statement is confirmed by the account of Delafield, who was descended from the surgeon who attended Hampden during his last moments. The contemporary relation, written by Edward Clough, and printed by Dr. Lipscomb, at p. 250, also corroborates the above, and is, we think, from its perfect air of authenticity very fully to be depended on, which we would extract did our space permit. We can by no means approve, remembering the horrors and desecrations of the civil wars of the seventeenth century, the decided leaning that the Doctor occasionally takes to the fanatical and revolutionary side. Surely the persons who imbrued their hands in the blood of their King, overturned the constitution, and established a military despotism, can claim no praise from any sound principled political party, whatever their abstract views of the perfection of a government. But we must here bring our notices of Dr. Lipscomb's pages to a close, having selected from them rather such specimens of his history as may be considered popular, than elaborate details of pedigrees of families, and descents of manorial property; which are nevertheless not among the least meritorious of the labours of a county historian. In these his book is not deficient; and it has numerous illustrations by etchings, lithographs, and wood cuts, representing the churches and seats of the county. Some of the wood cuts are rather coarsely executed. We shall hail the conclusion of Dr. Lipscomb's undertaking as an acceptable accession to British topography. A Body of Divinity; or, the Sun and Substance of the Christian Religion. Collected and arranged by James Usher, D.D. Archbishop of Armagh A New Edition, reduced from the original form of Question and Answer, by H. Robinson, D.D. 8vo. pp. xviii. 555. IT is rather remarkable, that this work has not been reprinted for a long period. The last edition, we think, was that of 1702, 4to. being the eighth, which, though professing to be carefully corrected, was very care lessly so, as it contains references to dates that were only applicable to earlier editions. Thus, for instance, Downame the editor, in his preface, which in 1645 speaks of the books being finished about twenty years since, has that sentence altered to sixty years, (which would suit an edition of 1685) an absurdity that might have been avoided by mentioning the original date of that preface. And at p. 141 that edition speaks of 1677 years as having elapsed since the Nativity, a computation which neither suits the original edition, or the reprint. The present editor has acted more wisely in saying, "from whence we reckon now (1840) years." He also retains Downame's original preface, with the term twenty years, but does not mention the date of the first edition. The literary history of the work, though it forms the subject of the editor's own preface, is not so fully treated as it might have been, considering that more copious materials exist. Dr. Robinson, however, as we shall see, has taken great pains in collating the work with the sources whence it is acknowledged to have been partly drawn. Indeed, some little obscurity hangs over the publication of the work, Dr. Parr, the Archbishop's chaplain, states that it was a collection from various authors, made while the author was young, and having been lent to some person who transcribed it, ultimately found its way to the press, without his (the Archbishop's) consent, during the civil wars. The editor of the 8th edition (if not of some earlier ones) who signs himself "J. Dan," mentions, that "the most Reverend author, in his elder days, blessed God for its publication, though it had at first started into the world without his consent, because he perceived it had affirmed to hear him say, who had no done much good, which those have fondness for the book." It is also intimated that he used the same me thod as a parochial minister, and also pressed it upon his clergy, viz. to go through the entire subject in fifty (fifty-two) heads. We can only regret that the work had not the benefit of his revision, as it had that of his approbation. He disclaimed being held responsible for every particular it might contain, as in a letter to Downame he spoke of it as "a kind of common-place book, where other men's judgments and reasons are simply laid down, though not approved in all points by the collector." How far he would have revised it cannot now be known; but in those troublesome times, such an indefinite disclaimer was probably meant as a protection in case of attack. The sources whence it was derived, are partly ascertained in the same letter. He represents it as being "transcribed out of Mr. Cartwright's catechism and Mr. Crooke's, and some other English divines, but drawn together in one method." Crooke's catechism is " a body of the doctrine of the scriptures," 1613, and Cartwright's is his "Treatise of Christian Religion." Dr. Robinson has collated the book with those productions, and has given a table of the incorporated passages, which occupy about a fourth of the work. Subsequent research may arrive at other sources; and the result will be, not so much to trace what Usher composed as what he adopted. The editor considers that these catechisms (or rather bodies of divinity) were selected as being then in most repute, to interweave with the author's own original observations. Dr. Robinson has greatly altered the external character of the work by reducing the catechetical form to that of continuous argument. This, he says, "has been thought advisable, in compliance with modern feelings," but we greatly doubt the expediency, not to say the propriety of the change. We like exact reprints, subject only to such omissions as a judicious editor would make, to quote an expression of Dr. Dibdin's. And those who remember what Gilpin says, in his Essay on Prints, concerning the superiority of faint impressions to retouched engravings, because in the former case we have the original, while we have not in the latter, will agree with us on this point. We venerate the memory of Usher, and in perusing his works, what we want is himself; we wish to know how he wrote and arranged, and not how an author * We presume he means of works of that size. would have composed or compiled in our own times. Yet, to speak candidly, while these remarks are preparing, we have found an unbiassed judgment differing from our own; and it is possible that general readers may prefer the book as it now stands. The fairest criticism will be to exhibit a specimen of both the works. The original begins thus : "What is that which all men especially desire?-Eternal life and happiness. "How do men look to obtain happiness?-By religion: which is a thing so proper to man, that it doth distinguish him more from beasts than very reason, that is made his form. For very beasts have some sparkles or resemblance of reason, but none of religion." This passage now stands affirmatively as follows: happiness, and look to obtain it by reli. "All men especially desire life and gion, which is a thing so proper to man, that it doth distinguish him more from beasts than very reason; for even beasts have some sparkles or resemblance of reason, but none of religion." The marginal notes of contents, such as this, "All men desire eternal happiness," are retained in part, but not entirely. Are they Usher's own, or merely Downame's?t In the course of study, before this edition appeared, we had marked several passages as important, some of which we quote from the present paging. Speaking of prophecies yet unfulfilled, the author says, "which, if we never understand, we shall be never the worse for the attaining of everlasting salvation." p. 25. Concerning the Ethiopian in Acts viii. "Though he understood not some harder places, yet that hindered him not from reading plainer places." p. 27. Usher's views of the doctrine of election are mildly intimated when he says, in the parable of the king's supper, of the guests who were first bidden; "he did not command that they should be compelled to come in, as the two sorts which were bidden afterwards." p. 68. At p. 240 we The words which we have given in italic are obscure, and the present editor omits them. The present editor has added some explanatory notes occasionally. "" an have an early instance of the term historical faith, which is now so generally used by way of distinction ; historical faith is a knowledge and persuasion of the truth of God's word concerning the letter and the story of it: as that there is one only God, and in the God a Trinity in Unity; that Jesus Christ is the Saviour of the world," &c. He considers the first resurrection (Rev. xx. 6.) to be "Vivification, or quickening unto newness of life, by the power of the resurrection of Christ;"-as a part of sanctification (p. 247), an opinion totally at variance with that of the Millennarians. There is an obscurity at p. 267, where he reckons "hellish terrors" in some cases as sins. Yet we might quote many passages of singular conciseness, perspicuity, and beauty; but let the following suffice concerning "the knowledge of God in Jesus Christ:" "The means whereby we may attain to this knowledge are principally twelve: 1. Prayer; 2. A simple heart desirous of knowledge; 3. Hearing of the word; 4, Reading of the word and holy writings; 5. Meditation in the word; 6. Conference; 7. Diligence in learning; 8. Remembrance of what we learn; 9. Practice of what we learn; 10. Delight in learning; 11. Attentive marking that which is taught; 12. Meditation on the creatures of God." p. 270. There are various passages which divines might make use of as heads of sermons, as on the corruption of the mind of man by the Fall, p. 178-180, and on the intercession of Christ, p. 214. It is remarkable that none of the passages or sentiments that we have quoted, (and this we have only just now examined,) are Crooke's or Cartwright's, and therefore they may be considered as Usher's till other discoveries are made. We close the volume, assuring the reader, that even if he should differ from its views occasionally, it must be his own fault if he peruses it without lasting benefit. It reminds us of an expression, attributed to king George III. when speaking of the writers of the seventeenth century, "There were giants on the earth in those days." (Genesis, vi. 4.) THIS work is divided into ten chapters, each of which contains some very interesting observations connected with Life and Disease; and the whole work may be considered as a summary of the most important facts and reasonings on the subject. It treats of the nature of diseases-of the causes-of the influence of constitution and habits of life on the influence of climate, and on the mean duration of life, &c. The general reasonings appear to us to be accurate, and the particular facts and details to be collected with diligence and care, We make an ex tract or two. "As there are some particular trades and employments which give rise to consumption more than others, we will give a condensed view of the conclusions. M. B. de Chateauneuf relates that in the parish of Meusnes, of a population of 1200, 300 families are occupied in the manufacture of gun-flints. It appears that this singular employment is very destructive to human life. Before flints were used for fire-arms, the mortality in the parish was 1 in 334; of the births, one-half survived till the 18th year; and the mean duration of life was 244 years after the establishment of the manufacture, the mortality became 1 in 224; half the births were cut off by the 5th year; and the mean length of life was reduced to 19 years. This fearful increase of mortality arises from consumption of the lungs, engendered by the inhalation of flint dust. The rate of mortality for consumption was, in 1000 admissions, 28.5 deaths for men, and 47.5 for women: which proportion may be used as a comparable standard, in investigating the tendency of consumption produced by different employments. Of 1000 admissions there are, who die of consumption, rag pickers, men 8, women 17; slate makers, 10; cotton spinners, men 19, women 27; bakers, 21; thread makers, men 23, women 34; grain market porters, 24; charcoal porters, 37. They have all occupations among vegetable dust, and it is said they engender consumption more than those giving rise to mineral dust. Among the stone-cutters, the deaths from phthisis are only 9 in 1000; marble cutters, 12.5; quarry men, 14.5; masons, 22; plasterers, 25. In those exposed to animal dust, the proportion is higher. Among card makers and mattress makers the deaths are 31 per thousand; brush makers, 35; hat makers, 48; feather workers so great as 80!! gilders, decorators, painters, smoke curers, the deaths from consumption are 53.22, 33.5 respectively. Among washermen the deaths are 18, washerwomen 46. Of late, says M. Benoiston, there has been a disposition to ascribe a phthisical tendency to those trades in which the arms and chest are habitually used with violence. Among locksmiths the deaths from phthisis are 7.5 per thousand; blacksmiths, 9; log sawyers and stone sawers, 11; carpenters, 15; weavers, men 21, women, 18; water carriers, 24; cabinet makers, 31; gauze workers, men 32, women 31.5. The proportion of deaths from pulmonary consumption to the whole of the admissions into the Parisian hospitals, is 285 per 1000 of men, and 47.5 for women, including all trades together. Very few of the above trades exceed the average of the whole; but it is different when we come to trades of a sedentary nature, requiring a constrained position of the body. In such trades, the deaths for any 1000 admissions are as follows:-Shoemakers, 43; polishers, 44.5; lace fringe makers, 47; tailors, 47; crystal cutters, 61-5; jewellers, 64. In female trades, polishers, 38; tailors, 46; fringe makers, 47; milliners, 55; shoebinders, 55.5; botchers and menders, 61; lace makers, 62; glovers, 64; embroiderers, 84; artificial flower makers, 115; jewellers, 133. In professions, of those who attain the age of 66, there are found to be, 43 theolo gians, 40 agriculturists, 35 men in office, 35 merchants, 32 military, 32 clerks, 29 advocates, 28 artists, 27 professors, 24 medical men. In Prussia, the mortality is 1 in 35; Turkey, 1 in 30; Austria, Spain, and Portugal, 1 in 38; Sweden and Holland, 1 in 40; Denmark and Germany, 1 in 43; Switzerland, 1 in 45; Poland, 1 in 44; Russia, 1 in 41; Norway, 1 in 45; United States, 1 in 40; South America, 1 in 30; England, Ireland, and Scotland, Peter Lardner, 131, Aberdeenshire. Stadover. Petratsch Zatar, 185, Hungary. In the report of the Holy Synod in Russia, in 1841, it is remarked of 148 men who professed the Greek Religion that had reached 100 years, 32 had passed their 120th year; 4 their 130th year. Of 606,818 men who died in 1826, 2785 were above 90; 1432 above 95; and 818 above 100 years; 88 more than 115; 24 more than 1207 were above 125; and 1 had attained the age of 160. It is said that the Arabs in the Desert live 200 years !" (V. Million of Facts.) NATIONAL PICTURES. FINE ARTS. The country may be congratulated on the purchase, for the National Gallery, of the celebrated picture by John Van Eyck, which was exhibited, last season, at the British Institution. It is not a work likely to run away with public admiration; but it will be an everlasting study to artists for transcendent colouring and delicacy of finish, the latter a beauty almost unknown amongst them. At Hampton Court, two more rooms have been opened. Before the accession of William the Fourth, in 1230, the number of state rooms open to the public was nineteen, the number of pictures about two hundred; the rooms shown are now in number twenty-four, and the pictures upwards of eight hundred. Among the pictures lately drawn from undeserved obscurity, are, a very large and fine Snyders a Boar Hunt, as usual; a divine GENT. MAG. VOL. XVI. Old Francia: one or two of Gainsborough's dashing first thoughts; a very nice little sketch by Frank Hals; a curious full-length of old Gondomar, the Spanish Ambassador here in the reign of James the First; Allan Ramsay's best picture; and a very fair Hoppner or two. To these observations, quoted from the Athenæum, we may add that a correspondent of the Art Union of Oct. 1, states that he has ascertained that a portrait by Holbein at Hampton Court, which has been attributed to Luther, and was engraved under that name by the Society for Diffusing Useful Knowledge, is really a portrait of Dr. Stokesley, Bishop of London from 1530 to 1539. This is proved by the arms, painted thereon. The writer has a duplicate of the same picture, which duplicate formerly belonged to the Countess of Holderness, and afterwards to Mr. Maitland of Woodford. 3 X FRESCO PAINTING, AND THE NEW Subse. HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT. The Committee of the House of Commons on the Fine Arts, which sat in the last session of the last Parliament, elicited some interesting information on the subject of Fresco Painting. This art, which has been revived with much success in Germany, owes its present favour in a great measure to the patronage of the munificent King of Bavaria. Mr. Eastlake stated before the Committee that he believed the King was first induced to have paintings in fresco on a large scale, on seeing what had been done at Rome, and that originated from the Chevalier Bartholdy employing a certain number of German artists, the best that were then in Rome, to paint a private room of his own. The artists so employed were Cornelius, Veit, Schadow, and Overbeck. quently, the King engaged Schnorr for ten years, and that excellent artist has now been occupied at Munich on public works for a much longer period. The fresco painters of Munich generally work on the walls from May to September only; the greater part of the year is thus devoted to the preparation of the cartoons. Five months in the year would probably be the longest period in which it would be possible to paint in fresco in London. But assuming the new Houses of Parliament to be thus decorated, and that the works could not be completed before the rooms would be wanted, the paintings could be continued annually in the autumn without inconvenience. The climate of England and Germany might in some respects be more favourable to the practice of fresco than Italy. The surface of the wall is in the fittest state to receive the colours when it will barely receive the impression of the finger (when more moist, the ultimate effect of the painting is faint); this supposes the necessity of a very rapid execution in a warm climate, where the plaster dries more quickly. Fresco painting, as a durable and immoveable decoration, can only be fitly applied to buildings of a permanent character. Not only capricious alterations, but even repairs cannot be attempted without destroying the paintings. There can be no doubt that the general introduction of such decorations would lead to a more solid style of architecture; at the same time the impossibility of change would be considered by many as an objection. This objection would not, however, apply to public buildings. In case of fire, frescos would no doubt be more or less injured or ruined, but they might not be so utterly effaced and destroyed as oil pictures in the On the same circumstances would be. whole, the smoke of London might be found less prejudicial than that of the candles in Italian churches. There is one recommendation of the mere material of fresco; it does not shine as oil pictures do, and the subject may be seen in a greater number of lights. Mr. Eastlake further makes the excellent remarks, that, if the national ardour of the Germans is to be our example, we should dwell on the fact that the arts in England under Henry the Third, in the thirteenth century, were as much advanced as in Italy itself; that our architecture was even more characteristic and freer from classic influence; that sculpture, to judge from Wells Cathedral, bid fair to rival the contemporary efforts in Tuscany, and that our painting of the same period might fairly compete with that of Siena and Florence. Specimens of early English painting were lately to be seen,some very important relics still exist on the walls of the edifices at Westminster. The undertaking now proposed might be the more interesting, since, after a lapse of six centuries, it would renew the same style of decoration on the same spot. We now turn to the evidence of Mr. Barry, whose opinion is of such importance with respect to the practical part of this proposition. He stated his opinion that painting and sculpture could be employed with great effect in the interior of the new Houses, and that some mode of colouring and of painting is essential to all styles of architecture. When asked, in what parts of the building he would recommend painting and sculpture to be employed, he answered, that the parts of the building best adapted to that object would be St. Stephen's Hall, the Royal Gallery, the Houses and their lobbies, &c. the public corridors towards the river front, and Westminster Hall; in all which places the light will be from above, and, consequently, most favourable to the exhibition of painting or sculpture. He proposed to increase the quantity of light to be let in through the roof of Westminster Hall. In that situation, the prepared paintings would have a similar effect to the tapestry which was generally employed at the period of its erection, when, upon any great occasion, the walls were entirely lined with tapestry. In their Report, the Committee suggest that "a commission might most usefully be appointed to assist, both with informa tion and advice, some department of the Government," in order to realize the objects of the Committee; and Sir Robert Peel, acting on this suggestion, has stated, |