gains by religion: what he has gained by the national debt so called: what he gains by a profuse government, and by excessive local taxes: if he has any thing of a head, he may see, that, in addition to this deprivation of necessaries, he gains nothing but the tyranny of those individuals over bim who thrive upon them, and a successive series of from bad to worse laws.

This being the real state of the case, I will never complain of too many human beings, whilst all these removeable evils exist.

COPY OF A LETTER ADDRESSED TO MR. DA YOUNG MAN OF BRISTOL,

About to enter the pulpit as a Unitarian Priest, which he acknowledged to put the question of an intelligent God in a shape in which he had never before been led to consider it.

SIR,

I SHALL feel obliged, if you will tell me, where your God is to be found, what is his essence, and by what rules he governs, or is governed. Tell me, if the contradictory, the ridiculous, the monstrous accounts of him found in the Bible, the Alcoran, the Zendavesta, the Veda, the Shaster, and a hundred other books, be true.

As your God must be the prime cause of all things, it follows, that he must be the author of vice as well as virtue. Tell me, does this God, by his state of ubiquity, reign in man, until the commission of sin, and then abandon him to some superior occult power? Or still continuing in him, does be induce man, by some slight agitation of the brain, to the perpetration of crime, and then punish bim for it? 16 the former, your God cannot be free and almighty; if the latter, he must be a monster unparalleled even by his devil for tyranny.

Theists say, that the earth would be one dull uniformity, if matter were moved by necessity. Does not the variety we see and are samples of proceed from the multitudinous combinations of matter in motion? Necessity, then, is only a name, that we give to a power, of the energy of which we are ignorant.

Relative almighty power may and does exist; but intelli

gence is not a consequence arising therefrom. A drop of water put on my tongue, will hardly excite my salivary ducts, whilst a collection of such drops would deluge worlds, in relation to which, the waters would be almighty.

On the supposition of such a God as yours, I think it will not be difficult to prove him changeable; for, he must have existed before worlds were made by his omnific power; so, it follows, that there was a time when they did not exist. The time before they began to roll in space is one; the time when they began, another: the latter, we can conceive to arise from your God's resolve; but the former is not quite so clear.

The idea of a God is not so influencial among rigid believers as is contended for. The belief does not prevent them from committing the most atrocious as well as the most trifling acts, when they think that none but their God sees them; so feeble is the influence of divinity in those who do believe. Hence, I conclude, that the belief is not necessary to increase the happiness of mankind.

Respectfully,

F. A. J.

Note by R. Carlile.-I have been called upon, by this correspondent and a few of his friends, to state some opinion about the origin of man. I can hardly say, that I have an opinion upon the subject; for, in the absence of all first productions, conjecture has but little weight. But, I confess, that the most interesting book I have read upon the subject is that called Telliamed, which is an inversion of the author's name, De Maillett, Consul General in Egypt, and Ambassador from Louis XIV. to the Emperor of Abyssinia. He obtained a theory from some of the Egyptian Priests that WATER was a common parent of all animals and of all vegetables: that from its power to produce animals and vegetables, and through them all sorts of minerals, and from a geological examination of the strata of the earth, he concluded a further theory, that the mineral part of the earth went on increasing, and the aquatic part decreasing; until, at length it would become so arid as to get into a state of combustion from its motion, and form a sun.

The strata-fied construction of the earth, in some measure, warrants this theory; but De Maillet does not seem to have kuown, that wherever proportionate degrees of hydrogen and oxygen can be eliminated, new water can be formed.

If these gases were not to be obtained from mineral matter, his theory would of necessity be correct; but since they are to be so obtained, a change of water to animals, vegetables, and minerals, argues no more, than a change of minerals to water and leaves the necessity of an ulterior cause to account for a decrease of water.

Having settled this theory in his mind, he proceeded to a collection of facts, wherewith to support it, and has produced the most satisfactory attestations of the existence of men, women, and children in the sea, some resembling those on the earth, some with but one leg and foot, some with tails, and some with the lower part resembling a fish; clearly accounting for all the grades and colours of mankind, now or hitherto on the earth. He has also proved, that these mermen, women and children are amphibious, in cases where they have been kept alive on the earth many years.

The pride of the existing generation of mankind, with their immortal souls, the soul of a fish! will not allow them to harbour the idea of the existence of animals in the sea like themselves; and notwithstanding the frequent sight of such animals, the cry of fable is raised. They will readily believe stories about personified Gods, Ghosts, and Devils, which no one professes to have seen, and for whose existence no rational nor probable account or theory can be given; but about the existence of such an animal as themselves in the sea, where it is notorious that all sorts of animals do exist, the spiritualists become the greatest sceptics and blasphemers. There was a clear and satisfactory attestation of a merman or woman having been seen on the coast of Ireland, a few months back. But the publication of such a fact is to the priests and their dupes one of the degrees of blasphemy. De Maillet's book leaves the matter unquestionable: and Mosheim, the author of the Ecclesiastical History, in referring to De Maillet's Description of Egypt, published at Paris in 1735, stiles him a writer of the most unquestionable authority. His book TELLIAMED exhibits the utmost reverence for truth.

The one-legged race, he finds amphibious, associating with the Esquimaux on the North American coasts, acting as a kind of boat managers. His authority is an Esquimaux Girl, that was taken and brought to Canada, where she lived as a servant to a French Lady. Some of the Esquimaux are little short of being amphibious animals; and if they rate as a part of mankind, we need not be ashamed to No. 19, Vol. X.

own the whole monkey race, and all that can be said about mermen and women. I should like to have asked Captain Parry, or any of his associates in the polar voyages, what he thought of the souls and heavenly salvation of those wretched beings which he found in his two voyages.

As it is evident, that the waters have covered and have rerired from every part of the earth, it is rational to suppose, that earthquakes and other convulsions have in some places caused a very sudden retirement of the waters from some places, leaving the larger, footed, animals contained in them on comparatively dry land, or with so small a quantity of water about them as to render them amphibious from necessity. A new kind of atmosphere, and gradual changes assimilating them to it, might change much of the original character of these animals. Terrified at their new situation, and ignorant of every cause of it, it is likely, that they would not move far from the spots in which they were left, and thus, after a time, lose their instinct as aquatic animals. If such a theory exhibits the least character of validity; it becomes a question, whether those heaps of bones which have been found in caverns, in collections so difficult to be accounted for, might not have been the bones of sea instead of land animals, and whether the Mammoth was ever really a land animal.

So much for the origin of man. It is a difficult and a delicate subject. It were fortunate for him to have kept in the water, or to have left his soul, or notion of an immortal soul there. I presume there are no sea-Gods; though we have identified sea-Devils!

THE PRESIDENT OF THE EDINBURGH ZETETIC SOCIETY, TO RICHARD CARLILE.

October 15, 1824.

IN your letter to Abel Bywater of Sheffield Park, of the 30th of September last, you mention, "that you do not approve" of the the plan which I have adopted in writing the Zetetic Society's Shorter Catechism. Now, as it is my opinion, that before any plan ought to be considered perfectly correct, it should be, what every one, whose mind can trace its consequences, can as a matter of necessity, approve of, therefore, your disapprobation, is to me, proof positive, "either that I have not followed the best course, or

that you have not yet perceived all the necessary consequences attending it. Knowing, as I do, that it is a law of our nature, that no human being can suspect the fallacy of his present opinions, I have learnt from this always to examine my own opinions first. If I can discover in them, any inconsistency, with reason, or with facts in nature, after viewing and reviewing them in every light-I am enabled, by this discovery, to remove the inconsistency or in other words-I am thereby compelled to alter my opinions. Knowing that you have had long experience on this subject, that you have naturally a very powerful mind, in tracing cause from effect, and above all, that you are sincere in expressing your real sentiments-it has been with considerable hesitation, that I have been induced to state that my opinions on this subject are still different from yours.

"do

However, that we may not continue to discuss, while we are both of the same mind, it will be well, that we understand exactly where the difference between us lies. Your words are-that I "deem it prudent to meet the Christian at half way, as the best means of drawing him the whole." And you add, that you not approve of this plan." If you suppose that I deem it prudent to profess to believe half the errors of the Christian Church, that we may, get its members, to renounce the other half-then I have failed to make myself understood, and we are still of one mind-for I do not approve of this plan more than you. The Bible, like every other disputed subject. appears to me to contain a mixture of truth and error'; and if, by going "half way," you suppose, that I mean, candidly to acknowledge my belief in the portion of their doctrines, which is true, as the most likely way of getting them to give up the portion which is false, then, do you rightly understand my intention. If, nevertheless, you disapprove of this plan, then, as I have said, our opinions are still completely

at variance.

If our difference in opinion arises from "a misunderstanding, as mentioned in the first place-I will take it exceedingly kind, if you will point out the passages in the Zetetic Society's pamphlets which caused this misunderstanding-or in which I have gone beyond the truth; that by having my attention directed towards them-I may become more guarded in future. But the perusal

Moral precepts are not considered as forming a part of the question of truth or falsehood; and if you, Mr. President, taking the moral precepts from the Bible, can discover any truth in it, useful and instructive, matter that can be attested, I confess to you, that I cannot. You should have defined what you meant by truth and error. The Jew and Christian value the Bible because they believe it to be a revelation from their God, and value it only upon that ground; now, can you, in any degree, participate in that sentiment? If you can, my position is still good; if you cannot yours is bad.

R. C.