sents it rather as the most plausible and consistent explanation of a doctrine held in the church. He maintains, it is true, in common with all Unitarian Christians, that Jesus partook in a peculiar manner of the divinity; but in explaining himself he does not hesitate to say, as in the following paragraph, that the peculiarity originated not in a difference of kind, but only of degree.

'From all which may be gathered that the application of the Deity to every sanctified believer was the same in kind with that to Jesus; but immensely inferior in degree, and temporary, with large intervals of disunion between. So that when we act under influence of the Spirit, still our acts have a mixture of imperfection; and in far the greater part of our acts we offend daily, being left to ourselves without any assistance; whereas, Jesus being styled the Holy Child, we must conclude, that holiness accompanied him constantly and uninterruptedly from the cradle to the cross.' Vol. iv. pp. 107, 108.

We can give but a single extract from the chapter on the Logos, in which he states what he supposes to have been John's object in the proem of his Gospel.

He is going to give a history of Christ's ministry upon earth this he ushers in by a brief account, in the concise apostolic simplicity, of what occasioned his coming; which was, the original constitution of mankind established upon a plan or word, something similar to Pythagoras' oath of Jove, regulating the courses of all events which were to follow. This word was before God, that is, God held it in contemplation before him, as we hold a paper of directions before us when we would proceed in exact conformity thereto.

"Then, "The Word was God," upon which such mighty stress has been laid to prove the divinity of Christ as a distinct Person from the Father, if read, as in the original, "God was the Word," will appear inserted purposely to prevent the notion of a distinct actor, by declaring that God himself was the Agent proceeding to creation in pursuance of his Word; and we may presume this little sentence was thrown in for the sake of the Gentile converts, who, having been accustomed to the notion of twelve greater Gods, whom one may style the Senate, or supreme Legislature of Heaven, might have fancied St. John only reduced them to two, and by the Logos understood another God, like Minerva, the daughter and first-begotten of Jupiter.' - Vol. IV. pp. 222, 223.

In the chapter on 'Redemption,' he says,

This brings me to inquire, in what manner the sufferings

of the Redeemer operated to our benefit and I apprehend it to have been, not by taking off any service we were destined to perform for the universe, for this would be sacrificing the general interest to the advantage of a few; nor by working a change in the constitution of human nature, for this would look like something of a charm and magic; nor yet by turning the purposes of God from resentment into mercy, for this would be to represent him liable to passion and mutability; but by setting an example which might lead us into the method of performing the hardest of our services with the same tranquillity and satisfaction of mind that he did.'— Vol. 1. p. 299.

It is on practical subjects that our author is most at home. We would recommend particularly what he has said on Vanity,' on 'Divine Services,' on 'Doing all for the Glory of God,' on Education,' and on Death." We have space

for but one more extract, which, though taken almost at random, is sufficiently characteristic.

'Very great stress has been laid upon the duty of fasting, which being a medicine in the spiritual dispensary, the qualities and uses of it deserve to be well considered before it be prescribed. Now I conceive it operates as a damper of the spirits, and weakener of that attachment we have to the common enjoyments and engagements of life: therefore ought to be administered to such patients with whom that intention is requisite to be pursued, and in no greater measure than suffices to answer it.

'But there are various degrees of fasting; the abstinence from all food, or from flesh-meats, for whole days together, was strongly enjoined in former times, perhaps not so much for the sake of religion, as to force men by the inconveniences of it to purchase a dispensation with their money so that he was the best son of the Church, not who starved himself most, but who gave most largely to be excused from the obligation to starve. Such abstinence might be very advisable for your turtle eaters, city-feast hunters, and persons who live in a continual round of pleasures; but for old women and others who have frequent occasion to converse with their apothecaries, I hold it stark naught; for they have more need of something to raise their spirits than to depress them, and their scruples, despondencies, and murmurings proceed in great measure from poorness of blood or stagnation of the circulating juices, occasioned by the feeble tone of their vessels, want of exercise, or of seasonable recreation; and if they could apply with more glee to their common employments, they might return from them with better alacrity to their devotions.

For my own part, who am of a rather melancholy temperament and cold digestion, I could never reap any benefit from fasting, though I have tried it formerly, but found it enfeeble my understanding, and make me less fit for religious exercises; and had I continued it till this time, I believe my chapters would have dissolved into a water-gruel style, and been still more deficient than they are in a rational, cheerful strain of piety.'- Vol. IV. pp. 171, 172.

The eight volumes of the English edition are here compressed into four, without the necessity, however, of so far reducing the type, or crowding the page, as materially to injure the appearance. We are happy to learn that the enterprise of the publishers is likely to be rewarded beyond their most sanguine expectations in the rapid and extensive sale of the work. A much more important service is done to the literature of this country by putting into circulation neat, and correct, and cheap editions of the standard authors, than by following at the heels of the English press, and reprinting indiscriminately its trashy novelties.

THE history of England is, on all accounts, the most interesting and the most important, which can be offered to the attention of Americans. The most interesting, not merely because it is the history of our forefathers, and holds us by that chain of sympathy, which irresistibly attracts us to all that is connected with our progenitors, but because it abounds, more than that of any other country, with events which have had an influence extended far beyond their immediate sphere, through distant regions and succeeding ages; and because it abounds with the developement of characters which deserve and command the admiration, the love, and the gratitude of mankind. England is the only country whose history exhibits the gradual and sure, though irregular, growth of a well organized system of political liberty; and in her history alone is it possible to trace the efforts, the sacrifices,

or the accidental circumstances, which have effectually contributed to the firm establishment of that inestimable right. Descended, as we are, from those who had already made great progress, we are apt to think that we have gone far beyond not merely our fathers, but our contemporaries in the path of political freedom, and that therefore we can have little to learn, and much to teach. We plume ourselves upon the progress we have made, and in some respects we are, doubtless, in advance of others; but what foul disgrace would it not have been to us, if we had entirely neglected to improve the peculiar and providential advantages of our situation. There is ample room for humility that we have not done more, and that we are not more practically established in the principles we profess to follow. The path of political freedom is emphatically the path of improvement, and of continual exertion. If our fathers toiled to attain the great object, we also must labor to preserve, to improve, and to transmit it. It is not a task of limited extent, which when once finished we have done for ever. It is an art which may be practised with an undefined degree of skill; it is a science which may be carried forward far beyond our present attainments; it is a blessing which, like most of the other blessings of life, is consigned to our care and vigilance for its preservation. We know of no way to obtain just ideas of its nature, or a knowledge of the means by which it may be gained, preserved, or destroyed, but by consulting the records of history, and especially of its own history, as it has appeared in England and in this country. We think, too, that even Americans have something to learn as to the true nature of political liberty, the means of its preservation, and the dangers to which it is exposed. Many among us seem to imagine that national liberty consists exclusively in freedom from foreign control; in the choice of our own rulers; and in the power of displacing them when they no longer please that frequent elections are sufficient to secure it; and that there is nothing to fear for it, but foreign force, or the growth of domestic aristocracy. They have yet to learn, that some who have chosen their own governors without fear of foreign influence, have only chosen despots; that frequent elections may be only the source of frequent tumults, or unimportant change of men; and that the enemies of liberty are as numerous as the uncontrolled passions of poli

us ;

ticians, and the unenlightened prejudices of multitudes. We conceive it to be of the utmost importance to us and to our children, that the true basis of liberty, and the true principles by which it is to be maintained and augmented, should be amply developed, and generally, as well as thoroughly, understood. If we do not know the nature of the foundation, we cannot erect the suitable edifice; and a single error of principle may lead to numerous and fatal mistakes in practice.

The dangers of liberty have in all past time been considered so great and fearful, that it has been apparently the direct object of many governments to prevent that state of things which it ought to have been their object to promote, namely, the equal enjoyment of individual rights, and the universal protection of property and life. It has been, and is still, in most countries, thought necessary for the good order of society, that its government should be in the hands of a few individuals; while the great mass of human beings are regarded either as a sort of live stock, the sole end of whose existence is the benefit of the few, or as a species of domestic enemies to be crushed and borne down by the hand of power, and whose well-being is absolutely incompatible with the necessary dignity and splendor of the government. Even England, a few centuries ago, groaned under as heavy a despotism as the rest of the world; and it is only by comparing her condition under the Norman kings with her present state, or with that of our own country, that we can learn the comparative value of arbitrary and free systems of government. It may not seem necessary to impress us with a sufficient sense of the importance of political freedom, yet it will hardly be useless, occasionally to look back upon what we have escaped; to form some idea, if we can, of the state of things when the Commons, that name which now conveys such impressions of dignity and power, had no political existence; when laws were made by the authority of an individual, and enforced by the edge of the sword, and the point of the spear; when usurpation and violence were the order, and ignorance and poverty the well-being, of society. The wildest anarchy to which the abuse of popular power has ever led, can be reproached with nothing worse than the legitimate effects of uncontrolled despotism; and the study of the means by which the evils of both may be avoided is 44

VOL. XI. — N. S. VOL. VI. NO. III.