hope that, by seeming to yield to it, they may in a little while be able to direct and control it by their superior address and management; but they have yet to learn that there is a cunning among religionists which passes the cunning of this world, and a lust of power more active and vigilant, and equally unscrupulous. The heated and perplexed politician may also be sometimes tempted to appeal to the prejudices of the Exclusive party, and court their alliance. We doubt, however, whether there is a single instance on record of an ambitious man who resorted to a religious faction for aid under hollow pretences, and from worldly considerations solely, who did not afterwards find, to his infinite mortification, that he had all the time been a mere instrument and puppet in the hands of the men he despised. The men who are really to influence and rule a violent religious faction, are men like Mahomet or Cromwell, who were reared in its bosom, and, at least in some period of their lives, have been themselves the subjects of the same delusion.

Again we say, the times demand that men of eminence, and public men, should raise their voices against the first and slightest encroachments on the glorious liberty of the children of God—that liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and which is recognised and guaranteed in the most solemn manner in the Constitution. By such a course a man does not make himself a partisan; on the contrary he shows that he is not a partisan in the common and bad sense; for he is seen holding the golden scales of perfect justice and equality over all parties. Let the people of New England remember the indignant remonstrance of William Blackstone, the first settler of Boston, that he did not, at sacrifices dearer far than life, fly from the tyranny of Lords Bishops, merely that he might pass under the yoke of Lords Brethren. Should the dominant sect in the church ever dare to assume in effect, no matter under what pretences, the least particle of influence or authority in the state, merely on account of their supposed Orthodoxy, the blood of our fathers, notwithstanding their many inconsistences, will cry to us from the ground for resistance-resistance unto death, and we shall prove recreant to the name and race, if it cries in vain.

ART. XII.-1. Original Moral Tales, intended for Children and Young Persons. 8 Vols. 18mo. Boston. Bowles & Dearborn. 1828.

2. The Juvenile Miscellany. 6 Vols. 12mo. Boston. Putnam & Hunt.

1826-8.

3. The Mirror; or, Eighteen Juvenile Tales and Dialogues. By a Lady of Philadelphia. 18mo. pp. 288. Boston. Munroe & Francis, and Charles S. Francis, New York.

AN earnest devotion to the cause of education is one of the most honorable distinctions of the present age. The efforts which have been made to extend the benefits of cultivation to the lower classes, and to make instruction more effectual, have been great and unremitted; and there is reason to believe that a real improvement in the modes of teaching and the character of elementary treatises, has been effected. It is not, however, our present intention to enter into an examination of what has been done by the efforts to promote education, but to call the attention of our readers to what seems to us a serious evil that has grown out of the prevalent desire of improving children; we mean, the character and enormous quantity of the books manufactured and published for their amusement.

Formerly children were amused by fables, fairy tales, and ghost stories, spells, spirits, and enchantments. It seemed to be thought that the strong excitement of something supernatural, and which could not be found in this every day world, was necessary to rouse their latent imaginations, and to teach them virtues to which their natures were averse. By degrees the world grew wiser, and it was found that children could be deeply interested in accounts of other children little different from themselves, and now it seems to be very well ascertained, that to amuse children is a very easy task,—indeed, that they will attend to anything in the shape of a story.

Many persons, who consider children themselves as the best judges of works intended for them, have taken it for granted that all the little stories, which the press is daily pouring forth, are good, merely because boys and girls read them with avidity. We have heard good intentioned and even sensible people say, 'How many books there are for children, and all so good!' Now, though we freely admit that many of these works are much better than most of those published thirty or forty years ago, we fear that a great number of them are open to very serious objections. The subject is of more importance than it may appear at first sight. This is a reading community; and the sentiments and principles of many children are formed almost as much by read

ing, as by intercourse with the world. To a man or woman, the injury done by reading a few silly, or even immoral books, is comparatively small. The impression is generally soon effaced by the employments of life and intercourse with society, even if the reader is not able to estimate very nicely the respective merits of the works which he reads, and to follow the best guides. Still, the injury to females, which was produced by the weak novels. and romances, which were current twenty or thirty years ago, was very serious and alarming. How much more dangerous, then, are the little novels which are written for young children. Impressions are easily made at an early age, which are hard to be obliterated in maturer years. Everything which is read in childhood forms a moral lesson; and the little heroes and heroines of these stories become at once models for the imitation of the boys and girls who read them. It seems to us, therefore, that the romantic and sentimental character of some of these stories is very objectionable. The tendency of this sort of writing, is obviously, as it is in similar works for grown people, to enervate the mind, to produce a morbid sensibility, and unfit children for the dull duties of real life, and make them act too much for stage effect. They learn false and exaggerated feelings, displays of sentiment, affectation, and the refinements of selfishness. Their views of life become discolored and distorted. The mind loses its healthy and vigorous action. A strong and perpetual excitement from the same poison which they have once drunk, becomes necessary to their existence. The full effects which might be apprehended from these pernicious influences, are fortunately in most instances prevented by other more powerful influences. Still, the tendency of this sort of reading is so certain in all cases, and in some its effects are so bad, that the subject deserves a thorough consideration. As specimens of the sentimental sort of writing to which we have adverted, we refer our readers to 'Isabella, or Filial Affection,' and the 'Lace Workers' and the 'Roses' in the Juvenile Miscellany, and the 'Two Portraits' in the Casket. Let us not however be misunderstood. We are not enemies to all romantic incidents indiscriminately, though we think they should be introduced sparingly, as they occur seldom in real life. They should never go beyond the limits of probability, and they should be of such a character, as not to excite in the young reader false views of the stage on which he is soon to act. And with regard to sentiment, we only object to extravagant and violent feelings, not justified by the occasions producing them, and an ostentatious parade of natural affections. We are not unwilling, but certainly desirous, that the virtues presented for imitation should be pure and refined.

It is very obvious, that whatever else is the object of a book of

amusement for the young, it ought to inculcate good morality; not an accommodating, worldly morality, but the pure and strict morality of Christianity. This perhaps seems almost a truism. Yet if we examine by this rule, the little tales which are current among us, we shall find that few of them will stand the test. A very nice moral judgment, indeed, could not be expected from all the numerous authors who are pursuing the path of juvenile literature; for many of them must be both injudicious and ignorant. And even where the writers may be supposed to be more capable of forming a correct estimate of the moral lessons of their pieces, we often find them inadvertently giving currency to the most incorrect principles. The following story, taken from a work which has been highly commended, and is in many respects worthy of approbation, affords a striking example of this fault.

INGENIOUS REPLY.-Mr John Horne Tooke, an Englishman very celebrated for his talents and acquirements, was the son of an honest man who sold poultry in London. While at Westminster and Eton schools, he associated with boys of high rank, and having a childish fear that they would laugh at his father's business, he resolved to save himself all ridicule by his wit, without telling an express falsehood. One day a circle of idle boys stood round him, questioning each other upon the respective rank and condition of their parents. One said he was the son of Sir Robert A-; the next, that his father was Earl of B—; and a third, that his grandmother was Duchess of C—; when it came to John Horne's turn, he observed "that he could not boast of any titles in his family;" and on being more closely pressed, he added, "that his father was an eminent Turkey merchant." This was strictly true; but the boys supposed his father to be one of the wealthy merchants, who, at that time, carried on an extensive trade with Turkey,—while in reality he was only a seller of turkeys.'*

It requires no very scrupulous moral sense to perceive, that here is a direct lesson in the art of lying; and yet it is sent out to the world, as an example worthy of imitation. Though the words of Tooke were strictly true,' the sort of truth which they possess, is no more creditable than express falsehood.' Again;

'Sally. Oh, Madam, it is Molly that is wrong; she wishes to read a letter which is not her own. Mrs Teachum. To whom is it addressed? Sally. To Cecilia, Madam. Mrs Teachum. Molly, give it to me. You certainly would not have read it! Go and rejoin your companions.Mrs Teachum, (alone.) Let me see this letter, which chance has thrown into my hands. It is my duty to establish my favorable idea of Cecilia. It is not the hand of my lady; who can it be from? (She reads.)'†

What lesson is to be drawn from this passage, except that the same code of morals which is enforced on the young, is not binding on grown people?

* Juvenile Miscellany, Jan. 1828, vol. iii. pp. 327. The Casket, pp. 87, 88.

We suppose that Æsop's Fables are quite exploded now, or we should enter a protest against them. Their great object appears to be to show the superior value of craft and cunning to open dealing and honesty. We can still remember the indignation which we used to feel at the triumph of the fox in imposing on the simple-hearted kindness of the goat. It is indeed astonishing that these fables, however fanciful and ingenious, should have ever been thought suitable for children. They do, perhaps, teach a sort of morality, but, as has been well remarked, it is the morality of a slave.

Mothers cannot be too cautious in selecting the books with which they furnish their children. Under the name of amusement, they may be unwittingly administering poison. Stories which have become popular, are generally put into the hands of children, with little or no attempt on the part of parents to judge of the quality of their contents. When any examination is made, it is usually very hasty and superficial. If the general design and moral tendency of the work seem good, almost every body is satisfied, though it is manifest that its general good tendency is perfectly consistent with great moral errors in different parts. And here is the great danger. The writers of these tales have generally a good design, and are capable of judging of the moral lesson which it is their main object to teach; but yet from haste, ignorance, narrow views, or some of the other numberless sources of error, will suffer incidents and sentiments of the most pernicious character to escape them.

We had thought it to be an admitted axiom in education that no sort of lying or deception should be practised towards children. Where a system of deception is habitually carried on in managing a child, he seldom fails to discover it sooner or later, and when once discovered, he loses entirely his respect for his guardian, and too often abandons that sincere love of truth which he sees is disregarded by those who ought to be wiser than himself. Stories in which this manoeuvring is exhibited without any marks of disapprobation, must have a very unfavorable influence on the character of both parents and children. They teach parents to practise a system of fraud, and children to suspect and elude it. They unsettle the first principles of right and wrong, destroy the graceful simplicity of youth, and supply its place by artful management. We are happy to acknowledge that in this, as in all other respects, there has been a general improvement in children's books during the present century. Still we are afraid that the reform is not so complete as is desirable. In one instance before us, a little girl and boy are represented as having come home wet and dirty, in consequence of visiting a family of rude