Professor of Divinity will be denied testimonials for orders. No candidate for her degrees has brought a legal action against his examiner, and forced the University first into a suspension of her accustomed modes of examination, next into an abortive attempt to legalize them, and at last, into a recurrence to the old monkish forms of disputation. She summons no Convocation to pass privilegia against her members. Her Vice-chancellor is not assailed by defiances from graduates demanding to be degraded. She does not exhibit, in short, the symptoms which precede political dissolution.

How, then, is Oxford to escape the fate which the intolerance that enacted the Caroline statutes, and the apathy not unmixed with intolerance that has preserved them unrepealed, seem to prepare for her? If there were any use in suggesting a course which we know will not be adopted, we should say, by following the advice of Dr Hampden,* and abolishing all tests except those which Parliament has imposed, and which Parliament, therefore, alone can remove. The next best expedient would be to follow Dr Paley's, advice, and change subscription from a profession of faith into an engagement of conformity. If, as we fear is the case, the genius loci, the present temper of the place, renders this impracticable, as a last resource the plan might be adopted which has apparently succeeded at Cambridge. No test should be required on matriculation; and no test previously to a degree, except that the candidate is a bona fide member of the Church of England. An engagement might be added to withdraw from the University on ceasing to hold the doctrines of the Church of England, and a tribunal created to decide on any imputed breach of this engagement. To decide such questions by npiouara, by judicial acts performed by a deliberative assembly, is revolutionary. It is an imitation of the worst practices of the worst democracies. Under such an arrangement, no one would be necessarily excluded from the studies or the honours of the place. A Dissenter, or a Roman Catholic, if he thought fit to comply with the usages, and receive the instruction of his College, might pass his examination, and be enrolled in a class, and obtain an under-graduate's prize. But he would be excluded from a degree, and therefore from the government, and, generally speaking, from the emoluments of the University. The sincerity of a graduate's declaration must be left to his own conscience; but, if he broke his engagement of conformity, the proposed tribunal would afford a remedy, which it will soon be found that Convocation does not.

* Observations on Religious Dissent, p. 39. 1834.

ART. IV-1. Rapport fait à la Chambre des Paris. Par M. le DUC DE BROGLIE, au nom d'une Commission spéciale chargée de l'examen du Projet de Loi rélatif à l'Instruction Sécondaire. Paris: 1844.

2. Des Jésuites. Par MM. MICHELET et QUINET. Paris: 1843.

'THE HE reader will remember' (so say Messrs Michelet and Quinet, in the preface to the fourth edition of their little work) under what circumstances this book was published. The two authors, doubly united by the ties of friendship and opinions, are both Professors in the College de France. Their lectures were disturbed, last Spring, by noisy expressions of dissent, which threatened to produce a scandalous disturbance. They had been engaged in commenting on the spirit and in 'fluence of the different Religious Orders. They had treated of the order of Templars, and they were then treating of the Society of Jesus-of its constitution, of its origin, of the part which it has performed, and that which it still performs in the affairs of the world. The opposite party wished to reduce them to silence; but the two Professors triumphed over this illiberal 'violence. They had the right of speaking according to their conscience, and they have spoken.'

Let any one who remembers France and Paris, such as they were only twelve years before the spring of 1843, in which these Lectures were given, reflect for a moment on the extraordinary nature of the change which these few words indicate. Let him remember the factious placards which filled the streets, the caricatures in the shop windows, the songs which every theatre and every place echoed. Let him remember Charles X. and his family flying from the enraged multitudes, which regarded him eyen less as a sovereign who had violated his engagements, than as an incarnation of Jesuitism. Let him remember the sack of an Archbishop's palace, and the destruction of his library, by a mob which would have been puzzled to assign any more distinct cause of quarrel with the Prelate, than is contained in the couplet shouted by the Gamins in the van of the attacking columnC'est l'archevêque de Paris

Qui est un Jésuite comme Charles Dix!?

Let him recall the timid, half-supplicating looks of the shrinking figures which might be seen shyly traversing the streets in clerical costume, like beasts of chase stealing from one covert to another; and the scowling countenances, generally

of men whose years and appearance reminded the observer of the first Revolution, which seemed to dog them as they passed, with unmitigated though triumphant hatred. Let them remember, perhaps more significant than all the rest, the eagerness with which the few who had courage enough to say a word on behalf of the exiled family and defeated party, were wont to lay the blame of all their faults on the clergy; and specially on those representatives of all that was detested and despised in the clergy, the common scapegoats of all political parties, the 'men ' in black from underground,' the children of Loyola. And now, in May 1843, two of the most eminent Professors in the College de France are interrupted in a course of Lectures directed against the Jesuits, by such determined opposition, that it is only through the strenuous exertions of their own partisans that they are able to put down the uproar and proceed. The liberals had the best of it, but only by a majority.. Our adversaries (says M. Michelet) were able to perceive, by the attitude of the silent 'multitude which filled all the courts of the Collège de France ' on the 18th of May, that it would be dangerous to tempt any longer the patience of the public. The silence was complete. An individual suspected, perhaps wrongly, of an attempt at interruption, was passed from hand to hand, and expelled from the hall in a moment. Since that day, order has not again 'been disturbed.' Changed indeed must the times be, when the Jesuit party can maintain such a fight, although unsuccessful,—in the very centre of the liberal youth of France, in the Lecture room of the College which has long been regarded as the special nursery of revolutionary doctrine.

As for these joint Lectures of the two learned and enthusiastic Professors, we are bound to say that they contained much to justify the partisans of the Church in their energetic protest. They made a great sensation during the popular excitement on this subject in the year 1843. But so rapidly do the fluctuations of controversy succeed each other in French society, that the work has already completed its 'run' at Paris, though it may yet be new to some of our readers on this side the Channel. We shall therefore be brief in our notice of it. As for M. Michelet, the Carlyle of Young France, his indignation is so imaginative, the objects against which he directs it so strangely transformed and unrealized by the halo which his strong fancy throws around them, that his rhapsodies impart rather the exciting sensations of romance, than the vehement feelings of real controversy. He seems now to have fairly broken with his old love-transcendental Catholicism. In his last work, with the piquant title Le Prêtre, la Femme, et la Famille, the

reader will find much grave Protestant doctrine conveyed under the airy shape of sentimental declamation; but to reconcile M. Michelet of the 19th century with M. Michelet of the 12ththe adorer of Saints and Cenobites, School Doctors and Begging Friars-is a task beyond our powers, and means of information. M. Quinet's faults are of a more serious kind. That his long and angry pamphlet should have been read in the shape of Lectures in the College de France, does not tend to raise the ideas which a foreigner may have conceived of the tone of education in that eminent establishment. Better had his wholesome indignation been tempered with a little mixture of justice, not to say accuracy. Better had he made himself acquainted with the language in which the Jesuit Institutes are compiled-the scholastic Latin of Loyola's time-before attempting to deduce moral conclusions from them. Such translations as 'de ente rationis,' of the idea of 'being'-'predicamentum substantiæ,' la pensée de substance,' (p. 265,) would hardly have passed current in the Pays Latin in the days of darkness, three centuries ago. And his suppres-1 sions and distortions of the truth appear to be far worse than his mistranslations; but it would exceed our present limits to notice them at length. The reader will find them very fairly exposed in a pamphlet of Father Cahour-Les Jésuites, par un Jésuite; the work of a man of some talent, and written in the placid, unctuous style of a Jesuit gentleman of an hundred years ago. Attacks at once so violent and so feeble, only give an easy triumph to the enemy assailed. Messrs Michelet and Quinet could have devised no better mode of furthering that dreaded reaction' which haunts the imagination of their liberal friends.

And it is difficult, no doubt, to over-estimate the reaction which has taken place in favour of the Church, in the great part of French society. How far it is durable, how far it rests on any solid basis of belief, and how far it is connected with political causes and with mere faction, is a matter far beyond the bounds of our present enquiry. Nor are we concerned to estimate the real strength of those mysterious personages, the Jesuits, who hold as prominent a place now in the imagination of philosophic France, as ever they did in that of Protestant England in the days of Titus Oates. Whether the Jesuits, as an actual living society, possess in these days all the importance attributed to them; whether they do really keep a register of the family secrets of all people of wealth and consequence, employ secret agents in every department of society, shut up countesses in convents, and inveigle young ladies of too exuberant spirits into madhouses, as we read in fashionable romances, we do not 2 c †

VOL. LXXXI. NO. CLXIV.

care to enquire. As the existence of Jesuits in France is illegal, (under the law against associations,) their numbers cannot very well be ascertained. According to one of themselves, M. Ravignan, there were 206 'professed Jesuits' in France in 1843. M. Michelet at the same time, on the authority of a person 'who considers himself well informed,' estimates their number at more than 960: at the time of the Revolution of 1830, there were

only 423. 'These thousand men have performed in twelve years a prodigious work. Beaten down in 1830, crushed and levelled with the ground, they have risen again unperceived by any one. Not only have they risen again: but while men were asking whether there were any Jesuits, they have carried off, without difficulty, thirty or forty thousand priests, and are lead'ing them-God knows where!"Are there really any Jesuits?" Many a man asks this question, whose wife they already govern through a Confessor at their service-his wife, his household, his table, his hearth, his bed-To morrow, they , will have his child!'

To-morrow they will have his child; and make him even as one of themselves-spiritless, cowardly, false; a sycophant and an informer; the slave to an abject superstition; the victim of a superficial, routine education, which gives no time, no room, for the energies to develop themselves, offers no sustenance to the heart, drowns the intellect and imagination, and poisons the affections. Such is the cry of the liberal party in France, or rather of that portion of it which is engaged in defending the species of monopoly at present enjoyed by the University-that is, the Government-in the matter of education. Save us from that monopoly, is the counter watchword of the Church party. If the state will maintain an institution founded on irreligious principles; if it will pension Pantheists and Materialists, and place them at the head of public education; if, in its horror of the priesthood, it prefers to keep up an establishment of its own, founded on the cold negation of all religion; so let it be, till a better day shall have dawned on France, and improved public feeling shall call for the total subversion of so unnatural a system. But, in the mean time, let not those who disapprove of it be forced to peril the immortal souls of their children; let them enjoy the choice of their own teachers, while they contribute as citizens to the salaries which the State pays its Pagan favourites.

Liberty of Education is, in short, the watchword of one party in the very important quarrel which has recently agitated France, and will shortly agitate it again. Liberty of Education answer the others as regards secondary instruction, (which, in the words