are, next to that integrity which he so eminently possesses, the first virtues of an historian, and that when the writer has once obtained credit for that great qualification, united with strong and discriminating sense, the reader will thankfully accept clear and brief results in the place of elaborate deduction.

But it is time to enable our readers to form their own opinion of the work before us.

James V. who understood the principles of government, and had the most earnest desire to communicate to his subjects the blessings which result from it, did not abandon the scheme of his most enlightened predecessors. The rigorous bondage which the Earl of Angus so long imposed upon him increased his antipathy to aristocratical influence, and he no sooner had emancipated himself from it than he attempted to divide his nobles. He executed with the utmost steadiness the laws, which they had been accustomed to despise or disregard, and he treated them with a contempt, to which their proud spirits indignantly submitted. To strengthen his efforts he conciliated the other classes of the community. He ingratiated himself with the people by listening to their complaints; by shewing the most humane attention to their wants, and he attached to his interest, the clergy, the most wealthy and most powerful order of the state. He selected from them his confidential servants, conferred upon them the highest offices, and committed to their management the most important and delicate negotiations. They were indeed best qualified to assist him and to benefit their country. Ignorant and indifferent about religion, as too many of them were, (and) much cause as there was to lament the want of literature and science, which was conspicuous in them as a body: there were among them some of exalted genius,' (this is perhaps rather too much) and of eminent political talents: while the nobility, occupied with their feuds, or elated with their hereditary dignity, despised knowledge and all who attempted to acquire it.'

We are not quite disposed to acquiesce in this general censure of the nobility, whose prevalent feeling towards the more able and active ecclesiastics appears, at this period, to have been that of hatred rather than contempt.-But to proceed :

'Sadler's account of his negociations with James exhibits in a very favourable light the acuteness and the steadiness of that monarch. When for the purpose of destroying his favourable opinion of the Cardinal, Sadler stated, that this prelate was desirous to engross the temporal, as well as the spiritual jurisdiction of the kingdom, and produced intercepted letters to Rome upon which the charge was founded, James replied, that the Cardinal had shewn him duplicates of those letters: adding, at the same time, with becoming dignity, that he would assert bis right, and that his clergy, who well knew that he would do so, stood in proper awe of his authority. When he was urged to destroy the religious houses, and to take possession of their revenues, he answered, as a man of principle, thinking as he did, ought to have done,

H 2

that

that he looked upon such a step as a violation of religion; and that even upon the plea of expediency he had no cause to have recourse to it, because the clergy would readily contribute, when he stood in need of their contributions. Wher, agreeably to the injunctions of the exemplary Henry, Sadler urged, as a motive for the destruction of monasteries, the irregular and dissolute lives of the monks, the king answered, that if the institutions were in themselves proper, the abuse of them afforded no justification for invading them: but that he would rectify abuses when he had ascertained their existence.'

In order to estimate the native powers of mind, which dictated these replies, it must be remembered that the education of this young prince, who reasoned with the acuteness of a logician, aud the precision of an enlightened casuist, had been almost wholly abandoned to buffoons and parasites.

The solitary faith of a noble hostage, when tempted by the bribe of freedom to betray his country, is painted in these glowing colours.

It is delightful amidst such unworthy conduct to behold the dignity and the intrepidity of virtue. There was, for the honour of Scotland, one illustrious exception to the general resolution. The Earl of Cassels, the guest of Cranmer, thought with indignation of the treachery to which he was exhorted. His sense of honour, his affection for his two brothers, who had cheerfully gone to England to relieve him, led him at once to decide upon returning: he firmly declared that he should surrender himself to captivity, that no reward, and no danger would make him secure his own life by the sacrifice of theirs. This generosity of sentiment, which contrast with the baseness of the other lords renders more conspicuous, made a suitable impression upon Henry, and he nobly gave liberty both to Cassels and his hostages.'

On the base surrender of Wishart to Cardinal Beaton, our author animadverts in a strain of becoming indignation, which at the same time does justice to the purer morality of the present age.

'I am willing to believe, that notwithstanding the too general prevalence of corruption in the present day, and the proverbial laxity of faith in which courtiers indulge, any man of rank, who should now violate such an obligation as that under which Bothwell came, would be universally execrated-would be banished from the society of all, who had not cast aside even the appearance of principle. That nobleman had to encounter no such ignominy. It does not appear that he was afterwards less regarded, at least upon this account than he had been before, and even the historians who record his baseness, have not stigmatized it with that decisiveness of moral disapprobation which they ought to have displayed.'

Never was a reprehension uttered with more authority or better grace for the decisiveness of moral censure (we use the word in

its proper sense) is with our author a matter of sacred obligation, and never omitted or misapplied.

The deep impression which the levity or buffoonery of Knox, in relating the murder of Beaton, and other events, appears to have made upon his mind, leads us to regret that he did not enter into a critical investigation, in order to prove or disprove the authenticity of that extraordinary work. It is certain that it was left by Knox in an unfinished state, and arranged and digested by his secretary, with some assistance from the Kirk, about the year 1572. But judging from internal evidence, and particularly from the force and originality of the most objectionable parts, it would require proofs more convincing than now exist, that his text has been interpolated, and his memory injured by the impertinence and scurrility of an editor. Spottiswood, indeed, whose gratuitous kindness to the father of presbytery in his country is more candid than convincing, doubts the general authenticity of the history ascribed to Knox, because it records facts which took place after the death of the reputed writer. The Archbishop of St. Andrews, however, might have recollected that the death of Moses is recorded at the close of the Pentateuch; yet he would scarcely. impute those sacred books to any other than the great Jewish legislator.

On the assumption of the ministerial office by Knox, we cite with pleasure the following reflections.

'Whatever ideas may be entertained of the necessity of episcopal ordination, a mode which viewed as a regulation of order has many advantages, and which does not stand in need of the doubtful and disputed' support given to it by those who defend it as of divine institution, and as essential to the very existence of a Christian church, a more serious and affecting designation to the ministry than the one which has been recorded cannot be conceived; and he must surely attach to the cere monial part of Religion a value which does not belong to it, who can have any scruple in recognizing Knox as a minister of Christ.'

Less than this could not be said in defence of an establishment to which the writer belonged, and more in those days needed not to be said for the conviction of any rational and unprejudiced mind. When the terms of communion with a corrupted church are become actually sinful, we are required, by the highest authority, to 'come out of her, that we partake not of her plagues: if in so doing, (as was the peculiar happiness of the church of England,) we can carry along with us a portion of the old ministry, purged from their errors, and enlightened in their views, it is certainly a very high privilege; if otherwise, as no church can subsist without a minis try, necessity is an ample plea for the establishment of a new order of public teachers. Such was the conduct of Peter Waldo, and

H 3

and such that of Knox. Let it, however, be remembered, that the necessity must be real and cogent, and that this plea affords no countenance to the pride, the levity, the conceit and the caprice which are at the bottom of almost all modern separations, and that, perhaps, as much from our author's church as of our own.

On the demolition of the religious houses in the first phrenzy of the congregation, our author has thus dexterously steered between the Scylla and Charybdis of modern taste and Presbyterian prejudice.

"That it is desirable that the magnificent fabrics which our ancestors devoted to the solemnization of the rites of religion had been preserved, no one can for a moment doubt. Who that has contemplated them with the feelings which such objects are in every susceptible breast calculated to excite, does not trace with regret the mouldering fragments of edifices, the extent and sublimity of which history might have delighted to record? But we must not yield so far to these impressions as to be averse to examine into the merit which belongs to the very men by whom the buildings were overturned. Had the people of Scotland been indifferent about their religious opinions, or coldly attached to them, had they not been elevated by that zeal, which looked with abhorrence on the pageantry of the old superstition, they would have purchased the ease and security which all men so dearly value, by conforming to the church, or by secretly cherishing their tenets, which would then have quietly perished; and had the decaying foundation of the church been strengthened or renewed, ages might have elapsed before civil and religious liberty had been the inheritance to our country; we might even now have with amazement or with envy, beheld amongst other nations the admirable form of government by which we are protected, we might yet have been obliged to excite the spirit, he woundings of which have been so keenly and so injudiciously eprobated.'

Before then Knox and his adherents be branded as intemperate zealots, and while we read the accounts which have been given, and those which must yet be recorded of wasted churches and ruined monasteries, let us moderate our lamentations by reflecting that this was a price, however high in the estimation of taste and sentiment, which we cannot scruple to have paid for those rights, &c.'

On the right of resistance in subjects, our historian's reflections, drawn forth by the conduct of the congregation in depriving the queen Regent of her authority, are cautious and profound.

'Here,' (that is, in the opinion deliberately pronounced by Willock on this delicate subject,) the doctrine of resistance is plainly avowed and as plainly defended: a doctrine theoretically true; resting upon the most obvious dictates of reason, yet the application of which to existing governments is at all times hazardous. No question can be conceived more hazardous than whether in any particular instance there subsists that severity of oppression, the removal of which can by no

evils be too dearly purchased. Were man uniformly guided, as he flatters himself that he is, by reason and truth, the question might with the utmost safety be freely discussed, and the proper answer to it steadily and unceasingly inculcated. But he does not come calmly to the decision; his judgment is in much danger of being biassed by the feelings which imaginary or real despotism had excited, and what still more disqualifies him for such a discussion, his passions, his pride, his self-love, his anxiety to shew his power, are generally called into action. Although then in the present state of human nature almost every attempt to carry the doctrine of resistance into execution, is, as experience has too strongly illustrated, to be avoided; although it should be stated with the utmost caution, yet it ought never to be forgotten that it is true; the knowledge of its truth cannot fail to exert a most salutary influence upon the minds of rulers; and there are extreme cases when even the most strenuous advocate of passive obedience must revolt from his principle, there is a degree of tyranny to which the human race ought never to submit.'

Seldom has the native propensity of a Scotchman to resist established authority, been checked by casuistry so discreet and distinguishing as this.

One citation more and we have done.

'The Dissentions of the protestants strongly influenced the political principles, the manners, and the general sentiments of the inhabitants of Scotland. Indeed the important events, which soon marked the history of that country, (and) its intercourse with England after both were placed under the same sovereign, cannot be fully explained or understood without adverting to these dissentions. To trace their nature and effects afford entertaining and instructive matter for another work, which as a supplement to this history, the author, if his book be honoured with public approbation, and if his other duties afford him leisure, may at some future period undertake.'

That such approbation will not be withheld, we owe it to the principles and to the intelligence of the best part of our countrymen not to doubt; and could our suffrage contribute in any degree to fortify the author in his purpose, we should scarcely hesitate to say, that sincerely as we love the ecclesiastical establishment of our own country, we would for once willingly trust in presbyterian hands, the fate and fortunes of episcopacy in Scotland from the close of the present work to its final extinction at the Revolution. We trust, however, and believe, that he who has freely censured the errors of the congregation, will feel no partiality for the cant and hypocrisy of the covenanters, and that he who has treated the character of Mary with a delicacy and forbearance so honourable to his feelings, will tread lightly on the ashes of her more innocent and accomplished grandson. For the political depravity of the last two Stuarts, as sovereigns of Scotland, and for the tyranny and