the morality of eafy, pliant, and conciliating manners, which neither bears hard on the vices, nor goes deep into the confciences of mankind; the morality by which men learn to declaim againft religious zeal, and against every thing which has the afpect either of fcrupulous holinefs or of earneft religion, but which can teach them to look, without any dif fatisfaction or murmur, on the diffipations of the world, on the profane, and on the fenfual, and on the oppreffors, and on the hardened. • Men of found understanding ought to be able to determine for them. felves, whether this is the morality of the gofpel which is inculcated with fcarcely any relation to it, and from every motive rather than the motives of religion; in which the leflons of moral duty, feparated from the language of Christianity, are every day brought nearer to the ma xims and to the manners of the world; and from which men learn, or are taught to believe, that, wretched as their progrefs is in moral duties, they muft derive from it their only hope of falvation. The unbeliever, and the falle profeffor of Chriftianity, infenfibly adopt the fame language. Under the pretence of fetting morality and Christianity at variance, they unite their endeavours to fap the founda tions of both. They firit banish from their thoughts the fubftance or the peculiar tenets of the gospel, as a metaphyfical fyftem which may well be fpared. When they have effected this, their work is almoft done: for the morality which they profefs to retain, is eafily reconciled to the vices of the worid; and, though it were pure, foon becomes a dead letter, feparated from the principles or motives which can alone fupport it. It is impoffible not to remark, befides, that the fupple and accom. modating morality, which bends to every fashion, and accords with every new opinion; which ftarties at every approach of zeal for religion, but which fears nothing from the lips of ungodlinefs or of infidelity; is, in its moil favourable afpect, at lealt far removed from the holiness of heart and life, by which the found believers of the gofpel are reprefented, in the New Teftament, as becoming the temple of God, and as having the fpirit of God dwelling in them. p. 147.-150. But while mere morality, or natural religion, are out of place in the pulpit, when they feem to be oppofed to revelation, we cannot help thinking, that a preacher muft narrow his sphere of utility very needlefsly, if he thinks it his duty, on all occafions, to introduce the peculiar views and motives which Chriftianity fuggets. If he feriously believes that religion, he certainly never will fay any thing that can have the fmalleft tendency to obstruct its influence: but he may not think it convenient, or he may not have the inclination, to make it the fole and exclufive foundation of all his counfels and exhortations. What is called the evange liral ftyle of preaching, appears to us an oppofite extreme from the purely moral; and, like all other extremes, it is bad. There is furely a difference between the prefent times, and thofe in which Christianity Chriftianity was at first preached by the apostles. The feed has been fown, and during the courfe of eighteen centuries has in one way or other been producing fruit. The work need not be done over again from the beginning; and even if a preacher thought it neceffary once more to lay the foundation, yet it would not be in his power. The preaching of the Apoftles themselves, would have appeared bold and extravagant, if they had not been able to accompany their words with demonftration of the fpirit and of power,' if they had not appealed to miracles and to the clear fulfilment of prophecy. Preachers now must take the times as they find them; and as they have not thofe fupernatural evidences, they must adopt a lower and more moderate tone. They muft not disjoin themselves fo entirely from the common business and common reafonings of the world, or reprefent Christianity as a fubject which is to be judged of, or inculcated, upon principles fundamentally different from those which regulate our opinion and belief upon matters of fmaller importance. In the preachers of the 17th century, who are indifputably believers in revelation, and who very frequently refer to its diftinguishing tenets, we may yet perceive an eafe and freedom, which demonstrate that their faith did not at all shackle their minds, or prevent them from reforting with the utmost readiness to every fource of morals or reason. Dr Barrow will in one fentence quote an Apostle, in the next a Father, and in a third Aristotle; and he will then pour out, with equal alacrity, the rich ftream of his own full and overflowing eloquence. The evangelical preachers of the prefent day, feem to be in horrors, if they happen to push their foot beyond the magic circle of Scripture; by which means they both renounce the affiftance which they may receive from their general learning and knowledge, and give a difagreeable impreflion of the facred writings, as if they were a repofitory of ftrange and peculiar doctrines with which the common fenfe and feelings of men can never be permitted to mingle. There is fomething extremely difagreeable to the minds, we do not fay of men tinctured with infidelity, but of the fenfible and reflecting part of Chriftians, to be kept in the trammels of mystery, and not to have their religion amalgamated in fome measure with their customary and daily fentiments; to have one fet of thoughts and phrafes for Sunday, and another for all the reft of the week. If we have any objection to the Sermons before us, it is, that the reverend author is fomewhat too conftant in enforcing fcripture doctrine; although we ftate this opinion with hefitation, when we confider his great experience as a clergyman, and the impreffion of cool reafon and practical good fenfe which is ftampt upon the whole volume. We would rather, from this peculiarity, take occafion to fuggeft to to fuch of our readers as have adopted the common philofophi-. cal principles of the day, that a circumftance of this kind in the fermons of a man whofe understanding and abilities are unqueftionable, is a point which, on their principles, they will find no little difficulty in accounting for. When we fee fuch a man enforcing with great ferioufnefs thofe doctrines of revelation which, in the eyes of the world in general, and especially in those of fceptics, have moft the appearance of "foolishness," what is the conclufion? The charge of hypocrify is highly illiberal, and the fuppofition that, on these subjects, the author's understanding has been warped by his peculiar profeffion, to fay the least of it, is fomewhat prefumptuous. Is it not more reasonable to fufpect that there must be folidity in the foundation, when we find a very wife man fo carefully employed about the superstructure? Upon the whole, this volume, we conceive, will afford the most folid fatisfaction to the serious reader, for whose use it is principally intended, and muft command the respect of those who are not habitually occupied with the fubjects to which it relates. They will never be disturbed with the author's admiration of himfelf, or his misconception of the subject; nor will their impatience be excited by any thing puerile, declamatory, verbofe, or inaccurate. They will find every where indications of a vigorous and independent understanding; and though they may not always be gratified with flights of fancy, or graces of compofition, they can fcarcely fail to be attracted by the unaffected expreflion of goodnefs and fincerity which runs through the whole publication. ART. X. De l'Ufage du Numeraire dans un grand Etat. (From the laft Volume of the Memoires de la Claffe des Sciences Morales et Politiques de l'Inftitut National.) THIS is one of the many productions that have lately appeared in France, as well as in England, from the pens of certain political economists, who, without genius to create new fyftems, or acutenefs to perceive diftinctly the errors of the old, are fufficiently fond of fingularity, to reject both the great theories which formerly divided the opinions of mankind on the fubject of national wealth. The first step which thefe authors fet out with, is a contemptuous difavowal of the doctrine, that money conftitutes conftitutes the riches of a people; but in a few pages we generally find how imperfectly their minds have been cured of this vulgar but most natural prejudice; and they no fooner come to lay down their own theories, than we perceive, that, to the funda mental errors of the mercantile fyftem, they have added nothing but mistakes from which it was free, and contradictions which could only arife from not comprehending it. M. Toulongeon is too much above ancient prejudice to believe that the richest nation is that which poffeffes the greateft quantity of circulating medium;' yet he has not proceeded far in the developement of his own doctrines before we difcover him uniformly fubftituting money for capital, and reafoning upon the employment and diftribution of stock under the appellation of numeraire.' A fimilar defire to thake off the prepoffeffion in favour of fpecie, which conftitutes the chief error of the exploded doctrine, induces him to feek for a fubftitute, in credit; and then his theory only differs from the old one, in afcribing to paper money all the powers which were formerly attributed to the precious metals. He does not, like the more vulgar clafs of politicians, declaim against trufting the profperity of a nation to the flimfy. refources of credit; but he goes further than Mr Pinto himself in his notions of the powers of credit, and argues as if credit could create capital, rather than draw unemployed ftock into ufe. His theory is delivered with more than the ordinary prefumption of a person who mistakes his ignorance for difcovery; and though he concludes his performance with a modeft prediction that it will find a place in the portfolio of projects configned. to oblivion,' yet the whole tenor of the paper, and especially of the paffages which stand next to this prophecy, demonftrate that he belongs to the fmall number who do not believe it will be fulfilled. The tract indeed abounds with well-turned and delicate compliments to the Citizen Toulongeon, who feems verily to think that he has removed all mystery from the difficult fubject of circulation and credit; that by a moft fimple theory he has explained in what manner money may enrich a people; and that, by a happy deduction from his fundamental propofition, he has pointed out the means of moral, economical, and financial improvement to his country. A corollary from the whole enclofes, rather than developes, a fingular fcheme of public credit, which is to prove a fubftitute for national debts; and we think our readers can fcarcely perufe the analyfis of thefe difcoveries, without recognizing fome portion of the fame genius that once infpired the famous M. Herrenfchwand, to which the world owes his memorable Adreffe aux vrais Hommes de Bien.' Money, according to our author, muft poffefs two qualities, in VOL. VI. NO. 11. H order order to constitute the wealth of a ftate-a rapid circulation, and proper diftribution. The good effects of quick circulation are too obvious to require proof-it enables a fingle piece to perform the office of many. Let us confider then what is meant by a proper diftribution. He purfues a long cafe in figures for the fake of illuftrating this point; but the fubftance of the ftatement is, that if there are two nations equally rich and populous, and if the fame quantity of money is fo diftributed, that in both a fmall clafs fhall have a larger thare of it than the reft, but that the difproportion fhall be much greater in the one community than in the other, then, in the former, the bulk of the people must la bour with little or no affistance but what they derive from their own hands, while, in the latter, they have the aid of a confiderable portion of the great inftrument of cominerce. On this ground, our author proceeds to construct a comparison between the happiness of the two communities; and to show that where almost all the money is in the hands of the rich, the poor must labour for them at competition prices in order to live, must devote their whole lives to drudgery without having time to think, and muft fee their condition growing worse and worse as their neceflities augment. But where the poor have a juft proportion of the circulating medium, they labour to enjoy as well as to live; they have time to refect and improve their minds; and their fortune is continually augmenting, while their yearly overplus is anew employed with profit. At this period of his reafoning, our author ftops to remind us, that he has been all along fpeaking of money, and not of wealth. But this will not do. If he is refolved to defcribe the effects of an unequal distribution of wealth, under the name of the unequal distribution of money, we cannot allow him to force his theory upon us in the form of a definition; and if he will ufe money in the fenfe of wealth, he must find fome other word to expreis what is commonly meant by money. It is however obvious, that there is much inaccuracy even in his enumeration of the effects of unequal diftribution, whether we permit him to call it of money or of wealth in general. How can the rich make the poor work uniformly at a competition price of labour, when their own fuperfluity of wealth is occafioning a competition of confumers, and is indeed the very origin of high wages? The idea of fuch diftributions is abfurd. The engine may be adjusted at first in whatever manner you pleafe; but its first movement must tend to derange the preeitablifhed proportions, unless the rich are to retain their wealth unconfumed, and the poor to work for nothing. To his fuppofition of the money in the two ftates being divided with different degrees of inequality, our author proceeds to add another; that, in the country where the fmall number poffefs the greate |