present reign, but which we shall quote without any observations:

"I recollect my being informed long since when in England that a certain very great personage, then young, studied much a certain book, intitled Arcana Imperii. I had the curiosity to procure the book and read it. There are sensible and good things in it, but some bad ones; for if I remember right, a particular King is applauded for his politically exciting a rebellion amongst his subjects at a time when they had not strength to support it, that he might in subduing them take away their privileges which were troublesome to him; and a question is formally stated and discussed, Whether a Prince (who), to appease a revolt, makes promises of indemnity to the revolters, is obliged to fulfill those promises? Honest and good men would say, Aye; but this politician says, No.'

Reformers would do well to recollect that to get the bad customs of a country changed, and new ones, though better, introduced, it is necessary first to remove the prejudices of the people, enlighten their ignorance, and convince them that their interest will be promoted by the proposed changes; and this is not the work of a day.' Politicians do not often contemplate a state of things like that of the Millennium, but, in a long letter from David Hartley, Esq. M. P. to Dr. Franklin, in May 1782, we find the former talking seriously of nations uniting to bring forward the reign of the Millennium.' Dr. F. knew mankind too well to entertain any such hope; though no person's heart ever beat with a more affectionate fondness for peace, or with a more vigorous detestation of war. As he was convinced that wars would be perpetually recurring, one of his most ardent wishes and most favourite projects was to soften the barbarism of the horrid conflict, and to render it less destructive to the interests of unoffending individuals. Thus, in July 1782, we find him making the succeeding remarks in a letter to B. Vaughan, Esq.; which, if nations could be brought to carry them into practice, would effectually tend to diminish the actual evils of war, and to increase the proba bilities of a more permanent peace than any that Europe has of late years enjoyed.

By the original law of nations, war and extirpation was the punishment of injury. Humanizing by degrees, it admitted slavery instead of death. A farther step was the exchange of prisoners instead of slavery. Another, to respect more the property of private persons under conquest, and to be content with acquired dominion. Why should not this law of nations go on improving? Ages have intervened between its several steps: but, as knowledge of late increases rapidly, why should not those steps be quickened? Why should it not be agreed to as the future law of nations, that

in any war hereafter the following descriptions of men should be undisturbed, have the protection of both sides, and be permitted to follow their employments in surety; viz. 1. Cultivators of the earth, because they labour for the subsistence of mankind. 2. Fishermen, for the same reason. 3. Merchants and traders in unarmed ships who accommodate different nations, by communicating and exchanging the necessaries and conveniences of life. 4. Artists and mechanics inhabiting and working in open towns. It is hardly necessary to add, that the hospitals of enemies should be unmolested: they ought to be assisted. In short, I would have nobody fought with but those who are paid for fighting. If obliged to take corn from the farmer, friend or enemy, I would pay him for it the same for the fish or goods of the others.' P. 388.

In January 1783, we find this wise and good man communicating some proposition to Mr. Oswald for the purpose of attaining the same philanthropic objects as those above mentioned. His remarks on privateering merit serious attention.

The practice of robbing merchants on the high seas, a remnant of the ancient piracy, though it may be accidentally beneficial to particular persons, is far from being profitable to all engaged in it, or to the nation that authorizes it. In the beginning of a war, some rich ships not upon their guard are surprized and taken. This encourages the first adventurers to fit out more armed vessels, and many others to do the same. But the enemy at the same time become more careful, arm their merchant-ships better, and render them not so easy to be taken; they go also more under protection of convoys; thus, while the privateers to take them are multiplied, the vessels subject to be taken and the chances of profit are diminished, so that many cruizes are made wherein the expences overgo the gains; and as is the case in other lotteries, though particulars have got prizes, the mass of adventurers are losers, the whole expence of fitting out all the privateers during a war being much greater than the whole amount of goods taken. Then there is the national loss of all the labour of so many men during the time they have been employed in robbing; who besides spend what they get in riot, drunkenness, and debauchery, lose their habits of industry, are rarely fit for any sober business after a peace, and serve only to increase the number of highwaymen and housebreakers. Even the undertakers who have been fortunate are by sudden wealth led into expensive living, the habit of which continues when the means of supporting it cease, and finally ruins them. A just punishment for their having wantonly and unfeelingly ruined many honest innocent traders and their families, whose subsistence was employed in serving the common interests of mankind.' P. 420, 421.

Undoubtedly, the practice of privateering is an addition of private robbery to public devastation, and is in reality no more justifiable between maritime nations than it would be between two continental powers, when in a state of hostility,

to

to infest each other's territory not only with regular armies but with desultory bands of pick-pockets, footpads, highwaymen, and housebreakers. Individuals, considered by themselves, are usually more or less under the influence of moral considerations: but, when they come to act together in large bodies or as parts of a national mass, they seem to be destitute of all moral sense, and with the most frozen insensibility to violate collectively the plainest precepts of justice and humanity, for which they nevertheless individually entertain the most vivid regard.

pos

It was the opinion of Dr. Franklin that the European nations, which have sugar-islands subject to their dominion, would be more benefited by the loss than they are by the session; for, as he observes, the cost of sugar to the consumer in those nations consists not merely in the price he pays for it by the pound, but in the accumulated charge of all the taxes he pays in every war to fit out fleets and maintain troops for the defence of the islands that raise the sugar, and the ships that bring it home.' (P. 421.) He expresses his conviction that sugar actually costs the consumer less at Vienna or Moscow, where the sovereigns have no sugar-islands, than it costs the citizens of London or Paris, though they are exempted from the charges of transport after the arrival of the commodity in their ports:

6

And I sincerely believe,' says he, that if France and England were to decide by throwing dice which should have the whole of their sugar-islands, the loser in the throw would be the gainer. The future expence of defending them would be saved; the sugars would be bought cheaper by all Europe if the inhabitants might make it without interruption, and whoever imported the sugar, the same revenue might be raised by duties at the custom-houses of the nation that consumed it. And on the whole I conceive it would be better for the nations now possessing sugar-colonies to give up their claim to them, let them govern themselves, and put them under the protection of all the powers of Europe as neutral countries, open to the commerce of all, the profits of the present monopolies being by no means equivalent to the expence of maintaining them.'

We have now given ample specimens of the proofs which this correspondence affords, of the moral and political wisdom with which the mind of the writer was imbued. It was a treasure, from which he was perpetually drawing large stores for the general benefit. No narrow or selfish considerations appear ever to have biassed his opinions, or to have influenced his conduct. In the intercourse of private life, he laboured to promote the interest of his friends and acquaintance; and

in his public conduct, though he zealously supported the rights and liberties of the state which he represented, he was by no means indifferent to those of other nations: indeed, the principles which he cherished and maintained were such as tend to establish the peace, the freedom, and the prosperity of every nation under heaven.

ART. III. Useful Knowledge: or a Familiar and Explanatory Account of the various Productions of Nature, Mineral, Vegetable, and Animal, which are chiefly employed for the Use of Man. Illustrated with numerous Figures, and intended as a Work both of Instruction and Reference. By the Rev. William Bingley, A.M. F.L.S., late of Peterhouse, Cambridge, and Author of Animal Biography. 12mo. 3 Vols. About 300 Pages in each. 11. Is. Boards. Baldwin and Co. 1816.

THAT

HAT the cultivation of an acquaintance with the objects of nature is attended with many and important benefits, is a position which needs only to be stated to obtain our conviction of its truth. It requires, surely, no labour of argument to demonstrate that an occupation of this description has a direct tendency to rouse and to gratify the principle of curiosity; that it is eminently calculated to mature and improve our powers of taste; that it influences the enlargement and melioration of our intellectual powers; that it generates and fosters those dispositions of mental composure and serenity which result from contemplation and reflection, and which, if not absolutely virtuous, are at least akin to virtue, and conspire to its production and maintenance; and that it contributes, more powerfully than the pursuit of any other branch of human knowlege, to stimulate and invigorate our sentiments of piety and religion. The proofs of the existence of a Supreme Cause, deduced from abstract and metaphysical argumentation, are capable of being apprehended only by a few individuals of leisure and learning: but the works of creation exhibit, in language intelligible to all, the most irrefragable and astonishing displays of power, design, wisdom, and goodIt is impossible to examine a blade of grass, or the lowest modification of animal existence, without reflecting that the models of their organization, which have remained unaltered for thousands of years, could never result from blind or fortuitous impulse. The kind provisions which have been instituted for the preservation of the various species, with the countless instances of the wonderful adaptation of means to ends, cannot fail to inspire us with the consoling and animating truth that the Deity exercises his paternal protection over all

ness.

the

the creatures which he has made, and that not an atom can change its form or aspect without his permission.

Independently, however, of these more dignified and exalted views of the subject, the study of natural history is intimately connected with the wants, comforts, and accommodations of civilized society. The food which we eat, the raiment which we wear, the roof which shelters us from the storm, the materials, in short, of manufactures, commerce, agriculture, and the arts are ultimately reducible to substances which appertain to the mineral, vegetable, or animal kingdom. Now, if we rightly comprehend the title and texture of the work which has suggested these observations, its main object is to unfold some of the principal direct and practical advantages that mankind derive from the various properties which have been ascertained in the diversified productions of nature; or, in other words, to trace an outline of the economics of natural history. Such a design is at once obvious and important; yet we are not aware that it has been executed, in a systematic form, by any writer of distinguised ability or reputation. The statements and enumerations presented by Professor Morelot, in his treatise intitled, Histoire Naturelle appliquée à la Chimie, aux Arts, aux différens genres de l'Industrie, et aux Besoins Personnels de la Vie, are not only very incomplete and superficial, but are mixed up with some fanciful dogmas concerning the production of all the solid parts of the globe from the wrecks of pre-existing organized beings, which originated in the waters.

The present reverend author, who has more than once attracted our favourable notice, very judiciously refrains from the introduction of theoretical discussion; and the character and value of these volumes would not have been impaired, if he had exercised the same laudable reserve with respect to those curtailed explanations, and those defective definitions, which he has so copiously blended with the more appropriate portions of the work. The productions of nature themselves, and the use to which they are subservient, are easily susceptible of distinct treatment; and any thing like a satisfactory account of both is altogether incompatible with the circumscribed limits of Mr. Bingley's plan. Such a condensed view, therefore, as he seems to have contemplated, should have proceeded either on a presumed knowlege of the objects selected for consideration, or on a scheme of regular reference to the proper sources of information. Besides, of elementary descriptions and elucidations of minerals, plants, and animals, we have now an abundant provision, while their useful properties have been but partially or incidentally detailed; and we may

add