.

Equally fanciful to me appears Dr. Hales's idea that this Hebrew medal was struck by order of Pontius Pilate, or even with his privity. Would a proud haughty Roman supersede the use of his own language on the inscription, and supplant it by that of a nation, so hated and despised as the Jews were, by all around them? and this too on a medal intended for the information of the Emperor, who was not very likely to be a proficient in Hebrew, sacred or profane; and as to Pilate's knowledge of Hebrew, it is no more proved by one of the inscriptions on the cross, than that of the priests of Thebes is, in Greek, from one of the inscriptions on the trilingular stone (brought from Rosetta)

in the British Museum; or the Prince Regent's in Chinese, from any letter which Lord Amherst may have taken with him for our august brother at Pekin: nor do I think it likely that Pilate would have ventured to designate any Jew" the King," in an official communication to so jealous and suspicious a tyrant as Tiberius ; and finally, was there ever a suspicion that Pilate was suspected of being a Christian; and if there was not even this shadow of a shade, whence comes the probability of this medal being struck by his command, or as having his sanction ?

Let us, however, suppose all these questions satisfactorily answered, and we have yet to remove the doubts which exist, as to the authenticity of the medal. All the Greek and Roman coins and medals of that period are struck pieces; indeed the only antient pieces, which are not struck, are the very early Roman weights. Now it unfortunately happens, that these Hebrew medals, with the portrait of our Saviour, are all cast and repaired (i. e. finished with the graver); a mode of getting up medals, resorted to on the revival of the Arts, when the old mode of producing a bold relief was unknown or unresorted to. This may not be visible on the Cork medal, from its bad preservation, but it is seen at a glance on the casts from similar medals, at Mr. Tassie's, Leicestersquare; one of which is from a medal in the possession of a friend of mine, and another, I understand, in that of Lord Milsington; and this, among other reasons, induces collectors in London, without the slightest hesitation, to rank them as modern fabrications, and as not deserving of any attention from the Antiquary.

I have, in conclusion, Mr. Urban, very humbly to submit these doubts and difficulties to Dr. H. and Mr. E.; and if "ignorance, vanity, and presumption," really do exist in this controversy (which I would fain hope is not the case), I must leave it to the publick to decide, whether it rests with them, or with me. R. S.

Mr. URBAN, West-square, May 13. those of your Readers who

mining some of my loose papers.
now fallen under my hand, in exa-

(Trist. 1, 2, 26,) we read,
In Ovid's description of a storm,
"Nescit, cui domino pareat, unda'
maris"-

sufficiently puerile(one would imagine)
without any further advance in pue-
rility! Yet Lucan appears to have
been of a different opinion: for, while
he admired the conceit, and deter-
mined to imitate it, he thought it
still susceptible of improvement, and
accordingly did improve it in his way,
as follows (lib. 5, 602)—
"Et dubium pendet, vento cui pareat,
æquor-

the billow standing in suspense, and
presenting to us the curious image of
deliberating, whether it shall obey
the will of the North wind or of the
South.

So much for imitation:-now for a specimen of parallelism.

Lucan and Florus, having to describe the same transaction-the snaring of Marc Antony's ships (or, rather, rafts) by means of ropes under water

present to us, of course, the same idea, though somewhat differently expressed.

Lucan says→→→

"At Pompeianus fraudes innectere ponto Antiqua parat arte Cilix; passusque

vacare

Summa freti, medio suspendit vincula

ponto," &c. (Lib. 4, 448.)

In Florus (lib. 4, 2,) we find, "Rates actis sub mare funibus, captæ, quasi ...novâ Pompeianorum arte Cilicum, per indaginem."

Here would have been a fine field for the ingenuity of those "falsi et audaces emendatores," so justly retheir mischievous audacity in corprobated by A. Gellius (2, 14,) for rupting the text of the classic Authors, under the idea of correcting supposed errors. A critic of that stamp might have pretended to "correct" Lucan's text by altering his

66

Antiqua parat arte Cilix”. to" Ecce novâ parat arte Cilix”. "because Florus, who occasionally borrows from Lucan, calls it a novel contrivance."-Or, on the other hand, he might have made a fancied cor

Take a pleasure in comparing rection in Florus, by changing his

imitations and parallel passages of authors, I beg leave to present a couple of examples, which have just

"novâ arte” to “notâ arte," and thus making it accord with Lucan's “ antiquâ arte".-.“ because, if an old prac

« EdellinenJatka »