sites," "from an art he has of persuading them in the highest characters in the office;"-" that their pleasures and their interests are equally dear to him as his own!"

I could easily shew this (if I have not already) on a transition of a few of his own words; that Honorius, if "a person,"-to say nothing here of his high birth and fortune-" a person" whose "wit is lively," morals without a stain ;" and who considers it "beneath a man of honour to fall below the truth in any degree, or on any occasion;" and from this principle he "speaks bluntly what he thinks," without respect to persons, and lectures freely on "hypocrisy," "simony and priest-craft," &c. like a faithful "monitor:" I say, Honorius's "grave discourses" like galenical medicines, though "often formidable in their figure, and nauseous in their taste," yet, "lectures from a doctor in this science," like a chymical extraction, "convey knowledge, as it were, by drops, and restore" good sense and good works, as the other does fame and wealth, "without the apparatus of physic."

This polite philosopher also seems to consider, if not confound" conscience, duty, or religion," as one and "the same thing," expressed by "different names" only. Nothing can be more false. Neither Seneca, nor Cato, nor all the ancient and modern

sages" united will, I think, be able to persuade me to it. The wisdom of the wise of this world is foolishness compared with the wisdom which cometh from above; and the mistaken notions of honour are so common and easy, and the ground on which it

stands is so slippery, and without foundation, "not built on a rock," that it never can stand in competition with "a religious scruple of conscience, and duty."

If honour" embrace virtue" only as being "ornamental" or graceful to human nature, and only 66 scorns to do an ill action," and "considers vice as something beneath him," how far doth the truly religious man, though poor and illiterate, rise above him, when he embraces virtue, as it is enjoined by laws of the gospel of Jesus Christ; and not fear merely, as fear of man, or character; but scorns to do an ill action, however trivial, and considers vice as something that is most offensive to a just and merciful God, the great Author and Giver of all things! Thus I would turn honour out, and say, RELIGION

----------“ is the sacred tie,*

The noble mind's distinguishing perfection,

That aids and strengthens virtue where it meets her;

It ought not to be sported with." САТО.

This polite philosophy will never, I believe, accomplish in the pupil those virtues which it is the design of the work to inculcate, viz. reason, calmness, good-nature, and good sense,-moral, political, and religious. And it will especially fail in fixing the attention on small things; while the fashionable style of raillery, egotism (self-praise), human pride, and human wisdom, are the prominent features of the work. The motto which is placed at the head

And ought to be "THE LAW of kings."

of this part of the work is so heterogeneous, or rather, profane and heretical, that I need only transcribe it, to refute and condemn it.

"He who intends to advise the young and gay,
Must quit the common road, the former way,
Which hum drum pedants take to make folks wise;
By praising virtue, and decrying vice!

Let parsons tell what dreadful ills will fall,
On such as listen when their passions call;

We, from such things our pupils to affright,
Say not they're sins, but that they're unpolite;
To shew their courage, beaux would often dare,
By blackest crimes to brave old Lucifer!

It is much to be lamented in "this enlightened age," that such a book as this, and hundreds like it, should gain publicity; much less be reprinted for instruction which may "make a man happy;" or as a system of education, to form the manners of men! And, however carefully such works may be revised, while the foundation or grounds of the arguments are the same, they are likely to be productive of more evil than good.

You, my dear Friends, and pious readers in general, will, I trust, excuse these extracts and remarks from the merely moral and polite philosopher; but, be it remembered, I write for "all ranks and degrees of mankind.”. This, therefore, may come into the hands of some not so religiously disposed and pious as yourselves; and who are not "confined and limited to the perusal of those books which belong chiefly to your own Society," or "within your own circle."

But as it respects the Letters of the celebrated Chesterfield, to his "natural," rather illegitimate son, which I consider as having appeared unhappily, rather than "luckily," for posterity, if I cannot say of them, with a certain elegant writer, that they, "from beginning to ending, are one continued libel (I am not willing to say only) on women," I do with him sincerely "wish the memory of his immoral graces, and his refined dissimulations, to sleep for ever with him in the grave."*

66

Again, in the words of a judicious correspondent of the Christian Observer, (A. D. 1806, "On the evil of violating Truth,” p. 80—2.) I feel desirous to remark further on the "trifling," though no less important concerns of life:" viz. "My reason for dwelling so long on this part of my subject is to convey an adequate idea of the nature and value of truth. There is, perhaps, no sin which is regarded in so light a point of view as that of lying. In general the evil of it is estimated entirely by its consequences. If, for instance, a person tells a lie in order to injure his neighbour, he is thought to have committed a very criminal act, because it is an act of injustice, and is attended with injurious effects. But if a person tells a lie merely to screen himself from punishment, or to advance his own interests, without any apprehension of immediate injury to others, his fault is considered as of a very venial kind. "It does no harm," it is said, 66 to any one." Now, in opposition to this erroneous idea, I would

* Vide "Strictures on Female Education," &c. by "a Clergyman of the Church of England." Essay 1, p. 5.

wish to inculcate upon the minds of my readers the evil of lying in itself, as a branch of that general system by which the devil maintains his empire in the world; and to lead them to consider it as a practice entirely contrary to God, to godliness, to excellence, to knowledge, to wisdom, to every thing that is great, and good, and useful in the world. I wish them to be thoroughly convinced that it is absolutely impossible to be renewed in the spirit of our minds, unless the foundation is laid in an inviolable regard to truth, and a sacred reverence for its authority: and therefore to tell a lie, on whatever account, is a heinous sin in itself; and that a liar, so far as he is justly chargeable with this sin, is necessarily under the influence of the father of lies.

"But there remains another view to be taken of the intrinsic evil of lying; I mean its being most positively and directly forbidden by God. And this it is which in any case constitutes the grand malignity of sin. It is utterly unchristian therefore to reason, as many do, only upon the injurious consequences of an action, as if in these consisted its whole guilt. It ought surely to be sufficient to satisfy the mind of a Christian that a thing is sinful, to say that it has been forbidden by God. Now, God has marked the practice of lying with peculiar reprobation. "Hear the word of the Lord, ye children of Israel, for the Lord hath a controversy with the inhabitants of the land. By swearing and lying they break out," break out, as it were, in open defiance of God, "therefore shall the land mourn." "Lying lips are an abomination to the Lord: but they that deal truly are his delight." "The Lord