REVIEWS.

The Statesmen of the Commonwealth of England. Life of Sir Harry Vane. By John Forster. Vol. 3. Longman & Co. 12mo.

It has been the singular fate of the great statesman whose name stands at the head of this article to be, at different times, the subject of more obloquy and of more praise than perhaps any other individual of the party to which he belonged, though of any one man of that whole party it is scarcely possible for an Englishman to think or speak in measured and moderate terms. Baxter says of him, and his disciple Sterry, that vanity and sterility were never more happily conjoined, and from this sarcastic attack by one who was engaged in the advocacy of the same great principles with himself was he defended by the weapons of a partizan of Laud, and therefore a staunch advocate of the hierarchy and a determined opponent of every form of dissent, the learned Thomas Pierce, of Brington, on the very extraordinary plea, in addition to "the quality and learned parts of that knight," that he had at least, "this commendation, that he is hated by Mr. Baxter beyond all measure, and is sufficiently averse to the Presbyterians." Excepted from the general act of indemnity granted by the returning exile in the hasty and soon repented of fit of generosity which followed the suddenness of his restoration, though no public character amongst the parliamentarians had so little participated in the guilt of Charles's death, to which event he gave no assent, nay, of which he published his entire disapproval; his death, by the hands of the executioner, was considered so characteristic, so necessary an accompaniment to the coronation ceremonies of a Stuart sovereign, that even at the cost of a monarch's promise, (though that indeed was little in the case of Charles II.) and by the agency of a plot, contrived between the king and his virtuous chancellor, that deed of darkness was accomplished. In the succeeding Saturnalia of the cavaliers, and in the chilly formality of that baptized heathenism, which became the national mould of orthodoxy, from the reign of the fourth Stuart to the middle of the last century, we presume that the name and the writings, and the principles of the enthusiast of the long parliament and others of his stamp, have slept in an oblivion so profound, that not even those most industrious resurrectionists of defunct and decayed literature, Cole, or Oldys, burrowing perseveringly in the "monuments of banished minds," have ever succeeded in disturbing their repose. In these days, however, whatever may be the cause, the case is very different. Some of our most popular and powerful writers have not only characterized the statesmen of the commonwealth as "the greatest geniuses for government that the world has ever seen," but Vane himself once the juggler of republicanism, the mountebank of enthusiasm, and zany of political frenzy, is now almost

honoured with an apotheosis. In one of our best periodicals, at least as regards its vigorous and manly tone of writing, this very enthusiast and his contemporaries, Milton and Bunyan, have been pronounced as the three greatest men of the period in which they lived, a period, nevertheless, generally acknowledged as not being the least remarkable in the history of our country for the production of energetic minds. Now though we must candidly confess that this is not precisely the selection we should have made had we been asked to point out a triad of England's literary athlete, yet we cannot but admit it as a tolerable compensation for that more extravagant calumny which, at no very remote a period, has endeavoured to establish a necessary connexion between illiteracy and dissent. But our antagonists do so rarely commit themselves on the side of candour, that it will appear injudicious in us to take any notice of their unwonted generosity. Numerous are the instances in which, in the eagerness of their zeal to prove the invincible ignorance of dissenters, the legitimates and exclusives of learning, have been guilty of the very faults which they have so contemptuously magnified. We remember to have seen in one of their reviews, of no mean character, a remark that the English Calvinistic dissenters had produced only three great men, naming, as two of the honourable exceptions, Jonathan Edwards and Dr. Priestley. The deplorable ignorance of dissenters might, perhaps, have imagined, that as the first of these gentlemen was an American, and the second a Socinian, the English Calvinistic dissenters were not entitled to the honour, whatever that may be, of claiming any connexion with those distinguished authors. It is, however, not the first time that hierarchial ignorance has confounded Socinians with the orthodox dissenters, and, it may be that as some compensation for the ecclesiastical strictness by which their ancestors transformed Englishmen into Americans, the geographical laxity of the present generation of episcopal rulers is induced to consider Americans as Englishmen. 'Tis certain their easy liberality would accept such a license, if it would empower them to aim a shot more successfully at the poor dissenters. Not that we have the slightest fear of the consequences of such attacks; the small shot which they are able to discharge, and their entire incapability of taking a steady aim, leave us in no uneasiness as to the consequences.

of

This extraordinary revolution in public opinion respecting the statesmen of the commonwealth, has been evidenced not only by occasional references in the monthly bills of mental fare, or, as they are sometimes perhaps more correctly styled bills of mortality, which our licensed caterers to the public taste circulate for the double purpose quickening the appetite of others and providing for their own, but by the numerous volumes of biography which have lately appeared respecting the men of that period. No less than two distinct lives of Sir Harry Vane have appeared within the last few years, one by a

respectable American author, the other by John Forster, Esq., of the Inner temple. The latter work is now under our consideration.

It appears from this book, that Sir Harry Vane was born in Kent, in 1612, a descendant from an ancient Welch family, which had been settled in Monmouthshire and the neighbouring counties from a very remote epoch, and which had allied itself with the daughter of Bledwyn, Lord of Powis. Some portions of the family had taken, and still retain, the name of Fane, which, in the Welch pronunciation, is expressed by the same sound exactly as the appellation still preserved by that branch of the family from which the distinguished individual now under consideration derived his lineage. The representative of the family, in Edward the third's reign, received the honour of knighthood on the battle field of Poitiers, for his distinguished valour. The present earldom of Westmoreland is held by that branch of the family which took the sirname of Fane, and from Sir Harry Vane himself is lineally descended the present Duke of Cleveland.

Sir Harry was initiated into learning under Lambert Osbaldeston, at Westminster School, and from thence he went to the University of Oxford. On the completion of his academical career, he made the usual tour of southern Europe, and having resided sometime in Geneva, came back, says Clarendon, with "a full prejudice and bitterness against the church, both against the form of government and the hiturgy." This was a deviation from the canonical uniform, which could not possibly be regarded by so strict a martinet as Charles, with any degree of clemency. Vane's old biographer, Sikes, says, that the bishops suggested to the jealous king the propriety of having the young reformer admonished by episcopal authority. Accordingly the schismatic was sent to be drilled into uniformity, under the hands of that exemplary disciplinarian, Laud, drill-serjeant of the awkward squad of Calvinian sectaries, and cropper-general of all the long-eared nonconformists of the day. But not all the weapons of this disciple of Dominic proved sharp enough to reduce to any size approaching to canonical length, the acoustic appendages of the idomitable Harry Vane. Though this singular fact seems to have been much wondered at by the easy civility of the courtiers of Charles, who were infinitely shocked that any private man should be hardy enough to refuse to be converted by arguments urged by the piety of a bishop and the authority of a king, we confess we should have expected no other result. A disciple of the school of Vane is about the most unlikely being in the world to be converted by arguments which, if they prove any thing, certainly prove too much, by assertions which, if they prevail to make him join a church founded on an act of parliament, would prevail to lead him on one step further into a church sanctioned by a pope, and so effectually put a final stop to the fear of schism, by plunging him into the dead sea of infallibility in order to cure that

restless disease of private judgment, so dangerous to the peaceful repose of an establishment. Vane could not see the necessity of ceasing to be rational in order that he might be orthodox, nor why he should put off the man, that he might be a Christian. In truth, in our judgment, the poor archbishop appears throughout his whole history a pedantic little priest. His judgment was precisely large enough to receive and exult in those details from which wiser men derive principles; or by a juster figure still, we regard him as an adjutant of a marching regiment, whose military knowledge is confined to theories on the best manner of cleaning buttons and pipe-claying belts, with a most consummate ignorance of the art by which battles are fought and victories obtained. In the early part of the dispute between Charles and his parliament, we find Vane taking an active part, and as might be expected, siding with the parliament. The facts which led to that disastrous quarrel, and the sanguinary conflicts by which it was decided, are too well known to our readers to render any account necessary in our pages. The merits, too, of the whole question, have been so long determined in our readers' minds, that we shall offer no opinion: whatever were the real character of the contending parties, those who have studied the extraordinary combination of mental and moral excellencies which centred in Vane, will have no doubt that he entered into the parliamentarian measures with the purest intentions. He regarded the conflict as one of those mysterious means by which light and purity were to re-enter the world, and whose final result he hoped would be the entire reformation of the human race, the preparation for the millenial reign of righteousness and peace, the blessed introduction of that kingdom when darkness, with all its attendant evils of tyranny, sin and misery, were to give way to the universal dominion of righteousness on the earth. He entered upon public business with a pure intention, and left it with clean hands. He took office under the existing government in perfect integrity of mind, and enjoying, when he entered on his official engagements, a princely estate; such was his disinterestedness, that not content with resigning again to the necessities of his country a considerable portion of that salary with which the munificence of the parliament sought to reward him, he sacrificed great part of his paternal income in aid of what he thought the public interests, and on the restoration he left his estate in so reduced a condition, as scarcely to afford a sufficient support for his family.

Indeed, the general character of that army, with whose interests Vane was allied, was perfectly distinct from that of any other soldiers of whom history makes mention. Concerning a considerable section of this army, that which consisted principally of independents, the following testimonies are borne by writers of very opposite opinions and, consequently, may be considered authoritative. Such testimonies should be attentively regarded by those who wish to take a correct view of the

history of the commonwealth times. Whitelocke, speaking of Cromwell, says, "he had a brave regiment of horse, of his countrymen, most of them freeholders and freeholders' sons, and who, upon matter of conscience, engaged in this quarrel. And thus being well armed within by the satisfaction of their own consciences, and without by good iron arms, they would, as one man, stand firmly and fight desperately." Even that inveterate enemy Clarendon, felt constrained to acknowledge on the motion, for their ultimate disbandment, that "no other prince of Europe would be willing to disband such an army; an army to which victory is entailed, and which, humanly speaking, could hardly fail of conquest, whithersoever he should lead it: an army, whose order and discipline, whose sobriety and manners, whose courage and success, have made it famous and terrible over the world." Burnet, speaking of those regiments of Cromwell which subdued Scotland, says, “I remember, well, of three regiments coming to Aberdeen. There was an order and discipline, and a face of gravity and piety among them, that amazed all people. Most of them were Independents and Anabaptists; they were all gifted men, and preached as they were moved. But they never disturbed the public assemblies in the churches but once. They came and reproached the preachers for laying things to their charge that were false; I was then present; the debate grew very fierceat last they drew their swords, but there was no hurt done: yet Cromwell displaced the governor for not punishing this.”—Own Times, vol. 1. p. 80.

Perhaps, however, the real character of this army is best determined by the words which they addressed to the parliament on whose behalf they were fighting. The documents from which these words are extracted were intended as petitions to the existing government of the nation, and our readers will acknowledge that the spirit of the language we quote is such as proves that these men are not to be regarded in the light of ordinary soldiers. "We were not a mere mercenary army, hired to serve any arbitrary power of a state, but were called forth and conjured by the several declarations of parliament, to the defence of our own and the people's just rights and liberties. To these ends in judgment and conscience we took up arms; and we are resolved to assert and vindicate these rights against all arbitrary power, and all particular parties and interests whatsoever." They assert, in the language of a similar petition, "that by being soldiers they had not lost the capacity of being subjects, that in purchasing the freedom of their brethren, they had not lost their own,—that they had not undertaken their present engagements as mercenaries whose end was gain, but as men who had abandoned their estates, trades, callings, and the contentments of a quiet life, for the perils and fatigues of war, in defence of the public liberty.” Men who could advocate such sentiments, and advocate them so well, are entitled to some consideration, and we have never yet seen any