pardon on account of their error, and on the fast day Judge Sewall with unfeigned humility procured the public reading of his confession from the pulpit of the Old South, himself standing in the presence of the congregation while it was read by the pastor, Rev. Mr. Willard (Holmes' Annals, I. 440, Talvj, 703); and this was not a solitary instance, (see Talvj). Where in all the history of persecutions will you find another instance of this kind?

The case of Judge Sewall is the more remarkable as his pastor Mr. Willard had always been opposed to these proceedings, and had openly differed with the Judge on the subject at the time. Where do we find any thing of this kind in the biographies of a Laud or a Torquemada, whose little finger all their lives long was thicker than all the loins of all the Puritans together? who shed more blood in the service of intolerance and superstition in a single day, and inflicted more pain in a single hour, than the whole nation of the Puritans during the entire period of their national existence! Why this exhibition of Christian penitence and humility on the one part and the entire absence of it on the other? It is because the Puritans were Christians, really and heartily so; while none of the stamp of Torquemada and Laud had anything of Christianity but the name: and it is men of this stamp who reproach the Puritans for intolerance and persecution.

We recommend to the particular attention of the reader Talvj's whole account of the witchcraft delusion, (p. 680—709) and regret we have not room to translate it here. Though Talvj is evidently inclined to do justice to the Puritans and cherishes no prejudice against them; yet she does not hesitate occasionally to censure them, and sometimes severely where in our judgment censure is little deserved, for example in reference to their religious persecutions she says, "That even Luther in his passionate anguish at seeing the gospel dishonored would have the Anabaptists annihilated with the sword, that Melanchthon approved Calvin's bloody participation in the sacrifice of Servetus and all their great contemporaries sympathized with them this certainly can neither justify nor excuse the severe measures of the Puritans in the seventeenth century. Those admirable men were but just emerging from a long night which had buried in slumber all free thought on the relation of men to God. And it would have been a miracle indeed if they, the only light-bringing stars, should at once have turned the night to day. But the Puritan legislators of Massachusetts lived a whole century later, a century during which the doctrines and the natural consequences of Protestantism had variously developed themselves. Still only a few of them had yet come to those clear views of the freedom of conscience which in our day have gained in all Protestant and in most Catholic countries a

preponderance so decided that no legislators can any more act contrary to them." (p. 325, 6).

If there be any justice in this censure, it must rest in the idea that the Puritans were behind the men of their own age, were less en lightened on the subject of religious liberty than the other legislators of the 17th century which certainly is not true but the very reverse of it is true, as is perfectly manifest from the history so ably and so interestingly written by Talvj herself. What in all conscience was there during the reigns of Elizabeth and the Jameses and the Charleses to teach the Puritans the true doctrine of religious liberty? They were obliged to feel their way along in the midst of the deepest darkness on this subject; and it is glory enough for them that some among them did see clearly, and most of them saw something where the rest of the world were still as blind as bats; it is glory enough for them that they set in motion those ideas which have since banished religious persecution from almost all Protestant, and even from some Papal countries.

So our author censures the colonial government for the death of Miantonomoh, as it seems without very good reason. Miantonomoh was a savage chief engaged in war with another savage chief; and according to the rules of savage warfare, which he well understood before he commenced the conflict, in being taken prisoner he was to be put to death by prolonged torture; the colonial government did rescue him from the torture, but not from death. Why should they, unless they were bound to adopt the Quaker principle in regard to all war and all capital punishment? There are a few other instances of cen→ sure which we feel somewhat disposed to criticise, but we let them pass.

Talvj brings prominently to view the difference between the original planters of the Plymouth and those of the Massachusetts Colony. The difference is important, and must not be lost sight of by any who would gain a right idea of the elements from which New England and the United States have developed themselves. The Plymouth colonists for the most part were poor, simple hearted, fully democratic and tolerant. The planters of Massachusetts, on the other hand, were many of them comparatively rich, aristocratic in feeling, republican but not democratic in their political principles, and with few exceptions very considerably high church in their ecclesiastical notions.

Connecticut was rather a mollifying combination of the Massachusetts with the Plymouth element; while Rhode Island was a sort of drainage, a receptacle of all the uncombining ultraisms, the radical de mocracies, the red republicanisms, the through and through come outerisms of that day. In the subsequent growth of the nation the Ply.

mouth and the Rhode Island development have increased much faster than the Massachusetts; and will in the end most probably give character to the whole. At least such is the present tendency of things, and so it has been ever since the close of the revolutionary war. At present nothing seems likely to arrest it, unless it be the vast immigration from the continent of Europe. The literature, the ideas, the habits which those immigrants bring with them, though the immigrants are mostly receptive rather than productive, acted upon rather than acting, will in the end exert a powerfully modifying influence on our national character.

Roger Williams, the conscientious and able leader of the democracy of these times, the most formidable and the most estimable of the opponents of the Puritans, deserves a special notice. Roger Williams was the prototype of the best sort of ultra reformers. There are many of his class at the present day, though but few as good and as amiable as he. It is a race that always will exist in every age of advancement and reform, and it is a kind that goeth not out except by prayer and fasting. Denunciation, persecution, blind conservatism, do not the least good. The reforms which are needed must be conscientiously, faithfully, and with all possible dispatch, accomplished, and thus the exciting, sustaining cause of the ultraism be taken out of the way. You must cure ultraisms in society as you cure delirium tremens in the individual, by abstaining from all that intoxicates. If this be not practicable, why, then the disease must ever and anon make its appearance.

Williams was an honest, earnest, good man, at heart a Christian, benevolent towards all, forbearing and forgiving to his enemies. In his controversies he was severe and bitter as any of his contemporaries; and no man ever said harder or more cutting things against the Quakers than he. But it is to his credit, and posterity ought ever to bear it in mind to his honor and with never ceasing gratitude to his memory, that he utterly repudiated physical pains and penalties and the burden of civil disabilities for mere matters of opinion.

The great duty of religious toleration he saw clearly, and practised consistently; and in this he was greatly in advance of most of the men of his age. The Puritans generally had begun to see something of this truth; though like the blind man in the gospel whose eyes had just begun to receive the light, they saw men as trees walking. Cromwell, Milton, Vane, and a few others, understood the matter clearly ; but they were exceptions to the general rule; and for nothing was Cromwell more severely blamed by that great and good man, Richard Baxter, than for his principles of entire religious toleration. This may show what the age was in that respect. We honor Williams for contending in behalf of this great principle, we honor him for his consist

ent practice in regard to it, and we cheerfully acknowledge the debt of gratitude which we owe him for it. Nor was he ultra on this point. He well understood and very happily pointed out the limitations of religious tolerance. He compared the members of a commonwealth to a ship's crew and passengers on the ocean, including men of every sort. The shipmaster is at liberty to establish daily worship, but not to compel others to attend it; nor are those who do not attend at liberty to disturb those who do. All are bound to submit to the rules of the ship in whatever pertains to the safety and comfort of the voyage, to bear their part of the expenses, to respect and obey the officers; and if any should refuse to do this, should any under pretext that all are equal in Christ, preach or write that there ought to be no officers or rules or punishments, I have never denied (said he) that such transgressors ought to be judged, restrained, compelled and punished, if they deserve. (Talvj p. 390, 91.)

Williams had an ardent, impatient mind; an idea burnt in him with such heat and flame that he could not stop to see its connection with other ideas, or its adaptedness to existing circumstances. While the iron was hot he hammered away with all his might, regardless of the shape he was giving to it, or of the use that was afterwards to be made of it. Hence many of his blows and much of his toil and sweat were thrown away. As soon as he got a thought he must work it out, must make everything else consistent with it through and through, whatever inconsistencies and incongruities might grow out of this one string of consistencies. It is pleasant to see the two boots of a pair perfectly matched; but if the feet on which they are to be worn are unlike, such perfect mates make a very bad fit. He changed his opinions many times during his life, and knew perfectly well that the process of conviction in his own mind was not instantaneous, but progressive. Yet he could not wait for other minds to go through a like process. They must change when he did, or rather they must be changed when he was changed, no sooner and no later, or he must excommunicate them; he could not conscientiously do otherwise. Williams gave the Puritans much trouble, and there was fault on both sides. In some parts of his career he was much like the refractory men on ship board, whom he himself affirmed ought to be judged, restrained, compelled and punished as they deserve. No commonwealth, especially in times of feebleness and danger, could without self-annihilation tolerate such a course as he sometimes took in regard to the government of the colonies. Yet in all these disputes and the consequent measures of violence, it is interesting to see that not a few of the colonists loved and respected Williams as a good man, though mistaken; and that this affection and es

teem was on his part fully reciprocated. Here is a striking difference between those who are really Christians, and those who are Christians in name only.

The Puritans, though like other human beings imperfect, were Christians, gospel men, good men, full of the Holy Ghost and of faith; and a great and good work it was theirs to do, a work of which we and all the world are now reaping the benefit, and blessings be on their memory and peace to their ashes; and let their revilers and the violators of their graves meet everywhere the contempt they deserve.

ARTICLE V.

CLASSICAL EDUCATION IN THE GERMAN GYMNASIA.

By Dr. Hermann Wimmer, late Professor in the Blochmann College, Dresden, Saxony.

THE political reformation of Germany, for a long time sought by philosophers and politicians, and fostered by the general desire of union, though its progress is now apparently stopped through the failure of the late revolution, is not likely to stand still until it has effected its object. The happy accomplishment of the revolution may indeed fall to the lot of a more fortunate posterity, but the passions of a revolutionary age will not cease to disturb the peace of the living generation, and to impress their stamp on the entire face of society. Changes are brought about to be changed again after the sun of freedom has risen; but these are now unavoidable, as the shadows of night precede the morning light. Professors have been writing in newspapers or speaking in parliaments; students fighting on barricades or haranguing the people in clubs; some are prisoners; others fugitive. In "the country of thoughtfulness and learning," a political pamphlet is preferred to a scientific book, and the speech of a noisy partisan to the lecture of a learned professor. All the institutions of learning, gymnasia or universities, will suffer from the vehement shock, and the vulgar reproach often brought against classical learning as not being practical enough, will now overwhelm the reasoning of its adherents, while on the opposite side the victorious governments do not feel bound to look graciously down on institutions which brought out that pernicious spirit of freedom and union. And whatever may be the state of