In his case, offences against the individual were offences against religion. Christ and Christianity are inseparable. He who reviled the Redeemer, dishonoured the doctrine which he delivered, the miracles which he wrought, and the God from whom he came. "He that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me." But though offences against him were attended with this extraordinary aggravation, he has left us an example of the meekest endurance. Was it not, it may safely be asked of any man who has once read the memoirs of Jesus, given by the Evangelists, was it not a trait in his character, which perpetually forced itself upon your attention, that he was remarkably patient under injuries, and ready to forgive? Was it not fact, that, "as a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth?" Did he not, even when greatly displeased at the hardness of heart, and inveterate wickedness of disposition which his adversaries displayed, withhold any vindictive exercise of the miraculous powers attributed to him by his historians; which, if real, he might have really employed against them; which, if feigned, might have been feigned for purposes of terror, as easily at least, as for purposes of kindness? Did he not, with his dying breath, offer a prayer for those, who, according to Christian belief, had committed the stupendous crime of hunting down, and through malicious misrepresentations and perjured witnesses, causing to be condemned the benevolent Jesus, the Lord of Glory? Can we- imagine this same Jesus, going on a certain day to Pilate, to complain that the Rabbies had represented him as a colleague of Satan, who cast out devils by the assistance of Beelzebub, and requesting that they might be committed to prison? Can we conceive of him as sending his disciples to the Roman governor, to demand punishment on those who had spoken such blasphemous words against their Master? If such a record were found in one of the Gospels, should we not look on it with a suspicious eye, on account of its dissimilarity to the rest of his deportment?'

Again :

'The evangelists testify that Jesus Christ gave his disciples reason to expect, that, after his decease, their principles would be aspersed, their characters vilified, and their persons exposed to persecution. The evils which they state him to have predicted, all history assures us came upon them. Whether deservedly or not, the first Christians received from those among whom they dwelt, the most decisive tokens of enmity. Pagans were incensed against the men who impugned the deity of their gods; and Jews maddened with rage against the worshippers of the crucified Nazarene. "That worthy name by which they were called," was stigmatized in their hearing, as the symbol of whatever was to be contemned or detested; and when they delivered their most solemn and affectionate discourses, their auditors, not unfrequently "were filled with envy," and spake against the things which they delivered, tradicting and blaspheming." Something of the spirit of Christianity towards its opponents, may be ascertained through these circumstances. If we can learn what was the duty of a Christian then, to the utterer of blasphemous speeches, we may thence infer the duty of a Christian

66

con

now, to the publisher of blasphemous tracts. Now the sum of the directions given by Jesus to his Apostles in prospect of these scenes, and by the Apostles to their fellow Christians who were suffering in them, seems to be, that they should leave their cause with God as their sole avenger; and in the interim instead of retaliating on their opponents, should seek their welfare. The language of Christ was, "love your enemies; bless them that curse you; do good to them that hate you; and pray for them that despitefully use you and persecute you.” The language of the Apostles to their fellow sufferers was in the same temper: Not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing; but contrarywise, blessing; knowing that ye are thereunto called, that you should inherit a blessing. If ye suffer for righteousness sake, happy are ye; and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled; but sanctify the Lord in your hearts; and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear."

66

Could it have been thought that they acted in the spirit of these injunctions, had they hastened to the nearest tribunal, and there preferred accusations against their adversaries, for having ridiculed their scriptures, or reviled their master ?'—p. 16, 17.

The whole of this pamphlet does credit to the writer's head and heart. While he labours earnestly, and successfully, to exculpate Christianity from the charge of countenancing persecution, he is equally solicitous to win the unbeliever to a serious examination of its evidences.

That Christians, the Author of whose religion was tried and executed for blasphemy, his own words during the trial being pronounced sufficient evidence against him by his sacerdotal judge; Christians, whose prophetic books are full of the most biting sarcasms on the gods and worship of the mightiest empires; Christians, who boast a noble army of martyrs, whose lives were the penalty of their avowed departure from the religion of their country; Christians, whose missionaries are striving in every region of the earth to bring other religions "into disbelief and contempt;" Christians, Protestant Christians, whose reformers perished in the dungeon or at the stake as heretics, apostates, and blasphemers; Christians, whose religion breathes charity, liberty, and mercy, in every line; that they having gained the power to which so long they were victims, should employ it in the self-same way, and strive to crush the opposition of opinion, or of passion even, by vindictive persecution, is most monstrous. The inconsistency shall not remain for want of being exposed. That indeed is certain, without our efforts. Mr. Hume has repeatedly drawn the attention of the House of Commons to the subject; and we hope will continue so to do. The disgrace is felt, and always

has been felt; and had we aimed to impress by authority rather than by argument, our pages might have been filled with appropriate extracts. Archbishop Secker, Bishops Lowth, Warburton, and Watson, of the church of England; Drs. Campbell and Gerard, of the church of Scotland; Drs. Chandler, Lardner, and Kippis, of the English Dissenters, have all deprecated the prosecution of unbelievers. Their tolerant spirit, their enlightened view of the real interests of religion, is not extinct. Mr. Hume last year presented a petition to the House of Commons, and it was only by accident that a similar one was not presented to the Lords by the venerable Bishop of Norwich, signed by upwards of 2,000 members of Christian congregations, and about 100 ministers, including clergymen of the established church and dissenting preachers, and persons of the most opposite theological opinions. We heartily join in its concluding prayer, that the House would "take into consideration the prosecutions carrying on, and the punishments already inflicted upon unbelievers, in order to exonerate Christianity from the opprobrium and scandal so unjustly cast upon it, of being a system that countenances intolerance and persecution:" and not only, we will add, in order so to exonerate Christianity, but also to render equal justice to believer and unbeliever, and not add to the misfortune of Infidelity the privation of civil rights, and the endurance of legal penalties.

ART. II. Observations on the Effects produced by the Expenditure of Government during the Restriction of Cash Payments. By William Blake, Esq. F. R. S. pp. 121. London, Murray, 1823.

ALTHOUGH the clamour of the agriculturists has been silenced, for a time, by the return of comparatively high prices; and although the questions to which it gave rise have lost that peculiar interest, which temporary circumstances had conferred upon them; we deem no apology necessary for laying before our readers a review of a pamphlet, in which are propounded, and from no mean authority, not only the most incorrect views on the causes of agricultural distress, but various errors of a more general nature, and affecting the vital parts of the science of political economy.

Mr. Blake begins his pamphlet by the following words:

'There never, perhaps, was a period which presented to the political economist so many interesting objects of enquiry as that which has occurred during the continuance, and since the termination of the late war. Peace, instead of its accustomed attendant blessings, seems to have brought calamity and distress upon almost every class of society;

and the circumstances in which we are placed appear to be so peculiar and anomalous, as scarcely to admit of a satisfactory solution. We have seen landed proprietors without rents; farmers and manufacturers without a market; the monied capitalist ready to lend, and the merchant not wanting to borrow; a redundant capital, yet a redundant population; and the industrious poor compelled to apply, like mendicants, at the parish workhouse.' p. 1.

Before broaching a theory to explain an alleged fact, it would have been better if Mr. Blake had first ascertained whether the fact itself was real. To us he appears to have pursued a contrary course. He first started a theory; and because it suited his theory that there should be universal distress, he persuaded himself that universal distress existed. We confess, however, that it has hitherto escaped our observation. We neither saw nor heard it, except in the cant of the agriculturists. Distress among the landlords, there undoubtedly was: as much distress as is implied in the necessity of contracting the expenses to which they had become habituated in the days of that good fortune, which was altogether unlooked-for and unearned, and of which, had they studied general principles, instead of scoffing at them, they would have foreseen the speedy termination. All classes, however, not directly or indirectly connected with the land, were so far from partaking in the agricultural distress, that they were actually in the enjoyment of unexampled prosperity. A few years before, the manufacturers complained of distress: but then, rents were high, and landlords insolent. Similar vicissitudes of distress and prosperity-to-day, agricultural prosperity and manufacturing distress-to-morrow, agricultural distress and manufacturing prosperity, may be expected to recur again and again without end, unless our corn laws should be repealed, or the seasons should cease to vary. But, although we are aware that, in the estimation of a great majority of members of parliament, the "landed interest" is the nation, and agricultural distress is national ruin, it is not so in ours; and we are very sceptical as to that universal distress, of which, at one time, we heard so much. Even Mr. Blake cannot assert it without contradicting himself. "A redundant capital, yet a redundant population:" in other words, too much to eat, and too many mouths to eat it.

The great fluctuations, however, which have taken place during the last thirty years, in the prices of agricultural produce, are highly interesting phenomena, and every plausible attempt to explain them is worthy of some attention. The ability, moreover, which Mr. Blake has displayed, even in the support

even

of what we deem erroneous doctrines, and his general acquaintance, in which he is excelled by few, with the science of political economy, give an importance to his errors, greater than they derive from the nature of the subject: since, if it can be shewn that even he could urge in their defence no arguments which may not be satisfactorily refuted, the true doctrines on this subject may be considered as placed beyond the reach of dispute.

There are three causes, to some one, or more, of which, the fluctuations in prices have been attributed:

1st. The alterations in the currency.

2dly. War, and the transition from war to peace. 3dly. The varieties of the seasons.

Mr. Tooke, in his excellent work on High and Low Prices, enters into a detailed examination of these three suppositions; and arrives at the conclusion, that the variations in prices were owing, in some degree, to the alterations in the currency, but mainly to the seasons, and in no degree to war, except in as far as it tended to obstruct the supply of imported commodities. In this opinion we fully coincide. To take even a cursory view of the evidence upon which it is founded, forms no part of our present purpose, and we must be content with referring the reader to Mr. Tooke's work.*

Mr. Blake has adopted the theory of war demand and upon this hypothesis, he endeavours to account, not only for that portion of the fluctuations in prices, which Mr. Tooke ascribes to the seasons, but even for that portion which Mr. Tooke (in conjunction, we believe, with all other political economists, except Mr. Blake) ascribes to the alterations in the currency. Mr. Blake, in fact, denies that any depreciation whatever took place during the Bank restriction: and to prove this, is the ostensible object of his pamphlet.

'There can be no doubt,' says he, that, subsequently to the restriction on cash payments in 1797, every symptom that indicates an over-issue of paper circulation, and an alteration in the value of the currency, has manifested itself. We have witnessed a depression of the exchanges, to a degree, and for a continuance, that has been un

* We owe Mr. Tooke an apology for not having reviewed his work. But we should have done it great injustice by such a meagre abstract, as it would have been possible to give in the space of an article. We flatter ourselves that we are rendering a more useful service to science, as well as expressing more highly the estimation in which we hold Mr. Tooke's work, by applying, as we shall do in the present article, his principles and his reasonings, in refutation of the fallacies with which his conclusions have been assailed.