Nor cafe or fexe this furious flame did Each gender in the loffe had common fhare. And fom with heat and fmoak are. stroken Supines lie gafping upward void of fenfe, wonder, &c. Elfe fure the fire into flames had turn'd, Then gan the Hitrockts to funder, Mr. URBAN, A R. C. Nov. 25. Sfcurrility is a had fubftitute for argument, I fhall not retort it upon the foi-difant critics in what is nually called Gothic Architecture. The former of thefe writers to whom I have alluded, in his unprovoked attack upon Tavistock chapel, has difplayed confidetable knowledge of that fcience, in which he has diftinguifhed himfelf both as an Antiquary and an Architect. It would have been well, it his candour had borne any proportion to his knowledge. But, unhappily, this writer is not lefs diftinguithed by prejudice, than an eager difplay of erudition on all fubjects connected with hiftory, architecture, and antiquity. Thele he uniformly makes the vehicles of cenfure upon the exifting ecclefiaftical infitations of his country. That a welldifpofed man fhould retain the errors of education and early habits, is not furpriting; but that he thould, upon all occafions, endeavour to impofe thefe errors upon the world, and purposely go out of his way to difplay his ingenuity in defending them, is one mielancholy proof, among many, how completely a man may become the flave of fuperftition, and the dupe of his own fophiftry. Of this, the Hittory of Winchetter is a deplorable in flance. Into this work, which exhibits great learning and tafte in antiquity, and that ftyle of architecture which, from its early appropriation to *As it is improperly cailed. religious edifices, may not improperly be termed ecclefiaftical, the author has contrived to weave a continued fneer upon the Reformed Faith, and a libel upon the religious eftablishments of his country. With an effrontery peculiar to himfelf, he fets all the mumeries, follies, and blafphemies of Popery in array, again the fimple, rational, fubfime inftitutions of Proteftantifin. But, leaving him to the juflly-fevere caftigation which the Chancellor of the Diocele in which he refides, has bestowed on a performance that was idly defigned to bring exploded errors once more into fashion, and to revive a controverfy which every true Chriflian and patriot would lament to fee, I fhalt proceed to notice the firictures of your other correfpondent J. C. on the new chapel in Tavifiock fquare. If in the former of thele writers we perceive the leven of Popery ever ready to ferment at the appearance of any efforts to promote the interefts of the Reforined church, whether by increafing, embellifhing, or even repairing its ftructures *; in the latter we obferve the jealoufy of a little mind, which can difcern nothing but faults in the works of a rival artist. This is evident in the title which this invidious cenfor has thought proper to prefix to the ftyle of architecture exhibited in the new chapel which has been the subject of fuch misplaced cenfure. He has thought proper to denominate it, "The Fantaftic Order of Architect ture." The title is not lefs invidious than falfe. The few deviations from the ftrict rules of what is commonly called Gothic Architecture, in this edifice, are either fuch as were unavoidable from local circumstances (for which no allowance is made), or fuch as are involuntary facrifices to convenience and accommodation. This will appear very clearly in the fequél of this reply. 1 The first circumftance which is imputed as a fault, is but one proof, ainong others, of this writer's want of candour, or of imperfect knowledge of his fubject. He cenfures the practice of calling a place of worship after the name of the builder, or the ftreet in which it ftands, inftead of naming it after fome Saint. But it has efcaped him, perhaps, that all religious edi *See fome cynical obfervations on the fashion of altering and beautifying antient Cathedrals, especially Salisbury. fices named in this certainly more appropriate manner are folemnly dedicated, by epifcopal authority, to the purpofe of divine worship, and that no chapel erected on leafehold premifes can be fo dedicated, or even confecrated. Similar to this, is his objection to the fite of the building, which is North and South. This is not as he fays, with uncommon fagacity, because the front or entrance is South, whereby the edifice in length flands North and South;" this would have been a reafon which none but himself would have thought of; but, because the proprietor was neceffarily obliged to place it fo, having no choice of fituation. But this is not quite fo rare a thing as he imagines: witnefs the parish church of St. George, in the fame neighbourhood. His next objection is, that the doors of entrance are on each fide of the centre of the defign." In this difpofition of them there is a great fpace under the gallery, which is now rendered very ufeful, and which must have been facrificed had the door of entrance been centrical. This rule has been frequently difpenfed with in. many autient and modern churches of finall extent. He next finds fault with the plays with which the doors are circumlcribed, and whereby they are much lighter. Thefe, he pretends, "are peculiar to windows only." But for this we have Tome of the best authorities; namely, Weltminster abbey, Chichester cathe dral, and many other equally correct and elegant edifices. The fquare-headed label over the pointed arch, which he next condemns, is of greater antiquity than the Tudor æra, and appears in the above antient fiructures, as well as in many others. It is, perhaps, the first time that ever mullions were condemned for being too fmall, the great beauty of which is fuppofed to confift in their light and airy afpect. Thefe, being not relieved with the trefoil and tracery (which would have increafed the expence in a great degree), are on that account very properly light and flender, but not to diminutive as to be deemed "petit." It is a "thick fight" indeed, that can difcern neither beauties nor convenience. The tracery, and all expenfive finifhings, together with the angular mouldings, which are wanting on the "wire-drawn edges of the groins" (as he terms them), were neceffarily omitted, as incurring too great expence. Fearing, Mr. Ur ban, to treipafs too far on your pas tience, the answers to the remaining objections fhall be very fummary. The principal ornaments on the pinnacles are fair proportioned crotch els. The battlements are proportionably large. J. C's objection to the fove is frivolous. To fuperfede the neceflity of fire in places of public worthip, it is neceflary to revert to the times of greater zeal or fuperftition. Till J. C. can diffufe generally a due portion of hiswarmth of piety, he should not object to this accommodation, without which places of worthip, in a luxurious metropolis, would be deferted. The panneling of the back pews is anfwered by excefs of expeace. Decoration was evidently intended, in relief, to the altar; but it is prefumed from the fame caufe has been at prefent omitted. The fitnation of the organ is cuftomary. The pulpit is very convenient for delivery. The building is fufliciently light, fo as not to require either lateral windows or the removal of the organ. The length of the chapel was neceffarily limited by the extent of the ground on which it is built, and could not have been extended. Here, again,effect unavoidably yielded to convenience. What would have been the ufe of decorating this end of the chapel with expenfive ornaments, when their view might have been thortly obfructed by the erection of buildings on the contiguous ground, which is the property of another, and over which the proprietors of the chapel could have no control? Having replied to the points which are worth noticing, I pafs over fuch idle fneers as are unbecoming the man of true feience; but cannot forbear obferving, that not only are the ftrictures of this felf-conftituted "Surveyor of the antient Architecture of England" frequently captious and erroneous, as has already been thewn; but that his ignorance of the common rules of grammar, and of the terms of art, even in their application to that fcience in which he is ambitious of appearing profoundly verfed, difqualifies him for the arduous office which he has fo arrogantly affumed. Of this, here follow a few ftriking proofs. "What is there in thefe names that cre analogous," &c. The fides, or flanks of the chapel have neither buttreffes, doors, windows, or battlements."-"The minds of the real pi ous. ous.- In one part, he talks of "THREE AILES *!!!" From this unclaffical fiyle, I cannot fuppofe the writer to be acquainted with the best and most candid of antient critics, or I would not, as a neceflary clue to the appofite citation, obferve, that by invidioutly carping at the defects of other men, we render our own more confpicuous, and make them very july the fubject of animadverfion: "U tibi centra Evenit, inquirant vite ut tua rurfus et illi." HOR. I Sat. ii. 26, 27. In conclufion, Sir, permit me to add, that the chapel which has excited fuch affected contempt in the minds of thefe arrogant cenfors, was not intended as a complete fpecimen of Gothic Architecture. It has other and better claims to approbation. It was intended as an ufeful auxiliary to the mother church; and, when it is fairly contrafted with that, it will not be thought to difgrace its origin. Whatever may be its imperfections, it muft furely be preferred, in point of beauty and effect, to its much-neglected parent. Every claffical spectator, on comparing the two buildings, will naturally exclaim-if not previoufly prejudiced by the charms of antiquated beauty-O matre pulchrá filia pulchrior! Its beft recommendation is, that it effectually fupplies the defect of the Legiflature, in not increafing the number of churches in proportion to the augmentation of houfes in the metropolis. With this important and ufeful view, it is fo conftructed as to feat, very conveniently, full 1200 perfons, and to give gratuitous accommodation to 300 and, therefore, this was paramouEL with the projector, who is neither a Pupift, a Diffenter, nor a self-appointed "Surveyor of the various ftyles of antient Architecture of England." As the tafle of the Architect is frequently called in queftion, and defecte are imputed to him which were the necellary confequence of his peculiar circumftances; I muft add, in vindication of him, that more effect has been produced than could be reasonably expected, or than ever was accomplified under fimilar limitations. To vou, Mr. Urban, as the friend of that molt faithful and illuftrious member of the Church of England, the pious, the truly learned and venerable Johnson, the appearance of zeal in the beft of caufes must be highly acceptable. You will, therefore, hail with exultation any attempts on the part of individuals, to extend the doctrines of that Church, which has long been the frongelt bulwark of Protef tantifim, by facilitating the means of attendance on her public ordinances. That this was the primary object with the projector of the chapel which has, as unexpectedly as unjukly, excited fo much invidious obfervation, I can aver on authority that is indifputable. It is this confideration which has induced me to trouble you with fo long a letter. It is this alfa, which, with me, is fuperior to every other confideration, and in which, I flatter myfelf, I shall find a powerful and ftrenuous advocate in the Editor of the Gentleman's Magazine. In this confidence, I am, Sir, with unfeigned refped, J. 8. J. Mr. URBAN, of those members of the Church of Eng-A land, who, from their peculiar circumstances, are excluded from their parish church through want of room. Whether this ample provision, both for those who can afford to contribute to the great expences of fuch a chapel, and to thofe who cannot, be at all important, I may fafely leave to the confideration of those who duly appreciate the utility of public worship. That this fingle confideration would have more weight with every friend to the Church of England, than the ftricteft conformity to the pureft models of antient architecture, could not be doubted; * Confounding the nave with the two ailes; an inaccuracy, to fay the least of it. Dec. 6. N old Correfpondent, who al ways efteemed Dr. Lettfom a friend to humanity, is much pleafed with his arguments in favour of the Vaccine Inoculation; and, if the matter be taken immediately from the cow, agrees that there can be no more hazard than in drinking the milk of the crea ture: but, if the inoculation is performed as in the old manner, by tranf miflion of the matter from one fubjec to another, wifhes to be informed by the Doctor if there is not equal hazard of any diforder the perfon has, from whom the matter is taken, being communicated to the perfon fo inoculated. It has been difputed formerly of the old inoculation, whether any other diforder could be tranfiuitted with the Small Small-pox; Dr. L. grants there may, which is a ferious hazard. The writer begs to fubjoin another hint to the pafiors of churches (by whatever title they may bear, rectors, vicars, or incumbents), not to permit the corpies of thofe who have died of contagious diforders to be carried for burial immediately after divine fervice on Sundays, having feen them crowding into the church before the congregation are well out, in populous pathes, and often meeting them in the, path. Sunday afternoon is chofen by the common people, on account of its being the leifure day for themfelves and invited friends; yet the prevention of contagion ought to fuperfede all other confiderations. Indeed, the minifters themfelves, when warmed in the exercife of their function, and not unfrequently in a fate of perfpiration, muft be more liable to infection from fevers, together with the humidity of the atmofphere in damp weather. Mr. URBAN, Νου. 7. BELIEVE the publick is unaninous in the opinion, that your Monthly Publication has from time to time imparted very useful hints for its benefit as well as rational amufement; and, being perfonally imprefied with this belief, I fhall be much obliged if you will communicate the following obfervation on the unequal tax which Government has thought fit to impofe on the probate of wills. Previous to this tax, many confcientious perfons, parents as well as other relatives, in the difpofal of their property after death, for the better fecurity of a provition to their furvivors, have vefted legacies in the funds under the appointment of trustees. Many famifies under this tax have now great reafon to complain of its oppreflions, and epecially thofe under the middling clats, who are freightened in their income; for, on the death of every truftee, if the property is entered only in the name of one, a fresh probate will caufe a fresh expence, and from 10001. to 20001. ftock it often amounts to 401. and upwards; an expence which the legatee could never have fuppofed would be entailed on the cautious provifion he had made for the furvivor, and in many instances almoft ruinous to the little families who calculate their expenditure on fuch a provision. Yours, &c. POST-OBIT. Mr. URBAN, Nov. 8. HAVE before addreffed you on the fubject of wills, which has claimed the notice of feveral of your correfpondents. I will now proceed upon another fubject respecting them, namely, that of legacies. It is the principle of our excellent laws, that no man fhall take advantage of his own wrong; but that principle is often fhamefully violated by an executor where he is alfo refiduary legatee; for, if he entertains the leaf doubt as to a legacy, however finall, he immediately refufes payment of it; and particularly where legacies carry intereft, the legarees think themfelves very fortunate to get the principal without any regard to their juft right of intereft thereon. I was lately prefent at a tranfaction of this nature, between an eldest fon left fole executor, where the youngest brothers claimed intereft on their legacies; which the eldeft brother refuted paying, telling them they knew their remedy. True, was the obfervation of the others to me, but we fear that "the remedy is worfe than the difeafe;" a bill in Chancery for the recovery of Gol. or 701. is no very favourable resource. Such is the cafe of a variety of legacies which are refufed payment by an executor who acts as judge in his own caule. The great expence attending the recovery of legacies by a fuit in Chancery, frequently induces the legatee to abandon his juft claim. I would recommend it to tellators at the time of making their wills, not only to fpecify at what time the legacies are to be paid, but also when interest is to be computed thereon, and at what rate of intereft; the executor frequently making five or fix per cent. intereft, and keeps the legatce out of his legacy, knowing that the Lord Chancellor ufually decrees "FOUR per cent, from the end of one year after the teftator's deceafe, unless any other time of payment or rate of intereft is limited by will, and in that cafe according to the will." I think fome method should be adopted for making legacies public; they are frequently, I believe, unclaimed becanfe unknown to the lega tees, and wills being proved in various diocefes, it is often attended with much trouble and expence to perfons relident in London, to fearch for wills in Yorkfhire, Lincolnshire, &c. I think, if Government were to gain poffeflion of the unclaimed legacies and intereft, it would would produce a confiderable revenne, and they are equally entitled to it as any other unclaimed property. I with W. Y. would favour us with a farther account of the Gipfies. A near relation of mine, a captain in the H. militia, enlified one of them into his company at the commencement of the late war, who proved a very good foldier. Probably the following circumftance may amule fome of your readers. I had, feveral years ago, a linnet given me; afterwards the fame gentleman gave me a canary bird. The lunet died; and, being informed birds are apt to pine after their companions, I purchafed a bull-finch. The canary bird ceafed finging, and began to molt; the bull-finch being filent upwards of a twelve month, I changed him away for a mule (canary) bird, which dying 1 purchaled a fine canary bird in full fong. My former one full continued molting and filent. The laft canary bird dying, I purchafed a linnet; when, after two years continued molt ing and filent, my former canary bird refumed his finging, and is now quite well. In the warehoufe of Mr. Delver, a whalebone merchant, in Fell-fireet, Cripplegate, are the ten Commandments ftill remaining. To what church or public place of worship was the fame for merly appropriated ? MENTOR. YOUR correfpondent P. P. p. 620, fays, he can bring inftances where no corpfe is carried into church for which a fee is not paid. I am forry to fay, I can bring an infiance of the fervice being refuted to be read over a corpfe in the church even after a fee hus been paid. On Sunday, Augufi 8, a funeral was brought into a church, where it remained nearly half an hour; when the mourners were informed, that a law had been made that no burials fhould be brought into church on Sundays; and the curate accordingly pofitively refufed to perform the fervice. I am anxious to learn by what authority a law of this kind can poffibly have been made. I make no doubt the directors of it will immediately come forward and justify their conduct. If abufes of this nature pafs unnoticed, we may in a fhort time expect to fee every church fhut up, if it Is in the power of churchwardens, cu N Stafford, OA. 21. palling by St. Mary's church in Stafford, when perlons were removing the foundation of the old church this fummer, uted of late as a fchool, the workmen informed me they had found above a peck of old ~ copper coins, fome few fquare ones; the inclofed two were taken up in my prefence. G. WAINWRIGHT, *** If all the coins found in the above difcovery are of the fame fort as the two Mr. W. has te t, they are nothing but common Flemish jetons, which were ufed principally as counters at cards. THE parish of Bufcot is in Berk thire, adjoining Oxfordshire, Wiltshire, and Gloucefterthite. The church is thall, confifting of a fingle aile it is antient; but that, as well as the church-yard, is in such a state of repair and neatnefs, as does credit to my excellent friend the rector, as well as the parish. The chancel, ornamented with two elegant mural monuments, belonging to the family of Loveden, is probably more antient than the body of the church, one of the windows being lancet-fhaped; but what is particularly obfervable, and is the occafion of my troubling you with this account, is the fingular form of the arch which feparates the chancel. It may be called a Saxon arch, for it is fupported by two round pillars on each fide, about fix inches difiant from each other, having rude Saxon capitals; and, as is ufual in that style, the adjoining capitals are fomewhat diffimilar, and the arch itself is ornamented with zigzag work of tolerable workmanfhip; yet, notwithstanding this Saxon appearance, the form of the arch is pointed rather sharply. To me, who am but a novice in fuch purfuits, this arch appeared fingular; and I fhould be obliged to An Architect, or any other antiquarian correfpondent of yours, if he would inform ine whether it really be fo or not. S. |