.........

purchase of an estate. He landed in England on the 23d of June; and, having taken his seat in the house of lords, received, for the twelfth time, the thanks and congratulations of parliament.

The genius of war was, however, within twelve months, again awakened by the return of Napoleon from Elba into France. He arrived in Dauphiny March 5th, 1815. | No sooner had his return become known to the Congress at Vienna, than they published a proclamation in these words: "By breaking the convention that established him in Elba, Buonaparte destroys the only legal title on which his existence depended. By appearing again in France, with projects of confusion and disorder, he has deprived himself of the protection of the law, and manifested to the universe that there can be neither peace nor truce with him. The powers consequently declare, that Napoleon Buonaparte has placed himself without the pale of civil and social relations, and that, as an enemy and disturber of the tranquillity of the world, he has rendered himself liable to public vengeance."

The Duke of Wellington was immediately placed at the head of an army, consisting of 50,000 men. Austria had provided 300,000, Russia 225,000, Prussia 236,000, the Germanic States 150,000, and the Netherlands 50,000 soldiers. This was a proud testimony to Napoleon's martial prowess,-that nothing less than an army of one million eleven thousand soldiers could wrest the sceptre of France from his giant grasp.

Napoleon had come down with great expedition on the Belgian frontier, before Lord Wellington, who was at Brussels, could be apprised of his advance. When intelligence was brought, it was so vague and indistinct, that his Grace, and many other distinguished officers, attended a ball, on the evening of the 16th, given by the Duchess of Richmond. "Amid these festivities, the roar of distant cannonade at length reached the ear of Wellington; and at midnight the bugle sounded, and the drum beat in Brussels." Every officer was shortly at his post, when the troops formed, and marched successively out of Brussels in the direction of Quatre-bras.

The engagements of Ligny and Quatrebras took place on the 17th of June, 1815. In the first of these, Blucher, having to contend with a slight superiority of forces, headed by Napoleon, was defeated with great loss, and obliged to retreat in the direction of Wavre. Lord Wellington was attacked at Quatre-bras by Marshal

Ney with a body of 45,000 men; and, when these were afterwards reinforced by Napoleon's victorious troops, his Lordship deemed it prudent to retire to Waterloo, in the confidence of being joined by Blucher on the 18th, the following day.

The morning of the 18th was wild and tempestuous; as if inanimate nature sympathized at that awful moment with man. At length the cannonade began, and the contest remained for a long time dubious; while victory shifted from helm to helm. After seven hours of unintermitting battle, the Prussians made their appearance. Napoleon perceived that the decisive moment had arrived; and placing his Imperial Guard, formed into two columns, under the guidance of Marshal Ney, commanded them to proceed to the charge.

The solidity of the English line defied their efforts; and they at last fled in confusion. "The Duke of Wellington now dismounted, placed himself at the head of his line, and led them against the four battalions of the Old Guard-the only unbroken troops remaining-behind whom Ney was striving to rally his fugitives.”

"The Marshal, at Wellington's approach, took post, once more, in the van, sword in hand, and on foot. But nothing could withstand the impetuous assault of the victorious British." Napoleon, who was watching this movement from the heights of La Belle Alliance, became suddenly pale as death ;-"They are mingled together," cried he, "all is lost for the present,"-and immediately fled towards Charleroi. The fatal cry of Sauve qui peut! (save himself who can,) was soon heard in the remains of the French army, and a general flight immediately took place.

The consequences of this important struggle are fresh in our minds. That daring spirit, at the mention of whose name the whole world had been dismayed, was for ever fallen. Cast forth to wither in a desolate isle, he ultimately relieved the fears of Europe by his death. His ashes rest in a savage and sequestered spot; but his name and mighty deeds will live for ages in the annals of history.

The Duke of Wellington once more received the thanks of parliament, for his services at Waterloo; and an additional grant of two hundred thousand pounds was voted him on the 11th of July, 1815, as the just reward of his valour.

"The season of peace has not been one of rest or leisure to his Grace. On the death of his Royal Highness the Duke of York, he was appointed (January 22nd, 1827) Commander-in-chief; and on Janu

ary 25th, of the following year, was gazetted as First Lord of the Treasury.

"Late events have called for the exertions of the Duke of Wellington in a widely different sphere of action to that of war; but it is in another place than this, that the tendency of his counsels must be determined. To pass opinions without having space or opportunity to show their reasonableness, is at all times a useless, if not a dishonest practice; and we therefore refrain from making any comments on proceedings, which are of too great importance to be alluded to lightly, or treated of in the superficial and passionate spirit of a momentary excitement. While, however, there will be a long cherishing of opposite and bitter opinions respecting the political career of his Grace, the sense of the nation will always remain the same respecting his services when England stood most in need of defenders. Of the celebrated men of modern times, no one has done more for his country, or deserved a warmer expression of her gratitude; and while there are many reputations which every coming year renders more and more unstable, that of the Duke of Wellington will be renewed, whenever France or England opens the records of its past history.

"His Grace married the Hon. Catherine Pakenham, third daughter of Edward Lord Longford, and sister of Thomas, present Earl of Longford; and has issue, Arthur Marquis of Douro, who was born February 3d, 1807, and Charles, born January 16th, 1808."*

See Fishers' Portrait Gallery, No. I.

INFIDELITY JUSTLY REBUKED.

In our number for December last, col. 1077, we inserted an address presented by the Secretaries of the Christian Instruction Society, at a general meeting of its subscribers and friends, held in Albion Chapel, London, on the evening of November the 3rd, 1829; convened to take into consideration "the awful profanation of the Lord's day in the metropolis," and to devise means for its suppression. Thomas Wilson, Esq., was called to the chair, and many of the most respectable Dissenting Ministers in London attended, the vigour and animation of whose speeches were honourable to the occasion.

At the commencement of the business, several attempts were made to interrupt the proceedings, by a person whose views were evidently hostile to the objects of the meeting. Order, however, was at length restored, but to the impression which the

intervention had made, we are probably indebted for a considerable portion of the following masterly speech, delivered by Dr. Bennett. Editor.

The Rev. Dr. BENNETT.-I rise to move the second resolution; "That we regard it to be our duty, as members and friends of the Christian Instruction Society, to endeavour, by all the moral means in our power, to promote one of the primary objects for which it was formed, the observance of the Lord's day;' and therefore, as the professed friends of God and our country, we bear this our humble but solemn testimony against the shameless violation of the fourth commandment, and presume to remind all persons of illustrious and noble rank, and of official station and influence, of the alarming mischiefs which must inevitably result to themselves and the country, from the open and continued profanation of that day, which is rendered sacred, not only by human edicts, but by that divine law which cannot with impunity be broken."

Mr. Chairman-As I am one of those that approve of meeting argument by argument, and allow of no other knock-down blows than those that logic would employ, I cannot but touch upon the previous occurrence of this meeting, before I go fully into the resolution. I so much approve of the principle of Mr. Yockney, that I had previously determined to propose to this meeting, that any person wishing to be heard, should have the opportunity, if he would hand up his name and his notion, provided it were consistent with the objects for which the meeting was convened. I premise this, because we have apparently (but only apparently) departed from that honourable and frank principle. Had the gentleman who rose, whom I know not personally, adopted this quiet, calm, gentlemanly mode, in which he was invited; had he silently handed forward his name, and address, and amendment, to the Chair, it would have met with a candid attention. But rising and obtruding himself upon the eyes of the audience, when there were so many associations connected with him, and with those who were united in the disturbance created; he evidently did not design to avail himself of the reasonable, generous offer, and of the frank mode of proceeding proposed at the opening of the meeting other designs evidently were in his head.

We avowed before the world that we did not intend to invoke the arm of the law, or beat the drum ecclesiastic, and proclaim a crusade against infidelity. (Applause.) We declared that we intended to employ moral means, and had there been a spark of

moral worth in the minds of those who opposed us, all their opposition would have melted away. But having said this, I now declare, on behalf of the Sabbath, that I would fling down the gauntlet at the foot of the boldest infidel, and challenge him to take it up. I would argue this point even with the deist.

As for the atheist who believes-I correct myself, he believes nothing, not even that he does not believe: for the man that can see a world of effects around him, and deny a cause, violates the first principles of reasoning. How can I argue with such men? for though he should see me, he might deny that I was here. (Laughter and applause.) Effects with him prove no cause, and though he might hear me, he would deny that I spoke, because he could not argue a cause from an effect. Though I might reason as a rational being, and put all my arguments into a regular systematic form, yet he would not conclude that I was a reasonable being, for no effect can prove a cause. (Laughter.) Near such a man as this, I own I should feel alarm, unless some spirit of martyrdom, like that of the early Christians, pervaded my breast. I should not like to stand within arm's length of him; for though he struck me with a dagger, and I fell down dead at his feet, he would, upon his own system, calmly say, that it did not prove that he killed me. No, Sir, with such a man argument is thrown away, and the result is perdere operam et oleum, to lose your labour and your time. But to the deist I would thus address myself. "You say there is a God, and that he hath made us and the world around us. You acknowledge that you are not a section of the chapter of accidents; that there is indeed a cause, and that you and the world around you are the effect of that cause. You declare that there was one great work which that Being you profess to acknowledge has performed, a work of creation. You say that the heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament sheweth his handiwork. Well, sir, upon your own principles, we meet to celebrate the honour of that Deity, and to keep up a memorial of what is, from your own admission, his own work, and to proclaim through the world the honour of that great work, and to celebrate its Author's praise. While, therefore, we meet you on your own ground, we appeal to you, whether the observance of the weekly Sabbath has not spread through the world, and whether you can trace it up to any other cause than the original revelation given by God, at the creation, to the whole family of man. To what other cause

can you ascribe the celebration of a weekly Sabbath? There is nothing in the course of nature that inculcates this. We might celebrate a yearly festival, for the sun rolls annual rounds. We might divide time into months, because the moon rolls monthly rounds. But tell me, which among all the works of God teaches a weekly rest. Where have men learned a seventh day's repose? The Greeks, however, had their sacred se. venth. We have the celebration of the seventh day, where the Scriptures are not known. The revelation given to the whole family of man, has spread the doctrine of the weekly Sabbath.

I would say to the deist, Is it not worthy of your own creed, to proclaim the greatest work God has wrought, and give to the author the honour of his work. If we admit, on the principles of the deist, that the weekly celebration of the Sabbath is rational, we can surely say, as citizens of the world, and friends of the whole family of man, you must allow that the weekly cessation from toil and labour is friendly to man. Had there been no such institution, might not the infidels have said, Is the Deity benevolent, that he urges on the task of his creatures, and bids them work, work, work on, and never rest? We know, then, that our Creator is benevolent. He has called us to work six days, which is conducive to our interests, but he knows his creatures need repose, and he says to us, as our compassionate Saviour did to his disciples, "Come ye apart, and rest a while.'

The Sabbath is as conducive to the comfort of the animal creation as it is to rational beings. The revelation of God has shewn us that the seventh day is a proper interval for the rest. Who does not perceive that fact confirms the propriety of the revelation, that six days' labour is enough to be pursued incessantly, and that when a man has gone thus far, he needs repose! While, therefore, we behold the benevolence and the wisdom of this institution, we need not be cowed at the interruption of an infidel.

I

To the Christian I now turn. I have another ground of appeal with him. would argue thus: You acknowledge that the law which gave the Sabbath was from heaven, and you should maintain it in the face of an opposing world, for you have a world of evidence to put down opposition. Sir, the law was published on Mount Sinai. Between two and three millions of people were gathered round the base of a lofty mountain, to hear this law proclaimed. Who ever heard of two or three

to witness in public, amidst the great elementary commotions of nature, an imposture? Who that had an imposture to palm upon the world would gather millions of people to be the spectators of the juggle! Two or three millions of people are not to be deceived, and told that they saw what they never saw; to be brought to believe they heard what not one of them heard, to be made to fancy they trembled at an earthquake, when they felt no such thing; that they saw lightnings flashing through the heavens, when none darted from the skies; that they heard the thunders roar, when thunders never uttered their voice: but two or three millions of people fancied they saw, and heard, and felt all this! Who, that had an imposture to palm upon the world, would choose such a theatre to act the juggle upon? (Cheers.)

But when amidst these convulsions of nature, the voice of God was heard by millions, proclaiming the law, "Remember the Sabbath day"-who received it? A people no longer in existence? A nation that is now upon paper only? The infidel would then rise and say, There never was such a people upon the face of the earth. Nay, more, that there never could have been such a people, that he who can believe there ever was such a nation, could swallow any thing. No, sir, a people now existing, a people travelling over the face of the world, a people carrying in their bosom the very code that contains the law published on Sinai, with all its attendant peculiarities. (Applause.) That people now exists, is spread over the world, lives in this country. I was the other evening at their synagogue, and I heard these Jews read the very Scriptures that contain the records of this institution. I looked round upon them, and saw the descendants of the same nation that was gathered round the foot of Sinai, to hear the proclamation of the eternal law. They have existed to this day, and yet the infidel would tell us that they never could have existed, (continued cheers,) that such a people, with such peculiarities and such a law, was an absolute impossibility-a mere chimera.

Sir, I am the servant of a God who makes the wrath of man to praise him. If the Jews had received Christ when he was first proclaimed, they would have been melted down in the common mass of the nations, and there had now been literally neither Jew nor Gentile. Had it been so, what a triumph would it have been for infidelity! This would have afforded the

ence. But God has made the infidelity of the Jew to confront the infidelity of our deists and our atheists. This people we appeal to as the evidence of the facts of divine revelation.

I know the way in which the infidel Paine has attempted to meet this-with a sophism so jocose, and so adroit, that it really passes with many for an argument. He says that the Christian appeals to the Jew in proof of his religion; and that the Jew, when he is called in, denies it. This is the same as if I should call my servant to prove what I say to be true, and when he comes he says it is a lie. (Laughter.) Now all this is very specious; it is quite a legitimate infidel argument. What is it that I call the Jew to prove? That my words are true? No; if I called him to confirm my testimony, I should conclude that he was a man believing the same testimony that I believed. Then, of course, I do not call a Jew to do that. What do I call him for? The dispute between the man and me is, whether my servant be living or dead. If the man dispute whether my servant lives, I say, "John, come here." If John, coming here, should say, “No, sir, I am not alive," (laughter,) why, surely, it would not put me down, and prove that I was false. servant can come at all, and speak at all, proves that my argument was true.-It is in this way that we appeal to the Jews: to their existence, and not to their testimony. (Hear, hear, and applause.) While, therefore, there is a Jew in the world, let the infidel go and meet him. Let him account for the existence of such an anomaly; let him account for his peculiarities; let him solve the difficulty. Then we will say, he is entitled to some respectful consideration.

That my

While, therefore, we can meet the infidel Paine on this ground, I know also that he may be met by fair argument on every other ground on which he will appeal to us. I had a friend lately in the county of York. He was an extensive ironfounder, and Paine was once in that part of the country inspecting the process of casting a bridge that he had projected. He was in consequence at the house of my friend, who received him at his table merely in the way of business. On one occasion, in a large party, he took upon him to sneer at religion, and at the name of Jesus. My friend took him up, and Paine began to shew that he was conscious of having offended the person at the head of the table, and said, "Jesus was a good