take, for example, a politician for a statesman, a wordy professor of morality for one of its practical disciples, or infer from the existence of one useful art, trait, or accomplishment, that others must be present, or that distinction in one sphere of action confers fame in another, our real capital in great and good men is essentially reduced. For the benefit of the "detective police," likenesses of the principal rogues in the city of New York are arranged in a gallery. There are to be seen eminent individuals, public men in various departments of human enterprise, leading pick-pockets,"" leading burglars," "general thieves," "notable counterfeiters," robbers, forgers, and assassins. Upon looking at their countenances, feigned names, etc., the thought occurred to us, Is the wealth of the nation much enhanced by such possessions as are here represented? Would it be enhanced, if, on account of the superior intelligence of these men, their dexterity in the use of weapons, or handicraft at various trades, insinuating address and confidential manners, great and good qualities should be ascribed to them; if, after the Carlyle fashion, there should be inscribed upon their portraits" hero as king," "hero as priest," "hero as saint," "hero as man of letters?" We would not by this general comparison press the portrait of the third president of the United States into such companionship, but would have it remain in the gallery of American statesmen. complaint, however, begins when he is not truly represented; when through the laborious performance of Dr. Randall,-who, in his portraiture, viewed as a work of art, has mixed ample materials without seeming to know exactly how to use his brush,-assisted by the graceful sketching of the Review, the old and familiar character of Thomas Jefferson comes up with a new and radiant face; when qualities are ascribed to him which he never had; opinions which he never held; sentiments which he never uttered; when on account of his strong intellect, eminent services in behalf of his country, courteous manners and domestic attachments, he is projected in such gigantic proportions of moral excellence that all his imperfections fade away; when having filled one high office as chief of a party or chief of the state, he is exalted to another, and when this hero, as high priest of democracy, becomes ex officio a high priest in holy orders.

Dr. Johnson, in "Lives of the Poets," says in substance that compliance with times, and desire to please friends, constitute the great bane of biography. There never was a fuller confirmation of the truth of this saying than in the new version of Mr. Jefferson's private history. The publication of his correspondence, in 1829, by his grandson, to whom the papers were bequeathed, was not quite satisfactory all round the circle of his admirers and surviving friends. The Review is pleasant and particular over that selection, and discourses upon its merits in this style: "The publication of Mr. Jefferson's writings did much to change the impression of his character in the minds of the younger portion of his countrymen, and they saw with surprise that the man, so held in abhorrence, had been engaged during his whole career in laying open his heart to his numerous correspondents, avowing most freely his opinions on public events and abstract topics, and that no unworthy sentiment, no base motive, no selfish views could be traced in a single line of the voluminous collection." Professor Tucker, however, in his Memoirs, takes an opposite view of the same production. "The maledictions of his enemies," he says, "have of late years been more frequent than the commendations of his friends. From the want of caution in making that publication" (his papers and Our correspondence), "owing, it is presumed, to a mistaken opinion of the claims of the public, the ill-will which had been felt against Mr. Jefferson received a new impulse, and was, in a measure, imparted to a new generation." The North American, too, felt that after all something was wanting, as a means of knowing the true character of the man, before the advent of Dr. Randall's biography. It speaks of the value of having the testimony of those who saw Mr. Jefferson most closely and for the longest time, and then says: "Mr. Randall has produced this for us by direct questioning of Mr. Jefferson's descendants." Let us see, then, how this gentleman proceeded to obtain the desired information by his "direct questioning?" The manner in which this was done we may infer from the inquiries put to Dr. Dunglison, and from his response, which we quote. "You ask," says Dr. Dunglison, "what were his private virtues that appeared conspicuous to all his acquaintances. I would say,

in your language, that he was always, in my while the letter-writer speaks only of what observation, peculiarly decorous, modest, she presumed to be her grandfather's sentiand decent in all things."" With such ques-ments, the reader can judge which of the two tioning of Mr. Jefferson's descendants, it is not surprising that their replies should cover more than all debatable ground, and that there should be no longer "something wanting," but something to spare.

descriptions lacks the necessary gradations and qualifications of expression, and whether the "Jackson portrait" is "too highly colored."

was obscured by a passing cloud. Everything, in short, in these Memoirs seems to be explained in a way most satisfactory to the surviving friends and relations of the great statesman, from grave questions in politics and theology, down to his predilections for "red breeches," for which he was distinguished as our minister near the court of France.

Thomas Jefferson Randolph, when quesDaniel Webster, who visited the " sage of tioned, stated in a letter to Dr. Randall that Monticello" in 1824, had criticised, in a he had seen in the countenance of his grandprivate correspondence, his person, dress, father expressions of sorrow, but never the manners, and opinions; had mentioned, slightest expression of anger or unquietness. among other peculiarities, his being "ad- Some of the elder members of the family dicted to French tastes, French manners, and had seen such expressions in two instances, French principles; " had said that though he and had spoken of them as remarkable. was "often unjustly attacked by the Feder- This incongruity required explanation and alists, they did him no injustice in charging conference. Two anecdotes are furnished upon him a preference for French opinions, which are minutely related, giving the exwhether in politics, morals, or religion." act time, place, and circumstances in which "These descriptions," says Dr. Randall, this phenomenon was visible, and "the noble "appearing to us to lack some necessary and serene countenance of Mr. Jefferson" gradations and qualifications of expression, we sought an opinion on them from one as familiar with Mr. Jefferson, his views and modes of expression, as one ever was, and received the following reply: "My dear Mr. Randall, Mr. Webster's description of Mr. Jefferson's personal appearance does not please me; though I will not stop to quarrel with any of the details. The general impression it was calculated to produce seemed to me an unfavorable one; that is, a person who had never seen my grandfather, would, from Mr. Webster's description, have thought him rather an ill-looking man, which certainly he was not. It would, however, be difficult for me to give an accurate description of one I so tenderly loved and deeply venerated." Mr. Webster had referred to Jefferson's expressed alarm at the prospect of seeing Jackson president of the United States, and to his strictures on Wirt's Life of Patrick Henry. Dr. Randall offers the following testimony obtained from the source already referred to. "Mr. Webster has too highly colored the Jackson portrait. I do not remember to have heard Mr. Jefferson speak of Jackson except with reference to the general idea that a (military) chieftain was no proper head of a peaceful republic. In like manner I never heard him speak of Wirt's Life of Patrick Henry with the amount of severity recorded by Mr. Webster." As the observations of the latter, however, are specific, relating to what he saw and heard,

Now if these extracts and our comments upon them seem to any person to be frivolous, we reply that in our opinion they are necessary to a correct understanding of the motives of the committee of conference and adjustment over the dilapidated condition of the character before us, and as preliminary to what we have chiefly in view in writing this article-the religious opinions of Thomas Jefferson. Some of our readers may not be aware of the serious and combined efforts of his friends to exalt him in the estimation of his countrymen as having been eminent in piety, and in case of a failure to deliver him from the charge of freethinking or unbelief. Dr. Randall, the principal expounder of the Jeffersonian creed, opens a long chapter with the assertion that " Mr. Jefferson was a public porfessor of his belief in the Christian religion." What is meant by a public professor of belief in the Christian religion, may be inferred from the following specifications: "In all his most important early state papers, in his inaugural addresses, and in many of his annual messages, there are

more or less pointed recognitions of God and erson has also used, once in his "Notes on providence." "He substantially avows the Virginia," and again in one of his letters, God of his faith to be the God of revela- the phrase "our holy religion,” as he would tion, declares his belief in the efficacy of speak of the Holy Inquisition. But there prayer, and the duty of ascription of praise" is not in his published works a single recog[of ascribing praise] "to the author of all nition of the Bible or any part of it as a revemercies; speaks of the Christian religion, lation from God. On the contrary, he denies as professed in this country, as a benign re- its truth and divine inspiration. This is ligion evincing the favor of Heaven. Had his said with a full understanding of the views wishes been consulted the symbol borne on of some of his descendants, to which our our national seal would have contained our author and the Review have given publicity. public profession of Christianity as a nation. As these opinions are presumed to throw There is nothing in his writings or in the new light on this subject, we transfer a few history of his life to show that his public of them to our pages. "From a letter declarations were insincere or thrown out written in 1834, in answer to one from a for mere effect. We find him once, like political friend of Mr. Jefferson, who wished John Adams and Hamilton, advocating a to exculpate him from the charge of infidelity fast day for popular effect. This is all, nor in religion: 'He called himself a Christian. does it in any way conflict with the declara- He always said he was a Christian in what tion of the text." ... "On the contrary, he understood to be the right sense of the his most confidential writings sustain his word; and according to the doctrines which public professions, and advance beyond them he believed to be truly those of Jesus. His into the avowal of a belief in a future state character, in spite of the mistakes which of rewards and punishment." This is cer- prevailed among many persons in regard to tainly a narrow creed, in its present shape, it, was essentially Christian, and could have to distinguish "a public professor of belief been formed under no other influences than in the Christian religion!" Its tangible those of the gospel. . . . He entertained points are not distinctive, since they might the greatest possible admiration and venerbe avowed by a public professor of Moham- ation for the character and doctrines of medanism or Judaism, such as "belief in Jesus. . . . Nor was his study of the Scripthe efficacy of prayer," and in a future state, tures entirely confined to the New Testa"recognitions of God and providence more ment. ... His sympathies were much or less,"-other parts of it either were not stronger with the Unitarian than any other professed even in public by the person to of the religious denominations. whom they are ascribed, or they have no known and esteemed Dr. Priestley. I repeat, bearing upon his religious belief. The again, my firm belief that such a character avowal substantially of the God of his faith as my dear grandfather's could have been to be "the God of revelation," is not found formed under no other influences than those in any of his writings. In numerous ex- of the gospel; that there is in the world tracts from messages and addresses, select- but one tree capable of bearing such fruit.'" ed by Dr. Randall, to prove his assertion, We turn for the present from these obserthere is but one allusion to the Christian re-vations of one who "knew him intimately," ligion, which is in these words: "Enlight- to the record of another who knew him betened by a benign religion, professed, indeed, and practised in various forms." Mr. Jeff

*What Dr. Randall calls a symbol of Christianity was the representation of the children of Israel in the wilderness, led by a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night, on one side of the seal,

and on the other the Saxon chiefs, Hengist and Horsa.

We find him, too, refusing to proclaim fastings and thanksgivings in accordance with the custom of his predecessors, and sending an address to Mr. Lincoln to be corrected, with the remark, "You understand the temper of those in the North, and can weaken it to their stomachs; it is at present seasoned to the Southern taste."

He had

ter, that of Mr. Jefferson himself, which contains such full and precise statements of his religious views and experiences that neither our author nor one of his assistant compilers nor favoring critics has thought it wise to expound them. This record is read in those very letters in which "he laid open his whole heart to his numerous correspond ents," the "incautious publication of which" Mr. Tucker so much laments, as having "increased the maledictions of his enemies and imparted a new impulse of ill-will to a

From the tenor of his writings, however, we are inclined to give Jefferson credit for theism, the "usefulness of virtue," and for an assent to the morality of the teachings of Christ, and a belief in a future state. From these affirmations his speculations ran into ridicule of the distinctive doctrines of Christianity, and a denial of its supernatural origin. He speaks of the Hebrew Scriptures and their authors in such terms as the following :

new generation." There can be no misunder- | favor the conclusion that the idea of God standing about the meaning and design of was not a point in his speculations. We these letters. Their dates range through quote a remarkable paragraph in a letter admore than half a century. Those on reli- dressed to Peter Carr, in which he is engious topics evince the full maturity of the joined to question boldly even the Divine writer's intellect. "They were," as he says, existence, and is sustained by this assurance: "the results of a life of study and reflection."" If your inquiries end in the belief that The preparation of the most obnoxious of there is no God, you will find incentives to them beguiled his leisure hours after he was virtue in the comfort and pleasure you feel seventy years of age, when he had, as he in its exercise, and the love of others which says, one foot in the grave; and being com- it will procure you." municated, under the seal of secrecy, during his lifetime, to persons holding the same sceptical opinions, he was careful not to be misunderstood. Some of these letters from time to time met the public eye. Two of them were published before his death, in the "Theological Works of Thomas Paine," as favoring the sentiments of the “ Age of Reason." To this correspondence of Mr. Jefferson, to his free speeches and familiar conversations, to his frank disclosures in private circles and around the festive board, -in all of which, according to Mr. Tucker, he was "particularly unguarded" in evincing his hostility to Christianity,-must be attributed "the excess of animosity which he experienced beyond any of his political associates." To these and to his open approval of some notorious atheists and deists in France and America, and to many of his public measures and official acts, must be attributed that deep current of religious feeling which set so strongly against him during his life, and which, as we have seen, has increased in force since the publication of his writings. We shall make free use of this confidential correspondence, or real autobiography, in which it will appear with what discretion it has been affirmed that "no unworthy sentiment, no base motive, can be traced in a single line of the voluminous collection," and that the character here delineated "could have been formed under no other influences than those of the gospel." This task has been partially performed by "The fumes of the most disordered imother writers. But the recent publication of aginations were recorded in this religious the complete works of the distinguished au- code, as special communications of the Dethor of these letters, in connection with the ity; and as it could not but happen, in the incautious disclosures of his friends, furnish course of ages, that events would now and additional materials for a synopsis of Jef- then turn up, to which some of these vague ferson's Body of Divinity. We do not main-rhapsodies might be accommodated, by the tain, with Mr. Dwight, that Jefferson was an aid of allegories, figures, types, and other atheist, in the popular sense of the term-tricks upon words, they have not only prethough some passages in his letters seem to served their credit with the Jews of all sub

"Their ethics were not only imperfect, but often inconsistent with the sound dictates of reason and morality. His [Jesus's] was the reformation of some articles in the religion of the Jews, as taught by Moses. That sect had presented for the object of their worship a being of terrific character, cruel, vindictive, capricious, and unjust." "Moses had either not believed in a future state, or had not thought it essential to be taught to the people."

"Moses had bound the Jews to many idle ceremonies, mummeries, and observances, of no effect towards procuring the social utilities."

"Jesus had to walk on the perilous confines of reason and religion, and a step to right or left might place him within the grasp of the priests of the superstition, a bloodthirsty race, as cruel and remorseless as the being whom they represented as family God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, the local God of Israel."

sequent times, but are the foundation of much of the religions of those who have schismatized from them."

the New Testament. In a letter to his sceptical friend, Dr. Benjamin Rush, accompanying what he call his "creed on paper," or "syllabus of an estimate of the merits of the doctrines of Jesus, compared with those of

"He alleges that the Jews alone present the doctrine of the unity of God. Yet their God would be deemed a very indifferent man others," the following introductory passage with us; and it was to correct these mis-occurs:representations of the Deity, that Jesus preached."

.

"I am a Christian in the only sense in which Jesus wished any one to be-sincerely attached to his doctrines in preference to all others, ascribing to himself every human excellence, and believing he never claimed any other."

From the syllabus itself we take a few sentences which bear upon the author's view of Jesus Christ. He ascribes to Jesus doctrines more pure than those of the most correct of the philosophers, but adds :—

after the transactions had passed. . . He fell an early victim, . . . his reason not having yet attained the maximum of its energy, nor the course of his preaching presented occasions for developing a complete system of morals. Hence the doctrines which he really delivered were defective, as a whole, and fragments of what he did deliver have come to us mutilated, misstated, and often

"You ask me" (to John Adams) "if I have seen the work of Never; nor did the question occur to me before, Where get we the ten commandments? The Book, indeed, gives them to us verbatim; but where did it get them? For itself tells us they were written with the finger of God, on tables of stone, which were destroyed by Moses. It specifies those on the second set of tables in different language and substance, "The committing to writing his life and still without saying how the others were re-doctrines fell on unlettered and ignorant men, ceived. But the whole history of these books who wrote, too, from memory, and long is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to attempt minute inquiries into them; and such tricks have been played with their texts and the texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right to entertain much doubt as to what parts are genuine." These extracts, it will be seen, contain the author's sense of the national God of Israel, the character of Moses, the moral and ceremonial law, the divine authority of the reli- unintelligible." gious system of the Jews, their typical, miracu- The following explanation of the Syllabus, lous, and prophetic communication, the gen-written by Jefferson but six years before his uineness of the Pentateuch and "other books death, is contained in a letter to another relating to them," which comprise the largest sceptical friend :portion of the Hebrew Scriptures. One of the descendants of Mr. Jefferson remarks, according to the Review, that "there were parts of the Old Testament for which he felt the most fervent admiration. I have heard him repeat from memory the most beautiful parts of David's lamentation over Saul and Jonathan, the mourning over Absalom, as well as several of the Psalms, such as the fifteenth and twenty-third. It may be worth while to remark that his voice and manner were particularly impressive when he read aloud passages from the Old Testament, or repeated the Psalms." In the face of our quotations no one will pretend, probably, that bolism. My eulogies, too, may be founded admiration of select passages of the Old Scriptures, or the repeating of the Psalms in an impressive manner, involves belief in their divine inspiration.

We pass to consider Jefferson's opinions of

"But while the Syllabus is meant to place the character of Jesus in its true light, as no imposter himself, but a great reformer of the Hebrew code of religion, it is not to be understood that I am with him in all his doctrines. I am a materialist; he takes the side of spiritualism; he preaches the efficacy of repentance towards forgiveness of sins; I require a counterpoise of gool works to redeem it. . It is the innocence

of his character, the purity and sublimity of his moral precepts, the eloquence of his inculcations, that I so much admire; sometimes, indeed, needing indulgence to eastern hyper

on a postulate which all may not be ready to grant. Among the sayings and discourses imputed to him, by his biographers, I find many passages of fine imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence; and