Mackintosh, striking evidence of his extensive reading appeared. It seems to have been his custom to always read with a pencil in his hand, to score the remarkable passages, and to make occasional notes; generally at the end of the book he indicates the place where, and date when he read it.

One remarkable and not uninteresting example occurs in the following volume in my possession:

"An Essay on the Right of Property in Land, with respect to its foundation in the Law of Nature: its present establishment by the municipal laws of Europe; and the regulations by which it might be rendered more beneficial to the lower ranks of Mankind." London, 1782, 8vo.

On the inside of the cover Sir James Mackintosh has written:

"Clapham Common, July 18, 1828.—An ingenious and benevolent, but injudicious book, which is a good example of the difficulty of forming plans for the service of mankind. To the author, an accomplished recluse, a lettered enthusiast of no vulgar talent or character, I owe the cultivation of a sense of the beautiful in poetry and eloquence, for which at the distance of near half a century I feel a lively gratitude. It was written by William Ogilvie, Professor of Humanity in King's College, Aberdeen. I even now recollect passages of his Translation of the 4th Book of the Eneid.—J. MACKINTOSH."

I have found a corroboration of the estimate above given of this person, by another of his countrymen, James Ogilvie (who appears to have been an itinerant teacher of oratory in America) in a volume of Philosophical Essays published in Philadelphia in 1816. Speaking of a gifted native of Scotland of the name of McAllester, settled in the far west, near Bard's Town, and lamenting that he should choose to bury his talents in obscurity and indolence, the writer says:

"He came nearer to the character of a scientific sage than any human being the narrator has ever known, with the exception of William Ogilvie, Professor of Humanity in King's College, Old Aberdeen, Author of a profound original 'Essay on the Right of Property in Land.'"

The book itself is, in some respects at least, well worthy of attention, and especially at the present moment, when the subject it embraces presses itself upon all men's consideration. On emigration, for instance, Ogilvie has some anticipatory views: thus he observes with truth:

"To increase the prosperity and the happiness of the greater number, is the primary object of government, and the increase of national happiness must be the increase of national strength. Is it not then the duty, and perhaps also the interest of every legislature in the West of Europe to promote the emigration of its less opulent subjects, until the condition of the lower classes of men at home be rendered nearly as comfortable as the condition of the same classes in the new settlements of North America?"—Pp. 50, 51.

Just now, when the Property Tax is to receive the mature consideration of the legislature, the following passage, which also anticipates the public feeling as expressed lately by an influential part of the press, deserves to be cited:

"Without regard to the original value of the soil, the gross amount of property in land is the fittest subject of taxation; and could it be made to support the whole expense of the public, great advantages would arise to all orders of men. What then, may it be said, would not, in that case, the proprietors of stock in trade, in manufactures, and arts, escape taxation, that is, the proprietors of one half of the national income? They would indeed be so exempted; and very justly, and very profitably for the state; for it accords with the best interests of the community through successive generations, that ACTIVE PROGRESSIVE INDUSTRY SHOULD BE EXEMPTED, IF POSSIBLE, FROM EVERY PUBLIC BURTHEN, and that the whole weight should be laid on that quiescent stock, which has been formerly accumulated, as the reward of an industry which is now no longer exerted."—P. 207.

In another work on political economy, Sir James has also recorded his opinion, and indicated some passages, which have been copied by Godwin. The work is: Doutes Proposés aux Philosophes Economistes sur l'Ordre Naturel et Essentiel des Sociétés Politiques, par M. l'Abbé de Mably: à la Haye, 1768, 8vo.

"This book is a greater mixture of sense and nonsense than any other I ever read. What he says against the Political jargon of the Economists, their evidence and their despotisme légal, is perfectly well reasoned. His own system of ascribing all evils to the Institution of Separate Property is too absurd for any serious discussion."

It is pleasant to have these recorded opinions of such a man as Mackintosh on books the subjects of which he had deeply meditated. Indeed, to me there is a great charm in such private memoranda of a distinguished and able man, giving the passing impression on his mind in the course of his reading.

S. W. SINGER.

Mickleham, June 7. 1851.

NOTES ON IRELAND, NO. I.
Notes on Ireland's Freedom from Serpents.

That Ireland was infested with venomous reptiles before St. Patrick's time, that he banished them, "and that serpents cannot survive in Ireland," is a well-known tradition, and one universally received amongst the native Irish. In Christian symbolism it was usual to designate sin or Paganism by a serpent or dragon, and saints who converted heathen nations, or subdued the evil promptings of their own nature, were represented with a serpent or dragon beneath their feet. Thus, St. Patrick, by preaching the doctrine of the Cross, and uprooting Paganism, may be said to have banished venomous serpents from Ireland. In his case, however, the symbol may have had a deeper meaning, if, as many (and with great probability) think, serpent worship formed part of that Oriental heathenism which obtained in early times in Ireland.

Dr. Geoffry Keating, in his History of Ireland (in the Irish language), which he completed about the year 1625, says: "Saoilim gurab do an deamhnaibk gairmithear naithreacha nimke i m-beathaidh Patraic" ("I think that by the serpents spoken of in the life of St. Patrick were meant demons"). Serpents figure among the carvings and hieroglyphical ornaments on some of the remnants of Irish antiquity which still puzzle our antiquaries. On Cruach Padruig, in Mayo, there is a sort of tarn which still bears the name of Loch na Pheiste, or the Serpent's Lake; and one of "the Two Lakes," whence Gleandaloch derives its name, has the same appellation.

Solinus, who flourished at the close of the second century, notices, I believe, the strange fact of Ireland's having an immunity from reptiles; Isidore and Bede, in the seventh and eighth centuries, respectively repeat the assertion. Donatus, Bishop of Fesulæ, who flourished about the middle of the ninth century, says, in a Latin poem on his native country:

"Rana." A note on this word in Montgomery's Poetry of Ireland declares:

"However fabulous this may appear, it is certain that Frogs were formerly unknown in this country: they were first propagated here from spawn introduced as an experiment by a Fellow of Trinity College, Dublin, in 1696."

Joceline of Furnes, Sir James Ware, Fynes Moryson,