versity the power of granting degrees.* One would suppose there is nothing "extravagantly insolent" in this demand, or anything opposed to the principles of free and enlightened government. The worst that any man, even the warmest admirer of the mixed system, can reasonably say of the Catholic body, is, that they share a certain preference with the Protestant public of Great Britain. And yet the mere hope that so cheap a privilege may be accorded to the Catholic people of Ireland, "has excited surprise and alarm” (pp. 4-5).

In the course of the spring a deputation of liberals waited on Lord Russell in behalf of their view. We remember the general purport of the conversation which ensued; but we have not been at the pains to look back at its record. Rather we have thought it well to draw out an imaginary scene, "founded," indeed, "on facts," but embellished to exhibit more clearly the point at issue.

Deputation. We have called on you, my Lord, in reference to Irish University Education, for the purpose of appealing to you in the name of liberal principles.

Lord Russell. I am glad to gather from your words that you have called to withdraw all further opposition to the Government plan.

D. On the contrary, it is against that plan that we protest in the name of liberal principles.

Lord R. You protest, then, in the name of liberal principles, against the carrying out of liberal principles ?

D. It is not the carrying out of liberal principles but of their contradictories, to sanction an educational body, which does not open its door except to one particular denomination. Lord R. What then do you mean by liberal principles ?

D. The principle that no man shall be placed under temporal disadvantage for his religious opinions.

Lord R. I so fully agree with your principle, that it has induced me to promote the measure which you oppose.

D. Exclusive education, supported on liberal principles ! Lord R. Precisely. I ask you this plain question. Is it or is it not a religious opinion-and one prevalent among vast numbers both of Englishmen and Irishmen-that mixed education inflicts on their children a most serious calamity; and that no system is tolerable except the denominational?

D. We believe there are vast numbers so illiberal as to hold this opinion:

*Or rather now, only the attainableness of degrees by its members as such. -(Ed. Dublin Review.)

Lord R. Here then is a certain religious opinion. Liberal principles then require that those who hold it shall not be subjected-in consequence of holding it-to any temporal disadvantage.

D. Certainly. We have no wish to inflict on them any temporal disadvantage, for holding it as strongly, and proclaiming it as loudly, as they please. Liberalism forbid !

Lord R. Well, but tell me. Suppose that a Methodist c.g. were allowed indeed, without molestation, to hold and proclaim that Methodism is true; but that he were placed under serious temporal disadvantage, so soon as he began to frequent a Methodist chapel. Could such a procedure be defended on liberal principles?

D. Of course not.

Lord R. Or suppose a Roman Catholic were allowed indeed, without molestation, to hold and proclaim that the Host is the very Body of Christ; but that he were placed under serious temporal disadvantage, if he fell down in adoration before that Host. Could such a procedure be defended on liberal principles ?

D. No more than the former.

Lord R. Liberal principles then require that men shall be permitted, without incurring temporal disadvantage, not merely to hold and disseminate those religious opinions which they honestly entertain, but also to act on those opinions; to put them in practice.

D. That is so, no doubt.

Lord R. Let us go back then to the particular religious opinion before us, "Mixed education inflicts on children a most serious calamity, and the denominational system is alone tolerable." Those who honestly hold this opinion do not (you will admit) enjoy religious liberty, if they are placed under temporal disadvantage by putting it into practice.

D. We cannot but admit this.

Lord R. Now will you explain to me how this opinion can be put into practice? A Methodist as such puts his religious opinion into practice by frequenting a Methodist chapel; a Roman Catholic as such puts his religious opinion into practice by adoring the Host. But how can he who disapproves mixed education put that religious opinion into practice?

D. We can see no other way of his doing so, except sending his children to a denominational system.

Lord R. It is required then by liberal principles, that he shall not be placed under temporal disadvantage by so doing? D. Certainly.

Lord R. But is not the circumstance of his children being unable to attain degrees, a most serious disadvantage to him? D. In may cases, no doubt.

Lord R. It is required then by liberal principles, that every man, who honestly thinks a denominational system of education the only tolerable one, may send his children to such a system, without incurring the consequence of their being unable to attain degrees. In the name of liberal principles you have appealed to me against a measure which those principles imperatively demand. I am engaged in the great work of my life, the carrying out of liberalism; and in the name of liberalism you warn me to forbear. One thing you show very plainly; viz., that you have no real notion of what is meant by the very principles which you clamorously profess. "Solventur risu tabulæ; tu missus abibis." Or rather "vos missi abibitis."

So the members of the deputation "depart" looking extremely small.

ART. VI.-INTERESTS OF THE CATHOLIC POOR.

Association of the Sacred Heart for the Education of the Children of the Poor in London. Signed, HENRY EDWARD, Archbishop of Westminster. Westminster Diocesan Fund. Signed, HENRY EDWARD, Archbishop of

Westminster.

ONE

NE characteristic of our day must strike every man who combines a study of history with observation of the present we mean, the rise and development of what is technically known as "Social Science." "Social Science." This may be defined, sufficiently for our present purpose, as the application of modern experiment, discovery, and general social progress, to improve the condition of the humbler classes. We say the humbler classes, to distinguish it from the mere development of that spirit of luxury, which in the sphere of the "upper ten thousand" is always holding out a prize, like the Roman tyrant of old, to him who shall invent a new pleasure. With such a perverted application of human ingenuity and toil we have, of course, less than no sympathy. We do not refer to it, except by accident or contrast, in speaking of Social Science. Nay, we must regard such over-polishing and adornment of the mere surface of life with grave disapproval,

even with grave anxiety. Bad in itself, it is the forerunner of worse. Not the Catholic moralist or essayist alone, but the general philanthropist, nay, the general observer, must see in the spread and intensity of the "Social Science" of luxurious living a moral and political evil. It is morally evil, for it enervates the character of the individual: hence, too, it becomes politically evil, as it deprives the State of her masterworkmen, and weakens the corporate life of the whole. Luxury, and the development of the arts of luxury, can hardly consist with vigorous thinking, with the self-denials of genuine patriotism, with the toil of brain, unflagging effort, steadfast aim and will, by which man has ever wrought out great results for his brother man. It hardly consists with the tempered domestic enjoyments and cheerfully accepted duties of family life, which reproduces in unnumbered homes the miniature of a great ideal of the patriarchal Government and State, precious in the eyes alike of ethics and of political economy. In proportion as the men of a state decline from the old simple, grave, and self-denying public life, which in Pagan times was a rude foreshadowing of the Christian polity, and in Christian times was the type of mind and of man produced by the Church: when

Privatus illis census erat brevis,
Commune magnum;

when great things were done, great offerings made, for the body politic, out of the staid and generous economy of the individual-in the same proportion has that state too surely entered upon the period of decline. It may be passing through a splendid vestibule, a gorgeous banquetting-hall; but that passage leads out to the scaffold. Be it the age of Augustus; and through a vista of years we see the northern barbarian at the gates of famished Rome. Be it the age of Louis XIV.; a glance forward shows us the rabble of Paris drunken and maddened with the blood of their ancient kings. The throne-room of the Grand Monarque melts, as by a dissolving view, into a picture of that altar of Nemesis, the Nemesis of the spurned and neglected poor-the Guillotine.

In pursuance of this train of thought, let it be permitted to us to sketch a character. The name shall be of the past; but the character is of all times. London will do for the background of our portrait as well as ancient Athens; and he has spoken in Westminster quite as probably as from the Pnyx. Alcibiades, then, stands before us, type of the handsome and not ungifted lounger of heathen refinement; a being not without talents, not without bravery; a man of virtù though not

of public or private virtue; a dilettante and a dabbler in many things he does not carry through, and who can talk brilliantly with Socrates himself; a disjointed mechanism of mere possible forces, without a main-spring, without a motive power beyond the moment: who has never worked consistently since he began to be, nor ever will, while the world endures. We need not go back into a chapter of history to say this: for Alcibiades, or some one very like him, perhaps with less talent, with not more dashing courage, not more listless good nature and laissez faire, is at this moment polishing the flagstones of Pall Mall with his boots, or yawning in the bowwindow of his club in St. James' Street, or making up his books for the next Derby; or, in some brilliant saloon, displaying a wit that outshines the ȧvýpiμov yéλaoua of the diamonds, sparkle they never so enchantingly beneath the blaze of those hundred-lighted chandeliers. Čontemplate him under any of these phases of his existence; speculate à priori, before the Great Book shall contain the history of the actual irrecoverable deeds of the life that he is throwing away. What will he effect, what will he store up in any garner, during the energetic portion of his three-score years and ten? He may lead a dashing charge of the 10th Hussars at some Waterloo or Balaklava; for he has the energy of a lion during a full quarter of an hour, till sloth, like the father-in-law in the fable, comes to draw again his teeth and claws. He may take up his pen for about the same space of time; and the very effeminacy of his habitual thoughts, and the practice of an ear attuned to the cadences of articulate music, shall give a softness to his syllables and teach his numbers a flow, to make us look at him twice, in doubt whether it is the Laureate we hear. He is singing some "airy, fairy Lilian," or achieving a stanza of some dreamy "Lotos-eaters." We cannot stay to draw him full-length. Ex pede Herculem. Here is a human instep, encased in a boot of Hoby's best; whence (if you, gentle reader, are a Cuvier in comparative anatomy) you may construct the life size Alcibiades of Belgravia, the votary and disciple, not professor-he give lectures! of the Social Science of our privileged classes.

Vanitas vanitatum, et omnia vanitas, this "strenuous indolence" and emptiness of all result, in Vanity Fair!

We must plead guilty to a grievous digression from the thought we started with, into which we ought by this time to have made some way. The Social Science we are now to say a few words about, is the science that aims at benefiting the sons and daughters of toil, hard-handed mechanics, grimy coalheavers, wan sempstresses, and the yet more squalid and