Smaller states show the same impatience and restlessness. Wallachia and Moldavia, to the alarm of their immediate neighbours, Turkey and Austria, and without much respect for the treaty which closed the Russian war, have elected Prince Alexander Couza their hospodar. A conference of the Great Powers is proposed upon the subject; and it remains to be seen whether they will sanction an arrangement which will again disturb the balance of power on the borders of the Euxine. Even the little Ionian confederacy has its quarrel. Since 1815 it has been sheltered under the easy protectorate of England; it now pants for union with Greece, and perfect independence ;-a nominal liberty, but in fact a real subjection to Austria, or France, or Russia, as the case may be. Sir H. Storks has just been appointed the "Queen's High Commissioner for the United States of the Ionian Islands;" but he no sooner entered upon his office, than he was told that his presence would not be permitted in their tiny par liament. He properly prorogued that august assembly for six months. And thus we might proceed enumerating, in almost every state of Southern Europe, some symptoms either of impatience or of just alarm. The wretched King of Naples, lying, it is supposed, on his death-bed, has released from his dungeons some at least of the victims of his untiring malice. Upwards of sixty of these, gentlemen and men of rank, and amongst them Poerio, a former minister of State, after ten years' captivity in chains, were released, a few weeks ago, and banished to the United States. The attendant steamer which guarded them out two hundred miles at sea, had scarcely left them when they, one and all, protested to the captain of the vessel in which they sailed (happily an American) against his right to act the part of jailor on behalf of the Neapolitan tyrant. It was, they said, and we believe they were correct, a violation of the law of nations. The helm was put about, and in a few days they were safely landed at Cork, penniless, but not friendless, as the result has shown. At the suggestion of Lord Shaftesbury a committee has been formed of men of all parties, who are anxious to prove that, however averse Englishmen may be to join in a crusading war in Italy, we are by no means indifferent spectators of the tyranny exercised by Italian sovereigns, nor wanting in sympathy for truly patriotic men. A liberal sum has been subscribed within a few days for their immediate use, and more, no doubt, will be contributed with a generous hand.

It is a strange illustration of the true nature of the Papal sovereignty; little affected by external reverses; ever striking its roots deeper into the hearts of men when most abject; that at this very period it has completed its triumph over an ancient monarchy, with which it has struggled for three hundred years, and whose liberties it has now strangled at last. If we may believe the Univers, the organ of the church of Rome in France, the king of Abyssinia has sought the propitious moment when, to human appearance, the sovereignty of Rome is trembling in the scale, " to throw his kingdom and himself at the feet of this august representative of Jesus Christ on earth, it being the first time that an Ethiopian sovereign has accomplished so solemn a submission." Among all their deeds of darkness the Jesuits have nothing to answer for which exceeds in moral turpitude, in the waste of human life, in the meanest treachery, and

the base overthrow of peaceful and confiding sovereigns, what they have achieved upon the ill-fated soil of Abyssinia; and now it seems that, for a time at least, their triumphs are complete!

At home, the proceedings in parliament have absorbed attention. No less than three bills have been introduced on the subject of Church-rates. The first by Mr. Walpole, on behalf of the government. It was well intended, but its fate was sealed as soon as it was known that it transmuted the voluntary rates into a permanent rentcharge on the land. Few who knew anything of the pride with which our ancient gentry regard their estates, and the pertinacity with which they resist the slightest attempt to encumber them, expected any other result than that which the first division of the House of Commons showed. The bill was thrown out by a considerable majority. A second has been introduced by Sir J. Trelawney, which we hope will meet with a similar fate in the House of Lords, its aim being the total abolition of church-rates. A third bill introduced in the Upper House exempts every parishioner who pays his quota, however small, to another place of worship. But this, besides other serious objections, is at one and the same time annoying to the churchman and a premium on dissent. The former must pay the rate at the peril of legal consequences; while his next door neighbour, on paying a nominal sum for the repairs of the dissenting chapel, is free from molestation. It were far better that the whole question of churchrates should remain as it stands at present; available as heretofore, where the parish is united; a dead letter, where the parishioners cannot act in a friendly spirit.

Another measure which will press heavily upon the clergy,―on whom, after all, the burden lies of providing funds for our parish schools and other charitable institutions,-is a bill for rating schools, hospitals, &c., which hitherto have generally been exempted from rates and taxes. The argument is, that such exemptions belong to an obsolete system of bounties and drawbacks, which sounder views of political economy have exploded. But every rule has its exceptions, and the advocates of this very measure are sometimes amongst the first to urge them. How do they justify the government grants for the education of the poor? Especially, how do they defend the capitation fee? What is this but a bounty? A bounty too-and yet a judicious one, upon the whole-on the indifference or ignorance of the parent; a bribe to induce him to send his child to school, by the offer, on the part of the state, to pay so many pence a-week towards his education.

But the great political event of the month has been the longexpected measure of Parliamentary Reform. It was introduced on behalf of the government by Mr. Disraeli, on the 28th February, and has now been a month before the public. Its provisions are so well known, that it is needless to repeat them. It reduces the number of representatives returned by fifteen of the smallest boroughs from two to one, and transfers them to the West Riding of Yorkshire, South Lancashire, Middlesex, and several large manufacturing towns still unrepresented. It extends the right of voting in several directions, and equalises the occupation franchise for towns and counties, making it a ten-pound suffrage. The bill was read a second time on the 21st inst., and was immediately met with an amendment by Lord John Russell. The debate, after continuing for a week, is not concluded

when we write, and may probably be prolonged till the month ends. Upon the merits of the bill itself it is needless to offer an opinion, since the ministry have expressed their readiness to submit it to that "calm and full consideration" in Committee, to which, they intimate, the House of Commons stands pledged by its address to the Queen at the opening of the session. We must repeat what we said a month ago. The bill stirs no enthusiasm. It is the subject of no eager conversation. Men of all parties, except that which is represented by Mr. Bright, agree in wishing the question set at rest, either by this or some other moderate measure. The debates have been eloquent, but not impassioned. They want reality. The question of real interest on both sides evidently being, who shall govern ;—or, at least, how to get rid with safety of an anxious and perplexing subject. So that, on the whole, whether Lord Derby or his opponents are in office, the question of Reform will, we still hope, receive a wise and safe, or, in other words, a moderate adjustment.

Mr. Spooner has fixed upon the 5th April for his annual motion on the grant to Maynooth. However unpopular the subject may be, he will have with him the cordial sympathy of all those who believe that the grant involves a national sin as well as a national disgrace. There will be a large house, and he will have many supporters if only one half of those members shall be present who gave their constituents to understand, when they last stood upon the hustings, that they were opposed to the Maynooth endowment. The prospect of a dissolution may possibly revive their sickly Protestantism. We honor him for his courage and consistency, and true christian principle.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, after due consideration, has at length given judgment in the case of Mr. Poole. His words, as became his Grace's high position and the grave importance of the question at issue, were few and weighty. He said, "With the assistance of my learned assessor, I have given the merits and the circumstances of this appeal my most serious and careful consideration. I am of opinion that the proved and admitted allegations afford, in the language of the statute, good and reasonable cause for the revocation of this license; and that the Lord Bishop of London has exercised a good and sound discretion in revoking the same; and I am further of opinion that the course pursued by the appellant is not only not in accordance with the rubric or doctrine of the church of England, but most dangerous, and likely to produce most serious mischief to the cause of morality and religion." The decree of revocation was then formally recorded, and the court adjourned. The judgment will cause thanksgivings to abound in every place," where the purity of the Church of England is prized and has been felt to be in danger. Once more, "We thank God, and take courage."

TO CORRESPONDENTS.

SIGMA will not suit us. The awful question of the nature of Future Punishments is not an open one in these pages. Nor do we insert anything anonymous. Still we thank the writer, and will return his paper if he will favour us with his address.

We must also decline several poetical contributions.

In a former paper on the subject of preaching, we addressed ourselves to the larger and more general enquiry, "What object should a preacher propose to himself on intering a pulpit?" and, as a consequence, in what spirit should he engage in his work? We should do well often to put to ourselves the question, "What mean we by this service ?" Do we mean merely to reconcile our congregations to their grudged two hours in the sanctuary, by startling novelties, by striking descriptions, by laboured argument, -now sharpening their wits by the keenness of controversy, now ministering to their imaginative tendencies by some eloquent and poetic flight? Or is our one object to convince of sin, to move to repentance, to gather in the dispersed ones to the fold of Christ, to build up in faith, and hope, and love, and holiness, the whole church of God? Plainly the last is our object; and therefore we were led to recognise, as among rules which the faithful minister will have ever before him, those two impressive scriptures :"Till I come, give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine;" and, "We will give ourselves continually to prayer.”

We now propose to enter upon an entirely different part of the subject, or THE METHOD of preaching; intending to consider under that more general designation, the structure, style, delivery, and subject-matter of a sermon.

I. To the subject of structure we advert, chiefly that we may raise the question, whether, in our zeal to avoid the cumbrous and complicated divisions which marked the homiletics of the Puritan and Jacobite age,-burdening, rather than helping, the memory by chief heads, and lesser heads, and inferences without number,-we do not sometimes run into the opposite extreme, by preaching discourses, of which it would be difficult to say that they had any

Vol. 58.-No. 257.

2 P

leading head at all? The mind of the hearer has nothing to rest upon. He recalls a tolerable argument in one part of the sermon, and a fair illustration in another,-here a carefully constructed statement of doctrine, and there a good practical appeal,—but how they came in, where they came in, why they came in,—how they were severally related to each other, or what was their bearing on some larger and general plan,-this he cannot tell, and the wonder would be if he could. For we had no plan. We could hardly say that we set out with the intention to prove one thing more than another. Our discourse was a succession of truisms, but unrelated to any central truth, a congeries of links, but no chain. Now it is certain we should tolerate this in no other art. An epic without its hero, a piece of music without its key, a picture made up entirely of chief figures, would, in spite of any excellences of detail, be condemned as a hopeless failure. Paley, in one of his Charges, says, "Propose one point in one discourse, and stick to it; a hearer never carries away more than one impression." One uppermost impression, perhaps, and the Archdeacon's dictum, may stand; because, though others are carried away, they are only as ancillary to that, confirmatory of that, illustrative of that. And this centripetal check upon all we introduce into a sermon, is what we should always aim at. It is not necessary to the clear understanding of a discourse, that the scheme or outline of it should be formally announced beforehand, any more than that, in order to appreciate an architectural design, it is necessary to see the working drawings. Only it should be patent from the beginning that a scheme we have that we have a point, and are working up to it. Whether we allow our implements to be seen or not, no one can fail to see that we are working upon a frame; have bound ourselves to keep within certain tram-lines; do not suffer ourselves to be drawn aside into those feeble and discursive platitudes, which would not much help any sermon; but which, at all events, would do for one sermon as well as another. We cannot find any countenance in Scripture for such unarranged, inconsecutive, untidy homiletics. 66 Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

II. A more important question, however, will arise as to what is the best STYLE of preaching? And here a'l hands will be first held up for a PLAIN style. Aim at what else you may, it will be said to us, Take care to be simple. Eschew all attempts at fine writing. Blot out, with ruthless hand, every allusion, reference, illustration, argument, which could not be apprehended by the commonest mind. And, instead of your hard sesquipedalian Latinisms, see to it that all your thoughts are clothed in strong, terse, Saxon English. And the authority of great names and great examples will be urged in support of such counsel. Better that the learned should find fault, than that the people should not