Your Eagles took their lordly ease After disporting with the braggart Breeze, Beneath the stars, that nod and start with sleep Fitfully the moon goes nodding through And dreams, forgetting all her queenly ills, So sweet is slumber, would not yet awake; Before whose closed eyes Dreamily move the boys of Paradise Under the stately palms It stirreth softly lest rough motion might So rest! and Rest shall slay your many woes; He planted many a budding shoot His labor done, the weary god went back Up the new mountain-track To his great house; there he did while away With lightest thought a well-won holiday; For all the Powers crooned softly an old tune Wishing their Sire might sleep. Through all the sultry noon And cold blue night; And very soon They heard the awful Thunderer breathing low and deep. And in the hush that dropped adown the spheres, And in the quiet of the awe-struck space, The worlds learned worship at the birth of years: Then, Millions! pause and keep a Sabbath-time! And lo! a setting sun Which tells that the o'er-labored frame In sweet repose may find a fresher flame. Angels may visit ye; And surely all will better be, A-listening to a well-tuned chime Will ye not also lend your souls to Song? Gloomily murmuring legends of the floods That troubled space before the worlds arose. Give for a time your souls to song Song of the dædal birth, The earth's first language, wooing heaven to earth, Whose glens were filled with many a heavenly throng: Sweet song, that cheers the mariner on the seas When fitfully blows the home-returning breeze Over a wide, long deep; That lulls at eve the little child asleep Upon its mother's knees; That lights a flame within the maiden's eyes Where all was cold before; That gives a southern glow to northern skies, Song with her bright hands crashing on her lyre Song! that has winged with an avenging fire And boasted heraldries are melted down: That teaches love, and only love, Showing the Universe a single throne Where towers the Immortal LORD of changeless love alone. III. Or sleep? why lose its wondrous world? Behold the arabesque Land of Dreams! Beside a little brook Mid sleeping flocks some sleeping men : And vainly hums a tune to keep awake; And now beside his brethren slowly sinks. Yes, sleep! why lose its lovely world? See what a languid glory binds The long dim chambers of the darkling West, While far below yon azure river winds Like a blue vein on sleeping Beauty's breast. Whose leaves are glittering with the dewy shower Which softly falls by turns From Dian's vase and Vesta's starry urns. She sleeps her rosy lips somewhat apart, Showing the curvéd line of pearl; She smiles! a dream of pure young love Of the delighted girl : The passionate vision of her lover stands And now he seems reposing by her side, And with her brow upon his breast The manly bridegroom and his beauteous bride Millions will ye not rest or dream with me? That shake the mountains with their thunder-peals; The low or lofty, and the rich or poor, Daughter of Truth and Ideality, Large VIRTUE towering on the throne of Will! And march triumphing over every ill. With thoughts that brood like stars in a dark sky- IV. Rest, Nation! rest! and in that blissful hour, As troubled waves are soothed by starry night. The weary slave shall rest upon the chain, The ardent aspect of his native skies- So Battle then will lean on his red blade, And sorrowfully look On all the direful wo which he hath made In all the bleeding lands; Then bending over a crystal brook Will wash his crimson hands. The altar of Humanity shall tower Without a victim, mid the waste of tombs: And incense shall be tossed and curled, At last, around a tearless world, From all its silver fires and bloodless soft perfumes. Nor in REPOSE a tentless desert fear, The gardenless wide waste of a blank heart: Between horizons to illume and cheer: Time's misty Nile shall wander slowly through The slumberous plain that never knoweth storms; Shall meet our dreamy view, Duskily towering mid the hazy blue, And freezing contemplation in the giddy air. Then all the weary myriads resting there Quiet beneath the hollow sky As shapes that in a pictured landscape lie Shall know that bliss, that perfect, heavenly bliss, Which falls as moonlight-music on a moveless scene like this. New York, United States Hotel. HAS THE STATE A RELIGION? Has the State any religion? This is the great question we propose to discuss in the present article. Has the State any religion, or anything to do with religion? With a certain class of minds, the mere proposal of such a question is enough to determine the political character, and the political predilections of the one who asks it. He will certainly be set down at once as the enemy of free institutions, of the rights of man, and, of course, of the rights of conscience. It is easy to imagine the real or affected alarm which some, who belong to the extreme left of the democracy, may be supposed to exhibit, at the bare suggestion of such a topic. You are for Church and State, then, it seems, as well as for monarchy and aristocracy. You really dare, in this nineteenth century, to mention the word religion in connection with politics. You would revive the fires of Smithfield, and all the horrors of the Inquisition. You would take away our precious rights of conscience. We would, however, beg our good democratic friend not to be so easily frightened. We mean to discuss a very serious question in a serious tone, and with a genuine feeling of regard, as we trust, for rational liberty, for the highest interests, and the most sacred rights of man, as man, and not a mere animal. This matter may not be so very plain as you have been led to believe. There may, after all, be more than one side to the question. It is not absolutely clear, to a certainty, that the State has no religion. The question resolves itself into these Is the State a moral as well as a physical agent? Has it, in any sense, a conscience? Is it accountable to a higher invisible power? Does it sustain any relations to an invisible world, and does it derive any sanctions from the immutable and eternal? In a word-is it to be guided in determining the duties and relations of men, solely by considerations of their physical well-being, or must it also, in connection with this, have some reference to those truths and those obligations, that concern the spiritual and moral health? The affirmative of this may be found admirably stated in the Appendix to Dr. Arnold's Inaugural Lecture on History (p. 65). We venture to quote from this most admirable author, VOL. III.NO. III. 18 notwithstanding a writer, in a late number of the Democratic Review, has pronounced him shallow, for maintaining the doctrine of a Particular Providence. No man was more free from all prejudice, arising from peculiar position, than Dr. Arnold. We have no reason to suppose that his opinions were more opposed to true liberty, or had any undue leaning against republicanism, or were, in any essential respect, different, on account of his being born in England, from what they would have been in almost any other locality. Indeed, we may rather believe, on the contrary, that if any difference could be imagined, he would have been more conservative in this country than in his native land, where he sustained the relation of a subject of a monarchy, and minister of an established Church. But why should we apologize for quoting Dr. Arnold on a question like this? Where, in our democracy, or in any other democracy, can there be found a truer friend to humanity, a more faithful and laborious advocate of the highests rights and interests of his fellow-beings-who, among us, ever possessed a larger liberality--who was ever more free from bigotry--who ever exhibited a warmer philanthro py, or was more opposed to all tyranny, whether of soul or body, than this most admirable scholar and most excellent man ? "The moral character of government," says he seems to follow necessarily from its sovereign power; this is the simple ground of what I will venture to call the moral theory of its objects. For, as in each individual man, there is a higher object than the preservation of his body and goods, so if he be subjected, in the last resort, to a power incapable of appreciating this higher object, his social and political relations, instead of being the perfection of his being, must be its corruption; the voice of law can only agree accidentally with that of his conscience, and yet, on this voice of law his life and death are to depend; for its sovereignty over him must be, by the nature of the case, absolute." Again he says (page 79): "If the legislator has anything to do with morality, the whole question is conceded; for morality is surely not another name for expediency, |