tering before the king within the rails, at the right hand, and three bishops on the left, viz.: London, who officiated, Durham and Rochester, with the sub-dean, Dr. Holder; the king, kneeling before the altar, making his offering; the bishops first received, and then his majesty; after which he retired to a canopied seat on the right hand." The union between the government and any religious institution has a strong tendency to bring both into disrepute. The discontent produced by misgovernment is extended to the Church with which it is associated; and the dissent which the privileges of an ecclesiastical establishment are sure to occasion, directs its hostility to the political constitution that protects them. The friendship of the one is not less injurious to its object than the enmity of the other. When Scripture is quoted for the purposes of arbitrary power, and the throne is built up. on the altar, the priest who ascribes the same foundation and the same sanction to moral and political obedience, injures the master he professes to serve, and gives strength to those opinions which it his duty to combat. The disgust which is naturally felt at the discovery of absurd and mischievous notions is transferred, by those who are more quick in resenting deception than in separating truth from falsehood, to those principles with which they have been casually conjoined ; and the "fear of God" is despised, because it is coupled with the "love of the King." If such sentiments were received with as much eagerness as they are taught, no security for good government could ever be obtained. The doctrine of "passive obedience," however, and of "non-resistance," will never want advocates while the head of the State is the head of the Church. "God and the King," says Blanco White, in his Letters on Spain, "are so coupled together in the language of this country, that the same title of Majesty is applied to both. You hear from the pulpit the duties that men owe to both Majesties." There is a similar piece of impiety or folly in the appellation we bestow on our monarch; and more absurdity, because Charles II., who first received this title, disgraced even royalty by his vices; and because we pray that spiritual grace may be granted to the same person, whom, at the same time, and in the same place, we call "most religious and gracious." The feeling which thus assimilates a fellow-mortal to the Divine Being is universal; and its effects on the mind, in degrading both those who offer and those who accept this fulsome incense, is not confined to any country or time. It was the same base feeling which led Virgil to prostitute his muse by the meanest sycophancy, and suggested to an English prelate to dishonour his religion by applying to his sovereign the language appropriate to his Creator; nor was Augustus more gratified by the compliment, "Erit illa mihi semper Deus," than was James, when assured that he was "the breath of his subjects' nostrils." There is no weakness or wickedness that may not be expected from this mixture of sacred and profane things, this joint worship of God and Mammon. Saint Pierre says, he was much surprised at Berlin, by the view of several portraits which the King of Prussia had ordered to be put up in the churches in honour of those who had died on the field of battle. Their names, and that of the places where they fell, were, with occasional verses, affixed to the frames, in commemoration of their feats of arms, and as an incentive to military glory. We have not yet adopted this piece of Church and State policy. The head of our inestimable establishment would not condescend to follow the example of his royal brother. We have, however, hung up, in our cathedrals the flags we have taken from our NO, IX, VOL. II. U enemies; and religion is instructed to pray to the "God of Peace" for destruction on ". our fierce and haughty foes." How can war cease, when it is thus excited by those who should condemn it ?* In legislating upon this important subject, any measure to be final must be based upon first principles. Commutation of tithes, equalization of benefices, and abolition of Episcopal translations, are mere palliatives to evils which arise from the exclusive nature of the system, and which are the offspring of an incongruous alliance, the hybrid of an unnatural union. If compensation be awarded, commensurate with the tenure of the usufruct, (and what else is it?) security might be given that the transition from monopoly to freedom should affect neither vested interests nor reasonable expectations. The argument drawn from considerations that would place Church property on the same footing with every other kind, by proving too much, proves nothing. It was granted originally for certain purposes; and who is to judge whether those purposes have been fulfilled? If the Church would enjoy the estate, while it declines compliance with the conditions, or refuses to the party for whose benefit it exists, the right of deciding upon the quantum of benefit received, the ereature of the State is independent of its maker, and an eleemosynary corporation is equally irresponsible to its founders and its trustees. This mode of reasoning, if valid against what is called spoliation, is valid against those changes which have already taken place; it is valid against the claim of the Protestant Church itself. The Curates Bill, the Pluralities Bill, the Act for Enforcing the Residence of the Clergy, are all unjust curtailments of a beneficial interest in ecclesiastical property; the transfer of tithes from the Catholic to the Reformed Church was equally unjust; and the present establishment is founded in usurpation. What is it like? not the will of the founder, for that has been set aside; not the consent of the nation, for that sanction it now denies to be of any force; not prescription, for that was not allowed in favour of its predecessor; not the authority of Scripture, for that is either silent upon the subject, or opposed to the inference; not the promotion of religious instruction, for that would be begging the whole question at issue; not a grant from the legislature, for that cannot bind its successors. What, then, is the nature of this "Wicliffe," says Gilpin, in his life of that reformer," seems to have thought it wrong, upon the principles of the gospel, to take away the life of man upon any occasion. The whole trade of war he thought utterly unlawful." It is singular how opposite have been the methods adopted by the different divisions of the Christian world in defending their respective differences of faith, and their similarity of acting. Each sect maintains its own creed by the authority of particular texts, while its adversaries oppose the general tenor of Scripture to the arguments it adduces; partial interpretation and prejudice against truth are imputed and retorted on all sides. With respect to the legality or illegality of war, on the contrary, there appears to be, with one or two exceptions, a universal consent to overlook the spirit of mildness and mercy, which pervades the whole gospel, and plead the incidental and isolated observations of its founder, in favour of a practice which is directly at variance with the fundamental principles of his religion, and involves the breach of nearly all its practical precepts. We are told by the 37th Article of the Church of England, that it is lawful for Christian men, at the commandment of the magistrate, to wear weapons, and serve in the wars." The legality of war is thus put, not upon the justice of the cause, but upon the command of the government. Such a doctrine is better suited to the worshippers of Moloch or the followers of Mahomet, than to the teachers of a religion, the foun der of which was sent to proclaim "peace on earth, and good-will towards men.” mysterious being, which is at once infallible, unaccountable, and eternal? From whom did it derive these extraordinary attributes?—and why were they given? These are questions which it requires no metaphysical subtlety to answer. Let us hope that the conduct of the Church will prove an exception to the general rule laid down by Robertson, in his History of Scotland: "To abandon usurped power, to renounce lucrative error, are sacrifices which the virtue of individuals has, on some occasions, offered to truth. But from any society of men no such effort can be expected. The corruptions of a society, recommended by common utility, and justified by universal practice, are viewed by its members without shame or horror; and reformation never proceeds from themselves, but is always forced upon them by some foreign hand." THE PLAINT OF CERTAIN CORAL BEADS. Θάλασσα θάλασσα. SPOILER of forbidden wealth Guarded by the hoary waves! Sooth us like the mighty sea? Near the shrine of star-bright eyes, When a startled throb or tremble, Through our light embraces swells; Fruitless secrets-vainly taught,—— Though the glowing bands we form, Fold us on a dovelike breast,- Is the passion changed or cloyed, See our mimic worth destroyed! Then, in close and narrow keep, Pent, with scorned and faded toys, Mourn we for the glassy deep, Sigh we for our early joys! What has earth like ocean's treasures? More than craving avarice measures, More than Fancy's dream enchants, Deck the booming caves below, Where green waters ever flow Under groves of pearl, that grow In the mermaid's glimmering haunts. Under spar-enchased bowers, Bending on their twisted stems, Fadeless-rich as orient gems. And a music wild and low Ever, o'er the curved shells, Wanders with a fitful flow As the billow sinks or swells. Now, to faintest whispers hushing, Wakens from their pleasant sleep All the tuneful Nereid-throng, Chanting joyaunce through the deep. Nor the strife of day with night. Death, who walks the earth in riot, Stirs not our primeval quiet: Scarce his distant rage we know From the dreary things of clay, Slain, alas! in ocean's play, Whom the sea-maids shroud and lay Fond! to deem we count it pride We, whose beauty-peopled tide Gave the foam-born goddess birth! Circling Amphitrite's car? Toiling o'er the shallow page, Whom our azure Thetis bore. Drawn from Nereus' sacred urn. Let us find our old retreat, Yield us to the kissing wave, From the daylight's parching heat If ye needs must rob for beauty, Gems, that love the blaze of day :- And the strife of man's display; Give us to our native bay! V SOME LATE PASSAGES IN THE LIFE OF JOHN BULL, ESQ. (Concluded from Page 83.) CHAPTER VIII, AND LAST. Shewing how Jockey of Norfolk waited upon his cousin Bill Boswain; the Interview between Sergeant Arthur O'Bradley and Sly Bob; the Prophecy, or spaeing of Silly Billy; the Conspiracy against Mrs. Bull; Peg's Matrimonial Arrangements, and the Grand Jubilee of Madam Reform. Ar the close of last chapter we left Jockey of Norfolk dropping in upon Bill Boswain and Tom Pipes, the former trolling forth the old stave of Gaffer Grey. Bill, if the truth must be told, did not now above half like Greysteel; and his reasons were odd enough, as you shall hear. When the footboy, seeing the back parlour so full of good company, ushered Jockey of Norfolk up to the cock-loft, Bill was rather taken aback, especially when he heard Jockey's errand, who said he only called to give him a friendly caution, as an old friend of his father's family; -he feared Bill did not understand the trim of John's wife, she was a damned crank craft in the present breeze. Bill looked seriously affronted, "Obliged certainly to his cousin Norfolk, but he'd be hanged if, for the life of him, he could spell it out. He meant," he said, “to have gone down and shaken hands with John, and have had a gossip with Mrs. Bull too, and taken his wife and the wenches to see how gallantly Atty would squire in Madam, if her French fal-als were once off." 66 Can't get through a Christian door, they tell me, in the hoops and fardingales Gaffer and Doctor Russell have tricked her out with—carries too much sail, Jockey-wont do-capsize the ship first breeze; and here you tell me, cousin, that Squire John is madder than ever? I don't fancy this handsome of Master Bull to me- -what the deuce signifies to him, since my wife and the wenches wish it, whether Hookey or Gaffer lead in that Madam of his? Split me! if one wouldn't fancy it was Gaffer's greybeard John was more in love with than Madam's comely countenance. Besides, (but this is between ourselves,) my wife mortally hates that pokerly Gaffer; and I can't say, Jockey, I admire him much myself of late, or care to see him much about me; for if truth must out, devil a snap, as Tom there knows, have I been served with, any time he has entered my house these ten months past, but that deuced bubble and squeak-I can't say I like it, Jockey. It a'n't good for an old tar. No, no; avast the Gaff! Good-day, Jockey; you see I am busy with Tom." It was morally impossible ever after this for honest Bill, who had been bred to the salt water, and liked to enjoy his ease, and see laughing faces about him, to separate the image of Greysteel and this devil's own mess. Doctor said it was a very remarkable hallucination; but this piece of learning left Bill's case much as it found it, which is a pity of much good scholar-craft. tion; Many hours after poor Bill was sound asleep, Noodle, and Doodle, and all the tag-rag-and-bob-tail of Rustyfusty, were still in deep consultaand it was at last agreed that Sly Bob, who, they thought, had the art of Old Nick himself for bamboozling John and throwing dust in his eyes, and knew the length of his foot to a hair's-breadth-though this was humbug, it was agreed if Bob would take earnest from Hookey, |