uate that I have copied yours. With the huge mass of materials we had, you will readily acknowledge, there could be no necessity, or even need of such a measure.

Permit me to say, what I think the circumstances will justify my saying, that I well recollect writing your name as an authority, sometimes when the thing taken was an extract you had made from another and it would perhaps have been more exact to have inserted another name: but this I did, to show my respect for you, and to keep your book in view. Finally, "I can not, I will not, wish to deprive" you "of one small resource." bly the following articles may be of use to you, in another edition of your very useful "View of Religions;" if so, I shall be very glad that I extracted them from "Bingham's antiquities of the Christian Church." [We omit these extracts.]

Possi

E. PARISH.

Dr. PARISH brought this letter to me himself, about the 12th Nov. It met my entire approbation. He delivered it to Miss A. with his own hand, and obtained from her "an acquittal." See the following document..

EXTRACT OF A LETTER FROM MISS ADAMS TO WILLIAM S. SHAW, ESQ.*

"From the time that my History of New-England was published, I steadily kept my plan in view of abridging it for the use of schools. Hence I felt greatly surprised, and hurt, when I found my design was anticipated by Dr. MORSE and Mr. PARISH. I did not receive the intelligence, that they had any such work on hand, till it was put to the press. I made it an object immediately after, to see Dr. MORSE, and informed him that I began my History for the use of schools, though the weakness of my eyes obliged me to print it in a less condensed form than I had intended; that I was now preparing to execute my original design; that my situation rendered it necessary for me to write for a support; that I apprehended his work would hinder the sale of those copies of my History, which I had still on hand, as well as prevent my publishing the abridgment, which I had already sketched out. He endeavoured to sooth my mind by complimenting my publications, and said "he did not think his work would interfere with mine." I then asked him, whether he was willing that I should go on with my abridgment: he answered, "Perfectly willing; and that he wished to encourage the undertaking."

Notwithstanding this assurance, soon after his history was out of the press, I received a letter from him stating Mr. PARISH'S objections to my publishing; of which I enclose a copy. This so much agitated and distressed my feelings, that I was unable to proceed in my abridgment, until I was encouraged by the friends

*The letter from which the following is extracted, contains other things relating to Miss A's. history and sufferings, which are irrelevant, and have no bearing on this

controversy.

whom I consulted upon the subject. I could not bear the idea of appearing arrogant and presumptuous by writing, after Mr. PARISH deemed it improper; and was besides intimidated by the idea, that if I proceeded in my design, I might "provoke" the Rev. gentlemen to make another abridgment. I imagined that Dr. MORSE, notwithstanding his late declaration, was averse to my publishing, but that he chose rather to have the objections appear in Mr. PARISH's name than his own. I concluded therefore, instead of answering his letter, to give the latter gentleman a true statement of my circumstances, and the motives that induced me to write for the press. I enclose a copy of my letter. When I was in town last autumn, Mr. PARISH called on me, and informed me, that after he received my letter his feelings upon the subject were entirely changed; that the objections he had made, were owing to his ignorance of my situation and views; and that since he knew the true state of the case, he sincerely wished me success in my abridgment. This interview acquitted him in my opinion, and relieved my mind from a weight of anxiety which had injured my health, and retarded my publication. If Dr. MORSE had been kind enough to have given his literary partner an account of my situation and views, this might have been prevented. I cannot think that he did as he would have wished others, in a similar case, to have done by him, in putting his work to press without first apprizing me of his design; and that he has treated me with that candour and generosity, which my helpless sex, and dependent situation, led me to expect from a gentleman, Christian, and public teacher."

REMARKS.

Here let the reader pause, and carefully re-peruse the preceding documents; for in them, let it be remembered, he is to look for the whole cause, the root of the controversy with Miss A. For this reason I shall examine them minutely. Before the re-perusal of these letters, the reader should have distinctly in mind the following facts and dates.

1. The interview, the only one I ever had with Miss A. on the subject, of which she gives an account in her letter to Mr. SHAW, took place after the Thursday lecture, in the crowd, about the middle of Sept. 1804, and about a fortnight, as nearly as I can recollect, after our Compendious History was published.

2. Previously to this interview, not the slightest difference between Miss A. and myself had ever taken place. I had always acted, and been considered, for aught I knew to the contrary, as her friend.

3. After Miss A. heard that our History was in the press, (when this was I know not) she complained to one gentleman, and probably to more, of Dr. P. and myself, because, as she supposed, our work would interfere with hers. She was advised to see and

converse with me on the subject, and was told that she would doubtless receive satisfaction.

4. She accordingly sought and obtained an interview with me, viz. the one mentioned in the first article. With this interview she was well pleased, and "entirely satisfied." The information, contained in these two last articles, I have received since this pamphlet was in press, from a respectable gentleman in Boston, who heard Miss A. utter her complaints, advised her to the interview, and heard her, after it, express her "entire satisfaction."

5. The reader is requested to read Miss A's. own account of this interview, which "entirely satisfied her," and to remark and remember, that she gives no hint of the MS. story, which makes so prominent a figure in this controversy; she makes no mention of the injury done her "reputation, as an author," in the preface to our History; no intimation that I had made an "improper use of her published work," out of which she and her friends have since fabted the charge mentioned in a note in her reply, (page 9.) and which was submitted to the Referees. Nor does she intimate that I came under any obligation whatever, not to publish another edition of our History. These grounds of complaint, which all existed, (the last excepted) if they ever had existence, at the time of this interview, were not even glanced at, according to her own account of it. We may venture to presume, therefore, that they did not then exist in her mind, as complaints; or if they did, they were, in her view, too trivial to mention. In any case, however, the interview "entirely satisfied her."

Here then, let it be remembered, that on or about the 15th of Sept. 1804, (the date of the interview) some weeks after our History was before the public, there existed, according to Miss A's own acknowledgment at the time, no cause of offence, or complaint whatever against me. Her mind was "satisfied," as to all that was past.

In confirmation of what is above stated, it will appear in its place, that it was admitted by Miss A. or, which is the same thing, by Mr. HIGGINSON, before the Referees, more than four years after, that our History was published, "with upright and honourable views of promoting the public good, and without the most distant thought of interfering with the rights, or interests, or wounding the feelings of Miss A. or any one else." It was declared before the Referees by Mr. HIGGINSON, with the knowledge and consent doubtless of Miss A. in whose behalf he acted, that " no one that he had heard, doubted the RIGHT of Dr. Morse to publish his work," and that he "never alleged, that I had a design to interfere with Miss A. in any work. I quote his own words. Resort was accordingly had to other causes of complaint, which will be noticed in their place. I therefore conclude, on the incontrovertible evidence now stated, that till after our History was published, and after the interview above mentioned,

no cause of offence or complaint against me existed, in fact, nor even in the imagination of Miss A. or of her friends. She declared her" entire satisfaction" with my treatment of her; and Mr. HIGGINSON admits what amounts to the same thing. All causes of complaint and offence must, therefore, be sought in events subsequent to the interview.*

6. The reader is requested now to turn to my letter to Miss A. bearing in mind, that I wrote it in the simplicity of my heart, as to one, with whom I was on friendly terms; that it was occasioned by her desire, expressed at the interview, that I would consult with Dr. P. and by the request of Dr. P. that I would communicate his objections. I say his objections; they were exclusively his. Inever had any. I expressly declared to her at the interview just before, that I had none; and repeated the declaration, or rather reminded her of it, in my letter to her. Let these things be particularly remembered, while reading this letter, and also the letter to Mr. SHAW.

[In this place read my letter to Miss A. of Sept. 26, 1804. pa

Here is the famous letter, which has made so prominent a figure in this controversy; from which was drawn a leading article in the charges exhibited to the Referees; a garbled extract from which is ingeniously introduced into the Reply to the Appeal, adapted, if not intended, to make a false and wounding impression on the public mind. This is the letter, which is thus noticed by the Editor of the Anthology, Dec. 1805, in his answer to my Remarks on his review of our history. "You very well know, that you privately endeavoured to dissuade Miss A. from abridging her work, and even threatened her, that the prosecution of her purpose, might "provoke an abridgment of your Compendious History." And yet you have always appreciated her merits, and befriended her interest!!!"

Mr. HIGGINSON, alluding to this letter, says, "my first charge was that he (Dr. M.) did interfere with her rights, by a cruel and unmanly threat, to publish an abridgment to meet hers."+

This letter is alluded to, in more softened terms, indeed, in the statement to the Referees, as follows: "Miss A. received a letter from Dr. M. saying, that he had consulted Dr. P. who did not approve of her publishing an abridgment, and advised her not to do it, lest it should provoke them to publish an abridgment

also.' ""

Such have been the representations of this letter; and it has been made the theme of incessant reproach, ever since it was written.

*Should it be found in the sequel, however, that Miss A. and her friends complain of what passed before the interview, and make charges out of them before the Ref erees and the public, they will now know how to estimate their foundation and their weight.

† Vol. ii. p. 673.

See Mr. H's. remarks on my letter to Mr. Salisbury, of Dec. 7, 1808.

172

The dismal effects produced by this letter on Miss A. ought here to be brought into view before the reader. They are described very pathetically by Miss A. herself, in her letter to Mr. SHAW. [Here the reader is requested to turn to the last paragraph in this letter, and to read it attentively.]

In the statement made to the Referees, these effects are thus described. "This shock (meaning the one occasioned by my letter) produced a serious effect on the weak nerves of Miss A. and deprived her of all power, if she had had courage, to go on with her work."

7. With the facts in view, which have now been stated, let the reader turn to Miss A's. letter to Dr. P. of the 13th Oct. 1804, the day after she received my letter, and then to his answer of 10th of Nov. the day after he received it; remembering at the same time, the interview which took place, when Dr. P. delivered his own letter to Miss A. about the 12th of Nov. to which Miss A. alludes in her letter to Mr. SHAW, and the effects of this inview, as stated by Miss A. to Mr. SHAW, in the following words; "This interview acquitted him in my opinion, &c. I much mistake if he will not here find, literally, "much ado about nothing.'

Here he will find these facts:

1. That Miss A. correctly considered the objections to her publishing, as Dr. PARISH's objections, not as mine; and that she accordingly wrote not to me, but to him, to remove them.

2. That he did in fact effectually remove them immediately, as soon as he was made acquainted with Miss A's circumstances, and with the effect they had had on her mind. To this fact Miss A. herself is the witness.

3. That the dismal effects of this letter on Miss A. above related, lasted just one month, from Oct. 12th, when she received my letter, to Nov. 12th, when Dr. P. called on her and delivered his letter, and had the interview, which Miss A. says, "acquitted him in my opinion, and relieved my mind from a weight of anxiety, which had injured my health, and retarded my publication.' The cause and the effects are now both before the reader; he will judge whether the one is proportioned to the other. On the preceding facts and statements I am willing to rest the whole controversy. If they are admitted as correct, and I think no one will deny them, then every thing that has since occured will admit of easy and satisfactory explanation.

It is obvious here to remark, that between the "satisfactory" interview with Miss A. about the 15th of Sept. 1804, and the satisfactory interview between Dr. P. and Miss A. about the middle of Nov. following, nothing happened to give Miss A. offence, or cause of complaint, except the objections, &c. of Dr. P. and these were entirely removed, as we have seen, and Dr. P. received an ample "acquittal." All matters of difference between Miss A. on the one part, and Dr. P. and myself on the other, ap