feveral particular paffages are attended, are commendable, even where his attempts may not be deemed entirely fuccefsful. In the prefent cafe, it is no mean task that he hath undertaken. The predictions of Daniel, when confidered in a general view, feem very clear; and it appears easy enough to determine the grand leading events' prefigured by them. But, when they come to be minutely examined, queftions arife which do not admit of a ready folution, though they are far from invalidating the arguments which may be drawn from his prophecies to fupport the truth of divine revelation. The learned Profeffor Michaelis hath lately pointed out, in a striking manner, the various difficulties which attend the famous prophecy of the feventy weeks; and, at the fame time, he hath gone farther, in our opinion, towards a true explication of it, than any preceding author.

Three of Daniel's principal predictions are examined by Dr. Parry, in the work before us. With regard to the first of them, Nebuchadnezzar's dream, it admits, accompanied with Daniel's interpretation of it, fo eafy an explanation, that there is scarce any prophecy in the Old Teftament the meaning of which is more perfpicuous and determinate. This prophecy our Author juftly entitles, The Kingdom of Heaven; or the Fall of Paganifm?'

The next prediction, confidered by Dr. Parry, is Daniel's vifion of the four great wild beasts which came from the fea. The first part of this vifion is fufficiently clear; but the concluding part of it hath been very differently explained by dif ferent writers. Our Author refers it to the fall of Judaism, and hath taken great pains to fhew that the little horn is descriptive of the province of Judea. What he hath said upon the fubject, is undoubtedly worthy of attention; though candid and judicious critics may, perhaps, ftill think that there is room for hefitation and debate.

Dr. Parry, at the clofe of his remarks upon Daniel's vifion, having taken occafion to apply himself to the members of the papal communion, makes the following judicious and liberal application to the protestants; We indeed, fays he, have prudifhly withdrawn ourselves from the groffer pollutions of that meretricious community. How far a fecond REFORMATION may be either neceffary or expedient, I must not take upon me to determine. This, however, may be faid with truth, and therefore, it is hoped, without offence, that the more there is OF THIS WORLD in our ecclefiaftical establishment, the nearer it is to POPERY, and the farther from the SIMPLICITY OF THE GOSPEL.'

Our Author, in his explication of the prophecy of the feventy weeks, endeavours to fhew, that the commencement of these weeks must be fixed from the fecond year of Darius Nothus B 4

King

King of Perfia. It is objected to this opinion, that the persons who are represented by the prophet Haggai, as having feen both temples, must have been of an age beyond belief; because from the deftruction of the temple to the fecond of Darius Nothus, , were an hundred and fixty fix years. Dr. Parry's reply to this objection, is too curious and extraordinary to be omitted. I anfwer, fays he, in the words of a very illuftrious writer on another occafion, "the promifes of God have never borrowed help from moral probabilities." His promifes to Abraham were not of this kind. And why then fhould they be of this kind to the children of Abraham? The Jews lived under an extraor-dinary difpenfation of providence. Long life was the general promise of the Mofaic law to the obedient. And this promife was particularly repeated at the time we are fpeaking of. "There fhall yet old men and old women dwell in the streets of Jerufalem, and every man with his staff in his hand for very age." Who now can think it improbable, when events correfpond fo exactly with every part of the prophecy, that some among the Jews fhould be found of an exceeding great age? "If it be marvellous in the eyes of the people in thefe days, fhould it alfo be marvellous in mine eyes, faith the Lord of Hofts."

Such a method of removing difficulties, can never fatisfy a difcerning critic, or do honour to revelation. At the time to which the objection refers, it was as contrary to the flate of things under the Jewith difpenfation, as it was to the usual course of nature for perfons to live above an hundred and fixtyfix years. Indeed, the promife of long life under the Mofaic law, did not originally include the term contended for by our learned Author. Unless, therefore, he can find out a more rational mode of answering the objections to his hypothefis, it muft, we are afraid, fall to the ground.

Dr. Parry has added, as he did in his laft publication*, a variety of notes, fome of which are ingenious and valuable. That upon the number 666, the number of the beaft in the book of Revelations, has very confiderable merit; and fo likewife has the note upon St. Paul's Address to the high priest of the Jews. We by no means agree with our Author in his opinion, that the title of Chriftians was given to the difciples at Antioch, by divine appointment. Dr. Lardner's reafons to the contrary, appear to us decifive upon the fubject. Neither do we approve of what Dr. Parry hath faid concerning the man of fin. That St. Paul's reprefentation of the man of fin is peculiarly defcriptive of the papal power, has been fo clearly fhewn

*The genealogies of Chrift in Matth. and Luke explained. See Review, vol. xlvi. p. 62,

by

by Benson, Duchal, Warburton, Newton, and Hurdd, that we cannot help confidering them as having given by far the moft probable explication of the prophecy.

ART. III. Remarks on the Opinions of fome of the most celebrated Writers on Crown Law, refpecting the due Distinction between Manflaughter and Murder: Being an Attempt to fhew, that the Flea of fudden Anger cannot remove the Imputation and Guilt of Murder, when a mortal Wound is wilfully given with a Weapon: That the Indulgence allowed by the Courts to voluntary Manslaughter in Rencounters, and in fudden Affrays and Duels, is indifcriminate, and without foundation in Law: And that impunity in fuch Cafes of voluntary Manflaughter, is one of the principal Caufes of the Continuance and prefent Increase of the bafe and difgraceful Practice of Duelling. To which are added, fome Thoughts on the particular Cafe of the Gentlemen of the Army when involved in fuch difagreeable private Differences. With a prefatory Address to the Reader, concerning the Depravity and Folly of modern Men of Honour, falfely fo called; including a fhort Account of the Principles and Defign of the Work. By Granville sharp. 8vo. 1 s. 6d. White, &c. 1773.

F

ROM the verbose title of this performance, it will appear

that its tendency is to prove the decifion of private quarrels by private combat, to be contrary to law; and that when one of the parties falls, the furvivor is guilty of wilful murder, and is not intitled to the mitigated verdict of manslaughter: in which conclufion it is difficult to diffent from the writer. In his preface he makes the following juft diftinction between wilful . murder and manslaughter.

Now, certain it is, that fome allowance ought to be made for heat of blood upon a fudden provocation, in confideration of the extreme frailty of human nature, provided there are no cir cumftances of malice in the cafe. As if (for inftance) a man, in fudden anger, should strike another, merely with his fift, or a fmall cane, or flick, meaning only to correct, and fhould accidentally kill; this would be, properly, manslaughter; which, though it is deemed felony (as the act of ftriking, or beating another perfon is, in itself, unlawful), is nevertheless pardonable both by the laws of God and man. But when two perfons fight with dangerous weapons, an intention of killing is expreffed by the weapons; and fuch intention renders the manflaughter voluntary, which is the fame thing as wilful; and confequently the "malice prepenfed" (which excludes the benefit of clergy) is neceflarily implied, though the sudden anger be but a moment before the fatal ftroke; for "malice prepenfed" is thus defined by Sir Edward Coke, "That is (fays he) voluntary, and of fet purpofe, though done upon a fudden occafion: for if it be voluntary the law implieth malice." 3 Inft. c. xiii, p. 62.'

The

The Author has fhewn much reading in establishing this point, and, prefuming on the fairness of his quotations, has detected feveral inconfiftencies in the writings of our most famous lawyers in diftinguishing between murder and manslaughter; though he may not have given his argument all the advantages it was capable of receiving. To infift on the Levitical law, and to ascertain the true reading of Hebrew. texts, will not be likely to operate much in confuting the current principles of modern honour: nor do gentlemen in fettling their frivolous punctilios, concern themselves greatly in pleas of the crown. It appears, however, from this treatife, that our lawyers have, in fact, countenanced the pernicious cuftom of duelling, by temporifing and warping their opinions, to make more allow ances for it than the public good of fociety will warrant. Selfdefence, as he obferves, cannot be pleaded in behalf of men who meet by consent to attack each other with deadly weapons.

Mr. Sharp, however, like other fanguine men, extends his argument to an abfurd length; for after endeavouring to op. pole this point of honour among the gentlemen of the army, by arguments not well adapted to their notions of things, and therefore not calculated to have with them the force that might perhaps be withed, he introduces the following ftrange principle:

The law, fays he, will not excufe an unlawful act by a foldier, even though he commits it by the exprefs command of the highest military authority in the kingdom: and much less is the foldier obliged to conform himself implicitly to the mere opinions and falie notions of honour, which his fuperiors may have unfortunately adopted.-Even in publick military service, or warlike expeditions by national authority, the law manifeftly requires the foldier to think for himself; and to confider, before he acts in any war, whether the fame be just; for, if it be otherwife, the common law of this kingdom will impute to him the guilt of murder.

And though the law does not actually punish fuch general crimes, as may unfortunately have obtained, at any time, the fanction of government; yet the time will certainly come, when all fuch temporizing military murderers must be refponfible for the innocent blood that is fhed in an unjust war, if they have rendered themfelves acceffaries to it by an implicit, and, therefore, criminal obedience to the promoters of it. "Item fit ho

micidium in bello," (fays the learned Bracton)" et tunc videndum utrum bellum fit juftum vel injuftum. Si autem injuftum, tenebitur occifor: fi autem juftum, ficut pro defenfione patria, non tenebitur, nifi hoc fecerit corrupta voluntate et intentione."

• Men of true honour, therefore, at the fame time that they are fenfible of their duty as foldiers and fubjects to their king, muft be mindful that they are fubject alfa to the empire of reafon,

and

and are bound thereby, in common with all mankind, to maintain the dignity and natural freedom of human nature: and those foldiers, who, in addition to their natural reason, have a true fenfe of religion, will not only be mindful, that they are foldiers and fubjects to an earthly king, but that they are also foldiers and fubjects to the King of Kings; whofe laws and precepts they will, on all occafions, prefer to every other command; and will obey the fame with fuch a feady courage, as may be equal to every adverfity, and undeferved fuffering that threatens them.

It was this indifpenfible, this unhappy difpofition, and fenfe of fuperior duty, which prevailed even in an unlawful standing army, that had been raifed, and was exprefly defigned for arbitrary purposes, and which, nevertheless, contrary to all expectation, exerted itself in faving this kingdom, at the glorious revolution, from the political flavery, which then threatened it, as well as from the more intolerable tyranny of the Romish religion.'

It will not be an eafy matter for this writer to juftify a mili tary man, and protect him from declared penalties, especially if he is in a fubordinate rank, for difobedience to orders; though he may disapprove the cause of a war, in which the government demands his fervice. Nor can any general principle be drawn from fo peculiar an exigence as the revolution, which was not only juftified by the general fenfe of the nation, but by what was of much more importance in this view of the cafe, by fuccefs. Had the Prince of Orange been defeated, as Monmouth was, and the nation again fubjected to James, it may be left to Mr. Sharp to imagine what would have been the fate of thofe officers who carried over their men to the unfuccessful invader ! Even as affairs terminated, though the army deferted the King, the individuals that compofed the bulk of it, however willingly they changed fides, ftill preferved military obedience to their immediate fuperiors, who led them over.

ART. IV. Curfory Reflections on the Single Combat, or Modern Duel. Addreffed to Gentlemen in every Clafs of Life. 4to. I s. Baldwin. 1773.

OTHIC and abfurd as the cuftom of duelling is generally

G allowed to be, there are advocates for it, on principle;

reafoners, who coolly argue for the neceflity, and even convenience, of this mode of accommodating certain kinds of per fonal differences, and of redreffing certain fpecies of injuries, for which the laws have not provided proper or adequate remedies: they conclude, therefore, that an appeal to the fword is a requifite fupplement to the law, and that this fort of fatisfaction for extrajudicial offences, must take place, till fome other mode fhall