being unknown, must then have been set down all equal to nothing; he would hardly have resorted to his horse-laugh and the "glaring evidence" from the insertion in Stephanus's words, to induce his readers to believe that the man had only the fifteen of the margin. I think also that he would have avowed that Stephanus had thirteen or fourteen MSS. of the Acts and Cath. Ep., and would not have placed it "extra omnem dubitationem," that Stephanus had only the cited MSS., when he himself quotes one that is cited perpetually in the next division, as having the Catholic Epistles, though never cited in that division. And in justification of myself for thus sturdily denying Griesbach's “nullum esse,” I ask, is this understood in any case but that of the readings of unknown MSS. in old critical editions of the Greek Testament? How is it with respect to Greek classical authors, when they, like the sacred writers, became the property of these booksellers? Are the productions of this identical Early Parisian Greek Press, then, set down to be utterly worthless? And, to come even still closer to the point, what are the sentiments of the conspiring critics themselves respecting these same unknown " MSS. used by R. Stephens and Beza," when their readings can be obtained against the received text? is it then " facile intelligitur, pretium quod dubium est nullum esse," or do they come into the tale as so much true and indubitable testimony? I fully accord, then, with Griesbach, in his decision, xxxiv., Lond. xliii., "vehementer errasse eos qui vulgaribus editionibus auctoritatem aliquam eo omine tribuerent, ut ab carum lectionibus recedere nefas sit." But when the great critic's real object appears, in the question at p. xxxvi., Lond. xliv., " quid est quod obstet, quo minus hodie Novum Test. e codicibus manuscriptis, nulla anteriorum editionum ratione habita, edi possit ?" I think I can furnish him with a very sufficient reason against it. I think I can see a distinction between attributing such authority to editions" ut ab earum lectionibus recedere nefas sit," and the determining to give a text from present MSS. alone, "nulla anteriorum editionum ratione habita." I should say, with respect to the Alexandrine MS., the Vatican, and the Ephrem, exactly as Griesbach does of the old editions,— that the man was very far wrong who should make it a sin to depart from any of their readings. I should hardly, however, admit that this decision would justify an editor in totally rejecting A, B, and C, in the formation of his text. And though I allow of no exclusive authority to the old critical editions, the proofs which the Docti et Prudentes have themselves furnished, inspire me with such "sublime notions of the morality of the editors," as to believe that they gave no " sophisticated text," but that they, like the writers of those old documents, followed the Greek MSS. that they had before them; and that neither the one nor the other were guilty of the atrocity of forging Greek, which has been so plentifully charged upon both, by those who have disliked the readings which they record. For myself, then, whilst I was permitted to hold a living,* and as a presbyter of the church of England, I constantly read

I should wish these words to be remarked by those who may have been induced to throw aside the Specimen, from the interested motives ascribed to its author by Mr. Oxlee,-Letters to the Bishop of Salisbury, pp. 120, 121. The following paper shews how just the charge was:

"MY DEAREST Boy,-I have expressed to you my opinion that my recent publication, Specimen,' &c. will pass unnoticed by one party, because they will find it unanswerable, and by the other, because great danger is felt in commending the λογος εκ των αδοξουντων ιων. I have decidedly told you my opinion, that very few years will pass after those days which may yet remain to me shall have been numbered, before some man of weight will tell the world what it has effected; and that you will then be pressed to publish anything that you may know of your father's sentiments upon the subject. I therefore sit down to leave you materials for completing the examination of the question, Of the MSS. used by R. Stephens and

to my flock the authorized version of the New Testament, as the word of God, I had the full assurance of understanding that I gave them nothing which had not the sanction of Greek MSS. collated by Stephanus and his son. And for those who tell me it contains foul and scandalous interpolations,-who can call it an historical fact, that these passages are nothing more than bald translations from the Latin by the early editors of printed Greek Testaments,-who can demand of me to give publicity to the fraud and to arrest its progress,-I say to them, justify yourselves, if you can, for reading to your congregations, as the oracles of Almighty God, that version of which you profess to hold such sentiments; justify yourselves, if you can, for your publication of such sentiments of that version, when, if you know anything of the subject upon which you have thus dared to speak, you know, on acknowledged authority, that Stephanus had " alii” besides the fifteen MSS. of the margin, and to a greater amount; you know that the Docti et Prudentes, who have pronounced that Stephanus never had any MSS. to furnish these disputed passages, have themselves given the readings of those MSS. in the greatest abundance, and in all parts of the sacred volume, avowedly from that book of collations which "Ro. Stephanus jam anno 1550 usus est," and in three out of four of the divisions of the sacred text, even from the margin of the folio itself; you know that there never was a more groundless slander than the assertion that he attributed the authority of MSS. to printed copies, or a greater fraud than the talking of his following printed guides.

Mr. Porson, with his wonted trenchant wit and irresistible genius, talks, p. 33, of "those coy, bashful Grecian beauties that withdraw themselves, not only from touch, but from sight

Quæ nec mortales dignantur visere cœtus

Nec se contingi patiuntur lumine claro."

P. 23, "6 They are lost: either they have been burned, or have been gnawed in pieces by the rats, or been rotted with the damps, or been destroyed by those pestilent fellows the Arians;" and still more particularly in summing up, at p. 87-" Having discussed the subject of Stephens's and Beza's orthodox MSS. [Let. Crito notice that the MSS. are Stephens's and Beza's], I am compelled to decide (with sorrow I pronounce it !) that they have disappeared; perhaps they were too good for this world, and therefore are no longer visible on earth. However, I advise true believers not to be dejected, for, since all things lost from earth are treasured up in the lunar sphere, they may rest assured that these valuable relics are safely deposited in some snug corner of the moon, fit company for Constantine's donation, Orlando's wits, and Mr. Travis's learning." And there are whole idolaters of Mr. Porson, who will not take the hint, which I think shews sufficiently that all this, to use his own

Beza.' If our church should then feel any gratitude to me for my labours-and you know what it has cost me to capacitate myself for the inquiry-there will be a mode in which she may cancel every debt. I have a son, an only son, who, blessed be my all-merciful God, gives me every ground of hope that he will be a Christian, a gentleman, and a scholar. Upon the supposition that he continues in his present course— and I trust that upon no other supposition would it be asked for by me-he will do honour to any patronage. If you have to publish anything upon the subject, you are enjoined to prefix this letter to it, by him whose injunctions you have never yet disputed, Your ever affectionate father, FRANCIS HUYSHE."

He to whom this was addressed lies in the strangers' burying-ground in Madeira; and a monument in the church of Harrow, erected by his fellow-disciples to record his worth, speaks, I think, as much to their honour as it does to the comfort of his justly-punished father. Mr. Oxlee's charge, then, no longer exists. I now have nothing, I now have no one for whom I would ask for anything. My present defence, therefore, of the church of England and her authorized version, is disinterested.

expression, was "not meant to impose but upon voluntary dupes," where the Professor declares (p. xxii.) that he will not follow Mr. Travis in pretending that truth was the sole aim, object, and end of his Letters, gentlemen who will not be content to worship, with me, his unequaled genius, but must fall down before the "pure and inflexible love of truth" displayed in the exposure of his Cloten. So Mr. Porson's wit stands for gospel. The Eclectic Review, vol. vi., January, 1810, p. 70, exclaims, “Lost! what, all?" and then gives the caustic raillery. We find it in Crito, p. 208, 114. And Crito's Unitarian admirers can depend upon it, Monthly Repository, May, 1828, p. 331, after the hints that they had received in the Specimen, respecting Beza, and the repeated reference to Eph. iii,, one of the places where, as we have seen, Stephanus himself, by the admission of all the critics, quotes the unmarked MSS. But observe in what manner Mr. Porson expresses his desiderium for them" they have disappeared”; and so, at p. 144, he speaks of “all the Greek MSS. now known to exist." No man, in the year 1790, could say that he had ever seen the unmarked MSS. of Stephanus,-no man could then say they are now known to exist. And Mr. P.'s followers, whose wits are deposited with Mr. Travis's learning, are left to conclude that because the MSS. have disappeared, no such MSS. ever did exist. I allow that if such never did exist, that would be a sufficient reason for no one seeing them in 1790. But, after some experience and attentive observation, I fancy to myself that I have discovered other reasons besides this, why an object might not be seen. Mr. Porson tells me, at p. 31, of two of the marked MSS. "that have disappeared," without any of that deep sorrow which he expresses when he says this of the unmarked MSS.—without any advice to true believers to look for them in the lunar sphere, and without even a word of contempt upon me, if I were to say that, though they have disappeared, I think that they did once exist, and that they may possibly still exist on this our terraqueous sphere. And I am led to venture upon this, by the fact of there having been three of the marked MSS. which had disappeared, and the finder of the third being now living, to hear the praises of the critical acumen and diligence with which he made the discovery. But there is yet another cause; and I can declare that I have more than once found it prevent a man's seeing an object, even where it was perfectly visible,—and that is, his not choosing to look for it. If any one should be induced to admit that this is not mere fancy and prejudice on my part, I ask him, who has ever looked for these "MSS. of R. Stephens and Beza”-the "plus grand nombre d'exemplaires"-which, let it be always remembered, Mr. Porson himself admitted to have been in Beza's book of collation, by his quoting, as indisputable authority, at p. 56, what Wetsten so nobly called the hyperbolica verba Bezæ, after he had himself incontrovertibly established them. With respect to classical authors, as we began with observing, the Early Press had the effect, that was naturally to be expected, of occasioning the loss of the written documents which it had employed. And the whole of the materials from whence the N. T. in the Complutensian Bible was drawn appear to be gone, past recovery, with several of those that Erasmus used. So that Mr. Gibbon's and Mr. Porson's sarcasm of "Invisibles" applies to the Complutensian Greek Testament as well as it does to the early editions of the classics, and, in a considerable degree, to Erasmus. Wetsten might safely exult, in Cicero's words, respecting these documents, " interiisse scimus omnes;" ii. 727. But by far the greatest part of Stephanus's MSS. were so differently circumstanced, that they may be reasonably supposed to be now existing. The fifteen that he received from the royal library, we know, from his own testimony, were returned. And when he employed his son in Italy, there is no reason for supposing that any of those were ever removed from the libraries to which they belonged, or that Robert saw anything more of them than his son's collations. The marked MS. ty has been discovered where no one, I think, could have surmised that it would have come. But have the conspiring

"

Critics, when they cry out respecting the unmarked, "Lost, all lost," ever looked into that part of the terrestrial sphere where they may so justly be expected to remain-viz., the " snug corners" of Paris and of the north of Italy? Did Wetsten ever search for them? did Bengel? did Griesbach? Did Mr. Porson ever suggest that the MSS. which he admitted in his appeal to Beza's words (p. 56), and whose readings he must have seen so perpetually quoted by Wetsten, should be looked for upon earth? Has his vindicator, since his attention was called to them, ever said a word to excite either our own travellers or learned foreigners to make a search "in regis Galliæ bibliotheca et in Italicis"? What has Bishop Marsh said beyond that note, the immense importance of which I readily and thankfully admit, (Michaelis, ii. 698, note 114,) where he speaks of them, and tells us of "several MSS. of the Greek Testament used by Stephens himself," which are "at present either lost or buried in obscurity"? "At present," says the note; and when we are saluted with "Lost! what, all!" and, for our consolation, are directed to search a lunatic asylum, I take shelter under this high authority-" at present either lost or buried in obscurity;" and it would have been no Herculean task to have made a collection of their lectiones singulares from Beza, being aided by Wetsten's and Bengel's quotations, and to say, they shall be no longer thus “buried in obscurity.' Mr. Porson calls them "coy, bashful Grecian beauties;" but I cannot think that the Professor was a very ardent admirer when he uttered these complaints, having at the same time such means of pressing his suit. I think no worse of them because "not obvious, not obtrusive, but retired," they did not jump into the arms either of Mr. Porson or his Cloten, when they were turning their backs upon them; but, "with conscience of their worth, they would be wooed, and not unsought be won." But our pretended lover of Grecian beauties, who bewails their disappearance in such doleful accents, is not content with blaming their coyness; he asserts that they “withdraw themselves not only from touch, but from sight.” I utterly deny such prudery as this. I admit them to be coy, but it was the coyness of the lady of whom I once heard, who had a lover that said of her, “fugit ad salices et se cupit ante videri." Look at the description which the happy Beza gives of their charms, from the sole of the foot even to the crown of the head, and then tell me what you think of the plaintive notes of this "lagger in love."-(Lady Heron's Song.) Did they withdraw themselves from the sight of the Stephani, father and son, and of Beza; or does this bespeak them, with "coy submission," longing to be seen"? Without crossing the Alps, from what we have seen distinctly stated by Robert, by Beza, and by Henry, there are some of them that, to use Griesbach's words, p. xix. note, Lond. xxxi., "in Parisino isto librorum manuscriptorum oceano hodie labere antumo." "Gnawed in pieces by the rats," says Mr. Porson; "or destroyed by those pestilent fellows the Arians." No, no! I have no reason for thinking that it has been such total destruction; only "mutilatos aut laceros," as Griesbach says-merely some bits of them gnawed off by one of these twolegged rats. Mr. P. is too strong in his expression, when he makes whole MSS. to have disappeared; only, I dare say, these bits of them, as I have already intimated, whether" too good for this world," or too bad to be left to mislead other editors, when a couple of them had been disposed of, by assuring a certain Cloten that their reading was not in any of the MSS. which Robert Estienne made use of; “ and therefore" these bits" are no longer visible upon earth." I have no doubt that there is enough of the MSS. left to prove their personal identity. If, however, I can excite no one to fish in Griesbach's Parisino oceano for "the remnant that is left," or to carry his net into the oceans of Italy, still I ask, what think you of the man who himself quotes 4 and 5 of these unmarked " MSS. of Stephens and Beza" in passages of the Acts and Cath. Ep., speaking thus of another place in that division-“ Cum enim codices Græcos hodie superstites causæ suæ adversari cernant, deper

"

ditos libros comminiscuntur, et hoc quasi spectro criticis, qui ab omnibus Stephani Græcis codicibus æque ac a nostris carmen istud abfuisse contendunt, terrorem incutere vanissimo conatu satagunt"? Griesbach, xxx., Lond. xl. What think you of Mr. Porson being compelled to decide thus " on the subject of Stephens's and Beza's orthodox MSS.," when Bishop Marsh avows that although they are" at present either lost or buried in obscurity," they were actually" used by Stephens himself," and when their various readings were before the Professor's own eyes, quoted perpetually in all the divisions, by Wetsten and Bengel? What think you of it, when, by Mr. Porson's own acknowledgment, two of the marked MSS. "have disappeared" equally with the unmarked, and all the critics have, for a century, been looking for them in vain; yet neither he nor any one else has even intimated a doubt of Stephanus having actually had such MSS., whilst no search whatever has been made for the unmarked, but in the "snug corners of the moon,” nor the least inquiry been instituted, except the Professor's advertisement in the Hue and Cry of the lunar sphere"? What think you of these unmarked MSS. being called “the imaginary books of dreaming Beza," and that not in a sentence clumsily foisted into a history to serve as an excuse for a note that shall fix the reader to an option between "the deliberate falsehood or strange misapprehension of Theodore Beza," but in a treatise which, we are to be told, brings the business " quam proxime ad evidentiam mathematicam"? Wetsten, 185, xvi. Seml. 461. Would that I could say that the author of it was himself dreaming or drunk when he wrote the words! Alas for human nature and her prodigy!-it was Sir Isaac Newton.* Bishop Burgess has happily proved (Letter to Mrs. Joanna Baillie, 68, 69,) that Sir Isaac shewed some penitence, and endeavoured to check Mr. Locke in propagating such a work. But it is enough for me that he could have ever come to such a conclusion, and once determined to publish it. The Unitarians are anxious to claim Sir Isaac as their own, or at least as belonging to a species which shall come with them under some common genus, distinct from our hated church. Per me licet. Let it be known that this incomparable man could set down Stephanus's text as having no other authority than the opposing MSS. of his margin, when he had Beza's calculation of the "viginti quinque plus minus MSS. codd." before him, and could call those of the viginti quinque which are not regularly cited in the margin of Stephanus's folio, "the imaginary books of dreaming Beza," with the quotations of the readings of those MSS. before him in Beza's notes, throughout the whole N. T.,-himself, too, avowing that there were seventeen of them cited in a place, and then the Unitarians shall not be disturbed by me in their claim, even if Sir Isaac had really displayed as much critical knowledge in his Letter as penetration in his mathematical inquiries-(Michaelis, i. p. 523, note 8); and I only regret that I cannot throw one or two illustrious names besides into the bargain.

FRANCIS HUYSHE.

I am aware that much may be urged in extenuation of Sir Isaac which I have myself urged for Mills. He knew however, as well as Crito himself did, that Stephanus's MSS. were not "all in sight:" he tells, §. xxv. p. 516, that they belonged to several libraries in France and Italy.