the example of the Church of France and Italy and Spain. That such may not be the case, that the Church may still continue to draw to itself the chosen men of the nation, is, I trust, not beyond the limits of hope, and not beyond the reasonable expectation of all who care for the future welfare of their country. I do not wish to exaggerate on one side or the other the importance of this fragment of subscription. There would still remain the obstacle always placed in the way of over-scrupulous men from the existence of a fixed Liturgy. This is inevitable. The Presbyterian and some of the Nonconformist churches are in this respect more completely their own masters than ours. They have the prayers of the Church at least in their own hands. But there is a great advantage in a Liturgical form, and of that advantage there is also the necessary disadvantage-that objections to particular phrases will always occur. There would still remain the possible, though certainly the decreasing possibility, of the authorities of the Church so applying the formularies as to oust this or that clergyman. This, however, is an incident of any form of Church government, to be found equally in conforming and nonconforming Churches; or, rather, more in non conforming Churches. No member of the Society of Friends would be permitted to preach the necessity of sacraments. No Unitarian minister would be permitted to read the Athanasian Creed. No Congregational minister would be permitted to affirm the necessity of an Established Church or of the Episcopal succession. It is only in the National Church that such variations and their opposites could be permitted. The largeness of the Church involves the largest of sufferance. Legal prosecutions for doctrine, on either side, have become almost obsolete during the last twelve years. It is therefore still to be considered whether there is any object in keeping up a form of subscription which, after the eviscence of the old form, contains nothing of a safeguard and something of an offense. There was a time when such questions were thought not unworthy of the heads of the Liberal party. In Mr. Trevelyan's brilliant book* on Fox's early life, there is given a vivid account of the speeches delivered on the occasion of the petition for the relaxation of subscription. "I cannot help saying," says a competent authority, who was present, "that I never was so affected with, or so sensible of, the power of pious eloquence as while Sir George Savile was speaking. It was not only an honor to him, but to his age and country. "Those giants of old," says Mr. Trevelyan, "showed of what they were capable when party feeling did not tempt them to pervert or * Page 442. exaggerate. The problem of the obligations of the clergy was stated and examined with a clearness and conciseness which seems to have been lost by some of our generation who choose that problem for their special study, and with a frankness which makes us proud to think what courageous fellows our great-grandfathers were. "* The pathetic tone of the gifted author indicates that this Liberal enthusiasm has become extinct. In fact, it lasted almost till our own time; but it has since been dwindling gradually away, until it now seems impossible to revive a spark of generous warmth in its behalf in those who are occupied with the object, important and desirable as it is, of keeping together the Liberal party. Any one who knows the present state of affairs will perceive that the desire of elevating, enlarging, reforming, any existing institutions is not to be expected from the present leaders of perhaps either party. "Jerusalem does not come within the lines of their operations." But there are in the younger generation signs that this apathy will not last for ever; and meanwhile it is our duty to keep alive the hope that the enlarged usefulness of the Church of England, or the preservation of the enlargement which exists, may yet become a motto of the Liberal cause, an object more worthy of the Church of England than the legal and technical trivialities which absorb the mind of a large portion of its clergy. Di meliora piis.--ARTHUR PENRHYN STANLEY, in Macmillan's Magazine. · THE CHASE-ITS HISTORY AND LAWS. II. At the close of our former article on hunting we proposed, on resuming the subject, to deal with that of the Romans. As we then observed, it is not as hunters or as devoted to the chase that the Romans were remarkable. It is a mistake to suppose, as a modern French writer has done, that, because Horace speaks of the "venator" who remains "sub Jove frigido," unmindful of his tender wife, for the sake of a hind or Marsian boar, all Romans were ardent sportsmen, or that, because, towards the close of the Republic, and in the early days of the Empire, hunting became for a time the fashion, therefore the Romans had been from the beginning a nation of hunters. Plutarch, it is true, represents Romulus and Remus as *Page 439. Mr. Trevelyan adds, "with a thoroughness as exhaustive as was attainable by an assembly of men who had not yet advanced to the point of asking themselves whether it was necessary to have a privileged church at all." There is another turn to be given to this ingeniously anachronistic sentence. But it would lead us too far into another region, given, among other things, to hunting; but as no one now doubts that the twin brothers were of a purely mythical character, the statement of that estimable but too-credulous historian is of but little value. Columella also, in his treatise "De Re Rustica," while he declares his objection to hunting, as enticing the husbandman away from his work, and tending to make him idle, says that the ancient Romans, vera illa Romuli proles," as he is pleased to call them, divided their time between the labors of agriculture and those of hunting; but, here again, as Columella did not write until long centuries after the age of which he is speaking, bis testimony can avail but little. The fiercer beasts of prey, being happily unknown in Italy-"rabida tigres absunt, et sæva leonum semina," says Virgil in that well-known noble outburst of patriotic enthusiasm-there was not the same necessity for hunting on the larger scale. At the same time, there is no reason to suppose that in a country still thickly wooded and well supplied with wild animals the rural population did not take the trouble to capture them. Wolves and foxes, too, as enemies to the flock and the farmyard, would require to be destroyed. The deer, the roebuck, and the hare would be worth the trouble to capture, as acceptable food. The wild swine, destructive to the crops, and also available as food, and to the pursuit of which the danger of the sport would add an additional zest, would not be suffered to escape pursuit. But the hunting of wild animals does not appear to have been organized on a large scale. Italy is not repsented as having possessed any indigeneous breed of dogs distinguished for hunting qualities of first-rate character; for the Umbrian breed, though excelling in point of nose, was, we are told, useless in other respects; nor does the use of hounds in packs, as a means of capturing game, appear to have been known till a comparatively late period. It was not till the tide of conquest had brought them into contact with the Eastern nations, and had made them acquainted with the grander style of hunting there pursued, that the Romans took to the chase in a manner at all deserving of the name. Having subdued Macedonia, Paulus Emilius is said to have brought away the hounds and hunting establishment of Perseus, the conquered king, to Rome, and to have given them to his son Scipio Emilianus. Hunting became soon afterwards the fashion of the day, especially with the younger men; so that Terence, writing some century and a half before Christ, says in the Andria:" Plerique omnes faciunt adolescentuli, Ut animum ad aliquod studium adjungant, aut equos So strong, indeed, did the passion for hunting become for a time, that Sallust represents Catiline as having used the gift of horses and hounds purchased for the purpose—“aliis canes atque equos mercari” -in addition to the "aliis scorta præbere "— -as one of the means resorted to by that arch-conspirator for the purpose of corruption. Their conquests in the East having made the Romans acquainted with the paradeisoi of the Persians, and the plunder of conquered nations and provinces having caused a prodigious influx of wealth, the Roman magnates, who now began to build sumptuous villas, added to them inclosures for breeding and preserving game; rather, however, it would seem, for the purpose of having the game at hand, when wanted for the table, than for the amusement of hunting; or, if for the latter, that the sport might be had without the chance of disappointment, as well as with the least possible amount of trouble and fatigue to the luxurious sportsman. Being surrounded by oak palings, these inclosures were termed roboraria. They appear, however, to have been at first of comparatively small extent, and to have been confined to the preserving of hares, whence they were also termed leporaria. Later on they sometimes assumed larger dimensions, and became parks in the fuller sense of the term, and contained deer and boars as well as hares and rabbits. The information on this subject is derived from Varro, an intelligent and reliable author, who lived to a great age, and who therefore,. when he wrote, could look back for two or three generations. Aulus Gellius, in the "Noctes Attice," at a later period, refers to the subject, but adds nothing to what was before known. Writing in the early years of Augustus, Varro says that there are three appendages to a villa: a leporarium (a hare-warren) for which name, by the time of Pliny, in consequence of its having become the custom to keep other game besides hares in these inclosures, that of vivarium had been substituted; an aviarium, or as it was also then called, an ornithon, and a piscina (fish pond). Speaking to his Roman friends of the leporaria of their day, Varro tells them that these differed very materially from those of their great-grandsires, inasmuch as the latter had been small inclosures of an acre or two, and for hares only, whereas in their day the leporaria were many acres in size, and contained wild swine, wild goats and deer, as well as hares and rabbits. He mentions that Fulvius Lippinus, who, according to Pliny-who, however, calls him Lupinus-was the first Roman who established a vivarium on this large scale—an example followed soon after by Lucullus and Hortensius-had in the neighborhood of Tarquinii an inclosure of seventy acres, in which were not only the animals just named, but also wild sheep. Varro speaks of another large inclosure in which the wild boars and wild goats had been made quite tame, and came to be fed when called; and also of one belonging to Hortensius, in Laurentinum, of fifty acres and upwards, which the owner called Onprorpopεiov, and in which, having his triclinium spread on an elevated spot, he supped with his guests. A trumpet being sounded, the table was surrounded by such a multitude of deer boars and other animals that the scene, Varro says, gave him as much pleasure as a venatio in the circus would have done, barring the absence of African wild beasts. It may be assumed that a vivarium, in which the animals were thus rendered tame, cannot have been established with much of a view of hunting. Speaking of the hares, which such a leporarium should contain, Varro mentions four sorts-the Italian, which he says is small, with short forelegs and long hind ones, and is dark in color on the back, but white underneath; those of transalpine Gaul, and those of Macedonia, both of which are very large; and the Spanish breed, which is small. He adds, as of the hare species, the rabbit (cuniculus), which he states to have been imported into Italy from Spain, in which statement he is confirmed by Pliny. With regard to the ornithones or aviaries, they appear to have been originally intended, not at all with a view to sport, but for the rearing and fattening of quails and thrushes, both of which were esteemed great delicacies by the Romans, and the rearing of which was a source of large profit to the proprietors of these establishments. These buildings were carefully constructed. They were roofed over with network, were furnished with artificial trees, and every convenience for the birds to perch and roost, and were supplied with small streams of running water, the whole being made to look as much like the country as possible; but they had only a few high windows, lest the birds, able to see outside, should pine for their natural freedom, and in consequence not fatten as they should do. But besides these aviaries, in which birds were kept, as Varro terms it, "fuctus causa," that is, for the table or the market, some villa proprietors had others, in which birds-especially singing birds--were kept "delectationis causa," M. Lælius Strabo, a friend of Varro's, having been the first to introduce such an ornithon. Lucullus, at his Tusculon villa, combined the two things under the same roof; and while, like Hortensius, in the midst of the wild boars and goats, he was reclining on his triclinium at supper-ubi delicate conaret "lie had the satisfaction of seeing some of the thrushes on the dish cooked, and at the same time the others flying about-"alios videret in mazonomo positos eoctos, alios volitare circum fenestras captos' -perhaps anticipating the gratification of eating the latter in their turn. Hunting was no doubt a common pursuit at the commencement of the Augustan era. Horace not only says that the Imberbis juvenis, tandem custode remoto, but also represents hunting as the ordinary and fitting occupation |