The author then slightly sketches the victories of the French General, in Italy and in Egypt; after which, he continues,

"The next great event in Bonaparte's history, was the usurpation of the supreme power of the state, and the establishment of military despotism over France. On the particulars of this criminal act we have no desire to enlarge, nor are we anxious to ascertain, whether our hero, on this occasion, lost his courage and selfpossession, as he is reported to have done. We are more anxious to express our convictions of the turpitude of this outrage on liberty and justice. For this crime but one apology can be offered, Napoleon, it is said, seized the reins, when, had he let them slip, they would have fallen into other hands. He enslaved France at a moment, when, had he spared her, she would have found another tyrant. Admitting the truth of the plea, what is it but the reasoning of the highwayman, who robs and murders the traveller, because the booty was about to be seized by another hand, or because another dagger was ready to do the bloody deed? We are aware, that the indignation with which we regard this crime of Napoleon, will find a response in few breasts; for to the multitude, a throne is a temptation which no virtue can be expected to withstand. But moral truth is immoveable amidst the sophistry, ridicule, and abject reasonings of men; and the time will come, when it will find a meet voice to give it utterance. Of all crimes against society, usurpation is the blackest. He who lifts a parricidal hand against his country's rights and freedom-who plants his foot on the necks of thirty millions of his fellow-creatures→→→ who concentrates in his single hand the powers of a mighty empire, and who wields its powers, squanders its treasures, and pours forth its blood like water, to make other nations slaves and the world his prey; this man, as he unites all crimes in his sanguinary career, so he should be set apart by the human race for their unmingled and unmeasured abhorrence, and should bear on his guilty head a mark as opprobrious as that which the first murderer wore. We cannot think with patience of one man fastening chains on a whole people, and subjecting millions to his single will-of whole regions overshadowed by the tyranny of a frail being like ourselves. In anguish of spirit we exclaim, How long will an abject world kiss the foot which tramples it? How long shall crime find shelter in its very aggravations and excess?

"Perhaps it may be said, that our indignation seems to light on Napoleon, not so much because he was a despot, as because he became a despot by usurpation-that we seem not to hate tyranny itself, so much as a particular mode of gaining it. We do, indeed, regard usurpation as a crime of peculiar blackness, especially when committed, as in the case of Napoleon, in the name of liberty. All despotism, however, whether usurped or hereditary, is our abhorrence. We regard it as the most grievous wrong and insult to the human race. But towards the hereditary despot we have more of compassion than indignation. Nursed and brought up in delusion, worshipped from his cradle, never spoken to in the

tone of fearless truth, taught to look on the great mass of his fellow-beings as an inferior race, and to regard despotism as a law of nature, and a necessary element of social life; such a prince, whose education and condition almost deny him the possibility of acquiring healthy moral feeling and manly virtue, must not be judged severely. Still, in absolving the despot from much of the guilt which seems at first to attach to his unlawful and abused power, we do not the less account despotism a wrong and a curse. The time for its fall, we trust, is coming. It cannot fall too soon. It has long enough wrung from the labourer his hard earnings; long enough squandered a nation's wealth on its parasites and minions; long enough warred against the freedom of the mind, and arrested the progress of truth. It has filled dungeons enough with the brave and good, and shed enough of the blood of patriots. Let its end come. It cannot come too soon."

Having, as First Consul, aimed at strengthening his power by calling men of all parties to his service, other means of attaining the same end are also pointed out:

"Another important and essential means of securing and building up his power, was the system of espionage, called the Police, which, under the Directory, had received a developement worthy of those friends of freedom, but which was destined to be perfected by the wisdom of Napoleon. It would seem as if despotism, profiting by the experience of ages, had put forth her whole skill and resources in forming the French police, and had forged a weapon, never to be surpassed, for stifling the faintest breathings of disaffection, and chaining every free thought. This system of espionage (we are proud that we have no English word for the infernal machine) had indeed been used under all tyrannies. But it wanted the craft of Fouche, and the energy of Bonaparte, to disclose all its powers. In the language of our author, 'it spread through all the ramifications of society;' that is, every man, of the least importance in the community, had the eye of a spy upon him. He was watched at home as well as abroad, in the boudoir and theatre, in the brothel and gaming-house; and these last named haunts furnished not a few ministers of the Argus-eyed police. There was an ear open through all France to catch the whispers of discontent-a power of evil, which aimed to rival, in omnipresence and invisibleness, the benignant agency of the Deity. Of all instruments of tyranny, this is the most detestable; for it chills the freedom and warmth of social intercourse-locks up the heart-infects and darkens men's minds with mutual jealousies and fears-and reduces to system a wary dissimulation, subversive of force and manliness of character. We find, however, some consolation, in learning that tyrants are the prey of distrust, as well as the people over whom they set this cruel guard; that tyrants cannot confide in their own spies, but must keep watch over the machinery which we have described, lest it recoil upon themselves. Bonaparte at the head of an army is a dazzling spectacle; but Bonaparte, heading a horde of spies, compelled to doubt and fear these base instruments of his power-compelled to

divide them into bands, and to receive daily reports from each, so that by balancing them against each other and sifting their testimony, he might gather the truth-Bonaparte, thus employed, is any thing but imposing. It requires no great elevation of thought to look down on such an occupation with scorn; and we see, in the anxiety and degradation which it involves, the beginning of that retribution which tyranny cannot escape.

"Another means by which the First Consul protected his power can excite no wonder. That he should fetter the press, should banish or imprison refractory editors, should subject the journals and more important works of literature to jealous superintendence, these were things of course. Free writing and despotism are such implacable foes, that we hardly think of blaming a tyrant for keeping no terms with the press. He cannot do it. He might as reasonably choose a volcano for the foundation of his throne. Necessity is laid upon him, unless he is in love with ruin, to check the bold and honest expression of thought. But the necessity is his own choice; and let infamy be that man's portion, who seizes a power which he cannot sustain, but by dooming the mind, through a vast empire, to slavery, and by turning the press, that great organ of truth, into an instrument of public delusion and debasement."

After sketching, in strong lines, the atrocities committed by Napoleon, to pave his way to uncontrolled dominion, the use he made of the Roman Catholic religion is ably narrated:

"Our religious prejudices have no influence on our judgment of this measure. We make no objections to it, as the restoration of a worship which on many accounts we condemn. We view it now simply as an instrument of policy, and in this light, it seems to us no proof of the sagacity of Bonaparte. It helps to confirm in us an impression, which other parts of his history give us, that he did not understand the peculiar character of his age, and the peculiar and original policy which it demanded. He always used common-place means of power, although the unprecedented times in which he lived, required a system, which should combine untried resources, and touch new springs of action. Because old governments had found a convenient prop in religion, Napoleon imagined that it was a necessary appendage and support of his sway, and resolved to restore it. But at this moment there were no foundations in France for a religious establishment, which could give strength and a character of sacredness to the supreme power. There was comparatively no faith, no devout feeling, and still more, no superstition to supply the place of these. The time for the re-action of the religious principle had not yet arrived; and a more likely means of retarding it could hardly have been devised, than the nursing care extended to the church by Bonaparte-the recent Mussulman-the known despiser of the ancient faith-who had no worship at heart but the worship of himself. Instead of bringing religion to the aid of the state, it was impossible that such a man should touch it, without loosening the faint

hold which it yet retained on the people. There were none so ignorant as to be the dupes of the First Consul in this particular. Every man, woman, and child, knew that he was playing the part of a juggler. Not one religious association could be formed with his character or government. It was a striking proof of the selfexaggerating vanity of Bonaparte, and of his ignorance of the higher principles of human nature, that he not only hoped to revive and turn to his account the old religion, but imagined, that he could, if necessary, have created a new one. Had the Pope never existed before, he should have been made for the occasion,' was the speech of this political charlatan; as if religious opinion and feelings were things to be manufactured by a consular decree. Ancient legislators, by adopting and sympathising with popular and rooted superstitions, were able to press them into the service of their institutions. They were wise enough to build on a preexisting faith, and studiously to conform to it. Bonaparte, in a country of infidelity and atheism, and whilst unable to refrain from sarcasms on the system which he patronised, was weak enough to believe that he might make it a substantial support of his government. He undoubtedly congratulated himself on the terms, which he exacted from the Pope, and which had never been conceded to the most powerful monarchs; forgetting that his apparent success was the defeat of his plans; for, just as far as he severed the church from the supreme pontiff, and placed himself conspicuously at its head, he destroyed the only connection which could give it influence. Just so far its power over opinion and conscience ceased. It became a coarse instrument of state, contemned by the people, and serving only to demonstrate the aspiring views of its master. Accordingly, the French bishops in general refused to hold their dignities under this new head, preferred exile to the sacrifice of the rights of the church, and left behind them a hearty abhorrence of the Concordat, among the more zealous members of their communion. Happy would it have been for Napoleon, had he left the Pope and the church to themselves. By occasionally recognising and employing, and then insulting and degrading the Roman pontiff, he exasperated a large part of Christendom, fastened on himself the brand of impiety, and awakened a religious hatred which contributed its full measure to his fall."

(To be Continued.)

THE CHRISTIAN PIONEER.

GLASGOW, February 1, 1828.

In our First Volume, page 421, we had the pleasure of inserting the Protest against the Marriage Ceremony of England, which was presented by two of our friends in Lancashire. We also expressed our sincere hope, that

their union might be a happy one. Fleeting indeed bas been its blessedness. We have now to record the death of Mr. Boardman. May the widow's God comfort the lonely mourner.

Died, Dec. 6, at his residence, Mountpleasant, near Manchester, Mr. FREDERICK BOARDMAN, Solicitor. In his profession, he was remarkable for the conscientiousness with which he gave his opinions; and though opposed to his interest, yet he generally advised his clients to act upon the Scripture maxim, "agree with thine adversary quickly," as he felt it to be his duty to prevent them from needlessly incurring the expense and unpleasantness which too frequently attends litigation. In all his transactions he was characterised by an unbending regard to principle, and his memory is embalmed in the affectionate remembrance of those who knew his worth. It is, however, the chief object of this notice of the departed, to review some of the leading features of his religious character. He was, from personal investigation, a firm believer in the doctrines of Unitarianism; and during the latter period of his life, he cherished a hope that he should be able at a future period, to devote the whole of his time to the office of a Christian Teacher. During the greater part of the time that the Lancashire & Cheshire Unitarian Missionary Society has been established, he was a preacher at its different stations. It was his practice generally to preach extempore, and there was always a fervour and an earnestness in his ministrations, which caused him to be listened to with great attention. He engaged in what he sincerely believed to be the cause of truth, with ardent and at the same time with steady zeal. The lukewarmness and want of co-operation which he observed in the general efforts of the Unitarians, to promote the cause of truth and holiness, was to him a subject of deep regret. Frequently has he remarked, that Unitarianism will never exert her whole energy, in reforming the mind and in subduing error, until its advocates are more sensibly convinced of its importance, and their hearts more seriously interested in its welfare. He greatly disliked that studious regard to fashion, and to the opinion of the world, which prevail too extensively even among that class of Unitarians which is considered as the most zealous and active. He often wished that the teachers of Unitarianism were more deeply imbued with the spirit of their Master, and that, like him, they would more faithfully and solemnly dedicate themselves to the great duties of their office. He was led into this train of feeling, from the anxious desire which he felt to extend the Gospel in its primitive simplicity, in order that its moral power might have a more extensive influence. It was also another source of regret to him, that he found so little religious conversation in Unitarian society. He thought, that much good would issue from the practice of devoting a greater part of the hours of social intercourse, to the consideration of religious subjects, instead of being wholly occupied by the discussion of politics or the merest gossip of the day. As a Christian, he felt that the more frequently the doctrines and the duties of Christianity were presented before the mind, the more likely it was that they would exert a beneficial influence over the conduct of its professors.

The Unitarian Society recently established in Salford, Manchester, has lost in him a valuable friend. He was connected with it from its infancy, and may be justly called one of its founders. He engaged with zeal and laboured with diligence, to promote the success of its different institutions, and he was greatly respected by its members for his talents and integrity. To the Sunday School he was a most efficient support; and, indeed, every scheme that had for its object the improvement of his fellow-creatures, found in him a ready and a sincere friend.