Page images

it secured the approbation of the General Conference, and since that time it has been gradually and efficiently extending its operations. Its stations are among the American Indians, in South America, Texas and beyond the Rocky Mountains. This last mission is particularly promising. The receipts of the Society in 1820, were $803,04; in 1839, $135,521,94!

The Missionary Society of the Protestant Episcopal church was organized by the General Convention in 1820. At the Convention of 1835, the church undertook and agreed, in her character as a church, to carry on the work of Christian missions. The Society therefore became extinct. Within the last few years, the spirit of missions in this denomination has evidently become more vigorous and active. Stations are now sustained at Green Bay, Cape Palmas, Athens, Crete, Constantinople, China and Texas. Funds are in readiness for more extensive operations. Men only are wanted.

The Freewill Baptist Foreign Mission Society was organiz. ed in 1833. Its formation was owing, in a great measure, to the appeal of Rev. Mr. Sutton, then and now the missionary of the General Baptists of England at Orissa. Its first missionaries sailed from this country to India in 1835. It has no other station.

The Board of Foreign Missions of the Presbyterian church was instituted in May, 1837. The missions, funds and all the concerns of the Western Foreign Missionary Society, which had been formed in 1836 by the Synod of Pittsburg, were immediately transferred to this Board. Its present stations are among the American Indians, in Africa, China and Northern India. The last is considered as offering great encouragment to missionary effort. It is the intention of the Board to make the mission to China extensive and efficient.

2.-The History of Greece. By Thomas Keightley. To which is added, a chronological table of contemporary history. By Joshua Toulmin Smith, author of "Comparative view of Ancient History, and explanation of chronological eras." Boston: Hilliard, Gray and Co. 1839, pp. 490. 3.-The History of Rome. By Thomas Keightley, author of "the History of Greece," etc. To which is added, a chronological table of contemporary history. By Joshua Toulmin Smith, author of "Comparative view of Ancient History, and explanation of chronological eras." Boston Hilliard, Gray & Co.; 1839, pp. 480. 4.-The History of England. By Thomas Keightley. Revised

and edited, with notes and additions. By Joshua Toulmin Smith, author of "Comparative view of Ancient History, and explanation of chronological eras." In two volumes. Boston: Hilliard, Gray & Co.; 1840, pp. 552, 559.

When we began the preface to the first of the above named volumes, and found that the book was designed "to supply the want of a good History of Greece for schools," we had very serious misgivings as to its value. A History for Schools, in this country at least, is a very equivocal recommendation. But we soon discovered that the works of Mr. Keightley were something more than mere school-books. His idea of a popular epitome is, "that, while by clear, animated and graphic narrative it should interest the young, the views of society and of political measures and characters should be such, as not to be disdained even by the statesman." According to his view, therefore, the young are not alone to be considered: there is a very numerous class of grown persons who feel the want of sound historic knowledge, but have not time for reading voluminous works, and have a just contempt for the common school histories." For persons of this description likewise these volumes are prepared: indeed, we regard them as better suited to their use than to that of ordinary schools. They will also serve as a good introduction to our larger histories.

Mr. Smith, the American editor, says of Mr. Keightley, that "he generally gives the facts on each side with equal fairness and freedom, and his expressions of opinion in respect to agitated or party questions are usually equally unbiassed and independent." This remark, we think, does no more than simple justice to the author. With a few exceptions, some of which will be noticed hereafter, we find nothing to say against his candor and impartiality. Indeed, we have seldom met with a writer of history who succeeded so well in this particular. We are constrained to give him "credit for a love of justice and liberty, and a hatred of oppression and tyranny" under every form. He is equally unsparing toward the democracy of Athens, the oligarchy of Rome, and the jure divino pretensions of the Stuarts.

These volumes prove Mr. Keightley to be a man of extensive research and sound learning. He has not been content with reading Goldsmith, Gillies, Ferguson, Hume, Henry, Smollett, etc. He has traversed the whole field, and brought to his aid the discoveries of the best writers, ancient and modThere is sometimes a greater display of erudition than


is required by the subject. Occasional mistakes are committed in reference to minor points; as where he says: "Consul means merely colleague, for, as in exul, praesul, the syllable sul denotes one who is." Still we have the satisfaction of feeling that we are in the company of one who is not a mere tyro in these matters. His style is generally good. It is concise, clear, nervous and animated; and hence, it is well suited to works like the present. We have noticed an occasional want of simplicity, and the too frequent introduction of words which are not English. We refer to such as the following: atimy, timocracy, proxeny, dokimasy, cury, praeluder, fetials, medism, phyles, consular, (as a noun,) epitomator, (instead of epitomist or epitomizer.) We earnestly protest against every such encroachment on the purity of our mother tongue.

In writing the History of Greece Mr. Keightley was greatly assisted by a careful study of Müller, Heeren, Böckh and Wachsmuth among the Germans, and Mitford, Arnold and Clinton among the English. He does not give us "Plutarch's men," the heroes and patriots whom we admired and loved in our boyhood. He makes the republics of Athens, Sparta, etc., something widely different from what we once thought them. But he does them simple, evenhanded justice. He dispels the illusions of poetry, and substitutes what we regard as the sober truth.

The History of Rome gives, in the first place, the usual account of the origin and growth of the city, previous to its destruction by the Gauls. But the author adopts the theory of Pouilly, Levesque and others, and, consequently, considers this portion of the Roman annals as mainly fabulous. He therefore presents the narrative of Niebuhr, and leaves the reader to make his election between them. His view of the struggle between the rich and the poor, though less favorable to the former than the latter, is generally correct.

The American editor, speaking of the History of England, makes the following remarks: "Throughout the whole work, Mr. Keightley exhibits exalted and noble views of constitutional independence; his account of the Stuarts is admirable; and his summary of the struggles of the spirit of the nation with the assumed prerogative of the monarch is, perhaps, the best that has ever appeared. It may be expected, perhaps, that much of the account of the American revolution would require considerable alteration. Such has not been the case. The spirit of the narrative, on that point, is candid, liberal, and just." We regard this high commendation as generally deserved. But the editor thinks that there is a lack of

impartiality in the author's account of "the influence and deeds of the church of Rome and her followers ;" "the merits of Queen Elizabeth, and her conduct towards Mary, Queen of Scots;" and "some of the more recent demonstrations of public opinion in Britain." His thrust at the Dissenters (vol. 2, p. 524) is unworthy of the dignified and candid historian. Though far from wishing to become the advocate of Mary, Queen of Scots, we should have preferred a more decided censure of the hypocrisy of Elizabeth. But we are not sure that Mr. Keightley's remarks respecting the church of Rome need any very marked qualification.

5.-Medical and Physiological Commentaries. By Martyn Paine, M. D. A. M. In two volumes. New-York: Collins, Keese and Co. London: John Churchill; 1840, pp. 716, 815.

[As this work has quite recently come into our hands, and embraces a great variety of subjects and reasonings, with which we cannot be supposed to be familiar, a medical friend, on whose competency and good judgment we rely, and who has thoroughly examined the work, has, at our solicitation, prepared the following notice.]

Few perhaps are aware, that one of our fellow citizens, the much respected author of the above work, has found time, amidst the arduous duties of active professional life, to accomplish a literary undertaking, which for extent of research, vigor of thought and ingenuity of reasoning, has certainly no parallel in this country. We rejoice to find that the author's labours are properly appreciated by his professional brethren; and we feel assured that they will not go unrewarded. The work, however, commends itself, not only to the attention of the physician, but also to the student of general science, and it abounds in discussions of an interesting nature to all. It embraces a critical survey of all the great doctrines in physiology and medicine, and is made up of a series of monographs, possessing mutual relations, which are so interwoven, that each is made to borrow light from the other. The principal subjects treated of are, the Vital Powers, Philosophy of the Operation of Loss of Blood, the Humoral Pathology, Philosophy of Animal Heat, Philosophy of Digestion, Theories of Inflammation, Philosophy of Venous Congestion, Comparative Merits of the Hippocratic and Anatomical schools, the Principal Writings of P. Ch. A. Louis, M. D. It seems to have been one of the leading objects of Dr. Paine to establish principles

in medicine; and with this view, he has taken the Baconian Philosophy as his guide, and extended his inquiries over the whole field of the art. He condemns all speculative philosophy, and, in a general sense, whenever he undertakes the exposure of error, he avails himself, for this purpose, of the very facts upon which the hypothesis is founded. In all his essays, we find the utmost candor and fairness; indeed there is a degree of particularity which is quite uncommon, in referring to the exact page of the author quoted; and however severe his criticism, there is a vein of generosity pervading it, which seems almost to blunt its edge. Although our prescribed limits do not allow us to give an extended notice of this work, yet we may add that we have perused it with high gratification and profit. The style is distinguished for terseness, vigor and elegance, and will compare with the very best works of the kind in the language. The author aims at instruction and practical utility, by settling the most important mooted points in physiology and medicine; and, as these lie at the foundation of the healing art, it will readily be seen that he could not have addressed himself to an undertaking of greater magnitude.

It is not to be expected, however, that Dr. Paine will escape criticism. In some of his observations in relation to the microscope he manifests a degree of skepticism as to the results attained by it, which will not satisfy those naturalists who have employed it extensively in their researches, and have looked upon it as of equal importance in the minute creation, with the telescope in astronomy. None can deny that the essay on this subject is a masterly exhibition of ingenuity and learning; and those who reject the conclusions at which the author arrives, must admire the humor and the skill everywhere displayed. Again his bold attack upon the writings of M. Louis, the founder of what is called the "numerical school," must call forth the friends of that popular author in his defence; and we shall not be disappointed to find the translators and proprietors of his works undertaking a reply. One thing must be acknowledged; Dr. Paine has indulged in no denunciation, or wholesale terms of censure; but has given his objections in extenso, carefully quoting, or referring to every paragraph and sentence under review, that the reader may be able to decide for himself as to the fairness or strength of the criticism. He has, it is true, generally taken the American translation as his authority; and has given his reasons for so doing. Should it eventually appear, that he has been led by it, in some instances, into unintentional error, not affecting, in the least, the merits of his argument, the translator must

« PreviousContinue »