had an earlier date than the tradition of the monks; but if this tradition existed from an early date, it would be a reason for its not being included in the city. This spot in the trench, or natural fosse without the city, was called the place of the skull-or as Luke writes, when they were come to a place called skull;' a proper name, not of a burial ground or place of execution, but that to which a particular tradition was attached. Here the Jews crucified Christ, and the tomb of Joseph was in a garden near it. Thus, though no person can positively state that what are now pointed out as Calvary and the Holy Sepulchre, are the actual places, yet no sufficient proof has been adduced to the contrary; and, as the author remarks, until there has, we are bound even as a matter of antiquarian research, to receive the tradition of nearly sixteen centuries, especially where no improbability appears against its validity.

'But we hasten to a spot that few can visit without emotionGethsemane-situated nearly opposite St. Stephen's gate, and looking down upon the valley of Jehoshaphat. It is a plot of ground fortyseven paces square, sown with corn, and enclosed by a low, rude wall. Eight aged olive-trees still exist within the enclosure, and are pointed out as those beneath whose shade the Man of sorrows experienced the bitter foretaste of that death he was about to suffer the pangs-the throes-the agonizing struggle, when soul and body part;' and hardened indeed must be the heart that can coldly contemplate this sacred spot where the Lord of life and glory drank that bitter cup of superhuman suffering for sinful man's redemption, and not partake of some such kindred feelings.

'Perhaps the readers of these pages may ask me what authority there is for supposing this place to be the garden mentioned by the evangelists, and how the olives within the enclosure could possibly have survived through nineteen centuries; and those learned in history or in works of travel may say, did not Titus cut down all the timber around the city; and did not the tenth legion of his army encamp on this very hill? True, gentle readers, but I answer that the locality assigned to this garden renders its identity very probable; especially when we consider the circumstances that are detailed in the gospels of the route taken by our Lord and his disciples when they went forth from the city after having observed the passover, and instituted the supper. On that memorable night they crossed the brook Kedron, in all probability opposite St. Stephen's, or the Sheep-gate: and from thence proceeded by the nearest route to the garden on the side of the mount; which corresponds exactly with the present locality of Gethsemane. It is also true that the Romans cut down the wood about Jerusalem; but the timber of an olive-tree would be of little value indeed, in constructing engines, towers, and battering-rams, to be used against Cyclopian walls such as I have described; and these trees in particular must then have been so slender that the besiegers would have considered them unfit for any such purpose. They are undoubtedly the largest, and I may add with safety, the most ancient olive-trees in the

world. The largest is twenty-four feet in girth above its roots, though its topmost branch is not thirty feet from the ground. The trunks of most of them are hollow in the centre, and built up with stones, like to their aged brother of Oratava (Madeira).

There is nothing unnatural in assigning an age of nineteen centuries to these patriarchs of the vegetable kingdom, whose growth is perhaps the slowest of any in existence. They have not borne fruit for some years past; but though their trunks are greatly decayed, yet, from the hardness of the wood, and each part being so retentive of life, there is still a considerable head to each, whose light-colored, silky leaves hang like so many silver locks over their time-worn and aged stems that now, in the evening of life, are fast tottering to decay. But having witnessed scenes of suffering, and the long dark night of gloom, and fearful retribution that has sunk the pride and prostrated the glory of Jerusalem, they seem yet to linger for the morning twilight of that bright era that will shortly dawn upon the land of Judah.'

-Vol. ii. pp. 313–315.

We willingly concede to the author what he claims for himself, but with sufficient modesty of manner in the preface, the credit of considerable labor in searching into the topographies of ancient Tyre and Jerusalem. These will prove useful to the biblical student, and add to those accumulations of knowledge which can never be too much appreciated. We are especially thankful for the correction of former inaccuracies, and for the examination of many tombs and monuments on the coast of Asia Minor, which have been heretofore but slightly regarded. All these things constitute the best literature of the country; the most valuable books which future generations may read, and by reading become learned in the transactions of bygone times. They are unsophisticated records, and beam forth with a stern rebuking aspect upon the perversions of prejudice and the distortions of vanity. The dryness, as perhaps most persons conceive of it, of antiquarian research, is surely compensated by the valuable character of the facts brought to light; besides that whatever links us with the past has romance in it. We seem to live amidst the bustle of now desolated cities, to join in the conflict with now prostrated and buried armies, and to catch the glow and inspiration of great movements of mind which, though stilled in death, have impressed their character upon succeeding ages. The very names of the mighty dead are a charm, and the antiquarian seems to have the privilege of living as it were in two worlds-in the past while its tombs and monuments recite to him its history, and in the present while he details his discoveries to the living generation. We envy the man who has leisure and heart to visit as they ought to be visited, Egypt, and Tyre, and Jerusalem!

589

Art. IX. The approaching Coalition, an Article in Fraser's Magazine, October 1840.

THE HE project of forming a coalition-ministry has recently been put before the public. The subject has been delicately unveiled by some journals; by others it has been openly espoused; and by another section of the press it has rather been adjourned than dismissed. A certain party are anxious to feel how the public pulse beats with regard to the question; it therefore becomes a duty to place our opinions on record.

We at once enter our protest against the formation of a coalition-ministry. We are opposed to all coalitions' as unprincipled and selfish combinations, as compacts entered into between men who are anxious to divide the honors and emoluments of office, without regard to the interests of the nation. A coalition must necessarily be formed on the wreck of principle; and as long as truth and consistency are valued by the people it will always be the object of public contempt. A rope of sand,-it will always balk the object of its constructors; who, hoping to bring their respective strength together, will find themselves left helpless and despicable.-Like the scorpion a coalition stings itself to death.

If, then, coalitions are invariably objects of distrust and general disgust, why, it will be asked, is the question now agitated? why does any party propose it? We shall endeavor to answer these questions; but before we do so, it is necessary that we should discover by what party the proposition has been put forward.

has

Fraser's Magazine, a publication in high favor among the Tory party, and a violent assailant of liberal principles, openly advocated the project!—the Times has given a conspicuous place in its columns to an article favoring it, and a programme of a coalition-ministry, originally set a going by a work devoted to colonial politics, which is conducted by a Tory writer of some note, has been widely circulated in the Conservative newspapers. It is quite true that the Standard and some other influential Tory prints have denounced the notion; but there can be no question that the proposal to form a coalition-ministry has proceeded from the Tory party, or, more correctly speaking, a section of it.

The motives for making such a proposal we infer from the following facts:

Ist. A coalition would immediately admit a portion of the Tories to a participation of the sweets of office ;-a consummation devoutly wished for!

IInd. A coalition between the Whigs and Tories would ruin the Whigs in the estimation of the people, who would regard it as a mutual sacrifice of principle by two opposite parties for the attainment of power; an excellent stroke of policy for the Tories!

IIIrdly. A coalition-ministry must be short-lived.

Thus the Tories, now too feeble to hold the reins of office,too weak to stand for a month against an organized opposition, would as a matter of course be called to power, having caught the Whigs in the trap laid for them, and having deprived them of their influence with the people, in which their strength must ever lie. As long as the Whigs remain true to the people the Tories must be kept from the government; the moment they coalesce with their enemies their downfall is certain, and the triumph of Toryism is complete. Give Sir Robert Peel and Lord Lyndhurst the seals of office at this moment, and what will be the result? They will be chased from office;-attacked by a powerful opposition, who can expose their misdeeds and condemn their policy, they cannot possibly maintain their position. But let a coalition take place, and after its failure place Sir Robert at the helm of affairs-who can assail him then? No one who has consented to the previous league. The Whigs cannot with effect do so, for they have associated and acted with him, and have in part consented to his policy. The Tories would thus, not only be rid of their rivals, but be secure from their efficient opposition in parliament: from all which it is evident that the Tories would materially gain by such a temporary union.

The proposal is accordingly put forward with great affectation of moderation, and with the most attractive lures that the case will admit of. Those who make it are compassing nothing less than the degradation and utter destruction of the Whig party, by placing them in a position in which they would forfeit public confidence, and with it that moral power without which they could not carry on a government, a position moreover from which there can be no retreat: we must not be surprised, therefore, to find them-after the the fashion of the seducer-engaged in gentle persuasion, and beginning the process of corrupting by flattering those they design to overreach. They hold out to the members of the Whig government prospects of a permanent possession of office in undisturbed tranquillity; and offer fresh dignities to many. Fraser's Magazine declares that the only men on the Whig side objectionable personally, are Lords Normanby and Palmerston; but even these noblemen are included in the list to which we have referred, as our readers will perceive :

Vice President of the Board of Trade Lord Sandon,

Minister to Constantinople

Mr. M. O'Ferrall,

Mr. Emmerson Tennant,
Mr. Colquhoun,
Mr. D'Israeli,
Lord Seymour
Mr. Clay,

Mr. Vernon Smith,
Mr. Gladstone,
Sir Thomas Cockrane,
Sir George Grey, Bart.

Sir John Campbell (with re-
version to Sir W. Follett on
Sir John's accession to the
bench),
Earl Minto,
Lord Morpeth,
Sir E. Sugden,

Mr. Shiel (to be knighted), Sir James Graham (with a peerage),

(Lord Elliott or Mr. Charles Wood (with a baronetcy),

Lord Clarendon,

Sir S. Canning.

ALL THE OTHER POSTS TO REMAIN AS AT PRESENT: Sir John Cam Hobhouse and Mr. Labouchere to receive peerages.'

The above list, it will be observed, includes the whole of her majesty's present ministers, with the exception of Lord Holland