MUCH of their leisure time is doubtless employed by all well-principled youth in reading. On the disposition of this portion of their life, their personal habits and ultimate character depend, almost as much as upon the course of study, or profession, or calling they may adopt. Not unfrequently, indeed, a direction is given to the thoughts and associations of the young, and a complexion fixed upon their minds, by the influence of these leisure hours, which mark them as the very busiest of their life, and most fraught with good or evil. In these hours tastes are formed, and passions nourished, associations with books and with other minds established, which leave an indelible impress. Indeed, the very freedom with which the mind acts, when thus released from restraint and submitted to its own direction, renders its action peculiarly characteristic.

Our views upon this subject will be best expressed in the form of distinct principles, for the regulation of miscellaneous reading.

The first of these principles, which we shall mention, is that such reading should never be a primary object in education. The young are not apt to reflect on the connection between exactness and extent of knowledge. They are not aware of the microscopic power of thought. They do not consider that minuteness of attention is really, in some respects, equivalent to extent of view; that the world may be studied in the turf under our foot. And they are apt to be impatient of severe application to elementary principles. They do not at once perceive their bearing or importance. Of natural science, of history, of poetry, the immediate practical relations are more obvious. Their principal mistake, after all, however, consists not so much in the preference of wrong studies, as in their conception of study itself. They think of patient intellectual effort in connection with abstract science and musty philology alone. Laborious and painful investigation, minute accuracy of distinction, severe reasoning, have, in their view, nothing to do with rhetoric and criticism, or with history and fiction. These appear to them to be amusements only. And this, in fact, is, in a majority of instances, the se

cret of the taste, as it is called, for these popular branches of literature. We can assure the young, that substantially the same mental traits, the same acuteness, the same closeness of reasoning, the same patience of attention, the same continuity of laborious thought, which are required for the processes of mathematical demonstration and philological analysis, are necessary, also, in the proper perusal of history, oratory, and poetry. Indeed, the moment we go beneath the very surface of these subjects, the questions which arise are often so profound and so delicate, they involve so many circumstances and so many ill-defined principles, that a really good judge of eloquence or poetry, or a sound reasoner in matters of history, is a rarer character than the profound mathematician. Let not the young hope that the superficial attainments which serve to sparkle in literary conversation, will answer the demands of real life. Learning may instruct, taste may adorn, fancy may amuse; but when important subjects are to be weighed, when minds originally strong and perfectly trained are to be encountered in the transaction of public business, or the conflicts of opinion, then higher powers must be put in requisition, and mightier energies awakened. For these manly duties, manly exercises alone can fit us.

That the principle just laid down may not be misapplied, we remark, in the second place, that the young ought to read-to read much. Whilst the power of thought is developing, the mind requires something to think of; it should be supplied with abundant materials. The facts of history and the creations of genius, the phenomena of nature and society, and the thoughts of eminent men in different departments of literature, are necessary to the full expansion and liberal culture of the mind. There is not much danger of overburdening it, so long as it is kept nerved for strong exertion. Like the body, it will digest almost anything, and any quantity too, so long as it is in vigorous action.

I would encourage the young, therefore, to fill up their time, to crowd life full of interesting subjects, that shall make an hour to look precious and the loss of a day to be felt as a calamity

130

Say to them, Read-read almost anything; but read. Anything, not absolutely corrupt, is better than reverie-better than entire stagnation of mind. Utter cessation of ideas, indeed, never takes place. When books do not supply materials to youthful thought, they will be furnished from other and more degrading sources; when the divinity in man slumbers, the animal riots. The man that reads not, is necessarily vulgar. His thoughts and associations become gross. Intellectual, spiritual life is not spontaneous; it is fine fruit of careful and patient culture on an ungenial soil.

From these remarks it is not to be inferred that the choice of books is of small consequence; and I therefore remark, in the third place, that too much care can hardly be taken to confine the student, as much as possible, to original and wellprincipled authors. The nature of the case will not allow that this should be always done. Information must often be sought in writers whose philosophy we cannot approve, and whose talents we cannot respect. Errors must be examined before they can be refuted; and faults must be seen in order to be avoided.

When room for election is left, original authors will in general be found most satisfactory. Even when making no pretensions to novelty, they are most worthy of confidence, and most salutary as models of thought and composition. There is in them a compass of view, a depth and justness of reflection, a temperance and a strength of thought, not found in ordinary minds. A philosophy, a respect for general principles will be found to pervade them, which redeem a thousand minute blemishes. They not only teach us what to think, but how to think. One is surprised to find how little the herd of common writers add to his knowledge, after he has well studied one sterling author on the same subject; and still more surprised to find how little such an one appears to say, in comparison with what he helps us to see might be said-how much he suggests more than he expresses-how much he makes us think, without seeming to think for us.

As to moral principles, let there be no compromise. Errors of the head, and acts of passion may be pardoned; but the offense of a mind capable of instructing mankind, and actually employed in assailing or undermining the moral habits or institutions of society, should have no forgiveness. With authors of unchristian and immoral character it is not good, it is not safe to hold communion. What, though their sophistry be shallow, and their errors manifest, their influence is scarcely the less pernicious. The moral sensibilities are too delicate for the contact of

pollution. It is the familiarity of the mind with false views and vulgar scenes, that chiefly taints and corrupts it. It is not so much deluded as degraded. The presence of false ideas and foul pictures of life, of necessity excludes better and nobler ones; and the standard itself of purity falls as the heart grows worse. The unhappy subject of this moral degradation loses at once the sense of descent and his motives to return, and goes down with a constantly accelerated rapidity to the abyss of guilt. The young should be well aware of the danger of habitual intercourse with authors of a mean ambition, or a gross imagination, or impure feelings. There is rarely anything wholly just in argument, or faultless in taste, to be found in them as an atonement for their more unpardonable defects. The truly great men are apt to be good, men.

Again; read with reference, if possible, to some definite end. Those acquisitions are always most permanent and most useful which are made in reference to particular objects. The mind must have been already trained and disciplined, which is able to lay up every valuable thought, as it occurs in miscellaneous reading, and to recall it in its true connections. The youthful reader cannot do it. To read to most advantage he will do well to select particular passages of history, or particular subjects in literature or morals to be investigated, and to pursue them as far as he has opportunity. If he begin right, one author will suggest another, new interest will be created as he proceeds, new relations of the subject will present themselves, new principles will be developed, until, to his surprise, he finds a little library collected around him, and begins to feel an acquaintance with a whole class of authors, of whom before he had but indistinct, if any ideas.

For example, he proposes to investigate a period of English history, the Rebellion, perhaps. He begins with one of the general historians, with Hume, an apologist for prerogative in politics, and a jacobin in religion. From Hume he goes to Lingard, a monarchist and a Catholic, but a student; from Lingard to Clarendon, a partisan of the king and a churchman, but an honest man; from Clarendon to Neal, a puritan and a republican. In Burnet's Own Time, Hutchinson's Memoirs, and the Lives of Charles, of Cromwell, of Usher, Baxter, Taylor, and Milton, he seeks a more minute account of personal incidents and private character; and in the works of some of these great men, he studies the literary character and spirit of the time. Rapin and various historical collections furnish many of the original documents, and seem to carry him back to the very period of which he reads. Such a course is

not, indeed, gone over in a day, but it is accomplished, by an industrious man, in no very long time. After the principal authors are carefully read, the rest are soon examined. Such a course, once thoroughly pursued, will be found to have enriched the mind of the reader with facts of great interest to the lover of civil and religious liberty; facts that illustrate the constitution of England, and the origin of our own free institutions. It will have led him to some definite ideas of the nature of government, of the right and hazards of revolution, of the mutual action of civil and religious parties, and of the genius and the moral and social habits of the land of our fathers, in one of the most active and instructive periods of her history. It will prepare him to read, more profitably, the records of preceding reigns, and to understand the principles on which the subsequent prosperity and glory of the country are. founded. In this way history is not merely read, but studied. Not only is information acquired; but, what is yet more useful, a habit of investigating, of comparing, of judging, is cultivated.

By such investigations a young man obtains the rare satisfaction of feeling, that, with all his ignorance and indistinctness of views, there are some things which he knows. It is above all price to a youthful mind to enjoy the consciousness of clear and exact intelligence. To be always, and on all subjects, in a fog, or under a cloud, seeing men only as trees walking, is inconsistent with mental independence, and a proper self-confidence. Precision, as well as extent of knowledge, is characteristic of eminent men. Perhaps we may be permitted to suggest in this connection, that of all professions, that of a clergyman is the least favorable to the promotion of a style of close thinking and severe reasoning. He is in too quiet possession of the field for the cultivation of caution in taking his positions; too secure from opposition to be very solicitous about the temper or the edge of his blade. And what is still less favorable to the perfection of his skill in argument, he rarely or never ascertains whether in particular efforts he succeeds or fails. The case at the bar or in the senate is brought to an immediate issue. The audience of a preacher listen with attention, and go away, it may be, impressed with his reasoning, but wait, with one consent, for a more convenient season to make up their minds. To persons intended for the pulpit, therefore, nothing in education which tends to give exactness to their knowledge, or precision to their reasoning, can be useless or uninteresting.

Essentially the same course may be adopted on philosophical or literary subjects, such as the theory of taste, or of moral sentiments, the au

131

thenticity of Homer or of Ossian, the learning of Shakspeare, the origin of language-anything which affords scope for inquiry, and in the pro gress of inquiry leads to the weighing of testimony, the comparison of facts, and the analysis of literary productions-anything which furnishes occasion to consult the works of eminent writers, and to subject their contents to careful and continued study.

Suppose the theory of taste to be chosen for examination. The first work to which the student would naturally be directed, is the very beautiful and delightful essay by Mr. Alison, a remarkable specimen of the application of inductive reasoning to a subject, which had before been loosely and unsatisfactorily treated. The admirable dissertation, by Mr. Jeffreys, in the supplement to the British Encyclopædia, will be found to exhibit the same theory, unembarrassed by the multitude of examples and illustrations which fill Mr. Alison's essay, and supported by a variety of additional considerations. Mr. Stewart's three essays on beauty, sublimity, and taste, in his volume of Philosophical Essays, in some degree modify the theory adopted by Alison, and trace, in a manner peculiar to that writer, and in the finest style of verbal criticism, the origin and successive applications of the terms taste, beauty, and sublimity. A review of these essays in the Edinburgh Review, deduces from the theory of association the proper doctrine of a standard of taste; and a review of Alison, in the Christian Observer, applies this theory, in a striking manner, to the subject of moral culture. In Dr . Brown's Lectures, the theory is still further modified; and in Mackenzie on Taste and Richard Payne Knight's Analytical Inquiry into the principles of Taste, it is altogether denied, and ingeniously controverted. In Lurke, Blair, and Addison, would be found the best specimens of the style in which the subject had been discussed, before Mr. Alison applied to it the singular ingenuity and copiousness of illustration which distinguish his essay.

By such an investigation, it is plain, the reader would be carried through a considerable range of authors, remarkable alike for clear reasoning and beautiful diction; a foundation would be laid for a system of philosophical criticism; habits of self-observation and reflection formed; and a species of judgment cultivated very analogous to that required in practical life-judgment upon facts often indistinctly apprehended, and connected with principles more or less indefinitejudgment depending frequently on a great vari ety of considerations, and the utmost nicety of distinction; and relating to subjects upon which