consciousness of advantages on both, they may cleave to one another, and feel that a rupture would be a calamity. It would leave a nation free at any moment to turn upon any other, saying, 'I do not care for you, I can live alone!' This is the policy which China is rising above, and into which America is sinking.

On the other hand, the total dependence of a nation upon a single foreign one for what is, or is deemed to be, a necessary of life, not elsewhere attainable, is a temptation to bully; and, unless with two people very differently constituted from the English and Americans, must bring war: for the latter were not the men to forbear from making insulting uses of an advantage, nor the former the men to endure insult always. So far from our necessity being peace with America at any price, that we might have cotton, it was cotton from elsewhere at any price, that we might have peace with America. The incredible shortsightedness of our statesmen,-deserving the blame of the Manchester men, beyond all they can utter; and the immoveable perversity and blind avarice of the manufacturers, deserving that of the statesmen,—have united to leave England, with the finest cotton fields and the richest mines of labour on earth in her possession, a timid dependant on the stores of others. That dependence has been counted upon by the South, as their shield in insulting us; (for be it remembered that all the presidents we have had to complain of were their men ;) and, worse still, as their stay in rebelling against a government favourable to human freedom. It was the weakest point in our national machinery, one that was liable any day to involve us in war without and stagnation within. Statesmen saw it, heard that a little outlay would make India at least yield such supplies as would change America from a self-sufficient master into a useful friend: but they had reasons for doing nothing. Manufacturers heard of it, knew it; but they thought the American supply would last 'my day;' and that they could get a better return for their money by investing all in mills at home, than by using a part to develope supplies in India. They were wrong in fact; and totally mistook and misrepresented the lessons of their own boasted science of political economy.

Now, in a way more gradual, less disturbing, than any that could have been foretold, the American supply is stopped. If it continue to be so for some three years, we must suffer, and pay in increased price for cotton a sum which, had it been spent in improving the natural water-ways of India, would have yielded Manchester a higher per-centage on the money invested than the best mills ever built; and would have laden Liverpool with

cotton grown on British territory, by freemen, every one of whom would use the purchase money, in part, to buy British goods. That sum must now be a sheer loss to us, as utterly so as that spent by America on the war is to it; for it will take as much to open communications as if cotton was cheap. But with all that loss, with all the derangement of trade, the process of opening new, various, and inexhaustible sources of supply is going on, and, as the pinch becomes more felt, will proceed more rapidly. It was shortsighted not to begin it long ago, parsimonious not to spend great sums upon it, culpable not to improve providential means laid in our own lap. But to interrupt the process now would be madness.

The selfishness which made men so shortsighted as to be dependent on America, would now make them so shortsighted as to rivet that dependence for ever. 'We must have cotton,' they would say, 'even if we break the blockade!' And suppose you broke the blockade, and had cotton, what then? You would thereby say to the South, the most reckless and domineering set of men on this earth, 'We are your dependents, we actually cannot live without you; we must give up our honour, our national self-respect, our character before the world, to secure your services. Right happy would the South be; and before any long period you would either be eating the dust of untold humiliations, or at war with the cotton country for which you had sacrificed some of the highest considerations a nation has to value. It may be a hard trial to go through the present transition; but it is only one of those momentary pinches which, with a nation like England, serve to keep energy fresh, by giving new difficulties to vanquish; and, the crisis over, with India pouring a tide of cotton upon our shores, beside which what America could send is a driblet, and taking from us an amount of goods greater than three Americas ever will; other sources of supply, British, and not British, open, from the Nile to the Essequibo, from Natal to Fiji; and, above all, America herself removed from the dangerous position of a dispenser of our daily bread to the advantageous one of a friend on equal terms, England will have hopes before her which may Providence

realize !

If the dark flag that is unfurled as the banner of slavery by the right, slavery extended, slavery for all time, is to be known as the flag of a nation,-which may it never be !--let us hope that the last power to recognise it will be that which was the first to give freedom to the slave.

BRIEF LITERARY NOTICES.

History of Wesleyan Methodism. Vol. III. Modern Methodism. By George Smith, LL.D., F.A.S. Longmans.

1861.

IN approaching the completion of his arduous work, Dr. Smith has had to encounter difficulties of a different kind from those with which he had to contend in its earlier portions. It is never an easy task for the historian to describe scenes, or to relate events, in which men still living, or men whose friends and coadjutors are still living, must necessarily appear as the most prominent actors. The difficulty of history increases with its recency. In this third volume, there are no traces of diminished power. As in the former volumes, the style is everywhere perspicuous and manly, the narrative is everywhere clearly traced. The references here and there occurring to national or political events, as affecting Methodism, are always interesting, and sometimes extremely valuable. Of the author's thorough acquaintance with the principles and genius of Methodism, and of his ardent attachment to the Church of his choice, it would be superfluous for us to speak. Yet this attachment has by no means blinded his judgment, or inspired him with the unscrupulous spirit of partisanship. The difficulties naturally incident to a work of this kind have been greatly aggravated,' as the author justly says, 'in the period treated of in this volume, by the animosities and divisions which took place in the Connexion.' The first two chapters, which relate to the period between 1816 and 1827, are comparatively free from any such admixture; but from that period onwards to 1837, the historian's attention is occupied with the organ question at Leeds, with the case of J. R. Stephens, and with the agitation of Dr. Warren, a dreary and troubled decade, which, however, ended in the legal establishment of Wesleyan Methodism, and in the defeat of those who sought to invalidate its discipline. All this is related with great ability, accuracy, and spirit. The period from 1838 to 1843 embraces the jubilant year of the Centenary celebrations, and the happy period of rest which followed. An account of the opening of Didsbury

College, immediately after the Conference of 1843, brings the regular historical narrative to a conclusion. A supplementary book is added, consisting of three chapters. The first of these treats of 'the recent agitation: its causes, character, and results;' the second, of the relation of Methodism to the nation at large; the third, of the Methodism of the future.' To the author this must have been one of the most difficult, to the reader it will be one of the most valuable, portions of the work.

The subjects thus introduced, far too comprehensive and connexionally important to be entered upon in a brief notice like the present, may perhaps receive a fuller consideration before long, when we hope to present a more extended review of Dr. Smith's important work. It can scarcely be necessary to inform any of our readers that the position and character of its author are a sufficient guarantee for 'the spirit of perfect independence' in which, as he is careful to inform us, the work is written. Several times in the course of this volume this spirit is freely displayed, though never with the slightest tinge of rancour. Thus, in remarking (p. 148) upon the general administration of the Connexion, he observes that it is, at least, unfortunate that the discipline of the Connexion has scarcely ever been amended, except after serious loss;' qualifying, however, this observation by adding, 'We are sure it is most unjust to attribute this circumstance to any illiberal disposition on the part of the Conference: the ordinary working of such a vast machine is sure to create, year by year, sufficient cause for labour and anxiety in its administration.' And again, referring to the action taken in 1835, (pp. 343–349,) while it is regarded as 'evincing in a high degree the wisdom, fidelity, and independence of the Conference,' and while the concessions then made were 'conceived in a liberal spirit,' yet 'it is equally clear, these changes were made too late, and in a degree too limited fully to answer the intended purpose.' Such remarks are perfectly within the historian's province; and they add immensely to the weight of that general approval-most decisively expressed-with which Dr. Smith regards the course of connexional administration, taken as a whole, in the period under review. On one point only do we feel constrained to speak of this admirable work in qualified terms. The references to Dr. Bunting we do not regard with unmixed satisfaction. Dr. Bunting's intellectual power, his administrative ability, his general force of character, and the extent of his influence in Methodism, are not unjustly appreciated; still, when Dr. Smith feels called upon to say in explanation, (page 497,) that he does not unite with the revilers of this eminent minister,' it will at once be judged that his tone towards him is not altogether friendly; and more especially the remark, (page 498,) that in the acceptance of official positions and responsibilities which were thrust upon him, 'there was an obvious reason why the Doctor should have exercised great self-denial,’ appears to us a reflection of undeserved severity upon one of the most disinterested and one of the most unselfish ministers who have ever fought and suffered for the Church of Christ.

6

We regard this history as decus ac tutamen, at once an ornament and a defence of Methodism. It is equally distinguished by conciseness of statement and by fulness of information; by candour and by charity; by breadth of view and by exactness of detail; by ardent attachment to Methodism, and by unaffected catholicity towards the whole Christian Church. We congratulate Dr. Smith upon having achieved a work so honourable to himself, so beneficial to the public, and which possesses so many of the elements of permanency. We earnestly recommend it, and wish it a wide circulation.

Trans

Coheleth; commonly called the Book of Ecclesiastes. lated from the Original Hebrew, with a Commentary, Historical and Critical. By Christian D. Ginsburg. London: Longman and Co. 1861.

THE learned author of this large, elaborate, and valuable work will have spent the seven years, which he tells us were devoted to it, to little purpose, if a page or two in a Review are space enough for expounding its merits. We do not pretend to do this within any such limits; much less, can we here discuss at length a number of vexed questions belonging to Mr. Ginsburg's subject, on which we happen to agree or disagree with him. It is but justice, however, both to the writer and the public, to call attention to one of the best Commentaries on an Old Testament book, which the modern English press has produced, and to offer a few remarks on certain opinions and conclusions of the author, which we deem to be erroneous or doubtful. The general plan of the work embraces, first, a copious Critical and Historical Introduction, of which we shall speak by and by. Then follows the Commentary proper, with a new Translation of the Original Text. After this, we find the Translation repeated in a consecutive form without the breaks occasioned by notes. A group of Appendices brings up the rear, containing, among other important matter, a collation of the Syriac Version with the Hebrew of Coheleth, and, what the mass of Mr. Ginsburg's readers will value still more, a literal rendering into English of the entire Chaldee Paraphrase on Ecclesiastes. As a whole, our author's Translation of the sacred text must be pronounced an improvement upon the version in our Bibles. It is closer to the original, and in many instances easier to be understood. But, where changes occur, we often miss the grand old music of the language of our fathers; and, not to mention passages which are all but hopelessly obscure, we remark more than one or two cases, in which the obvious meaning is either overdone or made less intelligible than it was before. Weakness is strength in philology as well as mechanics. Nowhere is it more so than within the circle of the Hebrew and its cognates. And the more frequently a translator of Old Testament Scripture can render the simple copulative by its simplest modern equivalents, and the more scrupulous he is to avoid, so far as may be, the introduction of connecting links of speech, where his original does not supply them, the better for the exactness, the force, and even