two hours, were generally very dull and languid. You rarely heard a hearty laugh among them. Where is moral dignity and Christian virtue fled? We cordially concur with Mr. H. in these remarks :- -True religion was far more wanting among the rich than the poor; and a mission from the poor among the rich, or those who make riches their idol, was now the thing needful. When Christianity began, it was a preaching by the poor to the rich. Its Founder had not whereon to lay His head. Its first Apostles were working men. It is possible to make morality palatable to the people without much preparation. The very disguise renders truth suspected. Let us go in quest of virtuous men who are in obscurity, and make them our models. The fable of "The Bees; or Private Vices Public Benefits," by Mandeville, may be viewed in two ways; as a satire on men, -and as a theory of society and national prosperity. So far as it is a satire, it is sufficiently just and pleasant; but viewed in its more ambitious character of a theory of society, it is altogether worthless. It seems to be his object to shew that national greatness depends on the prevalence of fraud and luxury; and for this purpose he supposes a vast hive of bees, possessing in all respects institutions similar to those of men. He details the various frauds, similar to those among men, practised by bees (alias INsects) upon one another in various professions. He shews how the wealth accumulated by means of these frauds, is turned, through luxurious habits, to the good of others, who again practise their frauds upon the wealthy: and having already assumed that wealth cannot be gotten without fraud, and cannot exist without luxury, he further assumes that wealth is the only cause and criterion of national greatness. His hive of bees having thus become wealthy and great (and may we not say some of them transmuted into wasps?) he afterwards supposes a mutual jealousy of frauds to arise, and fraud to be by common consent dismissed; and he again assumes that wealth and luxury immediately disappear, and that the greatness of society is gone. It is needless to point out inconsistences and errors, such, for instance, as the absence of all distinction between luxury and vice,—when the whole theory rests upon obvious false assumptions: and the long dissertations appended to the fable, however amusing and full of valuable remarks, contain no attempts to establish by proof the fundamental points of the theory. In an "Inquiry into the Origin of Moral Distinctions" contained in the “Fable of the Bees," he contends that virtue and vice, and the feelings of moral approbation and disapprobation, have been created in men by their several governments, for the purpose of maintaining society, and preserving their own power. Incredible as it seems that such a proposition as this should be seriously put forth, it is yet more so that it should come from one whose object always was-however strange the way in which he set about it— to promote good morals; for there is nothing in his writings to warrant the belief that he sought to encourage vice. But to return to the piscatory geniuses. The voice raised by a few poor Fishermen thrills through society to hour. Suppose Dives, Nicodemus, and the rich young man, had tried to make a similar impression on their fellow-citizens, could they have succeeded? The question requires no answer. It is enough to observe that all great reforms have originated from the common people. "Now, seeing how given up these money-hunting people are to all sorts of vanities, and how in them, owing to that base idolatry, all the nobler traits of humanity are in a manner lost, I think it becomes us," (says Mr. Jones in a speech extracted from Chambers' article-" Favours Returned,") "that we who are unembarassed with the world's possessions should bestir ourselves to go among them, and try to recall them to a sense of the higher aims of life. Let us hold up before them an unflattering account of their iniquitous practices. Let us denounce the luxuries and the vanities for whose sake they strain to get wealth. Let us endeavour to impress upon them the moral grandeur of the honest man who is contented with moderate things, and the high gratification which waits upon frugal contentThere are amongst us, I trust, abundance of men both able and willing to go forth upon this mission; and it is men, and not money, that are wanted. I therefore, with all confidence, move that a Society be formed for the sending out Missionaries among the Upper Classes." The motion was carried with acclamation. ment. Let our Croesuses stereotype the lines of Shakspeare upon their heads and hearts : "If thou art rich, thou'rt poor; For like an ass whose back with ingots bows, "Reason thus with life." The physical gain from the change from in-door to outdoor exercise, has been noticed in cases numberless. It is much easier to be honest when one's health is good, than when a sick body makes, as it always does, for a sick brain; a sick brain more or less perverts all mental impression, and all processes of thought. A man cannot yield music when the body is out of tune. The following excellent and very applicable article we copy from the Leeds Express:— "IS HONESTY THE BEST POLICY ?-Mr. Scholefield is again about to take up the question of adulteration of food before a Committee of the House of Commons. We cannot see what need there is for all this inquiry, believing that the fact of general adulteration is about as clearly established as anything can be. Few people are now so ignorant as not to know that almost every article of food or merchandise is more or less adulterated, and to this adulteration the great mass of the people are reconciled, not only because it cheapens the cost of the article, but also because, as food, the taste of the people has become accustomed to the flavour of the adulteration; the only doubt or scruple as to swallowing the compound being where there is suspicion of poison; and even poison, if given in small doses, is used at table without much demur, if economy in expenditure is thereby secured. Time was, when honesty was understood to be the best policy, when men believed that, on the whole, it was safer to be honest than otherwise. We know not how long ago it is since honesty, as a common human virtue, as a principle to be acted on for its own sake, and because it was the one right course for men to pursue in their dealings with each other,—went out of fashion; but we presume it went out with the golden age, long before buying and selling became a practice among men. As a policy we believe it remained in vogue for a long time, but even on that ground it is now exploded; and as science and knowledge progress, and the desire to get on in the world increases, every virtue by which anything is lost is disappearing; and he alone is considered practical in his character, and respectable in his life, who can scramble up in the world and come out at the top, whatever filth he may have to wriggle through whilst so doing. In making these remarks we do not hold British society responsible for the conduct of those who live beyond the pale of its laws. Robson, Redpath, the young lady that ingeniously robbed Messrs. Hunt and Roskill the other day, or the gentleman who passed himself off as Inspector Field, and plundered the house of Miss Constance Brown, are striking instances of the progress that has been made in the science of thieving. But these people, after all, break the law, knowing that they do so, and thus relieve society from any serious responsibility on their account. Such, however, is not the case with those who indulge in the unacknowledged plunder everywhere going on, and which is so general that no one man or class of men can put others out of countenance in relation to it. So far as Mr. Wakley's unauthorised inquiry, and Mr. Scholefield's parliamentary investigation have gone, nothing can be more distinctly proved than the dishonesty of trade. There is no use in singling out any class of tradesmen, such as grocers or millers, and saying they are the only guilty parties. Such is in reality not the fact. All are guilty; and still in the way in which the matter is looked on by the public none are really culpable. First some foreign substance is introduced, sufficiently cheap to increase weight, and thus add to profit; next some deleterious drug is added to improve the appearance, and, in the eye of the purchaser, to raise the idea of improved quality. The substances thus introduced in time become articles of merchandise, and are pushed in the market for purposes of adulteration. The man without conscience begins the practice; the man of small conscience follows; and the honest man, in the end, must imitate their example, or consent to be ruined. It is a moral dance of death, which all are doomed to join in, and men must take their places in it, even though the jig leads down to the devil. In this demoralising system the shopkeeper is not the only culprit. We must not forget the practices introduced by Mr. Hudson into railway management, and it may be remarked, that paying interest out of capital, and cooking accounts to make things pleasant, did not cease when the railway king was deposed. Then followed the bankers, the Royal British beginning with prayer, and |