fess to regard it as something of Divine origin and worthy of universal admiration. Our readers cannot have forgotten the execution of John Brown at Harper's Ferry, for attempting, by a public movement for which the Southern States were totally unprepared, to bring about the manumission of the slaves. General, then Major, Jackson was sent there with his artillery, to witness, and, if necessary, to enforce, his execution. "He was,' "" we are told, "a spectator of the stoical death of the old murderer, and gave his friends a graphic account of the scene." Then, after many pages of angry declamation and coarse abuse, Dr. Dabney condescends to an argument with his opponents. We give the reader a specimen of it :—

"But every citizen of the Confederate States, like General Jackson, would disdain to argue this cause from the premiss, that the relation of the master to his slave is unrighteous in itself. They assume the high position that this relation is, for their circumstances, as innocent and lawful in itself as any other relation of government, and recognised as such by God and sound ethics, as well as by all the laws of their country. When pointed to the almost universal condemnation of this proposition by the rest of Christendom, they boldly declare, that this results from an exclusion of the Southern people from a hearing in their own defence, and a perverse and indolent reception, from their enemies, of the most monstrous tissue of slanders and falsehoods which ever confounded a human mind. The world has been told a myriad times, until the world believes it, that Virginian slavery makes a human being a chattel, a piece of property, thus violating the first intuitions of justice. Yet all this is absolutely false; every slavelaw of Virginia treats the slave as a person, a responsible, reasonable being, and not a thing; the only property which the law recognises in him, is the property in his involuntary labour. And if the involuntary labour of a human being cannot be property, then every parent, husband, and master of an apprentice, in the civilized world, is made a transgressor. It is uniformly asserted that slavery proceeds upon the assumption that it is the master's privilege to expend and exhaust the labour, welfare, and very being of his fellow-man, for his own selfish behoof, without equivalent; and that hence it is a flagrant violation of that great law of love and equity, the golden rule. All this is absolutely false. This form of servitude is defended only on the ground, demonstrated so fully by experience, that it secures for the servant the greatest practicable amount of wellbeing. The laws all make the duties and benefits of the relation reciprocal, and oblige the master to render to his servant a liberal return for his labour, in the form of a life-long maintenance of himself and his family, secured against every contingency of decrepitude and sickness; just as much as they oblige the servant to render his labour to his master. That this is, in the general, a better recompense than the African could win as a free negro, is the justification always pleaded." (pp. 193-195.)

The following paragraph contains an untruth, implied or asserted, in every sentence:

"It has been charged that Virginian slavery makes the master the

irresponsible possessor of the chastity of the female slave. This is again an absolute falsehood; the law fences around the chastity of the servant, even against the violence of her own master, by the same sanctions which protect that of the white lady. It has been charged that the laws of Virginia forbid the slave to lift his hand for the defence of life or limb, in obedience to the instincts of self-preservation, against any white man. This is absolutely false; while the laws require the servant to accept the chastisement of his master, they recognise in him the same discretion of self-defence, even against his owner, when assailed in life and limb, which is granted to the white freeman. It has been said that we prohibit the slave all access to letters, and do not permit him to learn to read even the book of life. This, again, is unmingled falsehood; there is no law in Virginia forbidding a master to teach his slaves literature; and as many of them can read, and do read, God's Word, as of the agricultural peasantry of boasted England. It has been said that Virginian slavery forbids the marital and parental relations among slaves, consigning them to a brutal concubinage, like that of animals. In the sense charged, this is absolutely false; conjugal and parental bliss is as much recognised, and as little interrupted among them, as among any people of the same civilization. It has been said that their discipline and treatment are inhuman. This is transcendently false. No peasantry on earth is treated with as much humanity, and bears tasks so light. There are instances of barbarity, even of murder; but they are punished, by the laws and public opinion, at least as regularly as any crimes against free persons in this country. Are there no cases of wife-murder, and child-murder, in New and Old England? It is asserted, in ten thousand forms, that slavery has degraded the African; but this is also false it has civilized and elevated him, more rapidly than any other philanthropy has raised any pagan race in the world.

"This introduces the affirmative truth, that the relation of servitude is a righteous, because a beneficent one, for the African among white men. Let the tree be known by its fruits. It has conferred a higher physical well-being than is enjoyed by any other labouring population, as is proved by their increase of numbers, cheerfulness, and immunity from bodily infirmities. The Virginian servant is lifted in the scale of manhood so high above his fellows of the African wilds, that, when by rare chance he meets them, he is ashamed and indignant at the assertion of a community of race. American servitude has made nearly half a million out of four millions (one in eight) members of Christian churches, from being, three generations ago, besotted Pagans. All the Christian philanthropy of the rest of the world has not done as much for heathendom. Our system has created an affectionate union between the two races, elsewhere so hostile, which has astounded our enemies and the world, with their quietude in these times of convulsion." (pp. 195–197.)

It is in vain to tell us that Virginian slavery fences around the chastity of the servant even against the violence of her own master by the same sanctions which protect that of the white lady. The question with us is not about Virginian law, but Virginian practice; and so in every succeeding sentence.

Will Dr. Dabney himself dare to refer us to a file of Richmond newspapers for the last twelve months? Even where there is some pretext of truth, that truth hides a lie beneath it. If the patience of our readers, to say nothing of the modesty of every female, did not forbid the discussion, we, for our part, are ready at any moment to disprove the truth of every proposition the paragraph contains.

We wish to detract nothing from the military genius of General "Stonewall" Jackson. We are willing to hope that he was a sincere Christian; but he has gone to appear before the Judge of quick and dead, and with what sentiments he may now look back upon his wish ungratified, but never abandoned, of seeing a war carried on against men of his own kindred without quarter, we shall not determine. We know who hath said, "He that doeth righteousness is righteous even as He is righteous;" and we know, too, whose voice it was that proclaimed the beatitude from the Mount, "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy."

Only the first volume of this biography is yet published; but we now feel but little interest in the past American campaigns, and, to say the truth, very little in the private life of General Jackson. We shall probably not return to the subject. We wish well both to North and South; and we shall continue to do so, however much our conduct may be resented by one or both of them. The time will come when they will do England justice, though we fear it is still distant; and we are by no means sure that, before it arrives, we must not wade through the deep miseries of another war.

DR. PUSEY'S LECTURES ON THE PROPHET DANIEL.

Daniel the Prophet. Nine Lectures, School of the University of Oxford. the Rev. E. B. Pusey, D.D., &c.

delivered in the Divinity With Copious Notes. By Parkers, Oxford. 1864.

WE hail the publication of these Lectures with deep thankfulness to God. The name of Dr. Pusey has long been associated with a movement which, although some incidental benefits may have arisen, we have never ceased to regard as alien from, and opposed to, the spirit of the Gospel, and highly perilous to the best interests of the Church of England. But the course of the two main leaders of that movement, never strictly parallel, has diverged more and more. Dr. Newman, the man of lively and brilliant fancy, the intellectual gladiator, the self-confident champion, whose trumpet, he boasted, would give no uncertain sound, has passed over long ago to the ranks of the enemy.

His latest work is an exposition of himself, not of Holy Scripture, and exhibits a melancholy progress from the dreams of childhood to the fanciful speculations of his riper age, till he proved the truth of warnings he had received, and took refuge from utter scepticism in the arms of the great sorceress of Rome. Dr. Pusey's course has been different. Even when stirring actively in a movement we deeply deplore, his tone, compared with most of his associates, was more serious, calm, and reverent. And now, when subtle forms of unbelief are assailing the Church of Christ, we find him occupied with two of the noblest duties in which the Christian can engage, the earnest defence, and honest and careful exposition, of the word of God. We have no right to say that he has unlearnt the serious errors of his earlier writings. In these Lectures,

however, and in the Commentary on the Minor Prophets, ecclesiastical tradition, and the clouds of a sacramental theology, retire into the back ground, and almost disappear. The work before us is an able, learned, and patient vindication of the Book of Daniel from the learned scepticism by which it has been assailed. It breathes throughout a spirit of calm, deep reverence for Scripture. With some few exceptions, the line of thought and argument pursued is worthy of the high theme, and must approve itself to all who believe in those inspired oracles, which God has magnified above all His name.

These Lectures were planned by their author as his own especial contribution to the defence of the faith against the tide of scepticism let loose on the young and uninstructed, by the Essays and Reviews. We pass over with reluctance many weighty remarks, in the preface, on the character of that work, and the wide controversy it has opened. Its writers, he says with truth, "asserted little distinctly, attempted to prove less, but threw doubts upon everything. He selected the Book of Daniel, because unbelieving critics considered their attacks upon it one of their greatest triumphs. In vol. iii., pp. 158, 231, of Dr. Davidson's Introduction to the Old Testament, English readers will find a condensed summary, by an eager partisan, of all the German arguments of Lengerke and others against the genuineness of the work. The strange vacillation between orthodoxy not yet abandoned, and growing sympathy with neology, which marked the earlier volume of the same writer, and filled it with inconsistency and contradiction, has now settled down into a zealous advocacy of the unbelieving alternative on almost every question connected with the literature of the Old Testament. In a note of his preface Dr. Pusey remarks on it, that it "is only a reproduction of the rationalistic German works, which he either epitomises or translates," and that he has not "met with one new argument in it, or even an old argument put more forcibly;" and proceeds at once to

convict him of some strange mistakes in his Hebrew, and a surprisingly false assertion about Hippolytus, as if he were a sharer in Porphyry's unbelief. Still those who wish to learn, in a condensed form, the whole pith of the objections to which these Lectures are a reply, will find the chapter in question a very convenient compilation. The main conclusion reached is, that the book was of the time of the Maccabees, the forgery of some unknown patriot; and its one object was, by a fiction in the double form of history and prophecy, to encourage his countrymen in their resistance to the heathen tyrant, Antiochus Epiphanes, and his successors.

A copious table of contents shows the line of thought pursued in these nine Lectures. The following is a condensed outline. (1.) First, the Book is one. The character of Daniel is consistent from first to last. The Chaldee and Hebrew portions are from the same author. There are no Greek words, except the names of two or three musical instruments, imported along with them. The language agrees with the time and circumstances of the real prophet, and disagrees with those of the imaginary forger. (2.) The Book, whatever its date, contains real prophecy of the Roman empire, and of Messiah, both later than Antiochus. This is directly proved by a close analysis of the visions. (3.) The rival constructions of these prophecies are mutually inconsistent, and opposed to the force of the emblems. Three or four alternatives, which introduce the Assyrian, or divide the first, second, or third empire, are examined and disproved. (4.) The Prophecy of the Seventy Weeks agrees with the time of our Lord, and disagrees with those of Antiochus. Unnatural explanations, to get rid of the prediction, are examined, especially those of Marsham, Corrodi, Eichhorn, Paulus, Bertholdt, Wieseler, Lengerke, and Ewald. The whole prophecy is contrasted with the rationalist expositions. (5.) The minuteness of some of these predictions agrees with the whole system of inspired prophecy. A large induction is given, from the blessings of Jacob and Moses, to the messages of Jeremiah and Ezekiel. Daniel has all the varieties of prophecy. (6.) The Canon was closed at the time named by Josephus, or about four centuries before Christ. Date of the wisdom of the son of Sirach. Proof thence derived. Gradual collection of the sacred books, even before the Captivity. Direct proof of the existence of this Book before Epiphanes, from the use of its prayer by Nehemiah, two of Zechariah's visions, the book of Baruch, the 3rd Sibylline Book, the speech of Mattathias in the First of Maccabees, the Greek translation and additions to the book itself, and the Book of Enoch. 7. Historical inaccuracies are falsely charged; the dates in general, Belshazzar, the date of Susa, satraps, the den of lions, the classes of Magi, and their education. Twelve supposed improbabilities explained or