with French gentlemen of that day. It is now said how. ever to be merely a transposition of the letters composing the original signature which he employed in early life. His family name, it is well known, was Arouet, and having an elder brother he used to sign his name when young Arouet l. I;-le Jeune. The word Voltaire is an anagram or transposition of the letters in this signature.

In conclusion we have to observe, that we have not so far distrusted the moral sentiment of our readers, as to imitate the example of some of the most distinguished of our brethren abroad, and fall into passionate exclamations upon the immorality disclosed by this work, as well in the state of society as in the individuals, whose names occur in our article. No person needs be told that many in the higher classes abroad—we are not aware that any considerable exception is to be made of one country over others -are scandalously corrupt, in the article of private morals. We read their works, recognize their talents, do justice to their accomplishments, mingle as one may say in their company, with this exception, and are on our guard on this point. We indeed, in this country, where the suspi cion of laxity in the sacred relations of domestic life fixes a stigma on its subjects, might claim a right to bear loud testimony, did it serve any good purpose, against European corruption. But we would gently hint to our English brethren to abstain from any similar denunciations of French society, till that great scandal of the civilized world now under the consideration of the peers of the British realm, shall have been disposed of.

201

THE ART OF BEING HAPPY.*

[North American Review, July, 1828.]

THE author of the little work before us has not attempted any regular definition of happiness; but assuming that we all know pretty well what it is, has employed himself principally on inquiring how we may attain it. We are not sure that a more thorough investigation of the nature of the end would not have modified in some degree the notions of Mr Droz, in regard to the means. However this may be, it appears that he has made, as he conceives, some important discoveries, or at least greatly simplified and improved upon received notions. He has methodized his principles into a series of rules, which he entitles The Art of Being Happy; and he believes that by a steady and judicious application of them, a man may realize the summum bonum with a good degree of certainty. The subject is of so much importance, that all theories respecting it are worth examining, should they even turn out to be somewhat less original and valuable than they are considered by their authors.

Mr Droz commences by expressing his surprise at the apparent indifference of most persons to their own good.

'Our object in life,' he remarks, 'is happiness. One would think this a sufficiently familiar truth; but how often is it overlooked or depised! To see the restlessness and agitation of

* Essai sur l'Art d'Etre Heureux, par JOSEPH DROZ, de l'Académie Française. 4me Edition. 12mo. pp. 335. Paris. 1825.

many persons, one would suppose that the great affair was not to be happy, but to be rich, or to obtain some office.'

And again;

'Make happiness the principal object of your life. When one of your neighbors says to you, "My speculations are successful; I shall certainly become immensely rich;" and another, "I shall doubtless carry my election, and am on the high road of political advancement; " reply with equal self-satisfaction, "As for me, I hope to enjoy many happy days."'

Although the mass of mankind, in aiming at various unsubstantial objects of pursuit, overlook, in the opinion of our author, the search after happiness, he admits that there are some illustrious exceptions; and reckons among them our countryman Dr Franklin, of whom he speaks in the following high terms.

'We see, from time to time, appearing among us, some of those rare individuals whom nature intended as models of moral beauty. Such was Benjamin Franklin, the pride of the new world. I have often perused the pages in which he describes his plan for aiming at moral perfection, and which he concludes as follows. Although I have not attained the perfection at which I aimed, and have even fallen very far short of it, my endeavors have nevertheless rendered me better and happier than I should have been if I had not made the attempt, as a person who tries to improve in penmanship by imitating a copperplate model, although he should not equal the correctness and elegance of the engraving, may yet acquire a more easy and legible hand than he had before. It may be interesting to my posterity to know that I owe, under Providence, to this little artifice, the happiness which I have constantly enjoyed up to my seventy-ninth year, in which I write these lines. Should the rest of my life be disturbed by misfortunes, the recollection of the preceding period will enable me to support them with resignation."

While we perfectly agree with Mr Droz, in his estimate of the character of our illustrious townsman, and particularly in his approbation of the doctrine contained in the above extract from the Memoirs of his own life, we cannot but remark that it does not appear to confirm, so explicitly as our author supposes, his favorite notion of the great importance of making the direct pursuit of happiness the principal object. Dr Franklin assures us in this passage that by the use of certain means, which he describes, he had lived happily up to a very advanced age. But what were these means? Did they consist in making happiness the direct and principal object of pursuit? Quite the contrary, as appears from the showing of Mr Droz himself. I have often perused,' says our author as above quoted, 'the pages in which Franklin describes his plan for arriving at moral perfection.' Moral perfection, then, was the mark to which our philosopher directed his view. By aiming not immediately at happiness, but at moral perfection or virtue, he succeeded, it appears, in making himself, to a certain extent, both virtuous and happy. The conclusion is (as far as a single example can be depended on) that if a man would be happy he must endeavor to be virtuous, and that if he succeed tolerably well in this, happiness will come of itself. Mr Droz, on the contrary, advises that we should aim directly and immediately at happiness, leaving moral perfection (of which, indeed, he says but little) to come in by the way, as it may or can. Waiving any inquiry into the respective merits of the two systems, we cannot but remark that the example and precepts of Franklin, instead of confirming, as he appears to imagine, the theory of our author, are exactly opposed to it, and as far as they have weight, completely refute it in its foundation. Had Mr Droz examined more carefully, and followed out into its consequences the principle supposed in the single pas

sage above quoted, he would probably, if he really feel the veneration which he professes, for the pride of the new world,' have spared himself the trouble of writing his book, at least in its present shape. In fact, his theory and that of Dr Franklin, instead of coïnciding, plainly exhibit the adverse colors of the two great rival schools of philosophy, into which the moral world has always been divided. Franklin wishes us to frequent

'The marble porch where wisdom wont to talk
With Socrates and Tully;'

while Mr Droz would conduct us, in preference, to certain pleasure gardens of somewhat doubtful fame, which were laid out in olden time in the neighborhood of the said porch, but were never much patronized by the good society of Athens. We regret, by the bye, to learn that our fair friend, Miss Frances Wright, lately consented to pass a few days in these same suspicious gardens; but venture to hope, that she has only been upon a tour of observation, and will not think of making them her habitual residence.*

By aiming at moral perfection, it appears that Dr Franklin not only partially attained his object, but succeeded besides in realizing a good measure of happiness. Whether a man, who, in compliance with the advice of Mr Droz, should regard happiness as his direct and immediate object, would in that way he likely to make any corresponding approaches towards the attainment of moral perfection, is perhaps uncertain. But waving this

*See her work, entitled A Few Days at Athens, which contains a very ingenious exposition and defence of the Epicurean philosophy, in the antique form of dialogues. Although we disapprove the doctrine, which is also decidedly at variance with the principles recommended in the Views of Society and Manners in America, by the same lady, we cannot but regard the literary execution of it as highly creditable to the learning and talents of the fair writer.