fcribe the character of the Pfalmift, and of our bleffed Saviour, and have applied them to him!--To speak in fuch very high terms of a man whofe character we inwardly condemn, is a difingenuity to which no boneft man ought to fubmit; but to do this in our devotions, is affronting our Maker in the act of worshipping him, and is adding impiety to meanne's!"

Our Author thinks this an happy juncture for attempting to get rid of this abfurd anniversary affair. If, fays he, the Leaders in the prefent Adminiftration have, as I entirely believe of them ‡, a just fenfe of the nation's happiness in the expulfion of the Stuarts, and the fucceffion of a better family, if they are real enemies to the tyrannical and arbitrary principles which Charles I. fo earneftly adopted.--they cannot with for a fairer opportunity of gaining a victory over their opponents, than that which now offers itself, by their moving for abolishing the obfervation of a day fet apart for fainting the Stuarts,' to whom they are accused of being fo much attached. Is it poffible, adds he, for us to afk of them a better proof of their loyalty?What friend of Liberty is there in the kingdom, who will not embrace them as Whigs, after having delivered our church from the embarraffiment of this folemu day of triumph to Toryifm?-On the other hand, what man in his fenfes will not ever after treat with contempt an Oppofition's affecting to talk fo much against the Stuarts, if they fhall dare to oppofe fuch a motion?'-Should it be thought there is any danger of the Adminiftration's being weakened by this measure; in answer to this fuppofition, the Addreffer undertakes to fhew, that, on the contrary, they are more likely to gain ftrength by it: but, for his arguments on this head, as alfo for his various reafons, tending to convince the Gentlemen of the Minority, that they, especially, fhould efpouse this propofal, we refer to the pamphlet; which feems to have been written with a laudable zeal for the extinction of party-spirit among us, as well as for the honour of our church, and the credit of the nation. But whether the fcheme he fo earneftly recommends, be at this time fo very expedient, as he feems to conceive, may be a matter of doubt with fome; while others may apprehend it to be altogether inexpedient at any time. We have heard, that a motion of this kind was brought into the Houfe fome years ago, where it was warmly oppofed by the High-church party; on which a gallant-fpirited Whig rofe up, and declared himself against the motion: giving this memorable reafon for it: I would, faid he, have this day eternally commemorated, that future Princes may be annually put in mind, what Englishmen dare do, when their Kings prefume to invade their Liberties !"

I He really feems to be a fincere Advocate for Lord Bute in particu lar, and labours to prove, both him and his family, to have been remarkable for their attachment to the Houfe of Hanover.

Art. 9.

A Letter to the Public, containing fome important Hints relating to the Revenue. 8vo. is. Bladon.

The hints contained in this Letter, are, indeed, of GREAT importance, more than may, perhaps, appear at first fight to every Reader. They chiefly relate to a matter which the public-fpirited, and very able

F 3

Writer

Writer justly confiders, as the root from whence many public evils have fprung, or may hereafter fpring, viz. The allowance, by way of Fees, of a certain rate, more or lefs, for every pound, to Six Offices in the Receipt of Exchequer, or fome of them, on all Sums of Money whatever, great or fmall, within a mere trifle, iffued or paid there, as well for the public, as on account of the civil lift, in all cafes where they have not been exempted therefrom by authority of Parliament.' The enormity of this great and growing misuse of the public money, is fet forth by our Author, in fuch a manner, as muft convince every attentive Reader, of the crying neceffity there is for a reformation of the evil complained of: an evil by which every individual in the kingdom is, more or lefs, affected; because, as the LetterWriter obferves, every individual fum unneceffarily charged to the public account, muft end ultimately in increafing the taxes: and furely, adds he, while you boat of your freedom, you must look upon a freedom from unneceffary taxes as an effential part of it.'

We fay no more: but as the Writer feems to be thoroughly acquainted with his subject, we heartily recommend his hints to the serious confideration of thofe efpecially, who may have it in their power to contribute, in any degree, towards the reformation of abuses in the administration of public affairs in general, and of this greatly burthenfome article of Office-Fees, in particular.

Art. 10. Confiderations on the Legality of General Warrants, and the Propriety of a Parliamentary Regulation of the fame. To which is added, a Poffcript, on a late Pamphlet concerning Juries, Libels, &c. 8vo. Is. Nicoll.

A Writer who undertakes the defence of General Warrants, ought to be Ocaipus, Non Davus. As well might he attempt to make an Ethiop white: nay, as weil might he attempt to communicate patriotism to a Prime Minister, or candour to the Leader of a Faction. But if we judge aright, all that this Confiderer means, is to prove himself the molt obfequious humble fervant of the ruling powers.

MEDICA L.

Art. 11. Curfory Remarks on the Method of inveftigating the Principles and Properties of Bath and Bristol Waters; Jet forth in ATTEMPTS to revive ancient medical Doctrines; and in an ATTEMPT to afcertain and extend the Virtues of these Waters: Both by Alexander Sutherland, M. D. of Bath and Bristol Hot-Wells. By C. Lucas, Doctor of Phyfic, of Rheims, Leyden, and Dublin; and Member of the Royal College of Physicians in London. 8vo. 1s. Printed at Bath, and fold by Hawes and Co. in London.

Dr. Lucas, in his Account of the Bath Waters, proved, by various experiments, that those waters are impregnated with an acid, which generally predominates while they are in the natural state; Dr. Sutherland, nevertheless, in his Attemp's, hath undertaken to fhew, in oppofition to Dr. Lucas, that the Bath waters are impregnated with fulphur. That both thefe Doctors cannot be right, is most certain;

and

and Dr. Lucas hath here condefcended to make a fevere attack on poor Dr. Sutherland, who certainly is by no means a match for this celebrated Controverfialist. Indeed, Dr. Lucas feems confcious, that by honouring Dr. Sutherland with thefe Remarks, he was paying him an unmerited compliment; for, fays he, I must confess to you, * it [Dr. Sutherland's book] appears to me the moft ftrange, diforderly, immethodical, crude, and indigefted medley, that ever escaped the pen of a man capable of reading, fpeaking, or thinking.' But, addreffing himself to his learned Correfpondent, he thus apologizes for his condefcenfion. I fuppofe my good friend will hardly judge a work of this kind, worthy of ferious animadverfion: it will not admit of, nor, indeed, does it deferve it. To minds like yours, I need but fet down the groundless cavillings of this Writer, to expofe them fufficiently: but we must pay fome deference to the great vulgar. Some of these are poffeffed of this maffive volume, however they came by it;-with them, words, the last words especially, carry conviction, and it is fit to undeceive them.'

In conformity to the contempt expreffed for his opponent, Dr. Lucas hath not been very grave or ceremonious with him; but hath treated him throughout with a pretty liberal portion of ridicule as well as feverity as a fpecimen of which, we fhall quote his ludicrous farcalm on the fuppofed partiality of his North British Adverfary in favour of Sulphur, After an ironical encomium on Dr. Sutherland, as a man of parts and letters, he adds, Does not my candid Friend think me an hardy fellow, to take up the gauntlet thrown by fo potent a Champion? Of this you will be farther convinced, when you find the learned Gentleman, from pure patriot principles, contends for fulphur in Bath Waters; well knowing, that fince Solomon the fon of David fat upon the throne of Britain, there never was a time in which there was fo great a neceffity of having England plentifully ftored with brimftone, as these happy days in which our Author flourishes !'

:

This flourish of Dr. Lucas's pen, however, we may venture to foretel, will scarce bring the ingenious Writer into play, as a Court Phyfician; at leaft, not in the reign of Solomon the fon of David whatever may happen in cafe a Rehoboam fhould afcend the throne, while Dr. Lucas remains in the way of worldly preferment.

As to the medical merits of this controverfy, we refer to the tract at large; and for a farther idea of Dr. Sutherland and his performance here animadverted upon, we refer to a full account of it, in the XXIXth volume of our Review; by which the Reader will perceive, that we have not deemed much higher of Dr. Sutherland's abilities as a Writer, than Dr. Lucas feems to do in these Remarks.

Dr. Nathaniel Barry, Fellow of the King and Queen's College of Phyficians, and one of the Physicians General to the army in Ireland; to whom Dr. Lucas hath addreffed these Remarks, by way of Letter,

Art. 12. Man-midwifery Analyfed, and the Tendency of that Prae tice detected and exposed. 4to. 1S. R. Davis.

The Author of this pamphlet has conceived an implacable averfion

to Men-midwives. Some months ago, in a pamphlet he published, entitled, A Letter to a young Lady, he treated them very feverely. This pamphlet we recommended to the ferious confideration of the perfons interested in it; and no answer appearing, we fuppofe that circumstance occafioned the publication of this addrefs, To men in general, and to married men in particular, How far the practice of Man-midwifery is altogether right or wrong, we prefume not to determine. Certainly, if women are as well qualified, and which, indeed, they ought to be, there can be no neceffity for it; but if they are, as may be too frequently the cafe, ignorant of the duties of their office, it would be very hard the fair fex fhould fuffer on that account. The Author introduces this address with a very odd ftory; which, even if true, is not at all to the pur. pofe, as the ignorance of one practitioner, is not to determine the character of the whole, body. He pretends to be a great advocate for decency, and to be angry with Dr Smellie for having defcribed the parts of generation in a woman, in a book of Midwifery, where certainly it may be of use; and yet he has himself transcribed the Doctor's words into his own work, where it can be of no ufe at all. As we have never heard that fuch liberties as he defcribes, are usually, if ever, taken with pregnant women, we may juftly fuppofe this to be chiefly, if not altogether, an invention of the Author's, to ferve a purpose; and certainly he aggravates matters very much, when he fays, Iron inftruments are almost conftantly used by men; and must keep very bad company to hear fuch converfation as he writes of, pages 10 and 11; but for this we refer to the pamphlet.

"I am not unaware, (he fays, p. 11, 12) that it will be here faid, that difficult labours require not only the kill but ftrength of a man ; and that it would be impoffible to deliver fome women without inftruments. It may be fo; but I will take upon me to fay, it only happens to fuch women who have been injured by hafty or forced labours with a former child, or by iron inftruments. It never happens to a woman with her first child; nor it never happens to the poor with any child; the reafon is, that they are not injured by former labours; and that nature is the faithful and unerring midwife of the latter. I fee continual accounts of the death of women in childbed, that are women of fashion: I never hear in the country where I live, of the death of any of my unfhionable neighbours of this diftemper, as Dr. Smellie calls it. When does a mare, a cow, a hare, a rabbit, or any part of the brute creation, die in bringing forth their young? Never! And has Providence been fo careful of the prefervation of brutes, and left the noblest part of her production in danger? Certainly, No,'

Where this Writer lives we know not; but we can affure him, we have known feveral women die, undelivered, at their full reckoning, when they were left entirely to nature. Several others in labour, and others after delivery, when they were under the management of women only; nay, we have known the uterus inverted by a woman; and thefe Cafes were not the confequences of man-midwifery in a former labour, as they had always been attended by women.

Indeed, we cannot fee how it is poffible fome women could have been delivered without inftruments; and are as much at a lofs to perceive,

See Review, vol. XXX. page 410.

how

how a fécond labour could be rendered preternatural by any treatment in the first delivery. We have heard too, that many of the different kinds of the brute creation have died in parturition, and think it strange our Author thould never once hear of fuch a circumftance! We may rea, dily excufe his painting Man-midwifery in its moft odious colours, as there may be private reafons for it, befide thofe he publicly avows; but we know not how to excufe his falfehoods and mifreprefentations, nor how to fupprefs our indignation, when we read, page 23, the weeping claufe, which we do not chufe to transcribe into our work; but we will venture to fay, that what he there affirms, will scarce be affented to by those who are acquainted with the structure of the womb; for all such must know, that it is impoffible to be done: nor can we think, that any one ever attempted it.

If our Author fhould find himself inclined to grow angry with us, we hope he will remember, that we here declare, it is not the man, nor his caufe, we find fault with; but we must object to every mifreprefentation of facts, every appearance of deviation from truth :-which muft inévitably tend to hurt any caufe whatever, to obftruct the progress of real fcience, and to injure the best interefts of mankind t.

+ For fome of the remarks in this article, we are obliged to a Correfpondent in the country; with whofe fentiments we entirely accord. Art. 13. A Letter to the Author of a Letter to a young Lady, 8vo. 6d. Becket.

Since the foregoing article was written (it being intended for laft month's Review) appeared this reply to the pamphlet which, as we have above remarked, paffed fo long unanswered.

The prefent Writer is a warm Advocate for the Men-midwives; if he had been somewhat lefs warm, the cause he defends would not have fuffered on that account; for, hot headed Champions are not always the moft fuccessful, be their caufe what it will. He is very fevere in his perfonal glances at the Author with whom he contends, accufing him of uttering only falfhoods and mifreprefentations; and, in brief, as good as tells him, in plain terms, that he is a very bad man. A very bad method, this, of proving whether Midwifery ought to be confined to the hands of male or female Practitioners!

This Gentleman, nevertheless, is candid enough to mention a scheme for rendering the women Practitioners more skillful in their profeffion, and which must confequently tend to gain them a greater fhare of the bufinefs. He does not doubt that they are as capable of learning the art, and that they would be able to perform, in moft cafes, as well as the men; but, as he justly observes, It is well known, that the women Practitioners of Midwifery are generally of the lowest class and the moft ignorant of the people, fuch as have not had, and indeed could not afford themselves a proper education for their profeffion; fuch only as follow this employment for bread; and therefore it would be an ex

And this he does not merely affert, but he endeavours to make it appear, by contefting with him the principal points, and fuppofed facts, contained in the Letter to a young Lady. But thefe are things not to be controverted in a general Review of Literature.

celle.