Charles Leslie, or Lesley. Born at Dublin, Ireland, July 17, 1650: died at Glaslough, Monaghan, Ireland, April 13, 1722. A British nonjuror (Jacobite) and controversialist. He was an opponent of William III. whom he attacked in a pamphlet “Gallienus Redivivus, or Murther will out” (1695; a principal authority on the Glencoe massacre), of Burnet (“Tempora mutantur,” 1689), Tillotson, and others. He also attacked the Quakers (“The Snake in the Grass, or Satan transformed into an Angel of Light” (1696), and other pamphlets) and the Jews, and engaged in political controversies. His best-known work is “A Short and Easy Method with the Deists” (1698). He was obliged to leave England (1711) to avoid arrest on account of his political opinions, and later joined the household of the Pretender, whom he ardently supported.

General

  Leslie, a pert writer, with some wit and learning, insulted the government every week with the grossest abuse. His style and manner, both of which were illiberal, was imitated by Ridpath, De Foe, Dunton, and others of the opposite party.

  Leslie was a reasoner, and a reasoner who was not to be reasoned against.

  Leslie had much learning, but more faction; some wit, but more scurrility.

  A contemporary of Tillotson, but possessed of greater acumen, and exhibiting a more condensed and logical style, he was perhaps the ablest defender of orthodoxy at the close of the seventeenth century. Ever ardent and active in what he conceived to be the cause of vital religion, his heart and head were constantly excited to the bringing forth of those admirable works which appear to bear the stamp of immortality. No single theological work has perhaps received so much applause as his “Short and Easy Method with the Deists.”

  No book at this period, among many that were written, reached so high a reputation in England as Leslie’s “Short Method with the Deists,” published in 1694; in which he has started an argument, pursued with more critical analysis by others, on the peculiarly distinctive marks of credibility that pertain to the scriptural miracles. The authenticity of this little treatise has been idly questioned on the Continent, for no better reason than that a translation of it has been published in a posthumous edition (1732) of the works of Saint Real, who died in 1692. But posthumous editions are never deemed of sufficient authority to establish a literary title against possession; and Prosper Marchand informs us that several other tracts, in this edition of Saint Real, are erroneously ascribed to him. The internal evidence that the “Short Method” was written by a Protestant should be conclusive.

  An acute controversialist in favour of the Church of England.

  His abilities and his connections were such that he might easily have obtained high preferment in the Church of England. But he took his place in the front rank of the Jacobite body, and remained there steadfastly, through all the dangers and vicissitudes of three and thirty troubled years. Though constantly engaged in theological controversy with Deists, Jews, Socinians, Presbyterians, Papists, and Quakers, he found time to be one of the most voluminous political writers of the age. Of all the nonjuring clergy he was the best qualified to discuss constitutional questions. For before he had taken orders, he had resided long in the Temple, and had been studying English history and law, while most of the other chiefs of the schism had been pouring over the Acts of Chalcedon, or seeking for wisdom in the Targum of Onkelos.

  The works of this remarkable man have been collected in seven volumes (Oxford, 1832), and it must be allowed that they place their author very high in the list of controversial writers, the ingenuity of the arguments being only equalled by the keenness and pertinacity with which they are pursued.

  Leslie was pronounced by Johnson to have been the only nonjuror who could reason. He was, in fact, no despicable master of the art of expressing pithy arguments in vigorous English. His honourable independence of character attached him to the fortunes of a small and declining party; whilst his pugnacity plunged him into controversies with almost every section of the majority. Besides numerous political skirmishes, he found time to carry on operations against Quakers, Deists, Socinians, Jews, and Papists. The far more surprising circumstance is stated, that he had the almost unique honour of converting several of his antagonists. Amongst those who surrendered to his prowess was Gildon, who put forth his recantation some years afterwards in a flabby repetition of the regular commonplaces, called the “Deist’s Manual.” The pleasure of dragging a captive infidel in triumph must have been diminished by the consciousness that he was so poor a creature; but we might turn over a long list of controversial writers without finding one who had even a Gildon to boast of.

  Leslie wrote an easy and lively style, had some learning and wit, and more scurrility, and was adroit at logical fence. He was a most unsparing controversialist, Swift, while professing abhorrence of his political principles, warmly praised his services to the Anglican church. Johnson declared him the only reasoner among the nonjurors, and “a reasoner who was not to be reasoned against.”