These exertions, premature in boys, and misplaced in women, must not only check the growth of the rising generation, but eventually degrade the sex, whose virtues are principally domestic, and whose charms shed their best influence around the fire-side, and give to home all its attractions. Add to this evil, another of equal magnitude; employment of children in their infancy, by calling them away from home, withdraws them from the control, and deprives them of the instructions and the example of their mothers, instructions and example of all others the most important, because to them the infant owes the first ideas of decency, the first emotions of piety, the sentiments and the manners that raise the citizen above the savage, the Christian above the barbarian. To deprive children, therefore, of this early tuition, and to let them loose unrestrained in the fields, is to abandon them to the innate corruption of their own hearts, and to fit them beforehand for guilt and profligacy. Accordingly, vice and ferocity seem imprinted on the countenances of many of the rising generation; and have effaced those features of joy and good humour, and that merry grimace, which was supposed to characterize even the infants of ancient France.' p. 8, 9.

We refer our readers to the pamphlet itself for a description of Paris, given with Mr. Eustace's usual felicity of pencil, and conveying, by minute discriminating touches, the evident likeness of what he depicts. Above forty pages are occupied with architectural observations on the public edifices and recent improvements in the capital. But I have dwelt, perhaps, 'too long,' he says on the material part of Paris-you are impatient to hear something about the manner and character ' of the modern Parisians.' The following description of what they once were, will be recognised as nicely accurate.

Has the Revolution altered their ancient habits, or are they still the same good-humoured and lively people, proud of themselves, and indulgent to others, content with the amusement of the day, with little foresight or retrospect, polite and attentive, always desirous to please, and not unfrequently very pleasing?-Alas! no my friend— so many deeds of blood, so many scenes of misery, so many years of military oppression, and such a familiarity with injustice and slaughter, must be supposed not only to have checked the native sprightliness of the race, but to have instilled into it a considerable portion of gloom and ferocity.' p. 60, 61.

In assigning the causes of this deterioration of character, ke remarks,

Now what was the spirit of the French army under Napoleon; a spirit of atheism and vice almost incredible. The French soldier was taught to adore his emperor and to obey his officers, and this was his only creed, his only duty: beyond this he was abandoned to his own discretion, that is to his passions and to his ignorance; and encouraged to give every appetite its full play. Hence those scenes

--

of rapine, lust, and cruelty, exhibited in Spain and Portugal, and all the accumulated woes of unhappy Germany. I shall be told without doubt by the panegyrists of Napoleon, that soldiers of all nations are disorderly and vicious, and that the British army itself has left some memorials of its lawless spirit at Bajadoz and St. Sebastian. But if armies, formed of individuals, whose minds, in general at least, have been seasoned by christian instruction, and whose consciences, however deled, are yet alive to the distinction between right and wrong, and awake to the pangs of remorse, and the terrors of divine vengeance; if armies acting under officers of principle, honour, and humanity, and kept in constant check, not only by the authority of their superiors, but by the more powerful influence of the opinion and the estimation of their Christian countrymen, are yet so depraved and so mischievous, so apt to indulge foul passions, and to perpetrate deeds of cruelty, what must an army be, when free from all these wholesome restraints, when ignorant and regardless of virtue and of vice, without fear of God, without respect for themselves or their fellow-creatures, without one thought or one wish beyond the moment, and scoffing alike at the hopes and the terrors of immortality.' p. 64, 65.

Such an army is a confederacy of banditti, a legion of demons, let loose upon the creation to disfigure and to destroy its beauties. Now, into this school of wickedness every youth in France was compelled to enter; and it is easy to imagine the deep, the indelible impression which the blasphemies, and the crimes ot

thousand fiends, must make upon the minds of boys of seventeen.' p. 65, 66.

We must make room for two more extracts. The first suggests many important reflections, in which we have not room to indulge. Mr. Eustace's usual accuracy leaves us little occasion to harbour any doubts in regard to the circumstances which he advances as facts.

It has been stated by some of the newspapers in England, that Protestantism has made considerable progress in France, and that Protestant churches are common both in Paris and in the country towns This statement is inaccurate. In Paris there are only three Protestant temples, for so they are called, and those are of no magnitude, nor can their congregations be numerous. In the northern provinces there are no Protestants; and even in the two southern provinces, where they were formerly most numerous, they do not, I believe, increase. The truth is, that the only religious contest now carried on in France, is not between Catholics and Protestants but between Christians and unbelievers. The Catholic religion has a peculiar hold upon the feelings of a Frenchman; it is interwoven with the whole history of the nation; it combines its influence with the glory of the French arms, with the charms of French literature, with the fame of French heroes, and with the virtues of French worthies. If a Frenchman is a Christian he must naturally be a Catholic; he considers, the two appellations as synonimous, and

takes or rejects the system on the whole and without distinction.' p. 75, 76.

The other passage that we shall quote, closes a train of reflections upon the French Revolution, which took place, says Mr. Eustace, in a country where there was no public 'virtue, and no public opinion.'

'What has been the result of this tremendous revolution? what have been its benefits? has it improved the literature of France? has it produced one single historian, one poet, one sound philosopher? No: literature is on the decline; its utility is disputed; the dry sciences have usurped its place; and the language itself tends to barbarism. Has it improved even military tactics? No; the art of war consists in carrying a post, or gaining a battle with the least possible bloodshed. Was this the art of the French generals, and above all, of Napoleon? They gained their end by numbers, by bloody sacrifices, by a prodigality of carnage. Has it ameliorated the manners, and improved the principles of the nation? No; it corrupted their morals, and perverted their principles; had it lasted one generation more, France would have been inhabited by monsters, and Europe would have been compelled to wage against it a war of extermination. What then has it produced? It has deluged Europe with blood, and covered France with ruins and with graves.' p. 95, 96.

Art. IX. A Course of Lectures; containing a Description and systematic Arrangement of the several Branches of Divinity: accompanied with an Account both of the principal Authors, and of the Progress which has been made at different Periods, in Theological Learning. By Herbert Marsh, D.D. F.R.S. Margaret Professor of Divinity. Part III. On the Interpretation of the Bible. pp. 121. Price 3s. Deightons, Cambridge. Rivingtons, London. 1813.

COMMUNICATIONS of a literary or theological nature, from the Margaret Professor, whether they be made viva voce from the divinity chair, or through the medium of the press, are always acceptable to us. His comprehensive knowledge of the subjects of which he treats, the lucid order in which he arranges them, and the perspicuity of his language, recommend him as a writer; dignified manner, and clear and forcible enunciation, distinguish him as a speaker. For his labours in the department of Biblical Criticism he is entitled to our thanks. We wish him health and leisure to accomplish the objects of his professional studies; and shall be happy to accompany him into any of the walks of Biblical literature into which he may conduct us.

In this portion of the lectures, which relates to the interpretation of the Bible, many remarks will be found worthy

the attention of every student for the ministry in every class of professing Christians. An acquaintance with the principles of sacred Criticism, and the knowledge of the rules of Biblical Interpretation, are primary considerations with every man who fills the office of Expositor of the word of God. It is the combination of genuine learning with true piety, which makes the "workman that needeth not to be ashamed."

As Criticism and Interpretation are not unfrequently confounded, the Author commences his thirteenth lecture, by explaining the relation which the latter bears to the former. The object of Biblical Criticism, he justly remarks, is to ascertain what an author actually wrote-the words which came from his pen the object of Interpretation, to ascertain the author's meaning-the import of his words. Before a writer, or a speaker, attempts the exposition of a Book, he should obtain a correct copy of it ;--every comment ought to be founded on a genuine text. The Criticism of the Bible must therefore precede the Interpretation of the Bible.

nor

To every Christian-to all who believe the Scriptures to be the word of God, it must surely appear important to possess the sacred writings in the greatest attainable purity. The only way in which we could possess the very words of the original writers, would be, either by having the Autographs,the different books in the very hand-writing of their respective Authors, or a copy of those books exactly resembling the originals. The Autographs have perished;-no book of the Bible is preserved in the hand-writing of its author; does any copy exist which is an exact transcript from an Autograph. Should any person suppose that the New Testament has remained invariably the same through seventeen centuries, and has been conveyed to us in its pristine purity, his error may easily be corrected, if he will use his reflection on indisputable facts. The supposition is correct, as it regards the doctrines and the precepts of Scripture, and as it relates to the Books of Scripture in the main; but incorrect in respect of the words of Scripture. Many persons, it should seem, have never put to themselves the following very obvious questions. Since the art of printing was not invented before the middle of the fifteenth century, in what form did the Scriptures exist previously to that invention ?-and when they were first printed, in what manner did the first editors proceed in committing them to the press? The first part of the question, is answered by the fact, that the Scriptures existed in a written form, on parchment and paper, nearly fourteen hundred years; and as new copies were wanted, to supply the loss and waste of old ones, and to answer the demand of those who wished to procure them, they were written out from

preceding copies. If the writers committed no mistake-if they never transposed a sentence, nor omitted, nor added, nor changed a word, in all the thousands of copies which were written out during fifteen centuries, they must all have been guided by a miraculous agency. This supposition, however, is too improbable to be admitted; and if any person's credence is so peculiar as to lead him to adopt it, facts wil prove its falsehood.

Several hundred copies of the New Testament, of different degrees of antiquity, and all of them written before the invention of printing, and preserved in public and private libraries, have been examined and compared, and no one manuscript is, in all respects, like another. The possessors of these manuscripts must therefore have occasionally read differently from each other, and that which was Scripture to one, could not be Scripture to another. For example: the possessor of one M.S. would read, Mark iii. 32.—“ Thy "mother and thy brethren, without, seek thee;" and the possessor of another M.S. would read " Thy mother, and thy "brethren, and thy sisters, without, seek thee " If we ask which of the two manuscripts, the one containing the former reading, and the other, the latter,-contains the passage as it was originally written, it will be beyond the ability of a man unacquainted with Biblical Criticism, to give a satisfactory answer. Should such a person say, the difference is of no importance; it is easy to reply, how can you tell that there are not very important differences in the varying manuscripts of the New Testament? Besides, you must first ascertain whether a passage be genuine, before its importance, or nonimportance, can be a subject of consideration. If the words"and thy sisters," were written by the pen of the Evangelist Mark, it cannot be any objection to their being regarded as a part of the sacred writings, that they were not inserted in the printed copies of the New Testament, because the first editors may have printed from the MSS. in which they are omitted. This was unquestionably the case in various instances; for of the many MSS. still preserved, they employed but a very small number, in preparing, and in printing, the early editions of the New Testament.

In the first stereotype 12mo. Cambridge Testaments, Galatians iv. 29. is thus printed: "But as then, he that was born "after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the "spirit, to remain, even so it is now?" The words to remain' are no part of the English translation; but how is this known? Present a copy of this impression to an Englishman, in a distant country, where he could have no access to other copies, and on the supposition that he was unacVOL. III. N. S.

G