happiness of the inhabitants is the primary object;' and whe maintains that, if the territorial possessions were separated from this country, we should incur no greater loss than 144,000l. per annum, under the present mode of management. It is not our business to refute this singular proposition: we shall content ourselves with remarking that it is founded on the assumption, that the trade would subsist to an equal extent without the territory; and that it would be capable of being conducted otherwise than by exportation of specie. How far either of these suppositions is probable, we leave those to decide whose knowlege of India is derived from a personal residence. Innovation, however, is never to be recommended for its own sake; and the present Directors of the East India Company, by their extensive foresight, rigid oeconomy, and prudent management, have generally obtained the highest and the most deserved encomiums. Whence then arises the necessity for the changes so warmly urged? In viewing the laws and regulations (says Mr. P.) which regard the general monopoly and private trade, we find the latter under many unnecessary and improper trammels, and that foreigners have a preference that will in the end prove very destructive to this country. The Company's exclusive privileges are, of necessity, binding only on his Majesty's subjects: but, in determining the injury sustained by the public in consequence of their exclusion, it were well to consider whether the advantages accruing to foreigners from this circumstance are not unavoidably limited to a certain and that no very considerable amount; and whether it be susceptible of great and indefinite extension.

The real cause of jealousy (Mr. Play fair observes) originates in this, that as the greater part of the investments made in India are done with money that Europeans have gained there, and wish to remit home; and as the Company, adding a little of Asiatic despotism to the spirit of European monopoly, will not give bills on this country, either on advantageous terms or at convenient dates; Europeans, whether the servants of the Company or not, try to procure more favourable terms by other channels. From this circumstance, and the laws existing, it happens that a foreign house (a Dane or Swede) may trade to India with very little advance of capital.''

If this be the sole grievance, it is manifestly confined to a portion of the superfluous capital of Europeans resident in that country; limited in its amount, and capable of being remedied by the simple expedient of the Company granting bills on more favourable terms. This, however, is not the light in which the subject is viewed by Mr. Playfair.

be

aug.

The commerce between Great Britain and Asia may mented ad infinitum, and it is only to be confined by impolitic regu

lation s

lations, and particularly, impolitic prohibitions. It is entirely the fault of the legislature, and not any want of enterprize in the people, that our trade with the East has not by this time been more than doubled; for it is certain that the inhabitants of that part of the world would be inclined to deal largely in the produce and manufactures of Great Britain, and where cash is wanting they have abund ance of valuable staples to barter for our commodities*. If the mercantile genius of the nation had full scope, what commerce might not be carried on in the exports of slight woollens, hardware, guns, especially those of a small calibre, muskets, military stores, and ammunition.'

Those who are in the least conversant with the customs of the Orientals (and with them customs are immutable) know the impossibility of trading with them to any extent in woollens or hard ware. With regard to the implements of destruction, we must confess that we entertain very serious doubts how far it is consistent with morality, and with the religion which we profess, to supply innocent and distant nations with such pernicious inventions. We are not more satisfied that good policy would sanction the measure.

To conclude, Mr. Playfair proposes to invest the revenues of Bengal in the unmanufactured produce of that country, and to transport it to England. Has Mr. P. calculated how long that revenue is likely to endure, when the numberless persons, now employed in manufacturing the produce of their own fields, are stripped of the means of subsistence ?-We hope, however, that this consideration will engage the attention of his Majesty's ministers; that it will be remembered that the productions of Bengal are paid by its own revenue, and brought to this country; that, in addition to this loss, a constant drain of specie flows to the coast, to Bombay, and to China; that the welfare of our settlements is now supported solely by the strict administration of justice, and the security of private property; and that, whenever shoals of needy adventurers from Europe are permitted to settle in the interior, in order to cultivate sugar and indigo, the comfort of the innocent natives is at an end, their respect for the British character is gone, and our Indian dominion verges to its dissolution.

We think that the converse of the above proposition is ascer tained: but let us examine the articles proposed to be furnished from this country.

ART. XIII. Institutes of Natural Philosophy, Theoretical and Experimental. By William Enfield, LL.D. zd Edition, with Corrections and considerable Additions, &c. &c. 4to. pp. 450, and 11 Plates. 11. 1s. Boards. Johnson. 1799.

THE original impression of this work was reviewed by us in the year 1786 (vo!, lxxiv. p. 138.) -the present is aug mented by several new propositions, relations of experi ments, &c. and by an introduction to the first principles of chemistry. Our remarks on the first edition were very few, because we regarded the volume not so much as containing original matter, as being a compilation of the useful and less abstruse parts of philosophy, arranged with considerable method, and discussed in a plain and perspicuous manner. This opinion of its merits continues nearly the same; and as we did not formerly withhold our criticism from motives of delicacy and regard to living reputation, so neither do we now restrain or soften it from respect to deceased worth worth to which we would here and at all times bear ample testimony. As, however, we decline entering into a particular examination of the propositions, &c. our observations will relate to the general character of the publication; and our criticisms, which will be neither minute nor numerous, we trust will be temperate: severe they could not be, except, resolved on dissatisfaction, we had required in the performance more than its author intended. to introduce, or, making the demand of ignorance, we had asked for an union of inconsistent excellences,

Although the intention of Dr. Enfield might not be, as he expressed himself in his preface, to open a bye path to philosophy, yet his work is evidently calculated rather to recommend and insinuate truth by illustrations and examples, than to place it before the mind stript of all blandishments, such as it must appear according to the strict rules of severe reasoning. It is not indeed to be dissembled that Dr. E. was not eminently qualified to sound the depths of science, and to unravel its most perplexed parts. The variety of the objects of his pursuit dissipated his attention; the knowlege which he pos sessed was extensive and multifarious; and therefore the laws, which seem to confine within certain bounds all intellectual exertion and attainments, forbad that this knowlege should be in every instance exact and profound. Let it not be understood as our opinion, that there is an antecedent reason why the same individual should not possess at once accuracy and extent of information. Examples might be brought to controvert such an idea: but, looking to the common lot of humanity, we may justly treat universality of talents and acquirements as a chi

mera engendered in the warm imagination of youth, and fostered by the vanity of sciolists. Whoever pursues knowlege, let his ambition be insatiate but let his steps be uniformly and steadily directed towards the same point; cautious that his efforts are not diverted by the solicitations of extraneous ob jects, and dissipated by their frequency: otherwise, he must expect his moments of disappointment; and he will find, after fruitless trials, that a man who ranges extensively will want time to investigate closely, and to search deeply.

These considerations will not perhaps appear irrelevant : they may enable us to form a just estimate of the merit of the author of the present Institutes, may propitiate the severe critic, and may incline him to forgive partial inaccuracies in a book, when he looks to the sum of knowlege which its author possessed. They may also, perhaps, for a moment, restrain the triumphant sarcasms of that tribe of puny and indolent witlings who have never felt the toil of thought, yet pronounce their opinions with confidence, and, because they can censure an author, fancy themselves superior to him; if the work be familiar and illustrative, they complain that it is superficial; if deep, dull; if systematic, tediously formal.

Should one of these critics ask, purposely involving a con demnation in his question, what are the original inventions in the present Institutes, he may be told without hesitation that there are none; that the aim of the author was to treat known truths with method and perspicuity, to touch them mellao lepore; to disentangle that which was intricate, to familiarize that which was abstruse, and to reduce high matters to the level of ordinary capacity. If his book teems not with new ideas and discoveries, there are nevertheless in it (to use the words of a great writer,)" multa admista ex intimâ philosophia, multa dicta dialecticè, quæ quo facilius minus docti intelligerent, jucunditate quadam ad legendum invitati."

Criticism allows no work to be perfect: the faults of the present are either to be attributed to the plan on which it is written, or are to be derived from the turn of the author's mind, and the nature of his attainments. The performance was intended as a popular one; and what is popular must to a certain extent be vague, what is familiar will be deficient in philosophic precision, and what is illustrative will want generality. Dr.Enfield was averse from deep disquisitions and metaphysical refinements *; he is found, therefore, frequently inclin

ing

*In the first Scholium, the author expresses his dislike of what he calls metaphysical refinements; and his reasonings on the divisibility

ing to lax reasoning, and insisting on merely verbal proposi tions. He was fond of what are called obvious and sensible truths; he did not, therefore, give to the principles of science their due exactness and generality. He feared lest the reader should not understand him; and therefore he sometimes props on Induction and Examples, that which ought to have been established on the firm basis of mathematical demonstration. . We have endeavoured to place in a fair light the merits of this work with the imperfections which it possesses, it yet has a strong claim on public notice; if it be not faultless, it is far above mediocrity.

To the present editor some notice is due.-The augmenta tions and additions which he has given to the work may be 'inferred from his Advertisement:

In laying before the public a new edition of "The Institutes of Natural Philosophy, by the late Dr. Enfield," the Editor feels it incumbent on him to assure the Reader, that he has endeavoured, as far as was consistent with an elementary book, to avail himself of those advantages which the publication of new discoveries, and new works in science has afforded him; and although the limits of an advertisement will not allow him to particularize all the additions that will be found interwoven with the various parts of the volume, yet it may be expected that, in this place, some notice should be taken of the most material of them; and it is presumed that the following account will be deemed sufficient for the purpose.

In the first book, the propositions on the divisibility of matter, and the attraction of cohesion, are more fully discussed, and a very useful corollary is drawn from that on the attraction of capillary tubes. To the first and third propositions of the second book, considerable additions are subjoined; and in the second chapter is inserted a new proposition, from which, in conjunction with others, are deduced many corollaries and scholiums, connected with the remaining parts of the book t. Several examples are also given in the two first sections of the fifth chapter, which will be found useful to the young student as illustrative of the theory of falling bodies.

In the third book is given, independently of the additions noticed in the margin, an important proposition on the specific gravities of bodies, with which are connected examples, and a table of the comparative weights of many of the most useful substances in nature.

of matter, which follow, are disastrous consequences of this dislike. We wish that the Editor, instead of adding to what Dr. E. had done on this subject, had expunged all the proofs of the infinite divisibility of matter. In page 369, there

*

appears to be an addition.

+ See Prop. A, (p. 14.) and Cors. Schols. &c. to Prop. 14, 17, 24, 26, 28, 30, 31, 36, 44, 46, 49, 52, 53, 54, 57, and 58.' See additions to Prop. 3, 6, 12, 13, 18, A, (p. 103,) 50, and

55.*

Descriptions,