for it to attain its full size and beauty. And what is still more wonderful, the moral and physical evils of this world are thus made to nourish the very means which are to operate as their remedies. This self-restoring power, -this 'vis medicatrix naturae,' is a characteristic of our system which seems to be universal. It is to the physical and the moral evils of life-though chiefly to the former, that man is immediately indebted also, for what have been termed the passive virtues. Thus were there no pain and sorrow in the world, there would be no severe trials of our confidence in God, no willing resignation to his holy will in the day of trouble, no pious fortitude and resignation under the chastenings of a Father's hand. The common blessings of Providence would not brighten by contrast with the darkness of poverty and wretchedness, and gratitude and praise would lose one half of their intensity. For the purpose of illustrating this subject more fully, let us consider for a moment some of the advantages of sickness-as sore an evil, it is commonly supposed, as God permits to visit us. Nothing, in the first place, so effectually convinces us of our dependence on our heavenly Father, and of our obligation to Him for the common blessings of his Providence. When enjoying a sound state of health, we are apt to forget that the arm of God is constantly upholding us, and that his boundless charity is unceasingly flowing in upon us, and around us, and filling us with life and joy. We breathe the air which he diffuses around us; we lie down at night under his protection, and are awaked to activity again, by his gentle hand; and who realizes this so much, as the man who has just risen from the bed of sickness, where perhaps, the fire of some fever has heated the very air he has breathed, and converted the delicacies of life, and even the very down on which he has reposed, into instruments of pain? "A night's rest, or a comfortable meal,' says Dr. Paley, 'should immediately direct our gratitude to God. The use of our limbs, the possession of our senses, every degree of health, every hour of ease, every sort of satisfaction which we enjoy, should carry our thoughts to this same object." We should have suspected, had we not learned it from other sources, that Dr. Paley was an invalid, though according to his own account of himself, (and how worthy of him the acknowledgment!) he was blessed with a sufficiently happy life.' Sickness also, has a tendency to soften the heart, and awaken our tenderest sympathies for our suffering fellow-men. It teaches us very forcibly the uncertainty of life, and all its enjoyments. It teaches the vanity of human distinctions; of wealth, of beauty, of power, and of all the pomp and splendour of the great. "Bind the wreath of laurel around the sick man's brow," says an eloquent divine," and see if it will assuage his aching temples. Spread before him the deeds and instruments, which prove him the lord of innumerable possessions, and see if you can beguile him of a moment's anguish; see if he will not give you up those barren parchments for one drop of cool water, one draught of pure air. Go, tell him, when a fever rages through his veins that his table smokes with luxuries, and that the wine moveth itself aright, and giveth its colour in the cup, and see if this will calm his throbbing pulse. Tell him, as he lies prostrate, helpless, and sinking with debility, that the song and dance are ready to begin, and that all without him is life, alacrity and joy. Nay, more, place in his motionless hand the sceptre of a mighty empire, and see if he will be eager to grasp it. The eye of Cæsar could not regain its lustre by the recollection, that its "bend could awe the world," nor his shaking limbs be quieted by remembering, that his nod could command obedience from millions of slaves." It is the tendency of sickness also, to shew us our dependence on each other and thus to strengthen the bonds 3 of friendship and love. It shews us most forcibly the value of health, and if it is permitted to perfect its work, it will not leave us without kindling in our bosoms a glow of gratitude to wards our Heavenly benefactor, which will warm and cheer the soul in its progress to eternity. Sickness also is a friendly monitor, which bids us prepare for death. When our course as we advance in life is smooth, when the unruffled stream slides along, and the balmy zephyrs breathe upon our little bark, we are in danger of being lulled to repose, and to forget that ere long we shall be borne to the brink of an awful precipice. How kind then this heavenly messenger, to wake us from our slumbers, and admonish us of our mortality. A heathen prince once required a servant to come into his bed-chamber every morning, and admonish him that he was but a man, and must soon die. This was truly honourable to him, but how much more effectual had been the admonition, if he had been laid occasionally on a bed of sickness, and the sceptre of dominion had fallen from his hand. Sickness also presents an occasion for the exercise of fortitude, of patience, and of all those christian graces which constitute what is termed resignation. Where then is the evil of this supposed enemy to our peace and our happiness? Is it not the dictate of reason, as well as of revelation, "it is good for me that I have been afflicted ?" We confidently believe it is, unless the fault is our own; and were the question put to us-should you then really esteem it a blessing to be laid at times on the bed of sickness? we should readily answer, yes, and we envy not the man on whom this blessing in disguise has never fallen. We are now prepared to perceive the futility of an argument, very of ten urged against the doctrine for which we have been contending. Partial good, it is said, is for aught we know as compatible with the worst, as partial evil is with the best possible system. Now if it has been shewn that the evil which exists in our world has a tendency to promote virtue, we have better reasons for concluding that partial evil is compatible with the best, than we have for concluding that partial good is compatible with the worst possible system, for we know not, that evil is ever the result of good. What, precisely, Mr.Stewart's views are on the subject of the freedom of the will, he does not inform us. We learn however that he is not a necessarian. We have also been informed, that he has said in one of his lectures, that the argument of our illustrious Edwards on this subject is unanswerable. If this is so, we may conclude that his views on the subject, are not precisely those of his great master and predecessor, Dr. Reid. The disagreement of President Edwards and of Dr. Reid, however, on this subject, is not so great as has sometimes been represented. We think there are but two points on which they really differ. The President thinks that every act of volition is preceded by a motive. Dr. Reid does not. The President maintains also that (to use his own language) the doctrine of "the souls having power to cause and determine its own volitions," involves the absurdity of an infinite series of volitions. Dr. Reid is of a different opinion. It appears very evident to us, that Dr. Reid in his argument on the first point, has mistaken a preference for one act over another, for a preference for the object of one act over the object of another. It is true there is nothing in one guinea, as he says, which is not in another, and there can therefore be no ground of preference between them: still the act of taking one of them, may have a slight preference over the act of taking another. The reason why we do not remember the motive in such cases is probably, that it passes through the mind too rapidly; or for some other reason, makes too slight an impression to become an object of attention. We would in the last place call the attention of our readers to Mr. Stewart's definition of virtue, and to his views respecting the foundation of Moral Obligation. What his definition of virtue would be, may be inferred from the following observation: "a man whose ruling or habitual principle of action, is a sense of duty, may be properly denominated virtuous." This we acknowledge appears to us to be the correct, and the only correct view of the subject. Almost all the other definitions which have been given of virtue, are, we think, either erroneous, or not sufficiently comprehensive. One has said that virtue consists in benevolence,-another "in obedience to the will of God," another in the "love of being in general,”—another in the "love of doing good,"-another in doing good in obedience to the will of God, for the sake of everlasting happiness," another in "acting according to reason,”—another in "acting according to truth,”—another in "acting according to nature,”-another in "maintaining a proper balance of the affections,"-another in "that course of conduct which best secures ease of body and tranquillity of mind,"-another " in every faculty of the mind's confining itself within its proper sphere, and performing its proper office with precisely that degree of strength and vigour which belongs to it," &c. &c. Now if the eye was made for seeing, the ear for hearing, the memory for recollecting, and the judgment for perceiving truth and falsehood, then most surely conscience was given us to perceive right and wrong, for this is the purpose for which we are prompted by nature to use it; and it will not be denied that, when enlightened by revelation, it is a safe guide of our moral conduct. Although therefore, some of the above mentioned definitions of virtue, may lead to no error in our moral conduct, yet it is believed, it is because they coineide with the definition given by our author, Thus it is a sacred truth that we are bound to obey the will of God, but it is not simply because it is his will, but because it is the will of a good and just Being. Nor are we bound to obey his will, merely because he is our maker and our preserver and our bountiful benefactor, for this would be resolving virtue into mere gratitude. But the truth is, his will is, in its nature, morally right and excellent, and we are therefore under sacred and eternal obligations to obey it. What then is the foundation of moral obligation? In answer to this question, our author makes the following observation, and we think it is conclusive: It is absurd to ask, why we are bound to practice virtue? The very notion of virtue implies the notion of obligation." In other words, both of the following considerations enter into our complex idea of virtue—a course of conduct which conscience or the sense of duty deciares to merit approbation, and which she also declares we are bound to pursue. Before we leave the work we must express our opinion more distinctly of its religious and moral tendency. Mr. Stewart, it appears, is a most decided believer in the truths of natural religion, though we do not know precisely what are his views of Chistianity. He very seldom alludes to the sacred writings, though whenever he does, it is in a very becoming manner. Of the Deity he uniformly speaks with the most profound and unaffected reverence. The love of God, he considers the first of all duties. On the whole, although we should be exceedingly glad to see something more explicit from him on the subject of revealed religion, yet when we look at the moral pollution which has overspread so many of the pages of modern phi losophy, and when we consider the important service he has done the science of natural theology, and the purity of moral sentiment which runs throughout all his works, we find abundant reason to rejoice, even for the sake of our religion, that such a writer has appeared before the pub lic; and more especially when we remember how completely he has exposed the sophistry of such ingenious writers as Hartley, Priestley, Darwin, Tooke and Hume. The decided stand which he has taken in opposition to the sceptical conclusions of the last mentioned philosopher especially, does him great credit, for Mr. Hume, as is well known, was one of his countrymen, and indeed a cotemporary of his earlier years. "Berke ley," says Mr. Stewart," was sincerely and bona fide an idealist, but Mr. Hume's leading object in his metaphysical writings, was plainly to inculcate an universal scepticism. In this respect the real scope of his arguments has, I think, been misunderstood by most, if not all of his opponents. It evidently was not, as they seem to have supposed, to exalt reasoning in preference to our instinctive principles of belief; but, by illustrating the contradictory conclusions to which our different faculties lead, to involve the whole subject in the same suspicious darkness. In other words his aim was not to interrogate nature, with a view to the discovery of truth, but by a cross-examination of nature, to involve her in such contradictions as might set aside the whole of her evidence as good for nothing."* But were there nothing in Mr. Stewart's writings which has a direct bearing on religious subjects, still every friend to religion should rejoice to see the boundaries of human knowledge extending, and the cause of truth enlisting on its side so able advocates. It is too late to think of extinguishing the light of science that religion may do her work in the dark. She prefers the open day-nay, she courts it, and could one of her most fervent wishes be gratified, the torch of science would burn on every mountain and in every valley; for then she would exhibit her excellence to the best possible advantage. The world would then be attracted by her loveliness; they would be awed by her solemn realities; they would throng *Phil. Essays Essay 2d, chop 1. to her sacred temples for instruction and devotion. The song of angels would rise to a higher strain, and he who was once the light of the world, would bend his eye towards this once dark mansion, with a new and liveli er interest. We will conclude our remarks with a brief account of what Mr. Stewart has already done for the world, and of what we may perhaps expect from him hereafter. The plan of his lectures has been in the first place to treat of man considered as an intellec tual being, and in the second place to treat of him as an active or moral being, and in the last place to treat of him as a member of political society. His lectures on all of these great subjects, it appears, are written, and two volumes of them, which treat of the "Intellectual Powers" of man, as is well known, have been published. A third volume on this subject is yet unpublished. It contains something on the subject of language, of imitation, on the varieties of intellectual character, and on the faculties by which man is distinguished from the lower animals. Of his lectures which treat of man" considered as an active and a moral being," and as a "member of political society," he has published nothing except these outlines. It appears however that they were all ready for publication seven years ago, except that "much remained to be done in maturing, digesting, and arranging many of the doctrines," contained in them, and he adds (in the year 1813) "if I shall be blessed for a few years longer, with a moderate share of health and mental vigour, I do not altogether despair of yet contributing something in the form of Essays, to fill up the outline which the sanguine imagination of youth encouraged me to conceive, before I had duly measured the magnitude of my undertaking with the time or with the abilities which I could devote to the execution." Besides the works abovementioned, he has published, as is well known a volume of Philosophical Essays' and two long dissertations on the History of Metaphysical, Ethical and Political Philosophy;' the former of which works was written in the interval which elapsed between the publication of his two volumes of the Philosophy of the Mind, when it appears "the state of his health" was such, that he was induced to attempt "the easier task of preparing for the press a volume of Essays." A fine medicine, one would think, for a sick man! The latter work was published in part about four years ago, and a part of it is yet to appear.] A Sermon delivered at Lee, Dec. 22nd, 1820; being the two hundredth anniversary of the landing of our ancestors at Plymouth: By Alvan Hyde, D. D. Pastor of the Church in Lee, (Mass.) The character and sufferings of the Pilgrims. A Sermon delivered at Pittsfield, Mass. Dec. 22nd, 1820.: By Heman Humphrey, Pastor of the Congregational Church in Pittsfield. A Discourse on the settlement and progress of New-England: delivered in Farmington, on Friday evening, Dec. 22nd, 1820: By Noah Porter. A tribute to New-England: A sermon delivered before the New-England Society of the City and State of New-York, on the 22nd of Dec. 1820. Being the second centennial celebration, of the landing of the Pilgrims at Plymouth: By Gardiner Spring, D. D. Pastor of the brick Presbyterian Church in that city. A Sermon in commemoration of the landing of the New-England Pilgrims, delivered in the second Presbyterian church, Albany, Dec. 22nd, 1820: on the completion of the second century, since that event: By John Chester, Pastor of the second Presbyterian church, Albany. Some of the most delightful and improving emotions, that the beart ever experiences, spring from recollections connected with our Father's sepulchres. We cherish with the tenderest interest, the memory of our departed ancestors. The places where they lived and toiled; where they wept and prayed; where they fought and conquered; are dear to the sweetest efforts of memory, and the most sacred and most noble affections of the heart. land they conquered is ruled by their sons. Our Fathers, where are they? The Their fields spread their beauty to other eyes, and yield their harvests to other generations. That narrow spot, is all they possess. The stone that marks it, is al ready hoary with moss-the foot of time has worn out the inscription, that filia! affection had written. As individuals, few of them had any memento; though as a community, the history of their selfdenial and valour, their wisdom and patri. otism, will be cherished as long as their descendants shall inherit their spirit, or grateful affection shall exist. These are just and striking thoughts, though not perhaps the most favourable specimen that might be given of the author's style and manner. The Fathers of New-England, were indeed men of no ordinary stature. No other wilderness was ever subdued, by such a race of adventurers. They loved the country that gave them birth, and would gladly have been buried there, in the tombs of their ancestors. But they loved their Saviour more, and rather than submit to ceremonies and impositions of Popish invention, they determined to hazard the loss of all things. They came hither bright from the furnace of persecution, and singularly fitted by the hardships which they had endured, to encounter "perils in the sea, and perils in the wilderness." Brave, enlightened, pious; the ardent friends of liberty and literature, strict observers of the holy Sabbath, having the highest reverence for the bible and all religious institutions, and cordially embracing the doctrines of the most enlightened reformers, they proceeded without delay, under the smiles of a protecting providence, to lay those deep and broad foundations, on which some of the best institu Mr. Chester in his exordium, ob- tions in the world, have rested for serves, two centuries. Surely such men, |