them that the equality and the brotherhood and mutual kindness which they seek are all embraced in that very Christianity, which they have rejected, because they never knew it. Do not the teachings of Christ contain all, and far, far more of the benefits they seek than their highest wishes ever reached? It cannot for a moment be denied that if Christians,-all who are called such, made even a fair approach to the precepts of Christ in their lives and conversation, the abuses of which socialists complain and the sufferings to which the poor are subjected could no longer disgrace Christianity and outrage humanity.

While we lament that the socialists have injured their cause by indulging in vagaries at once absurd and wicked, we lament still more that those who assume to know so much better,-those who do know better, those who have read the benign injunctions of Christ,-should have so far erred in life and teaching as not to have exhibited to the socialists a living exemplification of that kindness, that mercy, that charity, that justice, that equality, that brotherhood for which they sigh. Can any one doubt that such examples would attract the eyes and the admiration of all the socialists and well-wishers of humanity in the world? Can any one doubt that such an example would correct the theories and repress and set right the erroneous speculations, now on all sides so rife, in regard to social progress? Such an argument would go farther to reclaim the socialists who are opposed to religion, than all the works on theology extant. It does not meet the objections which they offer, when the Catholic priesthood say to them that they must not oppose the authority of the church, that the church will take care of them, that she will make up in alms what may be wanting for their sustenance from the avails of industry. Nor is the case made better when they are told by Protestants that their position is the one assigned them in the order of Providence, which cannot be changed nor resisted without fatal consequences; that their misery and sufferings are the natural results of that depravity inherent in our nature and inherited from our first parents, and that we can no more banish wretchedness and poverty than we can eradicate original sin. Neither do the political economists meet the case by urging that the laws of trade are founded upon the very nature of things, and, if some men suffer apparently under the operation of these laws, the evil is inevitable, and that these laws cannot be altered because their working may not be equally favourable to all; if some be less happy, others will be more; if some are starving now, others will have plenty elsewhere or

hereafter, and thus the average will be fair; if many die, there will be more for those who remain; and if men are deprived of labour in one department of industry, they can turn to another; and if they die in the transition, it is because they were not needed. So, neither is the complaint of socialists met by statesmen, who tell them their demands cannot possibly be conceded without the greatest injustice to vested interests, without disturbing society to its foundations, without such a radical change of political institutions as would wholly change the existing order of things, and thus revolutionize our present social system; to the ruin of those who now hold wealth and power, advantages not to be surrendered without a struggle. No such responses as these can allay the excitement or stem the progress of socialism, the very object of which is to remove the barriers to progress, to open the career of industry to poverty-stricken multitudes, who now, when they labour at all, labour for the advantage of others more than for their own; who insist upon the solution of the problem, -What will best promote the interests of the whole number of any community?

Although we totally dissent from the plans of reforming political institutions which the socialists have proposed, we cheerfully concede their having rendered a great service to social science by demonstrating the justice and necessity of reform. Their strong sympathy for human suffering throws an interest over many of their writings, very much in contrast with much of the theology, political economy, and politics of the present day. It would be a useful task to glance over pages thus in contrast, and entertain our readers with socialists pleading the cause of humanity, and Christians taking the part of wealth and power. If much cause of humiliation should be found in this comparison, it would not be the only lesson of that kind which might be administered to those who profess to be the followers of Him who, when he took upon himself the form of humanity, became also its champion and friend.

Whatever may be said or thought by those who regard socialism as synonymous with infidelity, it is very certain that many of them are not only Christians, but derive their strongest assurances of the final success of their reforms from the universal prevalence of Christianity. It will be new to many, that one of the most noted of the socialists, the author of Icaria, and the leader of the French colony now settled at Nauvoo, M. CABET, is the writer of a work with the title, True Christianity as it came by Jesus Christ, (Paris, 18mo., 635 pages,) in

which is an exposition of the Christian system as delivered by the Saviour to his disciples, in not a few respects superior to any in our Protestant libraries. He sketches the Jewish dispensation, the law, ritual and moral, the types, the prophecies, the promises of a coming Saviour, his appearing in the fulness of time, and his divine mission: he receives Him as a Divinity, as the Son of God and the Saviour of sinners, as having given a new commandment and introduced a new dispensation, intended to open up the way of life for lost transgressors, and wisely designed to amend their condition in this world. But the distinguishing excellence of this work is the exposition it gives of the life, miracles, and teachings of Christ, precisely the department in which Protestant writers come short of what is due to their great Teacher, the author and finisher of their faith. We commend this volume, which is not free from serious defects, to those whose duty it is to produce, as far as human ability will permit, something worthy of the subject. Let us have an exposition of Christianity as it came from the lips of its Author, a full development of his doctrines and precepts, as the best and only appropriate introduction to the expositions and teachings of the apostles.

LATER INDICATIONS IN GREAT BRITAIN.

WHILST the preceding pages were going to the press, we have gathered fresh evidence that the subject of human well-being is receiving in Great Britain increasing attention. Not all the interests of rank or wealth, nor the influence of the church, nor the prejudices of education, nor the immovableness of conservatism, have sufficed to keep down the topic. Socialism can no longer be kept out of sight, and the subjects it involves can no longer be overlooked. That is the real triumph of socialism-it has raised the questions and forced on the discussion. The French mind has been fully employed upon all aspects of social science; in Great Britain they are preparing to follow. They begin to admit the subject may be openly treated, and that there may be something for consideration. We have referred to some of the pioneers in this path of thought. We now notice some of later date.

We find an article in No. 22 of the North British Review, for August, 1849, devoted to the subject of German and French socialism, which displays some knowledge of the various writers inIcluded in the survey. The writer treats them with unsparing, and, for the most part, just criticism: he perceives their weak points, their mutual variance, and the absurdity of their conclusions; but never once touches the question which such an examination should have presented to the mind of a thinking man. Another article in the same Review, No. 30, for August, 1851, enters so far into the subject as to concede there may be room for discussion,-there may be a necessity of examining theories of human welfare,-there may be a social science. Speaking of Newman's (Political Economy) depreciating socialism, the writer remarks:

66 Among the many merits of Mr. Newman's volume, we cannot rank, however, his unexcepting depreciation of the political force of the socialist movement. No movement occupying so large a space in history could possibly be so devoid of positive worth of any kind as he represents socialism to be. In this respect, Mr. Mill, who anticipates much from socialism, seems to entertain the more just and philosophic view."

But, the writer is far too deeply steeped in political economy, and too deeply convinced of the perfection of British institutions as they

are, to be able to conceive the importance or breadth of the subject which lay before him. His glimpse of the truth, however, obliges him to say

"Followed out to the utmost, indeed, the spirit of political economy leads to the fatal conclusion-that the conduct of the social life should be left entirely to the spontaneous operation of those laws which have the seat of action in the minds of individuals, without any attempt on the part of society, as such, to exert a controlling influence; in other words, without allowing to the state, or institutions for general government, any higher function than that of protecting individual freedom. And it is in this respect that political economy has called forth the antagonistic doctrine of socialism. Viewed historically, socialism has certainly some of the marks of a genuine step in the progressive development of the human mind."..... "The influence of socialism, however, on social science, properly so called, has consisted less in the addition of positive doctrines of any substantial value, than in the general impulse it has given to social speculation. As opposed to political economy, its effect has been to vindicate the right of other laws than those concerned in the acquisition of wealth to a recognition in the social constitution; and also, to reassert, in a new and higher form, the necessity of general government—that is, the scientific superiority of the will of society as such, to that of all its members individually."*

This is a large concession from that quarter, and a long step in advance of the article on socialism, in the number for August, 1849. It is far from explicit, but it clearly reveals the transition state into which the writer has passed. He begins to perceive that there was something in socialism which he did not see, and that there may possibly be some deficiencies in political economy which he did not conceive. He had not yet perceived that political economy, strictly so called, is as much opposed to the spirit of Christianity as it is antagonistic to socialism; or, in other words, that there is far more in common between socialism and Christianity, than there is between the latter and political economy. We make only one more remark,—— that this Review, being the organ of one of the most orthodox and enlightened of the Protestant sects, it is hopeful to find its door opening for the discussion of social science on its merits, and that the interests of humanity may yet find a place in Scotch theology.

The Edinburgh Review has long been known for its strict devotion to political economy. This might be exemplified in a way very little to its credit as the friend of humanity. But the light which has burst

* North British Review, No. 30, August, 1851. Article 1.