« PreviousContinue »
the morality of easy, pliant, and conciliating manners, which neither bears hard on the vices, nor goes deep into the consciences of mankind; the morality by which men learn to declaim against religious zeal, and against every thing which has the aspect either of fcrupulous holiness or of earneft religion, but which can teach them to look, without any dissatisfaction or murmur, on the diffipations of the world, on the profane, and on the sensual, and on the oppressors, and on the hardened.
· Men of found understanding ought to be able to determine for them. felves, whether this is the morality of the gospel which is inculcated i with scarcely any relation to it, and from every motive rather than the motives of religion ; in which the lessons of moral duty, separated from the language of Christianity, are every day brought nearer to the ma. xims and to the manners of the world; and from which men learn, ar are taught to believe, that, wretched as their progress is in moral duties, they must derive from it their only hope of salvation.
The unbeliever, and the false professor of Christianity, insensibly adopt the same language. Under the pretence of setting morality and Christianity at variance, they unite their endeavours to fap the foundations of both. They first banish from their thoughts the substance or the peculiar tenets of the gospel, as a metaphysical system which may well be spared. When they have effected this, their work is almost done : for the morality which they profefs to retain, is eafily reconciled to the vices of the world ; and, though it were pure, foon becomes a dead letter, separated from the principles or motives which can alone fup.
• It is impossible not to remark, besides, that the supple and accom. modating morality, which bends to every fashion, and accords with every new opinion ; which ftartles at every approach of zeal for religion, but which fears nothing from the lips of ungodliness or of infidelity ; is, in its moit favourable aspect, at least far removed from the holiness of heart and life, by which the found believers of the gospel are representcd, in the New Testament, as becoming the temple of God,' and as having the spirit of God dwelling in them.' p. 147.–150.
But while mere morality, or natural religion, are out of place in the pulpit, when they seem to be opposed to revelation, we cannot help thinking, that a preacher must narrow his sphere of utility very needlessly, if he thinks it his duty, on all occafions, to introduce the peculiar views and motives which Christianity sug. gests. If he seriously believes that religion, he certainly never will say any thing that can have the smallest tendency to obstruct its influence : but he may not think it convenient, or he may not have the inclination, to make it the sole and exclusive foundation of all his counsels and exhortations. What is called the evangeliral style of preaching, appears to us an opposite extreme from the purely moral; and, like all other extremes, it is bad. There is furely a difference between the present times, and those in which
Christianity was at first preached by the apostles. The feed has been sown, and during the course of eighteen centuries has in one way or other been producing fruit. The work need not be done over again from the beginning; and even if a preacher thought it necessary once more to lay the foundation, yet it would not be in his power. The preaching of the Apostles themselves, would have appeared bold and extravagant, if they had not been able to accompany their words with demonstration of the spirit and of power,' if they had not appealed to miracles and to the clear fulfilment of prophecy. Preachers now must take the times as they find them; and as they have not those supernatural evidences, they must adopt a lower and more moderate tone. They must not disjoin themselves so entirely from the common business and common reasonings of the world, or represent Christianity as a subject which is to be judged of, or inculcated, upon principles fundamentally different from those which regulate our opinia on and belief upon matters of smaller importance. In the preachers of the 17th century, who are indisputably believers in revelation, and who very frequently refer to its distinguishing tenets, we may yet perceive an ease and freedom, which demonstrate that their faith did not at all shackle their minds, or prevent them from resorting with the utmost readiness to every fource of morals or reason. Dr Barrow will in one sentence quote an Apostle, in the next a Father, and in a third Aristotle; and he will then pour out, with equal alacrity, the rich stream of his own full and overflowing eloquence. The evangelical preachers of the present day, seem to be in horrors, if they happen to push their foot beyond the magic circle of Scripture; by which means they both renounce the affistance which they may receive from their general learning and knowledge, and give a disagreeable impression of the sacred writings, as if they were a repository of strange and peculiar doctrines with which the common sense and feelings of men can never be permitted to mingle. There is something extremely disagreeable to the minds, we do not fay of men tinctured with infidelity, but of the sensible and reflecting part of Christians, to be kept in the trammels of mystery, and not to have their religion amalgamated in some measure with their customary and daily lentiments; to have one set of thoughts and phrases for Sunday, and another for all the rest of the week. If we have any objection to the Sermons before us, it is, that the reverend author is somewhat too constant in enforcing fcripture doctrine ; although we state this opinion with hesitation, when we consider his great experience as a clergyman, and the impression of cool reason and practical good fense which is ftampt upon the whole volume. We would rather, from this peculiarity, take occasion to suggest
to fuch of our readers as have adopted the common philosophia cal principles of the day, that a circumstance of this kind in the fermons of a man whose understanding and abilities are unquestionable, is a point which, on their principles, they will find no little difficulty in accounting for. When we see such a man enforcing with great seriousnels those doctrines of revelation which, in the eyes of the world in general, and especially in those of fceptics, have most the appearance of “ foolishness," what is the conclusion? The charge of hypocrisy is highly illiberal, and the fupposition that, on these subjects, the author's understanding has been warped by his peculiar profession, to say the least of it, is fomewhat presumptuous. Is it not more reasonable to fufpect that there must be solidity in the foundation, when we find a very wise man so carefully employed about the superstructure?
Upon the whole, this volume, we conceive, will afford the most folid satisfaction to the serious reader, for whose use it is principally intended, and must command the respect of those who are not habitually occupied with the subjects to which it relates. They will never be disturbed with the author's admiration of himfelf, or his misconception of the subject ; nor will their impatience be excited by any thing puerile, declamatory, verbose, or inaccurate. They will find every where indications of a vigorous and independent understanding; and though they may not always be gratified with flights of fancy, or graces of composition, they can scarcely fail to be attracted by the unaffected expression of goodness and sincerity which runs through the whole publication.
ART. X. De l'Usage du Numeraire dans un grand Etat.
Par le Cit. Toulongeon.
(From the last Volume of the Memoires de la Classe des
Sciences Morales et Politiques de l'Institut National.) THIS This is one of the many productions that have lately appeared
in France, as well as in England, from the pens of certain political economists, who, without genius to create new systems, or acuteness to perceive distinctly the errors of the old, are sufficiently fond of fingularity, to reject both the great theories which formerly divided the opinions of mankind on the subject of national wealth. The first step which thefe authors set out with, is a contemptuous disavowal of the doctrine, that money
constitutes the riches of a people ; but in a few pages we generally find how imperfectly their minds have been cured of this vulgar but most natural prejudice; and they no sooner come to lay down their own theories, than we perceive, that, to the fundamental errors of the mercantile system, they have added nothing but mistakes from which it was free, and contradictions which could only arise from not comprehending it.
M. Toulongeon is too much above ancient prejudice to believe that the richelt nation is that which pofleffes the greatest quantity of circulating medium;' yet he has not proceeded far in the developement of his own doctrines before we discover him uniformly substituting money før capital, and reasoning upon the employment and distribution of stock under the appellation of
numeraire.' A fimilar desire to shake off the prepossession in favour of specie, which constitutes the chief error of the exploded doctrine, induces him to seek for a substitute, in credit ; and then his theory only differs from the old one, in afcribing to paper money all the powers which were formerly attributed to the precious metals." He does not, like the more vulgar class of politicians, declaim against trusting the prosperity of a nation to the flimsy resources of credit; but he goes further than Mr Pinto himself in his notions of the powers of credit; and argues as if credit could create capital, rather than draw unemployed stock into use. His theory is delivered with more than the ordinary presumption of a person who mistakes his ignorance for discovery; and though he concludes his performance with a modest prediction that it will find a place in the portfolio of projects configned to oblivion,’ yet the whole tenor of the paper, and especially of the paffages which stand next to this prophecy, demonftrate that he belongs to the small number who do not believe it will be fulfilled. The tract indeed abounds with well-turned and deli. cate compliments to the Citizen Toulongeon, who feems verily to think that he has removed all mystery from the difficult fubject of circulation and credit ; that by a moft fimple theory he has explained in what manner money may enrich a people, and that, by a happy deduction from his fundamental proposition, he has pointed out the means of moral, economical, and financial iniprovement to his country. A corollary from the whole encloses, rather than developes, a lingular scheme of public credit, which is to prove a substitute for national debts; and we think our Teaders can scarcely peruse the analysis of these discoveries, without recognizing some portion of the same genius that once infpired the famous M. Herrenschwand, to which the world owes his memorable ' Adresse aux vrais Hommes de Bien.' Money, according to our author, must possess two qualities, in VOL. VI. NO. 1).
order to constitute the wealth of a state-a rapid circulation, and proper distribution. The good effects of quick circulation are too obvious to require proof-it enables a fingle piece to perform the office of many. Let us confider then what is mearst by a proper distribution. He pursues a long case in figures for the sake of illustrating this point; but the substance of the ftatement is, that if there are two nations equally rich and populous, and if the fame quantity of money is fo diftributed, that in both a small class shall have a larger thare of it than the reft, but that the disproportion fhall be much greater in the one community than in the other, then, in the former, the bulk of the people must labour with little or no affistance but what they derive from their own hands, while, in the latter, they have the aid of a confiderable portion of the great inftrument of cominerce. On this ground, our author proceeds to construct a comparison between the happiness of the two communities, and to thow that where almost all the money is in the hands of the rich, the poor must labour for them at competition prices in order to live, muit devote their whole lives to drudgery without having time to think, and must see their condition growing worse and worse as their neceflities augment. But where the poor have a juft proportion of the circulating medium, they labour to enjoy as well as to live; they have time to reflect and improve their minds 3 and their fortune is continually augmenting, while their yearly overplus is anew employed with profit. At this period of his reasoning, our author stops to remind us, that he has been all along speaking of money, and not of wealth. But this will not do. If he is resolved to describe the effe&ts of an unequal distribution of wealth, under the name of the unequal distribution of money, we cannot allow him to force his theory upon us in the form of a definition ; and if he will use money in the fenfe of wealth, he must fimt some other word to expreis what is commonly meant by money. It is however obvious, that there is much inaccuracy even in his enumeration of the effects of aequal distribution, whether we permit him to call it of money or of wealth in geneTal. How can the sich make the poor work uniformly at a competition price of labour, when their own fuperfluity of wealth is occasioning a competition of confumers, and is indeed the very origin of high wages? The idea of fuch diftributions is abfurd. The engine may be adjusted at first in whatever manner you please ; but its first movement must tend to derange the preeltablished proportions, unless the rich are to retain their wealth unconfumed, and the poor to work for nothing.
To his supposition of the money in the two states being divided with different degrees of inequality, our author proceeds to add another; that, in the country where the small number pofless the