mirers or eulogists; so far as they have given birth to a set of conceited and scornful sciolists, bandying the barbarous phrases of this school of metaphysics, and belabouring those for their shallowness, who do not understand it, despising "every thing but their own contemptible arrogance;" so far as they have trained up a race of preachers, who in place of the kindly verities of the gospel, deliver chilling and icy literary or metaphysical essays however brilliant, so far they have wrought evil. Coleridge though furnishing the richest treasures with which to stock our mind, if only he be mastered by, instead of mastering us, has faults so numerous and gross as utterly to disqualify him for being a model. These however are relieved and even dignified by their conjunction with his amazing genius and mighty intellect. But misproportions which are endurable in a giant, become insufferable in a dwarf. The transition from the great master to the miniature Coleridges, making a show like him of Piercing the long-neglected holy cave, The haunt obscure of old philosophy,"

is a complete plunge from the sublime to the ridiculous, and presents us all "the contortions of the Sibyl without its inspiration."

ART. II.-A History of Virginia, from its Discovery aud Settlement by Europeans, to the present time. By Robert R. Howison, Vol. II. Containing the History of the Colony and of the State from 1763 to the Retrocession of Alexandria, in 1847, with a Review of the Present Condition of Virginia. Richmond: Drinker & Morris. New York and London: Wiley & Putnam. 1848. 8vo. pp. 528.

NOTHING is easier than to say how a history ought to be written, and nothing harder than thus to write it. It is easy to say that a history ought to give a graphic picture of the inner life as well as the outward progress of a nation; that it ought to conduct us to the firesides and wardrobes of a people as well as to their courts, their cabinets and their battle-fields; that it should lay bare the great causes that gave shape to a nation's destiny, and deduce the great lessons that are taught by a nation's fate; that it should compress the facts and reasonings

needful for this purpose into a space small enough not to weary, and yet large enough to embrace all that is essential for future reference; that this should be done in a style that will be elevated without pomposity, clear without dullness, and lively without frivolity; in a word that it should present the finest exhibitions of the artist, the philosopher and the scholar; but the fact that this combination has never yet been found proves that the powers of human conception exceed the powers of human performance; and that there are intrinsic difficulties in the work, peculiar to itself. Every branch of art has been brought nearer to perfection than history, for the reason, perhaps, that it lays every other branch under contribution, and requires for its complete success not only excellence in one department, but to some degree in all.

When, therefore, we undertake to judge a historical work, we may apply to it either the rule of absolute or relative excellence. Applying the one it may be open to many objections. The artistic mind may object to the grouping and delineation of facts and persons; the philosophic, to the development and discussion of principles; the statistical mind, to the details of the work, and the grammatical, to its style. Applying this canon, no history that has ever been written could pass the ordeal unscathed. But it is manifestly unjust to subject every historical work to this test, for it is to demand what the experience of centuries has failed to furnish. Hence it is but an act of fairness to a work of this kind to apply to it the rule of relative excellence, and judge it by comparison with other works on the same subject.

Judged by this standard, the work of Mr. Howison deserves high commendation. It is, as a whole, incomparably the best history of Virginia that has ever been written, and would not suffer even by comparison with works of higher pretension and wider range. The first volume of the work was reviewed on its appearance, in the number of this journal for April, 1847. The points commended in it are equally manifest in the volume before us. And in the defects that were noted in it, there is in this a manifest improvement, amounting in some cases to their entire removal. The typography and general execution of the book are in the highest style of modern art, and rank it with the best productions of the day. There is the same apparent indus

try in quoting authorities; the same judicious selection of facts; and the style, whilst it preserves the dignity of the first volume, has somewhat of an easier flow. The omission of religious history noted in the former part of the work, appears from this volume, to have been part of the plan, and is remedied by a sketch, which although not as full in some respects as we could have desired, is perhaps as full as was compatible with the limits necessarily prescribed to a general history.

The error into which the author fell in speaking of the "New Lights," in the first volume, is very ingenuously acknowledged and corrected in this; and any seeming unfairness to the pioneers of Presbyterianism then perpetrated, receives an atonement that proves it to have been only seeming and unintentional.

The author divides the history of Virginia into four periods. Two of these are contained in the first volume: the period from the settlement to the dissolution of the London Company, in 1624; and thence to the peace of Paris, in 1763. The second volume contains the remaining two, from 1763 to the adoption of the Federal Constitution, in 1788; and from that period to the retrocession of Alexandria, in 1847, together with a review of the present condition of the state. The latter portion of the history of Virginia lacks the romantic interest that belongs to the early years of her existence, but it embodies lessons of value and interest to the thoughtful reader, that amply compensates for the absence of that stirring incident that throws such a charm about her early annals. It embraces the scenes and actors of the revolution; the war of giant intellects that followed the clash of arms; the adjustment of the principles and forms of civil and religious liberty; and the development of the agencies at work to determine her present spcial condition. This opens out a field of most inviting interest to a thoughtful mind, embodying as it does some of the most important problems in the future history of our common country; but a field too wide for our present limits. We cannot follow our author minutely in his delineation of this part of his subject, but must content ourselves with taking him partly as a companion and partly as a guide in glancing briefly at the religious history and social condition of Virginia.

The religious history of Virginia is one of peculiar interest,

on several accounts. She possessed the first, and we may add the worst religious establishment among the colonies. She was the battle-ground of the most earnest and protracted contest for religious liberty that was ever waged on the soil of America. And she exhibits, in their clearest form, some of those results of the union of Church and State, which lead us to regard that union as so great an evil to both religion and good government. This field deserves a more extensive and careful cultivation than it has yet received.

In looking over the third chapter of this volume, which contains the principal part of the religious history of the state, we see much to commend, and but little to disapprove. We admire the reverence and piety which pervade this author's remarks on the general subject of religion, and the fearless honesty with which he avows his convictions on controverted topics. As an illustration of these remarks, we subjoin a few paragraphs, omitting the notes. After discussing the nature of religion in general, and presenting a condensed view of the external evidences of Christianity, he remarks as follows, pp. 143-146:

"The Author of Christianity designed that it should carry with it power to convince by its intrinsic authority. The man who will apply his mind to its teachings will believe as certainly as the man who will open his eyes in the sun's rays will see the light around him. It is because it provides an adequate remedy for every ill, that the recipient of its benefits knows it is from the Author of good. Pardon for sin; purity for corruption; comfort for sorrow; unerring precepts for doubt in duty; a life of usefulness; a death of peace, and an eternity of happiness; these are gifts offered by the religion of Christ, in a form which no man resists who desires to know the truth. But to accomplish its object it must be pure as when it was first taught by its inspired originators. Mixed with human devices, it loses its force for good, and becomes the more dangerous because of its exalted claims.

Among the unhallowed inventions which have been applied to this system, none has produced so unhappy results as its union with civil government. Christianity, if truly possessed, will make a man a good citizen, but the law of the land can never make a man become a Christian. It was a sad day for religion when the Emperor Constantine adopted the Church as his ward,

and began to enforce his lessons by the arm of civil authority. The fires of persecution were better than the splendours of a seeming prosperity, which deadened her soul and threatened to destroy it. From this time we trace the decline of virtue and the growth of corruption; but power was too sweet to be rejected and in the old world Christianity has not yet thrown off the shackles which have so long confined her. The church is linked to the state and like the dead body chained to the living victim, it gains no vitality for itself, and gradually destroys its hapless companion.

"At the time when the settlement of Virginia commenced, England had laid, broad and deep, the foundations of her Episcopal church establishment. The dominion of Rome had been rejected, Popery was discarded, and English reformers had striven to give to their country a system of religious rule which would secure her welfare. But their reformation fell below the demands of liberty. We may not be surprised at this when we remember how long the human mind had been moulded by habit, and how far the boldest reformers of Europe then sank beneath the principles of true religious freedom. Two remnants of a corrupt age were unhappily retained in remodelling the ecclesiastical system of England. These were first, the principle of Church establishment, the King himself became the head of Christ's Kingdom on earth; clergymen as such, sat among the peers of the land, and voted for her laws; and men, whatever might be their opinions, were compelled to pay tithes to support their spiritual teachers. Secondly, an order of clergy superior to the rectors or pastors, who overlook particular congregations. This superior order has long been distinguished by the title of bishops, but they are not the bishops designated and appointed by the New Testament; they are the successors of the Apostles of the primitive church. It is true the Apostles were all inspired men; were all distinguished by having seen Christ in bodily form, and were so exalted in their duties and character, that, to a common understanding, it would seem impossible that they should have successors; but this difficulty has been removed in England and in Rome. The bishops of the Episcopal church bear the same relation to the Apostles that the Pope does to Peter, and few who acknowledge the exclusive claims of the first will be long disposed to deny those of the other. History