Methodists there, as in England, are numerous and increas ing; and are said to be almost the only persons who have paid attention to the religious and moral instruction of the slaves; and the mass of the free colored population as well as of the slaves are Methodists. The Shakers seem very much to have ingratiated themselves in our traveller's, estimation. Their absurd, monstrous, and unnatural peculiarities are very well known. Mr. Candler, the gentleman whom we understand to be the author of this work, says that they have been grossly misrepresented; which may probably be the case. Community of goods is by no means peculiar to them. The Harmonites, whose territory has recently been purchased by Mr. Owen, adopt the same custom: but it was only for a time, we believe, that they, like the Shakers, imposed on themselves, as a body, the restraints of celibacy. Mr. Candler believes that among the Shakers the intercourse of the sexes is purely mental and platonic, and that continence, with very rare exceptions, has been strictly preserved among them. It may well be asked how their numbers can be perpetuated? Constant industry furnishes the members of this society with great abundance of the good things of life; and the influx from other societies supplies the waste occasioned by mortality. Mr. C.'s account of the Friends in America excites our surprize:

Though the Friends are a more numerous body in the United States than in Great Britain, their influence in society at large is evidently less. Instead of co-operating with other Christian professors, as far as they can without compromise of principle, they stand aloof. Instead of trying to find points of union, they seem to delight in proving the incompatibility of reconciling their principles with those of others, in a harmonious design to pro mote the general welfare of the community. The Friends in Eng land are known to be warm supporters of the Bible Society. The Friends in America, on the contrary, are, in conjunc<< tion with Deists, its principal opponents. For though the Catholics are averse to it, they content themselves with neutrality; and though some of the Episcopalians are of similar sentiments, the great body of them are friendly to it. The Friends not only speak against it in private, but some of their ministers denounce it in public. On enquiring of several of them the reason of their hostility, I learnt that it arose principally from a notion that the Bible Society is founded on priestcraft, and is auxiliary to it. In former ages they say, priests opposed the circulation of the Scrip tures, from a fear of the people's becoming so enlightened, as to see the road to salvation sufficiently plain without paying for guidance. Now, since the people have learnt to reverence the Bible, priests avail themselves of this sentiments and advocate the Bible Society to ingratiate themselves into public estimation; since,

D 2

whether

whether they desire it or not, the Bible cannot be confined to the sanctuary. But the Friends do not confine themselves to the appearance of argument. They speak of the clergy and of other professors with a degree of asperity which their English brethren have long since disused, notwithstanding the examples for it to be found in the writings of some of their early ministers; and which is the more remarkable in the Americans, from the mildness generally adopted by the other religious professors in their country when speaking or writing of those who differ from them.'

In another place Mr. C. says that a strict scrutiny has convinced him that the opposition made by Friends to the Bible Society arises mainly from the spread of deistical opinions among them. I do not make this assertion hastily,' he adds, well knowing it is one which they will be reluctant to admit; but facts so fully confirm me in this opinion, that it would be wrong to disguise it.'

Those chapters which relate to slavery and the slave-trade deserve the highest praise; and will not be read without a painful, degree of interest. We had thought better of the American government before we read these chapters than we dare do now. It has introduced slavery where it was unknown before. It has extended it into the almost unpeopled districts of Missouri, and Arkansaw, and the Illinois; and although Congress has laudably endeavored to put an end to the African slave-trade, by denouncing it as piracy, it legalizes its own internal slave-trade. Thousands and tens of thousands of slaves are purchased in Maryland and Virginia to be sold in Georgia, Louisiana, and other states. Agents are stationed at Norfolk, Richmond, Baltimore, and other places, to attend to the purchase and shipment of these unfortunate creatures who, by the sanction of the legislature, are torn from all their dearest relatives and connections, and sent to a distance of two thousand miles away from them. There is no honest feeling against slavery or the slave-trade where this cruel and accursed system is sanctioned. Mr. Candler's feelings are roused by its iniquity; and he speaks his mind on it with all the indignation it deserves.

There is one point of view,' says he, to which I have not yet directed the attention of the reader. One part of the business of the agents of this traffic is to search for and obtain handsome Mulatto girls, to send them to New Orleans for the purpose of prostitution. What is the consequence? Why, by the unanimous accounts of all who have visited that city, it is the most profligate and licentious of any one in the United States. I have been informed that chastity is as rare a virtue there as honesty within the walls of Newgate.'

. Even in the free states there exists a strong prejudice against the Blacks and Mulattoes: but in the slave-states the influence of this antipathy is seen in the laziness, filth, and inferiority of the Whites themselves. When a man has been from his childhood accustomed to see all work performed by slaves of a different complexion from his own, he very naturally considers that labor is derogatory to a free White. He thus acquires habits of unconquerable indolence, as well as feelings of insufferable pride and insolence; slavery, therefore, does not confine its baleful influence to the character and condition of its direct victims, but it injures those who practise it on others. This is not an imaginary or trivial evil; and when Mr. C. says that he noticed a very striking difference in their general appearance between the free and the slave states, as to comfort, neatness, and industry, he only confirms the remark which all travellers, have made before him.

If the views of the Colonization Society are such as are here represented, no terms of reprobation can be too strong in exposing them. It is affirmed that the project of establishing a colony of Blacks on the coast of Africa who had obtained their freedom in America, under the pretence of preparing the native Africans to accept the blessings of civilized life and of spreading the truths of the Gospel by these 'sable missionaries, was merely a veil to conceal the real object, namely, to get rid of all the free Blacks from America, and thus to have an opportunity of rivetting more closely the fetters which confine the slaves! Many of the slave-holders were, accordingly, warm advocates for the Colonization Society free Blacks, having generally more information than slaves, are objects of jealousy to the masters. So long as the slaves are kept in ignorance they consider themselves safe; remove all the Blacks that are free, and the manumission of those that remain may be deferred without danger. - In the earlier chapters of this volume there are some trivial remarks and many frivolous anecdotes which might well have been spared: Mr. C. has also picked up several outlandish words which he would have done well to have left where he found them. It is sufficient to notice, thus generally, blemishes in a work of much information, and where the spirit of impartiality predominates over every other feeling.

(88)

ART. V. On the Science of Agriculture: comprising a Commentary on, and comparative Investigation of, the Agricultural Chemistry of Mr. Kirwan and Sir Humphry Davy; the Code of Agriculture of Sir John Sinclair, Sir Joseph Banks, and other Authors on the Subject. By Joseph Hayward, Author of "The Science of Horticulture." 8vo. pp. 220. 7s. Longman and Co. 1825.

MR. HAYWARD is exceedingly sore at having 'lost' what it does not appear from his own account that he ever enjoyed, namely, the patronage of the Horticultural Society of London. This patronage he confessedly sought; and not having had the good fortune to obtain it, he derides the fashion of the times" in attaching great importance to such authorities as professors of chemistry, extensive prac tical agriculturists, or the members of any learned society.'

Fortune,' says he, may enable pride and arrogance to smother truth and science for a time, but in a land of liberty these must ultimately establish themselves, however humble their immediate patrons. Although the Horticultural Society of London have refused to acknowledge the merit of my arrangement and explanation of scientific principles, they must ultimately adopt them, or be left far in the back ground, and their garden exhibit a glaring instance of a want of candour and liberality in the directors.'

This is really going a great way, and indicates a degree of presumption quite equal to the pride and arrogance' which have given him such offence. Mr. H., it seems, wrote a book on the science of Horticulture, submitted it to Sir H. Davy, and dedicated it to Mr. Knight, P. H. S. He has repeatedly applied to these gentlemen for their opinion of its merits, and he interprets their silence, perhaps erroneously, into contempt. The work alluded to has not fallen in our way: but the volume now before us shews a habit of observation and inference; and blends so much of practical knowlege in confirmation of theory, that we are far from thinking meanly of Mr. Hayward's judgment, whatever we may think of the supercilious tone which he occasionally adopts.

I

From the existence of a sexual difference in vegetables, Bradley had the merit of suggesting, a hundred years ago, that the tastes and properties of fruits might be altered by artificially impregnating one with the farina of another of the same class; and he was aware that, as in the animal creation so likewise in the vegetable, "it is from accidental coupling that proceed the numberless varieties of fruit and flowers which are raised every day from seed." As there is, generally speaking, more difficulty in regulating and limiting the sexual intercourse

intercourse of vegetables than of domesticated animals, varieties in the former have been usually produced rather by accident than system: they are, nevertheless, to be produced systematically, and the principle of their production is the same in both; namely, that of selecting and pairing the males and females.

The improvement which the late Mr. Bakewell effected in live stock by selecting parent animals of the finest form, and most valuable qualities, is well known: but the frequent degeneracy of the offspring when taken from under his manage ment brought his system of breeding in and in, as it is called, that is, of breeding from members of the same family, and of the nearest relationship, into disrepute. Mr. Hayward comes forward to defend the practice of Bakewell, and to shew that wherever this degeneracy has been observed, it ought to be ascribed to inattention in some other matters which Bakewell never overlooked; namely, in furnishing and adapting such climate, lodging, soil, and food, as promoted his object.

It must be admitted, that more valuable animals in themselves never were produced than those bred by Bakewell; but the old maxim no doubt is good, "You may purchase gold too dear." However, as before observed, Bakewell had an object in view, and to obtain this, every advantage of artificial climate, food, and lodging, were resorted to, regardless of expence; and so long as he could furnish exuberance in food, climate, and lodging, he found an exuberance in the flesh and size of his animals returned; but when his means of increase were exhausted, nature made a stand, she never went "farther than she intended." I once heard of a farmer, who, ambitious to excel, purchased a bull from Bakewell, or some such fancy breeder, and after having kept him for some time, the beast lost flesh, and became weak and languid; the farmer, on meeting with his former feeder, complained that the animal was fast declining, although he had plenty of grass, bay, &c.: the feeder told the farmer, that grass and hay were not sufficient; for besides these, he had been fed on grain, and had also been indulged with a pail of milk every day, from the time of quitting his mother. This sufficiently shows the folly of carrying things to such extremes for general purposes; but it does not prove Bakewell to have been erroneous in his judgment, nor does it detract from the principle of breeding in and in.

It is the general practice of sheep-farmers to purchase their rams from professed breeders, at enormous prices, and these, which are bred under peculiar indulgencies, are always kept away from the flock, with an extra allowance of the best food, such as grain, pulse, &c., and frequently, also, are allowed the shelter of a bouse; the consequence is, that their stocks are always lean and long, and large in their bones, and unequal to sustain the hardships of the natural climate, lodging, and food, with health and