rather than be indebted for the restoration of order, to the opinions and persuasions of another. Men which stand out of the mist of passion, can see more clearly than those enveloped in the fog.'

pp. 97-99.

At the same time, the old saw, all depends upon circumstances,' is particularly applicable in this matter of advice. A question of difficulty may be a very proper subject for reference a question of variance or litigation is seldom determinable by advice. If a minister and his flock are at issue, the attempt to reconcile them is something like interfering between man and wife. A minister's usefulness is gone when he has forfeited his pastoral authority. But, on the first formation of a church, on the settlement of a new pastor, or when a church is destitute of a pastor,-under any circumstances, in fact, but those of internal dissention, the advice of other associate churches may perhaps be of essential benefit. We warmly participate in Mr. James's anxiety to see a closer union realized among congregational churches. Independence is an unhappy term if it Leads (as we fear it too often has led) persons to look upon societies so characterised as therefore isolated. The independence of our churches ought to be regarded as, after all, only a means in order to an end, a right in order to a duty; the end, being the purity and spirituality of the particular association, the duty, union with the whole body. But how is this union to be promoted? It seems to us, that the essential idea conveyed by the word union, is that of moral cohesion arising from the influence of common sentiments and interests. Now, if we wish to see the Dissenting community, as such, bound up into a more visible union, it must be by bringing more into view Dissenting principles, by making them better understood, and by interesting Dissenters in them. God forbid that Dissenters should become more sectarian in their spirit! As their principles become more operative, they will rather become less so; for, in proportion as a man holds fast what he himself deems right, will he feel able to meet those of other opinions with candour and calmness. Bigotry is doubly a crime in a Dissenter. But, while we wish to see neither a sectarian nor a corporation feeling springing up in our churches, and would deprecate that esprit de corps which has its origin in jealousy for the secular interests of a party, we do wish to see revived that feeling which, in the days of our forefathers, bound together the members of our churches in no nominal or imaginary fellowship, and bound churches to each other. This, it appears to us, will be best effected, not by any mere schemes of association, or theories of union, but by endeavouring to interest the members of churches in the fundamental principles of their as

sociation. This must be done by exhibiting them familiarly, notin a controversial or detached form, but blended and harmonizing with all the other parts of the revealed scheme of faith and duty. Let the principles of Dissent appear to be, what they really are, the principles of Christianity consistently followed out into practice; the only principles on which the evangelization of the world can consistently proceed. Let those subjects be rendered interesting by alliance with the great themes of Christian duty, which are now repulsive through their dry, and secular, and abstract character. Let not questions of church-government or church-communion ever be held up as possessing any interest or importance for their own sake, but uniformly in connexion with the great ends proposed by all schemes of government that can have place in the Christian Church. Let the value of the shell be placed wholly in its preservation of the kernel; individual rights being shewn to be valuable, chiefly as they are necessary to the discharge of personal and social duties. In this way we would have Dissenting principles pressed home on the members of our churches, and instilled into our children. And then, when they should come to feel an interest in these as the best means of realizing the designs of Christianity, not only would our churches cohere better within themselves, but churches with churches would be drawn more closely together, from the operation of common principles, and a sense of mutual interest.

Then, perhaps, some comprehensive scheme of association, which should tell the world more distinctly, that, as Congregationalists holding the faith of the New Testament and of the Reformers, we are one body, though acknowledging no monarchical, prelatical, or synodical head, might be of advantage. Such an outward unity as is necessary to having one common organ, seems to be desirable. It is only when the internal constitution and discipline of churches are interfered with, that the power of any delegated or presiding body becomes dangerous. Our Congregational Boards, Red Cross Street Association, Protestant Association, &c. are attempts to realize such a union; but, having been adopted as expedients to meet particular exigencies, or else being merely local and partial in their character, they are all defective, and, in some respects, objectionable. Though they have done much good, and deserve the gratitude of the body, they serve to indicate what is necessary, and to keep alive a sense of what is desirable, rather than supersede a plan of Congregational Union, founded on unity of theological sentiment and an attachment to common principles.

Art. IV. Europe and America, in 1821; with an Explanation of the Plan laid before the Cortes of Spain, for the Recognition of the Independence of South America. Translated from the French of the Abbé de Pradt, by J. D. Williams. 2 vols. 8vo. pp. 898. Price 18s. London, 1822.

THE Abbé de Pradt is well known as a clever, but rapid and superficial writer on the liberal side of general politics. He watches events with a keen and comprehensive glance, and reasons on them, if not with profundity, at least with dexterity, spirit, and plausibility. His connexion with the French Emperor afforded him opportunities of marking the character and actions of that extraordinary man, of which he has availed himself, to give interest and effect to his different publications by the insertion of characteristic anecdotes; and in the present work he has successfully adopted the same plan. In fact, the most attractive portion of these volumes consists in the frequent references to the conduct and policy of Napoleon; too much of the rest being eked out by that vague and rambling sort of discussion which leads to no specific conclusion, and serves merely as a vehicle for opinions and descriptions, without tending to the establishment of principles, or the real elucidation of events. M. de Pradt, indeed, makes a mighty parade of his inductions and simplifications, and congratulates himself on the skill with which he has found his way through the embarrassing mass of circumstances which pressed upon his attention, to the following oracular results.

1st. That all the present questions, in every part of the world, relate to the Social Contract.

2nd. That an absolute and direct contradiction exists between the different parties, upon fundamental points.

3rd. That it was impossible that the former Ministry' (of France) 'could sustain the necessary consequences of its own system.'

It is quite impossible for us even to attempt an analysis of the Abbe's lively gossip. Although we have been amused by it, we cannot say that our edification and our gratification have run parallel with each other. We shall best convey to our readers a general notion of the character of the work, by adverting to its leading topics. He sets out with an attack on the selfish policy which prompted the Congress of Vienna to destroy the balance of Europe, by giving Poland to Russia, Italy to Austria, and by placing the territory of Prussia in contact with the French frontier. These three great Powers,' he says, 'mutually supporting each other, and always ready with fifteen hundred thousand bayonets, to engage in a va-tout, have thrown ' over Europe a net of iron.' Making every allowance for the

exaggerations of this representation, there is in it much of unquestionable truth. At the same time it should not be forgotten, that this Northern federation is opposed by the power and superior energy of the constitutional nations of the South. At the first signal of war between Austria and France, Italy will throw itself into the arms of the latter; and we suspect that the Tsar will henceforward be less diposed to trust his Muscovites among the contagious heresies of popular governments.

M. de Pradt discovers, in the elements of power of the • northern nations, principles of strength and durability, far superior to those with which Napoleon was invested.' We doubt this. The Court of Vienna cannot have witnessed without extreme apprehension, the extension of the Russian frontier until it infringes upon her own; and the continual demonstrations of Russia on the side of Turkey, must keep alive this spirit of jealousy. Moldavia and Wallachia guard the right flank of the Austrian front towards Poland; and when the troops of the Tsar shall have turned the Carpathians, they will be posted on the rear of the Austrian territory. Under these circumstances, to say nothing of the ambiguous and insecure position of Prussia, it seems to us that the triple confederacy, instead of. principles of strength and durability,' contains within itself the elements of inevitable solution. We are persuaded that the passage of the Donau by the armies of Alexander, would be the signal for the immediate rupture of an alliance originally formed under the terror of the arms of Napoleon, and since maintained by the fear of popular insurrection.

England is indiher only influence This source of innearly exhausted;

Nor can we accede to the assertion, that vidually nothing upon the Continent;' that there is from the subsidies she can furnish.' fluence is, we should suppose, by this time, but the fleets and armies of England would throw an immense weight into the scale of any belligerent power. In the event of war between Sweden and Russia, an English squadron in the Baltic would be of incalculable annoyance to the latter. Putting out of the question the possibility of our maintaining war as principals, an auxiliary army of Englishmen might have secured the independence of Italy, would, at this moment, secure the liberties of Greece, or, in probable futurity, may again range triumphant from Lisbon to the Pyrennees.

In the same peremptory way does the Abbe affirm the absolute nullity of France in Continental politics.

A chain of fortifications extending from Ostend to Basle, isolate her from the rest of the continent, and will render an egress from her own states impossible. Henceforth the height of her ambition will be,

to be able to offer to the ingress of others, as effective an opposition as 337 she finds to her own.'

We do not understand this. When France rushed forward from her own iron frontier, during the revolutionary war, we are not aware that the fortified towns which lay in her way, interposed any insurmountable barrier to her progress. She was then, nearly as much as at present, hemmed in by citadels and fortified posts; yet, she forced or turned them all. Neither Maestricht, nor Bergen-op-Zoom, nor Luxemburg, nor Ehrenbreitstein, nor Mayence, nor Magdeburg, nor Ulm, nor Dantzic, nor Warsaw, nor Dunabourg, prevented her from passing the lines, traced both by nature and art, of the Meuse, the Rhine, the Elbe, the Danube, the Vistula, or the Niemen.. And now that her weapons are of a higher temper and a finer edge than they were at that time, what is to prevent her from renewing a part, at least, of her former achievements? Of the men of Jemappes and Marengo, few probably survive; and the campaigns of Moscow and Leipsic made strange havoc among the brigades of Austerlitz and Jena; but there still remains a powerful remnant of those choice spirits who, at Montmirail and Ligny, held the fate of the day in suspense, and stood for victory when common valour would have fought only to secure honour to its defeat.

We are, however, happy to agree with our Author in his conviction, that two thirds of the European population,' are filled with abhorrence of arbitrary rule, and with restless desire for the establishment of constitutional governments. Nothing but this can rescue Europe from civil strife and miserable anarchy; nothing short of this can give to the world the blessings of rational liberty and religious knowledge. Too large a portion of Europe enjoys this privilege in a greater or a less degree, not to make it an object of attention and anxious wishes to the remainder. Sweden, Norway, England, Holland, France, Southern Germany, Switzerland, Spain, and Portugal, now possess governments which recognise a representative system; and though they may be somewhat inferior to the absolute monarchies in numerical strength, they are incomparably more powerful in intellectual energy. On the whole, then, though we are aware of much cause for anxiety, we see none for despondency. The noblest feelings and interests of the human race, are ranged against selfish and lawless power, and we cannot suffer ourselves to doubt of the issue. The conflict, whenever it may take place, must terminate in glory to God, and happiness to man.

The question may now perhaps be put to me, Whether Prussia, VOL. XVIII. N. S.

2 C