pur beer to be an indispensible necessary of life with the lower orders of society, have yet to learn how the lower orders live. In fact, beer has been long an article so costly, as not to be within their reach. The tea-pot has taken place of the mug, at every meal of the peasant's family; such persons, therefore, will be least of all affected by the stoppage of breweries. On the contrary, if the brewing of malt was prevented, they would be certain of a very large supply of good bread, without any sacrifice on their part. How large a supply such a measure would produce, we may pretty well ascertain by calculation. At present, how does man live? We will say, that his mode of cultivating his land is uniformly the same; that he sows wheat in the first year, barley in the second, oats in the third and, after coating his land with manure, sows wheat, barley, and oats, in succession, again. By such a scheme of husbandry, is it not manifest that he sows his land but once in three years, for the pose of raising bread for himself? In the second year he grows drink for his table, and some share of grain for his swine: in the third year he provides only for his horses. Now this is certainly very bad œconomy. Two years at least, out of the thres, ought to be made to Taise food for his own consumption. If then barley be made use of as meat instead of drink, is it not manifest that he will grow for his own table twice as much bread as he before did? And will he not obtain in the first two years as much solid provision from his harvestfield, as he has hitherto reaped in six years? The sound policy, therefore, of preventing barley from being converted into beer, when there is actually a scarcity of bread, must be obvious. If beer must be had, let brewers be compelled to make it from sugars; or at least let them be confined to the use of such barley only as they shall import. If such restrictions should be found to bear hard upon certain individuals, I shall yet be of opinion, that general preservation ought not to be sacrificed to particular convenience. If these observations, Mr. Editor, should appear to you and your readers to be of some consequence, I shall be happy in the reflection, that, by not suppressing them, I have been useful to my fellow-creatures. ACADEMICUS. TITHES NO BAR TO AGRICULTURAL IMPROVEMENT. SIR, TO THE EDITOR. EING a fincere friend to the King and the Church of England, I (when an undergraduate at Oxford) took in the British Critic on its first establishment, and ftill continue that publication; but having great obligations to Mr. Jones's writings, from which I have derived fuch conviction of the great truths of Chriftianity, that I believe my faith therein will not eafily be fhaken, I was furprifed that thefe critics ould treat with ridicule the analogy pointed out by that learned wri. ter ter: had they confuted his arguments, well and good; the world would have gained by the detection of fophiftry, and the establishment of the truth; but affertion being no argument, I confider their oppofition to Mr. Jones as proceeding from the groundlefs prejudice entertained even by men in other refpects candid, against the opinions of Mr. Hutchinfon. Hearing, however, that Mr. Jones was treated with greater refpect in your Review, I determined to fend for one of your Numbers, and am fo well pleased with your publication, that I have fent for it from its commencement, and propofe continuing it as long as I perceive, that the fame proper fpirit remains which first actuated it; of which I perceive, at prefent, no failure. Your obfervations on Tithes are admir able, and it is on this fubject, I wish to address you. I have been much affifted by your arguments on this long contested point; but there is one truth which I wish you boldly to fpeak out. It has been afferted (and it is no more than an affertion) that tithes are an obstacle to the improvement in agriculture: now I will affert, in direct contradiction to this, that they are a great benefit to the farmer in their present tenure, and, of confequence, ought not to obftruct but to further any agricultural improvement. I shall now give you my facts on which I ground my affertion. When I came into the poffeffion of my living, a little more than five years ago, I continued the cuftom long prevalent in this parish, and indeed in this county, where tithes are in clerical hands, which is to view the tithes and offer them to the feveral farmers on whofe grounds they grow. I did fo, and drew the tithes of the few who refufed; and mark the confequence. I kept an exact account of thefe tithes, and, after deducting the expence of loading, threshing, and marketing, (heavy to me, because I had every thing to hire, but which would have been little or nothing to the farmer) I nearly doubled the fum at which I offered them to the farmers. I do therefore maintain, that had I drawn all my tithes I should have nearly doubled my living; had I had my own horfes, &c. more than doubled it. The farmers ought not to have complained, because they had an offer of that to which they had no claim, for which they pay no rent, and which when they refuse they do fo, because they are not willing to take them, unless they are certain that they will prove what they call well worth the money. Now I do fay, that no method which can be adopted will prove fo beneficial to the farmer as the prefent mode, unless the Clergyman be deprived of his dues, which I am afraid is the with, at the bottom, in all the plans of commutation :this fufpicion fully accounts for the Clergyman's backwardness in con fenting to an equivalent, which, if really fo, ought to be much more productive to him than his prefent benefit. At the prefent moment, from the high price of corn, the gains to the farmer, from the tithes, must be immenfe; for which, as I faid before, he pays no rent, and to which he has no legal claim. The tithes this year are let, in general, in this county at little or no advance. Could an equivalent be adopted, is it not clear, that the farmers ought to pay this year twice, nay, three times the fums which they pay at prefent? For had the tithes. been drawn the gains to the Clergyman would have been in that pro portion portion more than he now receives; and yet the Surveyors of counties reprefent tithes as a grievance! I think that if you were to discuss Dr. Anderfon's arguments (or rather groundless affertions) againft tithes, you would do great fervice, as his publication is very generally read by Gentlemen who wish to commence farmers, and does great mischief to minds already but too ill-prejudiced on this fubject. This man, I believe, afferts that if the Clergy were not content with a fmall com. pofition for their tithes, the farmers would be ruined. If this be fact, it furely does not prove that tithes are a burden, but that rents are too high. Indeed, the farmers, in general, are well convinced that the tithes are underlet, but raife their voice againft them, because they confider them in the light of a tax and not of a property; and, there fore, imagine that they would have their farms at their prefent rents were the tithes abolished; but tell them, that there is a plan to com. mute them, by which the Clergy will receive to the utmost what is due to them (and if they do not, an injuftice will be done them), I dare venture to affert, that they will prefer the prefent mode. They must know, that when land is let tithe-free, the landlord adds to his rent more than they would pay to the Clergyman, a proof of which I am acquainted with, where the Clergyman waves his right of receiving tithe for feven years from land lately inclofed, being unwilling to fubject himself to a conteft at law; and what is the confequence? The landlord hearing of this has added to his rent, for seven years, as much as he thinks these tithes are worth; fo that the tenant receives no advantage, the Clergyman lofes by his forbearance, and the landlord takes what he never purchased; and to which he has no claim. I know of no objection to the drawing of tithe but the taking away, once in ten years, the ftraw of the parish; but this ftraw is confidered by the tenant as of fuch little confequence to him, that he almoft, invariably, fells the tithe ftraw when he purchases his tithes. This practice is fa prevalent, that many landlords have reftricted them from fo doing; but even admitting the utmost force of this objection, the manure is not loft to the country, but frequently turns out to better account by its being fent to towns, from whence it returns, much richer than it otherwife would have been. I thus have troubled you, at length, wishing you boldly to affert what is undoubtedly true; that tithes, fo far from being an obstacle to the improvement of agriculture, tend to promote its progrefs, if a property let at a low rent has that tendency; of which, indeed, I have my doubts. I am your humble fervant, A NORTHUMBERLAND RECTOR... SCHISM AND SCHISMATICS. N the laft volume of our Review, P. 90, at the conclufion of a the Lecturer of St. George's, Southwark, we promifed, in a future Number, 36 Number, to offer fome obfervations of our own upon that subject. By a reference to the Canons, our readers will find, that fome of them had been grofsly violated by the Lecturer, and that it was the bounden duty of the Churchwarden to report his fermon to the Bishop of the Diocefe; but the acting Churchwarden, we have been told, was a baker who attended more to his oven than to the Church, and who, probably, never having read the Canons in his life, was excufeable for not acting in obedience to their injunctions. Our reason, however, for recalling this fubject to the recollection of our readers, is to explain to them, what they have a right to know, the cause of our own filence. The fact is, that, on the appearance of the letter in question, we received an application from the Rector of St. George's, requesting a communication of the authorities on which the charges preferred against the Lecturer, in that letter, were founded. Thefe authorities were immediately tranfmitted to the Rector, and every thing being now placed in its proper channel, having rouzed the attention of the lawful fuperior of the offending party, a proper refpect for authority, and a due fense of subordination have led us to forbear all farther comments on the subject; not doubting, that the worthy Rector will take fuch steps as the exigency of the cafe fhall feem to him to require, and, if all other modes of correction shall prove ineffectual, that he will finally appeal to the Bishop. The growth of Schifm in these kingdoms is, we are concerned to fay, very rapid; and calls loudly for the utmoft vigilance and exertion of the Clergy of the Established Church. Now, that we are upon the fubject, we shall lay before our readers various anecdotes and letters, fome of which have been too long in our poffeffion.To begin with a licensed Schifmatic. Mr. ALPHONSUS GUN. Of this gentleman we had occafion to speak frequently in the early Numbers of our work. He lately offered himself as a candidate for the Lectureship at St. Bride's, where the canvas and all the other ufual accompaniments of an election, were carried on, with as much decency and decorum, as generally prevail at a contefted election for a county or borough, and to the great edification of the parish. The worthy patriots who conducted the election on the part of Mr. Gun, ffor it is worthy of temark, that all the patriots were his friends) were Citizens WAITHMAN and MORTIMER; the latter, we believe, is gun-maker to his Majefty. With fuch aid Mr. GUN could not fail to be fuccefsful. His party prevailed and he was returned by a confider able majority-of Methodists. The Clergyman, however, having a right to refufe the Lecturer admiffion to his pulpit; and wifely chufing to exercise that right, in the prefent inftance, the Lectureship ftill remains vacant, and, we hope, will continue to remain fo. On the fubject of Lectureships, we are truly happy to be able to state, that the BISHOP of LONDON, whofe zeal, vigilance, and activity, entitle him to the gratitude of every friend to the Church, has pofitively rejected feveral applications, for the establishment of new Lectureships; and, we trust, that this fpirit will be generally adopted by the heads of our our Church, and lead, in the process of time, to the utter eradication of that democratical fungus from the ecclesiastical body. The Me thodists have, very artfully, contrived to imprefs a confiderable part of the public with the belief that they are favoured and protected by this worthy Prelate, and the friends of Mr. GUN, in particulat, have laboured hard to propagate this calumny. If any thing were neceffary to prove the falsehood of fuch affertions, the following letter from the Bishop, (on the fubject of Mr. GUN's election) which has been circulated in the parish of St. Bride's, would effectually prove it. It is a letter which reflects equal honour on the Prelate by whom it was written, and on the Clergyman who caufed it to be written. Sundridge, near Sevenoaks, Kent, REV. SIR, YESTERDAY three of your parishioners, at St. Brides, came down to me here to inform me of what had paffed, relative to M Alphonfus Gun, and of your having refufed your confent to his being appointed Lecturer of your parish. I told them, without hefitation, that I entirely approved your conduct in that refpect; I truft, you will continue firm in your refolution, and, in every inftance of this fort, you will, I am perfuaded, never give your confent to fuch appointments till you are perfectly fatisfied refpecting the principles and doctrines of the perfon propofed. I am, Sir, your faithful and obedient fervant, SIR, TO THE EDITOR. S have undertaken to watch over the interests of the Church A and State, fo far as concerns the productions of the prefs, I imagine that the account I here fend you of a publication by Mr. Gilbert Wakefield may not be unacceptable. Many perfons are acquainted with the religious and political opinions of that voluminous writer; but every one ought alfo to be informed of the infidious arts which are made ufe of by him and fuch men, to ufher their vile trash into the world, in order, under the mafque of learning, to poison the minds of the unwary and lead them from the truth. Mr. Gilbert Wakefield thought truly, that the old tranflation of the Bible would not fuit his purpofe, and, therefore, in the year 1791, he published a new one, and dedicated it to the Rev. Mr. Tyrewhitt of Jefus College. To the work is prefixed a lift of subscribers, and a curious lift it is; and as if this Reverend Gentleman was confcious that his work needed fome extraordinary means to make it noticed, and to give it confequence in the eyes of the public, he has given titles to fome of the fubfcribers which do not belong to them, and who, without thefe fictis tious titles, are not to be confidered, in a literary view, as of any confequence at all. |