tainly,' he continued, 'no porer to prescribe any religious exercise, or to assume authority in religious discipline, has been delegated to the general government.' Whence, he concludes, it must then rest with the states.'

P. 10.

This argument of Mr. Jefferson would seem to deny a religious character to the federal government alone; that charter, under which he acted, was a delegated and limited power, expressly withholding what was not expressly given. This threw, apparently, the duty on the states, as part of their reserved rights. The argument appeared, therefore, to be an honest one, and to have been, with him, a question merely of constitutional interpretation. But such it unquestionably was not. The states on whom this responsibility was thrown, were themselves limited by their constitutions. Theirs, too, was a delegated power, and the power to "appoint" or "recommend" a fast, not being expressly given, was necessarily re erved; or, in other words, existed nowhere, and belonged, of course, to the people. That such was Mr. Jefferson's opinion, we know well, from his writings; that it was of the essence of his argument, is also clear, from such being the conclusious that by degrees have been deduced from it. The recent discussions in the state legislatures of New York and some others, on the subject of a chaplain, and the use of the Bible as a school book, have brought out this argument in all its length and breadth. It is this-our government is atheist; it knows no God, acknowledges no revelation, and, as it can do nothing, so, too, it cares nothing about religion. This is the unholy argument against which this work is directed. We will not flatter the author with the judgment that it could not have been better done. We think it might but still we think it well done. He has, we think, left some material points untouched; but he has shown that the government of the United States is, historically and practically, christian; as to the manner of his work, his zeal is honest, but oftentimes more honest than wise; his tone is too much that of the advocate, and we miss the persuasiveness of the unprejudiced reasoner; his style, eloquent as it is, savors more of the declamatory speaker than of what he professes to be, the didactic writer. În language, he should remember, as in objects of sight, perpetual glitter soon wearies—we long for repose. The eye rests contentedly only on the soft and unambitious colors of nature. To these drawbacks we must add one other—it is a dash of the old leaven of puritanism, seeing nothing, to use his own words, but "bribes" in a national church establishment "hypocrisy and falsehood" its "first_fruits," and "persecution" its "last villany." Of a church establishment we are not called upon to be the apologists, but then we think it might have occurred to our author, that his very argument savored of their defence.

We would fain believe that in some respects our author indulges in too gloomy a view. Whatever may be the native infidelity

among us—and that we believe to be a diminishing proportionthe malignity against religion comes from a foreign soil; it is not bred among us, and what is more important, we believe it loses its nourishment among us. It comes to us a concentrated venom, a pent up explosive gas; it evaporates in its explosion, and the bitter infidel, the hater of all that looks like religion, because he has seen it associated in his native land with oppression, or what he deems to be such, after a while loses his heat, cools down to the temperature of the mass around him, and eventually, we will hope in most instances, as we know in many, learns a better wisdom from a better Book. That our government and country are not to be made answerable for the occasional miscreant it may receive into its bosom, is an obvious dictate of justice, and in their name we protest against our author's easy admission of the charge against us. Not only have his fears, we think, magnified the evil, but his political attachments (as we presume from his most inconsistent eulogium upon Jefferson) have made him squeamish about drawing distinc tions between "native" and "naturalized." But this we fear not to do, and beginning with Jefferson-French in his morals, his philosophy, and his religion-down to the last importation of radicalism and infidelity from England, in the followers of Owen and Fanny Wright, we fear not to lay to the account of foreign teaching the doctrine now cast in our teeth as the growth of American republicanism. Doubtless it has taken root in our soil, and is bringing forth its fruits, for it meets here as elsewhere with its native food; and doubtless too, unless met and checked, it may presumptuously seek to violate that christian temple of republican freedom which our christian fathers erected, and which so freely opens its doors to receive the exile and the stranger.

sary,

it.

To maintain religion in honor—and by religion we mean christianity-is, beyond doubt, among the primary obligations of those who are called upon to administer a government that is founded upon How to do this without offence, it may be, is not easy; but many things are not easy in government which yet are necesand this is one. The state has cast off the church, but it cannot cast off religion; that is its vitality, and without it, it would soon sink into ruin. Whatever be the occasional forgetfulness of our legislatures or executives of this truth, our courts of justice, we are proud to say, have seldom or never lost sight of it. Nor could they; such dereliction would leave them no ground to stand upon, since, to cut out christianity from the common law of the land, or to administer it on principles which do not recognize it, would be an attempt as vain and fatal, as to extract the heart from a living animal, with the expectation of leaving it still perfect in all its other organs. We close this brief notice with the earnest appeal with which our author closes his eloquent volume:

Why do we still venerate the patriarchs of the revolution? Why is Washington a name we still are proud to repeat? Do we adhere to the views of our political founders? Do we hold the government in devout subjection to an overruling providence as they did? Do we even profess to esteem it now a christian government? Are there not efforts making to dislodge the very forms of piety from all connexion with it?

"And when these are gone, where will the substance be? Forms usually linger behind the principles they spring from. Pagan forms were to be seen among the institutions of the eastern empire long after christianity had ascended the throne of the Cæsars. Are we about to reverse the illustration? Has the substance of our religion taken flight already? and are we now engaged in obliterating the traces of angel feet that are never more to return among us?

"God preserve us, we must go back; we must reform our political administrations in the all-important point of their moral principles. Our christian population must do this: it is a work for them, and every other work of theirs will be hindered till this is done. We must retrace our steps; retrieve our errors; regain the position we have lost. Reform is wanted in another sense than what party-schemers think of. Let us have a reformation of the elements of public life; let us dig up the buried standard of the fathers, and fashion ourselves anew by it; let us return to the primary spirit of the government, ere the doom of the nations that forget God become our own." pp. 207, 208.

8. A Trip to Boston.

In a series of Letters to the Editor of the United States Gazette. By the Author of Two Years and a Half in the Navy. Boston: C. C. Little and James Brown. 1838. 12mo. pp. 224.

FEW pleasanter trips can be made in this, or indeed in any country, than a trip to Boston. There are few places, where friendly introductions secure a more cordial reception on first visits, and few in which the return of an old acquaintance is greeted with a more welcoming smile, or more generous hospitality. In spite of its "labyrinthine streets," its antiquated buildings, its ungenial climate, and all its odd notions, strangers love to linger there. Who ever heard of a person's visiting it, without either remaining beyond his prescribed limits, or resolving to return as soon as possible, or rather without coming under both categories, as did the author of the very entertaining volume before us, who extends his ten days to thirty, and leaves it at last with a lingering look cast behind him, bearing away the most delightful of souvenirs, the hope of another visit. If this gentleman had now gone abroad for the first time, and before known nothing of the world but from books, it might be necessary to make some allowance for the warmth of his admiration; but he proves to us, that much in all the four quarters of the globe had already been seen by him, and therefore justifies a fuller confidence in the correctness of his opinions. His visit not being made in the season of social intercourse in

cities, his pictures are necessarily more of things, than of men; but we have a few spirited sketches of some distinguished political and literary characters, in high coloring, but not beyond truth; of strong natural red, but not rouged; in speaking of such men, no praise is flattery. He is, however, not always entirely just and discriminating; he sometimes confers laurels not gathered upon Parnassus, and condemns upon evidence not admissible in a fair court of criticism;- we refer to his extravagant praise of a "little volume of poems," in a note, and his partial statement of the case of the predecessor of the present editor of the North American Review.

Our traveller visits and describes the various objects of art and nature in and around Boston. He presents the reader with faithful accounts of many of its noble institutions for the advancement of learning, the relief of suffering, and the improvement of morals; he takes him to the top of the capitol, and spreads out to his view the peculiar and delightful position of the peninsula on which the metropolis is built; he carries him out upon the bosom of its beautiful bay, through its multitude of isles, to inhale the breeze of the ocean, and stop for a while at the sea-shore resorts of beauty and fashion, or be whirled along the magnificent beaches, roiled smoother by the wave than any road which art ever formed. He then varies the scene, by an inland excursion upon the encircling hills, where he finds fine roads, overshadowed with lofty trees, and bordered with natural hedges, neat populous villages, tasteful villas, gardens, and pleasure grounds, rich woods, silvery lakes, and winding streams, all combining to give to these environs an unequalled variety and beauty. The multiplicity of roads and lakes, is one of the striking features of the neighborhood of Boston. Through a whole summer one may find a different drive for every day, within a circuit of ten miles, each time surveying the ocean, the city, and the fields, from a different summit; and a single morning's drive, within the same compass, under skilful guidance, will take one past a dozen of as pretty little lakes as can be seen any where out of Switzerland, Upper Austria, Italy, and the West of England. But the whole interest is not exhausted, when all this beautiful scenery has been beheld: the patriot will not neglect Bunker-hill, nor the scholar Cambridge, nor the moralist Mount Auburn; nor were any of them neglected by our traveller-he saw and noted them all with great fidelity. Still, inquisitive and close-searching as he was, he appears to have missed seeing one class of objects, the sight of which would well repay the toils and perils of an Atlantic voyage. Strange, that when he was on his way to see that bijou of a private library, which proves that the union of refined taste is not incompatible with assiduous manual labor, and makes real the story of the golden fleece, he should not have espied by the road-side a certain odd tabernacle-like looking building, with a single window that lets in the light of heaven upon an artist, who

dips his pencil in heaven's own colors. Of this artist, our author says nothing. Could he have been in Boston a month without seeing his Rosalie, or Beatrice, or Roman lady, or Rebekah, or Jeremiah, or his exquisitely beautiful landscapes, unsurpassed by any painter, born since the Pilgrims landed on the rock of Plymouth? In our estimate, they are more worthy of the traveller's notice, than all other objects of art in the country; and a man of taste should sooner go to Egypt and not see the Pyramids, or to Rome and not see St. Peters, and we would almost say to Naples, and not see Pompeii, than to Boston, and not see ALLSTON's paintings.

We have not thought it worth while to point out an occasional error in our author, for there are none of much magnitude, unless there is error in the statement we are about to notice. During his visit, a highly distinguished Unitarian clergyman, who had been long absent in Europe, is to impart to his people the results of his observations on the moral and religious condition of foreign nations. In listening to him, Mr. Wines hears, or supposes he hears him declare, that, "between the Roman Catholic faith and the Protestant faith, as it appears beyond the pale of Unitarianism, he would not hesitate a moment to choose. His preference would be given to the former." Again, the same gentleman "declared in round terms, and I think without qualification, that he had no respect for the established church of England. He not only expressed his utter want of respect for the English church; he declared also that he had heard preaching on various occasions, both in England and Scotland, which almost made him sigh for the instruction of heathenism." The gentleman here referred to is the Rev. E. S. Gannett, for whom we have ever entertained a high respect, considering fairness of mind to be a distinguishing feature of his character; we must therefore hope that his language would have a very different import, in the connexion in which it was used, from that which it wears in the detached passages quoted by our author; and we trust it may be so explained, as to justify our supposition.

The length of our notice of this volume has not been measured by its literary merit; on that score it has not high claims; the author we think would have done more justice to his own good reputation as a writer, had he allowed his letters to remain as communications for the columns of a newspaper; they have not that depth of thought, nor importance, nor beauty of language, that would entitle them to take a more permanent form.