This is an excellent essay--a practical exposition of the source and
character of the Law International, and for which the works
above-mentioned afford the _materiel_. A few articles similar to this
would at once redeem the reputation of American critical literature.
Our position in regard to France, gives to this review, at this
moment, additional interest.
Article III. "Matthias and his Impostures, or the Progress of
Fanaticism. Illustrated in the Extraordinary Case of Robert Matthews,
and some of his Forerunners and Disciples. By W. L. Stone. 12mo. New
York, 1835."
The critic here adopts the very just opinion that Matthias had formed
himself and his creed designedly upon the model of John of Leyden. We
think it probable that the impostor, who was grossly ignorant, may
have seen an account of the proceedings at Munster in some popular
historical work, and formed his own conduct accordingly. The leader of
the fanatics at Munster was _Matthias_, a baker. Matthews called
himself _Matthias_. The former had his Rothman and Knipperdoling, men
of respectable family and some consideration--the latter had his
Pierson and Folger, men similarly circumstanced. Rothman and
Knipperdoling were invested with an authority which was merely
nominal. It was the same with Pierson and Folger. John had his Mount
Zion at Munster, and Matthews his Mount Zion at Sing-Sing. The Review
gives a digest of Stone's book, and is very entertaining.
Article IV. "Scriptores Rerum Mythicarum Latini tres, Romæ nuper
Reperti. Ad fidem codicum M.S.S. Guelferbytanorum, Gottingensis,
Gothani, et Parisiensis, Integriores edidit ac Scholiis illustravit
Dr. Georgius Henricus Bode, Ordinis Philos. Gotting. Assessor,
Societatis literar. quæ Cantabrigiæ Americanorum floret Socius.
Celles, 1834."
Angelo Maio discovered and published, about three years ago, the works
of three Roman writers, supposed by him to be Leontius, Placidus, and
Hyginus, who flourished about the close of the fourth century, or as
the Review incorrectly states, after the commencement of the fifth.
The work criticised in the present article is a new edition of Maio's
publication, improved by the collation of MSS. at Wolfenbuttel,
Gottingen, Gotha, and Paris. Dr. Bode, a scholar of high reputation,
and who resided for some time in a New England literary institution,
is the editor. The reviewer speaks of the Latinity as simple and easy,
and, for the most part, classical in construction.
Article V.--1. "A Lecture on the Working Men's Party, first delivered
October 6th, before the Charlestown Lyceum, and published at their
request. By Edward Everett. Boston, 1830."
2. "An Oration delivered before the Trades' Union of Boston and
Vicinity, on Fort Hill, on the Fifty-eighth Anniversary of American
Independence. By Frederick Robinson. Boston, 1834."
3. "The Rights of Industry, addressed to the Working Men of the United
Kingdom. By the Author of 'The Results of Machinery.' Philadelphia,
1832."
{64} The Reviewer here commences with what we consider a _naïve_
acknowledgment, viz: that he has not selected the works whose titles
are placed at the head of this article because they are recent, or
unknown, but merely with the view of directing public attention to the
subject of which they treat. The Essay, however, is an excellent one,
and shows in a forcible manner, by a rapid comparative view of the
condition of the laboring classes in our own and other countries, how
few just causes of complaint exist among our 'working people.'
Article VI. "The Ministry for the Poor. A Discourse delivered before
the Benevolent Fraternity of Churches in Boston, on their first
anniversary, April 9th, 1835. By William E. Channing. Boston, 1835."
The North American, in its last number, considered Southey a fine
writer, but Washington Irving a much finer, and indeed 'the best
living writer of English prose:' having, however, to review Mr.
Channing in the present number, its opinions are conveniently modified
to suit the occasion, and _now_ the English of William E. Channing is
declared _coram populo_ to be 'equally _elegant_, and a little more
pure, correct, and pointed than that of Mr. Irving.' There is surely
something very absurd in all this. Mr. Irving is a fine writer, and
so, beyond doubt, is Mr. Channing--but the Review seems perseveringly
bent upon making the public think otherwise. What does the critic mean
too by the assertion that Coleridge's reputation is greater in America
than in England, and that he possesses _very slender_ claims to the
distinction of the first philosopher of his age? We should like to see
some direct evidence of what the Reviewer has so roundly asserted,
viz: that "Coleridge shews an almost total want of precision and
clearness of thought." The works of the man are before the public, and
we greatly prefer proof to assertion. We think this whole paper
exceedingly silly.
Article VII. "A Preliminary Discourse on the Study of Natural History.
By William Swainson. London, 1834."
We have not seen Swainson's work, and of course can say nothing about
it--the present article however, which professes to be, but is not, a
Review of it, we pronounce excellent indeed. It must be read to be
thoroughly appreciated.
Article VIII.--1. "Poems. By Mrs. L. H. Sigourney. Philadelphia,
1834."