« PreviousContinue »
the last touches of the poet ; and that we are by no means answerable for the irreverence of some of their allusions.
THE DEVIL'S THOUGHTS. 66 N. B. Ist. That he himself would not wish an Anti-diabolic Bard a more villainous pen to transcribe with.” “ From his brimstone bed at break of day,
A walking the Devil is gone;
And see how his stock went on,
And he went over the plain ;
As a gentleman swishes his cane.
0! he was in his Sunday's best :
And there was a hole where his tail went through.
On a dung-heap beside his stable;
Of Cain and his brother Abel.
Rode by on his vocation:
Death in the Revelation.
A cottage of gentility;
Is pride that apes humility.
Quoth he, we are both of one college,
Hard by the tree of knowledge.” “ He met an old acquaintance of his, a Fury, with a consecrated banner in her hand, and greeted her familiarly.") “ She tipp'd him the wink, but cried aloud,
Avaunt, my name's Religion !
A solitary cell ;
For improving the prisons in Hell.
“ A pig came swimming with wind and tide,
Came swimming with great celerity,
On old England's commercial prosperity." (" The clumsiness of half a dozen turnkeys in getting off the fetters from an acquitted prisoner, and in one-fifth of the time they had fettered and handcuffed half a regiment. O! how quick and clever men are in what thoy are used to. But the Devil turned libellous, and thought on the debates on the abolition of the Slave Trade, and on the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act in a single night.") “ General Gage's burning face
He saw with consternation;
It was General Conflagration." The solemnity with which the following epigram is prefaced reminds us of some of the grave introductory paragraphs recorded in the Baviad and Mæviad. Did the reader ever bappen to meet with any verses (except a schoolboy's exercise) from the twelve books of an epic down to the distich of an epigram, which were otherwise than “ spontaneous ?"
66 EPÍGRAM BY PORSON. " A Spontaneous Effusion, made at the Request of a little Girl, who
was his Favourite on a Servant, named Susan, when she was ironing
No damsel e'er look'd neater ;
And burn me like a heater.” P. 46. Lord Byron will not be much obliged to the editor of this collection for the revival of two of his juvenilia. His Lordship is not of that temper which will compromise for dullạess by the absence of all evil intent. If we were ill-naturedly inclined, we could not distress the adult bard more than by circulating largely his early efforts.
Of the probable Academical pretensions of the editor of this volume, the following specimen of latinity must suffice. It is printed as the motto to a “Poetical effusion by Mr. Ayloffe, Trinity College,” and no charity, however extensive, can possibly refer its deformity to casual errata. We give it literatim.
“ Nulla manere diu nequæ vivere carminant possum, quæ scribuntur
VOL, XIX. JUNE, 1823.
of the editor's connection with Cambridge, we offer the following proof. The lines (and they are among the best in the whole volume,) are plainly written on an Oxford Professor.
EPITAPH ON A GEOLOGIST.
That in peace he may rest his bones?
He'll rise and break the stones,
For he's quite in his element under ground.
In the common alluvial soil,
Of his own geological toil;
That embedded should be his organic remains.
His carcase let stalactite cover:
When he is encrusted all over :
Let him stand as a monument rais'd to himself.” P. 204. After these remarks we are sorry to add, that on a fly leaf appended to this collection is to be found the following advertisement. “Shortly will be published, Facetiæ Cantabrigienses : Anecdotes, Smart Sayings, Satirics, &c. By, or relating to, Notorious Cantabs ; being a Companion to the Cambridge Tart. Dedicated to the Students of Lincoln'sIon. By Socius.” We cannot but hope that the still-boru demise of the present volume, may produce a miscarriage of that which is thus announced in embryo.
ART. IV. The Rights of the English Clergy asserted,
and the probable Amount of their Incomes estimated, in a Letter to the Author of « Remarks on the Consumption of Public Wealth, by the Clergy of every Christian Na. tion." By Augustus Campbell, A.M. Rector of Wallasey,
in the County of Chester. Liverpool. 1822. Art. V. An Appeal to the Gentlemen of England, in
Behalf of the Church of England. By Augustus Campbell, A.M. Rector of Wallasey, in the County of Chester. Liverpool. 1823.
ART. VI. A Reply to the Article on Church Establish
ments, in the last Number of the Edinburgh Review. By Augustus Campbell, A.M. Rector of Wallasey, in the
County of Chester. Hatchard. 1823. MR. CAMPBELL'S first pamphlet has been so extensively circulated that we need not give a detailed account of its contents. He examines and exposes the monstrous false. hoods with which the Radicals commenced their present attack upon the Clergy; and so ably was his defence conducted, that its validity is admitted even by the Edinburgh Review
The fables of the Morning Chronicle and of its friend the Remarker upon the Consumption of Public Wealth by the Clergy, are disowned and rejected by the upper ranks of Reform--and the lie having worked its work among the frequenters of the pot-house-men of better information are assailed with insinuations less notoriously absurd, and arguments more skilfully marshalled. The “Remarks" may be considered as the forlorn' hope of the faction--exposed to certain destruction--and overwhelmed the instant they were seen. Yet did they prepare the way for the onset of Mr. Hume and Mr. Brougham, for the desperate and unremitting assanlts of the Edinburgh Review, and for that general spirit of virulence and slander, with which the Church is now assailed.
We have already noticed and quoted largely from the Letter to Mr. Jeffrey and from the Letter and the Remonstrance to Mr. Brougham ; and these able publications remain unanswered. The Edinburgh Review preferred an engagement with less powerful antagonists, and endeavoured in its last Number 'to crush and silence Mr. Campbell. It would be idle to pretend that this gentleman's pamphlets are equal to those of the three distinguished individuals to whom we bave alluded. And the courageous and honourable opponents who have passed over the gigantic and mighty, and thrown all their weight upon a less distinguished combatant, deserve the fate which has befallen them. They have been manfully encountered and repelled in a quarter from which they did not expect such a reception. Mr. Campbell has most completely vindicated himself, and made a formidable inroad into his adversary's territory. And the Reviewer will now have discovered to his cost, not only that he must sit silent under the rebukes and the chastisements of our eloquent and learned theologians, but that he is at the mercy of every clergyman who can make a plain statement in plain language. Mr. Campbell pretends to 'no bigher chia
racter than that of a sensible, well-informed man; but he is bold enough to brave the wit, and shrewd enough to unravel the sophistry of the whole host of reviewers and lawyers.
The principal attack upon Mr. Campbell relates to his assertion respecting the private property of the Church. He is well entitled to be heard in bis own defence.
“ The reviewer wishes to prove that by my doctrine, 'the Legislature would be completely estopped from the appropriation of any part of the revenues of the Church, however enormous and mischievous they might have become, till she, in her corporate capacity, made her appearance to give consent to the bill," and then, mightily pleased with his own picture of the Church in the shape of an old lady, he runs on, in a prodigious vein of pleasantry, about the · Council of Lateran in a large red hat;' Lady Pragmatic Sanction in shot silk: and the ghost of Prologue's grandmother in the German play.' Now all this is very witty; but wit is not the test of truth. Its object is not to elucidate, but disguise; and whenever a man is particularly facetious in a discussion, you may depend upon it he has, as in this case, some fallacy to conceal. In order to convict me of the aforesaid estoppement, in the usual style of Northern criticism, he takes two unconnected passages from different parts of my book, the fifth and twelfth pages, separates them from their context, tacks them together, calls them propositions, personifies them, and then says they contra: dict each other.
“ The first proposition is,- the property of the Church is as much private property as that of any corporation or any individual in the realm.'
• The second is, the Church, in her corporate capacity, cannot be compensated by any money payment offered to the Clergy as individuals."
Now, the truth is,' he says, " the second proposition cuts the throat of the first? This may be the truth in the Edinburgh Review, but it would not be truth in a court of justice. The real truth is, that the two propositions, as might be suspected from their relative positions, have nothing on earth to do with each other. The reviewer assumes that, in my second proposition, I say
that the Church cannot make any bargain with the State, or cannot be compensated by any payment. But I say no such thing : I only say that she cannot be compensated by any money payment: and here is his want of sincerity or discernment. The author whom I was controverting, offered us a money payment as an equivalent for our freeholds. I told him that a money payment was no equivalent at all, either to ourselves or our successors. This is my case :
I leave it to the jury, in full confidence that they must acquit the second proposition of any felonious attempt upon the throat of its companion. “ What, however, I do not say for myself, the reviewer says for