1829.] 
deep want of these contrivances, for we can 
very well imagine a child’s being taught to 
read, without being perplexed by names or 
rules for the letters and the sounds—as boys 
often learn Greek, without knowing the 
specific names of the characters. We have 
this moment questioned one, and found him 
ignorant of the names of nine of them. 
But though we may think little of these 
things, there are numbers who do think 
them even of importance; and we have 
no doubt, from the respectable testi- 
monies prefixed to the publication, the 
method recommended has been found effec- 
tive. It is the neatest little book imagina- 
ble, and the engravings delicately executed. 
The Christian Gentleman. Bya Bar- 
rister. 1829.—Colloquially the gentleman 
is one thing and the christian another— 
at least there is no inseparable connection : 
we speak of persons of certain manners, 
and certain conduct, without reference to 
their religious profession. The writer of 
the book before us—a very able person, and 
very capable of expressing his sentiments 
distinctly, and of enforcing them energeti- 
cally, chooses not only to describe the 
christian gentleman, which is an intelligible 
‘distinction, but to deny, in broad terms, 
that the qualities of the gentleman and the 
christian can spring from separable sources. 
“Tt is a mistake,” says he, “‘ to suppose that 
the qualities of the christian and the gentle- 
man are in parallelism with each other, and 
that each draws its existence and perfection 
from a distinct source—that the one taking 
its origin from the world and its school of 
manners, and the other derived from its 
proper author, work together as coefficients 
in fashioning the character of the christian 
gentleman. The case is far otherwise. 
he whole composition is fundamentally 
christian ;—the result of that formative 
grace which renoyates the heart, and which, 
as a refiner’s fire, or as fuller’s soap, purges 
the thoughts and temper from the dross and 
scum of their gross adhesions.’’? The spe- 
cific object of the writer is to portray the 
-eonduct and duties of the’christian gentle- 
man—the man of wealth and influence— 
__ the head of a family—the person whose ex- 
ample and authority is naturally looked up 
_ #0, and insensibly imitated; and this per- 
_ Sonage he accompanies, step by step, in his 
_ practice of family prayer and domestic ser- 
yices—in his politics, his literature, his con- 
_Yersation, his social intercourse and general 
dealings, in the education of his children, 
in his observance of the sabbath, and even 
his personal deportment and positions at 
_ the house of worship. Episodically, beacons 
and warnings are presented against the 
perils of metaphysical morals on the one 
hand, and of mechanic philsophy on the 
other ; for the dangers which spring up on 
the side of “ induction,’ he considers to 
be as great as those which appear on the 
side of abstraction. The former, which he 
brands with the term ‘ German metaphy~ 
Domestic and F oreign. 
659 
sics,”” he describes as tending to loosen the 
controul of testimony and authority, and to 
turn the mind to the fatal folly of looking 
within ourselves, and into the constitution 
of things, for the principles of our belief and 
practice. Of course such sort of censure is 
much too sweeping and declamatory. It is 
good, because it tends a/so to the detection 
of truth, to sift testimony and authority— 
and it is good, moreover, to look to our own 
feelings, and into the constitution of things, 
for facts are facts, and not to be shaken by 
testimony or authority, though they may 
and must be shaken by opposing facts. The 
truth is, it is no philosophy that shakes 
testimony—she rather co-operates and es- 
tablishes its force:—it is the prevalence 
of falsehood and imposture, that has done 
the mischief. But there is deep meaning 
and some eloquence in what follows—the 
fault is—which is that of the book gene- 
rally—it is too undistinguishing, too dis- 
dainful of due qualifying broad assertions. 
“ Nothing better,”’ says he,“ than this 
unhallowed product can come of an educa- 
tion of which real scriptural religion does 
not constitute the prevailing ingredient— 
no system of education can prosper which 
leaves out that which is the great and 
proper business of man. A principle of 
culture is proposed to us which has no 
reference to the end for which we were 
born : its maxims and dogmas are flux and 
evanescent, like the particles, whatever they 
are, which carry abroad the virus of disease. 
Down from the lofty, but unsound reveries 
of Madame de Stael, through all the 
deepening grades of German story, domestic 
or dramatic, to the pestilent pen of. that un- 
happy lord, whose genius’ has thrown 
lasting reproach upon the literature of his 
éountry—through every disguise, and every 
modification, the lurking disease betrays 
itself, amidst paint and perfumes, by the 
invincible scent ofits-native quarry.” 
Discoursing on the eftect of example, and 
especially that of high stations, he descants 
at great’ length, and with warmth, on the 
influence of the late king; and takes a 
side-wind occasion to brand his personal 
opponents with very unmeasured opprobri- 
um. Than John Wilks a more wicked 
man has seldom disgraced the name of 
Englishmen.”? Junius was “ malicious 5” 
the secret of his vaunted style was his 
“dextrous use of tawdry antitheses, a 
certain temerity of diction, and the play of 
verbal ingennity.”” Horne Tooke was the 
man of insolent phlegm, and studious ma- 
lignity. Fox, Burke, and Pitt, are alk 
tried by the writer’s stern standard.—Fox, 
of course, falls much below the level of the 
christian statesman. Burke was by many 
degrees nearer the christian gentleman 5. but 
though the christian. orator, he wanted 
many things which go towards the finished 
fabric of the christian gentleman. But 
Pitt (obviously the writer’s beau-idéal of a 
statesinan) has full credit given him (for of 
proof of course little could be found) for the 
4P 2 
