Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

from his connection with that renowned periodical, he might have been honoured as a sagacious, eloquent, and eminently-successful lawyer, and a firm and zealous supporter of popular rights; but he would never have obtained that world-wide reputation which he now enjoys, or have exercised that vast influence on public opinion which must undoubtedly be attributed to him. The credit, indeed, of originating the Edinburgh Review belonged to Sydney Smith, who was its founder; but Jeffrey was the editor who ruled over it in its palmiest days; and, though its pages were adorned by the contributions of Scott, Brougham, Horner, Mackintosh, Hallam, Chalmers, Smith, and many other writers of the highest eminence in every department of literature and science, yet it was mainly to the exertions of its editor that the new Journal owed its brilliant success. He was peculiarly fitted for the management of such a periodical,-not only by his extensive and varied information, his almost intuitive sagacity, calm judgment, and singular versatility of intellect, but also by a natural sweetness and suavity of temper, that kept his mind serene and unruffled, amid all the harassing annoyances to which an editor is continually exposed. The success of the Review was instantaneous and complete. "Without patronage, without name, under the tutelage of no great man, propounding heresies of all sorts against the ruling fancies of the day, whether political, poetical, or social, by sheer vigour of mind, resolution of purpose, and an unexampled combination of mental qualities, five or six young men, in our somewhat provincial metropolis, laid the foundation of an empire, to which, in the course of a few years, the intellect of Europe did homage." In the field of criticism, the new Journal produced an entire and immediate revolution, and extinguished at once the old periodical opiates. It rendered services still more important, however, to the cause of civil and religious liberty. To appreciate the value of these services, the state of the country at the period when the Review began, should be had in remembrance. The Parliament was unreformed, and the boroughmongering system flourished in full vigour-the Roman Catholic disabilities and the Corporation and Test Acts were unrepealed-the game laws were horribly oppressive-in the southern part of the country, prisoners tried for their lives could have no counsel-libel was punished by the most cruel and vindictive imprisonments-the laws of debt and of conspiracy were upon the worst possible footing-the enormous wickedness of the slave trade was tolerated and defended-the municipal corporations were nests of the most flagrant jobbery and corruption-the restrictions upon commerce, and the monopolies of corn and other necessaries of life, were maintained with the utmost stringency-popular education was violently resisted, as tending to revolution and infidelity. These, and a host of other evils, were then in existence, and their amelioration or entire removal has been in no small degree owing to the able, fearless, and consistent advocacy of the Edinburgh Review during the twenty-seven years of Lord Jeffrey's editorship. It has been justly said by Lord Cockburn, that there is scarcely one abuse that has been overthrown, which, supported as every one was, might not still have survived, nor a right principle that has been adopted, which might not have been dangerously delayed, had it not been for the well-timed vigour and ability of this Review. It was the established champion of the measures, and principles, and feelings, that have prevailed; and the glory of the victory cannot be withheld from the power that prepared the warriors who fought the battle.

It must be admitted, that there is one most serious drawback upon the high praise to which the Review is in other respects entitled ;-the irreli

gious spirit, the careless and scoffing tone by which its earlier numbers especially, were characterised. The age in which it was started was one of much professed attachment to the church, but of little real piety; and evangelical religion was at that period despised and derided, equally by the bigoted churchman and the sceptic. Not a few of the original supporters of the Edinburgh Review were trained in the school of Hume and Smith, and it is to be feared caught somewhat, at least, of their spirit. Their mode of handling religious subjects gave just offence and scandal to the serious part of the community, and afforded to the friends of abuses a plausible and popular outcry against an antagonist whom they both feared and hated, and thus great injury was done to the liberal principles which it was the professed object of the Review to advocate. It is most satisfactory to find, that while the great principles of freedom have steadily gained ground in our country, the principles of "pure religion and undefiled" have made even greater progress. Of this no more striking proof can be adduced than the fact, that the same periodical which, in 1807, contained the well known witty but most profane articles on missions, has recently given to the world Rogers' profound and able defence of the evidences of Christianity, entitled "Reason and Faith," with many other articles equally distinguished for their great ability and learning, and their high tone of piety. It would be unspeakably gratifying to know that this change in the religious character of the Review, is symptomatic of a similar change in the character and religious views of its early conductor, but of this, we grieve to add, the work before us affords no evidence. Not that there is any thing either in Lord Jeffrey's letters, or in the statements of his biographer, if we except one or two casual expressions, which can do violence to the keenest religious sense. We do not complain of what we find, but we desiderate what is absent. Throughout the work there is an entire negation of religion. It is characterised by a remarkable frankness and absence of reserve on other topics. The letters, especially, seem a perfect transcript of the character of the writer. He appears to have unbosomed his whole heart to his intimate friends. We learn what were his views and feelings amid all the diversified phases of human life-in health and sickness, in joy and sorrow, while prostrate under the heaviest trials, and while elevated to the highest pinnacle of earthly honour and prosperity; but amidst all these scenes there is not the slightest expression of any religious belief or hope, we have not discovered even a reference to the very existence of the sacred volume. Several years before Lord Jeffrey's death, it was currently reported that a great change had taken place in his character and religious views, and various anecdotes have been told in proof of the interest which, towards the close of his life, he took in the study of the holy Scriptures, and in the progress of evangelical religion. What measure of truth there may have been in these rumours it is impossible for us to say. We hope, though almost against hope, that they were well founded. But they receive no confirmation from the present work, and, judging from it, we are constrained, with the deepest sorrow, to express our fears that this highly gifted and most loving and loveable man, this ardent friend of the temporal welfare of our race, was, after all, a stranger to the hopes and consolations of the Gospel.

Lord Cockburn has executed his part of the work with great ability and good taste. It is, indeed, a remarkable book, to be the first literary production of a man who has nearly attained the patriarchal age of fourscore. We regret that our limits do not permit us to quote the graphic and interesting

sketches which he has given of Jeffrey's contemporaries,- John Clerk, Henry Erskine, George Cranstoun, Sir Henry Moncrieff, and his son, the late judge, or his picturesque description of Edinburgh society at the commencement of the present century.

The narrative of Lord Cockburn occupies only one volume, the other is filled with a selection from Lord Jeffrey's correspondence. These admirable letters have been declared, on high authority, to exhibit much of the vivacity and freshness of Walpole combined with the literary grace of Chesterfield and the sweet tenderness of Cowper. In their union of emotional feeling with refined sense and bright conception, their character is almost poetical. They are revelations of Jeffrey's heart as well as of his head, and will make him known and loved by countless readers, many of whom will learn with great surprise that this sharp and vigorous critic-the severe and unrelenting judge of literary culprits, was in reality a gentle and rather timid man, of remarkable tenderness of heart, keenly alive to the affection and sympathies of his friends and neighbours, and cherishing a kindly feeling towards the entire circle of his fellow-creatures. We must give a few specimens of these charming compositions. Here is his description of a spring morning in London after a night spent in the House of Commons.

"It was a beautiful, rosy, dead calm morning, when we broke up a little before five to-day; and I took three pensive turns along the solitude of Westminster Bridge, admiring the sharp clearness of St Paul's, and all the city spires soaring up in a cloudless sky; the orange-red light that was beginning to play on the trees of the Abbey, and the old windows of the Speaker's house; and the flat, green mist of the river, floating upon a few lazy hulks on the tide, and moving low under the arches. It was a curious contrast with the long previous imprisonment in the stifling, roaring House, amidst dying candles, and every sort of exhalation.”

THE HOUSE OF LORDS ON THE SECOND READING OF THE REFORM BILL.

"The debate was not very brilliant, but got, in its latter stage, excessively interesting. The Chancellor more tranquil, and less offensive than usual, but not at all languid, and in very good voice throughout, chiefly correcting false representations, dispelling vain terrors, and arranging and soothing. Lyndhurst's by far the cleverest and most dangerous speech against us in the debate, and very well spoken. Lord Grey's reply on the whole admirable; in tone and spirit perfect, and, considering his age and the time, really astonishing. He spoke near an hour and a-half, after five o'clock, from the kindling dawn into full sunlight, and I think with great effect. The aspect of the House was very striking through the whole night, very full, and, on the whole, still and solemn, but for the row with Durham and Phillpots, which ended in the merited exposure of the latter. The whole throne, and the space around it, clustered over with 100 members of our House, and the space below the bar nearly filled with 200 more, ranged in a standing row of three deep along the bar; another sitting on the ground against the wall; and the space between, covered with moving and sitting figures in all directions, with twenty or thirty clambering on the railings, and perched up by the doorways. Between four and five, when the daylight began to shed its blue beams across the red candle light, the scene was very picturesque from the singular grouping of forty or fifty of us sprawling on the floor, awake and asleep, in all imaginable attitudes, and with all sorts of expressions and wrappings. 'Young Cadboll,' who chose to try how he could sleep standing, jammed in a corner, fell flat down over two prostrate Irishmen on the floor, with a noise that made us all start, but no mischief was done. The candles had been renewed before dawn, and blazed on, after the sun came fairly in at the high windows, and produced a strange, but rather grand, effect on the red draperies, and furniture, and dusky tapestry on the walls. Heaven knows what will become of it!"

ALL IS VANITY.

1 "It is odd how strangely I felt as I walked home alone last night after all was over (the passing of the Scotch Reform Bill). Instead of being elated or relieved, I could not help feeling a deep depression and sadness, and I rather think I dropped a tear or two, as I paused to interrogate my own feelings in St James' Square. I cannot very well explain this; but a sense of the littleness and vanity even of those great contentions was uppermost in my mind."

JEFFREY'S OPINION OF O'CONNELL AND THE IRISH MEMBERS.

The Irish coercion bill gave him the best view he had yet obtained of the nature of a certain class of the Irish members.

"Without the least sense of shame or honour, bold, desperate, and loquacious."

He was always inclined to hope better of O'Connell, and had a great admiration of his eloquence.

"He is a great artist. In my opinion, indisputably the greatest orator in the House; nervous, passionate, without art, or ornament, concise, intrepid, terrible, far more in the style of old Demosthenic directness and vehemence, than anything I have heard in this modern world, yet often coarse, and sometimes tiresome, as Demosthenes was too, though venturing far less and going over far less ground,"

There are few who have ever been engaged in getting even friends to co-operate in measures of practical wisdom, who will not sympathise with him when he says,—

“It is mortifying and marvellous to find how difficult it is to do good, even when one is good-natured, and has neither sanguine motives nor sinister views.”

JEFFREY'S SYMPATHY FOR BURNS.

"In the last week (11th Nov. 1837), I have read all Burns' Life and Works-not without many tears, for the life especially. What touches me most is the pitiable poverty in which that gifted being (and his noble-minded father) passed his early days the painful frugality to which their innocence was doomed, and the thought how small a share of the useless luxuries in which we (such comparatively poor creatures) indulge, would have sufficed to shed joy and cheerfulness in their dwellings, and perhaps to have saved that glorious spirit from the trials and temptations under which he fell so prematurely. Oh! my dear Empson, there must be something terribly wrong in the present arrangements of the universe, when those things can happen, and be thought natural. I could lie down in the dirt and ery and grovel there, I think, for a century, to save such a soul as Burns from the suffering and the contamination and the degradation which these same arrangements imposed upon him, and I fancy that if I could but have known him, in my present state of wealth and influence, I might have saved, and reclaimed, and preserved him, even to the present day. He would not have been so old as my brother-judge, Lord Gleniee, or Lord Lynedoch, or a dozen others that one meets daily in society. And what a creature, not only in genius, but in nobleness of character, potentially at least, if right models had been put gently before him."

SYNODICAL DISCUSSION ON SCHOLARSHIPS.

THE discussion on the subject of scholarships at the recent meeting of Synod, of which an account is found in the present Number, raised certain points of interest to which it is desirable to attract special notice, were it only to keep the question before the minds of our readers. “At the same time, it will be seen that the measure never more demanded the urgent attention of the church, since nothing but prompt and strenuous efforts can secure a favourable throw of the die on which its fortunes may be said to be now cast. As a small contribution to the right appreciation of the present aspects and prospects of the scholarship scheme, we draw attention to the salient points of the late discussion, which the church will do well to look in the face.

First, then, it is matter of congratulation that a wider interest in the scheme seems at length awakened in the Synod. Almost for the first time anything like the cordial and emphatic response has been given which such a measure might have been expected to draw forth from the beginning. It is vain to conceal that on the part of not a few, the prevailing sentiment has been acquiescence rather than warm-hearted sympathy, a kind of contemplative apathy, which looked on the scheme as an experiment-perhaps an experiment of doubtful character—which might go the way of other innovations, without any violent regret or disappointment. Doubting and questioning would have been better than this passive indifference. The Scholarship report came round-the elaborate statement was read-the convener received his due meed of praise-the committee was re-appointed-perhaps some vague recommendation of a collection was issued-and then each went his several way; the convener to conduct his voluminous correspondence with the students, and to draw again upon the overburdened liberality of the few original donors; the committee to prepare their examination-papers, and to test competitors by them, and to dole out the ebbing funds; and the rest of the Synod, with a very few exceptions (rari nantes in gurgite vasto) to do nothing till

the empty jubilee of the next year came round. Had this state of things lasted, the scheme would shortly have died of inanition; no energy of an individual, or a committee, or a handful of contributors, could have kept up its fitful life, which indeed, on such terms, would not have been worth sustaining. It is, therefore, of excellent omen to find in the Synod a general rallying at length around the scheme a vigorous resolution to grapple with its difficulties-an expression in more quarters than one of a deeper conviction of its justness and necessity; and what is also hopeful, a more outspoken utterance of doubts and scruples regarding it, though these formed but a minor feature of the discussion. The bold and decisive step in advance taken by Dr King, doubtless did much to impart this new animation to the question, and it is to be hoped that henceforth the active interest displayed in it, will be as wide as the Synod and the denomination which it represents.

Secondly, another promising feature was, the universal impression that the scheme cannot be supported on its present footing. Amid the various suggestions and proposals that were made, no one seemed to dream of leaving the funds to come, as hitherto, from a few benevolent individuals (chiefly in Glasgow), together with the desultory proceeds of optional collections from congregations. The individuals in question, it was felt, had been already overtaxed in doing the work of the whole church; and had they, instead of making the generous offer to perpetuate their subscriptions by raising a capital fund, chosen to say to the Synod, "You have had the benefit of our money in conducting an important experiment, we have constructed the machine and tested its capabilities, and we now hand it over to you to supply the moving power yourselves," they would have deserved not only exoneration, but public gratitude. Nor could the most sanguine lay almost any stress on voluntary congregational collections. The Synod is perfectly alive to the inadequacy of this resource, and when it wants money, and must have it, enjoins the collection, and names the day. An optional collection is little better than a promissory note without a signature, and is dishonoured accordingly. Nor could an annual collection, taking rank with the authoritative collections of the church, though some looked for a moment hopefully on this alternative, mend the matter. It would be next to impossible to insert another in the already crowded list. Nor would it be consistent with the claims of other public interests connected with theological education, to exalt the scholarship scheme, while they are neglected. The expenditure for scholarships last year was upwards of L.700; and, in the full efficiency of the system, it would rise to L.1000. What annual collection would produce anything like this? And if it did, would there not be a cry of injustice from the Hall library, as receiving only L.100 for the benefit of all the theological students, while a small minority of their number received for scholarships L.300 or L.400-to say nothing of a still louder cry from the theological chairs (not to bring on the field their honoured occupants), protesting against the award of L.10, or L.15, from the collected money of the church, to help forward a single student, while the professor who helped forward a hundred and fifty, received only a small multiple of the same sum. Even if the whole expenses of the church for theological education (including scholarships) were defrayed by one annual collection-an arrangement dictated by common sense, and we trust soon to be resorted to,-it would seem impossible to allocate as much as the lowest efficiency of the scholarship measure demanded, without raising this painful sentiment of inequality, with all its heart-burning and disquietude. Reasons such as these, distinctly uttered or quietly hinted at, gave that character which has been remarked to the synodical discussion, of absolute distrust of the present resources of the scholarship fund, together with a reluctance to fall back upon an annual collection, either singly or in combination with other educational objects.

The third and last feature of the discussion which grew out of the former, was a readiness to embrace the proposal of a capital fund, qualified by a few difficulties and uncertainties. It was encouraging to find that no one doubted the practicability of raising the L.10,000 requisite for this purpose, if only energy were displayed in the work, and the sum gathered from a wide enough surface. The raising of more than a third of the whole by Dr King, was felt to be of the nature of an experi

« AnteriorContinuar »