the pulpit; and every artifice of cunning, and stretch of power are used to lure the Christian public into an unholy compromise, that may lay the Church open to the approaches of her cruel eneinies. At such a time, it is consoling and encouraging to receive an accession of strength, in a wellwritten, deeply-learned, and ably-managed English quarterly, the very motto of which is our church's best assurance of victory :

We

Πύλαι ἄδου οὐ κατισχύσουσιν αὐτῆς the promise of God himself. cordially offer the hand of fellowship to a periodical which enters on our common cause, not only with an uncompromising avowal of our common principles, but which enters the contest with an explicit declaration of the vital and fundamental truth, so apt to be lost sight of in the clash of human strife, that we are " of the fold of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." (Int. p. 1.) For, let the strife end as it may, whether in the cabinet or in the field, this is our trust. It is our avowed trust as individuals, and we should consistently bear it on our ensign in the field.

Nothing can more justly illustrate the vital union between Christian truth, and the constitutional stability of our laws and government, than the secret but constant union of act and purpose which is to be traced through the last forty years between infidelity and disaffection, through all their va ried forms and disguises. We can trace them the worthy offspring of atheism and regicide, from the bloody cradle of the French revolution, down the series of their transitions, through clubs, pamphlets, speeches, itinerant mongers of treason, infidel treatises on natural theology, and unprincipled reviews, until we find them spring up to their portentous maturity in the unequivocal denunciations of a Whig government, and the armed dictation of an Irish mob.

66

It is our best assurance, that we hold the ark of the covenant" within our camp. And it is not more our duty to contend as men for this sacred deposit, than to put our firm trust as Christians in that indwelling Spirit, which has promised, "I will be with you to the end." It should be our watchful care, that we do not, in word or deed, separate ourselves from this safeguard, for our adherence is our faith only. It is not the true principle of Conservative policy to enter into

the maze of tortuous and thorny questions. The complex results of revolutionary change are beyond the power of legislative provision-they are as the hands that administer, or the design that overrules them. But our part is, fearlessly and irrespectively to do right-to follow the laws, and depend on the power of that Providence which shapes our destinies, rough-hew them as we will. There is no fanaticism in this-it is the creed of the Christian Conservative, although its still small voice is sometimes faintly to be heard amid the stormy waters of national strife.

We are not less satisfied with the political opinious which "The Church of England Review" expresses on all the great leading topics of the day. It leaves not a shadow of doubt as to its principles on any question of moment. In an able introduction it takes up, one by one, and boldly testifies against the accumulated crimes and follies which have converted reform into destruction. The vain theories which have converted the interests of a great nation into an experimental plaything the extemporaneous legislation that sacrifices all beyond the moment, and, with the kite-flying wisdom of an insolvent trader, aggravates the ruin it procrastinates. There is, in truth, yet wanting that master-art, or science, of which political economy is but a little subdivision,—a just view of the whole and every portion of the interests of a nation, in which the rights of all classes and communities shall be strictly and precisely viewed. So that in any question that may arise, it can be traced in its remote as well as its immediate bearings, and justice distributed by the legislator with the impartiality of the judge. If an approach to this exists, it is in the laws of England, as they were delivered to us, the result not of theory but experience.

Our cotemporary, also testifies on the evils of that monstrous abortion of commercial cupidity-of wealth forced from the hotbed of poverty and demoralization-nursed with starvation and female prostitution, and infant sacrifice

that Juggernaut of avarice and cruelty, the manufacturing system. But this we must not trust ourselves to dwell on,-it leads to another link in the chain of errors, or crimes, which with a fearful consistency, mark the tendencies of the hour. Our new ally strongly deprecates the pernicious se

paration which has been effected, between intellectual and moral education. Knowledge without religion, has been made the lever for the radical to work with-and where religion is not taught, depravity must needs spring up. This is the secret. A course of unprincipled, but not improvident policy-has from afar prepared the way, for the events that have come to pass, and are at our doors. They perverted for their own use the maxim of Solomon, "train a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it." Such was the plan and principle of the worthy schoolmaster, consistent enough with the policy that would needs make national infidelity the rightful step to the downfal of the churchand degrade the people, before they break down the constitution. We need not with this new and promising periodical, run through the whole dark list of iniquities, to the opposition against which they boldly pledge themselves. Their pledges, strongly and uncompromisingly advanced, may be described in three words, as coextensive with the principles of conservatism. We may look in their pages for the maintenance of the rights of our church, on its own true basis of Christian truth; of our constitution on its own timetested principle of balanced powers, and impartial provisions. And for a firm, unsparing and unflinching opposition to the unhallowed union of the opposite extremes of flighty economical theory, and low grasping chicanery, which have come together in a hollow truce, for the ruin of the nation.

There is one pledge of the "Church of England Review," which specially entitles it to the notice of the conservative periodicals-the promise to watch over the conduct of the press. The exclusive circulation, of most of the party journals, to some extent must neutralize all attempts to control their influence. Every one must have noticed the unswerving confidence of statement, which gives an air of simple truth and honest zeal, to the most daring and fraudulent falsifications; and the implicit reliance, which is thus gained among the numbers who read to be misinformed. Among these, it is a general error to assume that any adverse statement can find its way, unless by extreme chance.

Our co

temporary has yet, so far as his intention has been carried into practice, judiciously selected his mark. Some of the higher periodicals, from the

seeming moderation of their reasonings-and their established literary reputation, have a wide neutral circulation, and under the shew of fairness, have no doubt the effect of deceiving some, and slackening the zeal or lulling the prudence of others. Among these, the Edinburgh Review stands foremost, longo intervallo; both for ability, moderation, and a large qualification of sound criticism and high feeling; and therefore a proportional power to do evil. Against this, our Church of England ally takes up the cause of our Episcopal Church, in a brief but cleverly written notice of the article on Lathbury's History of the English Episcopacy," in which the Episcopal Church is assumed to be intolerant in its spirit. The defence against a charge so thoughtless is of course brief:-it is a summary appeal to the well-known characters of our great Christian divines, whose writings breathe the mild and tolerant spirit, which was only to be rivalled by the saintly spirit with which they braved persecution-resisted encroachment— and suffered martyrdom. Chillingworth and Hales, and Hall and Davenant and Skinner, and those others who were persecuted for the truth, by the Puritan parliament, are cited as instances to enforce this defence, and recriminate a charge, which we must add is most audaciously flippant. That a church which holds the great central position-out of which all protestantism draws its nutriment, as members from the body; from which Christian sects arise on each side and into which they return; which interchanges fellowship, and in its articles professes Christian unity with all Protestant churches that agree in the fundamental truths of Christianity; that such should be called intolerant, is an absurd contradiction. It would be equally absurd to insist that it should not maintain the truths committed to its charge. To demand this, is to deny those truths. That it should not firmly guard the doctrines of which it is the appointed depositary, against the Infidel, the Socinian, the Arian, who deny Christ, or the Romanist who sets him aside, and "makes his word of no effect," cannot be demanded in fairness by those who pretend to assent to its doctrines, or who even admit that consistent principle of self-preservation, without which no institution can exist.

We pass the able article on Dr. Wiseman's lectures on the real pre

Trin. Col. Dub., January 10, 1837.

After having indulged very freely in general invective against my essay, the reviewer at length proceeds to give two specific examples of the faults imputed to me; the one to shew my ignorance and tendency to blunders; and the other, the calumnious malignity of my disposition. It was rather incautious in him thus to descend to particulars, as he has thereby afforded me an opportunity of placing in the clearest light the true nature of his attack; but when an assailant loses his temper, he is very apt to be thrown off his guard. The passages which he has selected as specimens of my style are introduced with the following remarks

"To expose even a portion of the numberless errors and inconsistencies into which Dr. Wall has been betrayed, far less to point out the rash judgments he has pronounced, and the unwarranted censures in which he is so prone to indulge, would require a volume as large as his own. As a specimen of his manner, however, we shall give two examples; one of his propensity to blunder, and another of his proficiency in abuse."

I shall commence with the second example, as being that upon which my very accurate and candid censor has grounded his most serious charge against me; and I quote the passage exactly in the form in which he has thought fit to present it to the reader:

"In placing M. Champollion in his true light before the public, I do not feel the same compunction. [He had just finished his attack on Warburton.] With ability enough to enable him to be mischievous, this writer endeavoured to sap the foundations of religious belief, by attacking the historic truth of the Bible; for he pretended to establish, through means of his phonetic system, the correctness of a chronicle which is at vari

CHAS. WM. WALL.

ance with the account of time deducible from the Mosaic record, by at least three thousand five hundred years; and whenever the nature of his subject permitted it, he lost no opportunity of throwing out hints against the veracity of the Jewish historian in other matters as well as in chronology. To expose, therefore, the nature of his efforts, in order to defeating them, will, I trust, be considered a useful act; and although it is impossible not to pity the miserable being who could have been capable of pursuing such an object, still the mischief he attempted is not to be allowed to pass without obstruction, merely from a reluctance to subject him to public scorn. He has been convicted, from his own writings, of falsehood-of falsehood for the purpose of robbing another of the exclusive credit of a discovery to which he knew him to be justly entitled. He endeavoured, under false pretences, to suppress a publication which interfered with his dishonest claim; but some copies of it escaped destruction, and have since come out to prove, at the same time, his falsehood and his dishonesty-admirably fit companions for infidelity."-Inquiry, pp. 85, 86.

By the allegations contained in this extract, the honest indignation of the reviewer was, it seems, raised to the highest pitch, and at length vented itself in the following burst of eloquent and triumphant vituperation :

"It is impossible for us to express the feelings which were excited in our minds, on perusing this attack upon one who is no longer in the land of the living to defend himself from such gross aspersions. We are not strangers to the weaknesses and infirmities of M. Champollion, any more than we are to his real and unquestionable merits; nor have we any disposition to extenuate the one, in consequence of our honest admiration of the other. But we owe it to truth and a sense of justice to declare our conviction that the charges here brought against

Champollion's memory have, in as far as regards religion, no other or better founda. tion than the imagination of his accuser. In point of fact, it is not true that he ⚫ endeavoured to sap the foundation of religious belief, by attacking the historic truth of the Bible;'-it is not true that, in his speculative attempts to reconcile the royal canon of Manetho with the chronological tablet of Abydos, discovered by Mr. Banks, M. Champollion ever dreamt of impeaching the account of time deducible from the Mosaic record;'it is not true that his readings or investigations, in connection with this or any other branch of his subject, ever led him to draw conclusions inconsistent with the

validity and accuracy of the chronology of Moses, or that, in any case, the most remote limit of his researches was carried beyoud the age of the patriarch Abraham; -and, least of all, is it true that he lost no opportunity of throwing out hints against the veracity of the Jewish historian in other matters as well as in chronology.' We defy Dr. Wall to establish by evidence any one of the charges which he has here preferred. He seems to suppose that, because M. Champollion attached credit to the canon of Manetho in some points, he must be held as admitting the whole; and that his memory must be made responsible, not only for the extent to which his own researches were carried, but also for any conclusion, however absurd, which his accuser may choose to deduce from them."

In the extract from my work, as exhibited by the reviewer, it may be observed that falsehood and dishonesty, as well as infidelity, are printed in italics; as much as to intimate that all the three charges have alike been made without any just foundation. In the ensuing animadversions, however, on my statement, this mode of vindi eating the object of his honest admiration from the first two charges, is not sustained by any more open attack on their validity; and it is only in a very indirect and insidious manner that they are still assailed. Indeed a plain and direct refutation of those charges could not have been attempted by my censor, since I am completely borne out as to their correctness even by the

Edinburgh Review itself. In its 116th Number, article ten, full details, drawn from the Examen Critique of M. Klaproth, are given of the instance of M. Champollion's total disregard of truth and literary honesty which is only briefly alluded to in the above extract; and more charges of a like nature are superadded in the same article from the same authority, as may be seen by the following passages :—

"This, indeed, constitutes one of the heaviest offences which Champollion has committed against the ordinary rules of literary honesty. With the Coptic, as we now have it, he was but very imperfeetly acquainted; yet in his transcriptions of Egyptian phrases, which he pretended to have deciphered by means of his phonetic alphabet, he scrupled not to set down as Coptic a great number of words which exist neither in the Bible, nor in the legends, nor in the lexicons; and, what is even more wonderful, he has favoured us with translations, which, if correct, could only have been disclosed to him by means of special inspiration—there being no human means by which he could ever have penetrated the mystery he professes to have revealed.* Quelle foi la critique peut-elle avoir aux effets de cette sorte de divination?' The plain answer is, none whatever."-Vol. Ivii. p. 472. "He is continually betrayed into incongruities and inconsistencies, so gross and palpable, as to warrant the suspicion of bad faith, with which M. Klaproth has in fact charged his memory." p. 475.

Even in the Reviewer's first article on hieroglyphs, which was written achievements of Champollion was at when his admiration of the hieroglyphic its greatest height, it is asserted that an allegation of this writer against the priority of Young's discovery was utterly unworthy of credit; and three reasons in proof of the falsehood of his allegation are given, of which it will be sufficient here to quote the last :

"Even if there were no weight in the considerations which have now been stated, the habitual disingenuity and want of candour manifested by M. Champollion