are anomalies which, though true individually, are as false generally as the accidental deformities which vary the average outline of the human figure.  They would be as much out of place in a fictitious narrative, as a wen in an academic model.  But any direct attempt at moral teaching, and any attempt whatever to give scientific information will, we fear, unless managed with the utmost discretion, interfere with what, after all, is the immediate and peculiar object of the novelist, as of the poet, to please.  If instruction do not join as a volunteer, she will do no good service.  Miss Edgeworth’s novels put us in mind of those clocks and watches which are condemned “a double or a treble debt to pay”:  which, besides their legitimate object, to show the hour, tell you the day of the month or the week, give you a landscape for a dial-plate, with the second hand forming the sails of a windmill, or have a barrel to play a tune, or an alarum to remind you of an engagement:  all very good things in their way; but so it is that these watches never tell the time so well as those in which that is the exclusive object of the maker.  Every additional movement is an obstacle to the original design.  We do not deny that we have learned much physic, and much law, from Patronage, particularly the latter, for Miss Edgeworth’s law is of a very original kind; but it was not to learn law and physic that we took up the book, and we suspect we should have been more pleased if we had been less taught.  With regard to the influence of religion, which is scarcely, if at all, alluded to in Miss Edgeworth’s novels, we would abstain from pronouncing any decision which should apply to her personally.  She may, for aught we know, entertain opinions which would not permit her, with consistency, to attribute more to it than she has done; in that case she stands acquitted, in foro conscientiae, of wilfully suppressing any thing which she acknowledges to be true and important; but, as a writer, it must still be considered as a blemish, in the eyes at least of those who think differently, that virtue should be studiously inculcated with scarcely any reference to what they regard as the main spring of it; that vice should be traced to every other source except the want of religious principle; that the most radical change from worthlessness to excellence should be represented as wholly independent of that agent which they consider as the only one that can accomplish it; and that consolation under affliction should be represented as derived from every source except the one which they look to as the only true and sure one:  “is it not because there is no God in Israel that ye have sent to inquire of Baalzebub the God of Ekron?”