spised riches that none were to be found among them more wealthy than the rest, it being a law among them that those who joined their order should distribute their possessions among the members, the property of each being added to that of the rest, as being all brethren-that they appointed stewards to superintend the common interest, and that these had no other employment than to consult the good of each member without distinction-that the sect was not confined to one city, but many of them dwelt in every city, and if any of their sect came from other places, what they had lay open to them, just as if it were their own; and that they went in to the dwellings of such even as they had never known before, as if they had been ever so long acquainted with them-that they carried nothing with them when they travelled into remote parts, except weapons, for fear of thieves-that they neither bought nor sold anything to one another, but every one of them was accustomed to give of what he had to him that wanted it, and to receive in lieu of it what might be convenient to himself.

Such were the practices of these Jewish Communists, according to Josephus; and his description of their religious doctrines and customs is of equal importance to us, while we are considering what were the influences to which Jesus was exposed from those around him. The Essenes, this writer further observes, believed firmly in the immortality of the soul, and esteemed that the rewards of righteousness were to be earnestly striven for: they adhered inflexibly to truth and chastity, exercised strict justice towards all men, forbad theft and taking of oaths, restrained anger, and if any of their members fell into immorality, they immediately disowned them. His description, in other respects, reminds us of the Monkish orders-for he tells us that they clothed themselves in white, sat down to eat in solemn silence, each with one sort of food placed before him, that their washings were frequent-in brief, that they manifested zeal for much which, we learn from the Gospels, that Jesus regarded as unimportant.

Philo, another writer, confirms the account of the Essenes given by Josephus, says that they numbered 4,000, and that their name signified 'holy,' for that they had attained the highest holiness in the worship of God, not by sacrificing animals, but by cultivating purity of heart-that none among them manufactured darts, arrows or weapons of war-that they declined trade, commerce, and navigation, as incentives to covetousness-that they had no slaves among them, but all were free, and all in their turn ministered to others; and that they condemned the owners of slaves, as tyrants who violate the principles of justice and eqality that they despised logic and metaphysics, but eagerly studied moral philosophy-that in reading and interpreting the Scriptures, they chiefly sought for rules to guide them to the love of God, the love of virtue, and the love of man-that they diligently attended to the sick, and ministered to the aged with reverence, as parents are attended to by affectionate children-that they were fiercely persecuted by the powerful, and by whole flocks were often cruelly butchered, though none could impeach the innocence of their lives. Philo also describes a peculiar sect of the Essenes, called Therapeuts' or healers, who especially cultivated the art of healing; and says there was a considerable settlement of this branch in "Egypt, about Alexandria, and beyond the lake Maria."

From the view given by both these writers of the Essenes, we see that, among "the common people," with whom Jesus delighted to associate, his mind would be able to gather many of his clearest perceptions of moral truth and purity. Yet the strict sabbatical observances, and many ascetic

practices, described by both Josephus and Philo, as characteristic of the Essenes, found no favour with the strong intellect of the young Galilean.

It is to the peculiar National hopes of the peculiar people among whom he was born, however, that we must look for the source of his deepest motives, and for the ruling enthusiasm of his pure and lofty character. The Jews, by all the associations of their national history, held themselves to be the chosen people of Jehovah. They had been punished for their disobedience; but their old bards, or prophets, had foretold that their Theocracy — the "kingdom of God," or "kingdom of Heaven," should be restored with exultant triumph. These foretellings have never yet been realised; but, in the time of Christ, and while in subjugation to the Romans, the fervent hope of a glorious restoration was national. When Cyrenius, or Quirinus, that Roman governor of whom we have already had a glimpse from the confused story of Luke, imposed an extraordinary taxation on the Jewish people, (and this would be in, or about, the tenth year of Jesus, if his birth is to be considered as fixed at the common era,) Josephus relates that a Galilean named Judas, raised an insurrection against the Romans, and asserted that God only, was to be the ruler and lord of the Jewish people. This is the person mentioned by Gamaliel, in the 'Acts' (v. c. 37 v.) "Judas who rose up in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him he also perished." Josephus tells us that the nation was never thoroughly settled after the appearance of this insurrectionist-that he founded a fourth sect, who, like himself promoted innovations in the Mosaic customs, insomuch that the strict Pharisees exclaimed against the new heresy. Other pretenders rose up who taught the people to look for deliverance from the Romans, not by arms, but by the miraculous intervention promised by the prophets. And one of these is depictured by Josephus as leading a multitude out to Mount Gerizim, and promising to shew them there the sacred vessels hidden in that mountain by Moses; but that Pilate violently dispersed them. John the Baptist is afterwards introduced by Josephus, and spoken of with respect as a teacher of virtue. The Gospels describe him as preaching the "kingdom of heaven," but we must reserve till the second discourse, any discussion of the probable influence exercised by him upon the character of Jesus.

We have seen that the moral and patriotic influences of his time were powerful. They must have stirred his gifted mind; and when moved, it could not fail to make an impression upon his countrymen. Like a true patriot he glowed with the desire to see his country freed from the Roman yoke; but like a true philanthropist he shrank from the thought of bloodshed. And, above all, his highly religious mind, had drank in the doctrine of "the kingdom of Heaven." He possessed a firm conviction that a new state of things was to be brought about by a great moral change,—and that that change was to be operated by Divine power. His large heart yearned over the sufferings of the poor, and the inequality among men. His idea of the Divinity was sublimated into the tenderest conception of Him as the great 'Father.' He knew that he himself would make the whole world happy, at once, if he possessed the power, and therefore he conceived that his Father,' the Father of all, would speedily make it happy. The "kingdom of Heaven" was at hand! A great regeneration of mankind was about to be wrought by the Almighty! The Prophets had foretold that the Messiah should be sent to effect this. He felt his own mental elevation over those around him; he felt that this thought filled up his whole being; and he began to conceive that he

himself was to be the Prophet and Prince like unto Moses who should fill the restored throne of David.

But in all this there was no vulgar aspiration. There were no longings for the tinsel and glitter of royalty. His burning love for mankind, his zeal for purity, his ardent attachment to justice, his pity for the oppressed—filled his expansive heart, and stimulated his intellect. It was impossible for such a character to remain all his life a carpenter at Nazareth. His mission must be begun. It was not only begun, but wrought out, and consummated by a martyrdom, which transcends, in the spirit manifested by the sufferer, all that is recorded of the great and good in all ages. Before reaching that closing part of the gospel narratives, however, we shall have to thread our way through much difficulty. Legend and wonder will meet us on every hand. But, after our difficult work is accomplished, to every mind that loves moral beauty, the character of Christ will augment in loveableness. We shall be constrained to say, if all the world were like Christ, it would be a happy world: we shall see him to be so worthy of love and reverence, when divested of the legends that deform and mar his transcendent excellence, as to wish that, daily and hourly, we may be like him.

Review.

Mons. Guizot; or, Democracy, Oligarchy, and Monarchy. By C. LELIUS. C. Fox, Paternoster-Row.

THIS is a very spirited castigation of that distinguished tool of tyranny, M. Guizot; and is apparently, the work of one of the intelligent exiles for liberty, now resident in our country. No minister ever fell more signally, than the author of the great treatise on Civilisation.' His book seemed to be a complete revelation of the secret of avoiding revolutions, by yielding in proper time and yet, M. Guizot was the very dullest scholar in practising his own lessons, when the exact time came for shewing that he himself had thoroughly learned what his book taught! So true it is, that clever men may be first-rate theorists, but fools in practice.

The fallen minister, it is well known, has been quite unrepentant of his errors, and worse than idle, during his exile-having published one of the most hollow and hypocritical books ever written by a politician. It is this work which M. Lælius has undertaken (in a half-crown volume) to anatomize. Here is an example of his mode of using the knife :

"What can be more hypocritical,-more profane,-more detestable than the following quotation; the christian religion is either designed to be the infallable guide of human conduct, equally, or it lays under the suspicion of being a human invention. Here however are the words of M. Guizot, The poor and humble would be submissive to the will of God and the laws of society. They would seek the satisfaction of their wants in regular and assiduous labour, the improvement of their condition in good conduct and provident habits, and consolation and hope in the futurity promised to man.'

Can any language be employed more monstrously hypocritical and abusive, and even derisive of human nature and the will of God, than that the industrious poor and humble only should be submissive to God's will and the laws of society? A law or will emanating from an infinite cause, whether intelligent or nonintelligent, must be of a universal nature; there can be no exceptions, no exemptions; rich and poor, learned and illiterate, all must be equally humble and submissive to the will of God and the laws of society. An humble king, an humble aristocracy or hierarchy, who submit themselves to the will of God and the laws of society, would indeed be a miracle! Conceited pride, insufferable arrogance, and unmitigated rapacity,

according to the will of God and the laws of society, convert the deity into a capricious warapproving being, an instrument for tyrants, which induces men to infer that religion connected with states is only a powerful engine invented for the subjugation of the human race. It is thus that man is reduced, humiliated to a mere biped; even the dogmas of religion are beyond his understanding, incomprehensible to his little shrivelled soul, and he seeks in vain the satisfaction of his animal wants by regular and assiduous labour, and consolation in his wretchedness in the hope of the futurity promised to him by a luxurious, a sullenly voluptuous priesthood, who labour not in holiness, but to convert doctrines attributed to God into invisible, spiritual, potent instruments to build up institutions of oppression, cruelty and war."

The author, however, is not a mere critic upon M. Guizot's sentences. The following passage shews, that his mind has been drawn towards devising a cure for the social evils which surround us on every side; and all who object to communism would do well to mark, learn, and inwardly digest' his sensible doctrines on the right of private property.

"The mind of the people in all countries is directed to the fand. Why does this phenomenon present itself to our contemplation, in the present age, in the midst of the immense services which capital has rendered to civilization?' Is it not, that labour is seeking for a loophole to escape from those immense services, of the civilizing energies of capital? or rather from that social system, which is deteriorating alike, both the physical and mental energies and social condition of those, against whose collective interests it is in continual antagonism? The mud-hut and the princely palace of the haughty Lord, or the more arrogant, lordly capitalist, stand in no more dreary contrast than the really civilized human being with the out-cast who tenants that mud-hut,-or than the filthy and wretched human beings who dwell in the equally filthy and wretched habitations, streets, and courts of our populous towns and cities. Great numbers, however, of the people are looking round for means of escape from this hopeless condition. Intelligence, even in a small degree, and entire dependence cannot much longer hang together. The uncertainty of,-the mental torture attendant upon man's well-being, pending upon the capricious will of another, not often the most considerate or humane, drives them to look with hope to the land, which offers to them independence, constant, and remunerative employment, and the means of escape from the tyranny of capital, and the more capricious tyranny of the capitalist.

"There are, in the present age, two schemes of proposed social improvement, openly and avowedly launched before the public, the one small landed possessions with individual interests, the other landed possessions, or land united with manufactures with a community of interests. The right of individual possession is now one of the fundamental laws of civil order; and no number of men, not even the majority of a nation, can annul without the greatest injustice, the right of private property, without, if required, giving an equivalent in value. Laws, prescriptions, and monopolies, either of private individuals, classes, or orders, may be abolished; but to seize and appropriate private property, would be a complete disruption of society, would carry out those principles so much complained of and censured, and which have wrought out so many evils, those of force and duplicity being the only standard of right. For the people to settle upon the land, in their own right, on either of the schemes propounded, must be a social movement; governments or communities must purchase the land; for even if the absolute will of a nation were to decree, that all individual or personal possessions should cease, another government, backed by power, might decree, that what was held by the nation of communities should belong to individuals, and force as hitherto, would be the only acknowledged standard of right. If reason is to displace force,-social war to give place to social peace; not one portion, the smallest, to govern a nation by martial establishments, and thus keep up perpetual warfare,-new arrangements must be made, and new principles must animate the governors, legislators, and the governed. The latter must be elevated, the former purified. This will indeed be the triumph of science and civilization; injurious to none, beneficial to all. And we may predict of labour, as M. Guizot has done, changing the purport of his words, when he says, 'It may be confidently predicted, that if, as I hope, social order triumphs over its insane or depraved enemies' (the present rulers of Europe) 'the attacks and robberies of which labour, the property of the labourer, is now the object, and the dangers with which it is threatened, will, in the end, enhance its preponderance in society.' (p. 42.) This will, this must be done, either with or without communities; for I am not pleading for any particular order, or social scheme.

"Man naturally longs for and values independence, not independence from labour, but from the caprices, insults, and injustice of his fellow-man. By what fatality,' then, asks M. Guizot, has it happened that the word labour, so honourable to modern civilization, is become the war-cry and a source of disasters in France? and it may be added in England and in the whole of Europe! Is it not that society is a cloak for a great and pornicious lie? Labour may be honourable to modern civilization, but is neither hon

oured nor guarded. Civilization has never reached out a friendly hand towards it, never acknowledged it as a friend, or as existing as an integral part of society, or as standing within the circle of fraternity. Labour then, like an cmnipotent principle, exerts itself, to shake off the artificial manacles with which it is bound, and to make itself free. Land is the natural home of man. There he breathes a free, a purer air; when once in possession of it, his house is his castle. But even there, and every where, his person must be his claim to equal interests and equal rights. The variations and uncertainty of the seasons, the calm of the summer's evening,-the glorious rise of the god of day,-the thunder storm and the whirlwind,-spring and autumn, all fill the mind with awe or gratitude, and teach man humility and dependance. But these feelings, this awe, may and will exist in the human being withcut servile fear, or reverence of men, perhaps not equal to himself. And although Descartes and Bacon, Locke, La Place, and Newton, have enlightened England and France, and Europe, if it had not been for the ingenious and industrious mechanics, this light would have been like the rays of the solar light, that slightly touch the periphery of the earth's atmosphere, but never illuminate those human beings who walk its surface; but pass onwards without enlightening their darkness into the infinity of space. Watt, Colbert, Arkwright, and other inventors, may have laid the foundations of the nation's prosperity, but the foundations would have been of little value, had not industry and practical skill built the wonderous superstructure.

"In what country has labour attained that ground, in the glorious path of civilization, on which it has acquired its proper rank and dignity? (p. 48.) Has it not everywhere to submit to the supercilious contempt aud insolence of wealth, and of pretended dignities; the most absurd and preposterous pretensions known to man? These are not the mysterious laws of God, or the inevitable results of the freewill of man. They are the arbitrary impositions and impostures of governments and nations."

At the risk of extending this notice beyond the length at first intended, the piquant finale of M. Lælius must be given. It is a choice morsel to

a democrat:

"Civilization has hitherto been like the oasis, or sacred spring in some desert, guarded from and prohibited the people. Yet it triumphs, triumphs over antagonistic governments. As is the intelligence of a nation, so is the industry, where industry is free. Nature furnishes the material, intellectual industry the creative skill. Labour and industry are linked together, they are distinctly directive and creative; but as great an amount of intellect is demanded to construct the hive, to gather and deposit the store, as to design and direct. They are however twins, born of nature and at one birth; the one cannot despise the other without suffering itself. Ignorance encumbers the soul of a nation, as much as a putrifying corpse bound by iron bonds to the living body. It is true slaves are more obedient from necessity, but the same inevitable necessity reduces the slave beneath the human being; a nation of unconditional slaves was never industrious, rich, brave, or prosperous; distinguished for art, science, or literature. Slavery obscures to darkness the collective intellect of a people. In the degree that a people are free, they ascend to eminence among the nations of the earth; are distinguished for all that is estimable in man, useful or ornamental to society, or consistent with the being, attributes, and nature of God.

"All that is thus advanced, or pleaded for, on behalf of the people, contend their political and social adversaries, is of the spirit of evil or metaphor. Hence Louis Paul Courier has prayed, 'May the Lord preserve us from the evil spirit and from Metaphor.' When these are correctly stated and understood, every individual favourable to humanity, and to the advancement of social and governmental science, may unite in the prayer. French and English society have been governed, no, not governed, but oppressed and abused by the spirit of evil and metaphor; the evil spirit of war and martial establishments; by metaphors the most pernicious, delusive of the ignorant, and generative of an unbounded spirit of vanity; metaphors that transform men and women into beings something inferior to their race. Here are the metaphors, and metaphors only, shrouding the spirit of evil from the gaze and abhorrence of the people; these are the ornaments of the funeral pall, or of the sepulchre of European liberty. What a spirit of evil! What Metaphors! My Lord! Your grace! Your highness! (do not cry baby). Your holiness! Your Majesty!! Perhaps insane; what a metaphor!! The Reverend; and the Right Reverend Father in God!!! His holiness the Pope--kiss his toe!! mortals, and still poorer mortals, who are thus blinded by the glitter of the tinsel of society, gorgeously covering the spirit of evil, and metaphors! May the Lord deliver and preserve us from the spirit of evil and these metaphors! And let all the people say, men!"

Poor