« AnteriorContinuar »
immediately employed to suppress every symptom of disorder; but the assertors of their national rights were so numerous, so united in spirit, and so encouraged by the resumption of the uniform of the National Guard, th efter three days' 'severe conflict, and the loss of sixteen thousand lives, Paris was left entirely in the hands of the people. The king had withdrawn to Rambouillet; thither he was followed by General Geraud and an army of the National Guard. A negotiation commenced, which soon terminated in the abdication of Charles X. and the renunciation of all claims to the succession on the part of the Dauphin. General Geraud guaranteed to the late king a safe conduct out of France, both to himself and all the members of his family, and that the future government of the kingdom should provide liberally for their support.
The Chamber of Peers, and that of Deputies which Charles X. had attempted to dissolve, met at Paris, on the 3d of August, according to their original convocation; on the 4th and following days, they entered upon the transaction of such business as arose from the awfulcrisis in which they found themselves placed; they declared the throne vacant,--that the Constitution had been endangered,--and that the Charter must be revised, to render it more safe from future attacks. In this revision the chief alterations are, the suppression of the sixth Article, which declared the Roman Catholic religion that of the State. It is now only declared to be that of the majority of Frenchmen; whilst the ministers of all Christian sects are henceforward to receive the stipends allowed by the public treasury: Initiative laws could formerly only begin with the king; they may now emanate from either of the three constitutional estates of the kingdom, with the exception of money-bills ;—these, as in England, must originate in the Commons, or Chamber of Deputies. The duration of the Chambers is declared to be quinquennial; and Members are eligible at thirty, instead of forty years of age, as formerly. The people now exercise the elective franchise when twenty-five, instead of thirty years old.
The censorship of the press is abolished for ever. All the nominations and new creations of peers made during the reign of Charles X. are declared null and void, and the unlimited power hitherto possessed by the king to create peers, is to undergo a fresh examination in the Session of 1831. The king is declared to be “the supreme head of the State, and commands the forces by sea and land; makes treaties of peace, alliance, and commerce; nominates to all public employments; forms regulations and ordinances necessary for the execution of the laws, without the power either to suspend the laws themselves, or to dispense with their execution.” (This clause dries up the fountain of mercy.) After this revision they offered the crown to Louis Philippe, Duc d'Orleans, whom they had previously nominated Lieutenant-general of the kingdom. He has accepted it; and on the 9th of August took the oath, in the presence of the Chambers, Court, and public functionaries, assembled in the palace, in the following form of words:
“ In the presence of God, I swear faithfully to observe the Constitutional Charter, with the changes and modifications expressed in the Declaration of the Chamber of Deputies; to govern only by the laws, and according to the laws; to cause good and strict justice to be done to every body according to his right, and to act in all things solely with a view to promote the happiness and glory of the French people.
His Majesty then signed the Declaration, the Act of Adherence of the Peers, and the Oath; and having seated himself upon the throne, addressed the Chambers thus :
“Messrs. Peers and Deputies, “ I have maturely reflected upon the extent of the duties imposed upon me. I have the consciousness of being able to fulfil them by causing the compact of alliance, which has been proposed to me, to be observed.
" I should have ardently desired never to have filled the throne to which the national will calls me, but I yield to this will, expressed in the Chambers in the name of the French people,
they, but such stuff as this? One grain of sense (and God be thanked I don't want that) weighs more with me than a tun of their papers.—Pp. 340, 341.
The last literary effort of Bentley's life was a reformed edition of Homer. This he purposed to effect by a collation of MSS., comparison of scholiasts, quotations in Greek authors, and, most especially, by the insertion of the Digamma. The existence of this letter was known from Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Priscian, Terentian, and others; it had been recently discovered in some ancient inscriptions ; there could be no doubt that it was prevalent in the age of Homer, and the insertion of it explained many metrical paradoxes. Bentley lived to collate the Iliad and Odyssey throughout; but he was never able to complete his notes or publish his text.* He had advanced as far as the Sixth Book of the Iliad, when a paralytic seizure, and the death of his wife, seemed to set bounds to all his intellectual undertakings. He had, however, in 1739, contrived to publish his edition of Manilius. His Lucan was not published until after his death, which took place on the 14th day of July, 1742, in the eighty. first year
age. Having now attended our critic to the close of his conspicuous career, we will add a few words, (they must be very few,) on the “word-catcher, who lives by syllables” in the Edinburgh Review. If he could live on these only, we would not interfere with his livelihood; for, from his sensitive remarks on the Bishop's expression, “some scribbler writing for bread in a garret," it is easy to conjecture his predicament. But he has chosen to live by detraction also. We have already noticed his perversion of the Bishop's sentiment respecting “ the first wish of a scholar;" we now examine some others equally flagrant. His Lordship is accused of “worldly wisdom ;"-in plain language, of giving inconsistent and unmerited praise to living individuals, with a view to secular advancement. We will not insult Bishop Monk by vindicating him from such a charge against such an adversary; but we will examine the proofs which the libeller has advanced in favour of his position, that the Bishop of Gloucester (say, if you will, the Dean of Peterborough; but Dr. Monk was Bishop, or elect, at least, when this Number of the Review was pub. lished) paid court, for preferment, to the Bishops of London and Durham. The biographer observes :
Notwithstanding this frequent abuse of his erudition, such is the power of genius, and so great the preponderance of his solid and unshaken merits, that Bentley has established a school of criticism, of which the greatest scholars since his time have been proud to consider themselves members; and in spite of the envy and opposition of his contemporaries, has attained a more exalted reputation than has hitherto been the lot of any one in the department of ancient literature.-P. 663.
For a compendious account of the Digamma, we refer our readers to the article under that bead in the Lexicographical division of the Encyclopædia Metropolitana, and to the sixth preliminary Essay in Trollope's Homer.
On this passage we have the following sage remark: Whether this latter clause does not contain a very material exaggeration, we may safely leave to the determination of the learned reader :* but it may not be superfluous to compare this lofty panegyric with another sentiment of the very reverend author, contained in his dedication to the Bishop of London :
“In the first place, there is no one to whom an account of the life and writings of a distinguished scholar can be inscribed with more propriety than to your Lordship, who have obtained the same rank in literature at the present day as was enjoyed during his life-time by Dr. Bentley.-P. v.
“ With what sentiments this passage will be read by many scholars on the continent, and even in England, it is not for us to anticipate." We agree in the concluding sentence; it is not, indeed, for such a scribbler as this to have any “anticipations” on the subject. We will, however, take leave to “anticipate " the fate of his criticism in all literary society. It is almost an insult to common sense to shew that the contradiction here insinuated does not exist. The Bishop makes no comparison between Bentley and Dr. Blomfield; he only states that they held the same station in their respective generations. May not this be true without any derogation from the Bishop's merited eulogium on the former? It is needless to point out the incapacity of this writer for comprehending the merits either of Bentley or Blomfield, even if he has attempted to read them, which we greatly doubt; but had he even mixed with scholars, he would have known that there was nothing incongruous in this passage of the Bishop's dedication. Our author offends in the same way by classing the Bishop of Durham's Historical Account of Infidelity “among the ablest theological pieces in our language.” This "worldly wisdom” the northern scribbler may not possess ; but does this prove (to retort his own words) " the extent of his learning, or the elegance of his taste ?"
The next misrepresentation is yet more grossly offensive: “Dr. Monk is pleased to remark that Atterbury has associated his name with the political history of this country, in a degree which has seldom been the lot of a churchman. After the statement we have now made, the reader may be sufficiently prepared to estimate the value of the commendation which one high churchman sometimes bestows on another." It is here evidently intended to charge the Bishop, or church principles, or both, with an undue connexion with secular politics, if not with treason. For this infamous accusation it must be obvious that the passage here cited affords not the slightest pretext. It is in truth no commendation of Atterbury whatever. It is a simple remark; a
* It is much to be regretted that the Boreal luminary did not condescend to illustrate this position.
remark which every reader, who knows any thing of the time, must allow to be true; and may be fully admitted by those who deprecate most decidedly both the principles and conduct of Atterbury.
After this exhibition, our readers would not thank us for disturbing the grammatical cavils of the blunderer. Some are founded in the grossest ignorance; but even had he succeeded in pointing out a flaw, we envy
little the creature who could read this great, laborious, and most delightful work, with a view to pick out the faults without which no composition would be human. Such there may be :
Verum opere in longo fas est obrepere somnum. With our youthful predilections for the style of architecture in which Trinity College is built, we cannot sympathize with the Bishop's commendations of Bentley's handsome and expensive, but Corinthian stalls and organ gallery of the gothic chapel of Trinity; there may be other points, too, which the Bishop himself might, in a future edition, think fit to revise; but the work is a valuable storehouse of literary, political, and academical information ; a monument which will remain eternal as the genius of him to whose commemoration it is worthily consecrated.
Art. II.-The Insecurity of Salvation in the Church of Rome. A
Sermon, preached in St. Martin's Church, Leicester, before the Venerable the Archdeacon and Clergy, on Tuesday, May 18, 1830. By the Rev. W. L. Fancourt, D.D. Vicar of St. Mary's and All Saints, Leicester. Leicester : T. Combe and Son. London : Rivingtons. 1830. Pp. 58. Price 2s. 6d.
The situation in which we place Dr. Fancourt's Sermon, as an article for review, will manifest the place which it justly occupies in our estimation, for it is very rarely that we feel ourselves called upon to assign any thing more than a notice to the occasional discourses which are submitted to our perusal. But the excellent Vicar of St. Mary's challenges our especial regard, whether we weigh the admirable matter of his eloquent sermon, or consider its suitableness to the times in which we live. No longer protected by the law from the machinations of her inveterate foes, who are admitted to the privilege of framing statutory regulations for our spiritual Zion and her disciples, whom they execrate as damnable heretics, and whom to pillage, to exterminate, and to murder, they would hold to be doing God service, the Church of England needs such honest and intrepid supporters as Dr. Fancourt, to blow the trumpet of alarm, and to rouse men from their bed of sleep and indifference. The Papist has, indeed, made a fearful inroad upon our establishment; and, no longer satisfied with toleration, “Etiam in Senatum venit; fit publici consilii particeps ; notat, et designat oculis ad coedem unumquemque nostrum.”* We would not speak with unnecessary harshness of him, who has thrown down the walls, by which our Church has been so long protected ; “Sed ex plurimis malis, quæ ab illo reipublica sunt inusta, hoc tamen boni est, quod didicit jam populus,-quantum cuique crederet, quibus se committeret, a quibus caveret.” of And, therefore, it is that we hail the appearance of such Protestant champions as Dr. Fancourt with peculiar satisfaction, at the present alarming crisis, and thank him cordially for the orthodox sermon, which we thus introduce to the favourable regard of our readers.
The preacher takes for his text, Psalm cxxxvii. 5, 6; and, from the example of the captive Israelites, inculcates upon his hearers the necessity of attachment to the service of God. After a suitable exordium, he adduces a variety of motives for our adherence to a Church, “ that alone deserves the name of Apostolic.”
These motives divide themselves into several branches. The rise and progress of our Church under its reformed state; the insidious machinations of its enemies; the bounden duty of its ministers under existing circumstances; the antiquity of its origin; the purity of its creed and ritual, and the consequent safety of salvation in its communion, compared with that of the Church of Rome. These are the several topics, intermixed with historical events, illustrative of the subject, which, with all deference, I offer to your serious consideration.Pp. 3, 4.
Having sketched the rise and progress of our Church through various vicissitudes of fortune, and multifold opposition, in its separation from that of Rome, and detailed the miserable schisms which were inflicted upon her at her very birth, by the jealousy, the pride, and the fanaticism of those Protestants, who fled to Frank fort during the reign of Mary, of bloody memory, Dr. Fancourt adds the remark
That in all the shifting scenes of politics, from the day that our Church separated from that of Rome; that in all the troubles which, from the reign of Elizabeth to the present period, have convulsed this Protestant country; one and the same evil spirit rode in the whirlwind and guided the storm. The crafty Jesuit,- avtoins åtárns peuvokwv,—well versed in human nature, its foibles, its vanities, and its interests, was ever active in political commotions; an agent, indeed, invisible, but always sensibly present. With the clue of history in our hand, we trace the wily serpent in all his windings of intrigue, under all his Protean forms, and well-chosen masks of character; at one time wrapt in the sombre cloak of a stern republican, at another gliding under the protection of despotic power, and now assuming, like an angel of light, all the amiable and insinuating qualities of gentleness and urbanity, liberality and conciliation. The objects of all the changes and movements of this grand agent of Rome has been, and is, invariably one and the same—THE DOWNFALL OF OUR PROTESTANT Church. With whatever fair speech, with whatever plausible words, it may suit his purpose to soothe the ear of mawkish liberality, and beguile the unwary
* Cicero in Catilin. 1.
† Cicero, Philip. 2. $ 46.