able that the History of the United States be written. The Whigs, or their fathers, have tried to write it; but they have been as unable to do it, as a Mussulman would be to write the History of Christianity. Nobody but a democrat can seize the spirit of this nation, comprehend its Idea or embody it in his narrative. Mr. Bancroft must then be endured as an historian; but as a man, he finds no mercy. He has committed the sin of democracy, in a democratic country too, and absolution he must not hope for, in this world nor in that which is to come.

Now the fact is, these democratic or liberal writers are not such depraved beings as this condemnation of them would seem to indicate. They suffer not in point of morals, talents, genius, information, by com parison with any who may be arrayed against them. A short time since, Alexander H. Everett was a great man, an accomplished scholar, an able and elegant writer; but now he is not allowed to be one or the other. Yet nobody can believe that Mr. Everett the Democrat is not every way as great a man, as accomplished a scholar, as able and as elegant a writer, as Mr. Everett the Whig. The truth of the matter is, the democratic writers are the great writers of the age and nation. This indeed is one of their principal sins. If they were weak, timid, if they neither had nor were able to impart life, they would be patronized, to a certain extent, by the aristocracy out of complacence to the common people. But being as they are, master minds, minds that will leave their impress on their age, they are not to be endured. justice be done them by the wealthy, the fashionable, the supporters of the aristocracy, their influence will be too great to be withstood. They will breed sedition in the populace, and carry away the whole people in a democratic direction.

If

We beg pardon of our readers for having bestowed so much attention upon the American aristocracy, for after all, the American aristocracy is an insignificant affair. We hope no one will infer that we are

hostile to it. We do not think it strong enough, or likely in this country to do mischief enough, to excite a reasonable man's hostility. The best way to treat it is, to let it alone. It will die soon, and the east wind will sweep it away, as it did Jonah's gourd. This country is appointed, or doomed, to be a democratic country. This may or may not be an evil, but it is the fact. Men may write against it, electioneer against it, do all they can to array wealth, fashion, learning, refinement, against it, but all in vain. Democracy at last is to have a country she can call her own. Here she is to reign, and the sooner we give in our adhesion, the better for her, and the better for ourselves. The policy we should recommend would be for every friend of his country, to do his best to enlist literature, philosophy, religion, and refinement on the side of democracy. This has ever been our policy, and we trust ever will be.

The following remarks on the aristocracy in this country strike us as just.

"No aristocracy can exist or maintain itself without property. The nobility of France had virtually ceased to exist long before the hereditary peerage was abolished; while the patronage of the English would alone be sufficient to establish a power which would make itself felt, even if the House of Lords were reformed. There are even those who believe that in the latter case its power, instead of being confined to its usual channel, would extend itself over every department of state, and absorb, for a time at least, the main interests of the country. The American aristocracy, on the contrary, possess neither hereditary wealth nor privileges, nor the power of directing the lower classes. The prosperity of the country is too general to reduce any portion of the people to the abject condition of ministers to the passions and appetites of the rich. It is even gold which destroys the worship of the golden calf.

"But how can it be possible for the American aristocracy to lay claims to superior distinctions, when the people are constantly reminded, by words and actions, that they are the legislators, that the fee-simple is in them, and that they possess the invaluable privilege of calling to office men of their own choice and principles? Are not the American people called

upon to pass sentence on every individual whose ambition may prompt him to seek distinction and honor at their hands? And what is not done to conciliate the good will and favor of the people? Are they not constantly flattered, courted, and caressed by that very aristocracy which, if it truly existed, would spurn equality with the people? Is the judgment of the people, expressed by the ballot-box, not appealed to as the ultimate decision of every argument and contest? Aristocracy, if it shall deserve that name, must not only be based on the vain pretensions of certain classes, but on its public ac knowledgment by law, and the common consent of others. This, however, is not the work of a generation, and requires an historical connexion with the origin and progress of a country.

"Why, then, should the Americans recognise a superior class of society, if that class be neither acknowledged by law nor possessed of power? How shall they be brought to wor ship those from whom they are accustomed to receive homage? - who are either men of their own election, and consequently of their own making, or the defeated and unhappy victims of their displeasure? The aristocracy of America may claim genius, and talent, and superiority, and they may be ambitious; but it is an ambition of so airy and light a quality that it is but a shadow's shadow,'-a sort of fata morgana reflected from beyond the waters, whose baseless fabric can neither excite apprehension, nor arrest the progress of democracy. Coteries there always were, and always will be, in large cities; but they need not necessarily be connected with power. In America, moreover, they exist principally among the ladies; there being, as yet, but few gentlemen to be called of leisure,' or exclusively devoted to society. The country is yet too young, and offers too large a field for the spirit of enterprise and business, to leave to the fashionable drawing-rooms other devotees than young misses and elegants of from fourteen to twenty years of age. That such companies may, nevertheless, have their attractions, no one can reasonably doubt; but they are not composed of elements capable of changing the manners and customs of the country; and, as long as their composition does not materially alter, must remain deprived of that influence which the higher circles in Europe are wont to exercise over all classes of society.

"The manners of republicans must necessarily be more nearly on a level with each other than those of a people living under a monarchical government. There are no nobles to

vie with the splendor of the throne; no commoners to outdo the nobility. The dignified simplicity of the American President and all high functionaries of state is little calculated to furnish patterns of expensive fashions; and were all Americans, in this respect, exact imitators of the amiable plainness of General Jackson, their manners would soon cease to be an object of satire to English tourists. They would then present dignity without ornament, candor without loquacity, loftiness of mind unmingled with contempt for others. Europeans would then visit the United States, not to ridicule American manners, but for the purpose of studying them; and, perhaps, carry home the useful conviction, that though republics are not fit schools for courtiers, they may, nevertheless, abound in good sense, agreeable address, and genuine cordiality of manners." pp. 22-24.

Mr. Grund's remarks on the intelligence of the Americans, on the respect paid to men of letters, on the character and education of American ladies, we wish he had said women, - will be found in the main just. He appears to comprehend our society, its tone, spirit, and fundamental principles, and what he says of it is liberal and candid. He bears honorable testimony to the morals of our community, and probably says more for the sanctity of marriages than our Moral Reformers, as they call themselves, will be disposed to admit. If so, he and they must settle the difference; we believe him rather than them. Men and women, who set out to cure a single vice, are prone to see it everywhere, and they almost inevitably exaggerate, in order to demonstrate the importance of their work. We never place much reliance on the statements of those reformers, who see only one evil in the world, and have but one idea to work with.

Mr. Grund complains of our aversion to public amusements, but as we think without any just reason. Many of our friends have made the same complaint, and we think we have seen it recommended that public provision should be made for diverting the people. We have no sympathy with the complaint, nor with the recommendation. A despot may furnish amuse

ments to the populace; it is a good way to keep them quiet, and from thinking of their rights, or trying to repossess them. For ourselves we are not frightened at sight of a serious people. A people with a destiny to achieve, a great work to accomplish for the world, has no time to be gay, to dress itself out in masquerade. It must be grave and earnest; it must think and act in relation to the future and not to the passing moment. They who are recommending amusements seem not to be aware that they are recommending America to give over the work to which God has called her.

We make the following extract because it expresses a thought and a regret which we frequently meet with among some of our countrymen, who have fallen into a habit of sentimentalizing o religion.

"But, proud as the Americans may be of their halls of congress, they have not, as yet, a single place of worship at all to be compared to the finer churches of Europe, where they might render thanks to the Omnipotent Being for the unexampled happiness and prosperity with which he has blessed their country. Some not altogether unsuccessful attempts have been made in Boston and Baltimore, at what might be called a cathedral; but neither the size nor the order, nor even the materials, are resembling those of the nobler specimens of Gothic architecture in Europe.

"Our feelings and emotions are always tinged with the reflections from the objects around us; and I cannot, therefore, divest myself of the opinion that a superior style of architecture in an edifice of public worship may materially assist the imagination, and enable the mind to turn from mere worldly objects to the contemplation of heaven and the adoration of God. I have known persons who could never pray so fervently as when encompassed by the sombre vaults of a gothic cathedral, and I have, myself, experienced the same feelings on similar occasions.

"But, in addition to the deficiency in style and ornament there exists in America, an almost universal practice of building churches, or at least the steeples, of wood, to which are frequently given the most grotesque figures, partaking of all orders of architecture, from the time of Noah to the present day. There is scarce an excuse for this corruption of taste,