plundering, instead of assisting, an unfortunate fellow-creature who had been washed on shore from the wreck, and was apparently dying, uttered some vehement injunctions to him to forbear, the author puts into Bryce's mouth the following reply: "Dinna swear, sir; dinna swear, sir; I will endure no swearing in my presence; and if you lay a finger on me that am taking the lawful spoil of the Egyptians, I will give ye a lesson ye shall remember from this day to Yule." The moral effect of the tale required that Bryce should have been the swearer, and Mordaunt the reprover; and in a " Cheap Repository Tract" it would have been so contrived. The Waverley Novels abound in characters thus excep. tionably delineated; a fault for which there is no excuse, even of a literary kind, as the author had all the regions of nature, and possibility, and romance, to cull from, and was both able, as well as in duty bound, to make such a selection of materials as should not injure but promote the cause of religion and Christian virtue.

We must pass over minor moral faults in the delineation of character, otherwise we should feel it necessary to object to several of the sketches in the present tale. As one instance among many-we se. lect one of the less flagrant sortis it expedient to represent law, and order, and magistracy, in the ridiculous light in which they appear in the Pirate, particularly in the characters of the magistrates of Kirkwall? No person certainly will suspect" the author of Waver. ley" of wishing to subvert principles of loyalty and respect for lawful authority in his countrymen; but many of his delineations of character are eminently calculated for such an effect. The revered authoress of the admirable Tracts just mentioned seems to have felt how much injury had been done by a similar style of painting in the bulk of tales and novels, as regards the

clergy; and that not only in those publications in which they are exhibited as mere drones and hirelings, fat, sleek, self-important, and bigotted, with as much knavery and Jesuitism in their composition as is consistent with a quantum sufficit of mental imbecility,-but even in others where they are represented as generally benevolent and respectable, as in the case of the Vicar of Wakefield, yet with such a tincture of whim, or vanity, or weakness, as materially to derogate from the weight of their characters. Mrs. More has accordingly introduced in most of her tales an interesting pattern of a respectable and pious English clergyman; and has taken special care, in delineating the characters of these and all other useful orders of men, not to dash the composition in such a manner as to render its moral impression injurious to the best interests of society.

We are not however, upon the whole, so much inclined to augur evil effects from rendering good men weak, as from rendering bad ones agreeable. The consequence, in either case, is doubtless injurious so far as it extends; but it is more circumscribed in the former than the latter instance. Fewer persons would be perverted by the character of Bryce Snailsfoot than by that of Cleveland. In both indeed the tendency of the ideal portrait is iujurious; in the one, because we are taught to blend religious sentiments with base and odious conduct; and in the other, because vice and irreligion are combined with qualities which are too apt to ensnare a thoughtless mind, and win upon an unguarded heart. Such a compound character as Richardson's Lovelace has perhaps assisted to make many profligates; but we do not suspect that it ever reclaimed one. Dr. Johnson justly remarks on this very point; " Vice should always disgust; nor should the graces of gaiety or the dignity of courage be so united with it as to

reconcile it to the mind. Whereever it appears, it should raise hatred by the malignity of its practices, and contempt by the meanness of its stratagems; for while it is supported by either parts or spirit, it will seldom be heartily abhorred." By this test we are willing that the character of Cleveland should be tried; and we are convinced that the result will be, that such delineations are deeplyinjurious to the cause of good morals, and calculated to pervert the heart. And if such writers as the respectable author of Waverley thus incautiously combine good and evil in their characters, what may we not expect from less scrupulous narrators of fabulous adventures?

As Christians, we might proceed much farther on this point; for it is remarkable how little the portraits even of the most virtuous novel-writers resemble those which are made up of Christian graces. Frequently, where no wrong impression is intended to be conveyed, much mischief insinuates itself from the incidental touches which characterize the various personages of the scene. Rank, figure, beauty, external accomplishments, and other adventitious circumstances, are interwoven with characters in such a manner as to make an inseparable part of the portrait. A really good man-a true Christian-a man who should live above the world, and as not of the world, crucifying the flesh with its affections and lusts-would be generally represented in a novel, if represented at all, as a poor tame creature, devoid of taste, and incapable of gratification. Thus, in a variety of instances it might be shewn, without selecting gross cases, that the ordinary delinea tions of novels are detrimental to those habits and principles which as Christians it is our duty, and we may add our privilege, to maintain. But we pass on to another exceptionable feature in most professed novels; namely, that they

generally tend to weaken our reverence for religion. We have already seen one principal way in which they may do this; namely, by injurious delineations of character. There are, however, other modes of effecting the same object; and into some of which the author of Waverley, however unsuspectedly, has been betrayed; and betrayed to such an extent, as cannot but prove highly prejudicial to many of his readers. We allude particularly to the irreverent manner in which he introduces the words and sentiments of holy Scripture in his tales; a fault (we use the lightest word our vocabulary suggests) on which so much has been said, both in our own pages and elsewhere, that we shall not dwell upon it at present as its gratuitous enormity deserves.

And while the generality of novels thus tend, directly or incidentally, to weaken the reverence due to religion, they often further cause injury by the encouragement they afford to the violation of God's commandments.-The light way in which they frequently speak of sinful dispositions and actions, is in itself a tacit encouragement to them. It is not necessary to ask whether duelling, and suicide, and adultery, are offences against the Divine law? Yet even these are too often upheld, or at least palliated, rather than frowned upon, in the class of writings under consideration; and where this is not the case, other less glaring, but still unchristian, propensities, are suffered to pass into the rank of virtues. The hero of a novel is not thought the worse of, but often the contrary, for being proud and ambitious; and should a considerable infusion of resentment or revenge mix itself with his character, it is so shaded off by a constellation of relieving virtues, that we are taught to resolve his " failing" into an exuberance of the generous passions. Even the novels of the present author are obnoxious to

-

the charge-though not in so great a degree as many others of "making a mock at sin," treating lightly and playfully offences against the Decalogue, which ought to be mentioned only with unaffected sorrow and reprehension.

Another grievous charge against the general run of tales and novels is, that they present false views on the most important subjects connected with religion and morals. Let us only assume that the Bible is true, and that its disclosures are of moment; and what an anomaly will most novels appear to a man who seriously regards them under this impression! We must take high ground on this question; but ground on which our readers, we trust, are prepared as Christians to accompany us, even at the risk of a smile of surprise, from their novel-reading friends, at the excessive oddity of their opinions. We would ask then, Do the class of works in question usually describe man in true colours? Do they describe him as God describes him? Do they view him as a fallen creature; or as needing an atonement? Do they even always assume him to be a moral and accountable agent? So far from it, the Law and the Gospel are, in many cases, almost equally crossed out in their code. Judging by their standard, there is no necessity for repentance, no profit in faith, no motive to holiness. Every thing relating to death, to judgment, to eternity, is studiously excluded; or is employed only on some rare occasion for the purpose of picturesque or sublime effect. The morals inculcated (we speak generally) are defective in their character; their highest virtues are but splendid sins. Affliction is not made to lead the sufferer to God; prayer and praise are but puritanical observances; and, in short, the whole scene of human existence and destiny is described precisely as it would be if Christianity were a mere fable. Now, surely, compo

sitions professing to delineate man either "as he is," or as he ought to be," cannot but be injurious in their tendency, if they thus systematically keep out of sight, or pervert where they introduce, the fundamental principles which relate to his actual condition. We do not look for moral touches in a work of science; the subject does not require or always admit of them; but in a novel, the whole composition relates to human actions, and unless the principles be right they must be wrong; they cannot be neutral; they are scriptural or worldly; they are such as, if admitted in real life, would lead either to eternal happiness or eternal misery. A novel ought, therefore, to be so constructed as not to oppose the disclosures of Revelation; but for this purpose, must recognise them; not always directly, as in a sermon, but always virtually; embodying them in its general tone and structure, even where they are not specifically adverted to or introduced. want of this, novels in general afford no just principle of action, no true standard of decision; and they are too frequently most dangerous and delusive, where they ought to be most correct, namely, when they venture to touch upon subjects of moral and spiritual importance.

it

For

We may add, as another strong charge against most novels, that they fill the mind with images which religion ought to dispossess.-The length to which we have extended our remarks prevents our enlarging on this point as it deserves; but we leave it to our readers to decide, without our filling up the detail of proof, whether the whole scenery and machinery of the bulk of novels, with their affairs of war, and glory, and display, and passion, are not diametrically opposed to the train of feeling and reflection, which Christians ought to encourage; whether an indulgence in the perusal of works of this sort does