sition, to be driven back to a state of anarchy, commotion and civil war. The very first overt act that shall be made in any one of the northern states to carry into effect the plans of those who oppose the Colonization enterprise, will probably result in a separation of the Union. The political fabrick erected with so much care, and at the expense of so many lives and so mnch treasure, will be prostrated in the dust. The institutions under which we have become a great and happy people will be subverted, and disaffection and hostility assume their place.

When, therefore, we are urged to the immediate abolition of slavery, the answer is very conclusive, that duty has no claims, where both the right and the power to exercise it are wanting. The door is shut upon us here: nor could we open it, but by a violence destructive of public harmony, and probably fatal to our national union.

But there is a vantage ground, where benevolence may expand in her broadest desires; and the Colonization Society presents it. Here the south and the north meet in kindred sympathy and cordial co-operation. We have seen with what liberality most of the southern states contribute to the treasury of the Society. It is an unfounded aspersion to ascribe their patronage to the sordid calculations of avarice, and the design of more firmly riveting the chains of slavery. To repel this ungracious imputation upon a generous people, we need only learn the fact, that the great majority of the colonists are emancipated slaves, liberated by southern owners. Some have been guilty of great injustice in the feelings they have cherished towards the south; and have declaimed against slavery, as if really, all Christian feeling, principle and duty, ranged on the north of the Delaware. There was never a greater, or more humiliating mistake. Who can forget the time when all our fields were cultivated by the labour and toil of slaves? and why is it, that we are a few years ahead of the south in emancipation? Simply because with us, the condition was so limited in its extent, that we could readily and safely compass it. We could without danger modify its tenure, gradually relax the dominion of the master, and at length abolish it altogether. With our sister states, it is a monstrous incubus, never sought, but imposed upon them: and consummate prudence, and the best directed skill are requisite to manage and controul it.

This cannot be the work of a day. Such a for

cing of abstractions, would be downright madness. This modern notion of rushing to the object, regardless of consequences, is a very simple, thorough process on paper. It would certainly save a great amount of thought, reflection and care. But it is a rash and dangerous spirit, which threatens ruin and devastation. We dare not trust it, because it regards neither time nor circumstances. What reply would this feverish temperament have returned, when the Roman soldiers made the interesting enquiry of the forerunner of our Saviour, "and what shall we do." These were the soldiers of a military and iron-hearted despotism. On the principles that assail the Colonization Society, the response would surely have enjoined upon them immediate desertion from such service, and a firm resistance of every measure, that would strengthen a tyranny over the free and equal rights of the people. And yet, in place of this, the great preacher, who was preparing the way before his Lord and Master, counselled, in far milder strains of heavenly wisdom:-" do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely, and be content with your wages." Did the gospel therefore justify war, or sanction despotism? Far otherwise. It was introduced at a time, when such was the state of the Roman people, and addressed its injunctions and promises to men, as it found them. It did not propose, violently to demolish "the swords and the spears;" but to change them "into plough-shares and pruning hooks;" and this requires labour, skill and pains, matters too sluggish for the wild, on rushing of fanaticism.

Before we conclude this paper, we beg a moment's further attention to the probable influence of the colony upon the native tribes of Africa. And here the subject rises to an elevation and takes hold of interests, that might well engage an angel's thought. A whole continent of sixty millions of immortal beings, sunk in ignorance and sin, sends up a cry for redemption. If philanthropy had now for the first time directed its concern towards this unhappy people, and was seeking for the most effective agency, we venture to affirm, that among its earliest measures, would be that of a Christian settlement among them, and above all, one of their own colour and kindred. Such a community, planted in the neighbourhood of an ignorant race, and exhibiting before them all the civil, religious and social duties and relations, in full subsistence and operation, will exert a moral influ

ence in extent and duration beyond our calculations. It opens a perennial fountain, that will send forth a thousand streams of salvation. These will strike their channels into every famishing waste, will make glad the wilderness, and cause the deserts to sing for joy.

Liberia sustains these hopeful relations, and justifies all these animating prospects. Much has already been done. The native tribes look on, and wonder. They behold their countrymen enjoying all the blessings of the most favoured nation. They may not at once apprehend the cause of the difference; but they see it, and feel it, and will very soon learn the reason, and teach it to others. The report of the colony will travel forth from tribe to tribe, waking up the sympathies of a long neglected and forsaken people. Her coasts will soon be lined by Christian settlements, which will gradually invade the interiour regions of darkness and pollution. The African missionary from Liberia, will meet his Christian brother from the Cape of Good Hope, and they mingle in prayer and praise together. The light will spread from mountain to valley, and from river to river, until the sleep of ages shall be broken, and the song of salvation fill the chorus of a redeemed and regenerated continent. Then will Africa's first tribute of praise ascend to God, the gracious giver of all these mercies; and next, will the blessing of many ready to perish come upon the Colonization Society.

These benefits, form, as we think, a full defence for the friends of this great measure. We commend this brief and imperfect sketch, to the dispassionate consideration of our fellow citizens. A cause which, in its early stages, engaged so much of piety and prayer; which has been distinguished by so many illustrious tokens of divine approbation, should not be pushed aside by prejudice or clamour. We should be

slow to believe, that such pure spirits as Mills, Finley, and Ashmun, that such exalted statesmen as Washington, Marshall, and Lafayette, would give the countenance of their names, or devote the anxious labour of their lives, to a device of cupidity, or a scheme of oppression.

ART. V. PHILOSOPHY OF THE MIND.

By REV. LEONARD WOODS, D. D., Professor of Christian Theology in the Theological Seminary, Andover, Mass.

In the series of Essays on the Philosophy of the Mind, which I propose to write for THE LITERARY AND THEOLOGICAL REVIEW, it is far from my design to bring forward the whole range of topics commonly treated in systems of mental philosophy. In regard to the particular objects which I shall aim to accomplish, this would be unnecessary. My design is to attend specially to those parts of mental philosophy, which have usually received a less degree of attention, than they seem to deserve;-to those parts also which are attended with uncommon difficulties;-and most of all to those, which have an important bearing on moral and theological subjects. I shall introduce topics like these in that order which I find most convenient, and bestow upon them just so much attention as their importance appears to me to demand. I shall do all in my power to free every subject which comes under discussion, from an indefinite and vague phraseology, to investigate it thoroughly, and to present it in a clear and satisfactory light; and thus, so far as my honest endeavours shall avail, to promote a just mode of thinking and speaking, particularly among young Ministers and Theological Students.

NUMBER I.

Mental acts to be classified, and referred to mental faculties. Use of the words, volition, will, affection, and voluntary.

THE philosophy of mind with which we are concerned, is the philosophy of the human mind, not of minds belonging to other orders of intelligent beings. And the philosophy of the human mind, is the knowledge and scientific description of man, considered as intelligent and moral. A careful attention to this point will, frequently be of use in preserving us from confusion and mistake. Suppose we are perplexed in our inquiries respecting the nature and operations of the intellectual or moral faculties; the perplexity may often be removed by shifting our language and our mode of investigation, and making our inquiries relate to man himself, or to his mind, which is indeed himself, considered as intelligent and moral. The question in the more proper and exact form, is not, how does such and such a faculty act; but how does man act; or how does the mind act?

What we call the faculties of the mind, are not so many different agents. There is only one agent, the mind. And when it is said, there are different intellectual and moral powers or faculties in the mind, the meaning is, that the mind itself acts in dif

ferent ways, and so makes it manifest that it is able, or has power to act thus. It is, I apprehend, in this way, that we come to consider the mind as possessed of different powers or faculties. But as this point is of radical importance in mental science, I shall treat it more at large.

To every one who carefully investigates the subject, it must be evident, that we are led to attribute different faculties to the mind, from the different classes of mental operations of which we are conscious. We perceive that certain acts of the mind have, in some respect, a resemblance to each other. The resemblance may be greater or less. There is no need of its being complete. For example; my mind recalls what is past. I have an idea of what I was acquainted with last week, or last year, or many years ago. The things recollected may, as to their own nature, and as to the times and circumstances in which they took place, be different; and the acts of the mind relative to them may in various respects be different,-may be strong or weak, pleasant or painful, etc. In one respect, however, they are alike. They relate to what is past. With reference to this point of resemblance, this common relation, I give them a common name, recollection. To express each of these acts of my mind, I say, I recollect, I remember. The word relates to them all equally, in that particular respect in which they are alike. The difference which exists among these acts of the mind in other respects, must be expressed by other words. This word, recollection, or remembrance, expresses these.mental acts only in that one respect, in which they have a common resemblance. After thus classifying these mental acts, which I am conscious of performing, and which I denote by the word recollection, I take one step more; that is, I attribute them to a particular faculty of the mind; or I refer them to my mind, as possessing a power or faculty to perform them. In other words, I refer them to my mind, which I find to be so constituted, or to have such power, that it puts forth acts of recollection. To this power or faculty I give the name of memory; still ascribing the power and all its acts to myself. I say, I have the power or faculty to recollect, and I do recollect. And as I find that I perform acts of recollection permanently, I speak of this faculty as permanent, and regard it as an essential attribute of my mind, and of other minds like my own.

I shall give one more example of this process in classifying