too long detained. His first three volumes were published in quarto in the year 1819; and he has now completed eight in the same form. An edition in octavo has also been published. Though we do not believe that the sale has been remarkably extensive, few modern works of the kind have obtained a more general notoriety, which has by no means been confined to our own country. A translation into French by M. Roujoux was, under the late government, used as the standard history of England in all the colleges of France. It would be unjust to suppose that the motive which will probably suggest itself, was the sole cause of this preference. The merits of Dr Lingard are of a high class. He generally discusses controverted facts with candour, (except on one subject,) acuteness, and perspicuity. He selects, in general, judiciously, arranges naturally, relates without prolixity or confusion. Abstaining from any comprehensive views of society, and from any profound remarks on human character, and thus certainly falling short of the first rank among historians, he at least avoids by this the habit of verbose declamation on these topics, which the minor Italian historians, and even Guicciardini, have practised, and of which abundant instances may be found in the writings of M. Sismondi, and, still more, of Mr Godwin. His style, which in earlier volumes was somewhat too much constructed after that of Gibbon, has become more easy and spirited by practice; and though not free from small blemishes, nor rising into any eloquence, may be considered as good from its conciseness and perspicuity. We shall presently give some extracts, which display Dr Lingard's powers of historical narration in a very favourable light.

It is impossible to deny that the celebrity of this work has been in some measure owing to the hostility it was calculated, or perhaps designed, to excite. In the first three volumes, though Dr Lingard was known to be a Catholic priest, little was found that provoked much controversy; nor indeed were they very much read before the publication of the fourth. It might be observed, that he disposed of the story of Edwy and Elgiva, and of the dispute between Henry II. and Becket, rather differently from most of his Protestant predecessors; but such matters have been reckoned open ground, and not very important to the Established Church. It was quite otherwise when, in descending to the Tudor dynasty, he exhibited the fathers of the Anglican reformation, and all the circumstances of that great revolution in the laws and opinions of England, so unfavourably, and yet to all appearance so dispassionately, and with so perpetual an appeal to authority, that, while many were startled to find their ancient

prejudices disturbed without much power of resistance, the champions of orthodox Protestantism were quick to take up the gauntlet, and expose, if they could, the misrepresentation and sophistry which was dimming the lustre of its historical glory. The time drew more than usual attention to such a contest. The great question, since so happily terminated, had begun to assume far more the character of a religious dispute, than it had done at the outset ; an activity in proselytism was perceived, or strongly suspected, on both sides; and though no rational and cool-headed men were disposed to rest the merits either of Catholic Emancipation, as a political measure, or of the Reformation, as a theological one, on the personal characters of Mary and Elizabeth, of Pole and Cranmer, yet it is certain, that nothing is more common than to measure the truth of doctrines by the honesty of their professors; nor had any argument been more efficacious, in the seventeenth century, to withdraw members of the Anglican Church from its tenets, than to raise unfavourable notions of those who, in the preceding age, had established it. Even the writings of its professed friends, when tinctured with the strong leaven of hierarchical principles, such as prevailed in the reigns of the two first Stuarts, tended to alienate their readers from the protestant theory of lay judgment in religion, and reform of the church by the temporal power; and thus James II. has mentioned Heylin's History of the Reformation as one of the two books which satisfied his mind, that the truth had been lost by those who seceded from the Church of Rome.

The manner of Dr Lingard's attack on the northern heresy, as established in these kingdoms, was conducive to his success. No angry expression, no arrogance or indignation, betrays the writer's intention; a placid neutrality, and almost an affected indifference to the whole subject, seems to guide his pen: aware of the propensity of mankind, and perhaps of the greater ease of the undertaking, he prefers lowering his adversaries, to exalting his friends; and if he can degrade the memory of Cranmer, or taint the fame of Anne Boleyn, or darken a shade in the character of Elizabeth, is not comparatively solicitous to interest us for the virtues of Gardiner, or to palliate the cruelties of Bonner. Whatever, indeed, is done either way-for much is done in the way of defence, though more in that of accusationis executed with consummate dexterity; the conclusions are always left for the reader, while the facts seem related with so much simplicity and fairness, that, when they are unfairly represented, it is not a slight acquaintance with authentic history which enables us to detect their fallaciousness.

L'arte che tutto fa, nulla si scuopre.

It was not, however, to be expected that any misrepresentations of importance would escape detection in an age when historical criticism is vigilant, and when public libraries are universally accessible. For several years Dr Lingard's want of candour in relating the history of the English Reformation was the theme of periodical criticism, sometimes also of more extended animadversion. Many attacked him with increased animosity on account of the pending Catholic question; a few, probably, defended him chiefly on the same account. Upon the whole, perhaps, each party came off with nearly an equal number of wounds in the controversy. If, on the one hand, Dr Lingard rendered it abundantly clear that Burnet, and those who have written the annals of Henry VIII. and Edward VI. in the same spirit, had somewhat overcharged the faults of the ancient church, and considerably disguised the injustice and intolerance which accompanied its overthrow; if he was successful in vindicating the English Catholics under Elizabeth from many aspersions, and held out to just indignation the persecuting laws which so long had passed for necessary safeguards against conspiracy; it is not less certain, on the other hand, that he was convicted of frequently going beyond the meaning of the authorities which he vouches, and of still more frequent suppression of the truth.

We have the less scruple, if indeed any scruple on such a topic could be felt by critics, in alluding to the faults of Dr Lingard in a portion of his history published some years ago, because we can bestow upon him the high, and not very usual commendation of having corrected, in a great degree, that propensity to carry a party spirit into the narrative of past times, from which writers of his profession are seldom exempt. Historical unfairness is indeed the besetting sin of the Roman Catholic advocates; and the name of Bossuet, in this respect, hardly reaches higher than that of Maimbourg. Even the soft and moderate Mr Charles Butler, who might pass for an exception, has sometimes brought to our remembrance the malicious Greek epigram,

Λεριοι κακοι' εχ ὁ μεν, ὃς δ ̓ δ·

Παντες, πλην Προκλεως και Προκλεης Λεριος.

which Porson very unjustly adapted to the following epigram on a scholar little inferior to himself:

The Germans in Greek

Are sadly to seek ;

Not five in five-score,
But ninety-five more ;

All, all, except Herman,

And Herman's a German.'

But be this as it may, we sincerely congratulate our author, as well as the public, on the manifest signs of increased candour and impartiality which distinguish his three quarto volumes on the reigns of the four Stuarts in England, especially the two latter. Not that we never detect prisca vestigia fraudis; but the objections we could raise on this score are much less frequent. One of the most remarkable proofs of this is, that the fortunes of the Catholics, which occupied a most disproportionate share in the history of Elizabeth, those of the Puritans, though far more important in their political consequences, being reduced into small compass, and many interesting events of the Maiden Queen's story slurred over with very slight notice, are less and less prominent as we advance, till the Popish Plot, and the designs of James II. to restore his religion, bring them naturally into the foreground.

Of the three quarto volumes to which we have alluded, the first comes down to the death of Charles I.; the next to the year 1673, and the last to the Restoration. They are consequently on a sufficient scale to permit the developement of facts with their causes and circumstances, and even some degree of critical examination of them. We have found, however, that partly perhaps from some habitual indisposition to circumstantial narrative, the civil war between Charles and his Parliament is more briefly related than may be satisfactory to the general reader, considering the copiousness of materials, and the consequent accumulation of records and events; nor do we think Dr Lingard is always full enough on the still more interesting conflicts of party within the walls of Parliament. These defects are more than compensated by a rigorous impartiality, which he uniformly displays on political questions, and which stands in singular contrast with the bias he, at one time at least, used to manifest as to the interests of his church.

We have already mentioned the remarkable improvement in Dr Lingard's language, and in his powers of narration, since the commencement of his laborious undertaking. Several instances might be brought from the last two volumes of the quarto edition. Among these a high place is deserved by the account of Charles the Second's memorable adventures after his escape from the field of Worcester, not literally from unpublished sources, but from such as historians, who follow the inaccurate story of Clarendon, have not taken the trouble, or possessed the opportunity, to explore. It appears that the king did not embark from Brighthelmstone, as commonly supposed, but from

Shoreham, though he had remained a short time in the former place. But it is rather too long for a single extract. The following account of Cromwell's celebrated expulsion of the Parliament from their seats in 1653, may be very advantageously compared with that given by Mr Godwin, whose great power of delineation in works of fiction, has never been imparted to his historical narrative, which is frigid and deficient in picturesque liveliness. But Dr Lingard stands in need of no foil. It cannot be denied, that Hume had given a great deal of spirit to the same transaction, and several differences will be observed in the characteristic traits of the usurper; but as the publication of Lord Leicester's, and of Burton's Diaries, as well as of Mrs Hutchinson's Memoirs, has furnished additional materials of undisputed authority since the days of Hume, we think it reasonable to prefer our present historian. The last paragraph of the following extract is not inserted in our pages as a specimen of Dr Lingard's narrative talent, but of his good sense; and we earnestly recommend it to the attention of those at the present day whom it concerns. It is still a duty to bring the lessons of the past before the eyes of mankind, whatever grounds we may apprehend to exist for the melancholy suspicion, that each successive generation, collectively as well as individually, is destined to profit only by the experience of its own follies, and not those of its ancestors.

At length Cromwell fixed on his plan to procure the dissolution of the Parliament, and to vest for a time the sovereign authority in a council of forty persons, with himself at their head. It was his wish to effect this quietly by the votes of the Parliament-his resolution to effect it by open force, if such votes were refused. Several meetings were held by the officers and members, at the lodgings of the lordgeneral, in Whitehall. St John and a few others gave their assent: the rest, under the guidance of Whitelock and Widrington, declared that the dissolution would be dangerous, and the establishment of the proposed council unwarrantable. In the meantime, the House resumed the consideration of the new representative body; and several qualifications were voted; to all of which the officers raised objections, but chiefly to the "admission of members," a project to strengthen the government by the introduction of the presbyterian interest. "Never," said Cromwell," shall any of that judgment who have deserted the good cause, be admitted to power.' On the last meeting held on the 19th of April, all these points were long, and warmly debated. Some of the officers declared that the Parliament must be dissolved " one way or other;" but the general checked their indiscretion and precipitancy; and the assembly broke up at midnight, with an understanding that the leading men on each side should resume the subject in the morning.

At an early hour the conference was recommenced, and after a