given to man, being the divine life of Christianity, and reasoning downwards from Christ our Lord. "This is the record, that it to the facts of Christendom, it would be God has given to us eternal life, and this well to begin by ascertaining the actual life is in his Son." Yet it must be con- phenomena, and then ascend afterwards to fessed that the evidence of the supernatural is hard to give. No amount of facts in the world of nature will ever prove the existence of a world or a life above nature.

the religious system which undertook to
explain and account for those phenomena.
With singular force and eloquence the
preacher invited his hearers to consider
with him the manifestations in the history
of Christendom of a noble and beautiful
life which could not be accounted for with-
out a new hypothesis of some kind. He
recounted the deeds of
of heroism and self-sac-
rifice which had been done in the name of
Christ, and said that there was visible to
all who looked for it a kind of life "that
lifts itself above mere morality, respecta-
bility, and decency; a life that is saintly
and beautiful, which is ever ready to give
itself for others, which is ever contending
with the evil and misery there are in the
world; a life which sends the pastor to the
outcast and the ignorant, which spends it-
self in efforts to reclaim the wanderer and

"Between the man who believes only what he sees, and the man who believes in order that he may see, there is a necessary and endless opposition; they are exactly in the position of two men, one of whom is looking at a picture from a right point of view, and sees the whole beauty of the design; and the other of whom is closely examining it piecemeal through a powerful lens. Both testify to what they see, but one sees more than the other, and the only answer he can make is, 'Stand where I stand, and you will see what I see.' It is impossible and in vain to dream of a reconciliation of the belief in the supernatural with the belief only in the natural. There must come a point when the man who to reform the criminal," and which had

originated all the greatest agencies for the

walks by faith must part company with the man who walks, and is resolved to walk, amelioration of our race. And if a still

closer inquiry was made into the motives and purposes of Christian men, it would be found that they all professed to have a hidden life of joy and solace and hope which was more beautiful than any which they could reveal. "Take up the biographies of men who in their day had belonged to the most opposite and contending sects, and who would scarcely have owned one another to be Christians. Read the records of their secret thoughts and feelings, uttering themselves in their prayers, their hymns, their journals of religious experi

only by sight. Is it not a great matter that they should reach that point in company, that they should not part before they have reached it? Is it not a great matter that the man of faith should bring with him the man of science to the very verge of the supernatural, showing him all he can see before he asks him to believe what he cannot see? Now, have religious men, as a rule, done this? Too often they have done exactly the opposite. They set forth the claims of Christianity in this wise: Eighteen hundred years ago there lived a man in Nazareth, who came down from ence. Blow away from their books the heaven, and claimed to be the Son of God, dust of the old bitter controversies, by and proved His claim by miracles; believe which these men were kept apart, and it, and ye shall be rewarded with salvation; what do you find? You find living souls believe it not, and ye shall be punished that wept, sorrowed, joyed, hoped, and with damnation.' Whether this was right- prayed alike; men who speak of the realily or wrongly put, the result of such a ties of a hidden life, of the sin they hated, statement was that the men of science of the temptations they struggled against, started aside from it at once, and rejected of a life and spirit in them which enabled the belief in the supernatural all the more them to conquer, and of the hope that sus

resolutely, because an attempt was thus made to enforce it by penalties."

The Dean proceeded to say that there was another way of enforcing the claims of Christianity, far more efficacious and more consonant to the legitimate demands of science. The inductive method of investigation was confessedly the fairest in regard to all forms of physical life; it would also be the truest in regard to the Christian life. Instead of beginning with a theory, historical or dogmatic, about the origin of

tained them. So much had they been animated by the same spirit, that however divided they might have been in creed, it was clear that they might have sung one another's hymns and prayed one another's prayers. And the explanation which they would each have given of these phenomena would have been substantially the same. This life is not ours, there was a time when we were dead; this life is in us, but not of us; it comes from another, it is the life of our Lord Jesus Christ. He died for us; power which influences them, and the acting of which they feel and see, we make our appeal; we ask you to listen to us, as we say, 'Behold, we show you another mystery, the mystery of a hidden life." And, he proceeded to urge, so long as the Christian life yields fruits of holiness, of

we believe in Him, and believing in Him, we find his life and spirit in us; as we trust in Him, the life grows stronger; when we forget Him it grows weaker; we can do all things through Christ, for He is our life." There, he continued, were phenomena in the history of the world which the student of human life could not disregard. They nobleness, and of beauty, so long its origin

required some explanation, there was, somewhere, a theory to account for them. He could not now ask them to go into the evidence of Christianity, but he invited them to consider whether, with these facts before them, the supernatural theory which Christianity set up appeared quite so improbable as it had seemed a priori; and whether it would be philosophical to reject without further examination an exceptional explanation for phenomena so hard to ac

and history will be deserving of the study
of every man of science. But if Christian-
ity ever ceased to purify and ennoble the
lives of men, it would die out as a creed,
and ought to die. Its Founder had com-
pared His disciples to the salt of the earth,
but if the salt have lost his savour
it must be cast out and trodden under foot
of men." There was no dead thing more
odious and pestilential, as it lay reeking on
the earth, than the corpse of a dead reli-

...

count for on any natural theory. They gion, one which had ceased to operate on had been considering the outward mani- the consciences and behaviour of its profesfestations of a life; and what was a life? sors. It was yet in the power of Christian He asked the man most profoundly versed men to vindicate the truth of their faith, if in science there present to define for him not in controversy with the modern forms what was that mysterious and hidden force of scientific belief, at least by consistent for which he was searching day by day into and holy Christian life. They might pathe recesses of beings that live, or that tiently wait for that reconciliation between have lived, and which still eludes his search? science and religion which men were lookWhat was the mysterious power which ing for; when science and philosophy, on makes of the inanimate the animate? The the one hand, should help religion to a men of faith had to tell of the life of man's truer expression of its own beliefs; and re

spirit; should it surprise us to be told that this life is more mysterious than the life that the men of science seek vainly to discover of the body? Was it so very strange a thing that they who already believe in an invisible influence in the realms of science should be asked to go one step further, and believe the invisible in the realms of faith? They might not be entitled to say, "Believe the Christian theory; " but they might be justified in claiming for it a respectful and patient hearing.

ligion, on the other hand, should give clearer evidences of its history and creeds. But one thing they could not afford to wait for, - the Christian life itself, as revealed in daily acts of self-sacrifice and holiness, Christian men must take care that at least no one should be able to challenge them for proofs of the reality of this life, and to say that there was no answer to the challenge.

It is very difficult to give in this brief summary a fair representation of an argument which was as remarkable for close se"The men of faith make their earnest quence and for concentration as for the appeal to the men of science for help, and richness and variety of its illustrations. for help which they can, give. From the Still more difficult would it be to describe babbler, from the shallow smatterer in science the profound emotion and interest which and theology who prattles about the super- was kindled and sustained by the preacher natural and the natural, and who refuses during a pulpit address of far more than the to believe in the mystery of religion, from average length. But we hope that the him, to the real high priests of science, to Dean of Cork will be induced to publish a the men who have reached the innermost full and accurate report of his sermon, and shrine in her temple, and stand there rever- that in this way he may address a yet wider ently with bowed heads before the veil and more influential audience than that which they acknowledge they cannot lift, which listened to his voice on Association but beyond which they confess there is a Sunday in Norwich.

From The Spectator. | litical in their actions but not in their writPOEMS BY ROYALISTS AND LOYALISTS.

THE object of this collection, according to Professor Morley's introduction, is "to blend the voices of true poets who lived in the time of Charles I. and the Commonwealth into a genuine expression of the man

ner of their music and the spirit of their

time.

The true division expressed by the chief title of the volume is between the men who upon the great principles then in debate were with the King,

and those who were with the Commons."

We think that the idea which is hinted at in this and other sentences was worthy of being worked out more completely than has been done in this volume. It might have been well if Professor Morley had shown in a more pointed way the contrast between the two parties in our great Civil War, and

had only chosen his instances from men who clearly belonged both in

date and sympathy

ings, others in their writings but not in their actions. Some maintained the King's cause from the point of view of divine right, and would have maintained the same cause if Charles had been a Caligula or a Nero. Some were mere soldiers and gentlemen, who

fought to keep down the populace, and wrote a sort of instinct of culture. But the three who were on the side of the people were sternly in earnest, both in what they wrote and what they did. We can understand Professor Morley's objection to the

name " Puritan" as contrasted with "Cava

lier; " for the first is used as an offensive nickname, while the second is meant as a

title of honour. It is for this reason that we have given the contrast a new wording at the head of this article, and have shown personal fidelity to a King in competition with

fidelity to the law.

is to some

extent justified by the high-flown language
Professor Morley's arrangement
in which all the writers in the first part speak
of royalty. What Herrick says about kings
is typical of the Cavalier spirit; for instance,
his lines headed "A King and no King"
strike at the root of all legitimate author-

"That prince who may do nothing but what's
just
Rules but by leave, and takes his crown on trust."
If so, what is the use of his distinction be-
tween kings and tyrants?

to one of those parties. In the present selection many poems which have no touch of the regular Cavalier spirit are placed on the side of the King. Men who died before the country was divided into two camps can hardly be assigned to either. Such as first adhered to the party of the Commons, then ity: wrote outrageous panegyrics on Charles I., then sang in praise of Cromwell, and ended by flattering Charles II., ought, strictly speaking, to be on both sides in turn. This last arrangement would be a fitting censure on Waller. The first division might exclude Ben Jonson. It is true that, in the two pieces selected by Professor Morley, Ben Jonson praises the King. But both these pieces bear the date of 1630, and the concluding lines of the second, in which the poet hopes that the King may cure the People's It is true that he is careful to provide kings Evil, savour more of the tone of Wither than with a special kind of education,

""Twixt kings and tyrants there's this difference
known,
Kings seek their subjects good, tyrants their

own."

odds,

of that of Herrick. If we look at Wither's "Twixt kings and subjects there's this mighty Britain's Remembrancer, written two years earlier than these lines of Ben Jonson's, we find an equal willingness to take the King's good intentions on trust, to allow for his desire to do what was just and right, and to blame the distemper of men's minds and of the time rather than the Sovereign. Yet, Wither is one of the three poets who in this book represent the Commons, and with Mil

ton and Andrew Marvell he shows himself thoroughly devoted to the cause of law and liberty. This is not the least striking part of the contrast between those whom Pro

fessor Morley unwillingly calls Cavaliers and

Subjects are taught by men, kings by the gods."
But what guarantee have the subjects that
this educational process is successful, and
how are they to decide whether their ruler
is a king or a tyrant, except by scrutinizing
the justice of his actions? Sir John Suck-
ling says that
"Kings and lovers are alike in this, -

That their chief art in reign dissembling is;"

us so

and he and his brother poets give many instances of dissimulation in love that the comparison is somewhat dangerous. Evidently the Court was the school at which these lovers studied. They thought that tan Song. Selected and arranged by Henry Morley, they might take any liberties because their own liberties, of another kind, were taken

Puritans. Of the thirty odd writers who were on the side of the King, some were po* The King and the Commons; Cavalier and Puri

London: Low, Son, and Marston. 1868.

from them. They might flirt and dally with | long it has prevailed in subsequent literaladies, be constant for twelve whole hours, ture. So many writers have been in a conor even three whole days, pay extravagant spiracy to vilify the Puritans and exalt those compliments, and then explain them away, whom it would be fair to nickname the because that was the principle on which the Charlatans, that it is very difficult to dissoKing acted with the Commons. This is not ciate abject hypocrisy from the one side and the tone of Lovelace, whose well-known patriotic generosity from the other. It must stanzas to Lucasta and Althæa stand out no- have been noticed already that while poets

bly from the mass of frivolous sentiment;
nor of Montrose. But if we want to find
the true contrast to the amorous inanities of
the Court circle, we must go to the popular
side, and read George Wither's manly po-
ems. The same poet supplies us with a
much truer ideal of royalty than the one con-
tained in Herrick's lines, or in that ode of
Sir Richard Fanshawe's where the King is
praised for not only making peace, but also
forcing his subjects to enjoy it. Even if we
want a worthy description of Charles's death,
we must go to Andrew Marvell, and not to
any of the Royalist poets:

"He nothing common did, or mean,
Upon that memorable scene,
But with his keener eye
The axe's edge did try;

"Nor call'd the gods with vulgar spite
To vindicate his helpless right,
But bow'd his comely head
Down, as upon a bed."

We may look in vain for any such fairness
to an opponent among the Royalist writers.
Wither's phrase of "the scornful adversa-
ries" well describes their literary warfare.
Sir John Denham's "Humble Petition of

and novelists have been quick to choose their heroes from the ranks of the King's supporters, the cause of the people has been impartially neglected when it has not been caricatured. Scott has done much to indoctrinate English readers with Cavalier sentiments, and many, no doubt, accept his picture of Sir Henry Lee of Ditchley as the type of fidelity, without recognizing the good knight's weakness and prejudices. On the other side, we have little save a poem of Macaulay's, which, stirring as it is, does not command so much favour as falls to the lot of the usual claptrap about the bold Cavaliers. It is natural that men who wrote a great deal about themselves should find imitators, and the frank heartiness of most of the Royalist songs cannot fail to be infectious. The stern, self-denying reticence of the Loyalists holds out no such attractions. In this collection we find much to explain the paucity of Loyalist poems. To the few who wrote, poetry was as serious as life. They did not waste their breath on love-songs and lighter dalliances. They would not even spend it on writing squibs. The result is that we have only one such piece here, from Marvell, to set against a great variety of them

the Poets" to the Five Members is even from the Royalists; and the loose, scattermore significant of this tendency than the ing fire of skirmishing songsters is drowned songs in which the Saints are ridiculed, and by the deep boom of Miltonic cannon, as the Roundheads are accused of prostituting each single piece is brought up and disChurch and State to the scum of the land. charged full against the Royal standard. For a squib the petition is too tame and The Cavaliers have certainly the advanargumentative. As a mere piece of vitupera- tage in lightness and gaiety. Waller's "Girion it has a distinctive value. As such, dle," and his "Go, lovely Rose;" Hertoo, it must be classed with many of the rick's "Gather ye rosebuds while ye may; other pieces in which the Cavaliers show Lovelace's "Amarantha sweet and fair; " their lofty disdain for the rest of the com- many of Suckling's poems, and some songs munity. It seems to have been impossible by less known writers, notably "When the for the King's friends to look beyond the King enjoys his own again," would suffice to hypocritical noncomformists and snuffling recommend a book like Professor Morley's, saints of the opposing army. Such things and, if all of them were necessarily Royalas grave constitutional questions, rights, ist in their tendency, to explain the long liberties, never could occur to the gentle- popularity of the Cavaliers. A more chastmen who bragged about unsheathing their swords in defence of the Church and the Crown. The Five Members seemed merely to be invading the poetic privilege of lying. Cromwell was "Oliver Brutus," and his object to "gull the people through the nose." Perhaps we can hardly wonder at this opinion being so readily accepted by the songwriters on the Royal side, when we see how

ened and more elevated tone breathes from the few poems of George Herbert's which Professor Morley has included in his volume. We may at first object to having the "Sweet day, so cool, so calm, so bright," placed in company with the trivial loves of courtiers and the snarls of political satirists. But the quiet country parsonage is not seldom the stronghold of party feeling, though there that which is an element of discord in the had none. Nor had he any tenderness, or busy life of the world is something calm and any reverence, or religious instinct, or any elevating. Still George Herbert died long power of reasoning. Leigh Hunt said Bybefore the troubles of Charles's reign had ron could never comprehend an argument; come to a head. It may be doubted whether and it is obvious on the face of his writing he would have taken an active line in poli- that the remark was a true one. The late tics had he lived to be deprived, as Herrick Alexander Smith asserted that Byron, when was, of his vicarage. Cowley, who was the he died, was on the way to become our later greatest and sincerest poet on the Royalist Fielding. But Fielding, man of the world