which are gained by the powers in nature of a superabundant multiplication; and, then, to shew, that these advantages are so many reasons for appointing that system of animal hostilities, which we are endeavouring to account for.

In almost all cases nature produces her supplies with profusion. A single cod fish spawns, in one season, a greater number of eggs, than all the inhabitants of England amount to. A thousand other instances of prolific generation might be stated, which, though not equal to this, would carry on the increase of the species with a rapidity which outruns calculation, and to an immeasurable extent. The advantages of such a constitution are two: first, that it tends to keep the world always full; whilst, secondly, it allows the proportion between the several species of animals to be differently modified; as different purposes require, or as different situations may afford for them room and food. Where this vast fecundity meets with a vacancy fitted to receive the species, there it operates with its whole effect; there it pours in its numbers, and replenishes the waste.'—

This superfecundity, though of great occasional use and importance, exceeds the ordinary capacity of nature to receive or support its progeny. All superabundance supposes destruction, or must destroy itself. Perhaps there is no species of terrestrial animals whatever, which would not overrun the earth, if it were permitted to multiply in perfect safety; or of fish, which would not fill the ocean: at least, if any single species were left to their natural increase without disturbance or restraint, the food of other species would be exhausted by their maintenance. It is necessary, therefore, that the effects of such prolific faculties be curtailed.'

What further shews, that the system of destruction amongst animals holds an express relation to the system of fecundity; that they are parts indeed of one compensatory scheme, is, that, in each species, the fecundity bears a proportion to the smallness of the animal, to the weakness, to the shortness of its natural term of life, and to the dan. gers and enemies by which it is surrounded. An elephant produces but one calf: a butterfly lays six hundred eggs. Birds of prey seldom produce more than two eggs: the sparrow tribe, and the duck tribe, frequently sit upon a dozen. In the rivers we meet with a thousand minnows for one pike; in the sea, a million of herrings for a single shark. Compensation obtains throughout. Defencelessness and devastation are repaired by fecundity.

We have dwelt the longer upon these considerations, because, the subject to which they apply, namely, that of animals devouring one another, forms the chief, if not the only instance in the works of the Deity, of an economy, stamped by marks of design, in which the character of utility can be called in question. The case of venomous animals is of much inferior consequence to the case of prey, and, in some degree, is also included under it.'

Though Dr. P. does not attempt an universal solution of the Origin of Evil, his views of this subject are extremely rational and consolatory. Our minds are somewhat reconciled to Im

perfections,

perfections, pain, disease, death, and external evils, when they are contemplated through this philosophic medium.

The distinctions of civil life, he observes, are liable to be regarded as evils by those who sit under them, but in my opinion with very little reason;' and his explanation conveys so excellent a moral lesson, that we are induced to transcribe

it:

In the first place, the advantages which the higher conditions of life are supposed to confer, bear no proportion in value to the advantages which are bestowed by nature. The gifts of nature always surpass the gifts of fortune. How much, for example, is activity better than attendance; beauty than dress; appetite, digestion, and tranquil bowels, than the artifices of cookery, or than forced, costly, or far-fetched dainties!

It is not necessary to contend, that the advantages derived from wealth are none, (under due regulations they are certainly considerable,) but that they are not greater than they ought to be. Money is the sweetener of human toil; the substitute for coercion ; the reconciler of labour with liberty. It is, moreover, the stimulant of enterprise in all projects and undertakings, as well as of diligence in the most beneficial arts and employments. Now did affluence, when possessed, contribute nothing to happiness, or nothing beyond the mere supply of necessaries; and the secret should come to be discovered; we might be in danger of losing great part of the uses, which are, at present, derived to us through this important medium. Not only would the tranquillity of social life be put in peril by the want of a motive to attach men to their private concerns; but the satisfaction which all men receive from success in their respective occupations, which collectively constitutes the great mass of human comfort, would be done away in its very principle.

With respect to station, as it is distinguished from riches, whether it confer authority over others, or be invested with honors which apply solely to sentiment and imagination, the truth is, that what is gained by rising through the ranks of life, is not more than sufficient to draw forth the exertions of those who are engaged in the pursuits which lead to advancement, and which, in general, are such as ought to be encouraged. Distinctions of this sort are subjects much more of com. petition than of enjoyment: and in that competition their use consists. It is not, as hath been rightly observed, by what the Lord Mayor teels in his coach, but by what the apprentice feels who gazes at him, that the public is served.'

Another difficulty with which Natural Theology is pressed, arising from so great an appearance of chance in the world, is well obviated by this rational Philosopher; who, in searching for a general solution of all those objections to the Divine Goodness which have been deduced from the evils of the present life, refers us to a view of it as a state of probation:

" We

We assert the most probable supposition to be, that it is a state of moral probation; and that many things in it suit with this hypothesis, which suit with no other. It is not a state of unmixed happiness, or of happiness simply: it is not a state of designed miscry, or of misery simply: it is not a state of retribution: it is not a state of punishment. It suits with none of these suppositions. It accords much better with the idea of its being a condition calculated for the production, exercise, and improvement, of moral qualities, with at view to a future state, in which these qualities, after being so produced, exercised, and improved, may, by a new and more favoring constitution of things, receive their reward, or become their own. If it be said, that this is to enter upon a religious rather than a philosophical consideration, I answer that the name of religion ought to form no objection, if it shall turn out to be the case, that the more religious our views are, the more probability they contain. The degree of beneficence, of benevolent intention, and of power, exercised in the construction of sensitive beings, goes strongly in favor, not only of a creative, but of a continuing care, that is, of a ruling Providence. The degree of chance which appears to prevail in the world requires to be reconciled with this hypothesis. Now it is one thing to maintain the doctrine of Providence along with that of a future state, and another thing without it. In my opinion, the two doctrines must stand or fall together.'

Connected with the doctrine of a Future State, is that of the Resurrection of the Body; to which Dr. P. discovers something analogous in the economy of Nature. In this respect, however, he is not original, and will not be generally deemed satisfactory. If he may be thought to have pushed his argument too far in some instances, and not far enough in others, he must be acknowleged so to have prosecuted his undertaking as to have added an additional laurel to his brow. In this volume, he may be said to have demonstrated the most important truths, to have induced us to view the Universe as the temple of the Deity, and to have inspired us with rational and indelible sentiments of Adoration. It must be delightful to the pious mind, to trace the perfections of the Creator written on the works of his hand; and to be assured that it is as much a principle of sound Philosophy as of Revelation, that Religion is Wisdom.

ART. V. The History of the Wars which arose out of the French Revolution: To which is prefixed, a Review of the Causes of that Event. By Alexander Stephens, of the Honourable Society of the Middle Temple, Esq. 2 Vols. Large Quarto, fine Paper. pp. nearly 700 in each. 31. 38. Boards. R. Phillips. 1803.

detail the particulars of a warfare so extensive, so pe-To culiar in its nature, and so important in its consequences, REV. Nov. 1803. T

as

as that which began with the declaration of war by France against the King of Hungary and Bohemia, and which closed with the treaty of Amiens, is certainly not an ordinary undertaking. The man who imposes on himself so arduous a task ought to be a favourite of the historic Muse, should possess skill in composition, be master of a simple flowing style, and yet have glowing language at command; he ought to have industry to brave the trouble necessary to clear up doubts, and to reconcile seeming contradictions, in order to form a luminous and consistent narrative; he should be endowed with sagacity to sound the measures of cabinets, the secret plans of commanders, and the deliberations of military councils; his mind, devoted to truth alone, ought to be superior to bias; his habits and studies should be such as are adapted to his subject; he ought to be well informed respecting the places which were the scenes of the exploits related, and he should have lived in habitual intercourse with the leaders and principal actors in the great drama which he sketches.

How far this member of an honourable society, who offers the present volumes to public notice, stands thus qualified for the high character in which he ventures to appear, our readers shall be enabled to judge by the extracts which we shall lay before them. For ourselves, however, we cannot refrain from declaring, that we discover in his pages little of the enthusiasm of genius, no indications of his having consumed the midnight oil in poring over the great masters of the historic art, no traces of that improbus labor so essentially requisite in the province which he has assumed, no zeal like that of old Froissart, nor any sagacity such as that which surprized the Duc d'Epernon when perusing the relations of Davila: nor can we acquit him altogether on the score of fidelity, since omissions occur in his accounts which must be ascribed to partiality; while it may be presumed that the purlieus of the Temple, and the contests of Westminster Hall, do not supply the best school for forming an historian of the revolutionary war.

The work is certainly extensive, and it is magnificent in its paper, type, &c.: but it seems to us to be principally a digest of former publications on the subject; though, at the same time, some of the most able and authentic of them have escaped notice. We have also to complain that the connection of the military with the civil history is not sufficiently traced; that, in the chain of events, important links are broken; that interesting traits are overlooked; and that the whole consists too much of a general abstract narrative.

If, however, we cannot allow to this performance, as a whole, the claim of superior merit, many of its parts de

serve.commendation; and if the style cannot boast of high finish, it is in general clear and easy, and often animated. In several respects, the work forms a convenient repository, and. will be deemed interesting and satisfactory by the great bulk of readers: but it might have been more acceptable in a modest and cheaper form, than in its present appearance in a garb of splendour, which becomes only the productions of eminent talents, and will recommend it only to those who consider a library merely as furniture.

If an author happens not to set any great value on his own labour, he should recollect that some of his readers may have no time to throw away, and that the price of books is high. Had these reflections duly operated on the mind of Mr. Stephens, he would probably have confined himself, in his elabo rate preliminary discourse, to the immediate causes of the revolution; and would have spared himself the trouble of sketching the state of Europe from the time of the Romans to the present day. It cannot be denied, to use the words of this author, that a large portion of Europe applauded the first attempts of the French to meliorate their political situation: but it may well be supposed that they regarded more the object, than the means used to attain it. If wise and good men, not examining narrowly the proceedings of the French agitators, gave their approbation to the early stages of the revolution, we do not see how it is possible that they should at this day feel pleasure in the recollection of them, or (with the author) refer to them with satisfaction, and talk of the glories of the 14th of July. At the moment, they were joyfully hailed because there was room for hoping that they might produce good: but now that their fruits have been seen, we are at a loss to conjecture what that ground can be, which can lead a rational being to describe them in the language of exultation. The historian of the revolutionary wars must, above all others, bet aware of the incalculable ills which they produced to France and to Europe; of the check (probably fatal) which they gave to the ameliorations which at that period were progressive in every eivilized state; of their having led to the overthrow of several independent governments, to the extinction of some of the most free and prosperous communities; and of their having terminated in the subjugation of the French nation itself, by creating an usurpation which, as it respects its subjects, has proved the most despotic and tyrannical,-which, as it respects foreign powers, seems by its very nature the permanent adversary of the spirit and arts of peace,-and which dissembles not its hostility against the remaining liberties and independence of Europe.

T 2

With