Fifth Decade.

LANT CARPENTER, 1780-1840.

LANT CARPENTER, the third son of George Carpenter, a carpet-manufacturer of Kidderminster, was born at that place on the 2d of September, 1780. He completed his professional studies at the University of Glasgow, where he acquitted himself with so much credit that the degree of LL.D. was conferred upon him at an unusually early period of life. After leaving Glasgow, he was for a time librarian of the Liverpool Athenæum; but he soon settled as a minister over a congregation in Exeter, and, after being there some years, he removed to Bristol and took charge of the Unitarian church, in which connection he continued to the closing year of his life. He died on the 5th of April, 1840. He had embarked from Naples (whither he had gone for his health) on that day for Leghorn, and at ten o'clock P.M. was seen, for the last time, walking the deck of the vessel. It was a dark and stormy night, and, as he was prostrated by sea-sickness, probably in one of the lurches of the vessel he lost his balance and fell overboard. His body was washed on shore about fifty miles from Rome.

Dr. Carpenter was distinguished by the possession of great benevolence and ardent piety. He entered with a peculiar zeal into every thing which he undertook, and his labors were always in the line of what is favorable to the best interests of man. He was held in affectionate esteem by his congregation, and was regarded with respect by all who knew him. While engaged in his ministerial duties he was for many years at the head of a school, and employed himself in lecturing and in writing for the press. Besides sermons and works connected with the Unitarian controversy, he published An Introduction to the Geography of the New Testament; Plain Rules and Catalogue of a Library for Young Persons; Dissertations on the Duration of our Saviour's Ministry; and the Chronological Arrangement of the Gospel Records. But the work by which he is best known-and a most admirable work it is-is that entitled Principles of Education, Intellectual, Moral, and Physical. He also wrote, in conjunction with the Rev. W. Shepherd and the Rev. J. Joyce, Systematic Education, or Elementary Instruction in the Various Departments of Literature and Science. From this very instructive book, and one peculiarly adapted for the mental and moral improvement of the young, I select the following excellent and timely remarks upon

THE REGULATION OF THE SENSIBLE PLEASURES.

Suppose that any one endeavored to gratify the impulse of his bodily appetites without any restraint from the virtues of temperance and chastity: he would soon destroy his bodily faculties,thus rendering the objects of the sensible pleasures useless,-and he would precipitate himself into pain, diseases, and death. "This is a plain matter of observation, verified every day by the sad example of loathsome, tortured wretches that occur which way Boever we turn our eyes,-in the streets, in private families, in

hospitals, in palaces." Positive misery, and the loss even of sensible pleasure, are too inseparably connected with intemperance and every kind of impurity, to leave room for doubt, even to the most skeptical. The sensual appetites must, therefore, be regulated by, and made subservient to, some other part of our natures; otherwise we shall miss even the sensible pleasures which we might have enjoyed, and shall fall into the opposite pains, which are, in general, far greater and more exquisite than the sensible pleasures.

The same conclusion also follows from the fact that inordinate indulgence in sensual gratification destroys the mental faculties, exposes to external inconveniences and pains, is totally inconsistent with the duties and pleasures of benevolence and piety, and is all along attended with the secret reproaches of the moral sense and the horrors of a guilty mind. Such is the constitution of our frame, that the formation of mental feelings and affections cannot be altogether prevented; but an inordinate pursuit of sensible pleasures converts the mental affections into a source of pain, and impairs and cuts off the intellectual pleasures.

Upon the lowest principles of self-interest, therefore, the pleasures of sensation ought not to be made the primary pursuit of life. Even a mere prudential regard to our own present happiness requires that they should be submitted to the precepts of benevolence, piety, and the moral sense.

By this steady adherence to moderation, we are no losers even with respect to sensible pleasures themselves; for by these means our senses and bodily powers are preserved in their best state and as long as is consistent with the necessary decay of the body; and this moderation and its beneficial consequences directly tend to inspire the mind with perpetual serenity, cheerfulness, and good will, and with gratitude to the Giver of all good.

"The only rule with respect to our diet," says Dr. Priestley, in his Institutes, "is to prefer those kinds and that quantity of food which most conduce to the health and vigor of our bodies. Whatever in eating or drinking is inconsistent with and obstructs this end is wrong, and should carefully be avoided; and every man's own experience, assisted with a little information from others, will be sufficient to inform him what is nearly the best for himself in both these respects, so that no person is likely to injure himself through mere mistake."

It is sufficiently obvious that it is the benevolent affections which give the chief value and highest interest to the sensible pleasures arising from the intercourse of the sexes; and it also appears that these pleasures were designed by the great Author of our frame to be one chief means of transferring our affection and concern from ourselves to others. If, therefore, this great source of benevolence be corrupted or perverted, the social affec

tions depending on it will also be perverted, and degenerate into selfishness or malevolence. It is more or less corrupted or perverted by every indulgence of the passions out of those limits which reason and sound and comprehensive experience prescribe, equally with the revealed laws of God, as best promoting the great ends for which they were implanted in our frame.

These limits are fixed by the marriage institutions, which philosophy as well as religion cannot fail to acknowledge as of the utmost importance to the happiness and improvement of mankind. The direct tendency of these institutions is to promote the comfort and moral elevation of that sex to whom Providence has, in a peculiar degree, intrusted the physical care of infancy and early childhood, and the commencement of the habits on which the welfare of the next race depends; to whom is committed the delightful task of first developing the powers of the understanding and cultivating and refining the affections. Independently of this more indirect influence, they essentially aid in the proper care and the mental and moral culture of the rising generation. They supply a constant and invaluable stimulus for the activity and abilities of the parents. They call into exercise and cherish in the child those charities which are the root of general benevolence and bear a close relation to the affections of piety. And the moral union which they produce between those who form the conjugal relation has a direct and efficacious tendency to promote in them the great ends of life, as well as to refine and dignify its present satisfactions and endearments.

To produce the best effects, this union must be inviolable and for life; and it should ever be attended with mutual esteem and tenderness, with mutual deference, forbearance, confidence, aid, and sympathy.

The laws of our frame, the plain dictates of experience and observation, and the express and authoritative precepts of the Scriptures, all concur in pointing to steady self-control as the safest, the wisest, and the happiest course, and in directing to avoid, with strict caution, every violation of purity and chastity. Ogden well observes, on this subject, "Irregularity has naturally no limits: one excess draws on another;" "the most easy, therefore, as well as the most excellent way of being virtuous is to be so entirely." The laws of the gospel enjoin that we avoid the indulgence even of impure desires. It is a strict, but it is also a benevolent, morality. It checks the evil where it is easiest, where almost alone it is possible effectually to check it,-at the source. Leaving out of view the mischievous and commonly irremediable effects of impurity of every kind on the health of the bodily system, it is a weighty consideration that licentiousness corrupts and depraves the mind and moral character more than any single species of vice whatsoever. That ready perception of

guilt, that prompt and decisive resolution against it, which forms one grand feature in a virtuous character, is seldom found in persons addicted to these indulgences. They prepare an easy admission for every sin that seeks it: they are, in low life, usually the first stage in men's progress to the most desperate wickedness; and, in high life, to that lamented dissoluteness of principle which manifests itself in a profligacy of public conduct, and a contempt of the obligations of religion and moral probity. Add to this, that habits of libertinism incapacitate and indispose the mind for all intellectual, moral, and religious pleasures, which is a great loss to any man's happiness.

The moral instructor, who is anxious for the welfare of the young, must feel solicitous to induce them to shun the beginning of evils so destructive to their peace and welfare; and he cannot fail to urge them to avoid every kind of indecent language. The advice of the heathen moralist cannot be too forcibly recommended or too cautiously observed. The Scripture precepts are express on this point; they require us to avoid all "corrupt communication;" and they point to a future account of our words, as well as of our actions.

In innumerable instances, the first step to ruin has been indulging in impure conversation.

To give the dictates of reason, religion, and conscience their due influence, the disposition to self-restraint should be early and steadily cherished by those who have the care of the young; and after they arrive at that period in which the passions too often acquire the ascendency, it should be carefully exercised by themselves. Next to the direct culture and exercise of religious principle, nothing can be more effectual than a full and judicious employment of their time in the various engagements of their station, in the occupations to which benevolence prompts, in the acquisition of useful knowledge, and in cheerful and active, but innocent, recreation. If habits are formed of indolence, and of unrestrained indulgence in sleep, in diet, and in mere amusement, it is in vain to look for that self-control which was declared to be "wisdom's root," by one who, through the want of it, blighted his fairest prospects and sunk into an untimely grave.

If we are asked by any of our young readers how they may pass through the present period of their lives with most of honor and of solid enjoyment, and at the same time make the best

preparation for future respectability, usefulness, and happiness, we should unhesitatingly answer,-Think nothing allowable, in word or action, which you feel your conscience condemn, and of which you could not speak to a respected friend,-cherish an habitual and operative sense of the Divine presence and your own accountableness, and remember that "he who despiseth small things shall fall by little and little."

THOMAS ARNOLD, 1795-1842.

DR. THOMAS ARNOLD was born at Cowes, Isle of Wight, on the 13th of June, 1795. He received his preparatory education at Winchester School, and went thence, in 1811, to Corpus Christi College, Oxford. In 1814 his name was placed in the first class in classical literature, and in the next year he was elected fellow of Oriel College, when he gained the chancellor's prize for the two university essays, Latin and English, for the years 1815 and 1817. In December, 1818, he was ordained deacon at Oxford. In 1819 he settled at Laleham, where he remained for the next nine years, taking seven or eight young men as private pupils in preparation for the universities. In 1827 he was elected head master of the school at Rugby. On the death of Dr. Nares, in 1841, he was offered the Regius professorship of modern history at Oxford, which he accepted, without resigning his place at Rugby, but the very next year, 1842, on the 12th of June, he died on the day that completed his fortyseventh year.

It is impossible, in the limits necessarily assigned to these biographical notices, to do justice to the intellectual, moral, and religious character of this eminently great and good man. No other English scholar of the present century has exerted a wider or more happy influence on the literary and religious world. In whatever light we view him, either as a scholar, an historian, a schoolmaster, a theologian, or as a man, he commands our highest respect and warmest admiration.

As a scholar, Dr. Arnold was distinguished for his deep and varied learning, and for his extensive and accurate classical attainments. He was particularly fond of Grecian literature, and his edition of Thucydides gave proof of his accurate Greek scholarship, and of his discriminating taste as a critic. But, what was better than all, he was a Christian scholar, and aimed to make himself and his pupils look upon knowledge not as an end, but as a means to higher and more enlarged usefulness.

As an historian, he shows in his own most instructive Lectures on Modern History, in his History of Rome, and of The Later Roman Commonwealth, what history ought to be, and how it should be studied. His History of Rome is undoubtedly the best history in the language; and to its composition the author brought the very highest qualifications of learning and of religious principle. "He saw God in history, and felt that righteousness exalts a nation, and that sin is not merely a reproach to a people, but that it introduces rottenness and decay into its very heart."