set flying to bring in more. Men leave their riches either to their kindred, or to the Public; and moderate portions prosper best in both. A great estate left to an heir, is as a lure to all the birds of prey round about to seize on him, if he be not the better stablished' in years and judgment: likewise, glorious' gifts and foundations are like sacrifices without salt; and but the painted sepulchres of alms, which soon will putrify and corrupt inwardly. Therefore measure not thine advancements by quantity, but frame them by measure: and defer not charities till death: for, certainly, if a man weigh it rightly, he that doth so is rather liberal of another man's than his own.

'Stablish. To establish. Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father. . . . comfort your hearts, and stablish you in every good word and work.'-2 Thess. xi. 16, 17.

'Stop effusion of our Christian blood,

And stablish quietness on every side.'-Shakespere.

Glorious. Splendid. Were not this glorious casket stored.'—Shakespere. Latin: Fundationes gloriosæ et splendidæ in usus publicos.'

⚫ Advancement. Advances; gifts in money or property. The jointure and advancement of the lady was the third part of the Principality of Wales.-Bacon's Hist.

ANNOTATIONS.

'I cannot call riches better than the baggage of virtue; the Roman word is better, impedimenta it hindereth the march.

In reference to the effect on the character, both of individuals and nations, of wealth and poverty, I will take leave to insert some extracts from the Lectures on Political Economy.

'We should attend to the distinction between an individual and a community, when viewed as possessing a remarkable share of wealth. The two cases differ immensely, as far as the moral effects of wealth are concerned. For, first, the most besetting probably of all the temptations, to which a rich man, as such, is exposed, is that of pride-an arrogant disdain of those poorer than himself. Now, as all our ideas of great and small, in respect of wealth, and of everything else, are comparative, and as each man is disposed to compare himself with those around him, it is plain, the danger of priding one's self on wealth, affects exclusively, or nearly so, an individual who is rich, compared with his own countrymen; and especially one who is richer than most others in his own walk of life, and who reside in his own neighbourhood. Some degree of national pride there may be, connected with national wealth; but this is not in general near so much the foundation of national pride as a supposed superiority in valour, or in mental cultivation and at any rate it seldom comes into play. An Englishman who is poor, compared with other Englishmen, is not likely to be much puffed up with pride at the thought of belonging to a wealthy community. Nay, even though he should himself possess property, which, among the people of Timbuctoo, or the aboriginal Britons, would be reckoned great wealth, he will be more likely to complain of his poverty, than to be filled with self-congratulation at his wealth, if most of those of his own class are as rich or richer than himself. And even one who travels or resides abroad, does not usually regard with disdain (on the score of wealth at least) those foreigners who are individually as well off in that respect as himself, though their nation may be poorer than his. And, on the other hand, those individuals who, in a

poor country, are comparatively rich, are quite as much exposed as any to the temptation of pride.

'As for what may be said respecting avarice, selfishness, worldly-mindedness, &c., it may suffice to reply, that not only these vices are found as commonly in poor countries as in rich, but even in the same country, the poor are not at all less liable to them than the rich. Those in affluent circumstances may be absorbed in the pursuit of gain; but they may also, and sometimes do, devote themselves altogether to literature, or science, or other pursuits, altogether remote from this: those, on the other hand, who must maintain themselves by labour or attention to business, are at least not the less liable to the temptation of too anxiously taking thought for the

morrow.

Luxury, again, is one of the evils represented as consequent on wealth. The word is used in so many senses, and so often without attaching any precise meaning to it, that great confusion is apt to be introduced into any discussion in which it occurs. Without, however, entering prematurely on any such discussion, it may be sufficient, as far as the present question is concerned, to point out that the terms luxury, and luxurious, are considerably modified as to their force, according as they are applied to individuals or to nations. As an individual, a man is called luxurious, in comparison with other men, of the same community and in the same walk of life with himself: a nation is called luxurious, in reference to other nations. The same style of living which would be reckoned moderate and frugal, or even penurious among the higher orders, would be censured as extravagant luxury in a day-labourer: and the labourer, again, if he lives in a cottage with glass-windows and a chimney, and wears shoes and stockings, and a linen or cotton shirt, is not said to live in luxury, though he possesses what would be thought luxuries to a negro-prince. A rich and luxurious nation, therefore, does not necessarily contain more individuals who live in luxury (according to the received use of the word) than a poor one; but it possesses more of such things as would be luxuries in the poor country, while in the rich one, they are not. The inclination for self-indulgence and ostentation is not necessarily less strong in poor than in rich nations; the chief difference is, that their luxury is of a coarser description, and generally has

more connection with gross sensuality. Barbarians are almost invariably intemperate.

'As for the effeminizing effects that have been attributed to national luxury, which has been charged with causing a decay of national energy, mental and bodily, no such results appear traceable to any such cause. Xenophon, indeed, attributes the degeneracy of the Persians to the inroads of luxury, which was carried, he says, to such a pitch of effeminacy, that they even adopted the use of gloves to protect their hands. We probably have gone as much beyond them, in respect of the common style of living among us, as they, beyond their rude forefathers; yet it will hardly be maintained that this nation displays, in the employments either of war or peace, less bodily or mental energy than our Anglo-Saxon ancestors. In bodily strength, it has been ascertained by accurate and repeated experiments, that civilized men are decidedly superior to savages; and that the more barbarian, and those who lead a harder life, are generally inferior in this point to those who have made more approaches to civilization. There is, indeed, in such a country as this, a larger proportion of feeble and sickly individuals; but this is because the hardship and exposure of a savage life speedily destroy those who are not of a robust constitution. Some there are, no doubt, whose health is impaired by an overindulgent and tender mode of life; but as a general rule it may safely be maintained, that the greater part of that over-propor tion of infirm persons among us, as compared, for instance, with some wild North American tribe, owe, not their infirmity, but their life, to the difference between our habits and those of savages. How much the average duration of human life has progressively increased in later times, is probably well-known to most persons.

Lastly, one of the most important points of distinction between individuals and nations in respect to wealth, is that which relates to industry and idleness. Rich men, though they are indeed often most laboriously and honourably active, yet may, and sometimes do, spend their lives in such idleness as cannot be found among the poor, excepting in the class of beggars. A rich nation, on the contrary, is always an industrious nation; and almost always more industrious than poor ones.'

'Among poor and barbarian nations, we may find as much avarice, fraud, vanity, and envy, called forth, in reference perhaps to a string of beads, a hatchet, or a musket, as are to be found in wealthier communities.'

'The savage is commonly found to be covetous, frequently rapacious, when his present inclination impels him to seek any object which he needs, or which his fancy is set on. He is not indeed so steady or so provident, in his pursuit of gain, as the civilized man; but this is from the general unsteadiness and improvidence of his character, not from his being engrossed in higher pursuits. What keeps him poor, in addition to want of skill and insecurity of property, is not a philosophical contempt of riches, but a love of sluggish torpor and of present gratification. The same may be said of such persons as constitute the dregs of a civilized community; they are idle, thoughtless, improvident; but thievish. Lamentable as it is to see, as we may, for instance, in our own country, multitudes of Beings of such high qualifications and such high destination as Man, absorbed in the pursuit of merely external and merely temporal objects-occupied in schemes for attaining wealth and worldly aggrandizement, without any higher views in pursuing them, we must remember that the savage is not above such a life, but below it. It is not from preferring virtue to wealth -the goods of the mind to those of fortune-the next world to the present that he takes so little thought for the morrow; but, from want of forethought and of habitual self-command. The civilized man, too often, directs these qualities to an unworthy object; the savage, universally, is deficient in the qualities themselves. The one is a stream, flowing, too often, in a wrong channel, and which needs to have its course altered; the other is a stagnant pool.'

'There is one antecedent presumption that the advancement in national wealth should be, on the whole, favourable to moral improvement, from what we know of the divine dispensations, both ordinary and extraordinary. I am aware what caution is called for in any attempt to reason à priori from our notions of the character and designs of the Supreme Being. But in this case there is a clear analogy before us. We know that God placed the human species in such a situation, and endued them with such faculties and propensities, as would infallibly tend to