Unitarian. This in fact is the reason assigned. "What is the painful truth, it is a Unitarian book, written by a lady who is a member of a Unitarian church."

See then how the discovery of the author's religious connections immediately change the character of the book! Before, it was a good book, to be recommended and read. Now, it is a bad book, to be denounced and shunned. Is this the christian principle of judgment? The "Christian Intelligencer" feels it a part of its duty, we presume, to denounce all false prophets, who come in sheep's clothing, but are inwardly ravening wolves. We suppose the editor has taken the trouble to read the rule, explicitly laid down by Jesus Christ for performing this work. (Matt. VII. 16-20.) This rule as it stands in our bible is "Ye shall know the tree by its fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? We may be mistaken, but it seems to us that the Intelligencer has taken exactly the opposite course, and judged the fruit by the tree.

In the first place, opening the book, and finding it full of grapes and figs, wholesome for the palates of young and old, it recommended them to its readers. "Coine, eat and drink," it said, "here is excellent fare-excellent good fruit." But while the fruit is yet in their mouths, it is snatched away again. "These are not figs my good friends! Be on your guard! It was a Unitarian tree, as we have just heard, which produced them. The fruit is known by the tree. They look like grapes, they taste like grapes, we thought them grapes, but the tree has not the right label upon it, therefore throw them

aside."

Again, consider a few of the consequences of following up this principle. All books written by Unitarians are to be distrusted, especially if they do not treat of religious doctrines, for "error is more dangerous, in proportion to the indirectness and insidiousness with which it is introduced." Very well. When does the Intelligencer intend to publish its "Index Expurgatorius," containing those books only which Presbyterians are to be permitted to read? More books will have to be cut off, we assure him, than Miss Sedgwick's works. In the first place, we must place in this Protestant list of denounced works, all the "First Class Books," "National Readers," "Eclectic Readers," &c., &c. used in all tha Schools throughout the country. All of these which we have ever seen, have extracts from Buckminister, Ware, Kirkland, Greenwood, and countless other Unitarian authors. The works of John Milton, John Locke, Sir Isaac Newton, Dr. Samuel Clarke, Dr. N. Lardner, Bowring, Rammohun Roy, Joanna

Baillie, Miss Martineau, Blanco White, Mrs. Barbauld, and a vast many others in English literature would have to be added. Dr. Channing's writings would be of course prohibited, especially the essays on Milton, Bonaparte, and Fenelon, because "error is more dangerous in proportion to the indirectness and insidiousness with which it is introduced." The works of Jared Sparks must be added, especially the Lives of Washington and Franklin, because "error, &c." The poetry of Pierpont, and many others, would be swept away by the same unsparing decree. Mr. Dewey's "Old World and New," must not be tolerated for an hour. The North American Review, from the beginning, must be discountenanced. The orations, and speeches, and other writings of Edward Everett, are to be added to the list. We believe that when Mr. Webster made his greatest efforts in Congress, he was a member of the church in Brattle Square. His speeches therefore must follow, since "error is more dangerous," &c. In short, the taint has been so long in New-England-there are so many of the John Adam's, Josiah Quincy's, Fisher Ames', and so forth, who were members of Unitarian Societies, that perhaps the speediest and safest way would be, to extinguish New England literature altogether.

Really, we may congratulate Miss Sedgwick of the good company she has fallen into. We did not know how rich we were, till we began to count up. The Unitarian sect, though small, has it seems, done its share for literature. English literature could hardly bear the loss of such a purgation as the principles of the New York Christian Inteligencer demand. We shall send a copy of this No. of the Messenger, to the editor of that print, praying in return that as soon he gets his Index Expurgatorius made out, he will forward us a copy.

SONNET.

Oft in my dreaming moods, when memory weaves
The many rose and rain-bow tinted hours,

As in a garland of wild summer flowers,
And brings it faintly flagrant, the bright leaves
Fresh as in times long past, my spirit grieves
That life should not be ever thus-a stream
Like the bright changes of some blessed dream,
Flowing in song and music-that receives
No ruffle on its breast-no chilling frost,
And hears no angry strife upon its shores.
Vain grief! or worse than vain. The heart deplores
The losing of a dream that best were lost;
For conscience bids me wake to toil and thought,
Nobler than any joys such dreams e'er bought.

C. P. C.

THE OTHER SIDE.

We

[THE following communication from our friend W. G. E. we insert with great pleasure, inasmuch as we wish, as often as we can, to act on the principle of letting our readers hear both sides. must confess, however, that our opinion of the necessity of our previous notices of the Alton transactions, is very little modified by it. The editor of a public journal, we judge, is bound most solemnly to let his voice be heard whenever any great event occurs, involving the happiness, morality, and religion of the land. That voice must be distinct and decisive, or it avails nothing. We never said, and never meant to say, that the wrong was all on one side in this matter. But the great, the terrible evil lay in the mob example. That should be first clearly discountenanced, and then we may look at the secondary features of the affair. We believe our friend mistaken in attributing the first shot to Mr. Lovejoy. The legal investigation has shown that the first guns were fired from without.-Ed.]

ST. LOUIS, JAN. 15, 1838.

Mr. Editor:-I cannot help thinking that your remarks upon the Lovejoy mob, as it is called, are exceedingly unjust. They are hasty and undiscriminating, and evidently founded upon mistaken information as to facts. You say, that "a man whose mind at such a time, can dwell for a moment on Lovejoy's imprudence or Lovejoy's mistakes; on the folly of abolitionists, or the mischief which abolitionists are doing, shows either that he has a very imperfect idea of the transaction, or a very imperfect notion of right and wrong." This is something new. We used to be taught that the circumstances of a case make a great difference in our judgment concerning it, and that what is murder in one case may be self-defence in another.

You know me too well, I hope, to suppose, that I would justify a mob like that of Alton. Like those of Boston, and Philadelphia, and New York, and Baltimore, and Washington, and St. Louis, and every other city in the United States, it was illegal and wicked. But what I say is this, that whatever we may think of that mob, the blame thereof rests as much upon Mr. Lovejoy and his friends, as upon the most violent of their

opponents; and as to the consequences of the mob, that the death of Mr. Lovejoy, however much it is to be lamented, rests upon his own head not less than that of him who fired the fatal shot. Mr. Lovejoy has no right to be considered the martyr to a good cause: he was rather the martyr to his own great rashness and his willingness to take the life of his opponents. I am well acquainted with the particulars of the affray, having conversed with the Mayor of Alton about it, and can assure you, that nothing was further from the minds of the people of Alton, than to murder Mr. Lovejoy. They wished to destroy his press, and in this deserve to be severely condemned. You cannot condemn them more strongly than I do. But what city shall cast the first stone? Besides, if such a case admits of any palliation, it should be understood, that Mr. L. was a man by no means of a conciliatory character, but one who has always made enemies wherever he has been, by his harshness of feeling, and his unmeasured style of expressing himself. He never seemed satisfied except in the

midst of contention.

This is worthy to be considered, when it is remembered how much the American people act by impulse and are apt to identify the cause with the man. But the Alton mob did not intend to injure him, nor to burn the house in which he took refuge. The Mayor informed me, that he has no doubt that he should have succeeded in dispersing them, without their doing any material mischief, had not guns been fired from the building, by which a man was killed. At the time these guns were fired, things had not proceeded to such an extremity as to make the act justifiable. Not a gun had been fired by the mob, and very few of them were armed. It needed only this to excite them to frenzy. It was generally understood that Mr. Lovejoy had fired the shot by which the man was killed, and after this the civil authorities could do nothing. Yet even then, the greater part of the mob only demanded the press to be given up. The resistance from the building continued, and an attempt was made to set the roof on fire. Mr. Lovejoy, with a boldness for which we give him credit, came out of the house three times to fire at the men on the ladder, who were ascending to the top, and the third time was himself killed by a shot fired from the crowd.

This is the true statement. There is reason to believe that Mr. Lovejoy fired the first gun from the house; he certainly did one of the first, and fired twice afterward with intent to kill. One of the newspaper accounts says, that when he was shot, he was endeavoring to extinguish the flames; this is not

true. He fell with a gun in his hand, which bore marks of having been just discharged. I think these facts ought to be known. The papers throughout the country speak of the affair as if Mr. L. was an unoffending man, and was deliberately murdered. In justice to Alton, let the truth be known. It has not half so much to answer for in this case, as at first appears. The case, as it really stands, is a bad one, but not so bad as it is proclaimed.

One word more, as to your remarks. Can you conceive no good motive for the recommendation, given by the Baptist paper in Alton, to the friends of religion, that they should not suffer their religious meetings to be affected by the unhappy events now under discussion? Are you just in your application of Isaiah's words to them? Was not the course recommended, for the time, a wise one? Does a religious teacher gain any thing, or do good, by taking sides in a popular tumult? I have written more than I intended and must here stop. I am sorry to appear, in the remotest way, as the apologist for mobs. Heaven knows I abhor them. But let something like discriminating justice be done. Yours,

W. G. E.

LINES WRITTEN UPON FINDING THE FEATHER OF A WILD DUCK.

The bright wing of beauty that bore thee aloft,

Poor bird of the stream side, the flood, and the air-
Could it save from the death-shot thy bosom so soft?
Or shield thy lone path from the enemy's snare ?

Thus the bright bark of pleasure, with sails all unfurled,
Securely may float upon life's summer sea;

For the beauty, the glitter, the wealth of the world,
Are to us, foolish bird, what thy wing was to thee!

We may rise, on the pinions of hope, in the air;

We may dive in life's current, or float on its wave;
But the foe still pursues us with death shot and snare,
And our refuge from all, is at last but the grave!

E. P. C.