Lapas attēli

liberty; but, as it is impossible to obtain the one, without having first fortified the other, security ought to precede, and prepare for the degrees of liberty, that a nation is capable of enjoying. Security is interior or exterior. The interior security of our republic, can never be sufficiently consulted in a country like ours, of an immense and unpeopled extent, unless by giving to the power of the government, an easy, rapid, and strong action, which can not be had in the complicated and weak organization of the federal system. Exterior security calls all our attention and cares to a neighboring government, monarchical and powerful; which possesses real advantages over us, and, at this very day, makes war against us, to sustain the scandalous usurpation of a large province of our territory; a government, whose pretensions are ancient, and a principal object of whose policy will be, to make these pretensions interminable, and so much the more violent, as our republic may be the weaker.

The national constitution ought to provide for the preservation of the state in peace, and its greater defence in case of war. Thus, in forming ours, all reasons of policy should carry our consideration to the states that surround us, with whom we are in contact, and must maintain immediate relations. Let us refer to the republics of Colombia, Peru, Bolivia, and Chile, and we shall be admonished that the Argentine Republic should be constituted under a government analogous to those governments with which it must form and maintain a permanent friendship, that suits the interests, the policy, and the general cause of free America. But, as a fatality, prepared in the contingencies of futurity, might disturb the peace, that ought to be perpetual, it is proper to observe that we are surrounded, on the one part, by a powerful empire, and, on the other, by consolidated republics.

A legislative body may, in certain respects, be compared to a skilful architect, who, though he cannot depart from the plan, that has been given him for the design of the edifice, ought, nevertheless, to form, in his mind, the model of the best, in order to approximate towards it as much as may be possible in the execution. The plan that the provinces have, with mutual consent, given us, is that of a representative republican government, but in relation to the best form of this kind, they are not agreed. The Congress is the architect; it ought to perfect the plan, with that form, which is most congruous to the purposes and objects of its constituents.

'Thus, after having felt the circumstances of the country, consulted our own experience, and profited by the documents, which the history of others presents to us, the Committee do not hesitate to offer to the House, the opinion, which a con

science, faithful to its sacred trusts, dictates. The representative republic, consolidated in unity of government, is the only one, which levels, on the one hand, the obstacles already designated, and guaranties, on the other, all social rights, combining the advantages of all free governments, and separating their abuses and defects.


The Committee would desire, that the Congress, and all citizens, the friends of a practical and rational liberty, would attentively pause on this last expression; for it removes the fears by which it is endeavored to alarm the people against the system of unity. This is not the unity which characterizes absolute governments, in which the universal law, is the single will of one man alone; it is the unity of representation and power, in which the law, that binds all, must emanate from the general will, representative of the rights of all.' 'A representative republican government of unity, certainly renders all these rights safe; under it the nation governs itself; the law, which it dictates, through the medium of its representatives, is its only sovereign, safeguard, and friend; the incapacity of some, is supplied by the capacity of others, and no one portion of the people can lose its liberty, unless it is lost by the whole nation.

Far from the Committee, is the antisocial thought to establish unity of power to bind the nation and individuals, depriving them of the faculty of providing for their wellbeing. On the contrary, the committee think that, after securing national and individual rights, the constitution should leave in the hands of the provinces themselves, those powers, which they alone, and none better than they, can exercise for the improvement of their physical and moral situation, for the necessary or useful establishments, that they may create, for the enjoyment of their local advantages, in everything that may not be essentially dependent on the general administration of the nation. This central power should be a beneficent power, whose authority may only foster, and never blight the principles of prosperity in each province; like the activity of the sun, which, scattering light and heat through all nature assists, and does not obstruct it, vivifies and fertilizes, that it may germinate, produce, vegetate, and ripen.

'We have, already, practically observed the little, that most of the provinces can effect towards governing themselves in an isolated situation; and we have, as yet, no lesson from experience against the government of unity, which the Committee propose. It is true that the multitude, whose philosophy is uniformly fixed on effects, feeling all the weight of the calamities, with which the country was afflicted, in the governments anterior to the year 20, imputed to forms what ought to be attributed to persons

alone; but it is likewise true, that this central power was absolute and abusive, and, at this day, no one can condemn, by practical arguments, the effects of unity of government. If any positive testimony can be opposed, with the appearance of reason, it is the example which is offered us by the federal government of the United States of North America; but no one denies the enormous difference that exists between the circumstances of that country, at the time of its establishment, and those of ours. The thirteen states, which, at the moment of their emancipation, were constitutionally confederated, did not make a perilous and violent transition to a new form of government; they did nothing more than perfect an organization as ancient as their existence. Instruction was there propagated through all the extremities of the territory, and above all, each state was a numerous nation, in respect to our desert provinces.'

Such are the arguments used by the Committee in favor of a central government, in preference to a confederated one. They are specious, but to us they do not appear altogether sound. The recent success of Mexico and Central America, where the population and other circumstances bear a strong resemblance to those of Buenos Ayres, affords a practical confutation of these arguments in the main. Federative systems have been established in those Republics, which have thus far proceeded with harmony, and a good promise of durability. All the Republics will inevitably come to this form at last, and it will be of great advantage to be placed on the true basis as soon as possible.

11.—Address on Church Music, delivered by request, on the Evening of Saturday, October 7, 1826, in the Vestry of Hanover Church, and on the Evening of Monday following in the Third Baptist Church, Boston. By LowELL MASON. THIS is on the whole a sensible pamphlet, on a much neglected, but interesting subject. We say interesting, for though it is unfortunately too true, that this part of the public religious services of our country is generally esteemed unworthy of the attention and encouragement of the best educated portion of the community; yet it seems to us, that the frequent recurrence of the performance of church music of itself makes it of some importance to society at large. There are indeed those among us, who would degrade this, as well as every other species of musical performance, by treating it as a mere address to the senses. The combinations of language are the only means of addressing their understandings, or of furnishing them with intellectual occupa

tion. The cry of grief, uttered by a being incapable of expressing its emotions in articulate sounds, the convulsive sob and the low moan of exquisite suffering, convey to the feelings of such persons no distinct impressions.

Mr Mason's pamphlet, if it has no other tendency than to correct opinions so obviously erroneous, and to excite attention to the subject of church music, will be highly useful; for if it be true, that 'music is only a refined species of elocution, and as such its office is to enforce upon the heart the sentiment which is sung,' all who would have the services of the church attended with the greatest effect, are concerned in the proper performance of this part of them. We, however, are disposed to go farther; we see no good reason for neglecting to make the church attractive, and we have no objection to the use of any means not incompatible with the solemnity of the place and purpose, to draw round the altar the gay, the frivolous, and the profligate. They may go to church indeed, not for the doctrine there, but to listen to the rich harmony of the organ, or the tones of some melodious voice, and yet this motive may not be very much lower than that, which carries to the same consecrated place some of their more insensible neighbors; and it is to be presumed, that none will go there, for whatever reason, who will not be in some degree benefited by the religious exercises. Music is said by some of the Fathers to have drawn the Gentiles frequently into the church through mere curiosity; who liked its ceremonies so well, that they were baptized before their departure.' But as Dr Burney, by whom this fact is related, observes, the generality of our parochial music is not likely to produce similar effects; being such as would sooner drive Christians with good ears out of the church, than draw Pagans into it. The remedy of the general indifference, which prevails among us, to the improvement of church music, Mr Mason thinks, should be devised and applied by that portion of the religious community technically called the church. We do not, however, at once, see the propriety of charging this body exclusively with such a commission. This and every other department of art or science. should, it seems to us, be committed to the management of those who are best informed upon the subject; and though we might admit the truth of the maxim, non posse esse oratorem nisi virum bonum, we think a man may be a very good psalm singer, though he may not be distinguished for his piety or religious zeal.

[ocr errors]

Mr Mason condemns, in strong terms, the deportment of many church choirs, which he states to be often highly irreverent and indecorous, and thinks that the improprieties he complains of are principally owing to the youth of the persons composing the choir. Without admitting the fact, for which we believe there is but little foundation, we should not wish to see any others em

ployed, than well instructed and agreeable singers, to conduct the music of the church; and as the powers of the voice, like all others, decline and decay as the age advances, the best vocalists of the parish will generally be found among the younger part of it.

We entirely agree with Mr Mason's remarks on the question, whether the whole congregation should be encouraged to join promiscuously in this exercise, or whether it should be committed to a select choir.

'If,' says he,' the devotional effect of music depends upon the mere circumstance of a person's engaging audibly in singing; or if it depends upon the quantity of noise produced; the congregational mode is undoubtedly to be preferred. But if, as has been suggested, there is an analogy between the arts of rhetoric and music if the effects of each are to be produced by means somewhat similar, all will agree, that from such a jargon of sound as will be produced by a large assembly of all ages and descriptions engaged each one in singing as seems good in his own eyes, but little benefit can he expected. Wherever congregational singing has prevailed, there has been neither good tone, correct intonation, distinct articulation, nor proper emphasis or expression.'

It is indeed a great abuse, that a considerable number of an audience should be interrupted and diverted from the perception of the musical effect intended to be produced by a fine choir, by the vainglorious exhibitions of some ignorant or discordant singer in their vicinity. The general pretence for this practice is, that one must sing or shout the words audibly, in order to feel the full force of the sentiment of the hymn. It would not be more absurd to insist on joining audibly in the prayers or the sermon for the same reason.

We have not room to notice Mr Mason's remarks on the nature of musical adaptation, which we think very judicious, and sincerely hope his observations on the whole subject may have the weight they deserve, with the musical part of the community. We have only to add, that in some future edition of the valuable collections of sacred music published in Boston by the Handel and Haydn Society, we trust we may see an illustration of Mr Mason's remarks on assimilating the musical expression with the sentiment conveyed by the words. A most striking instance of inattention to this important particular, in the means of giving effect to the words sung, occurs in a chorus of Mozart contained in the first volume of the large work published by this Society. In the clause, 'We give thanks to thee for thy great glory,' a powerful emphasis is repeatedly given to the particle for,' thereby destroying the musical expression of the whole clause.

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »