Of STATICRAFT and of PRIESTCRAFT, the Gran-Wan is her cheek, and very pale, her voice is low

dear!

And yet, albeit my sins be great, oh, Mary, Mary | been made to demolish this work altogether, Not to cruel Knox, nor false Moray, the Judge Smythe to smithereens. and to knock, quod absit, the Hon. Mr.

will then give ear.

But it was wrong and thoughtless, when first I came from France,

To lead courante, or minuet, or lighter, gayer dance;

Yes, it was wrong and thoughtless, to while whole

hours away

In dark and gloomy Holyrood, with some Italian lay.

Dark men did scowl their hate at me, and I have heard them tell

How the just Lord God of Israel had stricken

Jezebel.

But thou, blest Mary, Mary mine! hast ever looked the same,

With pleasant mien, and smile serene, on her who bore thy name;

Grant that whenever I must go to death, I may

not see

Nor axe, nor block, nor headsman, but Thee and only Thee!

Then 'twill be told, in other times, how Mary gave her grace

TRADE EXHIBITION AT PARIS.-There is, just now, in Paris, a congress of delegates, from different European states, to the number of twentytwo, severally commissioned to examine into the proceedings of the great Trade Exhibition there going on, and the various productions exhibited, and meeting and consulting with one another at the house of one of their colleagues, the Belgian commissioner. It would be difficult to over-esti

mate the importance of such an assembling for such a purpose, the awakened and spreading intelligence which it indicates, or the spirit of justified pride and generous emulation in which the whole affair of this exhibition has been planned and conducted. The entire proceedings are well worthy of notice, as significant of a new era. If there has been in them something of that display so dear to the French heart, it has, at least, been for an object so sound, as to bear almost any amount of decoration without losing its character of solidity; and if the nation be a lover of shows, it is well they should be provided for it in con

To die as Stuart, Guise, should die, of Charle-nexion with such substances. The people have

magne's high race!"

been made the heroes of a long festival in their own metropolis, the grand materials of whose In dismissing this volume, we need not pageantry was furnished by their own various repeat the gratification its perusal has given. skill and honest toil; and honors and rewards Its general scope, its tone, its topics, have have been freely given, by the hand that distribour warmest approval. We delight to find utes military crosses and political ribbons, in acknowledgement of past mechanic merit, and inour well-born youth applying their leisure citement to future. The trades' festival given by to such blameless performances, and rejoice the King at Versailles, too, well deserves another that in our time so many instances can be word of notice. The ambassadors of foreign pointed out of similar devotion to the hu- powers were invited to be present; and this mode of presenting to Europe the spectacle of a namanizing pursuits of literature. The question's vast resources, true wealth, and substantial tion put by old Milton, in whose days the power is so new, as to look almost like a discovery "Muse" was "thankless," viz.,

"Were it not better done as others use To sport with Amaryllis in the shade, Or with the tangles of Neæra's hair?"

of this clever king. It is the discovery of a grand truth, however; and we know not if the substantive greatness of a kingdom was ever so successfully brought under the eyes of foreigners before. In what other aspect could the nation's powerwhich is its knowledge, and its skill, and its is now satisfactorily answered. As old men, strength-so visibly present itself as in this aswe rejoice at the spirit which has gone forth sembled representation of all its producing classamong these youngsters, of praiseworthy es? This the first time in history, that the peoemulation in such walks of honorable dis-ple were ever the guest of kings, in virtue of their own inherent, positive, and recognized greattinction; as housekeepers, we are glad ness; and we scarcely remember any expression while they burn the midnight oil, that our of the change which has passed over the world hall-doors will be no further despoiled of since the days of Louis XV. and his scented their appendages. If Young England had courtiers and courtesans, which has struck us so accomplished nothing more, we think it en-wandering as the honored convives of a crowned strangely, as this picture of humble mechanics titled to the thanks of the parish. But it has renovated the whole surface of things, both in politics and literature, when both appeared blank, sterile, and unprofitable. This new guano has refreshed the field. For this we have chosen to devote so much of our space to these Historic Fancies, and also partly because we think justice has not been done them by a surly hebdomadal, the Whig Athenæum, where a vain attempt has—Athenæum.

Bourbon through the gilded saloons of Versailles, and artisans in fustian jostling the nobles of France on the benches of its famous theatre. Why, the very ghosts of the past must be dead—or some petit marquis would have surely risen up to avenge this last incredible desecration! But the age of the petits marquis is gone, to join the age of Chivalry; and the petits marquis themselves would world, than they are even in the dim vaults to be more of shadows in this living and stirring which they have all crept-and only just in time.

THE MODERN BABYLON.

facts of the case. The presumption rather is, that the Roman conqueror, though he must have passed it, did not visit London in FUTURE the course of his hasty invasion of Britain.

ORIGIN-PROGRESS-PRESENT ON DITION-CON-
TINUED RAPID EXTENSION AND
PROSPECTS OF LONDON.

From the Metropolitan.

IN proposing a series of papers under this title, illustrative of the wonders and mysteries of the greatest city in the world, it may be proper to devote an introductory chaper to the origin, progress, and present condition of London.

Several intelligent writers even doubt whether he ever crossed the Thames at all within many miles of London, there being then no bridges over the river, as indeed there could not be; for its waters, instead of being confined by embankments as at present, spread over the greater portion of the extensive tract of flat ground lying between Wandsworth and Greenwich. But The origin of London, like that of most though there can be no question that Lonof our European cities of note, is lost in the don existed for a considerable time before mists of antiquity. Nor is it within the pale the invasion of Cæsar, it could only then of probability, that the mystery in which have been the foundation of our mighty metropolis is ble importance: had it been otherwise, a place of very inconsideraenshrouded, will ever be cleared up. Geof- Cæsar would not have failed to visit and frey of Monmouth dates the origin of Lon- mention it. Besides, it is agreed on all don so far back as the year 1108 before hands, that the abodes of its inhabitants the Christian era. He tells us, with a consisted of miserable huts constructed of gravity and confidence of manner which wood and mud. show that he entertained no doubt on the The site of the original London was the point, that it was founded in that year by elevated ground on Ludgate Hill, and eastBruto, a lineal descendant of Eneas. He ward of St. Paul's. The station which the adds, that its first name was New Troy; Romans first occupied, was in the wellbeing so called in memory of the wondrous known locality called St. George's in the exploits performed at the siege of Troy. Fields. At what time they passed over the This would give London an antiquity of river, and took possession of London, which nearly three thousand years. The idea of they called Londinium, has not been satisits having been founded upwards of a thou-factorily ascertained. It must, however, sand years before the birth of Christ, and have risen rapidly into importance, after under the circumstances which Geoffrey of having fallen into their hands; for Tacitus, Monmouth mentions, is so exceedingly im- the first accredited writer who takes notice probable, that no subsequent writer has re- of it, describes it in his "Annals" as havferred to it, except for the purpose of ex-ing been, in the year 62, in the reign of posing it to ridicule. Other authors speak Nero, a "place of the first distinction for of London as having been founded so far the number of its resident merchants, and back as seven hundred years before the its traffic with other places." It is supChristian era; but they have not been able posed to have been taken possession of by to adduce any feasible reason for their be- the Romans under the emperor Claudius, lief. The only thing certain is, that it did about a century after the invasion of Julius exist before the birth of Christ, and that it Cæsar. The commercial eminence to was then the capital of the Trinobantes-which it so soon attained under the Roa people generally supposed to have recent-mans, was in a great measure to be ascribly come from Belgium, and constituting ed to the circumstance of its conquerors one of the numerous small nations which not converting it into a military colony, but then inhabited Britain. Some surprise giving it the advantage of many of the most has been expressed that Julius Cæsar valuable of their own institutions, and enshould not have noticed London in his "Commentaries." The conclusion has been come to by several writers, that the reason of his silence is, that London was not in existence at the time of his mention of this country; which, as the reader is aware, was in the middle of the century immediately preceding the Christian era. The inference is not warranted by the

couraging the pursuits of trade and commerce in every possible way. The Romans treated the Britons with the greatest generosity; never doing any thing which could have a tendency to perpetuate the remembrance of their being a subjugated people, but doing all in their power to obliterate from their minds the recollection of so mortifying a circumstance. They met

the Britons on a footing of perfect equality, | formidable army, and marched at once into studiously taught them the arts of civiliza- the heart of London. They scarcely met with tion, and sought to raise them to a level with themselves.

any thing worthy the name of resistance, in consequence of the dismay and consterna tion which the imposing appearance of their soldiers struck into the minds of Boadicea and the Britons. Of the latter it is com puted that not fewer than from seventy thousand to eighty thousand perished in one day and on one spot. The loss of the Romans was trifling as compared with the numbers that had fallen under their sword. Only about four hundred of their soldiery were killed, and about a similar number wounded.

Boadicea escaped from the scene of slaughter; but, finding her cause to be wholly hopeless, and anxious that the Romans might not be able to make her their prisoner, she took a quantity of poison, and very soon afterwards expired.

History is silent for a considerable period after this, respecting the condition or extent of London. That it speedily recovered its civil importance and commercial prosperity, under the same institutions which had so rapidly raised it to greatness before, there

London was thus rapidly improving in civilization and rising in commercial importance, when, in the year 64, Boadicea, queen of the Britons, with a boldness and spirit unparalleled in the history of female heroism, attacked and captured the city. It would have been well had her clemency been equal to her courage; unhappily her cruelty was as great as her bravery. She massacred the whole of the inhabitants who did not succeed in escaping by flight, showing no mercy either to innocent children or to those whose heads were gray with years, and were already tottering into their graves. And to aggravate the horrors of the scene, the most ingenious modes of inflicting torture which could be devised were resorted to-those of her own sex seeming to be the objects of her special cruelties. The number of individuals, inhabitants of London, who were thus put to death by Boadicea, has never been satifactorily ascertained; but it is supposed to have been not less than is no reason to doubt. The first mention from fifty thousand to sixty thousand. If this be so, the fact shows what an important place London must have been even at that remote period, especially as many thousands who were in the prime of life, must have effected their escape. Nor did this cruel though courageous woman content herself with the massacre of the inhabitants; she followed up her slaughter of the citizens by setting fire to, and destroying, the last vestige of the city. And here it may be remarked, that at this time London could not have been a fortified place; had it been environed by walls, it would not have fallen so easy a prey to the fury of Boadicea.

The Romans speedily recovered possession of London, though at what precise period has not been ascertained. It was not, indeed, likely that such a people as the Romans at that time, and for centuries before, the military masters of the worldwould allow any long period to elapse be fore they wiped away the reproach of being dispossessed of one of their favorite locations by a few thousand barbarians, under the command of a woman. Still less probable was it that they should rest satisfied until they had been revenged on those who had slaughtered so many thousands of their people, and their attached allies. They accordingly returned with a numerous and

made of it after this time, occurs in the life of the emperor Severus, by Herodian. That writer, speaking of it in the beginning of the third century, represents it as being "a great and wealthy city."

Considerable diversity of opinion exists among antiquarians as to the time at which London was first surrounded by a wall. A very general impression prevails that it was first enclosed in the time of Constantine the Great, in the end of the third or beginning of the fourth century. This is undoubtedly the traditionary account of the time at which the wall of London was constructed. It is supposed to have been built at the request of Helena, his mother; an impression strengthened by the fact that coins of that celebrated woman have been found under the wall.

Be this as it may, it is not questioned that before the close of the fourth century, London was surrounded by a wall. The extent of the city at this time may be inferred from the locality of the seven great or double gates by which it was entered. These are understood to have been Ludgate, Newgate, Aldersgate, Cripplegate, Bishopsgate, Aldgate, and the Posterngate near the tower. The wall was one of remarkable strength. Its foundation was eight feet deep, the height was ten feet, and its thickness about nine feet. It was composed alternately of layers of broad flat

bricks and of rag-stone. At a subsequent had the prospect of recovering at least period an addition was made to the height some portion of its former grandeur and of the wall, making its altitude about twenty commercial greatness, begun to break upon feet. The circuit of the wall was about it, than it was overclouded by the results two miles and a furlong. It had two grand which followed the invasion of the Danes. forts and thirteen smaller towers, conjec- One of the first of these results was the extured to have been each about forty feet in pulsion of Egbert from his adopted capital. height. The principal street of Roman This was followed by the massacre of the London is supposed to have been the Wat- great majority of the inhabitants, and the ling street of the present day. Cheapside destruction of nearly the whole city by is also supposed to have been then, as now, fire. another of its leading thoroughfares.

From the time of Constantine the Great until the departure of the Romans from Britain, which event is supposed to have taken place in the second quarter of the fifth century, our information respecting London is exceedingly scanty. One fact, however, of considerable importance, as indicating the commercial prosperity of London in the middle of the fourth century, has been ascertained. It is, that in the year 359, the very large number-large for that remote period of eight hundred vessels, were employed in the exportation from London of corn alone.

The name of London was, for about half a century after this, scarcely heard of, ex cepting in connexion with its past history At the end of that time, namely, in the year 884, the celebrated Alfred, having previously vanquished the Danes, and expelled them from Britain, ordered the city of London to be rebuilt. He was the first to introduce houses of stone and brick The circumstances of the people, however, were not such as enabled them to construct many of their houses of these materials; though, as London again advanced in the path of prosperity, the number continued to increase. He encouraged trade and comFor a considerable period after the Ro-merce in every possible way, and instituted mans had abandoned our shores, London a municipal system for the local governcontinued rapidly to decline, both in gran- ment of the place, which proves him to deur and in commercial importance. The have been as great a statesman and philosoSaxons, whom the Londoners had sent for pher, as his brilliant victories had before to protect them from the incursions of proved him to be a distinguished warrior. the Scots and Picts, began, soon after they London continued to make steady progress had acquired a footing in the country, to in trade and commerce, and civil and poattempt bringing the Britons under subjec- litical importance, for more than a century, tion to themselves. The Britons resented when it was again doomed to meet with as long as they were able, these efforts to disasters, owing to the pusillanimity of subjugate them to the Saxon yoke. At last Ethelred the Second, the reigning monthey were compelled to relinquish the une- arch. He ingloriously fled from London, qual contest. The decline of the trade leaving the citizens to defend their walls as and commerce of London, which had been they best could, when exposed to the asgradually going on for nearly a hundred saults of the united armies of Denmark and and fifty years, was now followed by its al- Norway, headed by the monarchs of these most entire annihilation. Ethelbert, king two countries. The citizens made a brave of Kent, whose sovereignty was acknowl- defence, repeatedly repulsing the invaders edged by all the Saxon nations south of the with great loss, and compelled them, at last, Humber, transferred the seat of government to raise the siege. The Danes, assisted by from London to Canterbury. From this the Norwegians, continued, however, to period down till the year 827-being a pe- harass other parts of the country, until the riod of nearly two centuries and a half-cowardly and feeble-minded Ethelred was scarcely any thing is heard of London, ex-induced to abdicate his throne, and retire cepting the fearful visitations which befel it into the province of Normandy. This was in the form of fire and pestilence. In the in the year 1013. Unable to hold out any year last named, Egbert, who had just established the Heptarchy, chose London as the seat of his sovereignty. Fortune again, therefore, began to smile on it. In six years thereafter, namely, in 833, a Parliament was held in it. Scarcely, however,

longer, the citizens of London were obliged to open their gates to the army of Sweyn, the Danish king, and to submit, with the rest of the inhabitants of England, to his sceptre. That monarch's reign, however, was not of long duration; he died in three