finite obligations to him. We owe him, as it were, a thousand ingots of gold.

When Mr. Fox inquired of George III., whether it would be agreeable to him to receive a minister from America, his Majesty replied:-The phrase of your ' question, Mr. Fox, rather surprises me; it cannot be agreeable to me; but I can and do agree to it.' Mr. Fox, however, had an extraordinary power of simplification. He undressed everything; and left it naked for all who wished to see. Thurloe's papers, too, are unparalleled for precision and clearness. Indeed, they throw transparency over the affairs of Europe, during the whole time in which he was secretary; and this quality, also, distinguished Frederick the Great, who always wrote, if we may credit the Count Guibert*, with a precision wholly unknown in diplomacy; an art, he assures us, that, in his time, consisted in drowning the sense in phrases, wrapping them in obscurity, and clothing every thing in mystery, the better to take advantage of ambiguous expressions in case it should be necessary.

In all previous assemblages of the notables, the members of the three estates sat in three different chambers; and Necker, having assembled them without stating in the edict, that they should meet in three bodies, gave rise to the idea that they ought to meet in And this idea being sanctioned by a large majority of the third estate, gave rise, also, to the summons of that body to the other two to sit in debate with them; and some of the nobility and clergy, having answered

one.

* Eloge du Roi de Prusse, p. 71.

that summons, the legislators, from that time, assumed the title of the 'Assemblée Nationale.' All this arose from a wilful or neglectful want of precision on the part of M. Necker.

The first Lord Holland was nearly being visited with a censure of the House of Commons, for writing to certain members of Parliament, requesting their attendance on the first day of session; when, he said, he should be able to make up his mind, whether he would accept the office of Secretary of State, and take upon him the conduct of the House of Commons ;' instead of his Majesty's affairs' in the House of Commons.

A word (' equal ') prevented a meeting between Mr. Pitt and the Duke of Portland; upon which a junta, at the St. Alban's Tavern, came to a resolution, that having heard, with concern, that an interview between the Duke of Portland and Mr. Pitt was prevented by a doubt respecting a single word, they were unanimously of opinion that it would be no dishonourable step, in either of the parties, to give way; more particularly as it might be advantageous to the public welfare. The word 'equal,' however, prevailed; for the parties could not be allured to meet, notwithstanding it was wished and recommended even by the king himself.

In later times, nay, only a short time since, a misconstruction of a phrase in a letter prevented the Duke of Wellington from forming a part of the Canning administration. Thus, too, when Lord Eldon argued*, that the church of England, combined with the state, formed together the constitution of Great Britain, and that the

* April 21, 1828.

Test and Corporation Acts were necessary to the preservation of that constitution, Lord Holland, with great force, argued, that the constitution consisted in the power of the King, Lords, and Commons, to make laws and statutes; not that the statutes, when so made, were the constitution. And when Lord Lyndhurst, then recently appointed Chancellor, applied the term 'mischievous' to one of his predecessor's amendments, he did it in a manner so ambiguous, that Lord Eldon thought he meant it to apply to his intentions. If I should be ' called immediately to lay down my life,' answered his Lordship, with great indignation, ' I should do as I am now doing; satisfied that I never meant anything mis'chievous to my country. It is an imputation which I 'do not deserve, and which I throw back on him who 'made it; and throw back with the scorn belonging to a man who is injured by even the suspicion.' The fact was, that Lord Lyndhurst meant, that Lord Eldon's proposition was mischievous; not that he had a mischievous intention in moving the proposition.

With many persons words are merely words: with others, however, they are things. To use words, then, with propriety, and with effect, must ever be the province and the ambition of a wise man; more particularly as, in certain stages of society, the majority of nations, as well as of persons, are governed more by words than they are by deeds.

*

* The most comprehensive law-maker (in respect to precision) appears to have been Merlin of Douay; the framer of the law against suspected persons: 6 a spider's web,' says Sir W. Scott, 'which was so widely extended, that no fly was insignificant ' enough to escape its meshes.'

Let us now turn to the want of precision in morals and theology.

The Latin word sacra ' is sometimes used for sacred, and sometimes for accursed. Thus Virgil, stigmatizing avarice, says, 'Auri sacra fames *.' The word 'crimen,' made use of by the Roman emperors in the rescripts, not having been defined, multitudes of Christians suffered. Being, however, at length, defined more clearly by Antoninus Pius, cruelty and injustice for the period ceased. Trajan, by an unprecise answer to Pliny, in respect to the Christians, too, caused many errors. 'O sententiam!' exclaims Tertullian, O sententiam necessitate confusam!'

The scriptural allegorical writers attributed various meanings to every phrase. Some ascribed three, some four, some five, and Angelome of Lysieux even seven; as we learn from his commentaries on the book of Genesis, and the preface to his commentary on the book of Kings.

Give me that creed, which, though it may require the longest line to fathom, may yet be so transparent, that, like the clearest lake in Mexico and Peru, all who will take the trouble may see to the bottom.

How many disputes, and even wars, have arisen out of the obscurity of theological terms and phrases! The word transubstantiation,' for instance, which Innocent III. introduced into the church, and which, a few years after, was altered by John Pungens Asinus into · consubstantiation.' What a senseless war of words, extending into persecution, did these unfortunate terms occasion!

*Eneid, lib. iii. 56.

The dispute, whether the early Christians had, or had not, churches, might have been settled in one moment, by the consideration that a house, or part of a house, may be esteemed a church, if used only for religious purposes.

Many are of opinion, that the violent contention between Nestorius and Cyril* arose out of the improper use of words only; and that the faith of the condemning and of the condemned was, in reality, one and the same. The like may be asserted † in respect to the arguments between the Eutyches and Monophysites in the fifth century, and between Luther and Huber in the sixteenth. Indeed, Ammonius wisely maintained, that the great principles of all religious truth differed mainly from each other only in the method of expressing them. For many centuries, popes, priests, monks, and ecclesiastical writers, guarded themselves from definitions, as if they thought the greatest evil that could befal them was to be clearly understood. Calvin, in the same manner, expressed himself so loosely, obscurely, and inconsistently, in respect to the eucharist, that not only Bossuet, but Courayer §, and several other writers, have insisted, that his sentiments coincided, almost entirely, with those of the Roman church.

A few words now in regard to philosophical terms. All subjects, relating to metaphysics, are extremely difficult, from the circumstance, that most of the words

* Vid. Luther de Consiliis, tom. viii. p. 265, 273. † Asseman. Biblioth. Orient., tom. ii. p. 291. Histoire des Variations des Eglises Protestantes. Examin des Défauts des Théologiens.