their maritime habits for any active exertions on shore, and in the other, of the oppressed, dispirited, and effeminate peasantry of Spain and Portugal, whom, with equal felicity, we had characterized as decidedly incapable either of acquiring the discipline, or of displaying the courage necessary for war, outmanœuvre, one after another, all those redoubted captains, and defeat those formidable legions, that had so long proved the terror of Europe, -that he would drive them from the strongest positions, capture their artillery, pursue them into their own country, and seize upon some of the richest provinces of France,-that the Germans, whom, in the same style of profound penetration, we had pronounced to be irrecoverably sunk into the most hopeless and unfeeling apathy, would on a sudden rally round their princes with all the feudal enthusiasm of the 12th century, and that these princes would lead them to victory with a skill worthy the great Frederick, and in a spirit of heroic ardour of which the Swedish Charles need not have been ashamed,-that the Emperor of the Moscovites, after rivalling the gallantry of Richard Cœur de Lion in the field, would enter Paris at the head of the wild tribes of his country with the paternal feelings of Henry IV. that he would convoke the senate, desire them to form a free constitution, and tell them that he would employ the Cossacks from the Don and the Volga, to give effect and support, that the great Emperor Napoleon, who had been repeatedly proved to be invincible, would be conducted to a place of confinement, like a wild beast in a cage, by British and German officers, that he would seek protection under the uniform of Austria, express a wish to become a subject of England, be compelled to mount the white cockade, and to join in the acclamations of the populace for the restoration of Louis XVIII.;-if any gentleman, I say, sir, had been pleased to favour us with a few predictions of this sort, his friends, in the midst of their amazement, would probably have been too prudent to hazard a reply, but they would have inevitably taken private measures for ascertaining in what situation his property was placed, that they might be enabled to adopt the necessary precautions for securing the possession of it to his family.

When we look back then, sir, úpon this strange tissue of errors, misconceptions, prejudices, delusions, and absurdities, in which, during the whole. continuance of this unexampled contest, all of us have been so deeply involved; when we reflect upon the ungraceful arrogance, presumption, and self-sufficiency, with which we have frequently decided upon topics which many of us, both from the nature of our education and from the habits of our private lives, were completely unfitted to understand,-upon the disgusting abuse and scurrility, and the bitter sarcasm and division, with which we have uniformly treated each others opinions, while we had in reality but one object in view, and when the only proper question between us, with respect to the means of its attainment, seems to have been which of us was the most profoundly ignorant of the subject, or the most glaringly and ridiculously in the wrong; but above all, on the singular and unequalled felicity by which we have at length arrived at the point of our mutual destination by paths of which neither of us had even suspected the existence, can we possibly hesitate for one moment in consigning to perpetual oblivion these political asperities, unfounded prepossessions, and useless unmeaning illiberal jealousies and aaversions by which our private society has been so long embittered and divided, and which, in effect, are no more worthy of being remembered than the blunders of a drunken squabble, where, after the parties have kicked, cuffed, and abused each other, till their strength and spirits are exhausted, it generally appears that there was either no cause for the quarrel, or that the combatants were on the same side.

If we have in reality the firmness steadily to adopt this resolution, to convert to its true purpose the memorable lesson we have received, and to introduce, into our future differences of political opinion, something of that decency, forbearance, and gentlemanlike urbanity of argument, which the superior information and civilized manners of the present day are so peculiarly fitted to inspire, perhaps even the blood and treasure which has been lavished during this stern scene of slaughter and desolation may not hereafter be considered as altogether unprofitably thrown away.

H.

ON CALUMNIES AGAINST THE LIVING.

MR EDITOR,

IN your Magazine for January, a paper appeared, which, under the plausible pretext of defending the dead from the voice of calumny, turned out to be a most virulent attack upon two eminent living individuals, who, in their respective departments, have been the zealous and devoted advocates of liberal and enlightened Christian principle. The writer of this has not passed unnoticed in a subsequent Number of your work; but though he has been refuted in a manner indicative both of acuteness and Christian forbearance, yet a few additional observations may not be superfluous, when it is considered, that the subject is of the most interesting nature, involving topics of no less magnitude than those of the Divine administration and the ultimate happiness of

man.

If there are" monopolizing religionists," as Euthus insinuates, "who consider all their fellow-men as the dust, and themselves as the salt, of the earth," it is the more to be lamented. Whatever be their faults, however, they originate not in their adherence to evangelical religion, but in the imperfections of their own characters. That such characters as Euthus alludes to exist, is undeniable; but this no more invalidates the moralising and exalting influence of the principles they professedly recognise, than the existence of ignorant or misguided political fanatics can disprove the beneficial effects of the great and important principles on which the liberty of the subject, and the safety of the monarch, depend. Euthus would have been entitled to the thanks of your readers, had the object of his remarks been to point out the inconsistency of men's professions with their conduct, and to reprobate, with appropriate feeling, the selected objects of his censure. He might have taken an excursive range over the whole aggregate of Christian society, and delineated all their faults, and affectionately advised them to ameliorate their habits. He need not thus have confined his observations to raving enthusiasts. If we may judge from appearances, there are not, at present, very formidable symptoms of the general prevalence of this distemper in the

Christian world. It is true, that we have had our Mrs Buchan in Scotland, and Joanna Southcote in England, who could work upon the hopes and the fears of the credulous, but such deplorable deceit and delusion very rarely occur. Enthusiasm, of a bold and magnanimous kind, requires, in general, so many sacrifices, and is so repulsive to the native selfishness of the human character, that where Christianity is concerned it is indeed a rare virtue. It seems somewhat remarkable, by-the-bye, that enthusiasm is esteemed a noble quality in every department of inquiry, except where we might be most prepared to expect it. Who does not love and admire the enthusiastic love of military glory, of professional eminence, of philosophical investigation, of poetic genius? How strange, that the laws which appear to the world so admirably adapted to regulate our intellectual constitutions, and to concentrate every la tent energy, should be viewed as phrenetical impulses whenever a man's nobler destiny begins to occupy his reflections, and excite the sublimest emotions of his heart! One would imagine that, if there be any thing noble and elevating in enthusiasm, it is when a man is led to expatiate in thought over the track of eternity, and the magnitude of those great and universal interests which lie within the compass of religion."

But leaving general observation, let us examine the remarks of Euthus on Mr Wilberforce. The crime, it seems, with which Mr Wilberforce is chargeable is, that of "assaulting the good name of Dr Robertson with malevolence, and of blowing the breath of unmerited scandal upon his fame!" It is impossible to appreciate too highly the literary character of Dr Robertson. He is, doubtless, the most elegant, and perhaps the most_instructive, of modern historians. But as it does not necessarily follow, that because an author possesses great excellencies, he is therefore faultless; so, on the other hand, it is neither very candid nor very legitimate reasoning, to ascribe the animadversions of a conscientious writer to motives the most unworthy and degrading. Had Euthus consulted the appendix to that very interesting account of Dr Robertson with which Mr Stewart has favoured the world, he would have

found some reason to modify the terms in which he has chosen to speak of Mr Wilberforce. He would have discovered, from the perusal of that gentleman's letters to Dr Robertson, that Mr Wilberforce entertained for his character sentiments of the highest esteem and veneration, and that no man would have been less likely than he, to "assault the good name of Dr Robertson with malevolence, or to blow the breath of unmerited scandal upon his fame."

From the extreme virulence of Euthus's remarks, such as have not seen Mr Wilberforce's book would naturally conclude that he has brought against Dr Robertson some unfounded charge, involving a high degree of moral turpitude. Indeed, the most charitable inference we can make is, that Euthus cherishes a feeling of such superstitious reverence for the departed, that the slightest insinuation of their liability to error, carries with it, to his mind, all the horrors of impiety; yet even thus we can scarcely explain, how asseverations, so strong and blameable as those which Euthus has employed, are compatible with his pretended esteem for the general character of the man he thus calumniates. But it is time that Mr Wilberforce should speak for himself.

In his work on the spirit of Christianity, that illustrious man expresses his sincere regret, that there should have existed such a close and intimate connexion between professed unbelievers and those who recognise the authority of revelation, "considering themselves as more closely united to them by literature, than severed from them by the widest religious differences." In a note connected with this subject, Mr Wilberforce adds,

"It is with pain that the author finds himself compelled to place so great a writer as Dr Robertson in this class. But to say nothing (he continues) of his phlegmatic account of the Reformation (a subject which we should have thought likely to excite in any one, who united the character of a Christian divine with that of an historian, some warmth of pious gratitude for the good providence of God); to pass over also the ambiguity in which he leaves his readers as to his opinion of the authenticity of the Mosaic chronology, in his disquisitions on the trade of India; his letters to Mr Gibbon, lately published, cannot but excite emotions of regret and shame in every sincere Christian. The author hopes, that he

has so far explained his sentiments as to render it almost unnecessary to remark, what, however, to prevent misconstruction, he must here declare, that so far from approving, he must be understood decidedly to condemn, a hot, a contentious, much more an abusive manner of opposing or of speaking of the assailants of Christianity. The apostle's direction, in this respect, cannot be too much attended to. The servant of the Lord must not strive, but be gentle unto all men; apt to teach, patient; in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give the truth." 2 Timothy ii. 24. 25.—( View them repentance to the acknowledging of of Christianity, chap. vi.)

Let the reader judge whether Euthus is justifiable in the "abuse which he has poured upon the great and good of his own' times." We ask him, whether this acute and deeply Christian writer has evinced “ any malevolence, or unmerited scandal," in any thing he has here said? Does he not declare that it is with pain he has asserted this? Does he not even apparently apologise for the observations he has made, by referring to an apostolical precept, the very allusion to which seems to involve a wish, if not a conviction, that the conduct he has censured may have resulted rather from a mistaken conception of the precise limits of Christian charity, than from any disregard to the interests of truth and righteousness. Mr Wilberforce has not disapproved of Dr Robertson's writings in a loose indefinite manner, but has given distinct, and, to many, the most satisfactory reasons for is disapprobation. We would ask uthus, if Dr Robertson's account of the Reformation, how distinguished soever by its excellence as a literary composition, does not admit of improvement? Will Euthus maintain, that the philosophic of our great historian, might not have discernments, and unrivalled eloquence, been rendered more deserving of general admiration, if, in the course of his statements, the one had been occasionally devoted to the developement of the principles by which the Divine administration is obviously conducted, and the other in warming the heart with impressive displays of the Divine goodness? Not that he has entirely neglected to do this, but surely his

most devoted admirer must acknowledge, that these topics might have been introduced much more frequently, in the course of his investigations,

than they have been. Is it not also true, that a more explicit reference might have been made to the authenticity and validity of the Mosaic chronology, if any reference was made at all? There can exist no doubt, in any unprejudiced mind, of Dr Robertson's belief of the truths of revealed religion; and although, in a disquisition upon India, he was perhaps not necessitated to vindicate the Mosaic chronology from the speculations of sceptical geologists, or professed infidels, yet it is not the less desirable that he had expressed his decided conviction of this important truth, and thus added his unequivocal testimony to those of preceding inquirers.

As to Dr Robertson's correspondence with Mr Gibbon, if it does not excite the emotion of shame (which is a very complex feeling), it certainly ought to occasion regret. In these letters, it is indeed to be lamented that Dr Robertson did not assume a firmer and more decisive aspect, and thus shew, that while they were connected by the ties of friendship (a friendship mutually resulting from the affinity of their literary pursuits), they were widely dissimilar in their views of Christian truth and moral obligation. Is it not possible that this distinguished and amiable writer was intimidated, in some degree, from invariably expressing his own sentiments, by the apprehension of encountering the opposition or the sneer of these and similar contemporaries? Whatever be in this, it is evident, that too much intercourse with the enemies of the truth exposes a man to peculiar temptations; and if, in the present condition of humanity, it requires the most unremitting vigilance to rise superior to the common evils" which flesh is heir to," a still harder conflict must be endured for the ascendancy of Christian principle, when it comes in frequent contact with genius and talent devoted to the support of sophistry and irreligion. What, but an indistinct or feeble perception of the grand and distinguishing features of Christian morality, together with a blind veneration for the character of his friend, could have induced the profound and ingenious Dr Adam Smith to identify the historian of England with all that is attainable in human perfectibility? There can be little doubt, that an excessive defe

rence to such allies in the pursuits of philosophy, led the same author to expunge from subsequent editions of his Theory of Moral Sentiments a paragraph, which would have done more to ennoble and endear his philosophic character in the eye of the Christian moralist, than the most ingenious reasonings which he has adduced in support of his truly fascinating and elegant theory. Without, however, enlarging on the imperceptible, but no less dangerous, influence to which all are exposed who make intellectual superiority the exclusive object of their reverence, it is surely more charitable to trace any defects in Dr Robertson's statements to such feelings, than to any premeditated design. We cannot but regret, however, that he has not contemplated the Divinity more frequently, in all the extent of His presiding and controlling energy. We cannot but regret, that, amidst his anxiety to trace effects to their causes, and his wonderful penetration in ascertaining them, he has not brought more prominently before the eye of contemplation the agency of the Eternal Mind subordinating alike the great and the little to the immutable arrangements of perfect wisdom. All this Dr Robertson might have done, without lessening his character either as a historian or a philosopher, while his works would have been appealed to by distant posterity, as combining every quality which can endear the scholar and the Christian. But more than enough has been advanced, to shew that Mr W. has not in the least detracted from the talents or the worth of our illustrious countryman, and that the remarks which have called forth so much indignation on the part of Euthus amount merely to this, that Dr Robertson's memory would, in the opinion of Mr Wilberforce, have been encircled with a still more resplendent lustre, if he had recognised the paramount authority of Christianity more uniformly in his writings and his friendships.

The attack of Euthus on Mr Foster is equally unjust. "This able writer," says Euthus, "has devoted one of his essays to shew that evangelical religion has at all times been despised by men of taste and genius." It is not intended to fill your pages with quotations from Mr Foster; but when your readers refer to the essays of this profound

writer, they will be somewhat surprised to find that there is no such assertion in the book. Mr Foster, in the course of a disquisition on the dislike of men of taste to evangelical religion, and the circumstances which have operated to produce and strengthen it, adverts to the influence of the common systems of education on the general character, and takes occasion to contrast the schools of polite literature with the school of Christ and his apostles (if the expression may be used), and to reprobate with manly indignation, but at the same time with great discernment, the highly unchristian ethics of some of our most admired writers. He has not been deterred by the high and merited fame of even Addison and Johnson, from pointing out what he conceived to be defective in both. And what, we would ask, is so very reprehensible in all this? Mr Foster, assuming, as he well deserves to do, the lofty tone of a Christian moralist, shews, that the peculiar and prominent features which distinguish the religion of the New Testament from every human system have been often thrown into the shade, while a superstructure has been reared of elements which neither reflect the light nor diffuse the warmth of "a hope full of immortality." And is there no truth in this statement? Have Addison and Johnson invariably discovered that sublime simplicity of Christian sentiment and feeling throughout their writings, which it is the grand prerogative of the religion of the Bible to excite and cherish? We are quite aware of the uncommon excellence which distinguishes both these writers, and conceive that the man who does not appreciate their labours and revere their memory is unworthy to be reasoned with. Yet these men are heathens, Euthus exultingly exclaims, in the opinion of Mr John Foster! This is a gross misstatement. Of Mr Addison Mr Foster says, "that he wrote a book expressly in defence of the religion of Christ; (Query, Is this to be a heathen?) though it is added, with great propriety, "but to be the dignified advocate of a cause, and to be its humble disciple, may be very different things." With regard to Dr Johnson it is said, "But few of his speculations comparatively tend to beguile the reader and admirer into that spirit which, on VOL. III.

turning to the instructions of Jesus Christ and his apostles, would feel estrangement or disgust; and he has more explicit and solemn references to the grand purpose of human life, to a future judgment, and to eternity, than almost any other of our elegant moralists has had the piety or the courage to make." So much for the candour of Euthus.

The ascendancy which such authors as Addison and Johnson have so generally obtained over the public mind, so far from forming a barrier against the subjection of their principles to a rigid examination, seems to furnish the best apology for any attempt to invalidate their claims to this superiority. To a believer in revealed religion it is superfluous to say, that there is one and but one standard, from which there can be no appeal. All the speculations of moralists, however ingenious or sublime, if, when weighed in the balance of the sanctuary, they are found wanting, must be rejected as unscriptural, and consequently as unsafe. A man in possession of an authenticated communication from "the Father of Light" is not at liberty to pay an undue deference to any human authority, even though it may have obtained the unqualified approbation of the proudest names in the records of science and wisdom. He may, and if he has any susceptibility of taste or of feeling, he must, venerate superior talent, and yield to the " inspirations of genius," and feel grateful, that while he is forced to contemplate in the world the baseness of some pursuits and the insignificance of others, his beclouded vision may be relieved by surveying the luminaries of the world-those men of vigorous intellects and elevated views, who, preeminent in the pursuits "to which the charms of lofty contemplation have allured" them, have illustrated what was formerly obscure, evinced a magnanimous contempt of whatever is associated with meanness or vice, and diffused over their appropriated departments of investigation the concentrated rays of genius and learning. It must not be forgotten, however, that there are assigned limits, beyond which we must not venture. It is possible, that after we have made great advances toward an appropriation of sentiment, and feel that our moral perceptions are on the very verge of a sympathetic 3 D