Dr. Boone on the one hand, and Drs. Legge, Medhurst, and Bowring, Sir George Staunton, and Mr. Doty, on the other, may be briefly stated thus:-Dr. Boone maintains that the Chinese have no word in their language answering to our word GOD; that the general or generic name of the Chinese gods is Shin; and that, therefore, this word Shin should be used to render Elohim and Theos. On the contrary, Dr. Legge argues that the Shin of the Chinese answers to the word Spirit, and ought to be employed in that sense alone; that the Chinese have a word Shang-Te, answering to Elohim, Theos, and GOD; and that this word-not Shin-is the proper word to be used in rendering Elohim or Theos into Chinese. To these assertions of Dr. Legge, Dr. Boone replied in his Defence ;' and the work now before us is an elaborate and critical examination of that Defence.' We cannot follow the writer in his wide range of Chinese literature, or in the acute and lucid investigations with which he has filled his 166 closely printed pages. We can only say that, accepting his translations of Chinese documents as accurate, he appears to us to have made out his case. In addition to the importance of correctly rendering such awfully momentous words as Elohim and Theos in the Holy Scriptures, we have been much edified by the proofs afforded in this discussion that, as among the ancient Greeks and Romans, so among the Chinese, there are such unquestionable traces of the recognition of one Supreme Being. As the translators of the Septuagint' were right in translating Elohim by Theos, as Theos is used in the Greek New Testament-as Deus in Latin, with its modifications in modern languages derived from Latin-and God, in its modifications in the northern languages of Europe-are accepted as rendering Theos, it certainly appears to us that the proper rendering of the same words in Chinese, is not Shin, but Shang-Te; and that, in every one of these instances alike, the propriety of the translation rests on the fact, that, in each language respectively, these words represent the fundamental idea to which the Scriptures appeal as already in men's minds, and which is enlarged and elevated by their glorious revelations of the acts and attributes of the Highest Being. It cannot but be a matter of regret that a keen controversy on this subject should have continued so long, without any near prospect of agreement or compromise; but, while gravely sensible of the present evil, and frankly acknowledging the difficulties that beset the question, so voluminously attested in the correspondence of the British and Foreign Bible Society, it is due to our convictions of truth that we should say, with becoming deference to Chinese scholars who take a different view, that Dr. Legge and those who think with him are right. We can have no interest in the question but one-that the Chinese should have the most appropriate word in their language for the name of GOD. According to the lights we have, and the best exercise of our judgment, that word is Shang-Te.

The Advocate; his Training, Practice, Rights, and Duties. By Edward W. Cox, Esq., Barrister-at-Law. Vol. I. London: John Crockford.

OUR readers will best understand the general character of this work by an enumeration of the Contents' of the thirty-seven chapters of which it

consists The Introduction, Capacities, Natural Qualifications, Physical Qualifications, Mental Qualifications, Pecuniary Resources, Will and Courage, the Training of the Advocate, Moral Training, Practical Morals, Intellectual Training, How to Study, How to Read, What to Read, Studies for Information, Studies that Educate, Professional Studies, Physical Training, the Art of Speaking, Practice in Chambers, the Inns of Court, Student Life in the Temple, the Call, Reflection, Choice of a Circuit, the Circuit, Practice in Chambers, Cases for Opinion, Advising on Evidence, Reading a Brief, Consultations, the Practice of the Courts, the Examination in Chief, Cross-examination, Re-examination, the Defence, the Reply.'

On these numerous and entertaining topics Mr. Cox treats with much force, good sense, and elegance. His style is singularly free from all lawyer-like verbosity. In some parts of the work-as in his racy description of Student Life in the Temple'-he discovers considerable graphic and artistic skill as a writer. The youthful student will not, therefore, be repelled from the many valuable lessons of instruction which the book contains, by any crudity or dulness in its style. Blackstone's Commentaries' would not have been half as much read and remembered but for the alluring fascination of their almost faultless composition.

Mr. Cox, in his most appropriate Dedication-made, by permission, to Lord Denman-speaks, we think, somewhat too despondingly with regard to the future prospects of the profession of an advocate in this country. But it should be recollected that it is a prodigiously wealthy, and what is better, an intelligent, a moral, and a free country. So long as the priceless blessings of freedom of speech and discussion, liberty of the press, and trial by jury shall be maintained intact, the Bar can never fail to be a noble profession, that will afford fine scope for pecuniary success and proud distinction to a fair proportion of its members. It is now, and for some years past has been, most enormously overstocked; but things in this respect will find their appropriate level.

It is the more creditable, however, to our author, that, with such gloomy forebodings, he has, nevertheless, bravely aroused himself to the praiseworthy task of aiding the crowd of youthful aspirants for success along their toilsome and somewhat discouraging path. Though it may not be a very flowery or even road which the young advocate has now to travel, it still leads to the Temple of Fame. We know not, in conclusion, that we can express more correctly our sense of the value of this treatise than by saying, that the very fact of the appearance of such a work, at the present moment, is a bright sign of hope to cheer up our spirits against the depressing effects of the plaintive vaticinations of our afflicted jurist.

General and Mixed Education. A Lecture delivered at University College, London: introductory to the Opening of the Classes, in the Faculty of Arts and Laws, at the Commencement of the Session, October 15th, 1851. With an Appendix. By John Hoppus, LL.D., F.R.S. London: Taylor, Walton, and Maberly.

As our views of the various schemes of National Education' are well known, and our objections to all of them excepting those supported on the

voluntary principle have been repeatedly given in these pages, we do not feel called upon to discuss them in noticing this 'Lecture.' The calm and courteous spirit in which Dr. Hoppus refers to the conscientiousness' of parties holding such views is beyond all praise; and though we are unable to modify our judgment against all the other schemes, we are free to concede that their supporters may be quite as conscientious as ourselves. The difference between us is, that we do not ask for compulsory support from parishes or government, while they do; consequently, we have them at liberty to labour for the education of the people in their own way, so long as they do not seek to enforce our co-operation in the shape of rates and taxes. We do not agree with those who think there is any analogy between free public schools for all and schools or colleges for those who pay the fees to teachers and professors. We rejoiced in the establishment of the London University, and we still deem it worthy of all the consideration which Dr. Hoppus claims on its behalf; yet we cannot but regard with complacency the more comprehensive system of THE UNIVERSITY OF LONDON, in which the earlier institution is now absorbed as University College.'

It is more for the interests of the higher education that twenty-nine colleges throughout the kingdom should have the power of granting certificates for degrees than that such a power should be confined to one college in the metropolis. No parties are more bound by consistency to hail this extension of liberal culture than the supporters of University College; and we believe that there are none who contemplate this state of things with higher satisfaction than Dr. Hoppus himself. We are convinced that the multiplication of colleges is a good, and can become an evil only when they are feebly conducted, or when they become rivals in a hostile sense. On some collateral questions mooted by the author in his Appendix we forbear remarking, further than to say-we deeply regret, with him, that THE UNIVERSITY OF LONDON' does not give the encouragement which we think ought to be given to psychological and ethical studies, thus falling below the Universities of Scotland, Ireland, France, and Germany, and the Owens College, Manchester, as well as University College at Sidney, in Australia. There is much in Dr. Hoppus' Lecture' which our readers will find highly instructive, and nothing to offend the most fastidious taste.

The Napoleon Dynasty; or, the History of the Bonaparte Family. An entirely new work. By the Berkeley Men. With twenty-two authentic Portraits. 8vo, pp. 624. New York: Cornish, Lamport, and Co. London: J. Chapman.

In a brief advertisement prefixed to this volume, the American publishers inform us-It has been often remarked in Europe, that if an impartial history of Napoleon and his Times should ever be written, it would come from America.' We were not aware of this fact. The remark had never reached us, and now that it has done so, we fail to discover its reasonableness. Certainly it receives no confirmation from the volume before us; for, whatever be its qualities, impartiality does not rank amongst them. A more thorough-going or one-sided advocacy of the present ruler of France

has never been attempted. The object of the work, we are informed, 'is to furnish, in a single volume, authentic biographies of the principal members of the Bonaparte family: to gather and array from many volumes into one, valuable, rare, and interesting materials now floating on the turbid ocean of modern history-beyond the reach of all but the adventurous, the curious, or the learned.' So far the volume is interesting, and may be read with advantage; but there is evidently another and deeper purpose in it-not, indeed, avowed, but sufficiently conspicuous to be traced by every intelligent reader. Louis Napoleon, significantly styled 'Emperor of the French Republic,' is the hero of the work, for whose exculpation it has been prepared.

We have no faith in the American origin of the work. Its style is French; many of its words savor of continental authorship, the structure of its sentences is artificial and artistic, and its materials are, to a considerable extent, derived from Bonapartist sources. We look upon it as one of the many efforts now made to create a public sentiment, favorable to the existing order of things in France. As an able, brilliant, and unscrupulous piece of advocacy, it has high merits; but as a contribution to impartial history, it is utterly valueless. Contemporaneous history, it is admitted, has pronounced the coup d'état a usurpation without parallel ;' but the state of France, it is argued, rendered something of the kind inevitable, and the act itself has been sustained by a very large majority of the French people.' 'The Napoleon dynasty,' we are assured, 'is the only possible compromise between Bourbonism and the American type of well-balanced democratic liberty.' How long that liberty would survive, if the principles of the Berkeley Men' were prevalent in the States, we need not say. We have no fear of this result-much less that it can be compassed by such glaring omissions, and intentional misconstructions of history, as this volume exhibits. As a collection of anecdotes, illustrative of the career and policy of many distinguished personages, the book has great charms, and as such we recommend it. In any more serious light, it merits severe castigation.

Miscellanies. By James Martineau. London: John Chapman. 1852. THIS is a reprint of papers, by Mr. Martineau, in various periodicals, which have been collected by Messrs. Crosby and Nicholls, of Boston, U.S. The papers are on 'The Life, Character, and Works of Dr. Priestly;' The Life and Correspondence of Thomas Arnold, D.D.;' Church and State;' Theodore Parker's Discourse of Religion;' Phases of Faith ;' The Church of England;' 'The Battle of the Churches.' Most of these compositions are well known to such of our readers as care for these matters. We greatly differ from Mr. Martineau on some of the most fundamental questions in theology. While he has much beauty of thought and of expression, his generalizations are hasty; his reasonings are superficial; his animosity towards evangelical Christianity is bitter and unsparing; and his hold of revealed truth is so slight as to suggest the apprehension, that if he had strength of intellect and purpose to push his opinions to their legitimate consequences, his position in relation to religion, whether natu

ral or revealed, would be far removed from that which he now holds. The path that leads away from faith in the Son of God is one which appears to us to afford no resting-place but simple atheism, under whatever guise of metaphysical philosophy it may be hidden. On that path the writers of this school are sliding with more or less rapidity: some of them with a consciousness of this tendency, and others without it, yet all unanimous in the denial of the truths which constitute what we believe to be the very essence of the Gospel. With these views, we look with sober sadness at the prominence and activity which characterize the movements of disbelief. There is no fear in our sadness, excepting for the victims of these plausible negations. A healthy reaction has already set in. Solid learning, genuine criticism, moral soundness, and practical sagacity, are ever on the side of the true. Both literature and science are becoming more decidedly tributary to the popular theology of the New Testament. We can wait for the passing by of clouds-the temporary disturbances of scepticism -surely trusting to the progress of that truth which is the parent of freedom, the light of man, and the revelation of God.

The Republic of Plato, Translated into English; with an Introduction,
Analysis, and Notes. By John Llewelyn Davies, M.A., and David
James Vaughan, M.A., Fellows of Trinity College, Cambridge.
bridge: Macmillan and Co. 1852.

Cam

WE cheerfully commend this translation both to those who can and to those who cannot compare it with the original. The introduction and the analysis are both valuable. We apprehend that Plato is perpetually lauded or censured by writers who know little, if anything, of his philosophy as expressed by himself; and we know not that the translators and the spirited publishers of this attractive volume could have rendered a better service to true philosophy than by thus bringing so celebrated a treatise before the English reader. The version is faithful and elegant, though the translators acknowledge that while the thoughts may be represented with sufficient accuracy in another shape, yet the grace of the style can scarcely fail to perish in a translation.' Not a few of our readers, we trust, will be induced, by the aids here afforded them, to study the original until they feel the lofty glow of its spiritual aspirations, the elevation of its moral tone, and the grandeur of its musical expression. The limits of human speculation were touched by the great Athenian, and left him perplexed by those profound and ever-pressing questions of which we find the true solution in the authoritative revelations of the Gospel. What Plato hoped, Jesus has proved, and his inspired apostles have taught, while the Christian theory of man and of his social relations is built on the foundations laid by the hand of God himself in the deepest instincts of our nature. Even the errors of Plato are instructive; and no candid student of his writings in the present day can fail to acknowledge his immeasurable superiority to the self-styled philosophers who see nothing but material phenomena, giving no heed to the universal voice of consciousness, while they deride immortality as a dream, and religion as a superstition. And we venture to suggest, that the study of Plato by the great English divines of the seventeenth century might be renewed with advantage by their successors in our own day.