« AnteriorContinuar »
mates, to see an eagle's nest, upon so minutely investigated. I need the summit of a dead tree in the not now attempt to explain to yon neighbourhood of the school, during the emotion of the widow of the the time of the incubation of that Irish patriot, on hearing those songs bird. The daughter of the farmer, which were intertwined with every in whose field the tree stood, and recollection of her heart, with her with whom I became acquainted, husband's unhappy death. (He cut married, and settled in this city his throat an hour before he was (Philadelphia) about forty years ago. to be led to the scaffold.) The in our occasional intercourse, we simple explanation of that, and now and then spoke of the innocent analogous phenomena, is, you now haunts and rural pleasures of our know, the diffusion of the reality of youth, and, among other things, of the suggesting object over the feelthe eagle's nest in her father's field. ings suggested. A few years ago, I was called to In this explanation of a very intervisit this woman, when she was in esting phenomenon, which it would the lowest stage of typhus fever. be impertinent, with you, to endeavour Upon entering her room, I caught to make plainer, you see, my dear her eye, and, with a cheerful tone of friend, there is no distorting of facts, voice, said only—the eagle's nest. She or straining of theory, in order to instantly seized my hand, without give plausibility to a paradoxical hybeing able to speak, and discovered pothesis. There is nothing assumed strong emotions of pleasure in her in it, beyond what takes place every countenance, probably from a sudulen time we direct our eyes to some obassociation of all her domestie con- ject, which, you know, we are doing nexions and enjoyments with the three-fourths of our ordinary life. words I had uttered. From that Many every-day occurrences which time she began to recover. She is appeared to you strange and unacnow. living, and seldom fails, when countable, will now, that you have we meet, to salute me with the echo the key of their apparent anomaly, of-the eagle's nest !.”
be neither one nor the other. The This is a beautiful and indeed im- effect which the sound of the national portant instance of the effect of an air, first heard amid his native hills, interesting object of external sense, has on the Swiss soldier, will no in suddenly awakening its associate longer surprise you, when you bring • images; and well illustrates “ the to mind that that sound is not then utility of a knowledge of the facul- merely the remombrance of a wellties of the mind to a physician.” known air, but a real constituent of a Dr. Rush reports this case in his lec- complex whole of delightful emoture under that: head. Apply Mr.. tion. The emotion wliich our young Stewart's explanation to this case, friend P. displays at the sight of a and you will see how lamentably it red shawl, and the more sad one that fails. On the contrary, how clear and is excited in. him, when the songintelligible it appears wheir examined!“ Home, sweet Home,” is sung, according to Dr. Brown's simple which you know he cannot altogether theory: the diffusion of the reality disguise even in the bustle of a of the external object (Dr. Rush), crowded theatre, will no longer apone part of a group of interesting re- pear mysterious to you, when you membrances; over the awakened as reflect that the reality of these per sociate conceptions, the remaining ceptions of sight and sound is difportion of the group or complex fused over feelings which, I fear, have whole. I need not dwell upon the too strong a hold of his mind. By suddenness of the effect, or on the the bye; it puzzled me very much, many important inferences that may wliy he should be affected by that be deduced from this interesting case; or any other song, for his friends but leave itsto yourself to reflect on. say he has no taste for music; and
You are now, I presume, able to you and I know his: associations apply to your own case the remarks with the word-home, cannot be of I have made, which, indeed, have such a nature as to give tenderness extended to a greater length than It to their recollection. intended; but the subject is ex I'must break off abruptly, but shall tremely interesting, and one that, as perhaps recur to the subject: far as I know, has not been before
NOTES FROM THE POCKET-BOOK OF A LATE OPIUM-EATER.
FALSIFICATION OF THE HISTORY OF ENGLAND. I am myself, and always have 1648. This doctrine is the main pilbeen, a member of the Church of lar of our constitution, and perhaps England, and am grieved to hear the the finest discovery that was ever many attacks against the Church, made in the theory of government. [frequently most illiberal attacks) Hitherto the doctrine that the King which not so much religion as politi- can do no wrong had been used not to cal rancor gives birth to in every protect the indispensable sanctity of third journal that I take up. This Í the king's constitutional character, say to acquit myself of all dishonore but to protect the wrong. Used in able feelings, such as I would abhor this way, it was a maxim of Oriental to cooperate with, in bringing a very despotism and fit only for a nation heavy charge against that great body where law had no empire. Many of in its literary capacity-Whosoever the illustrious patriots of the Great has reflected on the history of the Parliament saw this; and felt the neEnglish constitution-must be aware cessity of abolishing a maxim so fatal that the most important stage of it's to the just liberties of the people. developement lies within the reign of But some of them fell into the oppoCharles I. It is true that the judi- site error of supposing that this abocial execution of that prince has been lition could be effected only by the allowed by many persons to vitiate direct negation of it; their maxim all that was done by the heroic par- accordingly was". The king can do liament of November 1640: and the wrong", i. e. is responsible in his ordinary histories of England assume own person. In this great error even as a matter of course that the whole the illustrious wife of Col. Hutchinperiod of parliamentary history son participated"; and accordingly through those times is to be regarded she taxes those of her own party who as a period of confusion. Our con- scrupled to accede to the new maxim, stitution, say they, was formed in and still adhered to the old one, with 1688-9. Meantime it is evident to unconscientious dealing. But she any reflecting man that the revolu- misapprehended their meaning, and tion simply re-affirmed the principles failed to see where they laid the emdeveloped in the strife between the phasis : the emphasis was not laid, two great parties which had arisen in as it was by the royal party, on the the reign of James I, and had ripen- words “ can do no wrong”—but on ed and come to issue with each other “ The king": that is, wrong may in the reign of his son. Our consti- be done; and in the king's name; tution was not a birth of a single in- but it cannot be the king who did stant, as they would represent it, but it [the king cannot constitutionally a gradual growth and developement be supposed the person who did through a long tract of time. In par- it]. By this exquisite political reticular the doctrine of the king's vi- finement, the old tyrannical maxim carious responsibility in the person of was disarmed of it's sting ; and the his ministers, which first gave a sane entire redress of all wrong, so indisand salutary meaning to the doctrine pensable to the popular liberty, was of the king's personal irresponsibility brought into perfect reconciliation [“ The king can do no wrong"), with the entire inviolability of the soarose undeniably between 1640 and vereign, which is no less indispensa
* This is remarked by her editor and descendant Julius Hutchinson, who adds some words to this effect" that if the patriots of that day were the inventors of the maxim [The king can do no wrong), we are much indebted to them.” The patriots certainly did not invent the maxim, for they found it already current: but they gave it it's new and constitutional sense. I refer to the book however, as I do to almost all books in these notes, from memory; writing most of them in situations where I have no access to books. -By the way, Charles I., who used the maxim in the most odious sense, furnished the most colorable excuse for his own execution. He constantly maintained the irresponsibi. lity of his ministers : but, if that were conceded, it would then follow that the king must be made responsible in his own person :-and that construction led of necessity to his trial and death. Dec. 1824.
ble to the popular liberty. There is amongst hundreds of illustrations moreover a double wisdom in the new more respectable than Dr. Grey's I sense: for not only is one object [the will refer the reader to a work of our redress of wrong] secured in con owndays, the Ecclesiastical Biography junction with another object [the [in part a republication of Walton's King's inviolability] hitherto held ir- Lives] edited by the present master reconcileable, but even with a view of Trinity College, Cambridge, who to the first object alone a much more is held in the highest esteem whereffectual means is applied, because ever he is known, and is I am perone which leads to no schism in the suaded perfectly conscientious and as state, than could have been applied impartial as in such a case it is posby the blank negation of the maxim; sible for a high churchman to be. i. e. by lodging the responsibility ex Yet so it is that there is scarcely one actly where the executive power of the notes having any political re[ergo the power of resisting this re- ference to the period of 1640-60 sponsibility] was lodged. Here which is not disfigured by unjust then is one example in illustration of prejudices: and the amount of the my thesis—that the English consti- moral which the learned editor tution was in a great measure gradu- grounds upon the documents before ·ally evolved in the contest between him—is this, that the young student the different parties in the reign of is to cherish the deepest abhorrence Charles I. Now, if this be so, it fol- and contempt of all who had any lows that for constitutional history share on the parliamentary side in no period is so important as that: the “confusions” of the period from and indeed, though it is true that the 1640 to 1660: that is to say of men Revolution is the great æra for the to whose immortal exertions it was constitutional historian, because he owing that the very revolution of there first finds the constitution fully 1688, which Dr. W. will be the developed as the “ bright consum- first to applaud, found us with mate flower,” and what is equally any such stock of political principles important he there first finds the or feelings as could make a beneficial principles of our constitution ratified revolution possible. Where, let me by a competent authority,-yet, to ask, would have been the willingness trace the root and growth of the con of some Tories to construe the flight stitution, the three reigns immedi- of James II. into a virtual act of abately preceding are still more pro- dication, or to consider even the most perly the objects of his study. In formal act of abdication binding proportion then as the reign of against the king,-had not the great Charles I is important to the history struggle of Charles's days gradually of our constitution, in that pro- substituted in the minds of all parties portion are those to be taxed with a rational veneration of the king's office the most dangerous of all possible for the old superstition in behalf of the falsifications of our history, who have king's person, which would have promisrepresented either the facts or the tected him from the effects of any acts principles of those times. Now I af- however solemnly performed which firm that the clergy of the Church of affected injuriously either his own inEngland have been in a perpetual terests or the liberties of his people. conspiracy since the era of the re- — Tempora mutantur: nos et mulastoration to misrepresent both. As mur in illis. Those whom we find in an illustration of what I mean I refer fierce opposition to the popular party to the common edition of Hudibras about 1640 we find still in the same by Dr. Grey: for the proof I might personal opposition 50 years after, refer to some thousands of books. but an opposition resting on far difDr. Grey's is a disgusting case: for ferent principles: insensibly the prinhe swallowed with the most anile ciples of their antagonists had reached credulity every story, the most extra even them: and a courtier of 1689 vagant that the malice of those times was willing to concede more than a could invent against either the Pres- patriot of 1630 would have veutured byterians or the independents: and to ask. Let me not be understood to for this I suppose amongst other de
mean that true patriotism is at all formities his notes were deservedly more shown in supporting the rights ridiculed by Warburton. But, of the people than those of the king:
as soon as both are defined and li- idly do we say, in speaking of the mited, the last are as indispensable to events of our own time which affect our the integrity of the constitution - as party feelings,—“We stand too near the first: and popular freedom itself to these events for an impartial estiwould suffer as much, though indi- mate: we must leave them to the rectly, from an invasion of Cæsar's judgment of posterity”! For it is a rights—as by a more direct attack on fact that of the many books of meitself
. But in the 17th century the moirs written by persons who were rights of the people were as yet not not merely contemporary with the defined: throughout that century great civil war, but actors and even they were gradually defining them- leaders in it's principal scenes—there selves—and, as happens to all great is hardly one which does not exhibit practical interests, defining them- a more impartial picture of that great selves through a course of fierce and drama than the histories written at bloody contests. For the kingly rights this day. The historian of Popery are almost inevitably carried too does not display half so much zeahigh in ages of imperfect civilization: lotry and passionate prejudice in and the well-known laws of Henry speaking of the many events which the Seventh, by which he either broke have affected the power and splenor gradually sapped the power of the dor of the Papal See for the last 30 aristocracy, had still more extrava- years, and under his own eyes, as he gantly exalted them.-On this ac- does when speaking of a reformer count it is just to look upon demo- who lived three centuries ago—of a cratic or popular politics as identical translator of the Bible into a vernain the 17th century with patriotic cular tongue who lived nearly five politics. In later periods, the demo- centuries ago-of an Anti-pope-of crat and the patriot have sometimes a Charlemagne or a Gregory the been in direct opposition to each Great still further removed from himother; at that period they were ine- self. The recent events he looks upon vitably in conjunction.—All this, as accidental and unessential: but in however, is in general overlooked by the great enemies, or great founders those who either write English his- of the Romish temporal power, and tory or comment upon it. Most in the history of their actions and writers of or upon English history their motives, he feels that the whole proceed either upon servile princi- principle of the Romish cause and ples, or upon no principles : and a it's pretensions are at stake. Pretty good Spirit of English History, that much under the same feeling have is, a history which should abstract modern writers written with a ranthe tendencies and main results [as corous party spirit of the political to laws, manners, and constitution] struggles in the 17th century: here from every age of English history is they fancy that they can detect the a work which I hardly hope to see incunabula of the revolutionary spirit: executed. For it would require the here some have been so sharpsighted concurrence of some philosophy with as to read the features of pure jacoa great deal of impartiality. How binism: and others* have gone so far
. Amongst these Mr. D'Israeli in one of the latter volumes of his · Curiosities of Literature' has dedicated a chapter or so to a formal proof of this proposition. A reader who is familiar with the history of that age comes to the chapter with a previous indignation, knowing what sort of proof he has to expect. This indignation is not likely to be mitigated by what he will there find.-Because some one madman, fool, or scoundrel makes a monstrous proposal—which dies of itself unsupported, and is in violent contrast to all the acts and the temper of those times, this is to sully the character of the parliament and three-fourths of the people of England. If this proposal had grown out of the spirit of the age, that spirit would have produced many more proposals of the same character and acts corresponding to them. Yet upon this one infamous proposal, and two or three scandalous anecdotes from the libels of the day, does the whole onus of Mr. D'Israeli's parallel depend. Tantamne rem tam negligenter ?- In the general character of an Englishman I have a right to complain that so heavy an attack upon the honor of England and her most virtuous patriots in her most virtuous age should be made with so much levity : a charge so solemn in it's matter should have been prosecuted with a proportionate solemnity of manner. Mr. D'Israeli refers with just applause to the opinions of Mr. Coleridge: I wish that he would have allowed a little more weight to the striking
as to assert that all the atrocities of eyes of the unwary, &c.: he found the French revolution had their direct in short that reformation, by popular parallelisms in acts done or coun- insurrection, must end in the de. tenanced by the virtuous and auguststruction and cannot tend to the forSenate of England in 1640! Strange mation of a regular Government." distortion of the understanding which After a good deal more of this wellcan thus find a brotherly resemblance meaning cant, the Introduction conbetween two great historical events, cludes with the following sentence : which of all that ever were put on the writer is addressing the reformers record stand off from each other in of 1793, amongst whom both most irreconcileable enmity: the one leaders and followers,” he says “ may originating, as Mr. Coleridge has together reflect—that, upon specuobserved, in excess of principle; the lative and visionary reformers," (i. e. other in the utter defect of all moral those of 1640) « the severest puprinciple whatever; and the progress nishment which God in his vengeof each being answerable to its ori- ance ever yet inflicted—was to curse gin! Yet so it is. And not a me. them with the complete gratification moir-writer of that age is reprinted of their own inordinate desires." I in this, but we have a preface from quote this passage—not as containing some red-hot Anti-jacobin warning us any thing singular, but for the very with much vapid common-place from reason that it is not singular: it exthe mischiefs and eventual anarchy of presses in fact the universal opinion : too rash a spirit of reform as dis- notwithstanding which I am happy played in the French revolution—not to say that it is false. What “ comby the example of that French revo- plete gratification of their own delution, but by that of our own in the sires was ever granted to the “reage of Charles I. The following formers” in question? On the conpassage from the Introduction to Sir trary, it is well known (and no book William Waller's Vindication pub- illustrates that particular fact so well lished in 1793, may serve as a fair as Sir William Waller's) that as early instance: “He” (Sir W. Waller) as 1647 the army had too effectually “ was, indeed, at length sensible of subverted the just relations between the misery which he had contributed itself and parliament-not to have to bring on his country;" (by the suggested fearful anticipations to all way, it is a suspicious circumstance discerning patriots of that unhappy --that Sir William* first became issue which did in reality blight their sensible that his country was misera- prospects. And, when I speak of ble, when he became sensible that he an ão unhappy issue,”. I would be himself was not likely to be again understood only of the immediate employed; and became fully con- issue: for the remote issue was-the vinced of it, when his party lost revolution of 1088, as I have already their ascendancy:) “ he was con asserted. Neither is it true that even vinced, by fatal experience, that the immediate issue was “unhappy" anarchy was a bad step towards a to any extent which can justify the perfect government'; that the sub ordinary language in which it is deversion of every establishment was scribed. Here again is a world of no safe foundation for a permanent delusions. We hear of “anarchy," and regular constitution: he found of “confusions,” of “ proscriptions, that pretences of reform were held of “ bloody and ferocious tyranny." up by the designing to dazzle the All is romance: there was no anar
passage in which that gentleman contrasts the Frenclı revolution with the English revolution of 1640-8. However, the general tone of honor and upright principle, which marks Mr. D’Israeli's work, encourages me and others to hope that he will cancel the chapter--and not persist in wounding the honor of a great people for the sake of a parallelism, which—even if it were true—is a thousand times too slight and feebly supported to satisfy the most accommodating reader,
* Sir William, and his cousin Sir Hardress Waller, were both remarkable men. Sir Hardress had no conscience at all ; Sir William a very scrupulous one ; which however he was for ever tampering with—and generally succeeded in reducing into compliance with his immediate interest. He was however an accomplished gentleman : and as a man of talents worthy of the highest admiration.