rantee for exertion in his behalf, and adding the awkward acknowledgement, that "in his view the value of his patients' lives seldom enters into his account," the value of the individual life is nothing to him, and rarely enters at all into his calculation" and yet with the same breath admitting that "if it does, it must inspire greater caution." Surely such contradictory averments are ill calculated to impress your readers with respect for his judgment as a critic, and we could desire no stronger proof of the importance of "Professional Christianity" than such a direct avowal, that to the irreligious physician, or the medical man who is not decidedly pious, "the value of the individual lives entrusted to his care is nothing." If this be not a full admission of the truth of my description, in all its extent, I know not what would be. It is curious to see him nevertheless attempt to saddle the whole blame on the "hospital practice, and on the army and navy surgeons," whom he considers "the dregs of the profession." Now we submit it to his own mature consideration what these classes in the profession, who by the way stand somewhat respectably before the public, will think of a charge so specific and personal,that they take but little account of a poor fellow's life." Although I feel myself quite at liberty to argue from the general principles of human nature, and from the premises of divine truth, upon the evil tendency of infidel opinions as a reason for embracing Christianity, I would have been sorry indeed to have made so specific a libel on this or any individual or class of the profession.

66

From these specimens of direct self-contradiction on the part of our candid and instructive critic, we are really at a loss to conceive what sort of beings those persons must be whom a mind of such a standard feels itself entitled to look down upon and designate the dregs of the profession." Certain it is those physicians whom I consider respectable are at least accustomed to think consistently, and though some of them come short of Scriptural influence, I have generally found them rather unaware of its importance, and unfortunately for themselves and their patients, so much occupied and troubled with many things, as to forget this "one thing needful," than resolved to scoff at and trample it down in others, at all hazards, and with all their influence. Yet if the matter were traced out it would be found, that much of this delicacy of feeling on their part, is due to the high tone of moral feeling that pervades not only medical but general society, arising from the lustre that emanates so widely and so steadily in modern times from the sacred page; and the advantages the medical world would derive by drawing direct for themselves from that humiliating but purifying source, could be only equalled by the deplorable consequences that must ensue if all men were to turn sceptics, and the Scriptures thus be suffered to moulder into oblivion. It would then be seen what a fearful moral darkness must follow from an eclipse of scriptural and spiritual light, and how rapidly our profession would degenerate from their present standard to a much greater extreme of inefficiency both in motive and practice than any I have ventured to chalk out.

We shall not press upon our reviewer, the charge of a wilful and uncandid perversion of the meaning and scope of my whole argumentation, when he extracts from it a conclusion the very reverse of

that at which it points, merely to serve the purpose of a joke on the sacredness of death and of Heaven. We put it to his own better judgement, whether he who can speak lightly of such solemnities, is really "fit to put his foot into the chamber of the sick in a medical" or in any other capacity, and whether such a physician would not be likely, as I have urged, to extinguish every spark of devotional feeling on the part of the patient, and by untimely levity to add a merciless pang to the troubles that weigh down more or less every spirit in the immediate prospect of death. We can only hope that a careful perusal of the Scriptures will convince him that there is no likelihood, I might say possibility, of that physician shortening the lives of his patients who draws his principles from such a source, and that the abuse of the discretionary power to which he alludes, is only a creature of his own formation, and could never find illustration in the conduct of him whose mind is fortified and enlightened by religious truth.

It is not worth while to go on pointing out further inconsistencies in which, indeed, our critic's forte seems principally to reside. Your readers who are acquainted with their Bible, will, no doubt, smile at the bewildered notions he entertains on the subject of the resurrection, did not pity and sympathy for the ignorance he displays forbid. However surprising to him my views on the subject may appear, they could not be so to one conversant with Scripture, and especially with the true meaning of that very passage he quotes, when taken in connexion with the other announcements in the sacred writings. Į should have been happy to have entered at large on more than one important truth he, in his ignorance, has endeavoured to controvert, but really to attempt to follow such a mind through the mazes of inconsistency, is like the attempt to grasp a shadow-or to overtake an ignis fatuus.

We shall, therefore, in the mean time, take leave of our reviewer, under the hope that a diligent and serious study of the sacred writings will enable him to attain more correct and consistent views on this subject, and so soon as he gives proof of such attainment, we will, with much pleasure, receive any candid hints he may give as to the most judicious mode of advocating " professional Christianity."

We have left ourselves little room for a rejoinder to this courteous epistle; and, indeed, we should be perfectly satisfied to rest the justification of our former remarks, on the style, spirit, and matter of the above remonstrance. On the most deliberate review of the article complained of, we see no reason to admit that it is either illnatured,' unjust,' malicious,' merciless,' intemperate,' virulent,' or uncalled for. It is quite true that we expressed ourselves at a loss to con jecture what motive had prompted the publication, because it appeared to us so ill adapted to answer its professed design. The Author is perfectly correct in inferring, that our objections apply only to his mode of treating the subject, which we thought

[96]

likely to prejudice the cause it advocates. He has not removed those objections; and though we can assure him that we are his friends at bottom,' we are not in the least reconciled either to his views or to his manner of stating them.

Our Correspondent objects to the statement, that there are men who are neither infidels nor men of decided piety,' as unscriptural. There is, he says, no possibility of such a middle state.' We know not whether to treat this as a blunder or a quibble. We were not pronouncing on the state' or condition of any class, but stating a notorious, unequivocal fact; that there are individuals whose religious character is of a doubtful and indecisive description, which does not admit of our ranking them either with infidels or with persons of decided piety. If the Author of Professional Christianity is in the habit of applying the term infidel to every individual who is not, in his judgement, a decided Christian, he employs the word in a sense unauthorized alike by common usage, by Scripture, by good sense, or good manners.

The only other part of our Correspondent's animadversions to which we deem it necessary to reply, is that in which he accuses us of joking on the sacredness of death. We can assure him that, in the remark he alludes to, we were perfectly serious, and that we consider his principle as fairly liable to the consequences we have pointed out. Not to be uncharitable,' we hope that he has misunderstood us on some other points: he has certainly, however unintentionally, misrepresented our

statements.

Our Correspondent is satisfied that his views respecting the Resurrection could not be surprising' to any one conversant with the Scriptures. He egregiously deceives himself. however unpleasant it may be to speak of any individual contributor, we must assure this gentleman-our readers cannot require to be assured-that the author of the article in question is much more conversant with the Scriptures than even our Correspondent;-that he is so far from being either an infidel or a materialist, that he has exposed the doctrine of Materialism in the pages of our Journal on a former occasionwith what ability, our readers are the judges ;* and that, being entirely a personal stranger to the anonymous Author of Professional Christianity, he could be actuated by no other motive in his remarks on that Tract, than an anxiety to disclaim an injudicious advocate of the cause, and to mark his strong disapprobation of the rash and unguarded statements which the Writer has advanced.

* See E. R. June, 1822. Art. Lawrence and Pring.

THE

ECLECTIC REVIEW,

FOR AUGUST, 1824.

Art. 1. 1. Journal of a second Voyage for the Discovery of a NorthWest Passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific; performed in the Years 1821, 1822, and 1823, in His Majesty's Ships Fury and Hecla, under the Orders of Capt. William Edward Parry, R.N., F.R.S., and Commander of the Expedition. Plates and Maps. 4to pp. 601. Price 41. 14s. 6d. London, 1824.

2. The Private Journal of Captain G. F. Lyon of H. M. S. Hecla, during the recent Voyage of Discovery under Captain Parry. 8vo. pp. 480. Map and Plates. Price 16s. London, 1824.

Mo

OST gratifying was the return of the skilful and hardy seamen who had exposed themselves to perils, the bare recital of which makes a landsman shudder, and whose long absence began to suggest a feeling that the solution of a barren problem in geographical science was not worth so valuable a risk. This gratification was, however, we confess, considerably lessened to us by the intimation which followed 'hard upon,'-that the same gallant individuals were about to renew their laborious and hazardous researches in the same direction. It may betray a very unscientific spirit, to say that we regret this; but we cannot help thinking that enough has been done for knowledge, and that further perseverance in an enterprise which, if not hopeless, is at least unprofitable, is a blameworthy risk of valuable lives. The notion of making the navigation of the Polar seas subservient to the interests of commerce, must by this time be universally abandoned. The general character of the Arctic shores and waters has been sufficiently determined; and enough is known of the habits and qualities of the natives. Nor can we deem the more accurate delineation of the extreme boundary of the North American continent, an object of reasonable anxiety. The discoveries of Capt. Parry, with the singularly intrepid and skilful VOL. XXII. N. S.

I

investigations of Capt. Franklin and his companions, have set the main questions at rest; and the addition of a few details to the collections of science, will be dearly purchased by the privations and hazards incurred in their acquisition. The resolution is, however, taken, and in progress of execution. All, therefore, that remains, is to attend our fearless countrymen with our best wishes for a fair passage through Regent's Inlet, and a safe return through Behring's Straits.

.

The narrative of the late expedition, though it shews the efficiency of the plans adopted for the accommodation and security of the crews, suggests much cause for apprehension and anxiety. Independently of the usual hazards from the every-day casualties of sailing among shoals, currents, and ice, in all its various forms of embarrassment and danger, there were several occasions on which the safety of one, if not both of the vessels, hung on the extreme edge of destruction. When leaving Winter Island, after having been frozen up through a dreary period of two hundred and sixty-seven days, the ships encountered a most perilous navigation. They were hampered in all directions. The ice bore down on them with such force as to snap their hawsers, and bring them into contact under a tremendous pressure. On the following day, the Hecla having broken adrift from three hawsers, four or five of her crew were, each on a separate piece of ice, endeavouring to run out another, when they were carried to a distance from the ship. A heavy pressure closing the loose ice, unexpectedly gave them a road on board again: but for this circumstance,' they must have been hurried away by the stream to certain destruction.' Two or three days after this escape, the following circumstances occurred.

The flood-tide coming down loaded with a more than ordinary quantity of ice, pressed the ship very much at between 6 and 7 A.M, and rendered it necessary to get the stream-cable out, in addition to the other hawsers, which were fast to the land ice. This was scarcely accomplished, when a very heavy and extensive floe took the ship on her broadside, and being backed by another large body of ice, gradually lifted her stern as if by the action of a wedge. The weight every moment increasing, obliged us to veer on the hawsers, whose friction was so great as nearly to cut through the bitt-heads, and ultimately to set them on fire, so that it became requisite for people to attend with buckets of water. The pressure was at length too powerful for resistance, and the stream-cable, with two six, and one five inch hawsers, all gave way at the same moment; three others soon following them. The sea was too full of ice to allow the ship to drive; and the only way in which she could yield to the enormous weight which oppressed her, was by leaning over on the land ice, while her stern at the same time was entirely lifted to above the