one campaign, or when domestic or agricultural concerns wanted their presence at home; and thus they sometimes dispersed just when a victory had to be turned to account, or a defeat to be repaired, or a promising enterprise to be undertaken. Then the soldiers often chose their own officers, and would obey no others. All orders and plans were freely discussed; the commander-inchief had to persuade his regimental colonels rather than to direct them; his army was more of a voluntary association than an organised body of troops. Power there was almost none; authority could do but little; personal influence, moral and intellectual qualities, had to do the work of both. And all this time-while Washington had to control his men, to exhort his officers, to beg sometimes almost piteously for supplies he had to fight more numerous and powerful antagonists, whom nothing but the imbecility of their commanders could have enabled him to overcome; and to contend against the mean jealousies, the ill-timed parsimony, and the ungenerous exigencies and suspicions of his fellow citizens. Nay more, he had to keep together, and to inspire with zeal and submission to needful discipline, an army often without food, usually without pay, always unsupported by magazines and stores, yet sternly forbidden to supply their wants by plunder or exactions. Truly, here was a field, such as few men have, for the exercise of that hopeful and untiring patience which is perhaps the sublimest and most difficult of virtues; and never was there a more magnificent example of this attribute than Washington. His military genius was no doubt great, but it was as nothing compared with the moral qualities which were required to bear up against those difficulties which deprived military genius of its fairest opportunities. His reputation was founded, not on splendid days, but on painful years; not on a series of those brilliant and startling achievements in which, if there is much of inspiration, there is often yet more of accident, but on a whole life of toil, sacrifice, selfcontrol, and self-abnegation, such as no man can lead whose principles and whose virtues are not rooted in the very deepest recesses of his nature. His sagacity in governing the State was as eminent as his ability in creating it, For eight years he ruled the young commonwealth with rare prudence and firmness, showing the same resolute front to domestic insubordination as to foreign encroachment; and when he retired in 1796 to the private happiness he had so long sighed for, he left behind him that farewell address which is perhaps the most touching legacy of wisdom and affection ever bequeathed by a ruler to his native land. The exhortation shows with how true a foresight he laid his finger on each one of the dangers and weaknesses of the Republic. He warns his countrymen against "geographical divisions," against the bad habit, even as a phrase, of speaking of the North and the South. He tells them that to be a NATION they must have a central government, which should be the chief object of their loyalty, and which no local or democratic jealousies should be allowed to weaken; but he does this in language which proves how doubtful he felt in his heart whether the Union could permanently be preserved. "Let experience solve the question," he says; "to listen to mere speculation in such a case were criminal." He exhorts them earnestly to uphold public credit and the strictest national integrity at any cost, by careful economy and cheerful acquiescence in necessary taxes. Finally, he recommends a policy of rigid neutrality towards foreign countries, peace, forbearance, but above all the most magnanimous and scrupulous justice and good faith; and knowing his countrymen, he assures them that in the long-run this policy, and this alone, will pay. By the universal consent of mankind, Washington stands out among statesmen as the wisest, best, and purest ruler who ever governed a free nation. He was preeminent, no doubt, among his colleagues and countrymen, both in wisdom and in virtue, but he had many wise and virtuous men to assist him in his work. Jefferson, Hamilton, Randolph, Jay, Madison and Adams, though holding very different opinions, were all earnest and high-minded patriots. The first among them did ultimately much harm by the uncompromising democracy of his principles; but they were all worthy coadjutors of their noble chief. There were giants in those days. What are the advantages, and what should be the future of a nation which started on its career with such a man as Washington for its representative and guide !—National Review. ART. X.-AN ESTIMATE OF NEANDER AND NIEBUHR. "I FELL in last night with Neander's 'Life of Christ.' I cannot say I either liked it exactly, or disliked it. It wants, or rather I want, a fitting stand-point to judge of it aright. I think I am not with him in his views of inspiration, and his principles of historic criticism are to me exceptionable. He is strangely afraid of taking too much for granted, too much afraid of miracles; explains things in too anxious a tone of deference to human reason; is too sceptical when reasoning with sceptics-that is, too eager to conciliate them by rationalistic explanations-for me to look upon him in these points as either wise or pious. I do not know that I recollect a full instance of what I mean. You may guess it, perhaps, by what I believe his view of the star-phenomenon at the Redeemer's birth:- The Magi, as is notorious, were addicted to magic. Some of them were truth-seekers. They discover at that period a new star. They think it indicative of a great event; they connect with it the appearance of the Great Teacher who is to arise, and set out, therefore, in search of Him. There is a happy coincidence in this; and I should say, also, a very remarkable forgetfulness of certain other sayings in this matter by the Evangelists, which, perhaps, Neander would consider to be interpolations; for I see he ever and anon comes out with this, by some tact of discrimination I am at a total loss to understand. He is evidently a thorough believer in the Divinity of Christ, so that his explanations are not like those of the herd of Socinians and anti-Supernaturalists. He is a devout Christian philosopher and divine. Every now and then he reads like an evangelical Plato. Nevertheless, in my opinion, he often overdoes the matter, and loses himself in the exercise of his ingenuity, and concessions in meeting the objections of the antagonists of Divine Revelation. I greatly honour him after all. The sincere, earnest-hearted man is plain enough. He uses his learning, which is immense, as easily as he does his pen; in this, reminding me of Warburton; but the inner life of his soul seems a far more precious thing than ever Warburton's religion was to him. Perhaps, when I read him more extensively and quietly, I may like him more, and think him more safe and trustworthy than I did last night." "I know that, as a whole, Niebuhr's 'Rome' disappointed me. Indeed, I would as lief plod a thousand miles in a desert as attempt to re-read it. A fine bit of corrective criticism may be found here and there, just as an oasis in the waste; but it was one of the most arid books I ever attempted to get through. I should think, for general information and useful impulse to the faculties, there is no comparison between his book and those he derides as mere fabulists. He makes nothing of Livy, and Plutarch, and the rest, and puts forth accounts of events and institutions as if he had a reserved library of higher and more accurate writers, to which none but himself had access. Of his vast learning there can be no doubt, nor of his occasional felicitous application of it; but my impression was that he was a literary madman or historical Don Quixote, and my expectation that, like other celebrated preachers of paradox, he would have his day, and then become a warning and a gibe to the scholars who succeed him, as his speculations hereafter turned up for their serious refutation or literary mockery. For bits of reading, his book would be well enough. For a continuous survey of the rise and progress of the Latin Republic, I should think it full of false theory and suggestion."-Dr. Simpson. 94 BRIEF NOTICES OF BOOKS. Ecce Deus. Essays on the Life and Doctrine of Jesus Christ, with Controversial Notes on "Ecce Homo." By JOSEPH PARKER, D.D. Third Edition. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 27, Paternoster-row. 1868. A WORK which has reached the third edition in a comparatively short time, and won golden opinions from many literary authorities, must have great intrinsic worth, and must be a work of power. Freshness and force seem to be the leading characteristics of the author's writing. Many who had noted Dr. Parker's style, especially in his " Hidden Springs," pronounced him as the author of " Ecce Deus" on its first appearance, though it was then sent out into the world anonymously. At that time, bating some things of which we will speak presently, we read the book with great pleasure and profit. We hardly know whether most to admire the capital writing, the great wealth of rhetorical device and embellishment of style, writing always lucid and often luminous and brilliant, or the original and profound thinkings, and the fresh and vivid setting of old truths. The fertile mind of Dr. Parker here pours forth its richest treasures at the feet, and in honour of his Saviour and Lord. It is not stale gifts that are offered; no hashup of old things; no ringing of changes on worn-out topics, but the best products of cultured nature. The writing of this work was suggested by the appearance of "Ecce Homo," a book that made a profound sensation in all literary circles, and by the classic purity, finish, and repose of its style, as well as by the masterly vigour of its thinkings and originality of its views, was pronounced emphatically the book of the day. 66 Ecce Deus was not given to the world as a reply or even as a complemental production, though the title suggests the latter conclusion, if not the former. For this reason we regret the selection of the title. We see clearly, from our author's point of view, the strong inducements he would be under to adopt this title, and of course he was free to call his book by this or any other title that seemed to him most appropriate. But suppose the author of "Ecce Homo" wished, in the promised part of his work, not yet published, to employ, for euphony or completeness, this name, he is placed under a disadvantage. More than this: while we are forbidden by the author to view this book as a reply to "Ecce Homo," yet the design of it is to read the phenomena of Christ's life correctly, and to construe his character rightly where it is done wrongly in "Ecce Homo." In his preface Dr. Parker points out the radical fault of the earlier work, the ignoring of Christ's incarnation, and commencing his biography when he was "a young man of promise, popular with those who knew him, and appearing to enjoy the Divine favour," as if he had no ancestry, no parentage, no birth. This vice in the plan led the author into "several sophistical and untenable conclusions." Dr. Parker commences with the Incarnation, and goes on through these topics: "The written Word; The Inauguration and its diabolical phase; The mighty Works; The calling of men; Christ rejecting Men; The Church; The Church left in the world; Christ adjusting Human Relations; Christ the Contemporary of all ages; These Sayings of Mine; Christ as an Interlocutor; Eternal Punishments; The Cross of Christ; The Relation of the Cross to the Law; The Relation of the Cross to practical Morals; Posthumous Ministry of Jesus Christ; Controversial Notes on Ecce Homo." We regret that a book of such great worth should be disfigured by an occasional carelessness in the composition. The hand that has written this can write better than much of this. It is disfigured, too, by a certain flippancy of tone and rashness of expression. Too rude a hand is laid upon established and cherished beliefs, and much virtuous indignation is needlessly expended; his condemnation of "the sects" and creeds is very sweeping and often unmeasured. What is there proved or gained by assertions like this: "The heretics in civilisation, not to speak of theology, have done most for the world"? While some "sects" are flippantly disposed of, others are generously dealt with. Our author says: "Christ is in all the denominations where he is loved. The Romanist feels that he needs the crucifix, the penance, the Virgin Mother, the intermediate fire; let him have them," &c. And it is rung again and again into our ears that beliefs, opinions, and formulated faiths are nothing-worse than nothing, harmful,-love is all. One wonders that so subtle and powerful a thinker does not see the simple and initial impossibility of a man loving an object he cares not to know or understand, and cries out, "Don't instruct me concerning the object of my love, my opinions are nothing-indeed, I don't want an opinion." We say, no,— thoughtful and discriminating conceptions of the object are essential to true love. We may add that we get weary of these tirades against sects and creeds. Surely there is some need for qualification in such sentences as these: "The sects have shut up the theatre, the race-course, and the music saloon; * Christ never told his disciples not to go to the theatre, the race-course or the revel; from end to end of his teaching, there is no such prohibition to be found. What then did Christ do? He said, 'Make the tree good, and the fruit will be good;' don't trim the leaves, vitalize the root; don't attach, but develop." * * These however are only blots on the fair surface, and could be removed in another edition. Had there been space we could have culled numberless garlands, and plucked an abundance of choice and ripe fruit. The two chapters,-Christ the Contemporary of all ages, and The Cross of Christ, are worth vastly more than the price of the book, and we thank the able author for the intellectual and spiritual quickening they have imparted to us in this re-reading. We hope our thoughtful readers will speedily make themselves acquainted with this valuable book. Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. By FRANTZ DELITZSCH, D.D., Professor of Theology, Leipsic. Translated from the German, by THOMAS L. KINGsbury, M.A. Vol I. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1868. THE Messrs. Clark have laid the Christian Church in general, and Christian ministers in particular, under manifold obliga tions by the numerous translations they have effected from the theological literature of Germany. The works they have already translated and published are sufficiently numerous to form a respectably sized library; and though not all equally valuable, yet, taking them in the lump, their worth is beyond estimate. For more than twenty years these spirited publishers have been unceasingly importing these rich intellectual treasures from the Fatherland; and sustained by a wide, and, we believe, an ever increasing patronage, they continue to prosecute their important and deserving labours. The volume now before us, one of the four volumes of the Foreign Theological Library for 1868, is worthy of the fame of its author, and of the honourable company among which it is placed by its publishers. To elucidate the sacred text, the author draws from his immense stores of learning with a profuse hand, entering into the most elaborate criticism of every, even the most minute point with regard to which any doubt exists; while at the same time he develops with masterly skill the great doctrinal and practical principles which give to this Epistle such a high place among the New Testament writings. Thoughts on Inspiration and the Canon of Scripture. By the Rev. JOHN DOUGLAS, Portadown. Introduction by the Rev. W. ANTLIFF. London: W. Lister. AN excellent resumé of the usual arguments in favour of Verbal Inspiration. The author takes no new ground; but the old ground is ably occupied. This essay will well repay a careful perusal. A Bible Dictionary. By the Rev. JAMES AUSTIN BASTOW. Third Edition. Lonon: Longmans, Paternoster-row; Lister, Sutton-street. CONSIDERING the amount of time and labour and expense bestowed by the author on this book, it certainly ought to be a good one. Even if the ability of the author had only been moderate, the book itself should be good, for it has been in process of production and re-production, gathering to itself everything really valuable in Biblical literature, and shaking itself free from redundancy and questionable adjuncts, during the long period of thirty years. But, in addition to this consideration, the author is a man of mark and likelihood, endowed with clearness of per |