De Gerando among the French metaphysicians, by the most competent judge upon such subjects of this, or perhaps any, age. As a writer, it is perhaps true, that D'Alembert is cold; but so were Middleton, Hume, and others, whom it would be idle to depreciate. He is certainly acute, discriminating, and elegant. His éloges are generally interesting; and the conclusion of that upon M. de Sacy is exceedingly eloquent. Yet it is by an effort of candour that we make these concessions. We have lately had the misfortune to read for the first time some of this writer's correspondence with Frederick the second, and the temerity of some passages, in which he insolently impeaches and ridicules-not Christianity, for that all the philosophers thought they were privileged to insult-but the ordinary providence and oeconomy of God, is so offensive, that we could almost wish that the very name of the writer and all his productions were buried in oblivion. Better were it that science and literature should perish for ever; better that men should crawl upon the earth in brutish stupidity and ignorance; than that the best gifts of God should be employed by his ungrateful creatures to desecrate his name and insult his goodness. Is there in the universe a spectacle so wretched, so disgusting, so contemptible, as that of a being dependant for his hourly existence on the will of his Creator, and spending a portion of the little breath he has in baspheming him?

Among the lesser writers noticed in this work before us, there are several with whom we are wholly unacquainted. Wherever we happen to possess the means of judging, we have almost always been struck with the great justness as well as originality of the criticisms here presented to us.-Of Marivana the author says, "that he does not give the result of his observation, but the act of observation itself. A scene of Moliere is a representation of nature; a scene of Marivana is a commentary upon it." Nothing can be more accurate or more happy.

Thomas, we believe, all are agreed to consider as a vapid, elaborate and tedious declaimer.

"Marmontel," says our author, "tried to be a poet, and will' only leave the reputation of a prose-writer; but that he has merited; he has always facility and elegance." It is perfectly provoking, and a marvellous instance of the mischiefs of bad company, that Marmontel, who was formed by nature to write pretty little stories, and really succeeded admirably, could not be satisfied without interrupting his narratives to read lectures to priests and princes. One quite longs to have him slightly whipped for his vagrancy, and passed to his parish.

There is much good criticism on La Harpe's writings in the 157th page, but the subject is not considerable enough to deserve an extract. La Harpe was undoubtedly a man of talents, and his voluminous correspondence, though stuffed with trifles, is amusing, because it makes us acquainted with all the follies of Paris during his day. It contains too the most authentic account of the last days of Voltaire with which we happen to be acquainted. The Eloge du Catinat, which carried the prize in the academy against Monsieur Guibert, to the great indignation of Mademoiselle de L'Espinasse, has been, we think, quite as much admired as it deserves. It is a correct, and, in parts, though rarely, an eloquent composition; but it has no decisive traits of genius. By far the finest piece of La Harpe's, which we recollect to have seen, is a most impassioned and energetic declamation against the philosophers, written in the last years of the author's life; and after he had lived to see what desolation their profligate speculations in religion, morals, and politics, had contributed to bring down upon France. It is the more valuable because the writer had, during many years of his life, lived in much familiarity with the sect, and probably favoured their principles. It is in the Catilinarian style, and is extremely powerful.

We have now done with writers; but it is due to our readers to afford them an opportunity of contemplating the character and style of the writer before us in his native dress, not disguised as hitherto by the baldness of a hasty translation. We shall give only a single passage, which suffers by being broken away from the context; yet it affords a good specimen of the style of the writer both in dissertation and eloquence.

"Si nous avions eu a examiner la litterature des republiques anciennes, nous aurions dû placer les orateurs avant les ecrivains, et avant ceux qui ont employé leur talent a composer des livres; chez eux l'eloquence parlée avait quelque chose de plus vrai et de plus pénétrant, puisqu'elle faisait, pour ainsi dire, partie de la personne ; la parole était pour les orateurs une sorte d'action; car ils en usaient dans les relations directes avec les hommes. Elle sortait du domaine de l'imagination, pour se confondre entierement, avec le caractère, les opinions ou les interets; mais, dans nos mœurs les orateurs se rapprochaient beaucoup des littérateurs; il n'y avait pas d'arène ou l'éloquence pût servir d'arme pour défendre des sentimens personnels, ou elle pût briller dans le combat, et devenir par là pleine d'une complete realite. Les hommes auxquels il était permis de parler, le devaient toujours faire dans une position donnee; le caractère de leur langage, la nature de leurs idées étaient determinés d'avance. La parole était pour eux une partie de la profession qu'ils remplis saient dans la societè; il fallait parler suivant son rôle et non suivant son sentiment.

"Cependant, un prêtre qui s'est toujours renfermé dans son saint ministère, que le monde n'a jamais vu dans ses rangs frivoles, qui vivant dans le sanctuaire, n'a jamais fait entendre d'autres paroles, que la parole de Dieu, doit atteindre mieux que tout autre, à la plus sublime éloquence. Comme les orateurs anciens, c'est aussi sa vraie pensée, celle du fond du son cœur, qu'il veut persuader aux hommes. Mais combien elle est plus grande et plus touchante que toutes celles qui se rapportent aux intérêts humains! Quels mots a pronouncer, que la morte et l'eternite! L'honneur, la liberté, la patrie, les plus nobles idées des hommes, se voyent abaisser quand on Songe a l'abîine ou elles vont se perdre. Qu'ils ont été heureux ceux qui ont pu voir Bossuet orné de ses cheveux blancs, et du souvenir de ses vertus, s'élever dans la chaire, en face du cercueil du grande Condé, et consacrer les louanges de la gloire périssable, en les associant aux louanges de la gloire éternelle ! Jamais sans doute la parole humaine n'a été aussi grande, et nous ne pensons pas que l'imagination puisse se créer un plus sublime spectacle.

"Mais le temps de l'éloquence réligieuse etait passé, les orateurs et l'auditoire avaient changé; la foi était éteinte chez la plupart des hommes, réfroidie ou timide chez les autres. On nese portait plus dans les temples pour y'entendre prêcher des verites établies et respectées au fond du cœur; on n'y arrivait plus avec un sentiment de conformité et de sympathie; tout ou contraire on y'était conduit par une curiosité, sans bienveillance. On venait épier la parole sainte, et non point s'en pénétrer; chacun voulait savoir si un orateur se tirerait habilement de la difficulte de parler sur des choses qui n'obtenaient plus ni croyance ni vénération; un sermon était écouté dans la même disposition qu'un discours academique.

"Pour combattre ce penchant malheureux des esprits, il eût faller des orateurs remplis de chaleur et d'audace, profonds dans la science de la religion, et animés par une foi, que l'incredulité du siecle afflige et n'intimide pas; mais par malheur le public agit toujours sur ceux qui lui parlent, plus que ceux-ci n'agissent sur lui. D'ordinaire, pour plaire aux hommes, et pour produire sur eux un effet plus sûr, on entre dans leur sentiment, ou du moins on cherche a ne le point blesser; ainsi les predicateurs du dix-huitieme siecle ressentaient l'effect de l'esprit general. C'était avec une sorte de crainte et de réserve qu'ils remplissaient leur saint ministère; ils avoient peur de heurter la monde; ils tachaient de se faire pardonner et de leur profession et leurs discours. S'accommodant au goût de l'auditoire, ils fuyaient tout ce qui se rapprochait du dogme et des principes positifs de la religion, ils s'étendaient avec plus de complaisance sur ce qui avait rapport a la morale purement humaine, et la religion n'était employée que comme un accessoire convenu, qu'il fallait dissimuler le plus adroitement possible pour éviter la dérision; ils rougissaient de l'E'vangile, au lieu de le confesser hardiment.

"Cette disposition équivoque ne saurait inspirer l'eloquence. D'ailleurs que de ressources ils s'interdisaient en renoncant à la

Ce

doctrine pour s'occuper de la morale! Croyaient-ils pouvoir rem placer par des ressorts purement humains, les moyens que fournit la religion pour frapper l'imagination et pour émouvior les ames. style orné et mondain, cette élégance des beaux esprits, pouvaient-ils approcher des ressources que trouve l'orateur, vraiment chrétien dans le langage imposant et mysterieux des livres saints? L'Eloquence de la chaire perdit ces formes simples et presque vulgaires, qui rendaient les pensées plus fortes et plus terribles, qui lui imprimaient un caractère particulier, et la tiraient de pair d'avec les compositions des écrivains; elle perdit aussi cette puissante érudition qui rappelait sans cesse, soit les souvenirs divins de l'Ecriture, soit les souvenirs touchans des premiers âges de la religion, le génie des peres de l'église, les actes des martyrs, ou la dévotion des solitaires. Les prédicateurs, de pontifes qu'ils etaient, devinrent des litteratures. Et si l'on êut voulu retrouver le vrai caractère de l'eloquence sacrée, il eut faller le chercher, non parmi les plus grands et les plus habiles de l'église, mais chez quelque missionaire simple et farouche, isolé, par ces mœurs, de toutes les influences du siecle." (P. 163—165.)

After the extracts which we have given, especially the last, it is needless to say much of the writer. Our praise cannot add to his reputation, nor our criticism detract from it. But, in truth, we are little disposed to criticise. The rare combination of talents which were requisite for the composition of this little volume is what we contemplate with delight; and they have been employed by their possessor so honourably, with such unvarying candour and respect for truth, that we feel a sentiment of reverence, mingling with and exalting the admiration which his genius and attainments enable him to command.

But before we close this long article we must be allowed a few hasty remarks on some peculiarities which distinguished French philosophy during the eighteenth century. One naturally conceives of philosophers as of a serious reflective class of men: the subjects about which they are conversant are both grave and important; the investigation of truth necessarily demands the exercise of the severer powers of the understanding; and the results of their enquiries so nearly affect the happiness of the human race, that the alliance of frivolity with such pursuits exhibits an incongruity of ideas that would be ridiculous if it were not shocking; a confusion of images too monstrous to be comical. In perusing the works of the French writers who called themselves philosophers during the last age, the first feeling is a sort of distressing amazement, a kind of horrible surprise; such as overtakes us on beholding an extravagance of nature, or which travellers are said to experience on entering the mansion of the prince Palagonia in Sicily, who has crowded into his rooms every fantastic

image which a depraved and unnatural fancy could assort. These men write of God; of creation, providence, redemption; of man and virtue; of life, death, and eternity;-ideas of which the very names are awful ;—to which the mind approaches purified and chastized by reverence ;-and they are as merry as monkeys. They chatter and grin, and talk of the government of the universe, and jest a little, and come back with a light turn to the origin of morals, and then a clever story against priestcraft, and a merry pass at providence, and-adieu mon cher philosophe! What shall we say to reasoners such as these? Were they sane? Is it rational for beings who can think and feel, who hope, and fear, and suffer,— for mortal beings, who in a few years must mingle with the dust they tread, to sport with the things in which they are the most vitally concerned, and which may determine their happiness or misery for ever? Is it decent for a feeble creature, crawling upon the earth for a moment, and ready to sink under the pressure of the very atmosphere he breathes, to canvass with levity the ways of his Creator, and clap or hiss as if it were a scene at the opera? I this be the fruit of knowledge, indeed "ignorance is bliss." I this be philosophy, it is that of the petites maisons.

We always suppose philosophers to be possessed of some fixed principles, whether right or wrong; a system, a centre of opinions. Else why do they think; what is the value of reflection, if they are exactly as ignorant as their neighbours? If philosophers therefore attack existing institutions or sentiments, though we may doubt their wisdom, we at least give them credit for wishing to substitute notions which they think sounder and more valuable. But the philosophes of France had no opinions at all; they were mere haters; they attacked every thing and recommended nothing. We have difficulties enough to perplex us upon any hypothesis; but these men, instead of applying their skill to unravel the entanglement, only wove new labyrinths in every direction. They contradicted one another, and they contradicted themselves;

"Chaos umpire sits,

And by decision more embroils the fray." Neither in the works of the philosophical writers of France considered as a body, nor in the productions of the individuals, is there any thing to be found worthy of the name of a religious and moral system; unless Helvetius's paradoxes, which they all laughed at, are to claim such a character. They dismissed, indeed, Revelation by general consent, as quite unworthy of the just ideas of a Deity; and having mastered so easily the great despot which had subdued mankind, it was to be imagined that they would open some peculiarly noble and comprehensive views of God and his