Now in the West, The radiant sun To his God declines; O'er shiver'd altare, Fallen domes, The ruby beam Its working glare And so on, for whole pages, trips the "Spirit." But we have had enough of it, and shall turn with pleasure to a very interesting and unpretending morceau, from the pen of a reverend author of great literary eminence. How admirably he developes his immediate inspiration from the genius of facetiousness must strike the reader at once on perusal of the ensuing lines. They savour a little of the "Lakist" school, but far be it from us to cast a stain upon the divine garb of simplicity upon which we should say a good deal had we not been anticipated by what old Jacob Tonson used to call more "able pens." Our ON MY BEING REFUSED THE LOAN OF AN UMBRELLA, BY A CERTAIN LADY, When rain smartly fell, I ask'd an umbrell From kind Mrs. Doe, Who cried out, "No, no, As no doubt you'd break it, And who would repair it? If you're wet to the skin, the At a future period we shall resume "Random Poetics," and commit a few further depredations upon 'Stores of Posterity.' Wewould now once more recommend all of every sex who aspire after that species of fame, now by far the most difficult of attainment, "the poetical," not to approach the fountains of Pirene ere their genius he rified, and their taste refined from the dross of ignorance and self-sufficiency. pu The Muses, to be won, must be wooed by gentle approaches; they never fail to shrink from the rude grasp of uncouth and uncivilized violence; this we have seen tolerably well exemplified in the rather indifferent snccess of the "uneducated Poets;" very few of whom have approached the fame of Robert Burns, whom we shall mention as the most splendid exception whereby to prove our rule, in any defineable number of degrees. As it is still a moot point whether Shakspeare was or was not indebted in some degree to art, we shall not adduce him as an example where we are discussing the capabilities of nature per se; besides we take it for granted that no one has any intention of breaking a lance upon the ground of uncultivated genius with him, about whom Dr. Johnson has left nothing for admiration to express: neither should we permit the unschooled' to build upon Swift as a model or an ally, because he obtained his University degree by special grace, which he had the wit to convert from its proper meaning into a particular compliment.-The natural talent which springs elastic from the pressure of adverse circumstances, or unassisted by the extrinsic aid of academic education, of itself at once commands notice and approval, is indeed of the most brilliant and dazzling character, but it appears with the intervals of centuries between its rare and beautiful risings; and as wisely in sooth might the unfledged gosling attempt in all its affected majesty of impotence to rival the soarings of the eagle, as the very many silly and incompetent musemongers to catch, through the fog of their folly and ridiculous aspirings, even one glance at the glorious train of the great luminary, which would not have its beams polluted by lightning, for an instant, on the stagnant vapours that hover round their turbid intellect. We owe to the kindness of a gentleman, whoformerly distinguished himself as a successful candidate for the ViceChancellor's prizes in our University, an original letter from Sir Walter Scott in reply to a note, which he sent to Sir W. S. with one of his poems; which having received permission to insert, and as it bears strongly upon our subject, independently of every other inducement, we haste to submit to the reader, and so to close for the present. "SIR, Iam obliged with your letter, I generally am unwilling to correspond on the subject of Poetry, with aspirants after the favour of the Muses, because one must give pain by criticism or perhaps excite false hopes by complaisance, and neither alternative is pleasant. But youth is a sacred word with me, and has at all times a right to the best advice which experience enables me to offer. Your early composition shews I think both spirit and thought, and expression, but it has many of the faults incident to early composition, in particular the language is at times too flowery to express the author's precise meaning. But I have had only time to look at the verses, otherwise I should find more to censure as well as to applaud. "I greatly approve of your resolution to work hard at your studies, there is no rising to any permanent eminence in literature, without knowing a great deal more than others do, and Horace you they did not find the treasure which his dying words led them to seek, but they raised an excellent crop, which was as good a thing. Let me hope that your studies tend to some profession; that of literature alone, and for subsistence, is the most miserable in the world, you must either be a slave of the daily press and sell your daily thoughts for your daily bread, or you must court the caprice of the Public by compositions, adopted not at your own choice, but that of the booksellers, and sacrifice of course both literary and even personal independence, whereas having a profession you may use literature as a staff to support you occasionally, not as a crutch to lean upon, and write when you please and how you please. "To these few hints I can only add the propriety of abstaining from dissipations of every kind, which seldom fail, when habitually practised, to deprave the imagination, and destroy the powers designed for higher purposes. I can only add, that I remain your sincere friend and well-wisher, as well as obliged servant, 10, Stephen's-green, Wednesday, WALTER SCOTT." 1825.. "P. S. The kindness of my Dublin friends has scarce left me a moment to write these lines." 1 WHIG LEGISLATION. That our observations can have much effect in checking the present headlong career of lawlessness and revolution, is perhaps, too flattering an expectation to be entertained. The march of intellect is, we fear, too far advanced to allow the still small voice of reason to meet with much attention. Nevertheless, although we may not be successful in stemming the torrent of anarchy, it will be some satisfaction to have placed our opinions upon record. Legislators who have failed in their opposition to an injurious measure, do no not conceive that they fully acquit themselves of their duty, unless they enter their protests. In considering the phenomena, which the present system of misgovernment presents to our view, it appears to us, that many of the dangerous mistakes into which modern reformers fall, may be traced to one or two errors :-one of these errors is the endeavour to apply principles which hold good only in the simple and original rudiments of society, to that complex, artificial, and heterogeneous combination, a modern state. Revolutionists are fond of insisting on the natural equality of men, and are ready to inform us, that all members of the community are invested with equal rights. The truth of these principles, when applied to society, resolved into its primary elements, is not more evident than is their falsehood, in reference to the social body, when moulded into the form of a civilized nation. In the same way we are free to admit, that a reformed house of commons is more consonant with the abstract theory of representation than it was as formerly constituted. And yet this admission does not one whit alter our conviction, that the so called, reformation of the house of commons was the most insane and reckless project that ever disgraced the councils of profligate political empirics. Another prolific source of error consists in the want of a comprehensive view of the various interests and numberless relations, which exist in the complicated machinery of our political system. It belongs to contracted understandings to see things only in detail; the various parts and members, which constitute one great whole, appear to them isolated and independent; they perceive a "mighty maze," but are unable to discover that it is "not without a plan." A melancholy instance of this want of philosophic scope is exhibited by our reforming legislators in their treatment of the British constitution. That any part of this admirable edifice should appear to their discriminating eyes to be corrupt, is sufficient cause for its removal. To consider its relations and independencies, to ascertain whether it be not inseparably connected with the other parts which it is desirable to preserve; such reflections as these are beneath the notice of their enlarged philosophy, which condescends to view things only in the nakedness of metaphysical abstraction. They do not remember, that the removal of a decayed buttress or mouldering pillar may occasion the downfall of the entire structure; they do not call to mind, that the amputation of a diseased limb may extinguish the vital spark in the whole body; they forget that in eradicating the tares, they may root out the wheat also. Dangerous and fatal as the mistakes arising from these sources certainly are, would to God they were the only errors with which our rulers could be charged!-would to God that, although their judgments were warped, their intentions were upright! would to God, that to weak heads they did not add perverted hearts! But what abstract theory will account for-what weakness of intellect extenuate the reckless robbery of chartered rights-the establishment of popish education in Ireland-insulting legislative enactments against the tried supporters of British connexion in this country-the fatal coalition with France to support a nation of popish rebels in their revolt against the lawful authority of our old and ancient protestant ally the reduction to beggary of our much venerated clergy? But time would fail us to complete the dismal catalogue, and mathematicians though we be, we confess ourselves unable to sum the infinite series of calamities, which the Grey administration has brought upon the country. That unprincipled spoliators should attack the possessions of the church, is not matter of surprise. To address any observations to them would be a mere waste of argument. As well might we enter into a discussiou upon the rights of property with the footpad, who demands our money or our life; but if there be any moderate and wellmeaning men, who consider the property of ecclesiastics as less sacred than that of the laity, to them we would beg to address a few brief remarks. ditions. But does this weaken their tenure, so long as those conditions are observed? Who will have the hardi hood to say so? This then is the real state of the case. All estates, both lay and ecclesiastical, are held conditionally upon the observance of certain duties specified by law, and we are unable to discover anything in the duties imposed upon churchmen, calculated to invalidate their rights. The qualifications required of ecclesiastics are that they shall be men of learning and piety, that they shall reside upon their cures, and that they shall devote their time and attention to the welfare of their flocks; that these should be the conditions required of them, may no doubt, in the eyes of modern reformers, appear cause sufficient to nullify their right to their incomes, and to sap the foundations of property. But to those not so far advanced in the march of intellect, it would not appear any very grievous calamity, if the póssession of all estates whatsoever was incumbered with similar duties. One grand scource of misconception upon this point, appears to be the tacit assumption, that property which is held under certain conditions-property, to But some of those who clamour loudthe enjoyment of which the perform- est about church property being the ance of certain duties is attached-is property of the state, are at other times, not, in reality, property at all. The with admirable consistency, prepared possessors of ecclesiastical property are to inform us that it belongs to the poor. required to fulfil certain conditions, to And in support of this second claim, perform certain duties, and, therefore, they conjure up some lying legend it is assumed, that their estates are sa- about an original fourfold division of the laries, which the state is at liberty to revenues of the church. I answer then, give, to lessen, or to withhold. The we deny that there was ever a fourfold vìs consequentiæ of this deduction, we division of the property of the estabconfess ourselves not sagacious enough lished church. Before the existence of to discover; on the contrary we boldly an establishment, the voluntary conassert, that, if the necessity of fulfilling tributions of the people were indeed certain conditions invalidate the right divided into four parts: one for the supof property, there is no such thing as port of the bishops, another for the property in the empire. We distinctly maintenance of the clergy, a third for affirm that there is not one solitary in- the building of churches, and a fourth dividual in his Majesty's dominions, for the relief of the poor. But when who possesses a shilling of uncondi- permanent endowments rendered the tional property. Have any of our li- bishops and clergy no longer dependent beral legislators, any of our new-light on the eleemosynary support of the politicians, in whose vocabulary church people, and when the building and rereform and church robbery are synoni- pairing of churches were also provided mous terms, ever heard of forfeited for by a charge on land, the contribuestates ? Have they ever heard of tions of the people ceased to be divided treason, felony, misprison of treason, into four parts, and were directed wholpræmunire, &c. ? And do they know ly to the relief of the poor. These colwhat effect the commission of any of lections ceased in England on the esthese offences would have on their broad tablishment of poor laws, but still exacres? All estates then are forfeitablet to a certain extent in Scotland and for certain crimes; that is, in other words, the possessors of them are required by law to conform to certain con Ireland, where poor-boxes are handed about the churches on Sundays. Such is the foundation of the boasted argu ment derived from the fourfold division of church property! pro But the beggars and the state are not without competitors, in their claims upon the revenues of the church. The popish landholders of Ireland think their right to the tithe of the lands undeniable. It may not be amiss therefore to consider the case of church perty, with respect to landlord and tenant. It will not be denied that land, which is subject to tithe, sells proportionably lower than land which is tithefree, that is, in other words, the buyer of land purchases nine-tenths of the value of the ground. These nine-tenths, and these only, are his property, and these he sets to his tenants for corresponding rents. Upon the remaining one-tenth, neither landlord nor tenant have any claim whatever. The inheritor of land, in like manner, inherits only nine-tenths of the value of his estate, and is in this respect similarly situated with the original purchaser. Those who view the church establishment in this light, can see no meaning in such expressions as, that the church costs the public too much, that it is too burdensome upon the people. They cannot understand how an institution can cost the public anything, which is supported by revenues exclusively its own, by revenues which do not belong to the public, and which therefore are not subtracted from the pockets of the public, nor can they readily perceive in what respect it is burdensome upon the people, that they are not put in possession of property, upon which they have no moral or legal claim whatever. Were a foreigner, a stranger to the circumstances of our nation, to be informed that there existed in this country an established church, that its ministers were learned, pious, and exemplary men, that they were possessors of property as sacred as any in the empire, that this their lawful income they spent in constant residence among their flocks, that in order to qualify them for their holy calling, they had received a liberal and expensive education, that in entering into their honorable profession, they had been sanctioned and encouraged by the government of the country; and were he further informed that the nation so highly favoured was the empire of Britain-of Britain, whose justice, whose laws, whose polity, whose constitution have been the theme of admi ration to philosophers, statesmen, and historians, and the envy of civilized Europe, what would be his natural conclusion? Would he not take it for granted that these deserving men were not only protected in all their rights, but cherished and honored by the paternal care of a friendly government? And could he be accused of incredulity if he refused to give credence to the following agonizing tale : It is now more than two years since the Clergy of the Established Church, throughout a great part of this country, have received any of their lawful income, if we except the wretched pittance doled out to them by the grudging hands of a hostile government. In bespeaking public sympathy for our injured clergy, we are persuaded that it is only necessary to state their case as it really is, and so let the facts speak for themselves, a plain, unvarnished tale. Were their sufferings known to the public, we think too well of the Protestants of this country-we think too well of the British nation—we think too well of human nature, to suppose they could be heard with indifference. The British public, we are well aware, have but little idea of the condition of our impoverished clergy. But we have lived amongst them, and can speak from actual observation. We have seen their once happy homes, lately the scenes of contented competence and peaceful domestic enjoyment, now the abodes of wasting poverty and fearful anticipation. We have seen sons, the solace and the hope of their parents' declining years, summoned home from school or from the university, to share in the miseries of the paternal roof, because the blessings of a liberal education could no longer be extended to them. We have seen daughters, the ornaments and darlings of the domestic scene, torn from the embraces of their sorrowing parents, to earn among strangers that subsistence which could no longer be afforded to them in their father's house. We have seen Ministers of the Established Church deprived of the very necessaries of life, harassed by vexatious creditors, and rescued from the ignominy of a gaol only by the humiliating alternative of accepting alms. Nor are the actual privations of poverty the only, or even the most bitter ingredient in the cup of their sorrows. He was no superfi |