who celebrate these mysteries, are accustomed to say: There are many bearers of the Thyrsus, but few Inspired; and, in my opinion, we are to understand among the inspired, those who devote themselves to true wisdom. I have, in my life, spared nothing, but striven incessantly to be one of the inspired; whether my labor has been fruitless, or how far my purpose has succeeded, I shall best learn these where I am going, and as God wills, in a short time.

This is my apology, Simmias and Cebes, wherefore I leave my best friends here, without sorrow, and tremble so little at the approach of death. I believe that I shall find there not less noble friends, and a fairer life, than I am leaving here behind, though this will obtain little belief among the common multitude.

'Hath now my present defence found a better reception than that which I delivered before the judges of the city, then am I satisfied.'

Socrates had finished speaking, and Cebes took up the conversation. 'It is true, Socrates, thou hast perfectly justified thyself. But what thou affirmest of the soul, must seem incredible to many; for they hold, in general, that the soul is no more to be found, when once it leaves the body, but immediately after the death of man, becomes lost and annihilated. It rises, as a breath, or like a fine mist, out of the body and into the upper air, where it disappears and entirely ceases to be. Could it be established, that the soul can exist by itself, and is not necessarily connected with the body, then the hopes which thou cherishest would have no small probability; for, as soon as it is shown, that it can be better with us after death, the virtuous has well-grounded hopes that it will actually be better with him. But the possibility is in itself very difficult to conceive;-that the soul after death should still think, that she should still will and have all the powers of reason; this also, my Socrates, demands some proof.'

Thou art right, Cebes,' answered Socrates.

But what is to be done?

Shall we consider whether we can find a proof, or not?'

'I am very eager,' said Cebes, 'to hear thy thoughts upon this subject.' 'At least,' replied Socrates,' any one who hears our conversation, even were he a comic poet, cannot reproach me that I employ myself with trifles which are neither useful or important. The inquiry which we have now before us is indeed so weighty, that any of the poets would allow us to petition the gods for assistance, before we proceed to our task' Socrates remained for awhile absorbed in silent devotion; then spoke thus: 'Yet, my friends, with true hearts to search for truth, is the most proper worship that we can render the one Godhead. To the task, then! Death, O Cebes, is

a natural change of the condition of man; and we will now inquire what, through this change, happens both to the body of man, and also to his soul. Is not this the subject to be investigated?'

'Exactly.'

'Would it not be advisable, first, to inquire generally, in reference, not only to man, but also to animals, plants, and lifeless things;-what is a natural change?'

'The idea seems to me not unhappy,' answered Cebes; our first inquiry, then, is, What is a change?'

'It seems to me,' said Socrates, a thing is said to change, when of two states that may belong to it, one ceases and the other commences. For example, beautiful and ugly, just and unjust, good and bad, night and day, sleep and waking; are not these opposite states, that are possible to one and the same thing?'

'Yes!'

'If a rose wither, and lose its beautiful form, do we not then say, It has changed?'

Certainly.'

'And if an unjust man would alter his mode of life, must he not assume the opposite, and become just?'

'How else?'

'Also, if any change takes place in anything, the contrary of that which now is, must previously have existed. Thus it becomes day, after it was before night; a thing becomes fair, great, heavy, important, &c., after it has been ugly, small, light, and unimportant. Is it not so?

'A change means, then, nothing more than the exchange or interchange of the opposite states, which are possible to a thing. Shall we rest satisfied with this explanation? Cebes seems still undecided.'

'A little, my dear Socrates. The word opposite causes me to hesitate. I should not suppose that exactly opposite states could immediately succeed each other.'

'Right!' said Socrates. We see, also, that nature, in all her changes, knows how to find an intermediate, which serves as a means of transition, from any state to its opposite. Night, for instance, follows day by means of the evening twilight; day follows night by means of the morning twilight. Is it not so?'

'True!'

'In nature, what is great becomes small by gradual diminution, and on the other hand, the little becomes large by addition or increase.'

'Just so.'

'Though in certain cases we do not give particular names to this intermediation, yet it is not to be doubted that it actually exists, if a state is to succeed another in a natural manner; for, must not a change, to be natural, be brought about by the powers of nature?'

'How else could it be called natural ?'

'But these original powers are constantly active, constantly alive; for if they were to cease a single moment, it would require nothing less than Omnipotence to rouse them to activity. But can that be called natural

which could only be caused by Omnipotence?' 'How indeed could it?' said Cebes.

What the natural powers, then, can accomplish, my beloved, they have already exerted their forces upon; for they were never idle, only their operation was at first invisible. The power of nature, for instance, that produces the changes in the times of the day, is operating every instant, to bring night again over the horizon; but it takes its way through noon and evening, which are the intermediates between the birth of the day and its death.'

'Truly.'

In sleep itself, the powers of life are already preparing the future waking; so in creatures awake, they are preparing the coming period of sleep. This is not to be denied.'

'And generally, if a state succeeds in a natural manner its opposite, as happens in all natural changes, the never-ceasing powers of nature must have been constantly producing this change, and, as it were, impregnating the former state with that which was to succeed. Hence, does it not follow, that nature makes use of all the intermediates, when she would exchange any state with its opposite?'

This is wholly undeniable.'

(TO BE CONTINUED.)

DANIEL WEBSTER;

HIS POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY IN 1820.

MAN too frequently lacks self-confidence. Not knowing how much he can accomplish, he often fails to put forth the energy requisite for success, although it is within his control. A deficiency of self-knowledge often casts a shadow over the realm of the future, and dims the brightness of hope. Many of our most worthy young men need encouragement to incite them to vigorous action.

We are apt to look up to certain individuals who have been fortunate enough to get the ear of the world, and command the attention of mankind; and awed by the power they wield, we are too often contented in being their humble disciples, and receiving, without a question, the dicta they announce. We quail before the towering intellect, and tremble in the presence of greatness.

In this we are under an illusion which a little reflection will readily penetrate. No man has ever occupied the sublime position, whence, with undiminished vision he could survey the whole field of truth, and know himself beyond the reach of error. Indeed, it so happens that some of our greatest intellects are less truthful in their inquiries than many who are inferior in the world's estimation.

When, therefore, we see giant minds engloomed, and can discover delusions they cannot surmount, we have reason to be encouraged, and are authorized in bracing ourselves with manly dignity, and claiming the right of independent inquiry.

Let us, then, examine the opinions of one who is acknowledged by the world as one of the mighty among men, in order to persuade ourselves that no man can be so great as to command our obedience. We have long since dissolved the chains which bound us to legal despots; and we have arrived at that stage of progress in which we should assume the separate and equal station" as individuals, in which we shall feel no subserviency to those who would be our intellectual masters.

In reviewing the opinions of Daniel Webster, I shall confine myself to such as are of fundamental importance, and yet not the especial sentiments of any particular party; opinions which speak of the man, and not of the partizan, and will, therefore, render more forceful what I may say.

In 1820, delegates asserabled in convention at Boston, to review the organic law of Massachusetts. The constitution of the state had stood forty years without amendment, and many sober people began to think that the area of liberty" should be enlarged in that old commonwealth; that their charter of government, in many respects, operated as a restraint upon individual freedom, and impeded the progress of the people. Accordingly, the citizens commissioned their delegates to inquire behind the fundamental law, to recur deliberately to first principles, and to amend the constitution, wherever it was found, in their opinion, to conflict with the immutable laws of nature, as evidenced in the hearts and understandings of a generation in advance of its framers.

The Puritans, and their descendants, had enjoyed nearly half a century

VOL. XXII.-NO. CXVI.

of what they considered the highest attainable prosperity, under the constitution of 1780; and this experience was considered, by most of the leading minds of the convention, as an irrefutable argument against changing any of its fundamental principles. This argument of experience was strenuously urged by some of the profoundest members.*

Experience, although she is our chief instructor, is nevertheless, at times, deceitful. We learn from her the good or bad effects of certain causes of action, and thence conclude as to their moral character. But experience frequently deceives the ignorant and undisciplined; indeed, it requires a more extensive knowledge, and a wider mental scope than have yet distinguished a human being, to trace the whole chain of causation and effectuation, and determine that which is truest and best in every case. Because the country has been more prosperous than other countries, is no indication that she is enjoying a tithe of the happiness that may be attained.

We also deceive ourselves in permitting prejudice, and the principles in which we were educated, to close our eyes against the truth. We should always be suspicious of the truthfulness of our father's instructions, until we have proved them for ourselves, and to our own satisfaction. We have all the light they had to guide our feet, and the advantage of half a century's improvement. We show an excessive stupidity when we tremble in stepping out of the "old beaten track;" because, as man is a progressive being, we should prove ourselves the worthy sons of Old Dullness, did we not expect, seek for, and actually attain some truth or some improvement which was not known before.

Our prejudices and education makes us the worshippers of the past; hence, the almost insurmountable obstacle which authority interposes against real advancement. Authority has impeded all kinds of improvement, and especially the progress of human liberty in constitutions and statutes.†

We are apt to bow with reverence before ancient things, and in our devotion overlook the wrongs they may have occasioned to the mass. In the Massachusetts Constitution of 1780 were many provisions contravening the rights of man, some of which it was attempted to abrogate in the convention of 1820; but a blind veneration for that instrument prevented all but a very trifling modification. The fallacious argument of experience had much to do in preventing reform. The healthful condition of the commonwealth was claimed as conclusive against any fundamental changes. But a close inspection into the society of the state of the Puritans, must have convinced any impartial inquirer of enlarged views, that the spirit of progress had been forced to struggle against the spirit of the organic law; that, while certain classes may have felt no grievances, they had flourished, in a manner, at the expense of individuals whose rights were, and still are, violated; and that individual liberty is not yet understood and maintained, even in that said-tobe centre of intellectual and moral light.

For instance, the convention recognized, and suffered to remain in the constitution, the element of force as a means of maintaining and propaga

"What is the matter with you? What would you have? Look at the people there, and there: think how much better off you are than they are. Your prosperity and liberty are ob jects of envy to them: your institutions are the models which they endeavor to imitate. **** Take any one of the orators by whom this argument is tendered, or of the sages on whom it passes for sterling; with an observation of the general wealth and prosperity of the country in his mouth, instead of a half year's rent in his hand, let any one of his tenants propose to pay him thus in his own coin,-will he accept it? *** Were the prosperity of the country ever so much greater than at present,-take for the country any country whatsoever, and for the present time, any time whatsoever,-neither the injustice of the argument, nor the absurdity of it, would in any the smallest degree be diminished."-Bentham's Book of Fallacies, p, 431, 432, Propose any thing good; the answer is at hand: wild, theoretical, visionary, utopian, impracticable, dangerous, destructive, ruinous, anarchical, subversive of all government-there you have it."-Bentham.

ting religion. They somewhat improved the old constitution by substituting the term " Christian" for "Protestant," so that all systems of Christianity might enjoy the beneficence of the law. But the constitution still provides for the support of the Christian religion by taxation; so that those believing in no system of religious faith are compelled to contribute equally with worshipping devotees to its maintenance. Under that constitution the citizen is compelled to violate his own conscience, in being forced by the law to contribute to the support of what he believes to be error. Against this infringement of individual freedom there was much unanswerable argument by some liberal members, whose eloquence and truthfulness were unavailing. Some zealous defenders of Christianity scorned all support of religion which did not come from the heart, and rightly believed that piety would flourish more, and hypocrisy less, did the laws leave every one free to give or withhold, according to the promptings of his heart. Speaking concerning the support of Christianity, Webster is reported, in the debates of the convention, to have said: "The legislature ought to have the power of making the particular provisions on this subject, as on others. The committee had listened to cases of particular hardship. This is a necessary consequence of all general rules."

He might have declared this to be the case with all general rules not founded in truth; for truth can never work a particular hardship when action conforms with its dictates. The moral government of God is harmonious; under it none can suffer. When men enact His laws, their operation will ever produce good to all. Webster, therefore, must have seen as through a "glass darkly," in making the above remark. But in two or three sentences which follow he did honor to his great mind :

-

"The sects in this country seem to require more guards against the oppression of each other, than they would in Turkey against the oppression of the Grand Seignior. I entreat gentlemen to consider, that if their debates are to go abroad literally reported, the impression will be, that religious liberty does not exist among us. The French have a maxim in eloquence, that nothing is beautiful which is not true. I wish gentlemen would pay regard to this maxim in their speeches. The committee has agreed to strike out of the constitution that part which respects enjoining attendance on publie worship. I agree with them. That is the only part which seems to effect liberty of conscience. Gentlemen have talked of paying for doctrines abhorrent to their feelings. I know of none such. The effect of every such is good when we look to the interests of society. How, then, can they object to taxes for the support of them on the ground of conscience? It is proper to put guards on the power of taxing for this purpose; but there is no right of conscience in the case-it is a right of property. The word "Protestant" has given place to the word "Christian," and the clause enjoining attendance on public worship is struck out. What more is required? Nothing but to make certain the right of going from one society to another of the same denomination."

"No right of conscience is violated." Why not, when a person is compelled to support, by his money, doctrines he deems erroneous and injurious in their influence? True, all sects are necessary, because they enable individuals to more fully manifest themselves. Each enfolds individuals that would not rally to any other altar. But each of them embodies in its creed both truth and error,-and the false will die more speedily when left to its own resources, than when the law sustains it by forcing from others its support. This, it must be conceded, is another glaring error which received the support of the unrivalled "Expounder."

Webster then introduced an amendment to the proposition under dis