labours of her patriots; deaden her industry; neutralize her charities. From arguments directed against the system, it is natural to turn our attention to the sentiments which we ought to entertain toward that numerous class whose interest it serves. When we see their wealth accumulating over the ruins of private happiness, we might feel our thoughts excited to indignation. But, on second reflection, we should be disposed to compassion rather than anger, when we observe at what expense of character their wealth is gained. The assertion may be maintained, that a lottery-dealer, so far as his character is derived from his business, can never be a very respectable man. Wealth may afford that sort of respect which easily attaches to it; but his profession has no quality of elevation or benefit which can attract esteem. If he possess it at all, it must be on other grounds, -of public usefulness, or private character: for an upright man will sometimes be strangely blinded to the moral nature of the craft which he has taken for his profession. But if a dealer in tickets should be disposed to make appeal from such a sentence upon his character, he might be asked;-Upon what do you found your pretensions to respectability? Do you not know that the honour of being useful, which most other citizens can claim, you cannot claim? You stand behind your counter and gather in your substance, by practising upon the credulity of the people. You feed yourself from the necessities of the indigent, and maintain your splendours by the folly of the rich. Were the world what it ought to be, there would be no room for your profession. The patriot can have no friendship for you; since you impair the resources of his country. The man who regards the interests of the poor can have no friendship for you; since he every day can see the evils which you have created. The lover of his country's institutions can give you no regard; for you circumscribe the influence of her happiest institutions. If you are desirous of character,look to your wealth, look to your family; look to any thing but your occupation. But with many, perhaps I should have said the most, of the tribe, it would be superfluous to waste time in argument. Men who know no higher good than wealth, and call no means of gaining it dishonour; their precise elevation of character is very significantly exhibited, in their windows, by the whole apparatus of wheels and squirrels, mice and painted goddesses; while they stuff the papers with effusions, appropriate to their intellect, in sickly advertisements. One would suppose that they had not yet arrived at the dignity of reason; or had stopped short at some intermediate stage of the progress, which Lord Monboddo has described, from an ape to a man. Beings not far enough exalted for the honour of reproach, their best element is contempt. I shall now bring this letter to a close; having put together the thoughts which I first proposed to do, upon that part of the general subject which relates to the public tendency of lotteries: I hope for a future opportunity to confer with you upon the portion which remains, and to prosecute the inquiry, whether, on moral principles, distinct from every ground of expediency, a man ought not to renounce them. АНЕ. (To be continued.) BISHOP HOBART AND THE RE VIEWERS. THERE are some men who seem destined to make a noise, move how they will. Such a man appears to be the Bishop of NewYork. On his late return from England, that prelate preached, 66 do indeed seem to see some truth in the Bishop's statements, but his high-church friends know no bounds to their resentment. They see nothing in the whole discourse, but the most gratuitous obliquity, or the most amazing obtuseness,— the nine lauditary paragraphs notwithstanding. Hear for example, in what a strain the Quarterly Theological Review speaks,-a periodical, than which there is not another in the world more eminently high-church, the New-York Christian Journal not excepted. as who needs to be informed, a less. The dissenting magazines comparative view of the mother country and his own. In that discourse, though he lauded England not a little, yet as he presumed to give his own dear native land" the preference, it behoved him as a reasonable man to set forth the grounds of such preference; and in doing this he must needs displace some of the loose stones and Idust which it seems he had discovered in his clamberings about the walls of that venerable edifice, the church establishment. The consequence was as might have been expected. For "a man of gentlemanlike habits, nay, of considerable intelligence, nay, of the sacred profession, nay, of episcopal rank, actually to signalize his first appearance in the American pulpit, on his return from the hospitality and marked attentions of the British clergy, by a laboured, and most unmeasured, and most unfounded attack on the established church of England"-was an offence not to be borne in silence; and accordingly upon the first appearance of the discourse in England, all good churchmen, and especially highchurchmen, and above all, the highchurch reviewers, were thrown into such an uproar, as, judging from the hum at this distance, resembled, in no small degree, the stir among the people which the townclerk at Ephesus was hardly able to appease. The Bishop seems to have had a presentiment of what was coming, and to have guarded against it. For in his English edition, as I gather from the reviewers, he selected and brought together in his preface no less than nine paragraphs from the sermon, of unequivocal and downright praise of England. These he hoped might serve as a sort of paragreles to mitigate the storm. But in this he was disappointed. The hail came thick and pitiless neverthe "Still more repugnantly" says that oracle of the establishment, "should we believe that Dr. Hobart had volunteered this offensive publication; that he had been thinking only of a vulgar flourish to announce his arrival in America; and that any unfortunate eagerness to grasp the contemptible popularity attached to libelling England, should have betrayed him into a flimsy and fantastical declamation, stiffened out with charges, which, if he had not examined, it was rashness and presumption in him to mention; and which, if he had examined, and even found to be true, he should have been the last man to mention." "Or, was this depreciation of our church designed for the pastoral edification of his own, as his pamphlet seems to say? . . . Or, did he discover that the spirit of Episcopacy in America would derive new purity from the announcement that the great parent church in England had fallen into gross decay? Or, could he have conceived that in the midst of his crowd of native sects, all fiercely jealous of the church, the declaration that the principles of Episcopacy were fallible, worldly, and incapable of resisting rapid and rancorous corruption, would tend to raise them in the American eye? the American eye? None of these suppositions will relieve him.".. have in Dr. Hobart, a clergyman stepping from the very shore to the pulpit, brimfull of the most unfortunate opinions on our affairs; laying upon his cushion for a sermon, a political pamphlet; and calling upon his congregation to rejoice in the superiority of their obscure church over the fallen and decrepit grandeur of the mighty church of England." Thus the reviewers go on, pouring forth page after page of national indignation. Indeed it is amusing to see magnanimous England, --forgetting her own similar offences, committed in the persons of her Fearons, and her Fauxes, and her quarterly reviewers, against her transatlantic daughter,-wince and smart thus, under the castigation of "the gentle shepherd of an obscure flock in the wilderness;" for thus diminutively do the reviewers of the sermon affect to speak of Dr. Hobart and his dio cese. Now, for my part, since the reviewers make such a bluster, I wonder Bishop Hobart does not at once put them all to silence and to shame, by coming forth with the whole, of which he had not told the half. He knows, and his review ers know, that not only may the "charges" he has brought against them be substantiated, but those charges may be backed by many more of the same kind. But the misunderstanding is one of a family nature, and it does not VOL. I.-No. II. 11 perhaps become us who are without to intimate any opinion as to the merits of the case. It is merely incidental that I have touched upon the subject, having taken up my pen with reference to another topic, suggested by the Christian Observer. The conductors of that work indulge but a moderate resentment at Bishop Hobart's sermon. For they remark that he had formed his opinions, "not among Bible Society and Church Missionary schismatics, but in his intercourse with the warmest opponents of all such outrageous proceedings, to whom his well known opinions, on these and similar matters, had introduced and recommended him ;" and therefore they know how to excuse him. But they take occasion from the sermon to notice several other things, and among these, the use the Bishop makes of the term dissenters. "With us," say they, "in England, the term is neither harsh nor inappropriate; for it means only "non-conformists" as it respects the established church: but what it means in the United States we cannot so clearly understand; and the use of it appears to us exceptionable, because it seems to imply a spirit which would exclude from the visible pale of Christ's church all who do not adopt the doctrines and discipline of a very small, though highly respectable, minority of transatlantic Christtians." And this exclusiveness of spirit the use of the term is intended to imply; and the Christian Observer folks must be very degenerate Churchmen, and very ignorant of the apostolic claims of Episcopacy, to think the spirit censurable. In any other sense of the word, it. would have no propriety of meaning. For if it be merely used to denote all non-episcopalians simply as such, it might be used with as much propriety by one denomina But with our Episcopalian brethren the term dissenters is by no means used thus, as a convenient noun of multitude. It is the handmaid of Episcopacy, and has the same general import as all that incessant talk about the " apostolic and primitive" church; the church "divinely constituted in her sacrements, ministry, and worship;" "the divine institution of Episcopacy;" "the divinely constituted powers of Bishops," &c. &c., which one meets with abundantly in all American high-church publications, and which load especially those of Bishop Hobart, even to an offence against taste.* Now if it were not invidious, and if it were worth the while, to go into a statistical view of the matter, it might easily be made to appear how little reason our Episcopalian brethren have for any complacency in the use of the term " dissenters," from a comparison of numbers with their sister denominations. In this light the term is, to say the least, incongruous; for in all other cases of division among men, the few are said to dissent from the many, and not the many from the few. Again, which have been the great and prevailing denominations in the land, from its earliest settlement; and which is the best entitled in this view of the subject to apply the term in question;-the Episcopal? or some other denomination. But this is not to the point. For what have priority and numbers to do with the question whether Episcopacy be of divine right or no? True. But when a man finds a hun *For all the expressions here quoted, and many more, see the Discourse on England and the United States: also see the Bishop's writings everywhere. dred of his neighbours, and among them many grave men, and good men, differing from him in some of his peculiarities, however much importance he may attach to those peculiarities, it becomes him to assert them with modesty. But in respect to our high-church brethren, not only do the great majority of Christians in this country differ from them in their notions, about divine right, and so forth, but the better part of their own church also, both in England and in this counry, disapprove of such pretensions. It is time they did so. And it is time, I do not say merely that churchmen, but that all denominations, certainly all protestant denominations, should become ashamed of their exclusives. In an age of bigotry these things might be expected; but how do they accord with the spirit of the present day. There is no salvation," says the Roman Catholic, "out of the Catholic church." "There is only uncovenanted mercy," says the Churchman, "out of the pale of Episcopacy." "I will allow none to be members of Christ's visible church," says the close-communionist, "but such as agree in immersion.' "And in the days of the millennium," affirms the Shaker, "the world will go out in Shakerism." Thus we mutually hold each other. Each the church, and all schismatics.* But let me ask, in conclusion, what is the church of Christ; or, rather, in what does its unity consist? Does it consist in an agreement in this or that particular set of forms? or in a common relation to a common Lord; a common renouncement of the world and a common adherence to Christ, by a public and sincere *The Presbyterians and Congregationalists are not wholly exempt from censure. I allude to their application of the term sectaries, to certain intruders into their flocks. The intrusion may be censurable, but the use of the term is illiberal. An extensive acquaintance with mental philosophy is confessedly important to those who are employed in forming the youthful mind, and training it to habits of activity and usefulness. It is no less important to those who, having come to years of reflection, are endeavouring, by assiduous and persevering attention to learning and science, to cultivate their own minds. A study in itself dry and difficult may become interesting when it is seen that the instruction derived from it is of great practical utility. There is no greater benefit to be derived from pursuing the philosophy of the mind, there is nothing which throws around the study a higher interest, than its practical bearing on mental discipline. The subject of investigation is within us. It constitutes the more noble part of ourselves, and to its improvement we are impelled by the most weighty considerations. An object ever to be kept in view, in mental cultivation, is the proportionate and harmonious improvement of all its faculties, both speculative and active. The strength and elegance of architecture depend on a due attention to fitness and proportion in all its parts. A part too much enlarged or too highly ornamented, with a corresponding part feeble, or uncouth,is viewed with disapprobation and disgust. The same is true in the mental fabric. Sound judgment and correct taste demand in it the same qualities which appear in finished architecture, while the mind destitute of these is viewed as imperfect and uncomely: or, to recall a familiar comparison, the mind to the statuary marble,-as it is the perfection of the sculptor's art to present by proportion and symmetry the dignity, and grace, and beauty, of the human form, as it is when most admired; so it is the highest perfection of mental cultivation to present a mind so improved by a due attention to all its faculties as to awaken in the beholder the highest admiration. The memory has its uses. But an excessive exercise of the memory, and an undue reliance upon it in the common course of education, is often ruinous to the inventive faculties. The student of mere memory becomes a menial slave to other men's opinions. The imagination is an interesting and a noble faculty. In its legitimate exercise it gives gaity and embellishment to the intellect, sheds a pleasing lustre on untried life, and becomes a powerful incentive to deeds of noble enterprise. Its excessive indulgence often becomes fatal. The mind of powerful imagination, like the heavy ship of towering sail, if balanced and directed, is borne in safety. But who has not seen the floating wreck of many a shattered intellect, torn from its stand, and cast on the waves, by a towering imagination? Similar results follow the excessive or defective cultivation of every other faculty. In studying the philosophy of the mind with a view to mental improvement, it is not sufficient to have studied the philosophy of mind in general. But the student should carefully investigate the philosophy of his own mind, and mark distinctly the customary operations, and the state of improvement of each faculty. And can he discover that which an ill-directed educa |