seat I.II1KHTY. VOIj. IX, I next mi a mountain lofty and far, Was placed, and beheld the fair evening star; (For the sun was just setting alar in the west, And all living creatures were going to rest.) I looked and beheld that the sky was nglow; The sun, setting, splendors untold did show; And the doors of his light, as it were, did unfold, And Hooded the mountain with gl ries of gold. And the world down below with her carpet of green, And the blue sky above, with the sun's light betwecn, AU these il was granted to me to be seen. I paused in retleclion; for thinking in mind, I wondered if any one ever could find A power to compare with the power of the mind. LIDEliTY. rt... HEN a comparison is made between the liberty we really possess, and that which we should have, it will be found that we are far from practically re. alizing that liberty which, in principle, we make the corner stone of our Republic. To be sure, we are no longer burdened with some forms of oppression. Govern mental interference- with private rights, and the despotism of personal rule arc :ut little fell; and as these are the most com mon and obvious forms of oppression, we often Halter ourselves that the last foe to liberty has been subdued, and thai noth ing remains to be done in the future. But I fear we flatter ourselves too soon. We must remember that there can be an oppression by society but little, if any, less burdensome than the most absolute personal rule. The individual may have little liberty, on account of the prejudices and customs that society impose upon him. Liberty of act, liberty of thought even, have narrow limits for development, since the majority seldom giant to others the full and fiee expression of their opinions. But those who think that the individual if of minor importance, and belice that all men should be moulded after u pattern which they themselves determine, will in. sist that the individual cannot be allowed to develop himself as he will; but that the restraining power of Hociety must be wrought in to curb the infamous and de structive doctrines propagated b) him. But why are these opinions branded with the epithets infamous and destructive? Who is to decide whether these innova lions are right or wrong? Evidently, those only, who are in favor of the estab lished custom, and who are opposing the desired change. But what authority have the,) to determine for others what is right, and what is wrong? None at all, unless we are ready to admit thai "Whatever is, is right," and also to grant that any thing established by custom is infallible. But what would be the lesult of such a princi ple? Firsts to cut offal change, and thus to prohibit any advancement in thefutuie; and next, to bind men down to a similar, ity in thought and action; of itself, de structive to all progress. But, perhaps, the opponents of individual liberty will reply thai this is an extreme view, and that, in this day and age of the world, no one wishes to cm tail the liberty of the in dividual except in cases where his actions are manifestly injurious, not only to him self, but also to other member of society; hence mutual rights demand that he should be restrained by law or custom. If this weie Hue, it would heal we could