APPENDIX TO THE MEMOIR. No. I. Several of these letters are addressed to Mr. Daubeny's only sister, a very lovely and interesting woman, upon whom he fondly doated. Other letters are addressed to various friends -as the Rev. F. Kingstone, the Rev. T. Lear, Henry Leppincot, esq; the Rev. W. Ralfe, Robert Auriol Drummond, esq; Thomas Estcourt, esq; Lady Ryder, and the Rev. H. Bathurst, the present venerable Bishop of Norwich. This most amiable man was fellow student with Mr. D. and his brother, the Rev. James D. at Winchester College, and at Oxford. Thus they passed their youth together. On subjects of ecclesiastical policy they widely differed, and it was often a subject of regret to them--but the attachment between these old friends being founded upon early impressions and happy recollections, continued unabated through life. An anecdote characteristic of the Bishop, and also of the late Archdeacon D. occurs to the writer of this Memoir, who happened to be present on the occasion to which it refers; and may e here introduced, though not in chronological order. The Bishop being at Bath in the winter of 1824—5, shortly after the publication of the Archdeacon's "Protestant Companion," frequently called upon him in the Crescent. One morning, after much cheerful conversation, seeing a book upon the h 1 table before him, the Bishop took it up, and having satisfied himself, replaced it. Turning presently to the Archdeacon, he said, "Charles, I hear you have been in the press again—is it true?" "It is true," was the Archdeacon's reply. "Well, then," resumed the Bishop, "you mean to send me your book, don't you?" Which being answered by a simple negative, he said, "No! you don't! Why not?" After a short pause the Archdeacon said (in the same good humour with which he had been addressed) "Why should I send it you Harry? you won't read it—or if you do, you won't like it." Without appearing to notice this last remark, the Bishop merely repeated his inquiry, whether he meant to send him his book or not— which being answered as before, he took up the "Protestant Companion" from the table, and putting it into his pocket, walked down stairs hastily, bidding his friend "good morning." A few days afterwards, the Bishop calling again to return the book, said to the Archdeacon, "I have been much entertained with your book, Charles-it does you credit-much credit. What you have said on the subject you have said admirably—— but though we do not think exactly alike upon all parts of this subject, you should have sent me your book." No. II. A Prayer composed for this occasion, will be found at the end of the 2d volume of this Edition. No. III. From the Rev. Mr. Jones, to Mr. Daubeny. DEAR SIR, October 20th, 1780. I have read the copy of the Inscription intended to commemorate the benefaction of the late Mr. Catcott, with the criticisms which have been passed upon it by the literati of Bristol : as I have a regard to the memory of the man, I shall, according 1. Adamitice is said to want meaning and authority; as to its meaning when joined to Terra, it must signify the earth on which Adam lived; the world that then was when Adam was; which world is said to have perished: therefore some Epithet equivalent to Adamiticæ must be admitted to distinguish it from the earth on which we live; and perhaps you will find none better. If the name of Noah had been chosen, it had been equivocal, because he inhabited both the former and the present world. The objection to Adamiticæ, as wanting authority, savours too much of the Birch, and is below a man of learning, though excuseable from a grammarian. We cannot use the terms of Cicero or Paterculus when we speak of things or persons unknown to the Romans. What classical authority, will you find for the word Catcott, which we cannot exclude, if we retain the Inscription. Fama Philistæas ah, ne pertingat ad urbes, says Dr. Louth in an elegant Latin Poem: what classical authority there for Philistaas more than for Adamitica? But we must allow him to use such terms as are required by the nature and necessity of the subject. If you write of what the Romans did not know, you are obliged to write in terms which they never used. If they wanted an exotic word, they went to the Greek: we use the like liberty in having recourse to the Hebrew: and great critics will excuse you for so doing, but small ones will show you no mercy. If my memory does not Ime (for I have not the book at hand) the famous naturalist Linnæus takes the term Adamitica in the same sense, to disfinguish the former earth from the present. Terræ Adamiticæ rudera nusquam inveni quousque penetravi-such is the expression, which is all we are concerned with; the sentiment is very exceptionable, and I think contrary to truth and fact. 2. Indubitata is thought too dogmatic upon a disputable subject; but we must not give up this great point so easily: for where shall we stop, if we comply with fanciful philosophers, who doubt and dispute when there is no cause of doubting? By the infidel reasoner, indubitatum will be objected to as an epithet to evangelium; for has not the gospel been disputed? That the fossil shells we find in the earth are really of marine origin, and that they were lodged there by the catastrophe of the deluge, are doctrines clearly established: I wish I could say as much of some other doctrines commonly admitted in natural philosophy. As to any late publication pretending to prove the contrary, you need be under little concern about it; for let the Author be as ingenious as he pleases, he cannot alter the nature of things; and the earth, to those who search it, will give full evidence against him and all his works; though he may be of oracular authority with those who chuse to think as he does. Mr. De Luc, who is eminent as a philosopher and naturalist, has very lately taken up this subject, and shown the indubitable origin of fossil bodies against such superficial reasoners, in his five volumes of Natural History, lately published in French, and addressed in letters to the Queen of Great-Britain. I hear the public will soon see much more to the same effect from another hand: and therefore I think indubitata may keep its place in. your Inscription, without offence to any person who has a proper knowledge of the subject, and is not disaffected to revelation; for in that case a man is willingly ignorant, as St. Peter has observed, concerning this very subject of the deluge. 3. Magno labore (non sine periculo) they say is superfluous : but I cannot understand for what reason, unless it be to detract from the merits of the benefactor. It is very unjust that a man should hazard his life for the advancement of science, and receive no thanks for it from those who have the benefit of his labours for nothing. This circumstance should rather endear his memory, and enhance the value of the collection. His fossils are like trophies, obtained with danger to himself for the good of his country. 4. Posteritati is thought to be too general: it is so, if it were thence to be understood that every man born into the world will be a fossilist, or that the Mayor of Bristol will be so |