depriving ourselves of an advantage, not to undertake that execution. Unfortunately for the world, however, it is a reason which very often prevails.

We have seen that, in an early part of the book, our author treated of the authority by which coin in this country is rendered current. We have to complain of him, that he has not discussed this point, which is of so much importance, in a more satisfactory manner. He contents himself with a mere historical deduction, to show that the business of coinage has always been intrusted entirely to the executive power; that is, in his language, has always formed part of the royal prerogative. But he has kept entirely clear of the question, whether it ought to be so intrusted. If our ancestors in so many other respects acted unwisely in regard to coin, it does not follow as an intuitive certainty, that because the coinage of money has always been part of the royal prerogative, it ought always to continue so. Lord Liverpool informs us, that the kings of England have never lately, in any instance of importance, exercised their prerogative of coinage, but by the advice of parliament. Is not this itself an acknowledgement that the business, in some degree at least, is legislative, not executive, and that the 'whole ought not to be vested in the executive power. To have the command of altering the coinage at pleasure, is infact to have the command of the greater part of the property of the kingdom. It was the business of Lord Liverpool to have carefully investigated this new and delicate point, and to have drawn the line of distinction between what is legislative, and what is executive, in the policy of coinage. In a professed treatise on coinage, this omission is a gross defect.

After describing the present state of the British coinage, and recommending the practice of weighing coins as the expedient against their degenerating, a remedy worse than the disease, the author introduces some reflections on the subject of paper money. It is to be lamented that he did not let this task alone. He is much less instructed on this point, than on those which formed the previous subjects of his investigation. "Paper currency," he says, "is carried to so great an extent, that it is become highly inconvenient to your Majesty's subjects, and may prove, in its consequences, if no remedy is applied, dangerous to the credit of the kingdom." It is only small notes, however, to which he seems to object. "I do not," he observes, mean to say, that the higher orders of paper currency may not be very convenient, in carrying on many branches of the trade of a country so wealthy as Great Britain; the sort of paper currency to which I principally object, is that which interferes

with the use of the coins of the realm, more especially in the payment of labourers and artificers, of the sailor and soldier, and in the smaller branches of the retail trade of the kingdom." But where is the evil in employing notes in small payments as well as in great? So long as the security is good; so long as the notes issued are sure of payment by the steady responsibility of the issuers, the more that gold and silver is saved, in the medium of exchange, the more of the stock of the nation is set free for some other employment. His Lordship's reasons will not bear examination; they are mere unfounded prejudices. As the notes of private bankers are generally confined in their circulation to one district, travellers, he says, suffer great inconvenience on this account. But this is a great mistake. No inconvenience, which is worth mentioning, is thus experienced; because it is the easiest thing in the world for the traveller to provide himself with a medium which is current all over the kingdom. His Lordship next mentions the great inconvenience which is experienced when bullion is at a higher than the mint price; as if that could ever be caused by the use of paper-money, the effects of which must be directly contrary. The use of paper money lessens the demand for bullion, and by consequence, as far as its influence reaches, tends to keep down the price of bullion.

His Lordship next shows where he picked up his prejudices against country banks. The difficulties of the bank of England in 1797, he tells us, were in his opinion principally owing to the extent to which paper currency had been carried; and he then gives us the doctrine circulated at that time, about the obligation of the bank to supply coin, not only for its own notes, but those of every bank in the kingdom. But this doctrine is entirely fallacious; and the opinion, that the difficulties of the bank in 1797, were principally created by the failures in the country banks, is demonstrably unfounded. It may excite some surprise, when we state that these are literally all the objections which his Lordship has to produce, in support of the violent condemnation which he pronounces on the extension of paper credit by private bankers. It is a striking instance of the unlucky facility, with which even men of sense too often permit themselves to form opinions, on the most important subjects. The multiplication of banks is, in fact, the security which the nature of things provides for the system of banking. By their multiplication, the sphere of each is confined. It is kept within its capital. Their mutual jealousy and competition keeps them all constantly on their guard, and prevents all those adventurous speculations which constitute. the great source of danger.

, the ques.

with great keenness aracters of the first celeir genuineness, both internal and ery narrowly investigated by those who Purious; while their patrons and advocates

o less zealous in searching for testimonies in their and rescuing from oblivion whatever fragments of a

ilar character were yet recoverable. This zeal on both prides has at length produced a body of evidence, which we think sufficient for deciding the principal branches of the quescontroversy, we hope that our readers will lend us a willing tion at issue; and as we profess to be quite impartial in the attention, while we proceed shortly to estimate the proofs, for, and against, the fidelity of Macpherson's translations.

The author of the present Essay seems to consider his work as a supplement, or controversial appendix, to the "Report of the Committee of the Highland Society of Scotland, appointed to inquire into the Nature and Authenticity of the Poems of Ossian," published in 1805. The authors of that work, he observes, satisfied themselves with collecting facts, and procuring evidence, which they laid before the public, without offering any opinion of their own, or engaging in controversial discussion. To do justice to the question, he therefore conceives it necessary to enter more precisely into the particulars of the dispute, and to examine what points may now be considered as fairly established; at the same time

Treatise on the Coins of the heal

the realm, more esp

dicer, of the

.

cavils of some late opponents of the authenticity, 'cularly Mr. Malcolm Laing's, are scrutinised and rethis account, we shall refer as much to the Report ittee of the Highland Society, as to Dr. Graham's we are to submit to our readers concerning the ; nor shall we follow the exact order of subGraham has prescribed to himself, though perspicuous and well-suited to his purThe period in which these poems composed; the state of society and which Ossian is supposed to have vhich these poems are represented us; and, finally, the manner in ed, translated, and published, by

established, in the first place, tionary poems have existed ncerning a race of heroes, principal chieftain, Fion, or Fion

to Fingal; and that, by the general anders, these poems, or at any rate the most

. them, are ascribed to Ossian, the son of Fingal, Last of that redoubted race. So current have these raditions been among the Highlanders, that many of their proverbial sayings are founded upon them. Thus the Report of the Highland Society informs us (p. 16) that when the boys in their sports cry out for fair play, they use the expression, Cothram na feine," the equal combat of the Fingalians." Ossian an deigh nam fiann, "Ossian, the last of his race," is proverbial, to signify a man who has had the misfortune to survive his kindred. And servants, returning from a fair or wedding, were used to describe the beauty of young women whom they had seen there, by the expression, Tha i cho bordheach reh Agandecca, nigheau ant sneachda, "She is beautiful as Agandecca, daughter of the snow." To the same work we owe the curious information, that so long ago as the year 1567, complaints were made by Bishop Carswell, in his preface to a Gaelic translation of Forms of Prayer, &c. printed at Edinburgh, that those who cultivate the Gaelic language, were more desirous and more accustomed to compose vain, tempting, lying, worldly histories, concerning the Tuatha de dannan, and concerning warriors and champions, and Fingal, the son of Cumhall, with his heroes,-than to write and teach and maintain the faithful words of God, and of the perfect way of truth."

It appears equally certain, that, from the most remote periods, traditionary ballads concerning the very same heroes, VOL. IV.

Bb

We have little to say respecting the manner of this work. The form of a letter to the King is novel; but the peculiarities of address seldom occur, and in few men could that appearance of familiarity which it implies be so graceful, as in the Earl of Liverpool, who has long been distinguished by the friendship of his Sovereign. The style is excellent. It is indeed seldom that a scientific book displays so many of the graces of composition It is elegant, without departing from simplicity. It is, notwithstanding, too frequently defective in philosophical precision. Vague and ambiguous words are pretty often vaguely and ambiguously employed. In point of style, this is almost the only fault of the book.

Art. V. Essay on the Authenticity of the Poems of Ossian; in which the Objections of Malcolm Laing, Esq. are particularly considered and refuted. By Patrick Graham, D. D. &c. &c. &c. 8vo. pp. 500. Price 12s. boards. Edinburgh, Constable and Co; Murray. 1807.

IT

T is surely time that the controversy concerning the poems of Ossian were at an end. Nearly half a century has elapsed since Macpherson gave to the world his professed translations from the Gaelic; and, during that interval, the ques. tion of their authenticity has been agitated with great keenness and ingenuity, by many literary characters of the first cele brity. The evidence of their genuineness, both internal and external, has been very narrowly investigated by those who thought them spurious; while their patrons and advocates have been no less zealous in searching for testimonies in their favour, and rescuing from oblivion whatever fragments of a similar character were yet recoverable. This zeal on both sides has at length produced a body of evidence, which we think sufficient for deciding the principal branches of the question at issue; and as we profess to be quite impartial in the controversy, we hope that our readers will lend us a willing attention, while we proceed shortly to estimate the proofs, for, and against, the fidelity of Macpherson's translations.

The author of the present Essay seems to consider his work as a supplement, or controversial appendix, to the "Report of the Committee of the Highland Society of Scotland, appointed to inquire into the Nature and Authenticity of the Poems of Ossian," published in 1805. The authors of that work, he observes, satisfied themselves with collecting facts, and procuring evidence, which they laid before the public, without offering any opinion of their own, or engaging in controversial discussion. To do justice to the question, he therefore conceives it necessary to enter more precisely into the particulars of the dispute, and to examine what points may now be considered as fairly established; at the same time