to be taken in the only sense in which they would have any force, Fraternity and Equality can mean nothing but an equal division of property, and a full development of the 'equality and rights of man' principles of Mr. Midshipman Easy's father. It has always seemed to us most unfortunate that the French Republic should retain as its motto words of such vague meaning, and such dangerous significance, but the defence would doubtless be that the labour and even danger to the Constitution of altering them would be much greater than any advantage to be gained. This, however, is no reason why they should be held up to admiration in England, in whose history they fortunately have no place; and we would earnestly recommend Mr. Russel to be more careful in his language in future, even when irritated by the contemplation of such an unnatural political result as Whiggery. Unfortunately it seems to be an irresistible temp. tation to a Radical at times to indulge in vague and meaningless language, which, nevertheless, is admirably fitted to stir up vague desires and animosities in the minds of those who listen to it. What, for instance, is the meaning or force of Mr. Chamberlain's recent sneer at a public meeting against Lord Salisbury, as belonging to that class 'who toil not, neither do they spin'? Mr. Chamberlain, when removed from the intoxicating influence of Radical cheers, will surely not deny that if a man is fortunate enough to have obtained an independence, whether by his own labours or by the accident of birth, he is under no obligation to continue to add to his means; nay, on the contrary, that he is leading a far higher and more useful life, by unselfishly devoting himself to the pursuit of politics, of science, or of philanthropy, rather than to the further accumulation of wealth. We have assuredly no love or admiration for Lord Salisbury, whom we regard as one of the most extreme,' violent, and bitter of politicians, yet we consider that to blame him for 'not toiling or spinning,' is to use language which has no meaning. He most certainly has 'toiled' both in Parliament and out of it, and we have little doubt he would have 'spun' very successfully, if he had been in any way called upon to engage in such an occupation. The fact is, if there is a large class in this country who

more limited. Increasing civilisation and more enlightened views of what constitutes true happiness, are more and more leading men of all ranks and conditions to take their part in the work of life. But even if it were not so, an orator of Mr. Chamberlain's position should surely be careful of increasing and stirring up the very natural feeling of hardship and injustice which lurks, and which will always lurk more or less in the heart of the poor man against the rich, of the 'toiler and spinner' against the peer, who is popularly supposed to do nothing but enjoy himself. However hard and unjust the inequality of human prosperity and happiness may seem, no sensible man denies that such inequality must always exist, so long as human beings are born into the world with unequal moral qualities and with unequal physical and mental powers.

Mr. Russel also informs us that he does not

regard as Whigs those who belong to, or have cordially supported Mr. Gladstone's Government. They may or may not be Whigs at heart, but by their public acts they have associated themselves with the general body of modern Liberalism, and their small differences of individual opinion have found no opportunity of making themselves felt. With the 'permeated Whig' absorbed into the Liberal party, we have no quarrel, our business is with the Whigs as a separate section.'

In other words, it is only upon those Liberals who have dared to have a different opinion from the present Government, and who have had the courage of their convictions, that the phials of Mr. Russel's wrath descend. With the Liberal who puts his principles in his pocket for the sake of office, or in order to please his constituents, he has no quarrel. This is certainly a beautifully simple definition of a Whig-Has he ever differed from the present Government?" "Yes?' 'Then he is a Whig, and let him be anathema.' Under this category of condemnation, we must include the Duke of Argyll, Lord Sherbrooke, Lord Brabourne, Lord Lansdowne, Lord Cowper, Mr. Goschen, Mr. Forster, and many other lesser lights.

These therefore are the men who live exclusively on the worship of the past,' who 'hold the creed of a privileged and exclusive class,' who have dreaded and shrunk from the modern spirit,' &c., &c.

has such profound contempt, were distinguished members of the last Liberal Cabinet—a Cabinet which disestablished the Church of Ireland, which established an admirable system of national education both in England and Scotland, which abolished the unjust practice of purchasing commissions in the army, and which altogether effected more reforms, and did more hard work than any Government had achieved in the same space of time before, or than the present Government seems likely to accomplish in the future. It is too much that four illustrious members of such an illustrious Cabinet, are to be sneered at and ridiculed as 'Whigs,' by this, the most junior member of the Government, because they have dared to have an opinion of their own. Fortunately, other people of more judgment than Mr. Russel, refuse to be led blindfold and unresisting wherever even Mr. Gladstone may choose to lead them, however deeply they respect and admire that great statesman. We are convinced that, in one instance at least, the opinion of the country has been on the Whig, rather than on the Radical side. Since Mr. Forster resigned, the course of events has surely proved to every unprejudiced mind that he was right and the Government The chief point of difference between them was that he wished the Coercion Bill to precede the Arrears Bill, that he desired to have the means of preserving law and order before any concession was made in the way of releasing Mr. Parnell. He resigned, and within a fortnight the murder of Lord Frederick Cavendish, though not really worse than that of Mrs. Smyth, or of many others which had taken place before, forced the Government instantly to introduce the Bill which Mr. Forster had wanted. As if still further to show that the Chief Secretary realised the situation in Ireland in a manner that none of his colleagues did, the recent revelations in connection with the Phoenix Park trials, have proved that the country was at that time in a far more dangerous condition th was supposed, that repeated attempts had been made to assassinate Mr. Forster himself, and that Mr. Parnell, whom the Government had persisted in releasing, even at the cost of losing Mr. Forster's services, had been involved in the grave suspicion

wrong.

'murder'-societies of Ireland. We are convinced that the country endorsed Mr. Forster's views on the occasion of his resignation. There is not a more truly Liberal constituency in the kingdom than Glasgow, yet in the course of last winter M:.. Forster was accorded one of the most enthusiastic receptions when delivering a political address to an enormous audience in that city, which it has ever been the good fortune of a statesman to meet with. He was too generous to make any reference on that occasion to the recent unfortunate disagreement between the Government and himself, but his reception was undoubtedly intended as a mark of encouragement and approval of the line of action he had adopted. In truth, Mr. Forster on that occasion occupied the Whig or 'mean' position between the two extremes. He did not consider like the Tory that the existing state of the land laws was satisfactory in Ireland, that everything should remain in statu quo, and that all that was wanted was a firm and vigorous application of buckshot and martial law, but neither was he of opinion with the Radical, that immediate concession was the only cure, that everything was to be granted in response to murder and outrage, and that peace was to be purchased at any price. He was determined that submission should precede concession, that the law should be vindicated and obedience to it enforced before reform was thought of, and he resolutely refused to release from prison men steeped to the lips in treason,' unless they expressed contrition for the past, and promised amendment for the future.

6

Indeed, in our opinion, the Radical extreme on the Irish question is further removed from the mean' than the Tory. To keep things as they are' may be inexpedient and even unjust, but it is not so immoral and disastrous as to encourage in any way the idea that lawless outrage will be rewarded, and that the best and simplest method of getting the land laws reformed is to shoot the landlords. It must be admitted that Mr. Gladstone's remark in one of his speeches-though, doubtless only a slip of the tongue that attention had been called to the state of Ireland and to the position of the Irish Church, by the Clerkenwell outrage, was most unfortunate. If it is to be supposed that

ing policemen, it is not unnatural for an Irish tenant to try the same method of improving his position; and it cannot be denied by any unprejudiced critic that the Government have wandered from the 'mean' position not towards the extreme of severity but towards the extreme of leniency. It is to be hoped that in future the old theory and practice will prevail, and that reforms will be introduced solely because they have been proved to be just and necessary, and not even indirectly in response to lawless agitation and murderous outrage. The line of conduct followed by the Government as regards the Highland Crofters, for example, seems to us to have been eminently wise and judicious. In consideration of their illiterate and to a great extent helpless condition, they have issued a Royal Commission to inquire into their grievances, which, if found to exist, they will no doubt take steps to remedy, but in the meantime they insist upon, and have enforced, obedience to the law.

We are pleased to find our theory of the mean' in politics confirmed by one who had himself taken no small part in the government of his country, and whose opinion and reputation for sound judgment on such questions are second to none. The following passage is taken from Macaulay's History of England, Chap. I.:

'From that day (Sept. 10th, 1641), dates the separate existence of the two great political parties, which have ever since alternately governed the country. In one sense indeed, the distinction which then became obvious had always existed, and always must exist. For it has its origin in diversities of temper, of understanding, and of interest, which are found in all societies, and which will be found till the human mind ceases to be drawn in opposite directions by the charm of habit, and by the charm of novelty. Everywhere there is a class of men who cling with fondness to whatever is ancient, and who, even when convinced by overpowering reasons that innovation would be beneficial, consent to it with many forebodings and misgivings. We find also everywhere another class of men, sanguine in hope, bold in speculation, always pressing forward, quick to discern the imperfections of what exists, disposed to think lightly of the risks and inconveniences which attend improvements, and disposed to give every change credit for being an improvement. In the sentiments of both classes there is something to approve. But of both, the best specimens