ty, modesty, and, beyond what is requisite in a woman, learning upon which Gilbert Wakefield, writing in the margin with his pencil, makes this apostrophe—“ John, John, I blush for thee." THE PRESS. [From the same. THE radical hostility of tyrants to the circulation of thought, is strongly depicted in the reply of Sir William Berkley, governor of Virginia, to certain questions relating to that colony, propounded from abroad in 1670. “I thank God there are no free schools, nor printing, and I hope we shall not have these hundred years: for learning has brought disobedience and heresy and sects into the world, and printing has divulged them, and libels against the best government. God keep us from both!" What an admirable text for the Holy Alliance ! What a consoling reflection for the editor of a free paper to know, that monarchs, at the head of mighty armies, dread the combination and array of the simple letters of the alphabet, subsisting on bloodless ink, and quartered on virgin paper! There is something military in the art of printing. The line, the column, and the square, do they not belong alike to the nomenclature of printing and of war? On the other hand, how did the army of France, and the navy of England prosper until they resorted to the press? MISTAKE OF POPE. We have always thought Pope wrong, in saying, "An honest man 's the noblest work of God.". For ourselves, we give a decided preference to an honest woman; women are preferable in every thing. CONCILIATION. CONCILIATION is the great art of debate. In a deliberative assembly, where the majority of wills is to be obtained, it is astonishing that any man, having the re putation of talents, should so far mistake his aim, and his object, as to be deficient in courtesy to his associ→ ates. The authority of intellect is difficult enough to be sustained, even with all the blandishments of rhetoric. It is not, like personal strength and majesty, palpable to the eye; nor like the soul-subduing fascination of beauty, thrilling through the fibres; it is an authority founded on opinion, on the opinion of your associates, as impalpable as the thoughts, which cherish and support it; an ideal supremacy, which men readily deny when they choose, and always acknowledge with reluctance. Therefore is it an authority, which can only permanently and happily rest upon the affections of discerning men, who are your contemporaries. You can gain the affection of no man by insulting him; you impress no idea of your superiority by rudeness. Frowns are the arguments, and threats are the persuasives, of bullies. The brave despise, and the wise rejoice, in them. They are, inevitably, symptoms of surrender and defeat. An angry, supercilious speaker, on a legislative floor, is a positive injury to his own constituents. Invest him with what great renown you please, let his praise for mind be trumpeted from the forest to the sea shore, it avails nothing; place him in a situation where, like Lord Thurlow, or Judge Chase, he may be rude without the danger of impeachment, but do not send him to a deliberative assembly, to mar the beautiful art of persuasion with the very weapons of rhetoric. HUSBAND AND WIFE. AMONG Some, who have read Blackstone, and more, who have not, the erroneous and ungallant opinion prevails, that a husband may chastise his wife, provided the weapon be not thicker than his little finger. For the benefit of the ladies, the information of the gentlemen, and the honour of our state, it should be known that this is not the law of South Carolina. There was a decision of our constitutional [supreme] court about thirteen years since, pronounced by the late Judge Wilds, in the dignified sweetness of his noble spirit, in which he proclaimed the law of South Carolina on this subject, in the following graceful extract from the Honey Moon: "The man that lays his hand upon a woman, EXTRAVAGANCE IN SPEECH. How annoying it is to encounter one of that class of persons, who, having no measure in their minds, use none in their discourse; with whom nothing is indifferent, nor simply bad, nor purely good, but every thing is in the superlative degree, speaking after this fashion : "He is the best preacher I ever heard in the whole course of my life!" "This is the finest piece of mutton I ever sat down to !" " Well, such a hot day as this I never saw since I was born!" "That is the prettiest girl I ever set my eyes on !" "Of all the speakers, I ever heard, he is the poorest !" &c. It is in vain to suggest any exception or modification of these absolute propositions, or for a moment to question their entire truth. And yet they cannot possibly be true, unless the speaker can rally in his mind's eye all the preachers, legs of mutton, warm days, pretty girls, and poor speakers, which he has met with in the course of his life, compare them all at a glance, decide their merits, and declare the result. Now these people pretend to nothing like this. Instead of their memory embracing all the past, their mind is competent only to the present, and one object at a time fills it "chock full." Hence the disproportionate size, which it assumes in their sight, and obtains in their descriptions. Associate with them only a day or two, and you will find they attach no importance whatever to their own gratuitous decrees; having, for every preacher, every leg of mutton, and every pretty girl, the same commendation, which you would suppose was confined to one of each. The correct rule is, to pay no attention to these comprehensive speakers, except, perhaps, when there is something of selfishness in their remarks. As when you hear one of them say, I have the best pointer in the state; my horse is the best horse, &c. and then you may venture to set him down, having on your side every other man in the state, who owns a horse or a pointer. CORONATION OF GEORGE IV. [National Advocate. New-York.] COURT OF CLAIMS. SIR GEOFFRY SQUINT claimed to look awry upon his majesty's liege subjects, at the banquet; Sir G. to be fasting. Allowed. Sir Nimbleton Legges claimed to cut three capers for his majesty's divertisement in Westminster Hall, and to do the same by deputy. Allowed. The said Sir N. being an alderman. Terence Swigall, Esquire, of Dublin, presented a petition to be allowed to drink for his majesty, when his majesty should be laid under the table. Rejected. His majesty having the strongest head in Europe. Giles Grumbleton, Esquire, claimed to grunt three times, after the banquet, and to have three pigs' tails, and a ram's horn, in a tin box, from the city of London. Allowed. The Lord Mayor of London claimed, on behalf of the city, to taste his majesty's turtle soup, and to have all that remained in the pots. Allowed. His majesty was also pleased to order that a place in the procession should be provided for Sir Hans Snickerenstough, of his majesty's kingdom of Hanover; the said Sir Hans to be dressed in fifteen pair of breeches, three coats, and seven waistcoats, each garment to be half orange, and half scarlet, and to carry the grand standard of Hanover, a large cheese, surmounted by a dried rat, and two onions. Knowles Growlton, Esquire, claimed a place at the banquet, to eat out of a wooden trencher, and swear at the cookery, and to have the trencher. Allowed. But to find the trencher himself. It was also declared to be a prescriptive right of all the good people of these realms to grumble at their dinners. The master of the horse claimed to cut two somersets and a half over his majesty's saddle, on the ground, and to have three hairs from the tail of his majesty's horse. Allowed. The said hairs to be plucked under the inspection of a committee of the commons, and the judges of the court of exchequer. Allowed. The honourable company of brewers, by their president, claimed to drink two pots of ale with his majesty. The right hands of his majesty, and the president, to be joined, and their right legs resting on the back of a chair; and to have the pots. Allowed. But his majesty to drink by deputy; his temperate habits allowing him to drink nothing stronger than fourth proof whiskey. The Universities of Cambridge and Oxford, by their chancellors, claimed to send two wranglers, to wrangle, and chop logic, on London bridge, with all the good people of the realm. Allowed. Mr. Toupec, his majesty's barber general, claimed to walk in the procession, with all the varieties of wigs on his head, for the last two hundred years, surmounted by a barber's basin; and to shave all the pigs in England, for forty days. Allowed. The societies of the Inns of Court claimed to walk in the procession, attended by their clients. Allowed. But recommended the clients to stay at home, his majesty not wishing to have poverty and rags in the procession. The Royal College of Surgeons, by their president, as the true and legal successors of the ancient and right venerable company of barbers and surgeons, claimed to extract two teeth, and draw a horn spoonful of blood from his majesty, by leeches, immediately before the pouring out of the holy oil. This case presented some nice point; the court adjourned to take counsel. In this case, previous to the next meeting of the court, there will be a solemn argument before the twelve judges, on two points. First, That inasmuch as his majesty's teeth have all decayed, whether the extracting of two false teeth, is within the meaning of the charter of the college and, second, that inasmuch as whiskey has been substituted in his majesty for blood, whether the drawing of a fluid from his majesty's veins, is, by the com |