Графични страници
PDF файл

with me in Christ, I have no more personal sympathy with them than with the dust beneath my feet.

May 21. 1832.



PROFESSOR PARK talks * about its being very doubtful whether the constitution described by Blackstone ever in fact existed. In the same

* In his “ Dogmas of the Constitution, four Lectures on the Theory and Practice of the Constitution, delivered at the King's College, London,” 1832. Lecture I. There was a stiffness, and an occasional uncouthness in Professor Park's style; but his two works, the one just mentioned, and his “ Contre-Projet to the Humphreysian Code," are full of original views and vigorous reasonings. To those who wished to see the profession of the law assume a more scientific character than for the most part it has hitherto done in England, the early death of John James Park was a very great loss. -ED.

manner, I suppose, it is doubtful whether the moon is made of green cheese, or whether the souls of Welchmen do, in point of fact, go to heaven on the backs of mites. Blackstone's was the age of shallow law. Monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy, as such, exclude each the other: but if the elements are to interpenetrate, how absurd to call a lump of sugar, hydrogen, oxygen, and carbon ! nay, to take three lumps, and call the first, hydrogen; the second, oxygen; and the third, carbon ! Don't you see that each is in all, and all in each ?

The democracy of England, before the Reform Bill, was, where it ought to be, in the corporations, the vestries, the joint-stock companies, &c. The power, in a democracy, is in focal points, without a centre; and, in proportion as such democratical power is strong, the strength of the central government ought to be intense — otherwise the nation will fall to pieces.

We have just now incalculably increased the democratical action of the people, and, at the same time, weakened the executive power of the government.

It was the error of Milton, Sidney, and others of that age, to think it possible to construct a purely aristocratical government, defecated of all passion, and ignorance, and sordid motive. The truth is, such a government would be weak from its utter want of sympathy with the people to be governed by it.

May 25. 1832.



MERCURY strongly illustrates the theory de vi minimorum. Divide five grains into fifty doses, and they may poison you irretrievably. I don't believe in all that Hahnemann says; but he is a fine fellow, and, like most

Germans, is not altogether wrong, and like them also, is never altogether right.

Six volumes of translated selections from Luther's works, two being from his Letters, would be a delightful work. The translator should be a man deeply imbued with his Bible, with the English writers from Henry the Seventh to Edward the Sixth, the Scotch Divines of the 16th century, and with the old racy German. *

Hugo de Saint Victor t, Luther's favourite

* Mr. Coleridge was fond of pressing this proposed publication :-“I can scarcely conceive,” he says in the Friend, “a more delightful volume than might be made from Luther's letters, especially those that were written from the Warteburg, if they were translated in the simple, sinewy, idiomatic, hearty mother tongue of the original. A difficult task I admit, and scarcely possible for any man, however great his talents in other respects, whose favourite reading has not lain among the English writers from Edward the Sixth to Charles the First.” Vol. i. p. 235. n. - ED.

+ This celebrated man was a Fleming, and a member of the Augustinian society of St. Victor. He died at divine, was a wonderful man, who, in the 12th century, the jubilant age of papal dominion, nursed the lamp of Platonic mysticism in the spirit of the most refined Christianity.

June 9. 1832.


If you take Sophocles, Catullus, Lucretius, the better parts of Cicero, and so on, you may, with just two or three exceptions arising out of the different idioms as to cases, translate page after page into good mother English, word by word, without altering the order ; but you cannot do so with Virgil

Paris in 1142, aged forty-four. His age considered, it is sufficient praise for him that Protestants and Romanists both claim him for their own on the subject of transubstantiation. -ED,

« ПредишнаНапред »