many a moral feeling, and kills many an unworthy thought: it gives them a willingness of submission,' &c. &c. If all this had come forth from the pen of some of the small fry of the literature of the metropolis, we should never have heard the last of the cockney school. It would have been set down as an effusion fit only for the album of some fair sentimentalist, full of the visions inspired by a recent lionizing of the classic groves and cloisters of Alma mater. We should like to know how much any young undergraduate, even among Mr. Sewell's own pupils, ever thinks of the antiquity of the regulations under which he lives, except to laugh at or abuse them.

But the master-key to everything great and good is, according to Mr. Sewell, the name and character of a gentleman. This is the real object to which all university regulations should be directed to those who are gentlemen, and those alone, the benefits of the university ought to be confined; and, forasmuch as connexion with the aristocracy has a great tendency to form and promote this high character, the university ought to be exclusively aristocratic. To this purpose, all its institutions ought to be adapted: nay, this gentlemanlike spirit is the complete and sufficient substitute for learning, science, and even for religion.

'If ever a nation has risen to a just and a permanent glory, it has risen by this spirit of a gentleman. It is the substitute of nature, the substitute supplied to the world through the spontaneous arrangements of society, for that better soul of Christianity, which God in an exact analogy supplies through the institutions of his church. We possessed it in this country, possess it still, to a greater degree, and over a wider extent, than any other country upon earth. It is the foster-sister of religion, and grew up beneath the same wing; and if we lose it, lose it with our religion, where are we to look for its like? If we think that mere intellect can supply it, we are indeed mistaken. A nation of Newtons could no more generate a gentleman, than a nation of infidels could create a Christian. It is blood, birth, the very accident of blood and birth, old names, venerable inheritances, &c., &c.' (p. 37.)

As the feeling of birth and the honour of a gentleman are substitutes for religion among the higher classes, so, Mr. Sewell informs us, as we descend in the scale towards the baser portion of the human creation, these high principles are wholly and completely supplied, and with precisely the same effect, by the spirit of religion.' Had this come from a Professor of the London University, it would be branded as downright infidelity. Voltaire built a church for the poor; and many unbelievers have

said, religion is a very good thing for the lower classes,—but the higher, endued with the inherent feelings of gentlemen, do not need it. Such is precisely the sentiment now uttered by a Reverend Divine of the Church of England, the advocate of orthodoxy, a tutor of the young aristocracy, and of the aspirant for the ministry of the church he advocates religious exclusiveness in the University, and compulsory attendance at chapel; because religion is a good thing for those who have no better or higher principle to guide them. Its influence (especially when thus inculcated) stands in the stead of gentlemanly feeling, and greatly facilitates the keeping up of academical discipline.

We are quite aware that there is, and always has existed, a very close attachment of the whole body of tutors to young men of rank and high connexions; more especially when the aristocratic feeling fosters religion in the shape of rich livings: it would indeed be hard to deny it the characteristic of true piety and orthodoxy, when it so substantially provides for both. Our author pithily observes, that where it is wanting, the work of instruction goes on very unpleasantly. A high born youth he represents as the most compliant and easily led, the most deferent to the recommendation of the tutor, and that soon (for obvious reasons) they become quite friends together. The same thing is true (as to docility, &c.) in a less degree with inferior youths, who have only religion to recommend them. In a word, the system is beautiful in itself, and more beautifully disclosed, as peeping out half-veiled from the rich metaphors of Mr. Sewell's periods.

Mr. Sewell professes to be a believer in Christianity and a religious man; nor will we insinuate that he is not sincere in his profession. That can only be known to himself. But there is no indication in his pamphlets of that religious feeling which has warmed so many true believers, and taught them to extend to all the human race the kindly sympathies and beneficent practices which were inculcated by the founder of Christianity. We quarrel with no man for his religious belief; all that we require is sincerity, a correspondence between professions and practice, and an observance of the rule of doing to others as we would wish them to do to us. We have not discovered in Mr. Sewell's Letters any attention to these principles.

The admission of Dissenters, it is contended, would be encountered by many practical difficulties from the whole form and circumstances of the present collegiate system. This, we must own, to our apprehension, so far from being an objection, would be rather a recommendation, since it will add one more

powerful reason to those already existing, which point out the necessity for great amendments in all parts of the system.

It is due to the author to remark, that there appears to be one argument supplied by the pamphlets before us, which really, as far as it goes, may induce a doubt as to the desirableness of the object which the Dissenters seek. If Mr. Sewell were a fair specimen of an Oxford tutor; if his learning, his discernment, his style, and his opinions, were fair samples of the acquirements made under that system which he advocates, we can only say, we think the Dissenters really lose very little by exclusion from its advantages, and might find much better instruction among themselves.

MILITARY AND NAVAL EDUCATION.*

THE length of Major Lachlan's title-page has at least the advantage of informing the reader pretty distinctly what the subject of his pamphlet is. We do not propose to examine the data by which the writer attempts to show the practicability of his scheme, as far as raising the necessary funds is concerned, because we consider the money a secondary matter in all undertakings of this kind. If all the officers of the service were fully impressed with a sense of the importance of public schools for their sons and daughters, there is no doubt that the necessary funds could soon be raised. The first and great difficulty is, to produce a strong conviction of the necessity of establishing such institutions; when this is overcome, there remains the second difficulty of bringing persons to co-operate with perfect sincerity and good faith. These two difficulties lie at the bottom of all attempts by individuals to improve the education of this country; the money difficulty, we believe, is quite a secondary one. In the case of officers, for instance, whatever sum they can now spare for the education of their children, they could also spare for the purpose of supporting any public institution in which they might be educated; and with this additional advantage, resulting from the lower price attendant on such co-operation, that the benefits of instruction might be enjoyed for a longer period by those children who now often receive a very limited

*Revived Thoughts, on the Foundation of a Great National Institution, intended more especially for the Reception of Orphan Children of Officers of the British Army; but so constituted, as to form, at the same time, a highly respectable yet economical Public Seminary, for the Education of Officers' Sons and Daughters in general. By R. Lachlan, (late) Major 17th Regiment. Plymouth, 1834.

education, and would also be extended to others who, under present circumstances, must go almost altogether without any good education.

It is only of late years that the importance of universal education has been fully discussed or fairly recognized; the truth of this fundamental principle is daily, though perhaps slowly, gaining ground. It will be a further step gained, when it shall be admitted, that the superintendence of education ought to be a branch of public administration; for without the establishment of this second principle, we do not expect any great improvements in our system of instruction. At present the necessity for giving the poor a better education seems to be pretty generally admitted, but the education of the poor is the limit of what many friends to education propose; they seem to think that the classes who can afford to pay for instruction can procure for money all that they want. We admit the necessity, under actual circumstances, of providing first for the poorest classes, but we contend that the classes above the poorer stand as much in need of a good education as the poor themselves, and that they have almost as great difficulty in getting it. The want of cheap and good schools for that numerous body in England, which is comprehended under the general name of the middle classes, is so urgent, and the difficulty of making any important change by individual exertion is so great, that all the true friends to education look anxiously forward to such a change in public opinion as shall bring about the establishment of a department of Public Instruction.

While many of the middling classes complain of the want of good and cheap education for their children, their complaints attract little attention, because they assume no definite form, and are confined to individual expressions of dissatisfaction. It is different, however, with the army or navy. The officers in these two bodies are united by so many ties, they have so many common feelings and sympathies, that any inconvenience felt by them individually, is pretty sure to become a subject of discussion among the service generally. Such a subject of common interest and sympathy among military and naval officers is the education of their children. Perhaps few members of society are often placed in more trying and painful situations. Brought up to a profession which requires them to live in a manner often ill suited to their scanty resources, exposed to the loss of life and health in battle or on unhealthy foreign stations, and most frequently deprived of the opportunity of personally superintending the education of their children, or of providing for them in case of sudden death, it certainly appears that no body of men have so strong a motive for lightening the

burden which bears so heavy on each, by availing themselves of the strength which arises from the union of all. Nor does the argument apply with less force to half-pay officers and others resident at home; they wish to give their children the advantage of a good and cheap education, which we believe they can rarely find in England, and therefore many of them seek it, though unwillingly, abroad.

6

The first proposition in Major Lachlan's pamphlet (p. 4.) is the establishment of a respectable and comfortable home for the unprotected orphan children of all ranks of commissioned officers, in the British army, free of expense, and for whose reception it should be open, from the unfortunate moment of parental bereavement, up to a suitable age for commencing their struggles through life-say sixteen years-subject to rules and regulations to be hereafter considered.' The second proposition refers to the respectable establishment in life of all such orphans of both sexes, at the age of sixteen, as may be left altogether dependent on the institution; and the third is, 'to establish a most respectable yet economical seminary, for the reception and education of the children of military officers in general, but more especially those belonging to corps serving abroad, &c.'

That military men are particularly interested in these propositions hardly needs remark. In case of their premature death, or even their long residence on a foreign station, to whom could they intrust their children with such confidence as to a well-directed public establishment? In some rare instances, friends may be found faithfully to discharge the duty of a parent, who is either dead or in a foreign land; but such cases are exceptions: and what security has an absent parent, in general, that his children are not either ill-treated and allowed to acquire the most vicious habits; or, should they meet with kind-hearted guardians, what security is there against their being spoiled by carelessness or indulgence? An orphan institution then for the children of British officers, founded on sound principles and directed by honourable and upright men, would be the best asylum for those who are unfortunately deprived of their parents; and a well conducted school for the children of living officers, and especially of those on foreign stations, would tend more than anything else to diminish the solicitude which must often oppress the heart of an anxious parent when unavoidably separated from his children. There might be difficulties, as the author states, in the first establishment of such an institution, but he endeavours to show, and apparently satisfactorily, that it would be by no means difficult to provide for the current expenses at least.