thoughts and conduct, which such a review brings to his mind. A thousand circumstances which seemed at first sight to be merely in the ordinary course of things, or to have arisen from the most trifling accidents, will be found to have worked out the most important con sequences, affording the strongest confirmation of the truth of the poet's assertion,-

"There's a Divinity that shapes our ends,

Rough hew them how we will."

To busy ourselves, however, in tracing these proofs of God's interference, much as it may conduce to animate the piety of the soberminded, is to most men an unprofitable, and to many a dangerous occupation. The slothful finds in it an excuse for his negligence; the presumptuous man makes it the foundation of his own arrogant confidence, or of the rash judgments he is ready to pronounce on the conduct of his neighbour; while to the timid and irresolute it affords nothing better than a new cause for his groundless though overpowering apprehension. On this account it cannot too often or too earnestly be taught, that the most scrupulous caution is necessary in applying this doctrine of a Special Providence practically to the affairs of individuals, whether as appertaining to ourselves or to our neighbours. We must not, on the one hand, be too ready to cry out, Behold a judgment! or, on the other, to argue from the temporary success of any one, that he is in the visible enjoyment of God's favour. To do this rashly or frequently is one of the worst symptoms of a most pernicious enthusiasm. But if, instead of the affairs of individuals, we consider the succession of events in the history of a mighty nation, perhaps the mind of a thoughtful man cannot be better employed than in tracing the proofs which it is calculated to furnish, that there is " One over all, God blessed for ever, by whom Kings reign, and Princes decree justice."

I have lately been led into this train of thought, while taking a review of the leading incidents in the late war which we have seen so prosperously terminated. It would be easy to shew how they were made to work together for good, though they were connected together by a chain of circumstances, so intricate and minute as to baffle all the conjectures of the most refined human wisdom; but this would demand an inquiry too exact to be interesting to your general readers: I will confine myself, therefore, to the consideration of the five great naval victories, in the hope that while we look back upon them with all those feelings of exultation which such splendid dis plays of valour and discipline must excite in us as patriots, we shall not shut our hearts to those emotions of gratitude and awe, with which as Christians we must be penetrated,-joining unaffectedly in the simple yet sublime acknowledgment of our own great commander, that it was Almighty God who blessed his Majesty's arms."

The success which attended the first efforts of revolutionary warfare had filled the friends of anarchy and disorder with the

most arrogant expectations. France saw herself able not merely to resist the attack of the combined forces, but to carry her victorious arms beyond the limits of her ancient territory, and pour the thousands whom political frenzy had brought together under her standard, like a torrent, upon the territories of her neighbours. The confidence which these successes inspired was not confined to her military efforts; she looked to her fleet also as an instrument to enlarge her triumphs, and cherished a belief that the time was at last come when a limit would be set to the naval ascendancy of Great Britain. The result of her first exertions was fitted to encourage this expectation; the merchant ships of England covered the seas, and offered an easy prey to the detached cruisers and small squadrons which were first sent out:-It is said that in the month of May 1794, not fewer than 97 vessels were carried into the ports of France. But the ambitious Republicans were not to be satisfied with these petty successes in the month of May the Brest fleet, to the amount of 26 sail of the line, ventured to sea, for the purpose of protecting a large convoy which was expected from the West Indies. Rear-admiral Villaret commanded; but in compliance with the jealous spirit and practice of the new Democracy, a National Deputy, the notorious Jean Bon St. Andrè, sailed with the Admiral to watch and report upon his conduct. Lord Howe, with a British fleet of 26 sail, was already at sea, in the hope of intercepting this rich West India convoy. On the 19th instant, he received information that the Brest fleet was at sea; on the 21st, certain intelligence reached him that the enemy were but a few leagues to the westward; and on the 28th, early in the morning, his advanced frigates had sight of them far distant to windward on the weatherbow. Both sides were eager for the combat; the French bore down immediately towards their opponents in loose order, and some time was lost before they could get in regular order of battle, which they did on the starboard tack. This time was employed by the British Admiral in making his arrangements; and it enabled him to place a detached squadron, under Rear-admiral Pasley, in a situation to make an advantageous impression on the enemy's rear. Towards the close of the day the Rear-admiral led on his division, and attacked a three-decker, the sternmost in the enemy's line. This ship (the Revolutionnaire,) was subsequently engaged by the Audacious, a British 74; and in the darkness of the night both ships were separated from their respective fleets. The Revolutionnaire having lost her Captain, and suffered greatly, (according to some accounts her colours were once actually struck,) was towed into Rochefort; the Audacious, nearly disabled, got into Plymouth. On the morning of the 29th the hostile fleets were still in presence of each other, and Howe made an effort to practise the favourite British manœuvre of breaking the line. But the effort was ineffectual. In the course of these preliminary movements the British fleet had gained the weather-gage on the enemy, and they retained it till the decisive moment of action. The two following days the fleets remained separated some few miles,

at times in view of each other, in the intervals of a thick fog. On the first of June, between seven and eight o'clock in the morning, the British fleet bore up together for the purpose of bringing the enemy to close action. The French waited for them, and sustained the attack with great steadiness. This was not an action which depended on management or manoeuvre; the fleets were of equal strength, and it seemed to be the object of both that the issue should be made to depend on what we may call fair fighting. In less than an hour after the action commenced, the French Admiral, who had been engaged with Howe's own ship, the Queen Charlotte, crowded off, and was followed by most of the ships of his van who were in a condition to carry sail, leaving behind about ten or twelve of his crippled or totally dismasted ships, besides one sunk in the action. The conquerors were not, however, in a situation to reap the full fruits of their success; seven ships eventually remained in their possession, one of which, Le Vengeur, sunk before her crew could be taken

out.

Thus terminated the first trial of strength between the fleets of Old England and new revolutionary France. It taught these wild democrats a lesson which they did not soon forget. I shall proceed in the next Number to state when and by whom similar lessons were given to the other maritime states who did not disdain to make common cause with those enemies of social order.

ON THE DIVISION OF LABOUR.

(Abridged from Smith's Wealth of Nations.)

The science of Political Economy, or, the knowledge of those principles which constitute the prosperity and power of a state, originated in the research, and, perhaps, in the habits of very modern times. Whatever might be the extent of the riches which the great empires of antiquity possessed, their wealth was not derived from the certain re-production of perpetual and uniform labour, but rather from the violent and unequal exercise of military strength, or the fortuitous advantages of soil and climate. The speculations, therefore, of the philosophers, and the practical wisdom of the legislators, of Greece or Rome, were seldom exercised in attempting to seek for other causes of the wealth of kingdoms, than might be deduced from the comparative opulence of individuals. Even in the modern world, long after the discovery of America had effected a complete revolution in the operations of national industry, the causes of public prosperity were very imperfectly understood; and even when they had become subjects of interesting inquiry, were referred to false and impracticable conclusions. The French economists, who pursued these studies with more application than was discoverable in the political reasoners of other countries, were the sole authorities of

Europe for nearly a century; and these were contented to rest their doctrines upon a principle which placed all value in the Soil. It is the boast of Scotland to have produced a man who saw distinctly into the causes of national prosperity, by discovering that Labour is the great and universal agent in the creation of wealth. The doctrine of SMITH, after a few reservations, is now received as an infallible guide, in this most important, and perhaps most difficult, branch of political science. It is one of the highest praises of his system that it distinctly points out the value of our social relations, by showing the relative importance of every member of an opulent community, whether labourer or capitalist-producer or consumer. The advantages, therefore, of an acquaintance with this celebrated work are not limited or partial; next to the obligations of our religion, and the general enactments of our laws, the causes by which a country is advanced to real greatness, and the application of those principles to the evidence of our personal industry, or of our actual observation, demand a particular atttention from us, as members of the first commercial nation on earth. We shall therefore occasionally present a few of the leading principles of political economy, chiefly abridged from the "Wealth of Nations."

The greatest improvement in the productive powers of labour, and the greater part of the skill with which it is any where directed, or applied, seem to have been the effects of the division of labour which effects, in the business of society, will be better understood by considering how it operates in some particular manufactures.

It is commonly supposed that the division of labour is carried farthest in some trifling manufactures, which is an error probably founded upon this circumstance; that the number of workmen, in every branch of these manufactures, being small, may be collected in the same work-house, and placed at once under the view of the spectator; whereas in those manufactures destined to supply the great wants of the people, we can seldom see at once more than those employed in one single branch: therefore the division may be greater, and yet not so obvious. As an example of the division of labour;a person unacquainted with the business of pin-making, could scarcely make a single pin a day; but by dividing the business into various branches, which are now distinct trades, each person may be considered as making 4800 pins in a day.

In every other manufacture the effects of the division of labour are i similar to what they are in this, though they may not be reducible to so great simplicity: hence the increase of the productive powers of labour; the advantages of which have caused the separation of dif ferent employments. This separation is carried farthest in countries most improved: what is the work of one man in a rude state of N society, being generally that of several in an improved one. Hence the different trades in the woollen and linen manufactures, from the growers of the wool or flax, to the dressers of the cloth.

Agriculture does not admit of so many subdivisions of labour as

mi

I

manufactures: the different sorts of labour, in the former returning with seasons, no man can be constantly employed in any one of them; hence its unimproved state, in all countries, compared with manufactures. In agriculture, the labour of the rich country is not always much more productive than that of the poor. The corn of Poland is generally as good, and as cheap, as that of England, notwithstanding the improved state of the latter. But in manufactures, Poland can' pretend to no such competition.

The increase in the quantity of work, which, in consequence of the division of labour, the same number of people are capable of performing, is owing to three different circumstances.

1. To the increase of dexterity in every particular workman, by reducing every man's business to one simple operation, and by making this operation the sole employment of his life. A common

smith, unaccustomed to making of nails, cannot make more than two or three hundred nails a day; whereas lads, under twenty years of age, who never exercised any other trade but that of making nails, can make 2300 nails in a day. Neither is this one of the simplest operations, and of course not one where the dexterity of the workman is the greatest.

2. To the saving of the time which is commonly lost in passing from one species of work to another. It is impossible to pass very quickly from one kind of work to another. A country weaver, who cultivates a small farm, must lose a deal of time in passing from the loom to the field. A man commonly saunters a little in turning his hand from one employment to another; and when he first begins the new work, it is seldom with spirit; hence the habit of indolent careless application acquired by every country workman, who is obliged to change his tools and work, every half hour.

3. Labour is much abridged by the application of proper machinery. The invention of those machines, by which labour is so much facilitated and abridged, seems to have been owing to the division of labour: for men are likely to discover the readier methods of attaining any object, when their whole attention is directed towards that single object. It is natural also, that out of many workmen employed in each branch of labour, some one or other should find the readiest method of performing their own particular work. It is a fact, that a great part of the machines used in those manufactures in which labour is most subdivided, were the inventions of common workmen. In steam engines, one of the greatest improvements was discovered by a boy who wanted to save his labour. Many improve ments in machinery have been made by the ingenuity of the makers of machines; and not a few by philosophers, or men of speculation; whose trade is not to do any thing, but to observe every thing Philosophy, like other employments, is not only a trade, but is subdivided into several classes, which, as in every other business, improves dexterity, and saves time.

It is the great multiplication of the productions of the different arts, in consequence of the division of labour, which occasions, in a

VOL, I.

I i