in performing which the fettler finds fufficient leifure to repent his folly in quitting a civilized country for a defolate wilderness. If the emigrant betakes himself to commerce, he is expofed to long credits, bad payments, frequent loffes at fea by capture, and knavifh agents. The mechanic has a chance of faring better; but as his profeffion leads him to the great towns, he is peculiarly expofed to that bane of Europeans, the yellow-fever. The learned profeffions of law and phyfic are, according to Mr. Janfon, monopolized by the native Americans, who are able by their perfonal connections to exclude foreigners from a fair competition: "great intereft leaving little to fuperior abilities without patronage." With refpect to the liberal arts, America is certainly not their genial foil; nor will any artist of eminence meet at prefent with adequate encouragement in that country. Literature too is rather at a low ebb. Newspapers, magazines, and political pamphlets, form nearly the whole intellectual food for which there is a regular demand in the United States. Of these there is indeed a confiderable fupply. Several hundred different newfpapers," fays Mr. Janfon, "are daily diftributed by the public mail, in all parts, to fub fcribers, at the small charge of one or two cents, at most, for poftage; but printers exchange their papers with each other, by that mode, free of any charge. I have often feen a printer receive as many newspapers by one mail, as would fill the room of feveral hundred letters." With refpect to the original authors of America, they have hitherto been very few in number, and with the exception of Dr. Franklin, of very fubordinate merit. Of the American tafte for profe compofition, the following extract from a treatife called the " Hiftory of the three Judges,' published by Dr. Efra Styles, prefident of Yale College in 1795, furnished by Mr. Janson, may afford a specimen. "What I have before narrated* is delivered upon fure documents. I fball now narrate what is only conjectural, and leave it to every one's judgment, only obferving, that if it ever did take place, no one will doubt but that Dixwell was concerned in it. There is fomehow preserved, not in univerfal or general, but in particular and ftrong lineal tradition, at Newhaven, which is to be confidered more largely hereafter, that another *This narration confifted of extracts from Hutchinson, copies of old records, letters, &c. &c, of the regicides, befides Dixwell, lies buried in our buryingplace, and that this other was Whalley. This is particularly preferved among the fextons or grave-diggers, who, it seems, for many years, and perhaps even from the time efpecially of Dixwell's death, have fhewn the stone marked E. W. for Whalley, as they have that marked J. D. for Dixwell. I have not found the leaft tradition of Goffe, till I myfelf conjectured it, January 1793, inferring in my own mind, without a doubt, that if Whalley, who certainly died at Hadley, was afterwards removed here, Goffe must be here alfo. But of this, I mean as to Goffe's being here alfo, I can find no tradition, yet I find it tenacioufly adhered to, efpecially in the line of the grave-diggers, that Whalley is here. I have often examined the E. W. tone, but confider the matter without proof, yet poffible, but by no means certain. Nor do I wish, and least of all attempt, to gain any one's credulity to it, leaving every mind perfectly free and unprejudiced. But as I know that whoever take the pains that I have done, to trace out, and collect, and digeft the traditions in Newhaven, will find this among others, however it originated among us; fo, after this precaution and notification, I shall proceed, &c.!!" P. 54. In poetry the Americans have to boaft of their epic, dramatic, lyric, elegiac, and fatiric writers; but all, as far as we have learned, are of the order of mediocres poetæ, on whom Horace paffes unqualified condemnation. We are told by Mr. Janfon that Mr. Feffenden is "the Hudibras of America*." The following is a short specimen of this gentleman's pointed fatire. "Step forward, demagogue Duane, "Law, order, talents, and civility, Before your worshipful mobility, Muft bow, while you their thinking man, Lead by the nofe your kindred clan. "Thou art indeed a rogue as fly, As ever coined the ready lie, Amongst the Catilines of faction, None calls more energies in action." P. 200. Thus have we endeavoured to enable our readers to judge of the contents of this large and coftly volume; which, in his See our account of his Poems, Vol. XXV. p. 196; and of poem on the Tractors, Vol. XXI. 552. proportion proportion to its intrinfic value, could hardly have been too low priced. The original information refpecting America, which it conveys, might be comprised in a nutshell; and if deprived of the materials which it has borrowed from the newspapers and periodical works of the day, it would indeed be thorn of its beams. As a literary compofition it defies all criticism; for it aims neither at perfpicuity of method, arrangement of materials, nor correctness of ftyle. ART. X. The Claims of the Establishment. A Sermon, preached Auguft 30, 1807, at Croydon, in Surrey, by John Ireland, D.D. Prebendary of Westminster and Vicar of Croydon. Svo, 26 pp. 1s. Hatchard. 1807. THIS HIS is a very masterly difcourfe, and difcuffes a most momentous fubject with great energy of language and due force of argument. A great deal has been faid on what are called the Claims of the Roman Catholics, and the affertors of thofe claims have of late affumed a bolder Dr. Ireland in this Sermon vindicates the claims of the Establishment. The text is 2 Tim. xi. 25.-" In meekness instructing thofe that oppose themselves." The preacher begins by obferving, that the Church has lately been called upon to confider the principles of toleration, but that the advocates of the fuppofed fufferings of those who diffent from it pay no attention to the claims of the Establishment. It is proper, therefore, to enquire why the Catholics and other Diffenters are excluded from polítical power? The first question is, to whom does the headfhip of the church belong? The right of the fovereign of thefe realms to fuch headship, was denied at the Refor mation, alike by the Catholics and the Calvinifts. But against fuch pofitions uncontrovertible arguments were brought by our ancestors,, and in particular by the immortal Hooker, whofe eighth book of Ecclefiaftical Polity puts the matter for ever at reft, and proves that the refufal of obedience to any branch of government is an impeachment of the principle of fovereignty itself. With this partial refufal of obedience the Catholics of thefe dominions are chargeable. Religious toleration may indeed in this abfolve from punishment, yet it does not raife the recufant to an equality of privileges with thofe fubjects whofe obedience is entire. The next queflion is the confideration of the civil domi nion established. among ourselves. Now the papal power here was manifeftly an ufurpation on the previous rights of the throne. In the earlier times of our Church, the fovereigns enjoyed the power of erecting bishoprics, granting inveftitures, affembling fynods, and making laws in facred matters. At the Conqueft the papal encroachments began, but even in the time of Edward L. a refiftance to thefe encroachments commenced, which ended in the Reformation. The Chriftian Emperors of Rome united in their thrones the civil and religious authority; our princes had anciently, and now have the fame fulness of authority. This principle was afferted at the Reftora. tion; the attempt to violate it produced the Revolution. In the Union with Scotland, and in the Union with Ireland, it is promifed, that "The Proteftant Religion as established in these countries fhall be preferved FOR EVER." Thus then are we enabled to underfland and to apply the rule of toleration. And now let the author speak for hims felf. "There is one government over all. There is one Church, which exprefsly acknowledges its right of ecclefiaftical as well as civil rule, and which therefore obtains its efpecial protection. All others, refufing this concurrence, are allowed to perfift in their refufal, fubject to an inferiority of civil privilege. To toleration (or the fafe and practicable ufe of their own mode of worship) they are entitled through the claim of Christian chaty, and the religious refpect which is due to the confcience of men towards their God. To a certain forfeiture of civil privilege they are neceffarily fubject, on account of their denial of an effential part of the civil fovereignty, and their ftanding want of compliance with the full demands of the conftitution. This is the true notion of toleration, which must always be confidered in fubordination to an establishment,-as an indulgence, and not as an inftitution. "It is indeed too much the fashion of our times to overlook the foundations of government, to reafon from the feelings of the moment, and to neglect fubftantial principles. And hence it is, that wleration is confounded with equal encouragement, and perfecution with mere exclufion from political power. Yet let it be remembered, that no writer, whofe opinions have any influence on fociety, has ever ventured to place religious notions entirely beyond the pale of reftraint. For this we may appeal to the authorities which have been principally quoted during the late difcuffions. By one of thefe, a partial toleration has been faid to allow to Diffenters the unniolefted profeffion of religion, but to deny the entrance to offices of truft and emoluJument in the ftate. A complete toleration is faid to be the al lowance lowance of both. But notwithstanding the wideness of this pofition (which indeed deftroys the very nature of toleration), an exception is immediately made; for it is justly fuppofed, that cafes may occur,, in which "certain tenets of, religion are rea. fonably concluded to have a connection with difpofitions dan gerous to the state." This is the fubftance of the opinion of Dr. Paley, a writer whom none will accufe of a want of liberality. on religious fubjects. "A much higher name has lately been used as an authority for the unlimited claims of toleration. Mr. Locke is apt to inconvenience his fubfequent reafoning by affuming too great a latitude for his fundamental pofitions. His general maxim (the only part of him which fome of his readers feem to remember) is, that the civil magiftrate, having, in the nature of things," nothing to do with the religion of any country, can exercise no control over the fubject on account of religious opinions; and that all fubjects together are entitled to the fame common rights as men and denizens. This is his toleration. But, when called upon to defcribe what he means by the common rights, he defines them to be "the protection and impunity of men, not offending in civil things." And he fuppofes in the Diffenter "mere feparation and difference of opinion joined with inno cency of life.". Nor is this all. Mr. Locke, who, at first, fo exprefsly excludes the magiftrates from any control on account of religious opinions, is obliged, with all others, to call him in on certain occafions. On every principle stated in this discourse, he defends the fuppreffion of idolatry among the Jews. God exercifed the fovereignty over his chofen people; but idolatry naturally promoted an alienation from his regal authority. Ít was therefore liable to reftraint, as the acknowledgment of another King, against the laws of empire." Again, in points of faith, he pronounces thofe which are merely fpeculative to be entitled to an unlimited freedom, even to the denial of the truth of revelation itself! But in practical cafes, or those which involve moral actions, he establishes a control. He excepts Atheists from his toleration, and thofe whofe opinions are contrary to the existence of fociety. To thefe he adds another inftance, of much importance to this argument. "That church can have no right to be tolerated by the magiftrate, which is conftituted upon fuch a bottom, that all thofe who enter into it, do thereby ipfo facto deliver themselves up to the protection and encouragement of another prince: for by this means the ma giftrate would give way to the fettling of a foreign jurisdiction in his own country." He makes another exception elsewhere, and will not grant his toleration to thofe religions which are themfelves intolerant. Nor is this faid through vengeance: for it may well be fuppofed, that a religion which is intolerant when poffeffed of power, will be a religion of intrigue when out of power, and is therefore to be watched over, rather than thought. lefsly and too liberally trufted," P. 14. The |