faculty is acquired, it seems neceffary to examine, in the first place, that particular clafs of objects with which tafte is converfant; feparating the refpective effects of the various ingredients, which may be blended in the compofition of the beauty of the objects fo examined. In analyzing fuch complex beauties we muft proceed on the fame general principles, by which we are guided in investigating the phyfical and chemical properties, of material fubftances; that is, we must have recourfe to a series of obfervations and experiments, on beautiful objects of various kinds; attending to the agreeable and difagreeable effects, which we experience, in the cafe of thefe diversified combinations. Such an analysis feems abfolutely neceffary, to thofe who wifh to ftudy the principles of Beauty, with a view to their practical application. "Whether their aim may be to produce new combinations of their own, or to pronounce on the merits and defects of those executed by others, it is of effential importance, that they should be able to separate what is pleafing from what obftructs the agreeable effect. Independently of experience, however, the most exquifite fenfibility, feconded by the most acute intelleft, cannot lead to a fingle conclufion concerning the particular circumftances from which the pleasure or uneafinefs arifes. In proportion, indeed, to the degree of the obferver's fenfibility, he will be delighted with the former and offended with the latter; but till he is able to draw the line diftinctly between them, his fenfibility will afford no lights of which he can avail himself in future, either as an artist or as a judge. It is in this diftinguishing or discriminating percep tion, that the power denoted by the word tafte feems to me chiefly to confift." P. 441. The author next points out the difference between corporeal and intellectual analyfes, and fhows how the latter, though conducted on the fame principles, are fo much more rapidly made than the former; the refult appearing, in the man of cultivated taste, to be almost inftantaneous, like our com. mon eftimates of diftance by the perceptions of vifion. The Effay concludes with various obfervations on the different kinds of tafte-philofophical and fentimental, general and local. Thefe are for the moft part juft, though not perhaps arranged in the manner beft adapted, to fix the attention of the reader; but we could have wifhed that the fevere animadverfions on John fon's Lives of the Poets had been fuppreffed, not merely because we think differently of that work ourfelves, but because there feems to be no prudence in drawing the attention of the reader, to the comparative merits of Johnfon and Stewart as biographers. The concluding Effay is on the culture of certain intellec tual habits, connected with the first elements of tafte. It is not, however, the author's aim, to explain how a vitiated or falfe tafte may be corrected; or an imperfect tafte trained by culture, to a ftate of higher perfection. His object is to enquire, how far it may be poffible for an individual, whofe thoughts have been wholly engroffed by other purfuits, to bring his mind into that track of obfervation and ftudy, by the fteady purfuit of which alone, the power of tafte is to be gradually formed. This he thinks may certainly be done, by cultivating the power of imagination; not that inventive or creative power, which is peculiar to poets and other men of high genius; but that power which readily feizes and prefents to the mind, in a lively manner, the combinations which have been formed by others. This apprehenfive power of the ima gination, as he terms it, is to be cultivated by experience under judicious guides; but for the methods of cultivation we must refer to the Effay itfelf, as well as for a confutation of the very general opinion, that imagination is in its state of highest perfection, in thofe rude periods of fociety, when ali the faculties of the mind fhoot up wild and free. We have now taken a furvey of this elegant volume, and declare again, that it appears to us in every refpect worthy of its author. It is not however equal throughout; and we confefs, that we were lefs pleafed with the Effays which conftitute the second part of it, than with thofe which conftitute the firft. The Effays on the beautiful and fublime, contain indeed many excellent obfervations, neatly and elegantly expreffed; but in the two Effays on tafte, we feemed to feel the want of that precifion, which generally characterizes the flyle of Mr. Stewart, and renders it fo proper for the difcuffion of abftract queftions. In thefe Effays too, the author makes long quotations from himself, a practice which is not frequent among good authors, and which can feldom, if ever, have a good effect. This however is not all. He repeatedly quits his fubject before it is finifhed, promifing to refume it in fome future work; but will the purchasers of this work be pleased, or indeed have they reafon to be pleased, with fuch conduct? The author indeed concludes the vo lume with expreffing, what he had so often expressed before, fome hope of foon refuming a more fyftematical analyfis of our intellectual powers and capacities; but was it perfectly correct to agitate queftions concerning taste, and leave them undecided, until the period of that refumption, merely be cause the fize of his volume fuggefted the propriety of pauf ing for the prefent? ART. ART. VII. The National Religion the Foundation of National Education: A Sermon, preached in the Cathedral Church of St. Paul, London, on Thursday, June 13, 1811: being the Time of the Yearly Meeting of the Children educated in the Charity-Schools in and about the Cities of London and Weftminster. To which is added, a Collection of Notes, containing Proofs and Illuftrations. By Herbert Marsh, D.D. FR. S. Margaret Profeffor of Divinity, in the University of Cambridge. Preached and printed at the Request of the Society for promoting Chriftian Knowledge. 8vo. pp. 33. Is. Rivingtons. 1811. IF any thing which is incapable of mathematical demonftra tion may be confidered as a moral axiom, it is furely the pofition fo ably argued in this difcourfe, that The National Religion fhould be the foundation of National Education, The learned preacher taking for his text, Proverbs xxii. 6. "Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it;" invefligates and analy fes the popular fyftem of education, executed by Mr. Lancafter, or under his direction, and now fanctioned by all ranks of fociety; points out and explains its defects; and like a faithful defender of the established church, animadverts on the pernicious confequences to which it may lead. In doing this, we hardly know which moft to admire, the acutenefs and ability of his arguments, or the very temperate language in which he enforces them. The difcourfe commences with the obfervation, that our religious reformers being well aware that if truth be not at a very early age inflilled into the mind, its place will be occupied by error, wifely intermixed the principles of that faith, of the truth of which they were fully fatisfied, with the firft elements of education. In the very firft Chriftian office of Baptifm, it is required that the infant fhall be taught, fo foon as he fhall be able to learn them, the Lord's Prayer, the ten Commandments, and the Creed, and all other things which a Chriftian ought to know and believe to his foul's health. Thus the foundation was laid for a system of religious education; and it was moreover enjoined by the Rubrics that this fhould be conducted under the direction of the Parochial Clergy, thus it appears that a Church-of-England education is clearly prefcribed, and, as appears from the 77th Canon, which was confirmed by the Act of Uniformity, prescribed from authority. The Liturgy, therefore, may be confidered as the repofitory of the National Religion established by law. Can, therefore, any mode of education be properly entitled to be called national, when the children do not attend attend the Service of the Established Church? This is, however, intended to apply to the profeffed members of the Establishment: the members of other churches may adopt fuch mode of education as they may think beft adapted to their own principles, but do our brethren act wifely in promoting and affifting fuch fyftems, where the Liturgy is not only neglected, but where it is a matter of indifference whether the children frequent a Conventicle or the Church? Surely fuch a conduct is utterly inconfiftent, and however men may be deluded by the feducing terms of Liberality and Philanthropy, if we flarve our own to feed the children of ftrangers, we neglect a primary duty. Such is the fubftance of the argument which introduces the following obfervations from the preacher: "It is well known, that a fyftem of education, conducted by a very intelligent and active Diffenter in this country, a fyftem, in which, of course, as he himself conducts it, the doctrine and difcipline of the Church of England form no part, has, during the laft feven years, received very extenfive patronage from men of all ranks and profeffions. This fyftem he conducts on the avowed principle, that "education ought not to be fubfervient to the "propagation of the peculiar tenets of any fect." Hence no other parts of Christianity are there profeffed, than what he terms its "uncontroverted principles." Whether our religion, when thus curtailed, does not lofe the character of Chriftianity altogether, or whether enough of it remains to fatisfy the demands of any other religious party in this country, it is certain that the doctrines of Chriftianity, as taught by the Church of England, have no admiffion there. That Difenters therefore, Diffenters of every defcription, fhould join in promoting such a plan of education, is not a matter of surprise. To fuperfede the parochial and charity fchools, which our forefathers had founded on the maxim in the text, of training up a child in the way that he should go, and to raise up feminaries in their stead, where the children should not be trained in the way of the Established Church, was to them an advantage, too obvious to be overlooked. If no predilection for any peculiar fect was thereby excited, one point at least was gained, and that an important one,—that the children educated in such feminaries, would acquire an indifference to the establishment. And not only indifference, but feceffion from the Eftablished Church will be the final refult. "Education, on whatever principles it be conducted, must have fome influence, either favourable or unfavourable, on the established religion. Even neutrality, however ftrictly obferv. ed, is in this cafe a kind of hoftility. It is hoftility to the Establishment, to deprive our children of that early attachment to to it, which an education in the Church cannot fail to infpire, and which, if loft in their youth, can never after be recovered. "If this lofs were compenfated by any folid advantage, ob tained by that neutrality for the general caufe of religion, we fhould have lefs reafon to lament the injury, which we ourselves fuftain. But no fuch advantage can be expected from fuch neutra. lity. For there is less probability, that men will finally embrace the truth, if their education difmiffes them unattached to any partiz cular religion, than if they had been educated in fome religious fyftem. Among the perfons difmiffed in this ftate of fuppofed impartiality; how small must be the number of thofe, who will have the leisure, the inclination, and the ability, to weigh the argumenrs for reli gious opinions? And when we further confider, that the question now relates to perfons educated in fchools of public charity, an union of thofe qualities in fuch perfons can never be expected. But if thofe qualities are wanting, there muft alfo be wanting the knowledge, and the judgment, which are neceffary to direct men in the choice of their religion. In fuch circumftances, they will either choose no religion; or, if they choose any, it will be mere accident, that they fall on the right one. Inftead therefore of advantage from that neutrality, we may certainly expect the re verfe. + "But_the_neutrality professed is virtually difregarded, and hence indifference to our religion, which the mere circumftance of not being brought up to it cannot fail to produce, is not the whole extent of the evil to be apprehended from this fyftem. Indeed, neutrality in religion it is hardly poffible to maintain. If we adopt a Creed, we cannot expect, that all parties fhould agree to it. If we adopt no Creed, we differ from all who have a Creed. We cannot be negative in refpect to Creeds, without pofitive oppofition to thofe who maintain them. But the educator in quef tion has formally declared, that he objects to Creeds in general and he has declared it in the work, which is intended to defcribe his plan of education. His fcholars, therefore, who neceffarily imbibe the fentiments of their mafter, will foon acquire a contempt of the national Creed. The Office of Baptifm, where the learn ing of it is enjoined, and the Office of Confirmation, where the knowledge of it is required as an indifpenfable condition, will foor be regarded as the rites of bigotry and fuperftition. Can the refult then of fuch an education be doubtful? Will the children, thus educated, have to chcofe, when they come to years of difcre tion, whether they fhall be Churchmen, or not? No! They will long before have decided against the Church. "When we further confider, that this fyftem of education has in other refpects fo much to recommend it; that the mechanical part has advantages, which no other fyftem poffeffes; that reading,' writing, and arithmetic are taught by it, under one master, tó hundreds of children, at a moderate expence; that these useful arts are |