case they would probably be more easy of correction than in the former. We must argue first on general principles; and when these are settled, minor difficulties may be disposed of in detail. But we But we must not suffer them to disturb or perplex our general reasonings, lest through the common infirmity of our understandings, we should arrive either at no result or a wrong

one.

In the general conclusions at which we have hitherto arrived on this subject, we are happy to find that we are supported by so sensible a writer, and so experienced a magistrate, as Mr. Jerram; while bis observations assume a more decidedly religious complexion, and are on this account so much the more valuable than those of any other of the writers now under review. We do not mean to say, that there is any essential part of Mr. Davison's system which is not in perfect harmony with Christian principles; but, at the same time, the connexion between that system and those principles, is rendered more apparent in the pamphlet of Mr. Jerram. The propositions which that gentleman endeavours to establish are the following; namely, "1. That all hopes of entirely removing the evils of poverty are vain; 2. That the present administration of the system of the Poor Laws tends greatly to aggravate those evils; 3. That the means which bid the fairest for success lie with the poor themselves, under the direc. tion and assistance of the legislature, in conjunction with prudent and active charity." (p. 3.)

On the first of these propositions there can be no difference of opinion among those who acknowledge the authority of holy writ, any more than that the charitable relief of the distress arising from poverty is a duty binding on Christians. That "the poor shall never cease out of the land," is the declaration of Omniscience, as it is bis solemn

injunction, that to such we should "be ready to give and glad to disdistribute," enforced by the heartexciting motive, that," inasmuch as we do it," from a regard to his authority, and gratitude for his mercies, " to the least of these our brethren," he will acknowledge it in the great day of account as done to himself.

In proof of the second proposition, Mr. Jerram argues, and argues, we think, conclusively,

1. That the system of the Poor Laws "creates the evil it professes to remedy," by superseding industry, sobriety, and forethought, rendering the labouring class reckless of the future, and preventing the natural inconveniences of neglect and vice. (p. 21.)

2. That it even "holds forth encouragement to the idle, the thoughtless, and the profligate, by securing to them all the temporal advantages they could have derived from sobriety, prudence, and industry." (p.27.)

3. That it "breaks the link which connects the best feelings and best interests of the poor with their natural friends and patrons," their superiors in station. (p. 30.)

4. That it obviously tends to diminish the interest which parents feel in the fate of their children. (p. 32.)

5. That it is opposed to the ordinance of God himself, that “if a man will not work, neither shall he eat;" and to his declaration, that "if any provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house, he has denied the faith and is worse than an infidel."

6. That it strikes at the root of the benevolent and charitable feelings, and renders abortive all mea sures for bettering the condition of the poor." (p. 37.)

And lastly, That "it tends to universal pauperism." (p. 41.)

We can only glance at Mr. Jerram's remedies for all these evils. He proposes a thorough revision of the present system, in order that

no refuge may be held out to idleness, improvidence, or vice. The poor must be shut out from all dependence on foreign aid, where prudence and industry might have rendered that assistance unnecessary. They must not be permitted to lean upon others, but learn to support themselves. In the words of Mr. Burke, “patience, labour, frugality, sobriety, and religion should be recommended to them: all the rest is downright fraud." (p. 99.) It will be impossible for us to follow Mr. Jerram through all the modifications by which he would accompany this general rule, in order to abate the severity of its operation in particular instances, or in his exposition of the various means by which he would carry his principle into effect. Suffice it to say, that among his instruments we find "saving banks;"-" benefit clubs," which, however, he places very far below the former in the scale of utility, whether be regards their principle or their effects as they are now constituted; -" benevolent funds," and "legacies for the use of the industrious poor;" which we cannot but think more questionable than either, partaking as they do of some of the radical evils of the poor system;-in the country, garden ground, or ground for a cow or two, for which a rent should be paid;-and last, though not least, moral and religious instruction. "It is a complete destitution. of all religious principle," Mr. Jerram justly observes, "which leads men to the wretchlessness of ungodly living;' and if ever we see men really industrious, provident, and moral, we must lay the foundation in Christian piety." On this subject he says much, and says it well, closing the whole with a sentiment, in which we most entirely concur; namely, "that all efforts" to repair the evil of our Poor Laws "will be abortive without moral culture."

In the mean time, if any attempt is to be made to continue the pre

sent system, or, indeed, to substi tute an improved one, of which some national provision for the disabled poor is to form a part, two things are essentially necessary, in order to give it efficiency, and to hinder a recurrence of the evilswhich now prevail; first, an im provement of the law of settlement; and secondly, a change in the order of persons, selected as overseers. On both these points, our authors, for the most part, are agreed. On the former, the observations of Mr. Davison, in particular (p. 80,&c.), are well worthy the attention of the legislature. On the latter, the same writer remarks, that the management of the poor is an object not unworthy the most liberal feelings of the upper orders. And, "as to the interest and benefit of the poor in such an arrangement, it is certain," he adds, " that their affairs, when they require any interference by authority at all, are never in such good care, as when their superiors are induced to take an active and gratuitous part in them. The dispensation of good from the enlightened mind, the cultivated feelings, and the independent spirit of the higher ranks, in the way of disinterested service, is an invaluable part of the constitution of our country in its magistracy, and in some other instances of a less ostensible nature. It wants only a few distinguished examples to raise the name of Overseer of the Poor to a level with that of Magistrate.” Davison, pp. 45, 46.

These considerations we think eminently deserving of the attention of all those Christians whom providence has blessed with ample means in respect of fortune, with a range of valuable influence, and with a command of their own time.

With respect to any other new regulations to be introduced, in conformity with his suggestions, Mr. Davison observes, that every considerate person must feel he is stepping upon the ground of most serious difficulty. Nevertheless, he does not altogether shrink from the duty. Mr. Courtenay, however, has given the suggestions of that

tee. Unless therefore a survey shall be ordered, and a report made, upon the character of the parties to be combined together in parochial associations, it

never can be other than mistake and

fraud, to engage them that they shall mutually indemnify one another, against any thing more than casualties, or events absolutely out of their own power, and wholly independent of their manner of acting." Davison, pp. 20--22.

Mr. Davison, indeed, appears to us to limit far too narrowly the ob. ject of parochial saving banks, when he proposes that they should be "strictly confined to a provision against the extreme hardship of bodily infirmity, permanent and irremediable." We perfectly concur with him, however, in thinking that the "contributions from the poor themselves should be on the sole and separate account of each individual," and

as a most necessary stipulation of justice, in order that he may never lose by the exercise of his economy, that the full amount of his contributions, if they should happen not to be ultimately withdrawn by his own personal want, or the remainder of them, should be restored at his decease to his family, or other representatives of blood; or perhaps, in default of near kin, as he might direct." Ibid. p. 24.

On these principles we believe that all the saving banks, whether parochial or not, hitherto formed, have been constituted.

If any persons think we are stepping beyond our proper province in thus advocating measures of a purely political nature, our answer is, that some change of measures is now universally contemplated, while yet we do not hear that any change sufficiently radical to meet the necessities of the case is in agitation and surely it is the duty of a Christian observer to come forward on such occasions with his Scantling of judgment, be it what it may, to contribute to the general stock, and co-operate in determining the result. The intelligence of the nation is that which constitutes our national fitness for any bene

ficial measure which may be prac ticable: for, however wisely it may have been planned, any scheme may be defeated in its operation, if it be encountered by ignorance, perverseness, or bigotry, in those on whom it rests to carry its details into execution; and it therefore becomes in the present state of things a serious duty to assist, to the best of our ability, in circulating, through the country, those wholesome princi. ples which may help to disentangle the intricate problem of our national perplexities, and to restore a sounder system. On this head, indeed, aud in reference to the hope which such projects may excite, we are desirous to check our own more sanguine wishes, and those of others, by the salutary memento contained in the following passage.

"At the same time, projectors of amend ment have no right to be very sanguine in the extent of their aims. For the particular interests of the country, which are the most nearly affected by the constitution of our Poor Laws, are by no means beholden to those laws for all the injury or benefit of which they are capable. We must not suppose, therefore, that if they were set as completely at ease as the most satisfactory removal of all that is objectionable in these laws could set them, they would immediately pass at once into a state of extraordinary high order, vigour, and perfection." Davison, p. 79.

But it must never be forgotten, that the morals, as well as the comforts of the poor, are deeply involved in the decision of this question; that, although political institutions, however wise, can never make a people moral, they may, if unwise, throw additional impediments in the way of their becoming so; and that therefore one of the several duties incumbent upon Christians, as members of a political body, is first to satisfy themselves in regard to the nature of that policy, which will most conduce to the welfare of their fellow-citizens, and then to lend to it, for the public good, the support of their un

derstanding, of their example, and of their general activity.

Three Sermons on particular Occasions. By the BISHOP of GLOUCESTER. London: Hatchard. 1818. 8vo. pp. 64.

DR. Lancelot Ridley, in his commentary on the passage in the Philippians, "to abide in the flesh is more needful for you," has the following observations on the duty of bishops: "This place willeth that the coming of the bishop or pastor to his cure, should not be without spiritual profit for his flock; that it should be to the increasement of faith, by pure and sincere preaching of God's word; and that they should more and more rejoice in God, knowing God's benefits the better by the word of God purely preached by the bishop, pastor, or curate. And this place doth something reprove those bishops that be dumb, and will not preach when they come into their diocese; that will not feed their people with the food of the soul, but suffer them to perish without food for them. How should bishops increase the true faith of the people, that will not preach to the people God's word? For as faith cometh by hearing of God's word, so it is increased by the same word. And as Paul more regarded those things that should be profitable to others than to himself, so should all others do, both bishops, pastors, curates, and all the lay people. But alas, for pity! few or none seek other profit, but their own. And so they be well, and live in ease, rest, and pleasure, they care not what becomes of others, what pains or torments others suffer. But let every one amend this fault, and study to be profitable, as well to others as to himself. For we be not born for ourselves alone, but to glorify God, and to profit by words, counsel, works, and deeds, as God hath given us gifts and talents for that

purpose. Not all gifts be given to one, but to divers, that every one should be an helper to another, for every one needs help of another."

Such is the picture given by a father of our own church, of the duties of a Christian bishop. And though we should wish, as far as possible, to avoid personal allusions, we cannot but say that we have been somewhat reminded of this picture in perusing the Sermons be fore us. They discover so much Christian simplicity, so rigid an adherence to the great principles of the Reformation, such a practical reference of these principles to all the uses and purposes of life, and so careful an abstinence from deep and unsettled questions, that we seem to be carried back by them into older days, and to meet again one of those early friends of the Gospel and the church to whom their successors stand so deeply indebted.

We are aware, indeed, that the question has been often agitated in what degree bishops should be preachers; in what degree they should turn aside from the task of superintending the pastors of the church, and become pastors and preachers themselves. When the late revered Bishop Porteus first entered on his course of weekly lectures, many persons were ready to charge him with an abandonment of his dignity, with the love of popularity and ostentation, and with a desire to share the laurels of public applause. But the bishop had strength of mind and character sufficient to encounter these imputations. He continued to pursue his object, trusting to the blessing of God, and the character of his sermons, to vindicate their author: and as we cordially approve of this proceeding, we shall think it right to state a few of the reasons which incline us to this opinion.

Preaching is to be considered as a means of public instruction almost peculiar to Christianity. Under the pagan institutions, nothing analogous to it existed. Indeed, as