ed hole, are right facetious men-and, strange as it may seem, their very calling makes them such. Why should they always be Newgatory in their spirits? The rogues of the present day describe the uneasy process of hanging, as "going out of the world with your ears stuffed with Cotton:"-The doctor will not easily shake off this jest. In the work before us, we read of one ruffian who "would swear, while others were singing a penitential stave of Sternhold and Hopkins." How could he, we would ask, or any one else, help swearing?-In another place, the Ordinary, for once, becomes figurative; for, in speaking of the justices, he says, "they preached to the winds, and were under the disagreeable necessity of reading the riot act." The confessions scattered plentifully throughout the four volumes are of the deepest interest, far superior to Rousseau's: thus beating that eminent Confessor on his own dunghill. The long examination we have undergone, has left us nearly as jaded as a Common Serjeant at the fag-end of a tedious session. As we approach our end, we catch the trick of convicts, and begin to get serious. A few plain words, therefore, upon a subject which has been deeply impressed upon us in the course of reading this work: they may be taken as our confession, if the reader pleases. In closing the book, we are naturally struck with horror at finding, that few of the criminals have exceeded the scanty age of twenty-five,-that they have, indeed, generally been removed from this world at twenty. It is to be inferred, therefore, that with them reflection has had little to do; and that, in most cases, they have been depraved for mere excitement sake, and that excitement indeed was necessary to the existence of their vices. From this, does it appear that punishment by death has any terror, any moral effect upon one miscreant on record?-No! The public exhibition of a young man dying resolutely, is rather a fearful display of courage, than an awful warning against crime. The depraved adore what is game; and to them a daring death is rather a stimulant than a dreadful shock to their vices: the halter sublimes the ruffian, and makes him a hero at the Debtor's Door:the gallows, indeed, is but the tree on which desperate courage hideously blossoms!-The convict's piety in the condemned hole is insecure while a chance of reprieve remains; and the moment he escapes the rope, back he rushes to the herd. His solitary penitence, is fear, garbed in religion,—not a healthy consciousness of crime,-not the pure, white repentance of a heart, open to the past, and hopeful for the future! Before capital offences are decreased, capital punishments must be altered. Our laws must lay aside the frequent rope, for the crimes in the hearts of criminals are of those stones, which constant dropping will not wear away. Solitary confinement will work incalculable good,-a bad, restless, young man, can bear death better than his own company. The pang of a moment can be steadily met; but patient punishment tames the most brutal-minded. Then, employment should be fully introduced into our prisons,-and the police of our metropolis better ordered: the rewards of officers should not depend on the increase or decrease of crime; at present the rope bears a premium. We are quite sure, that if those persons who are anxious for the amendment of the penal code of laws in this country, would study the Newgate Calendar, they would arm themselves with proofs sufficient to satisfy the most obstinate parliament. THE CHRISTIAN OBSERVER AND THE EDINBURGH REVIEW. [It will not always be considered necessary that the pieces selected for the Museum should be fresh from the press. Very interesting or very able articles may have been so little circulated as to have escaped the attention of our readers. The Christian Observer is a publication of such extended reputation, that we should not venture to copy any thing from late numbers that have been republished in this country-but in the early part of its existence its circulation in the United States was confined to those few who imported it from England-and we therefore, as a literary curiosity, copy from the number for January, 1803, its notice of the first appearance of the Edinburgh Review.] MANKIND may be divided into two classes: those who, on the whole, think for themselves; and those who borrow most of their opinions from others. The latter class comprehends the bulk of the community.-The sources from which opinions are borrowed, vary with the several subjects to which the mind is directed. Religious tenets are in part derived from the pulpit: political tenets from the Houses of Parliament: legal tenets from the Courts of Justice: commercial tenets from the Bank and the Exchange. Books, however, are the fountains whence, mediately or immediately, a large proportion of the public sentiment flows. Books, changing their office, form the channels by which the current of public sentiment, whatever be the topic, is conveyed-through them it is distributed from the city to the town, from the town to the village, from the village to the solitary dwelling. The conclusion imbibed by the eye hastens to the tongue. The reader becomes a speaker: the hearer becomes a speaker in his turn. The stream, originally issuing from the shop of the printer, gradually extends its influence to every rank, and almost to every member of society. If the number of persons who take most of their opinions upon trust be so large, and if those opinions ultimately proceed in a great measure from the press; the importance and the effect of literary journals are established. Works of this nature, embracing every treatise on every subject; claiming general circulation by their comparative cheapness; attracting readers from all quarters by the promise of information and entertainment; remunerating curiosity by a regular recurrence of gratification; and by summary statements and compendious decrees kindly relieving those who relish not the labour of thought from the trouble of thinking at all; are among the most powerful of the instruments-are themselves, perhaps, the most powerful of the instruments by which the opinions of the greater part of the people of this country are, in most cases, produced, guided, and impelled. They are works, therefore, whose principles and proceedings cannot be indifferent to The Christian Observer. The first number of a new work of this nature, entitled "The Edinburgh Review, or Critical Journal," has recently been published. In size, it exceeds every similar publication with which we are conversant; but the time which is to intervene between its periodical appearances is three months. In another respect also it is distinguished by peculiarity of design. Purposing to carry the principle of selection to an extent not customary with reviews, it professes to decline any attempt at exhibiting a complete picture of modern literature, and to confine its attention chiefly to works which have attained, or deserve, a portion of celebrity. This purpose we think very judicious. By discarding the mass of trivial or worthless tracts, by which taste is perverted, and the understanding led astray, leisure and space are obtained for a mature and ample examination of interesting performances. This new potentate in the regions of literature, has as yet advanced but one foot over his threshold: but the articulations are so large, and the sinews so prominent, that we need not hesitate to pronounce, Ex pede Herculem. To the considerate reader, and even to the cursory inspector, of the publication in question, it must be evident that talents of no common description have been employed in preparing it; talents, in fact, of such magnitude and variety, as have very rarely been united in a periodical work. The depth of reasoning, the acuteness of discrimination, the keen but too sarcastic humour, the closeness and perseverance of investigation, by which the work is distinguished, are adapted to gain possession of the public mind; and, under conscientious and discreet management, to render essential services to society. Authors, readers, and the community in general, may turn their eyes with reasonable solicitude to the principles and proceedings of this formidable tribunal. We shall lay a brief, and we trust a fair, account of them before the public. This critical bench appears to consider itself rather as a court of justice than of equity. While it renounces not the wide jurisdiction assumed by co-ordinate tribunals of criticism, it exercises with scrupulous moderation its sway over the province of rewards; and expatiates with boundless freedom over a department, in which it displays pre-eminent skill, the infliction of punishment. Gnossius hæc Rhadamanthus habet durissima regna. Its motto characterizes its spirit: "Judex damnatur, cum nocens absolvitur." The nocentes seem, by its decisions, to constitute the mass of the literary world. And especial vigilance is exerted, lest by the acquittal of a single delinquent, criminality should be fixed upon the judge. Happy the writer who escapes VOL. III. No. 17.—Museum. 3 I from the inquisitorial scrutiny without the brand of ignorance or of dulness on his forehead! With regard to political principles, the Edinburgh Review sets its face against the anarchical philosophism of the French Revolutionists, and professes attachment to genuine and well regulated liberty;* speaks in strong terms of respect concerning the Constitution and the king of Great Britain;t avowedly approves what is denominated Catholic emancipation; intimates dislike and suspicion of the present ministry, and a highly favourable opinion of the late premier;§ and declares its detestation of the slave trade, and its conviction, that the immediate and total abolition of that traffic, by an act of the British legislature, is indispensable to the safety of our colonies. On the subject of morals, it unequivocally accords with Mr. Hume and Mr. Godwin, in assuming universal benevolence, or general utility, or, as the same principle is termed by Dr. Paley, general expediency, as the standard of all moral duty; and in thus reducing virtue to a mere computation of consequences. On religion it delivers no specific opinion. Its language apparently implies belief in Christianity; but nothing farther. In treating of sermons, it speaks as though eloquence were the grand object to be pursued ;** and when it recommends for discussion from the pulpit the great law of Christian practice, adds not the slightest reference, the most distant allusion, to those peculiar doctrines of the Gospel, those fundamental characteristics of the Christian dispensation, whence the principles and motives of acceptable works are to be derived. The parallel which it drawstt between poetry and religion belongs to that species of wit, into which a religious mind is not easily ensnared. On the whole, while the Edinburgh Review manifests the possession, it betrays the pride of talents. Irritated, as it should seem, by the exaggerated praises which have been heaped on writers of moderate abilities, and solicitous to reduce to the proper point in the scale of reputation, those whom fortuitous circumstances have exalted into fame, it wields the scourge of censure with complacent satisfaction, and applies it with unremitting severity. Genius and wisdom and learning unquestionably are to be encouraged; and useless publications to be repressed. But to do good, not to acquire credit, ought to be the motive of every writer; and that motive every reviewer ought to estimate and respect.-Works not remarkable for ability may produce much practical good. If such works are reviewed, let them not be measured exclusively by the standard of literary excellence. We allude not to any specific work already examined by the conductors of the Edinburgh Review, or likely to come before them. But we have wished to state the general observation as one that probably may be applicable to many performances, and especially to such as are of a religious na * See Review of Mounier's works, passim. ** Page 83-85, &c. † Page 98. Page 138, 227, 233. # Page 63. ture. With regard to religion, we should have been particularly glad if the reviewers had enabled us to speak decisively concerning their opinions. But it would be so rash to prejudge them on this supremely important subject, and so culpable to prejudge them unfavourably, that we feel it our duty to refrain from all further remark, until the progress of their publication shall have disclosed the views and sentiments which they approve. FROM THE RETROSPECTIVE REVIEW. ENCHIRIDION: containing Institutions, Divine {Practicall. Ethicall. Moral Economicall. Politicall. Written by Fra: Quarles. London, 1702. 12mo. FRANCIS QUARLES, the author of this excellent little book, has met with hard measure from the wits and poets who succeeded him. Popular as he was in his own day, that popularity was very short lived-more so, indeed, than merited popularity should be. As a devotional and pious poet, he was, of course, proscribed by the profligate and licentious court of Charles the Second, and those who called him a dull writer meant, in fact, no more than that he was a serious one. Pope, with the usual hastiness of satirists, took the ridicule upon trust, without examining into its justness, and has accordingly mentioned our author amongst the heroes of the Dunciad, in a line which has the dishonour of undervaluing the efforts of two good writers, and one well meaning man. For a long period subsequent, the names of "Wither, Quarles, and Blome, were used but as the synonymes of neglected and deservedly neglected scribblers. Of late, however, the merits of our author have excited more attention. It could not, indeed, be, that the character and intellect of a man, like Quarles, should fail, in the end, of being candidly and properly appreciated. The pretensions of Quarles as a poet may be easily adjusted. Like Herbert, Wither, and Crashaw, he endeavoured to mix the waters of Helicon with the waters of Sion; to give devotion some of the attractions and ornaments of verse; and it can be no disgrace to Quarles, if, in common with these and other greater men, he had but little success in his attempt. He wanted, indeed, almost all the requisites for a poet. With great sagacity and good sense, which, where human nature was concerned, seldom allowed him to be mistaken, he had little or no fancy, and scarcely any perception of harmony. Pious enthusiasm therefore in him supplied the place of poetic fervour, and much conceit was substituted for imagination. Wanting the real afflatus of the bard, and yet glowing with heavenly |