The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1822-07-27 00:00:00

~~

I

There is mot an origioal mathematical fset of the rManPal
valne in all his hook; and his barbarous style, and vile ar-
rangement, bare dune a great deal to übacure the melt of
who 4 he has purloined. Idu nut inteart,for it would out be
the proper platelet go 1.11/1 an, dela led remarks Wu his en.
retry, hut every mathematician her lamthr.l at his droll
proof of the doctrine of peial!el lines—at Its Jackie* se
ratin—at Lk (allure in proving his very first proposition,
the foundation of his system, and a thousaud other sashr
Am I to bow to kim I,Prauce he is an
Editi-
beech Reviewer! I question the in-piratic'', of. that worthy
(wattle. And as to the Professor's own part in it,
why, his impudent pliffitigs of himself, and Ignorant Sioper
Mg, at whets, have often matte me ►iken Leslie As Re-
sievetr to some enormous over fed pet of the parrot •peeress
much up at a garret window, and ocrepied all day with ray.
ing, t Pretty Poll---Pretty Poll` to itself! trout witch—Foul
witch,' to every p -by. Look sow, l beseech you, at his
article on the North-west Passage!!! What other claims to
respect he poem-sera I know not, camp, Lis having made
some mat second-rate chemical experiment*, and invented
some trimly little instruments; bob even if his claims were
ten cm,. an weighty, they showld nut have (lettered me from
ritt`"k.ng as I thought. A man who would co cut of his
path on as inquiry on the mature of bent, to rscommeuil ac'
i"lpSoiss work—and in a t►eatise on arlthotetie, lartset an
lehurant smelts. us the language of the Hil.le, or to sneer
et the foarses of one of the Apostles, most ever be an object
of suspicion to there who hold the Scriptures in honour, and
!"41.17 im del..olevion. We have nu assurance that he may
not digress a. culpably hereafter; sod if he does so, it ta
not, to give Lim warning that I shall take care to point
teem."

Whether the whole, or any part of the said word. are of
sari concert Meg the PitrAsser, and falsely, taliciusgiy, and
brinriona!y represent soil hold up the Pursuer to-public ri-
diestie and contempt, by representing him to be, or assert-
ing that he is Ms insolent elogntatiat, or that he has the ins.
pimiento to exercise that of which I.e is ignorseit; or, that he
terminated by hostility to the language of revelation, sim-
ply because it is the I ge of revelation ; or, as hieing ly-
icg, thithimest, or Juicing aith a bookseller to impose ulnae
the public by dolumesty; or, as bowleg purloined from other
%others, or As hasieg been guilty of a thisimmil hearer;
or as reseinhling a parrot ; or, as an object of ciPpiciosi to
theme nho.hold the Scriptures in honour arid impiety ill
tiCreeliliclol; or, as going out of his way to recommend an
impinges work; or, as hating cast an ignorant saccasm on
the lesigerige of the Bible; or, as siseerimr at the fieriest of
owe of the Apostles, to the injury and 4-image of the said
runner ?
It being also admitted, that the said 441i1i number of the
said Magazine contains the follu•Ing woods, viz. " With
reeler I have perceived that many of the young men who go
from ibis country to Edinburgh, to muster their medical
stadia, emote beck with their religions principles perverted,
and their reverenee for holy things sneered sway. It would
be very unjust to *reuse soy of this weighty
charge, hut the fact is undeniable. I r• joice, therefore, alien-
ever it is in ray power, even in the most trivial degree, to
shew,elit the lights or the ramose Tforthere Sort are nut
infallible; that under affected knowledge, groin iesiorasica
may lurk ; and that etmaiderable into ',raiser may some-
times be the characteristic feature of philosophical hirers.
lity. I rejoice also, but much more sincerely, to learn that
a better spirit is ariatug in your Ninon. Useiversity ; and in
spite of its levity, its humour, its follies, nay, tiro its
ironer esaions, I think your Mrgazine has been imitrumeu-
tat in this Bond noik.
Whether the whole, or any part of the said words, are of
end concerning the Pursuer; and falsely, rosliehaudy, sad
injorisrusly bold oat and represent the Pursuer as being one
of the public teacher*, by whom young see, who come as
students to the University of Miriam-2h, have their reli-
giose* principles perverted, and their rote for holy
things sneered away, to the injury and demage of the said
Pursuer Or
" Whether the Pursuer held himself forth as the author
of certain di its in regard to freezing or 'tidiest eon-
gelatioo, by means of evaporation ander en exhausted re-
ceiver, be, the Pursuer, knowing or being aware, that the
elms or similar diseoverieu were previously pointed out, or
described is a paper in the 87th volume of the Philosophical
Transamious of the Royal Screirty of Loudon, entitled An
Aoeomil atom, Experiments made with on Air-Tamp, oat
Mr. lienetaton's principle; isseether oink tome experiments
with a Common Air-Pump: Hy Edward Nuirce, t .8.8. r ^
It being admitted, that a book entitled the Philosophy if
Arithmetic, seem published by the Purim r in the year 1810,
stud is described is the title page as a second edition ism
proved and enlarged, meaning thereby, that the said ;wok
described se a second edition, was enlarged and improved
in rompas Moo with the ens edition of the said book:—
" Wheihrr the Paretic', with the bookseller, is bolding
out to the public, the book Ant aforesaid, as a settand edi-
lien Wailed and improved, was guilty of a dishunest at-
tempt to impose upon the public?
" Or whether the Pursuer did writeoteomposseerrtain

a•tistes in d.iferent numbers of the Fdinharyk Recietr,
[entracte (tuns which were yet forth is ssersi containing en.
cuallunis on the dtscoverics and literary character of the
Pursuer, and strictures on the dtaeurerita and li y
metre of Count Ifitmford?

" And whether abe Defender, in qtatinx that heath-Is liken.
to theyuraner to a parrut, meant and intended w allude to,

and characterise, tied did allude to end eh irseterize the
Piresser, solely as the author of the said pass gee'".
Damages laid et 5.0001.
The Jury having been swore, and the above issues read
Ly the Clerk,
Mr. Moaclesaer said he had the hensear to address the
Jury on behalf of the Pioneer Mr. John Leehe. Professor of
Natured Philosophy in this University-1 'tense of which
be might be permitted I. ray, be hoped without repotting
himself to the derision of the Defeader, that it was weer
pronounced is soy society of learned men, without exciting
that respect whkh was always paid to the character of
• great gelidity; be bad, however, attain.] to no small
triturate by his diligeoce as a tutor, in which capacity
•Il his istercst depended se his fidelity and attestiow.
On the other hand,_ Mr. Blackwood, the Defender, wan
P baokaeller of some consideration, but who was chiefly
looms as the publisher of a Magezine which bore his
frame. With the general character of that publication they
had no more to do than as concemsed the tames in this cause.
Those costaleed reflect Maui isijnrioes to 11w Purse... as well
it, his character ea professor as in that of •n honest man.
The passages in piestion not only arraigned the Pursuer in
FM literary character, which must ever stand high in that
part of the "meld wherever kis writings and his discoveries
become known—they sot only charged the "NUMMI' with the
grossest ignereatm el the subject upon which he wrote, sod
of Lost i lit y to Mit (Arista. religion, bet, lastly, they accused
bias in direct terms of correlating the pritscipies of the youth
who came to receive his iastruclions. Ile should also
im-
press oil their Mealtime, that it was not a solitary attack on
the frolitege, the property, or the usefulness ut a public
teacher, but a contiowed series of naultitarierus libels for
which reparation was now sought. Who the author of ;hese
writings arms lie did not know.
The gentleman alio bad been supposed to be the author,
bad tune forward, sod as every man of honour so caveat.
staueed should have done, denied the rumour • and on lip.
plyiag to Mr. Blackwood, be had positively reused to give
up the author, alleging that he was wilirug to take all the
retpoosibility for what he bad published. The Pursuer bad
gives the Defendtr no join caller of provocation, and the
only coaceivable mutt re for these attacks was a paltry feeling
of jeslosay, occasioned by Die Pursuer having employe
ed a rival bookseller to pithiest, his weeks, and by his
having been, as the Magazine seemed to suppose, a
large contributor to a rival publication. Some of the
attacks, and eves some passages in the issues, might
have been treated with contempt, had they stood
alone; but when it was considered, that these were
comeected with other passages, which imputed to the
Former the charge. of dtabetsesty, impiety. and of being the
corrupter of youth, it world be GM that, whether as ••
iadt-
v.dual teacher, or as the member of a teniverday, the eu-
terests of which, sad of the mildews who resorted to it, weirs
concerned in the character of its professors, it was
alike his duty to submit this cam to the consideration of a
Jury. He believed they world see that this was no trivial
care, sad he trusted that, if they famed a verdict fur the
Pursuer, they would award are* damages as the case de-
manded. The points of the issues might be divided into four
classes. The first class related le the literary and scieatilk

stisaraeler of the Pursuer, sad seensea lint of ignoranee and
jor..ii,ssce, in cuing Oat of his way. to write upon a sub-
ject, the rudiments of which be did not understand ; the
scroad charged bias with dishonesty as a man, sal with ail-
,eleavornring in impose an the public ; the third coalsiatrd.l
Ifidiciale of hie press. ; sad the fourth was an attempt tet
ruin him as a !waren., and pot.lk teacher, by representing;
him as an rsienty to oar holy religion, and as a corrupter tit
the young men who attended his lectures. The passages is
the first were published in lb. number of the Mura-
list for Fehroary, 1820, and they formed a collection of all
the ewilijscos of attack, the sole pretence for which was •
roma' remark wbkh the Professor had made as the charac-
ters of the Hebrew language. Among hi. ether studies, he
had written a small book on the l'hilosophy Arillinetic—
a beck which, though small, was one of great research, sail,
ia he midst of Isis Oilier 11111.146, was highly crinlitahle tu

him as an author. In a comparison of the Hebrew with the
Greek and the Homan eurnetals, the Professor hail Intro.
cloyed in Ion" a itote eunlainiog, by wa♦ of illustration, the
follusiug account sit the mode of enunseratieg by t►e aticient
Hebrew characters :
" The Oriental nation■ appear generally te Sew napes.
tented the numbers a• far as one thalami( by dividing their
alphabet into three sßatiuel classes; Oa the Hebrew, the
oldest and poorest of all written languages, baring oaly
twenty.iwo ',Awry, could advaoce no farther than 400; ped
to exhibit 500, 600, 700, 800, atid 900, it had recourse ter
br 'ad IV

the clumsy expedient of addition, by joining 400 - . 100,
and 400 and 200, 400 and 300, 400 and 400, and 400 with
400 and I00."—( Philosophy if Arithmetic, p. 219.)
It was material that he should state, that Mr. Italie here
referred to the ancient Hebrew language, which was very
plain, from a subsequent passage in p. 42 of the same work.
The ancient Hebrew, referred to by Mr. Leslie, undoubb•
telly assist the character in use by the Samaritans—that i•
which, arconlinz to the beat optimism", the books of Moses
were originally written ; and it was obvious, that if Ibis
libeller bad any waning be also refereed to the ancient
Hebrew, because he represents Mr, Leslie as defaming the
lenguageof the Old Testament. But there was sot iet all Mr.
Leslie's strictures ani the Hebrew alphabet, • siogle saes
slon to the Hebrew language as that of the Ohl Trsta.
ment, or to the religion of the Old Tests.ent. The corn.
meut which be bad read was a fair philological or arithmeti-
cal allusion, and as regarded the media of this riestion, it
did not signify one pin whether Mr. Leslie was right or
wrong iu his remark, except as it regarded his character as a
Professor. Now, referring to the terms of the first issues,
beginning at " Leslie crisis Hebrew," be would ask if there
was not in all this a most wilful misrepresentation, atet only
of opinion but abet of Nei? There wall ouch s connexion
between the whole of the issues, that he should have
repeatedly to recur to the first, the meaning of which
indeed could not be fully appreciated until they had
considered those *bids follow; in the meanwhile he
should go on to the belt passage, in which the ob.
jert of the imputation would be immediately seen.
The Pursuer was, in fact, accused of making the remark
just quoted, for the purpose of ridiculing the Hebrew lain
(nage, hems..e it is the language of the Old Test/meet,
mud as being t• the language, as • philosopher like Mr.
Hume, or a portlier§ of Mr. flumes, would soy, dedicated
to superstitiou," and therefore " to be attacked by thole
tolerant sect per fits et tae fu." But the writer did*
stop bete: lie even weal on to say, that " is doing so, des
details of the siege ought mot to be intrusted Ina blearier-
ing grinner or a reek volunteer; and," he added, tt I must
consider the Professor as a most usfuetunate, though
perhaps most courageous sittings perdu, after this specimen
alas skill, Oatmeal' he may be enlightened enough in other
respects, to be eutoled to sneer at the credulity of Luther,
the dreams of the Christian Whets, and the fancies of St.
Jobs." He would presently shew, that this about the
" fancies of St. Joint was • false insinuation. He had al.
ready said that the issues ram we nitre another, so that they
could Dot do justice to this first ionic, until they bad con-
sidered the whole. He must now go back to the bed pa•-
MO which he I ad quoted. He bad tbierespoe asserted, shed
it did nut signify whether Mr. Leslie's comment on the He-
brew alphabet was wrong or right : it was a part of his sub-
jeet on which he was witted to aliver his opinion. But be
should prove that the pursuer's statement was right. It was
• fact well known, that the ancient Hebrew alphabet con-
sisted but of tweaty.two letters, though this writer says
it had live final letters besides. lie should shew that
the Punuer was right on three dished grounds. The
learned were generally of opinion that the "nand
Hebrew character, which was the same as was used by
the Samaritans, contained but 22 letters, without any addt.
tional final marks. He had the authority of Dr. Wilson, of
St. Andrew's, who stated in the first page of his grammar,
An there were but twenty-two letters in the language of
the ancient Hebrew., who used the Ssmarilsa character.
The English Bishop Beveridge also stated, that the societal
Hebrew bad but twenty.two letters, wasting the anal letters.
Father Simms, who wrote in 1083, was very decided that the
ancient Hebrew character was the Samaritan. This opinion
was confirmed by a circumstance which was dears ibed is the
Aral book of Kings. After the dispersion of the Jews, the
Tea tribes appointed scribes to instruct renal. Hebrews In
the law of Moses, and in their possession were found the
are books of Moses,•written in the anelent Hebrew, sow
called the Samaritan. It was necessary to explain that these
books had been afterwards transcribed into the Chaldaic,
which was then properly diating•isbed as the modern He-
brew, and the Samaritan as the ancient Hebrew. The latter,
as far as he could find, never had the five field letters at alt.
The manner in which the letters were set down in the
of Bishap Beveridge Identically agreed with the 'tattooist
of Professor Leslie. In the grammar of Joseph Frey. the
alphabet contained but 21 letters, sad the numerals were
' espresied as Mr. Leslie stated them. But that was not all;
even the Chaldaic language, into which the Scriptures were
translated, had only twenty-two letters origieally, five of
which were subsequently written in • varied fur., to de-
mote that they were final letters; then, having these Ave
sew forms of lettere, there was no occasion to have renters"
to the " clumsy ersedieirt" described by Professor Leslie.
the date of tilt introduction of these final letters, he did not
toow ; it could sot, however, be presumed to bave been
prior to the Babylonia% captivity. It was only 250 years
before Christ that the Septuagint translated the Scriptotes
into Greek, and the translators are said to have fallen into a
mistake In the book of Zsebariab, for want of the final cha-
racters. He should, however, calamine some Hebrew
scholars on thee subject; and be had the satisfaction of
thinking, that if he had committed any mistake, be should
most probahly be corrected. He thought, at least, be had
stated enough to shew, that if this libeller had not written
in gross ignorance of his sniTer, if he had not writ•
ten Without ever having looked at the title-page of a Hebrew
grammar, he must have knows that whet he was denim of
Mr. Leslie was false. Whet fault could be sonlanted to
th•• statement of Mr. Leslie? Was Mr. I.eslie to be charged
with ridiculing the Scripture.;' because he enuld not say of
the language In which the Old 'Vestments was written, what
was not true? He would have bees accessed of not having
studied the Scriptures, bad he omitted that comment; se
this libeller would have said, that he had omitted all notice
of the subject, fur the purpose of degrading the Hebrew
language. Mr. Leslie had only said, that the Hebrew was
the pottiest and rudest language, is so far as it had only
twenty-two letters—tbat in fart it was merely the poorest
and rudest language fur that particular purpose with
which they had here to do, viz. arithmetic. This was
sees by referring to some other passages in Mr. Leslie's
work, particularly where be stated, that the langeages of
the moil pulisbed nations, when compared with the methods
of counting in use by the most barbarous people, betrayed
the greatest poverty in numerals. He animadverted on the
Bomas numerals in- the sane terms, and in comparison with
them, extolled the nureeriral signs of On Greeks. Was it
true, then, as the libeller had stated, that Professor Leslie
had censured the Hebrew system of counting from apiece,
Notwithatanding the Borns.' method of notation was still
more clumsy? In applyingthe language of this issue, it was
still .ore nn enemy to connect it with the language of the
3d None, where the writer said, that in treating on arithmetic
that "celebrated" man thought paper to go out of his way
to revile the Hebrew language. " I asserted that he did not
know • letter of the tongue he had the impudence to pretend
to criticise, and 1 priced my amettion"—and ' 1 proved that
he was actuated by • hostility to the language of revelation,
simply because it waste; sell l4efy any use to refute me."
—Was Ws, he audit ask, a fair inference, that Professor
Leslie" was, battik to the Hebrew language, because, it was

the language of Scripture; while he woe at 14 some
time rebelling that tareeenge, Ile Greek,. he. eVeh the
most importst part of Scrips,* wee silks •. Still he.
ginieng withrhe some cearge—listrodets Zif Hebrew, the
writer he the 21 issue metered *pee 11 sew willitett o'l%l
leg •i stet same time close contact with the old owe.
he licensed the Purseeeof a wilful 'imposilitte i sod "Wes-
sours by dint of his own little tales to depiive'bim of that
just celebrity *loch helad eeriest. Mr. Leslie had 'mit-
ten a treatise on the these of heat, .rid was soon after elect-
ed to the mathematical chair which bad bets filled by • Re-
binsie earl by • PlBOllB.. He was elm elected• Member edam
of Paris, which only admitted shoal Are 'Wagger* ;
end though be had to compete with five or six rival candi-
date a, he wax elected by majority of 33 est of 37. Yet the
writer of these libels,iestigeted by jealoosy, or some violent I
impulse or either,-cliesenbed this Professar es having imposed
or the world, by represestieg himself as the anther of dimes-
series previously recorded its the Trensaclions of the
PAlrsaopittrat docie/p. It mm impossible; the chargel
itself eres'elswird. The Philosophical Troneeefione were as
fenedier to Ike learned as the tamsesals of /Surfed to the
matheeeniciags. Bet he should state es accurately as he
could what were the facts. To describe inventions in a seien-
Aifie maser he was not able ; mad if he tout.), perhaps some
if them world nut he able to nederstead hits ; bet be would
be as plain end as correct as he could : if, however, he coo.
waffled say errors he requested that they would correct them
by the evidence —olr. Monereiff bete described Mr.
Leslie's improvement on the hygronieter : and explained the
peoliar combUstion of knoott priseiples In his experiment
wf segeletion iw iscuo.)—All idea of plagiarism was de-
stroyed by the feel, that Mr. Leslie's first experiment pro-
diced a directly opposite effect from whet he had expected :
instead of givieg back the moisture from evaporates,
it corgraltd. 111 r. Leslie immediately corresponded ew
the subject with tee principal leareed men in Loudon
egg ow the La Piss, the
greatest natural philosopher of the times; mid the ezperi.
west was received all over Europe with applause, and by
America in a very short time after. le England it did not
succeed so soon aon he Coulters!, because the senses '
there were not so attentive to Mr Leslie's directions. Yet,
ten years aftersusle, • person started ap and accused Mr.
Leslie of a monstrous plagiarises, sad of apprupriating to
biesself the iiistention of others. Every discovery andel be
nothing else than the application of some principles is as.
tare Integra before, to a particular purpose. Stub *es the
Newtonian law of vegetation. Was this no diseovery, became*
every one knew before that • steel dropped from the clouds
would fall to the sewed. It was said after the discovery of
America, that say es might base been sure, from first
principles, that there was • coetioent is the west; and as it
might perbaps be said with respect to Mr. Leslie's expert-.
Sent ; bat, in fact, was it previously writers in the paper of
Mr. Noire', or had Mr. Blackwood made the discovery. He
came now to she tbird issue, the language of which was really
intolerabia.. The word " lying" was not permitted to be is-
trodeeed in judicial proceedings. It seemed the Purser of
adding "• fresh lying title-pageoted a few additional leaves;
la short, only a collusion between an boost bookseller sad
a dumbly busiest professor, to impose on the public." The
very word* are sufficient to sustain the proof of this libel.
The Defender, however, bad hero at the pains to explain
lee word " holiest" in his justsfieatory issue—that it meant
dishonest." It was not a y that the second edition
of a book should be entirely • new print. No one knew
better thee Mr. Blackwood that nothing was more common
than to replies only sucb parts of • work as required correc-
tion, but this was particularly necessary is the present case,
where the hook contained date* or figures ie almoit every
page. Indeed it was bet jest stow, when he was quoting a
sole in the book, that be beard his Lesrsed Friend ow the
other side say, /• That easily is the second edition." So that
They confessed it was a second edition in which something
import's' was introduced. indeed an aecoust of all the im-
provements sad additions was given in the preface. One
of the deferents was, that the words were not applied to
Mr. Leslie. Teis was an effect saying, "Mr. Leslie, you are
• very ignorant and impertinent man ; you are hostile he
Hebrew, because it is the lasgasge of the Old Tevtantst ;
the young men situ attend the university bete their eels-
tolovs opinion* sneered away by you and others; you ere •
storious plagiary ; you helm connived with your bookseller
In defrauding the public ; you are very like a parrot : but
do no thick, Mr. Leslie, that I mean poi." Such • defence
only d to bring out theme suss es well as the malice
of the Defender. The libeller had stated that is spite a
hitter spirit was displaying Itself in this Coequality, and
fist Mr. Blackwood's Magazine bad contributed to it. He
takes merit to himself for having pointed oat Mr. Leslie's
faults. He had eadertaken to justify his libel, sad if he
abound not call soy witueiters it most be because be was now
so convinced of the offence which he had committed, that no
dare not set his face to the altar. He (Mr. f J.) denied that
there was any truth is the statement, that the religion of
students had been sneered away. It
. character of this coentry; it never bad been the character of
this people. If it had been the case, he would have been
the last to stand up in its vitadkatios ; but if it were the
case, it was not by each mesas that the evil could be tor-
remedy it was nut by the moans of maliginut calumnies
that 'dig's' could i.e served. One word to damages, and he
I had done. He should only call upon them to promotes, such
a verdict as would convince the country that they bad valued
s Professor's character; • would vomitus Mr. Black woodoied
those elnihave abet lid him in bit career, that if they will lake
op
that trade which Cicero had so •pily described as " Lee
tonanie quarts furpissimus," they must take it with Hu con•
sequence, of making the amplest reparation to those whom
they have is- jured, wbe they come forward to claim it.
The first witness called wee the Reverted David Dicksao,
one of the Ministers of the Wen Church, who, being sworn,
stated, that he had somewhat attended to the study of tb,
Hebrew languages. Wes one year • candidate for the He.
brew chair. The laugusge was not always written in the
same character. The received opinims at present was that
„ the Samaritan, or perhaps the &anent Phoenician character
was the one formerly used ; it has 22 characters, and no
finals, as be _knew. %Vas not aware the encieht He.
brews always seal tbis alphabet for numerical note*. Mem-
bers is the body of the Scriptures were always set dews
in words. Bishop Beveridge states that the Hebrews had but
these 22, without any final letters, sod then explained the
use of these as numerals thus:—The first sine were exile;
the next eine, tote; the last four were used for the hundreds,
100, 200, 300, and 400; no higher could they go without •
farther complication of signs. It was the operetta of the
learsd, that the square character of the Chaldaic was istro-
duced subsequently to the Bebylenish captivity, sad the final
letters were not in use tdl after the istroductiow of the
Chaldaic character. It was the opinion of Bishop Callicut
that the anal characters were not Introduced till after the
tramline's of the &risers; sod he, whets, was of the
some opinion, because writings in the Chaldaic characters,
without any finals, end of a date about 201/ years before
Christ, bad been discovered.
Witness hooked at the note in Professor Leslie's book, and
said it did not betray a total ignorance of Hebrew, mot of the
alphabet at all events; It did not state any thing that was
not the teeth.
Cron-examined by Mr. FORSYTH --The Scriptures, wills
few exception, were banded down to us in whet we call
Hebrew. The General Assembly, when they ordered stu-
dents to be instructed in Hebrew, meant the Chaldaic.—
%Witness described the use of tbe five foal lettere, ems-
'aerating from the 400 (where the ancient+ stopped) ow to
900. He had go doubt but the Greeks borrowed some newer-
rale from the Hebrews. The Greeks had 24 letters.—(M.
Forsyth here read the note of Professor Leslie, and asked
witness if that was true of the Hebrew lenguagel—This re-
quited some exploitation. It was true of the ancient He-
brew language--tbe Imaguage in which the Bible was writ-
ten.—[Mr. Footmen: The language of which the Church of
Scotland celled Hebeewl—No ? the Hebrew sow studied bad
the final letters. There was on intent./ of enumerating by '
numerals in the Old Testeremit. the numbers were invariably
set down iu full. He was the other day reeding the grammar
of the oldest Protestant Hebrew writer, and be referred to •
still older Jewish writer, who said the finals were eel weed as
numerals by the Hebrews. "Were there any authors who he-
•lieved scan earlier existence of the And letters?"—" AY, yes :
Mr. Buxton believed thelfieal letters were as old as Adam."
The Rev. Dr Scott, Minster of Corstorphibe, had devoted
• considerable time to the study of the Hebrew language.
It was the tapholes of the teemed that the Scriptures were
written ia the Samaritan leeguage, mud afterwards trans-

• 411.. T.

(erred into the mpare Chaldaic charsetet. A majority went
of opinium that the change took place Immediately after
the retorts from t►e Babytonish captivity' het a very respect.
*hie minority were of a dare:est opision. Some conteeded
that the thongs did -not take plate till two hundred
years after Christ. This witness corroborated Mr. Dickson's
dracription of the use of the Samaritan and the Chaldean
character• in emimeratiou, and after looking at the note of
Professor Lambe's account of enumerating in the ancient
Ilebrew wasicorreet, mad that it displayed a perfect know.
ledge of the Hebrew. alphabet; from mothing that be could
isler from that passage, should he believe Shut Peon ssor
Leslie was ig t of the Hebrew language, and even of
the alphabet.
Dr. Scott was troaa-etamiaed by Mr. Foaavrw, to the
same effect as the last witness, whose opinions be confirmed.
Mr. .Itrntsw here submitted in evidence several voloomel
of EycYcloPledia% from which be. read encomiums oa Mr.
Leslie's discoveries.

Dr. Marcel had beet) member of the Philosophical Society
for some time, sad lectured is London 00 chymislry for
several years. Is 'acquainted with, and leas often repestril
the experiments of Peofeesew Leslie, by which he frets, s
wider fa cacao. He believed at first, as he does now, that
the process was originally discovered by Professor Leah.
The feels ow w►ich the experiment was grounded had
bees knows long before the experiatest of Mr. Leslie, or
eves that of Mr. Nairn. 'The most meritorious discoveries
were those produced by sew combinations of the simple facts,
the discovery of which is oilers fortuitous. Does not be-
lieve, that from reading Mr. Nairies paper, as gives in the
Transaction* of lA. Philosophical Society, he should have
bees guided to the Professor olio's process, and for this
'coon, that because the paper had been for seventy years
in t►e possession of roach greater philosophers them hiss, also
had also overlooked the experiment. The discovery of Pro.
(essay Leslie was considered origisall by all the leased men
in London, and abroad as far as his knowledge extended.
The first lime he knew of the experiment sscceediag in Lou.
dos, it was perforated by Professor Leslie himself. Wiliest
aid many others bad previously tried the experiment as de.
scribed by Professor Leslie, and failed from out atteudeng
to some of the perticulars. He bad succeeded is producing
• great deal of coal, but foiled iee effectiag cungelatsou. He
believed 1110 Professor Playfair bad also failed in his
grit trial of the experiment i but ►e could sot speak of this
to a certainly.
Cross.rxamioed by Mr. Foftsred.—The production of
cold by evsporalioti had bees previously knows, and ante
• powerful genius puwerfally applied, this experiment might
certainly have bees carried forward to Mr. Leslie's discovery.

Re-examined by Mr. JrnatY.—Profrosor Leslie, by his
experiment, had displayed a great inductive and ineutive
grains, and had done what fur 60 years the whole piano.
phical world had ant been able to do.
Dr. Thompson, Professor of Chymistry at the Glasgow
University, was acquainted with Professor Leslie's exprri•
meat, and had tried it at least a hundred times. Had read
Mr. Naira's paper in The Philosophical Tretemsclions, and
it never shook his conviction as to the originality of Prole*.
sot Leslie's discovery. Was quite certain, from i radio( Mr.
Nairu's paper, that Mr. Nairn had ectoa!daeti his data
after the manner of Professor Leslie. Considered it a valu•
able discovery, and
Was acquainted with Professor Leslie's mathematical works,
and considered them meritorious, particularly is the geome-
trical analysis.
Dr. Dewar was a physirise, and had 'Heade! particularly
to chemistry, on which subject he bad leetnred In Ediu-
burgh. This witness corroborated the two preceding o it-
anon is the other poetic-Wars of their evidence.
Mr. Csdell, partner is the hone of Mears Constable and
Co., bookseller*, proved Hoot 900 copies of The Philosophy
of Arithmetic had been sold within two years; had lain
applied to fur the purpose of oodeviaking a second edition
of that along with other works; did not agree to the terms;
lookiwg at the two books, one entitled first and the other
second editious of that work, be should say that the latter
was a different edition from the former. A paragraph is
the preface of the second edition gave a true account of the
improvements which had been made on the former edition t
the price he understood was raised en the second edition, in
consequence of the improvements. Did not consider that
Mere was any dishonesty in giving out the second edition as
I one edition, and was not aware bow the improvements in
the book could have been notified to the public but by call.
lag it a new edition.
Mr. Tait, publisher of the second edition, corroborates
the preceding witness. 1
Cross-examined by Mr. Fortsame.—Would not the im-
provements i• the book have been as well described by the
author stating in his preface, that the book now presented to
the public was the old one, with such and such new pages,
No; it could out be properly notified so.
By lb. COURT.— A book entirely reprinted io called a
new edition, and a book only partly re-printed, is also called
a snood edition. Knew no particular quantity of additions
that was necessary to coastitute a new edition.
Mr. S. Aitkes, bookseller in Edinburgh, and partner
with Mr. Bradfute, corroborated the two precediug witnesses,
and added, that Mr. Blackwood had purchased at Goldie%
safe the remains of Guldie`a edition of Coodoreets AriM-
=elk, and had republithed the same work with only a new
title page, in which the book was styled • sew edition.
Mr FORSTTO and the Court put several erns viontions
to this witness, who answered them in a manner very dis•
tint, cooBrmatory of his evidence in chief.

Mr. Millar, partner of the house of Messrs. Manners and
bookseWirw, folly corroborated the other witnesses of
his ow■ profession; and; in his cross-examination, sseniion-
ed a ease in which Mrs. Elizabeth Hamilton ►ad agreed with
their house, on she republication of her popular essays in
the old print, with some sew additions, and entitling it a
new edition.
This closed the ease for the Parswer.

Mr. FORITTII having addressed the Court at great 'mg*,
on the part of the Defender, the Jury, were charged by the
LORD CHIC, COIIIII4SIOR CR, with his usual ability.
The Jury retired, and after rs rosining in coasultation an
hour and a half, returned with the following verdict
In the first imue, the Jury find for the Defeuder, as far
as the words—' We must look' (the point at which the Court
was of °pinks' that tie libel eorrowescest); fur the Peruser as
far as ' He may believe ;' and the remainder of this issue
for the Defender. Os the second and third issues, find fur
the Pursuer, and the fourth for the Defends.. Damages—
Ono Hetriefred Potted,.
There was some disapprobation expresses' in the Court at
the ansonneenseat of the verdict.
The trial was rot concluded till past eleven p rs.

Several persons were yesterday convicted at
Bow-street In penalties, for having sold fruit mid
vegetables in Covent garden market on Sunday
last.
Sy DONN DEATH.—On Tuesday night Mr. BROO.
SNOOFT. Clerk of the Day Rules to the King's
Bench Prison, retired to bed in full health, but in
less than an hour awoke with a violent pain in his
head, and jumping up in bed exclaimed, " Good
God ! wlmt's that 1" Medical assistance was im-
mediately obtained, when it was discovered that lie
was seized with apoplexy. The usual means were
adopted, but lie survived the attack only two hours.
Mr. Bwoosttoorr was highly esteemed by till who
knew him; lie had been connected with the Bench
for 32 years. His remains, we understand, will be
conveyed to the grave by six of the Rulers.

MARKRTS.

CORN EXCHANGE, FRIDAY, Jinx
The %Vbest trade was henry this marnlar, horsing • eel.
siderable questity at market, mid the faroltrahle change I.
the weather missing a cessation in the d.msnd, the 'ohs were
dull this toornim even for the 13nat SUMO'S, at Bloodily's
The ordinary qualities of Barley is Is. per quarter lower,
but superfine fresh thrashed samples 'mid on fall its good
terms as on !Woodsy. Mane, Pease, and Oats went off
hem ily ai a small decline from Monthly* quotations.

UXBRIDGE.
Cora Inspector's Ret YIN Tnttitsorr, it.TLY ?S.
Wheat, pee load
_ New ditto l6l —s to 181 --e
Bosley, per cr.'s lei
Oats l7s —d to 23s —4l
Beans •'l+ —d to 31s —d
Prose 2Bs —d to Me

NEWBURY, BRIBE Jour 25.
Wheat ~.,....lea to nil I (lota l4s to 21s
Alto wew 44s to 1401 Reuss
Kye .. • ..... —s to --a Pease 23. to 2:J.
Barley l6s to les
Bread pre gallon 1. Id to Is 3d.

DEVIZEM, Jvcy Ur. •
Wheal.... >t3s Od • 370 Od t Outs l7s OJ a 201 OJ
Barley.... —s Od a 21s Od I Beans ISs Od a fl. Od
574 Sacks of Wheat said al the average of Its. 4f,d.

HUNGSRFORD, Jots
Od. to 83.. 04. Oats_ -Oa. lb Of.
Od. to 20.. Od. I Beau 20s. Oil. to 30.. Od.

SALISBURY, JuLt 23.
Whe
0a.... 180. 08. to M. 88
11
Barley. Ito
Beams .. 225. 1141. to 40.. Od

SMITHFIELD, FITDAT, JULY U.
Our supply, with the easephon of Beef, ettolistees to he
abundant, sad the qualify brio% lamer, She primp dloaf
market day wen with delkelt) obtaieed. la the Hay
Market there is se allayetino.

NEWCATII AND LEADENHALL MARKETS.
(Ny Ike Cardoso.)
Bret .... 4o 64 is Ils 64 Veil IN to as n
Rs I. So $4 I Pork .... Is ad to Sr 4ti
Ls b3.NleasOd.

LIII 1 I k lIIIN M N