North Wales Gazette

POETRY. For the North Wales Gazette. The following lines were occasioned by the Address, inserted in the last Nurth W ales Gazette. -0 Cambrian Mase that dwells on Snowdon's height, The Welsh Parnassus, or the lofty iiiglit, Inspire my smu. Reso nd that nohle praise Due to thy B* and his heav'nly lays. In ruder times beneath the Muses' sway, When genius strove few blossoms I," display, The Cambrians sang of warlike heroes slain Of wrecking Vessels toss'd upon the main And am'rous maids, whom blind delusive love, Led plaint ve waiid'ring to Coedhelen-grove-, ";Yht'e mimic echo in the vocal wood, JL-pears their murmurs to th'answ'rin¡?: fllod. Allei cruel Edward, curs'd by age, HiJsh'd the fond Muse that swelt'd the tuneful pag-e, Left but young Bards to tune the mournful lyre, In solpllln accents for their dying sire. If len(1 his wit to living Hope, And sill; in strains, sang hy manorial Pope, Cambria may spurn uwlici ius powers combind, And smile contemptuous on the envious mind: For brave Caractacus in chains forlorn, Betray'd the spirit of a Camhrian born; And Boadicea led a martial hand, To sweep usurpers from her native land Boldly she dar'd Suetonius' arms to brave, J And, pnisou'd fell a victim to the grave.

MYFYRDOD A Yts MA \*i YSGOL. Mi d-reuliais Attaf oerliyd, Yn ddigon isel ysbryd Ce's 1m yn tfais,—a'r flall yn ffol, Wrth dreulio mai wol fy vvyd. Bum braidd a digalonni, "VVrth weled maint direidi Ton o ga'ledion, bliniou Blant, Na fyunant eu rheoli. Dyledswydd pob rhieni Llafuno zyda 'r Meistri, Gan ddysgu Plant i wfuddhau, Mewn syiwedd, a'u moesoli. E ddylai (Jon rhywdrigfail Fod megys Ysgol fechan, I ddysgu a li, ffoi-(idi Plant Ithag dilyn trachwant aflan. Addysger yn ddi-esgus I'r Plant egwyddor iachus; Gan arfer ffurf o weddi a mawl, Mewn dull ystyriawl barchus. Os ofer Ifurf o weddi, Mae'n ofer ffurf o foli Os gwir yw hyn, cyn ierfyn taith, Ni ddylid chwaith addoli. \Tnfydrwydd esgusodi, Drwy opdi, lyth, ac oedi; Arferer Ifurf, mewn gwresog fryd, Nes disgyn ysbryd gweddi. Alae gado Planfos mwythus Yu ben rh)dd afreolus, Yti groes bohegwydrlor dda Mae 'n Bechod tra pheryglus. E ddywed rbai eam, synniol, Sy 'n goddef Plant annuwiol, Y troant oil, oddiwrrb ddrwg DW)" Os eawsatit hwv eu hethol. Nid chwilio llyfr etholiad, Ond tlarllen llyfr ei alwad Yw dyled poh rhyw Gristion byw, Sy 'n earn Duw yn wastad. Mae Brenhin Nefoedd uchod Yn galw am ufudd-dod Gan bob rhyw oedran, llwythac Iaith; Drwy Iwrw yaiaifh Bechod. Nid yll) w doniau gwyrthiol Yn awr yn angenrheidiol Fel ar ddechreuad torriad dydd, Anegwan Ffydd Grist'nogol. Trwy fortiliou cyffVedinol Cyfrennir era, neilltuol; Mae ysbryd Dtiw yn gweithio '11 gry' Drwy foddion sy'u allanol. Os dihen yr arhrawiaeth Ywannog PROSELYTIAKTH, talae 'n gyflawn I)ry(f, mewn liawer Bro, Diwygio weinidogaeth Nid swyd L CE\'H.VDON HEDDWCII Yw annog cuJ Blndgariech Ond annog rhvdd liwvLtvs DA, Agored, a BSIWDGARWCH. Cyhoeddodd y NEFOMON, EWYLLYS DA 1 Ddynion v AVei, tlyna siampl t'avvr ei bri, Hagoiol i FARWOLION. Diflauned ffrwythau 'r Felldith, Cenfige: 1, Calais, Rhagrith Boed y'tnhot) Gwlad, drwy GARIAD gwir, Bob UNDEB'hir, a Bendith. Caernarfon. M FN I.

For tne Horth rFales Gazette. ERYRON. Cyfarfod yr Eryron a gynnaliwyd yn y Bonl Newydd, ar ddydd Hun y Pasc, 1813. ^gor wyd V cylarfud y nh y leh dau o r;jlocli biydtt hawu Dycliwelodd y Belrdd adrel ynghylcli machlud liaul. Y cytarfod uctiod a gynivali- wyd yn y fnodd i)wy 'A f dvii)iinol, 0 ran rhcol a g-wedrlusder: undeh a brawdgavwch oeddynt yn y,oddan;os yn dra egltir yn y Gymdeilhail. Y11 y cyfarfod uchod, dad^anwyd pedair o Awdlau ar y teslyn gosodedigj sef,yslyriaeth- au ar ,I} ¡. honniadau pabaidd Euwau 'r Beirdd a gauasaut ar y testyn yn- ghyd a rhifedi 'r llinellau yu eu caudadau, sydd fel y canlyu 1. Richard Jones, Erw Ystyffylau, Llanwnda, yn agos i Gaernarfon Awdl, yn cynnwys 185 o liiiellau. 2. liichard Hughes, Ty Yfk y Ion, Fodadan, Llanwnda; Awdl, yn cynnwys 164 o linellau. 3. William E Iward, Wallil iawr,.yn agos i Gaernarfon, Awdl, yn cynnwys 141 0 linellau. 4. Oieii Williams, Waun fawr, Awdl, yn cyn- nwys, 127 o liuellau. Yn gymmaint nad caniadati ar destyn o yri). ryson vdyw 'r caniadau a grybwyllwvd uchod, a/uad'oedd ychwailh uit gwobr wedi ei addaw i'r Gorentardd; ni thyhiwyd yn angenriieid iol rhoddi harn neillduol arnynt. Dymunol i'r Beirdd ieuaingc gaei amser o Brofiad. Dymunoi hefyd ydy w goctielyd p, b at hlj^tir o eiddigedd a rhagfarn, yr hyn hetiiau sydd vii fynych JM oeri gwr< sawgrwjdd Brawd- garweb, ar ,11 torri rhwyn>yn cyirdeithas Er hyn oil, nid ydyw'r Gynideitbas yn anicamt gadael i'r caniadau ddiangc yn ddi ystyr; Mae 'n deilwng i haeddiant gael ei deilyngdod. Ar ohvg gyGFredinol mae'n 5nuidatigos fod y caniadau crybwylledig yn cynllwysarnryw darawiadau gorchestol. Ond lIid yw In beth, arferol yng nghynideithas yr Eryron, rhoddi bam ar un gwaith newydd, lies iddo gael ei yslyried yn fanylaidd a phwyllo, mewn dan lieu dri o Gyf(-iriodydcl.-( yt)gliorir y Beirdd, IllIwalth ychwallcg, i ochel gorfelther YII eu caniadau nesaf, ar y teslyn gosodedig, erbyn yr unfed ar ddeg o Awst nesaf: Cofier mai 'r lestyu yd\w Dyclmeliad yr luddewon. Amlhavvn ddawn, ddynion, I'n mad henwlad lion, E ddaw i Feirddion Ddeu fwy urddas; Awen gyniiiien gj, Ilydr rnydr o'i medru, Da i ni g-aru Douiau gwiwras. Aledti GORONWY OWAIN.

To the Editor of the North (Vales Gazelle. SIR, After what I bad written in answer to your Correspondent J. J. it did not appear to me that it would be requisite to animadvert far- tiler on strIctures of so unworthy a descrip- tion. But as, in his fiftli Iettei-, lie his at- tempted to say something in what lie is pleased to call defence, of his having changed liie word Gahius into Gabii, when iv ing a passage as a quotation from my translation of tile British Chronicle, it may be expected that I should not permit even such a defence to pass wholly tiiiiioliced I therefore once more trouble you on the subject. However virulent the effort which your cor- respondent displays, and however persevering his toil to write down the publication, which is the object of bis animosity, it cannot but afford gratification to the author, that the unfairness and ill bcralily of the censures are such, -s a simple reference to the hook iiself must In g-elleral at once discover When the Collectanea Cambrica was given to the world, its author was perfectly appriscd lhat he miiriit have some difference of opinion to encounter, as to several subjects on which his own, afler 4oisji and laborious researches and serious de- liberation, did not coincide with that which has generally prevailed and be had 1 too much respect for I be public and for him self, to lay an) thing before it either without due consideration, or without stating the ar guments on wlvch Ills own opinion, especially where the topic had, or miht he thought to have, any appearance of novelty in it, was founded. He was not so vain, or so ignorant as to look for an unhesitating concurrence on some of them which had long been involved in obscurity, and on which a satisfactory degree of probability is the most perhaps that can he obtained. With truth alone 111 view, and Ihe greatest probability where certainty could not be had, after diligent enquiry, he wrote and published without a wish to sacrifice either truth or probability, to Iny other cunsidera tion, or to deprecate fair criticism. To those who are conversant in the history of remote ages, it is well known that much is obscure, and the means of developing the truth ilt many cases very scanty. That the best informed men sometimes find it difficult lu assign the correct limit between tiiat which appears credible, and that which may safely be rejected as false, where the ignorant will decide without scruple. The school boy will despise as idle tales that mythology, from 11 y which a mature knowledge will deduce proofs, and an illustration of the progress of primaeval traditions Whether in the Collectanea Camb. the ahove dlstanctions have been correctly oil served or not the author hall a right to ex- pect that whalever was controverted, if should not be misrepresented s and that, if any pas sage was quoted, it should he quoted as it was printed; and not as it neither was, nor could have been intended to be so. Honour and common honesty demand thus much, and it IS more with coil) iiiiserit ioll for the error of. different conduct, than with any other senti- ment, that I notice what is so unwiseU ttazarded cvell hy an anonymous writer. As to the general styte of the strictures, it is jus! such as a Bavins in Rome may be supposed to have made on the first Dccad of Livy, soon after its publication which foverlooking 11;,0 introduction) he would do probably in some such manner as this. The fabulous tendency of this history is best exemplified by staling the general tenor. As to the long list of names, the fabricator has certainly taken the opportunity of swelling the narrative to the utmost extent and attributing to most of them some fabnlotis exploit or oilier. He brings -Eneas to Italy, where finding it difficult how to dispose of him, he makes him to be receivett with grealcivililv hv the eood old I atid to malr Ilis daughter.— This history abounds with the most absurd fictions, it says tlwt Homulus and Renins were suckled by a wolf, that the Romans he lleved Iht Romulus was carried to heaven in a thunder storm that a single man, with a single eye, defended a bride against a whole army. It abounds with speeches never spoken, .1. and with anachronisms. Julius Cssar, who lived a hundred years after, is made the Son of Iscatiius, and Junius Brutus, who killed Cassar the first Consul. The capture of 1; ome by Ihe Gauls, is taken from tiie capture of Athens by Xerxes." Such a species of criti cism needs no answer. The more immediate subject which may require some reply, is that which concerns your correspondent's giving an erroneous statement in quotation. 1 had hen inclined to attribute his rashness of as sertion, and his misrepresentation* in the pas sages quoted, to a levity of mind and confusion of ideas, not perfectly under I lie control of a cool nleitt. I am sorry to observe that, from the defence itself, if assumes a more serious complexion since the error appears to have been deliberate and wilful, lie says, "My reason for changing Gabius into a town, contiguous to Rome. was from (meaning, as I suppose, det-ivedfrom) the frequent instances which occur in the Chronicle of similar trans- I formations, and because nosuch name appears in the Fasti Consulares In page 159, the Milvian bridge is in like manner converted to a Roman senator." Had the alteration been made thro' mistake, or even thoughtlessness, and properly acknow- ledged, or had the sense not been affected by the alteration, I should have said no more concerning it though even an oversight or mistake ( which it is eot very possible always to avoid) is blameable 111 proportion to its importance. But here it is avowed as an intentional act, the consequence of which could not but operate to the injury of the hook from which it was represented as being a quotation ? unless the misrepresentation was discovered. Or, at least, such was its known tendency. The word. as it stood originally, would not answer his purpose, and therefore. without giving any intimation of what it was originally, he alters it and thereby the sense, and endeavours to makt it pass for the ori- ginal. Where then is the difference when a mati. who finds that a Bank \ote of st. will not serve his purpose, al'.ers (he five into fifty, and presents il as having been originally hfly ? In moral estimation certainly none. The only difference is as to the penalty by course oflaw. But ii is alleged,that trequent instances of similar transformations occur .111 the Chronicle. Even were Ihis so, though I know of none, how would this jusliiy him ? Just as or e .literalion in a Bank iN <>U; won't! justify a similar one in another. The error 11, the Chronicle, 1! it did exisl would no! jnsiuy his. ? find as follows .•—'•And of the Roman seuaie there were Lucius, the Rotnau general, Ca dell and Meyric, Lppidus, Caius, Mel alius, Colin, Quint us, Milvius, Cai ulus, and Quinius it, this passage, in which alone in tliis,page, and I believe, in tiie Chronicle, the name Milvius occurs, I must confess 1 cannot perceive any, even the slightest intimation of a bridge though I confess there is the name MdvÍ! all(! nlso that there was a lvli!vi:w bridge at Rome. If-then it follows that the Rumsn bridge has in this passage been trans formed into a Senator, I fear we sh iil have sumls!. tr-msforiiial4ons to fkcouwt for nearer home For Burn, itlhis Be. Law, quotes a Chief Justice Holt. Now, as on the cUllhlèS of is a If oil bridge, it would in like manner follow, that Born has f r snsforined a bridgeinlo a Chief Jmtice. Whether he has done sfi, or not, is a ponv-t which 1 will leave to your correspondent's accuracy dfinvcstiga lion Ihe validity of tiie argument being equal in both rases. As to the second reason, viz- that ihe name Gabius"d^es nol appear in Ihe Fatli Consulares, or list of Homan o-tistils." Why should it in a lipl v. hrch has so few names hesides those of Consuls? If ihal o:f Porscnli(l is noticed, was it necessary lo notice a col league of inferior, or even of equal rank, when the historians attribute the conduct of the war to Porse-iiiia ? At mosl the omission of the name could only be a reason for doubting the correctness of such a name in another record, but it could be no justifiable one for such a substitution as your correspondent has made. ![I file note on the word Gabius, I had said Gahii belonged to the Taiquins, and hence any of that family may have had the name of Gabius;" whereby il was plainly inticrated i considered the word Gahius, as signifsiag a Gabian, or the Cdbian, a sense consistent with the history and all which only casts a deeper shade OH AC disingenuousness of your correspondent. What could be the motive lo such a pro ceeding, it would have been difficult lo con ceive, had not the writer declared thai his> object in this at tack is io prove the genu- ineness and 3ufhcilticil V of the oldest and most venerable British writer extant." Whe Iher it is the similarity of purpose which ex- cites his veneration or whether your corres- pondent,prov'denll)' anticipatin;; an cstah!ish ment of Popery ill his zeal by vindicating Ihe calumnies of one of ihe 1-. omish Church, who lias prefixed ihe name of (1 sIdas to a forgery, it is not for me to ticieviiiiiie. Thai he is no stranger to the ilomi^h mode of attack, or, as I am more in clined lo think, that the plan is of such origin, is to. my apprehension nol very improbable.— He has opened the trenches at a distance, and ihen assailed the out-works, and as he pro. ceeds towards the ultimate object of demo- lishing the fair fame of Use British primitive church, does not seem to forget the Roman maxim of Dolus an virtus quis in hosf.c rcqui-rat ? To succeed in Ihis object it will indeed be necessary to estahlish the authenticity and genuineness of this libel. Now what do we find in the very first paragraph of this sup- posed Gildas, whose history excites such ve- neration ? Kveu this, that the Romans when I they crossed over into Britain," hroughtwitit them the terms 011 which the Britons were to slIbmit. and met with no resistance tint the British nation being unworlike, tho' Pagans, were subdued, not hy arms or engines of war, as other nations were, but by fhreals alone, or 11 civil prosecutions and exhibited an outward shew of obedience, though grief sunk deep in their hearts." Sue!) is the fidelity of ihis writer. It is well that Cjcsar's Commentaries are yet extant.— He did not find it so. if then this venerable writer, as your correspondent holds him to be, sets out with such an infamous falsehood, what credit can his subsequent assertions merit r Surely none as his. Some few fads, even fo support the pretence of writing his- tory, be was obliged to notice, and of these there are but few. which he has not turned to the disadvantage of the Britons. These mis- rci)t-csetit,,itiotis ii)ay be very get-viceal) Ic to your correspondent's purpose but as he has already given himself plenary indulgence, it might be prudent for him to pause before he proceeds lo a farther extension of it, lest it should become eventually a ruinous evil to himself, for he may be assured that whatever momentary object may he gained by sucii means, ultimately they never prosper. P. ROBERTS. Oswestry, 16/A May, 1813.

F, ol- ihe ivoi-th tvales Gazette. NUMBER III. THE Author of the 1 otlectanea Cambrica has selected many passages trom Gildas, in which he fancies be has discovered a marked attempt to advance the papal power, but which, upou enquiry will be found to have nusllch tenden cv. The first III the author's series of irrefra- gable arguments is the term, » venerabilis mater Ecclesia, which occurs 111 Gildas. which is undoubtedly as applicable to the British as to tiie Roman Church. In his opinion, howe- ver, none, but a professed Koiuanist would have used it; such a shadow of an argument needs no refutation. The next expression which is produced, as demonstrating- a design of establishlog popery, is that of recommend- ing a person -who is slyied, it Prmceptorem pene talius Brilannios elegantem magistrum." This person is supposed by the author to he St. Auslin, in which supposition there is what he calls-a small anachronism-small certainly ttheu compared wilh those of the Brut, Is it probable that the author of this supposed forgery could have conducted it so artfully, and yet he guilty of so gross an error as to recommend a person who came over to Britain many years after the death of Gildas ? The person alluded to by Gildas is, in all probabi liiv, liis own Preceptor flitilkis, wli,se ac-,ide my, it appears trom Leland, was attended by the most distinguished characters of lhat a^e or it might be Cadocus, who was living in thp time of Gildus, and established the monastery "t Llaucarvan, a person highly respected,and the preceptor of illulns. At all events, it t-,iiiiiot I)c Atistiii who I. alitided*lo, .,vii(i w-,iq posterior to Gildas The next irrefragable •argument is, that the British Clergy are ac Cii'-efi of usurping <he chair of St Peler dan r'etri iposl ili usurpantes" i e. ac < ording lo the author s translation, they con sHli'rt'd IL"ir OWl! mc!ropoli!all :'IS their head. a;id would not acknowledge ihe Pope." The context will admit of nosuch interpretation. Peter is here contrasted »ilh Judas, and Ihe British Clergy accused of tollowill lhe exam pie of the latter, under a pretence of obeying that of the former. Sedan Petri immundis pedtbus ussirpantes, sed merilu cujndilalis in Judas tradiloris peslilenfem cathedram deci denies." Mow peculiarly applicable Ihi* was, will appear from Hie lenor of the Epistle, in which he accuses thjm of excessive avarice of which Judas is one of the most awlul in stances in holy writ. A similar mode of ex p'-ession occurs respecting St. Paul. Si huuc apos'oli retmetis in omnibus affectum, ejus quoque cuthedrce legitime nisidere noseatis." I f lhe Papal cnair be the one allndod to in the first instance, it must be the same in the other. A few other passages are introduced, in which St, Peter is mentioned, bu! without lhe lenst reference to the Church of Rome. The exam pie of St. Paul is more frequenl ly insisted upon by Gildas than that of the apostles; all of whom are introduced in this Epistle, with 110 other intent than thai of impressing upon the Clergy the nercssih of reforming their lives, and confirming to the precepls of the Gospel There is nothing said ibroughoiit the whole of it respecting the Bishops ot HOine, or any jurisdiction in ecclesiastial affairs. In IIw hist extract from Gildas occurs the word schism. upon which the author dwells as affordi ng a complete proof of his hypothesis: which howe ver is a most convincing proot of his own pre cipilaucy. Gildas exculpates the Clergy from the charge of schism. The auMior maintains lhat there was no schism in the British Church at that time, Peiagianism having becíI sup- pressed. and, consequently, that the schism here alluded to, was a repugnance to lhe church of Rome. Tins is a complee tinstance of in consistency,' for according to such a sun- position, the British Clergy who are expressly I said to be free from this charge, must have acknowledged the Pope's supremacy, in the time of Gildas. The Pelagian Heresy mosi undoubtedly is that alluded to, which had been suppressed in the early par! of his life Such untenableconjeclucesare the irrefragable arguments by which the author endeavours ] to undermine the auihority of Gildas, So far from proving lhe general tenor of the hislory or Epistle to favour the interests of liie See of lie has not been able to produce a single pass'ige without perverting Ihe sense, in which there appears the most far-fe:ched allusion to the Church of Rome, the Pope bis succcssors or decrees. The sense, it milst be confessed, is not always clear, and the al- lusions frequenl ly unintelligible but to attri hute the whole composition to motives of an unprincipled imposition, nothing can be more preposterous and inconsistent. Few probahly will deny, but that the copies of Gildas may be very incorrect, but no one, 1 am confident, will be persuaded by the author's arguments, if he ever peruses the works themselves, lo consider them as the production of a Roman Ecclesiastic, under the fictitious name of Gil- das, labouring to advance the Papal nower." The author's hypo) hesis depends solely upon his own bare assertions, and a vast deal of pains have been bestowed with a view of up- holding a favourite Theory. Bangor. J.