the Pope must permit an union of this kind: "sc. si maritus quidam a barbaris castratur et abhinc mulieri suæ cohabitare et carnaliter, ut ante, se miscere voluerit." And upon the whole they concluded, that the marriage should be deemed valid, and the parties re-admitted to all religious privileges.

I am most pleased with the decision of the faculty of Gripswald: they opined, that as the lady had got into the scrape with her eyes open, they might suffer her to take the consequences without danger to their own souls; and that as she had been encouraged by her mother and several friends in her attachment to Sorlisi, it did not quite amount to a mortal transgression.

While these huge bodics of divinity thundered forth their decrees, a shoal of small writers skirmished on both sides. The noise of the contest occupied the attention of all Dresden.

One Dr. Bulæus, on the part of the

Sorlisi, proved in form, that there was nothing so very scandalous and alarming as had been represented, in their marriage. He shewed, with great modesty, that excepting the certain prospect of sterility, they had no peculiar cause of dissatisfaction, and that other matches, equally objectionable in that respect, were often concluded between persons of very unequal ages. He also shrewdly observed, that no small scandal had been given, by the singular discussions in which their reverences had indulged; discussions which he considered as snares for their consciences, and not highly edifying to the public.

An examination of this paper immediately appeared, by an anonymous writer, who remarked acutely enough, that the consent of the parties could not ren-. der a compact legal, which was illegal in its nature; he proceeded to shew syllogistically, that the lady had been blinded respecting certain circumstances, VOL. II.

C

1

by the rank and fortune of Sorlisi, and that this match was certainly brought about by the Devil himself. To strengthen his argument, he adds the curious story quoted by Dr. Warton, in his Essay on Pope, respecting the complaints of a matron against the barbarities of a certain Italian, duke; adding, by way of inference, "huic sané uxori-plus credendum, quam nostræ Mariæ inex pertæ et nescienti quid distent æra lupinis." He adds, that it would be harsh and uncivil to prefer the fancies of a raw girl, to the unanimous sentiments of an host of bearded civilians.

Another examiner came forth, who might be suspected, from his manner, to have belonged to the faculty of Stras burg. He declared, that Madame de Sorlisi lived in statu peccaminoso, scandaloso et damnabili;" and gave the most odious turn to the pure attachment she had manifested. Will it be believed, that this furious theologist wished that

the lovers, instead of being married, had been cudgelled out of their mutual affection? He supported this extravagance by the example of Luther, who seems to have been fond of using the argumentum baculinum with his friends. It is well known that he once compelled a disputant to come into his opinion, by the dextrous application of a good cudgel; and the examiner says, he took the same method with his maid-servant, who had been silly enough to fall in love, and whom he thrashed into a severer way of thinking.

It would have been easy to have replied, that Luther shewed a little more complaisance for the tender passion, when he sanctioned the bigamy of the Elector, his patron; but the retort would have been ill received at the court of Dresden. This terrible doctor, however, literally called out for clubs; "ad baculum, ad baculum quo pruritum extinguite !”.

A milder adversary, moved by the largeness of the fine which Sorlisi had engaged to pay, doubted whether the parties, upon acknowledging the enormity of their offence, might not be suffered to live together as brother and sister, a concession which the unfortunate pair seem to have been at length willing to make. But upon setting aside the consideration of the money, and regarding the scandal and danger likely to accrue to the protestant church, from such an indulgence, he reluctantly decided in the negative.

After wearying the reader with this tedious detail, he will be glad, for more reasons than one, to learn, that in May, 1668, the Consistory of Leipsic declared that the marriage ought to be tolerated, and the parties to be freed from any farther vexation or prosecution on that account. At the same time, the Elector, to prevent the growth of scandal, ordered that this case should not be considered