separation which it has pleased the Americans to make between religion and the state. The friends of religion, by this measure, having been forced out of the legitimate path which is or ought to be assigned to them in every nation, have been compelled to find out a field of exertion for themselves, in which, aided by the circumstances of the country, and the peculiar character of the government; it is much to be regretted that some of them have not confined their proceedings within those limits which a feeling of propriety, a due sense of subordination, a real piety, and a true measure of zeal, should have pointed out. We must not reason from our own case to the condition of things in the United States. In our country societies of a similar character are, generally speaking, contented to pursue their operations in quiet and silence, satisfied with effecting an infinite degree of good in that decorous manner which a religious spirit, when actually felt, will always prescribe to its possessor; and instead of interrupting the functions of the state by their conduct, satisfy themselves on great occasions with making representations and presenting appeals to its feelings of benevolence and justice, which, with sorrow be it spoken, of late years, have not always experienced attention, or, at any rate, have perhaps received only a cold, a tardy, and reluctant acquiescence.

In fact, the society system in America has been fostered and encouraged by, and indeed forms the grand component part of, that dynasty of opinion to which we have already adverted, and which appears to pursue its course victorious over law, and order, and government, being, in fact, a law unto itself.

And what, after all that has been said upon the subject of America and its institutions, is the conclusion to which we should come? Is there anything so striking in the example which she sets as to render it peculiarly worthy of imitation? Are the advantages which she possesses so great and overpowering as that they ought to render us desirous to obtain similar ones? Is the character of its Government so firm and so enduring, so little exposed to suffer from the excesses of the popular will, so well able to resist violations of its laws and ordinances, and to protect the lives and property of its subjects, as to claim to be considered superior to those forms of government enjoyed by other countries? We leave the answer to be made by all reasonable and unprejudiced persons. Singular to say, however, America is constantly appealed to by certain classes amongst our countrymen as the sole model in government, legislation, and religion! The political dissenter, who wishes to destroy the Church, in order that he may obtain a share of her revenues, the advocate of the voluntary system,

who is opposed to religious establishments theoretically, but whose opposition comes to the same thing in the end, the avowed republican, who professes his hostility to monarchical government, and the philosophical radical, who is desirous of effecting various successive changes, which he is well aware, if once accomplished, will produce his real object, the overthrow of the constitution, and the building up of his own fancied schemes of visionary perfection-an end of which the friends of order would seem to be ignorant, if we may judge from the cold and cautious resistance which they offer to his progress-all these seem to regard America with peculiar favour and affection, and to look upon her as the realization of their wild dreams of improvement, as the Utopia of liberty and freedom.

Unfortunately, however, for these practical men, or philosophers, it so happens that a cool and quiet examination into the real state of things, a very little labour employed in penetrating beneath the surface, will produce a very different result, and will prove that, like other excesses of the imagination which have no basis, so these visionary partialities are destitute of foundation, and, on the very showing of those who indulge in them, are utterly valueless.

With regard to the voluntary system, although an unfavourable dispositon towards religious establishments appears at one time to have existed in America, that feeling is very much altered now; and so far from a general hostility existing towards them at the presest time, it seems that a wish at any rate for a limited establishment prevails amongst many parts of the community; nor is this favourable disposition confined to members of the Episcopal communion, far from it it exists among the different sects, most of whom possess endowments which they would joyfully increase to as large an extent as possible. Indeed, the unfavourable disposition towards establishments was never directed against endowments as possessed by any religious body, was never identified with the voluntary system as it is advocated in this country, but was only manifested against the connexion of the state with any particular church. Of course, in our opinion, and we trust in that of our readers, such a feeling as this was equally unjustifiable, equally pernicious, and equally impolitic with that which exhibits itself towards endowments; but we are now only speaking to a particular point, and endeavouring to prove the total disagreement between the sentiments entertained by the advocates of the voluntary system in this country-the voluntaries, as Dr. Chalmers calls them and the opinions held by the religious bodies in the United States. The author of the work before us has summed up the

evils which flow from the voluntary system as it exists in America, and we shall place his statement before our readers :-

"There is an indirect and reflective action of this system, in consideration of the relative position which the state assumes, which favours infidelity and detracts largely from the appropriate influence of Christianity. This system operates as a check to the advancement of Christian civilization. This American system of voluntaryism has called into existence and action an anomalous spiritual power, more formidable to the state than any alliance of church and state that has ever been devised. The voluntary system of supporting religion in America is inadequate to the purpose. Moreover, the American system of supporting religion has brought about great instability in the religious world, and induced a ruinous habit of change. Such a system makes the clergy servile and the people tyrannical. The voluntary system of supporting religion provides not for the poor. The voluntary system tends to the multiplication of sects without end. Finally, we observe that this voluntary mode of supporting religion is a mendicant system, and involves one of the worst features of the Church of Rome, viz., tending to the practice of pious frauds."

If the author is to be considered as a fair representative of the sentiments and opinions of a large and influential class among his countrymen, and there is every reason in favour of such a supposition, we think the voluntaries of our own land have no great reason to boast of a coincidence in views concerning ecclesiastical matters between themselves and their transatlantic brethren.

But to come to the other two points in consideration-government and legislation. We cannot think that the picture which the author has drawn is particularly inviting, or much calculated to gain over disciples to the cause of republicanism. When we are told by an American, one evidently of no common character of mind, who has attentively studied the subject, to the effect that in his country opinion, the opinion of the populace, is able on occasions to triumph over the law of the land, and to set that law at defiance, not only with impunity but without exciting any feelings of surprise; when we learn, moreover, that in the same country no one individual dares to express sentiments on any political topic which are not in accordance with those held by the majority in the district to which he belongs, without subjecting himself to very unpleasant consequences; when we recollect that in a great part of the country slavery is not only permitted but legalized, and human beings are bought and sold, and that in some states of the Union the bare circumstance of teaching a slave to read is punishable by imprisonment; when we are also told that the whole country was convulsed and public credit overthrown for a time, in order

to gratify one ambitious individual in his resentment against its monetary establishments-we cannot, wishing as we do to speak with all tenderness and proper feeling of a nation so intimately united with our own, consider her to possess the excessive freedom which is sometimes attributed to her; nor do we think it quite impossible but that persons may enjoy as much comfort and security in a land which, without professing to bestow on her citizens so much apparent liberty, allows them to use that portion which she does give unalloyed with licentiousness.

We have often fancied, it may be in the simplicity of our hearts, how much better and how much more happily the affairs of the world would be carried on, if each individual could be contented with the blessings which he already enjoys in his own land, without wishing to impart to it those real or fancied advantages possessed by other countries. It is this unhappy spirit of change which has proved the fruitful source of rebellion and revolution, which has disturbed the comfort and security of the private dwelling, as well as of the palace which has dared to intrude with impious and unhallowed step within the recesses of the sanctuary, and has presumed to place its lawless grasp upon the throne, which has spread confusion, and misery, and woe through many a fair and goodly territory.

How we wish that our countrymen would pause ere it be too late! That, when meditating to alter or destroy any of the institutions of their native land, they would only remember the various blessings which they possess, the comfort, security, and happiness which each one may enjoy in his respective station! That they would bear in mind, when attempting to change the constitution of their country, that to it the eyes of foreigners were once directed with admiration and envy, regarding it as the sole depository of genuine freedom, the true model of monarchical government! Earnestly do we wish that they would ponder over those heart-stirring words of the immortal poet of England, which have of late been adopted with such singular felicity, by a truly English spirit, as the text of his work, on a kindred subject to this article:

123

The Periodical Literature. Its Rise, Progress, Tendency, and Effect.

The Edinburgh; the Quarterly; the Foreign Quarterly; the British and Foreign Quarterly; the London and Westminster Reviews.

ON looking over the history of the past, it cannot fail to strike the notice of the most careless observer, that at various periods different characters have arisen to give a colour to the age in which they lived. Thus Greece can point to her Lyric, Dramatic, Historic, Rhetoric, and Philosophic periods, when intellectual stars were seen to shine simultaneously, or one after the other, as each phase of mind passed under view, from Pindar to Aristotle; and something similar is to be found in the history of Rome, from the birth of poetry in Ennius to the death of history in Tacitus. So, too, from the revival of learning to the present day, ancient and modern literature, the dogmas of religion and the discoveries of science, the airy visions of the mind and the tangible forms of matter, have at different periods attracted the attention of the leaders of the masses, and have concentrated to a single point a great portion of intellect, which would have been directed elsewhere, and diffused over a great extent of surface.

Posterity, if indeed our children shall look, except with feelings of shame, on the miniature minds of the last quarter of a century, will describe the present age as one when the whole air was swarming with ephemeral productions, that kept dancing before the eye in all the brilliancy of the diamond beetle and all the brittleness of the butterfly's wing.

Of course, we are aware that as the accomplishment of reading extends itself, more books will be printed to suit the taste of the many. But if the advocates of the march of intellect would only cast their eyes over the kind of stuff sent into the market of mind, they would have little reason to point to the printing press as the grand regenerator of man.

It is not, however, so much on the caterers for the many, as on those for the better informed, that posterity will pass its severest censures; when it will be discovered that the luxuriance of periodical literature, like that of novels, was the certain sign of the exhausted soil of intellect.

Of the two classes under which periodicals may be ranged, one receives the impress of passing events, the other reflects