The Welshman

I THE COMING ELECTIONS. I It is generally assumed that Parliament will meet, as usual, about the beginning of February, and after a short session devoted to the despatch of the most necessary busi- ness, be dissolved early enough to leave the victors and the vanquished in the elections their autumnal relaxation. Of course, there is no formal arrangement of this kind. it is open to the Ministry, if they can obtain the consent of the Sovereign, to dissolve any time most convenient to them- selves but the Ministers have themselves countenanced the impression that such would be the course adopted, and it has been of late years the custom to deal frankly with the Opposition in this matter, and not to attempt any surprise. Upon the faith of this tacit understanding Conservative candidates, anxious to avoid plunging constituencies into an election fever for months before the contest, have post- poned their canvass, and many of them are amusing them- selves at a considerable distance from the constituencies upon gaining whose affections they have set their hearts. We are sorry to break in upon this pleasant idleness, but we cannot feel any confidence that this understanding will be adhered to. There are several circumstances which justify the suspicion that the Ministry, fancying they have lulled the Conservative party into repose, and that an early dissolution would catch it napping, intend to try for a fresh lease of power. The temptation is one which such old in- trigues can hardly resist. In the first place, there is the gain to be derived from taking the Conservatives by surprise Iu the next place, Ministers feel that they will probably be even more at a loss for a decent cry at the end of a few months than they now are. They cannot agree what to do beyond, of course, clinging to their places, and an early dissolution would have this great advantage, that on the one hand, they might appeal to the moderate Liberals with Lord Palmerston, the anti-Reformer, and, on the other to the Radicals with Mr Gladstone, the advocate of univer- sal suffrage. In a few months that may be impossible the Cabinet may be compelled to pronounce on one side or other and alienate one portion of the electors to whom it looks for support. Moreover, the Premier, must be in continual dread that Earl Russell, whom he is not strong enough to get rid of, will involve himself and the Cabinet in another scrape. There is another reason which would make an im- mediate dissolution desirable in the Ministerial judgment. The result of the recent revisions of the electoral lists has been most unfavourable to them. In some constituencies quite a revolution has been worked the Conservatives, who, at the present are in a minority, are certain of a majority with the new lists. Ministers may therefore wish to tight the battle with the old lists, as they would do if they were to dissolve at once. In the United States the party managers, as soon as the election approaches, and the best speakers they can com- mand to stump" the most important states and counties. Mr Grladstome has been "stumping" Lancashire. All his speeches were fervent recommendations of himself and his colleagues, as the men to whom the prosperity of England and the comparative prosperity of Lancashire were solely due. All his eloquence was employed to show that the progress the couatry has made is not due to tne energy of its people or to other favouring circumstances but entirely to the measures of which he and his colleagues are the authors. The Gladstone programme is before the electors soft soap in plenty for all, and promises of peace, retrench- ment, and reform at the hands of a Ministry which has done its utmost to embroil the country in war, which has carried the national expenditure to an unprecedented height, and has, in the coolest manner possible thrown over reform and jeered at all reformers. Mr Gladstone's tour through Lancashire was undoubtedly an electioneering one. Perhaps he was only trying the ground. Perhaps he was thinking more about a seat for himself than about a majority for his party at the general election. In any case it is a significant fact, and an unmistakeable warning to the Conservatives to be ready for the contest. -Standard.

THE EFFECT OF NOVEL-READING ON GIRLS. I Miss Braddon's new book the Doctor's Wife will be put to one use which, we suspect, she did not anticipate. It is a severe blow, administered by a novelist, to her own department of literature. Her patient and very unpleasant sketch of the effects of no el-reading upon a young girl's mind will be quoted everywhere as an argument against the habit, and many a cautious mother will ask her longing daughter, as she impatiently lifts her head from the facinat- ing volume, whether she is not afraid of becoming an Isabel Sleaford. The old household antipathy to novel-reading, which twenty years ago marked one-half of English society, has not been so entirely suppressed as people who judge England by London are very apt to imagine. Fathers, even of Evangelical principles, have, it is true, pretty much given way, partly because they see that novels are better than they were, partly because they litve fallen into the habit themselves, and do not like the sort of restraint which accompanies a parlottr Index lixpurgatoriu3, but chiefly because they cannot help themselves, and prefer the haoit of novel-reading to that of hyprocrisy. With novels in every magazine, even those called religious, the compulsory ab- stinence either suppresses literature altogether, or leads to a practice of secret reading, more injurious to the character f than any other plisso of household deception; The mothers, however, of the middle class, have not quite given up the I struggle, but have contented themselves with a rather clever shifting of the ground of objection. Very few in that class have now the courage to repeat the old assertion that all fiction is evil, though we see that Mr Weaver, the pugilist preacher, still defends the doctrine of Omar, and holds that nothing should be read unless it tends directly to feed the soul," He would not read a wurd of Burns or an act" of Shakespeare, not he, and we entirely believe his assertion. He was once not alone in his thought, for half the religious world formerly needed sorely to ponder Robert Hall's smashing retort Go! no need of human knowledge! How much need has Ho of human ignorance ?" That particular form of obscurantism is, however, nearly dead, and mothers have even been driven from their great stronghold, the impropriety" of such literature. Most novels nowadays are" proper" enough in substance, and taste as to non- essentials has grown rather laxer, if we may judge at least from the fact that a writer like Mrs Wood gives us a whole chapter of the little incidents which precede a "confine- ment." There is not the smallest harm in it all, only the ancient ideas about the utility of verbal buckram become thereby slightly discredited. The mothers therefore, in despair of maintaining the old ground, have retreated upon another position, one far stronger than any yet taken up. They do not argue that novel-reading perverts, or defiles, or destroys the imagination, but that it cultivates it too much, that it gives the girls two lives to lead at once, both perhaps equally good, and both in themselves pure enough, but sure to jar against one another. Their daughters, they say, are to marry plain, decent people, with just enough of money to get along with, and the novels make them long for inaccessible heroes, people of boundless wealth and heroic horsemanship, perfect natures and an irresistible smile (there is a run on smiles !) till they hate the thought of life with that struggling doctor, or rising lawyer, or pre- occupied man of commerce. That the ideal hero is better than he used to be, John Halifax, gentleman," instead of Charles Lovelace, does not mueh mend the matter, for John Halifas is as unattainable, thank Providence! as ever Love- lace was. The girls have to keep modest households neat, and the stories set them longing for luxury which they can- not get till, as Miss Braddon says, furniture without colour, ottomans without flowers, paper without brightness, become of themselves a source of suffering. They have to be rather dull, and the tales give them pictures of life so bright, so full of incident, and movement, and colour that the con- trast changes mere dullness into unendurable ennui. Girls cannot stay at home to-day as their grandmothers did thirty years ago. Above all they acquire, it is said, a most per- nicious view of religious ethics—the duties they ought to perform. Most English girls in the classes we speak of are wanted to lead good" lives, to perform quiet duties, under- go little sacrifices, and spread a healthy atmosphere of reverence, and purity, and where possible charity, around their homes. The novels teach them, say qniet old ladies, who are a great deal farther from being fools than the new generation ever will be, to despise this silent and uneventful worship, to long for careers, for duty which shall be great as well as useful, for some sacrifice which shall task all their powers of endurance, some life-long wearing of the hair shirt which almost everybody of either sex believes at heart must be pleasant and beneficial, Amaryllis, it is said, is good, and the milkmaid is good but when the milkmaid reads stories till she wants to be, or thinks that alie is, Amaryllis, she is sure at some time or other to spill the milk out of the pail. That is the line of argument which a picture like Miss Braddon's fine etching of Isabel Sleaford is very likely to strengthen, and there is more sense in it of a hard kind than educated men will be quite willing to admit. They read many books, and see many people, and rub sharply against life's corners till their imaginations even if affected by what they read-a doubtful point after thirty—are held under sharp curb and rein. Sir James Mackintosh was not the worse judge, but the better, for dreaming all day at inter- vals that he was Emperor of Constantinople. But girls as a rule do not read many books, pass their lives under re- straints from etiquette and espionage of themselves very favourbale to reverie, and have usually a large amount of time hanging idle upon their hands. Is it quite so certain that to them this filling up of the imagination with unreal pictures, this habit of dwelling in two worlds, this widening of the chasm which must always exist between the inner and outer life, between Jean as she appears to her Maker, and Jean as she appears to her friends, is altogether inno- cuous i The question puzzles a good many households where novels are as plentiful as loaves, and people whose judgments are not to be pooh poohed as crusted with ancient prejudice. On the whole the verdict must, we think, be in favour of the novels, though with more reserves than it is quite the fashion to make. The objection rests, we think, upon two assumptions, neither of which is more than partially sound, —that the evils produced by reading are confined to novels, and that there is no positive good to counterbalance the possible ill result. Any exclusive system of reading is undoubtedly injurious to any half-disciplined mind. Give a girl of fifteen nothing but history for two or three years, and her judgment will become as distorted as if she had passed the time in reading the wildest romances. She will not, it is true, imagine heroes with yellow whiskers and wild words of worship, but she will invest historic personages with charms they never possessed, grow enamoured of the great deeds occasionally performed, and consider no man worth anything but those who resemble the exceptional and over-coloured personages upon whom her mind has dwelt. It is as ill to long for Sir Philip Sidney as for Charles Lovelace. Miss Yonge in one of her books, we think the "Heir of Redclyfle," puts this effect very well when she makes her heroine sympathise strongly with. a wild rage into which the hero puts himself because Charles I. is attacked. There are hundreds of girls in England who feel critioism on Charles Stuart as they feel criticism on their brothers, who believe that feeble, intriguing, Italianesque grandson of Rizzio to be a Paladin and a martyr. They may just as well worship John Halifax as their ideal Charles Rex. Exclusive reading of history is in England at least infrequent, but exclusive reading of theology is not, and its effect is at least as bad as that of the novels. There is noth- ing more pitiable in the world than the condition of an English girl nourished on the pabulum provided in some households—on religious biographies, and tracts about the impulses, needs, and temptations of the soul, unable to move for fear of committing some sin, with a conscience debauched by confusion between things indifferent and things sinful, with a finger perpetually placed on her reli- gious pulse. A woman may as well neglect all her duties while waiting for the hero with yellow whiskers as neglect them while waiting for the emotion which she believes will accompany conversion, had far better become discontented through hunger for the novelist's life than despairing because convinced she can never be forgiven by Heaven. The dis- eased conscience is as unhealthy as the diseased imagination, and produces much worse results; the Exstatica is rather less admirable than the Isabel Sleaford. Many people can recall the result of a similar devotion to music, a convict ion that all real real life was insipid compared with the ideal life evoked by the glorious combination of sounds. The mischief is not the kind of reading but the exclusive devo- tion to one kind, no matter what its object or its active machinery. Poor Mr. Weaver in running down Burns and Shakespeare thinks he is simply doing his duty, He is ignorant of the great fact, true of the mental as of boldly physiology, that the constant eating of one dish, however wholesome or however simple of itself, produces disease, that the contempt which he thinks so self-denying and so grand is merely a sympton of mental indigestion. If he looks at the sun only for ten minutes he will be able to see nothing else, but his sight is not the better for that. The other argument is of course more of an a priori kind. It is, however, pretty safe to say that novel-read- ing brings to the ordinary mind at least as much good as ill. As we recently endeavoured to show, reverie is of itself beneficial, and all that novel-reading can produce is reverie about characters and situations imagined by oneself. Isabel Sleaford debarred from dreaming of Edith Dombey would have simply dreamed of Isabel Sleaford in Edith's situations. Suppose that the novels do produce the expec- tation of ideal heroes who never arrive, they also enlarge the standard of what a hero ought to be, confer the expe- rience which the events of life give to the majority of men. John Hailfax is absurd, and to male thinking imbecile, but John Hailfax is not a bad standard by which to test the difference between Robert Smith the wine merchant s heir next door, and James Robinson the mellifluous curate who preaches in the neighbouring church. So with the argu ment as to luxury. A girl may learn from some novels to dream of saloons and gilding, gardens and bright decora- tion, careful tendance and wishes gratified 11 with the bloom on," till she despises the brown, slightly stuffy, very nearly worn-out home rooms,—but the effect of her scorn will not be merely dissatisfaction. It will also be an effort to im prove the surrounding stuffiness, to add what of brightness, and colour, and life is humanly possible to the prosaic origi- nals. The taste is not perhaps elevated by such books, particularly in the matter of upholstery, but the experience is widened, and the mind had better be cognizant of two bad models than of absolutely ncne at all. As to the religious excitement, English girls are pretty sure to get that whether they read novels or not, and an exaggerated external idea is a good deal better than the one evolved by the introver- sion of thought which is the habitual substitute for light reading. Reading of impossible asceticism, such, for ex- ample, as is described in a recent novel in which the hero commits an injustice every hour rather than break a promise given under moral compulsion, at least forces the mind to consider what asceticism means, to realize it in action, and not simply admire or despise it as an abstract virtue or failing. The figures in the novel are, it is true, unreal, but they are not more unreal than the figures of flesh and blood which the girl thinks she understands. The glimpse given by tho novelist of these heroes' inner minds is at least as accurate as the glimpse gained at a party or during a short period of courtship. John Halifax is not more unlike the reality than the John Smith whom Jean thinks she sees is unlike it, and both together are much nearer Nature than either would be apart. Novel reading in short, if not too exclusive, is a kind of experience, and the only real question to be argued is whether experience is worth a woman's having. That is too large a subject for the fag end of an article, but we think sensible mothers, aware that it cannot be wholly avoided, will hesitate ere they prefer the ideals every girl creates for herself to the ideals j her mind may accrete out of many books.- Spectator

THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLE. The Duke of Newcastle is not a man who should be suffered to pass away without a kindly aud appreciative notice. Among all our statesmen no one who deserved so well has left behind him so strong and general an im. pressioon of having been habitually unsuccessful. In nearly all the relations of life, public and private, misfortune seemed to have marked him for her own yet few have been more sincerely and steadily beloved by their friends, and few have served their country with more fidelity or zeal. It is not easy to say to what defects or failures in himself—if to any-the unfortunate tone of his career is to be traoed -probably the cause, if we knew all, would be found more in a sort of unsuitability to the oiroumstauooI ia which he was placed, the persons by WIBM he was surrounded and the peculiar political era ill which his lot was oast, ra het than in any actul fault or slPrtcd.mng in his intellectual or moral nature.. Ho was unlucky at his first entrance into public life f, r he entered Parliament at the very crisis of the Reform agi- tition, and he entered it as member for South Nottingham- shire by the influence and ai the supposed nominee of his father, who had rendered himself especially obnoxious to the liberal part of the coniminity by his famous question in teferonce to his tenant's vltes May I not do what I like with my own?" lie ws unlucky, with his father, in having himself strong, though only slowly-developing liberal tendencies, and in attaching himself to Sir Bob rt Peel, whoso face was just tion keginning to set in a new direction, and whose influence was certain to draw his honest follower more and more away from tho political opiuians an,1 associations of hisiamity. He was unlucky, moreover, in falling upon a period of transitions, who men's views were in a constant proces, of modification, and when events forced unon them a rapidy altering course Of action, such as only the most consummate tact, with a large ad- mixture of what must be terrred "humbug," could save from the appearance of inconsistency and tergiversation while of tact the Duke bad no great endowment^ and of humbug none at alL. He had no brilliant or imposing qualities to make head against the difficulties af such a position, or to render him a ;avourite with the public at large whíl his father quairelled with him for his sur- render of the Corn Laws, ant the Irish members laughed him to scorn when Chief Secretary for Ireland, because his unfortunate reading in the louse of the scarculy legible letter of a correspondent bet-ayed that he did not know (and it was not necessary thrt he should) the name of the county town of May The country has long ago felt inclined to acknowledge and atone for the harshness with which they visited upon him the calamitous break-dovn cf our war administration during the Crimean war. It is now unirersally admitted that he suffered on that occasion for faults not his own, and for the utterly absurd and unmanageable administrative arrangements which he foullt in operation, and which, pro- bably, only the calamitous experience or tiiat war wouiu have enabled us entirely to overthrow. The War Depart- ment at that time was a mere branch of the Colonial Office, and the Duke of Newcastle, who had been appointed to the Colonies, found himself bf a mere accident Minister for War as well. It very soon became obviously necessary to separate the two departments, and the Duke, when the choice was offered him, selected that of War. Probably this was an error for he possessed neither the compre- hensive glance, nor tile commanding will, nor the instinc- tive sagacity in judging men's characters, which suoh a post, at such a time, imperiously required. But he had no avowed or distinct competitor; he had most diligently endeavoured to master the business of the office and he was, perhaps, more in earnest about the war than any of his colleagues, unless, perhaps, Lord Palmerston. He suf- ferred severely and soon for his lack of self-knowledge. The old administrative arrangements, even with such modifications as could be improvised in the midst of a sudden pressure utterly broke down under a task for which they were never adequate but it was the Commissariat and the Land Transport that failed most deplorably, and these branches of the work were, by the old senseless system, entrusted to the Treasury and not the War Office. We believe it is new generally admitted that the worst portion of the failure of that calamitous time was not in the do- partment over which the Duke presided and for which he was properly responsible. It is understood, we believe, that the Duke was more eager than the rest of his col- leagues in urging the expedition to the Crimea, and is in a special manner answerable for that piece of strategy but it is not by any means certain that, if the object of the war was to be secured, that expedition was not in itself a judicious measure, nor that if it was to be successful we could well have sent fewer troops than we did —while it is quite certain that the Duke was almost the only member of the Cabinet Who took a correct or adequate view of the seriousness of the undertaking on which we were entering or of the dimensions which the struggle was likely to attain. Here a^ain, the Duke's evil star attended him. He had a ctearconception of the magnitude of the enterprise on' which Englatid had resolved he had a strong conviction of its righteousness he brought to bear upon it considerable good sense, vast industry, and all the energy which was in him he prepared and suggested many reforms in the un- wieldy system he was called on to administer ;-but mis- fortune came so quick and thick upon him that he was turned out of office before he could reap any of the fruits of his improvements and exertions. But the landing in the Crimea was admirably effected the battle of the Alma was a signal victory, and, if followed up on the spot, as the more energetic spirits urged (and as, with more zealous and sanguine allies, it would have been), it seems now nearly certain that Sabastapool would have been taken within three days. Had this course been followed and this result been obtained, it is probable ;that the Duke would have I remained at the head of the War Department; that much of the glory of a magnificently successful enterprise would have settled on his fame that he would have been able t carry out all the administrative improvements be had planned, and would have gone down to posterity as one of the most successful and reforming War Ministers we have ever had. As Secretary of State for the Colonies, we do not know that the Duke was exactly unsuccessful or injudicious, but he was unfortunate. The course of conduct of the Aus- tralians had not been altogether such as they or we oan look upon with unmixed satisfaction for the last seven years, and their controversies with the Home Government have been neither few nor always pleasant. There have also been two New Zealand wars during the Duke's tenure of office but we hesitate to pronounce whether he, or his antagonists were in fault in reference to either set of colonies. Still, the unluckiness of having so many wars and controversies remains the same. Perhaps the only really successful portion of the Duke's Ministerial career was his visit to Canada and the United States with the Prince of Wales, four years ago, when, on mure than one occasion, he showed much firmness and discretion. Probably a more honest statesman than the Duke of New- castle never served any country. tie had very .considerable talents for business, and, with seference to many politioal questions, he displayed great insight and more than com- mon sense. Indeed, we should say that his most noticeable intelleotu.il gift was good sense without any acuteness-a oort of slow sagacity. He was thoroughly in earnest in all he undertook very anxious to get to the bottom of a sub- ject, and resolute that no effort on his part should be wanting to the success of his measures. His main merit was integrity and the most conscientious industry. His main defect was that he was a bad judge of character :—he did not see into a man readily or far, and he did not select his instruments with skilL He made, perhaps, as few personal enemies as Sir G. Cornewall Lewis and he was, we believe, unusually generous and unselfisli.-Ecoitoinist.

LORD STANLEY BE OMNIBUS REBUS. 1 Now that s eecbes about all inings ana some otners are in season we have no right to complain of Lord Stanley's comprehensive survey of the affairs of the world in its five great divisions He travels fast, does not stop too long anywhere and gives his views with great clearness and precision He is not unsparing, for we have to thank him for his mer in not having touchod upon education, the revised codecYand the conscience clause; also for having refrained from any part in the angry wars of the Church. Lord Stanley commences with America, and has no hope of an early close of the war, neither party being yet half beaten. I-Îe thinks the Federals will in the end succeed in Occupying and overrunning the South, but that then will begin the great difficulty of the 11 habendum," the problem how to have and to hold six or seven disaffected millions by twenty millions. The situation will be that which the French well describe by the figure of having the wolf by the ears, with the choice only of suffering from letting him go or of continuing the distressing attitude of holiling him. Lord Stanley thinks that the principles of good, or indeed of any government are likely to suffer most from this war, and the sequel he contemplates. He thinks lightly of the drain of men and money. in a country of such immense resources. And amongst its resources, first to be resorted to, may be renudiation- I. is easy to promise to pay, and easier still not to pay. There will be no difficulty about the question whenever it oomes to the pinch. From North America Lord Stanley passes to Italy and the Roman question, the solution of which will, bethinks, ba promoted by the arrangement made by France. The Pope left to his own resources cannot long be an obstacle to the wishes of Italy; but Lord Stanley cannot comprehend the extreme importance the Italians attach to the possession of an unhealthy decaying town possessing no military or commercial advantages, and with nothing to recommend it but an historical name. It is the old story, the angtilus ille, without which nothing will square, and there can be no content. In Germany Lord Stanley expects great changes before long, the Confederation having broken down, and the dream of unity having become an impossibility. He hopes and expects the disappearance of the petty sovereignties. Lord Stanley then passes to the East, and it seems to us that nothing can be sounder tha i his opinion upon our nursing and coddling of the sick man, with all his vicious cravings and obnoxious practices: -11 I believe the breaking up of the Turkish Empire to be only a question of time, and probably not a very long time. The Turks have played thpir part inihistOrY they have had their day, and that is over; and I confess I do not understand, except it be from the influence of old diplomatic traditions, the determination of our older statesmen to stand by the Turkish rule whether right or wrong. I think we are making for ourselves ene- mies of races which will very soon become in Eastern coun- tiies dominant races, and I think we are keeping back countries by whose improvement we, as the great traders of the world, shall be the great gainers, and that we are doing this for no earthly advantage, eitbor present or prospective. I admit that England has an interest, and a very strong one, in the neutrality of Egypt, and some interest also, although to a less extent, in Constantinople not falling into the hands of a great European Power but, these two points set aside, I can cunceivo no injury arising to Great Britain from any transfer of power which might affect the Turkish Em- pire." Is any one indeed so ignorant of public opinion as to believe that the country which has refused aid to oppressed Denmark would endure another war for the integrity and independence of Turkey ? That Quixotism will not bear repetition. It had its use for once, for the Crimean i.r served to dissipate the alhsion about the power of Kussia, supposed to be gigantic till it was brought to the trial, from the damaging consequences of which it has not yet recovered. The Northern bully has been obliged to lower his tone, and is no longer the dictator to Europe but this gam was nurcbased at a high price, it must be confessed, and what has been taken from the prestige of Russia has been carried to the account of the increased power of France. As usual, our share was the cost, hard blows, and ingratitude and so heartily sicked in the country, that it will never consent to another war such as the last. And small indeed will be its concern for the downfall of Turkey whenever it shall happen, and with it the cessation of the barbarous Mahometan sway, thwarting the progress of civilization in Europe. Lord Stanley strongly disapproves of the attempt to force our convicts upon Australia. Bentham thought transpor- tation unjustifiable on the same grounds. He asked whether it was fair for the maturest and strongest com- munityto transfer to a new and much weaker community the criminals it, with all its power, had "not been able to colitrol. The question is the precise parallel to the Sewage question, and the pollution of streams. As to the flourishing condition of finances, Lord Stanley thinks moi -c is attributed to legislation than is due, aud less t?) the gro%vin-of tile count?y. ?here?here per- bap8. a little Conservative prejudice. And t4ue icglsl?ion which has worked well has not been the lcislation of oricrtn? but of ?-.? a?'- laisses .?'?- It has "?  law-making, but h?repe.Ung. It has remofeJ trammel,s. As fdr 'ctr?ch?. he despairs of an expendiUarn  sixty millions, but think* a million or a rnilliün and a h if may be saved in dockyanl It is in that quarter that the great expenditure lies, bu„ tUG time is coming 'when itwillbe found abso'utely necrss.ry t- oller betterinducements to the ja^ o^hr^l mSi?, | h.d.u the P?se? terDR, The pay of  howe^rj but a Vmall part of tha 11 dittire I' the navy, ?n??'i.n??? ?ou??thL..of 'he viX? wS Not unconnected w ith  is subject of the cost of t4e navy is the persevering folly 0£ OL!r Afrlcan intermeddling ,-Take the thing ca'Loi the Cane Coa't nrotec^otate; That nl1Y Rt any time involve vou in war-it last yea? actually did in,ol"o you in war- with some barbarous chief like the King of Ash ante e, ma country where men die l?ke rotten sheep and riever see the face of an enemy, And what is the return for all that t 1 suspect uncommonly little. The whole subject of theso African settlement? and of the African squadron wants inquiry and 1 am glad to learn that It is about to be taken up in the course of next Session by an independent member My own idea is Hold on to places where ydu èitbet have or where you can develope an important traSc, if abandoning them you would sarrifice that traffic, but do not go inland hdd nothing except where yon can reach by water; keep dear of protectorates and alliances; and recollect that though civililizing Africa may be a very noble idea with those who are willing to undertake it, st i., England ought to be just before she is gpnerous, and we have plenty of that work to do neafer home. Lord Stanley now comes to ..the home question of the franchise, and he comes to it only to evade it It is not now the upper, it is the middle class—the owners of the orpnt.pr nriH. of thr* nnunt.rv, And hv far the most powerful class in it—that exercises political supremacy at the present day. They are not likely to part with it-that is, of theif own free will (at least, if they do, it will be a fact new ir^ the history of this country); and I see no such movement on the part of the working-classes which would be likely to overhear the resistance which might be expected. I do not think the Conservative party have anything to reproach themselves with on that subject. They were expected by Parliament and by the public to make in 1858-9 some pro- posal which should be in the nature of a compromise. They made it, they failed, they withdrew from power. These suc. cessors made a similar attempt they failed also, and they have stayed where they were. Now, my opinions on this question are those which they were in 1859, but if it is to be dealt with at all, it cannot be settled without a dissolution of Parliament, and therefore any persons who wish to have from mo a detailed explanation of what I should or what I should not support will &e perfectly sure to have his oppor- tunity." There is nothing specific here. No intimation of what the speaker thinks advisable and practicable. He contents himself with saying that the middle classes, who have got the power, will not freely give up the monopoly, and that there is no present prospect of a compelled surrender. Mr Gladstone takes another view. He reckons upon a sort of social millennium. People of different classes are to get to know and love and trust each other so well that it will eud with a free gift of a political power from the upper to the lower. But as it is supposed that meanwhile the House of Commons will faithfully represent the people and consult all their interests, we cannot see any moti e for the conces- sion. Out of good will to our neighbour we do not give him what will be of no use to him, and what will not a jot better or change his condition. We do not take him into a partner- ship which will give him no advantage beyond what ho already enjoys. If we give him a spoon it is that he may help himself to some pottage of which he has not now the benefit. But this cannot be the case if the representation and its legislation be ( f the perfection Mr Gladstone des- cribes, leaving indeed nothing to be desired. Why put a fifth wheel to the State coach ? In the political millenium anticipated by Mr Gladstone, as there will be no wrongs there will also be no rights to care about. But as the blend- ing and fraternizing of classes will be rather long coming about, we should like to see a little reform meanwhile even of so admirable a representative system as the present, of which, with all reverence, we may venture to say, est ubi peccat. But to return to the speech of Lord Stanley. There is in it abundant evidence that the interests studied by the speaker, and which guide his conclusions, are interests much higher than the interests of party. Indeed, the speech is much more like a speech of Mr Gladstone than a speech of Lord Derby or of Mr Disraeli. It closes with this programme of the work to be done in the next Session, and with a recommendation to constituencies to see that their representatives do not neglect their duties: We have a vast mass of miscellaneous work on hand quite sum- cient to occupy our attention for years to come. Our law, even after modern reforms, perhaps the most cumbrous and complicated in Europe, wants to be consolidated and simpli- fied. That is a process involving, no doubt, labour at the hands of persons to whom Parliament shall intrust it; but otherwise the task is not especially difficult. We have that extraordinary system of purchased commission in the army, which I firmly expect to see done away with, at least so far as regards the higher grades. We have the question of parish or union rating for Poor Law purposes, and connected with it that intrieate problem the law of settlement. We know that the administration of our public charities is faulty, and I cannot conceive of a better invest- ment for time and labour of a member than would be a Parliamentary inquiry into at least the chief of them, with a vi w to utilize the vast funds at their disposal. We have a licensing system which satisfies nobody, and the reform of which was recommended by a committee of the House of Commons ten years ago. In Ireland and Scotlai.d the laws which regulate marriage arc in a state only fit for a barbar- ous country. It cannot be said that what is called the private legislation of Parliament is in a condition altogether satisfactory, though, as I frankly admit, it is easier to say that than to suggest a remedy. Then our patent laws want amending, if the privilege of granting patents for inventions is to be retained and that itself is a question for very serious discussion. A commission has been issued, and upon which I have the honour to sit, to inquire into the laws relating to capital punishment; and, whatever opinion may exist as to the limits within which such punishment shall be inflicted, I think almost every one agrees as to the incon- venience of having cases tried over again in private at the Home-office after they have been publicly tried by a judge and jury. Well, I might go on almost indefinitely with a list of questions that require to be dealt with or discussed, but these are enough as a sample. You see there is plenty of work which you may put upon us, and I only wish that you, the constituencies, would look a little more sharply after us, and make sure that we do it." It will be observed that some of these proposals are of a very Radical character, and go rather beyond the scope of Mr Gladstone'i liber- ality, with which they generally are in most conformity.— Examiner.

I THE GLaDSTONIC RADICALISM. Mr Gladstone's political creed may be described as a chemical combinatica between the ideas of Oxford and Manchester. In the last of the cycle of sev n speeches with which he delighted Lancashire last week, he explained with some pathos how difficult he had found it as a member for the University of Oxford to harmonize the thoughts of Oxford and of Lancashire. For many long years," he said, it has been my undeserved but happy lot to represent in Parliament one of the ancient Universities of the country. Often and long have I deplored, and sensibly have I felt, the difficulty of keeping together in harmony and efficiency the older and newer pursuits of our Christian civilization." Be- tween civilization as understood by Oxford, and civilization as understood by Manchester, he explained, a generation or two ago there was little sympathy or connection." And even now there is but an imperfect understanding between them which much needs to be rendered wider and more profound. We would not assert that Mr Gladstone is pre- cisely the man to mediate between these different worlds, though he has deep sympathies with both. For we very much doubt whether the teeming and ingenious intel- lect of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, fertile as it is in s ubtle distinctions, finesse of thought, and delicate artistic playfulness, is precisely of the sort to impress Manchester with the advantages of a scholastic training. Much as he has politically in common with Manchester, his modes of conception and expresion are too complex, not broad and emphatic enough, to fasten on the imagination of Lancashire, nor, on the other hmd, do we think that they adequately represent the proper results which Oxfoid culture tends to produce. Mr Gladstone's intellect is so to say furrowed or chased" with Oxford distinctions and subtleties, but they have never run deep enough into him to merge in that ultimate simplicity and unity of conception-in one school or another—which is the most remarkable result of Oxford training on the minds which have exhausted the utmost power of that discipline. There are many representatives of the typical Oxford culture whose modes of thought would find their way much more easily to the hardy understand- ing of Manchester than Mr Gladstone's. For he has grafted what we may call a multitude of the secondary ideas of one particular Oxford school, rather than the ultimate principles of any, on a mass of intellectual tendencies which are indi- genous in the manufacturing districts. But whether Mr Gladstone is the man to interpret Oxford to Manchester, or whether, as we suspect, he is much better fitted to interpret Manchester to Oxford, it is not now to our purpose to in- quire. What we want to discover is how far the type of Radicalism into which Mr Gladstone's powerful mind is steadily drifting differs from the ordinary creed which has hitherto been known by that name. And it is necessary first to notice that even of the old Radical creed there were always too very different branches, —the one proceeding from the proud independence of the capitalist, which distrusted legislation, pleaded for laissez fetire (meaning by laisses fuire free dictatorial power to control labour so far as money can control it), and cared for Parliamentary reform rather as an engine to be used against the special privileges of the" aristocracy than from any deep value for the political dignity and education of the poor;— the other branch of Radicalism proceeding from the political aspirations of the working-men, who have always contem- plated the intervention of legislation between themselves and the power of the purse, and yet have desired triiamen- tary reform for its own sake, to relieve them of Treproach and a disability, quite as much as for any legislative results they have expected from it. The former type of Radicalism has always insisted specially on economy and non-inter. ference in foreign affairs from a real jealousy of the infiu- ence of Government, a strong utilitarian trade feeling, and distrust of the power of any political principles but self- interest. The working-class type of Radicalism, on the contrary, has always been tolerably willing for laush expen- diture, eager for the extension of imperial influence, and credulous of the power of propagandist efforts in the cause of freedom. Thus the two types of Radicalism have had little in common but the name, together with a common profession of dislike for aristocratic prestige and a desire for t Parliamentary reform as the supposed instrument for sap- ping its roots. Now, as the complex network of secondary Conservative ideas (chiefly of ecclesiastical origin) has gradually worn away from the surface of Mr Gladstone's intellect, the type of Radicalism which has manifested itself have been no doubt rather of the former-the capitalist laissez faire kind,—than the latter. The economist's dis- like of intei ference in foreign affairs and jealousy of public expenditure, that distrust lof national propagandist which the complete self-sufficiency of trade and its well-denuea insulation from all the other interests of life produce on the managing capitalist,—that tendency t,) test moral rcs ilts by saccess, — the reverence for dictatorial power, at least with respect to all moral contracts, and that delicacy about weakening it even by remonstrance which the conduct of large commercial transactions ensures,-all crop out occa- sionally in Mr Gladstone with the force of an inherited nature from beneath the modifying influences of his intel- lectual culture. Yell see it in the hard view that he takes of the American contest, which is not only utterly without sympath y with the imperial instincts of a great nation, but also quite irrespective of the rights of the slaves, and as if the qutstion were, for the North, merely one of meddling or not meddling in the affairs of an independent section of the country. You see it again in the root, though not in the mo le, of his constant advocacy of a chastened" mo- desty in the attitude of England towards the rest of the world, her own colonies included. His dislike to a wide territorial empire is a gtowing one. Ho feels that it per- plexes and embarrasses our financial calculations, and ho susoects that it is an inflated ambition to attempt to control go wide a surface from a single centre. The business side of politics influences his creed more than either the purely moral or the imaginative side. i On the other hand, Mr Gladstone s Radicalism is essen- t tially modified from the Lancashire, or what we have called the capitalist type, by two disturbing causes, his inventive and discursive intellect, and his Christian sentiment. It would be impossible for Mr Gladstone to acquiesce complete- i tv in t.he hard bare doctrine of the laisses jaire economical séhool, which reduces the State to a mere body-and-goods insurance society, and looks upon working-men as ma- chines with the power to make contracts. lio knows that thig is false economy. Ho feels that it is false doctrine. Ho has a ? ?ater respect for the State and its power of modi. :f? the relations between class and class than the Man- Eer School. In this directs he ? nearer to he Se-e sT type of Radicalism. He can see how he ?.? ?Y o?auize and express the real lItrestB of the ?'.u?y ? Way quite impossible to   I- tii,? iiff,,Pnt deeree of corporals ? >r s». State and iu any other possible or- corpOra.t l' the State anfi inanY Other 1'()-"?ble or- gamzation by the peopl, e^ estimate the moral value of ganlz1böt1 by the neople, all, shown in his Annuities & h and its influence Th' t r etio1ate 0  b? ? ?  f V1l1. o IS ?e Padicalism it1 i direction 0 ? ?o?!6cd iz Gelaah?.ed dtthe I ?,adicalism in i'L.e direction of the type we hav'i *colied the working-men's Radicalism, as .?istinguiBhed from ("at gf the jealous economica l school, But on th6 other band, the dtp Toin of what we have '"But on tb. ether ?nd,t? ??????,?jy called Christian sentimcu,  pacific humanitarian Christian ethics, in his mind, 1. not on prin- feeling which makes him shrink from all ,"tP" ciple, but by instinct, which again when he haS makes him writhe painfully under the duty of prosecutiW" it, and which makes him feel the consummation ol a gtiit injustice preferable to resisting it at the cost of blood, —the intellectual refinement which gives him a distaste for the use of physical force as something coarse and vulgar evlt:n when most necessary,—tbo Peelite prudence which over- estimates the risk of a strong policy and under-estimates the risk of a vacillating otie,-all these qualities tend to modify Mr Gladstone's type of Radicalism in the opposite direction to that of the working-class type, and to strengthen in effect while touching with a softer and warmer colouring the policy of the Alatictieiter School. In short, Mr Glad- stone's Radicalism is, in rough type, that of the capitalist class,—eager, active, fertile of economies and improvements, caring more for the free scope of energy and capacity than. for the protection of feeble individual rights such as those of the slave. But the hardness of the outline is modified considerably both by intellect and sentiment. It is in its picturesque effect as different from Mr Cobden's as the iron outline of the horizon in a March east wind from the blue distance of a summer sky. His reverence for the State- closely connected with his reverence for the Church-brings him nearer to the working-class; his somewhat feminine Christianity and deficiency in sympathy with rude popular justice, takes him further in the opposite direction. But considered as a whole his Radicalism, though not perhaps of the most masculine type, has a more refined, a more delicate, a more intellectual essence, than any of the somewhat harsh and narrow creeds which have hitherto gone by that name. -Spectator.

JUNIUS AND NEWSPAPER WRITING. If the best newspaper writing of the present age surpasses the writing of Junius, the public is very much to blame both for its want of curiosity about the authorship of leading artioles, and for being generally oontent with one reading. How many times was Junius read by the edu- oated and intellectual men of the last genefation ? How many passages were learnt by heart ? No such compliment has been paid to any newspaper writing of the present century. Sufficient for the day is the merit thereof. And if writing be so immensely improved, how is it that the public appreciation of it, and interest in its authorship, have not kept pace with the progress? Is it that Juniuses are so common now-a-days that no one asks questions about them ? But Junis was not really a newspaper writer. He wrote, indeed, in a newspaper, but without the hard condition of a newspaper writer. He took time to prepare his essays, and to polish the style to the highest degree. He had his choice of subjects, and could touch and retouch his composition till he satisfied his nice judgment. Regular newspaper writing, generally against time, is very different sort of work. It must be off hand, pro re nata, struck off at a heat, and with little opportunity for correction and emendation. The pre- paration must be in the mind beforehand, not in any stage of the hasty performance. The task being so much more arduous than that of the writer who composed and corrected at leisure, the newspaper writer who could equal Junis would be very much his superior in the powers of author- ship. But we thinks that Junius stands unequalled, and must reruain unequalled, by any writer, whatever his genius or accomplishments, who labours under the disadvantages of a daily or weekly press, requiring prompt performance and allowing little room for second thoughts and the polishing hand. It is wonderful in such circumstances that the wri- ting is so good, that the rough cast has so little that lacks mending and smoothing but, as the Greeks say, it is a grievous thing to be over praised," and let us deprecate this wrong to newspaper composition. At the Manchester meeting Mr Gladstone observed :—The great organs of the press, as you well know, are conducted by some of the most accomplished minds of the country. Many of those articles written in those papers before the repeal of the paper duty were worthy of taking a place in the permanent literature of England. I well remember being in company with Sir R. Peel, not less than thirty years back, when a question was raised about the author- ship of Junius.' You well remember how great a na- tional as well as a literary sensation was produced at the time by the publication of those letters in point of fact, the intense controversy with respect to the authorship may enable us to measure the importance of those letters as a political phenomenon of the times. But when that question was in discussion in private conversation, the literary merit of the letters themselves was also brought under view, and I well recollect that Sir Robert Peel gave at once his opinion that the letters of Junius were not as well written as the Times. The opinion of Sir Robert Peel was entitled to great weight upon matters of finance, upon details of government, and administrative questions, but he was no literary autho- rity, and we are surprised that Mr Gladstone should have quoted his crude judgment upon such a subject. There was no refinement in the mind of Sir Robert Peel, and we can easily understand its inability to appreciate the keen points and consummate genius of "Junius." Sir Robert Peel was not a sufficiently good writer to be a critical reader, and seldom did a note of his appear without some sin against good taste. He was, indeed, not the man to judge of the tbing in which he was remarkably deficient. Like many other debaters, his speech was far above his writing, but his speech had faults of inelegance. He did not always pronounce the h where it ought to have been pronounced, and he pronounced it where it ought not to have been heard. And, farther, he occasionally slipped into expres. sions belonging to the diction of Mrs Malaprop. It is no disparagement of a main with the powers and attain- ments of Sir Robert Peel to say that the refinements were out of his way, and pure English may have seemed to him insipid. We remember hearing an opinion upon Junius very much like that of Sir Robert Peel, hazarded by a young man in the presence of a true critic, who disposed of it in three words, Read him again." Perhaps, if Sir Robert Peel had read Junius again he would have amended his judgment upon him, for there were few questions upon which he had not held opposite opinions at different times. The comparison between the excellent writing of the Times and Junius is one which no L terary man would have made The Times is written by several hands, with their respective and peculiar styles, which cannot be brought into compirison with the writing of one author. The expression well written" is, however, very vague. It may mean style, or it may mean no more than correctness in grammar and diction. Probably what was in Sir Robert Peel's mind was simply that the writing in the Times pleased him as much as the writing of Juiiius, the very merits of which could neither be found in the treatment of current topics in a newspaper, nor suited to the appropriate handling of a diversity of subjects. What we dislike is the disparage- ment which accords too well with the propensity of the age, and flatters its self-suiffciency. Why cast dotfn Junius from his place in the English classics ? How are we the better for having a standard, a model, the less ? And it is not alleged that the model is faulty, though much might be said on that score, but that it has been equalled by another, which has not the fixed permanent form to mould a taste. Not that we think an immitation of Junius desirable, for he is too artificial a writer, even if imitation were evor good, but his niceties would serve as corrective to the slovenliness which is becoming more and more prevalent, the slipshod style of the very easy writing which is hard reading. We regret that Mr Gladstone did not give us his own judgement upon the merit of Junius instead of screening himself bohind Sir Robert Peel's opinion. If it be true that it is a consolation to have companions in misfortune, the shade of Junius may derive comfort from the fact that the finest political writer of France, Paul Louis Courrier, obtains mention in Lord Stanhope's Life of Conde only as a libeller, or pampleteer, Courrier may have had as much art in his composition as Junius, but if so, he had withal the art to conceal it, and to wear the grace of nature in the most cuttiug exposuies of tyranny and hypocrisy.—Exami- ner.

OUR POLICY TOWARDS GREECE. Another Whig experiment in the art of Government has failed disastrously, and politicians most interested iu its success are at length constrained to admit that the result is unsatisfactory. To the long list of States in which the attempt to apply. the Whig system has disappointed the hopes of its sanguine supporters, Greece must now be a:Jded. We long ago foresaw that no other termination could be expected from such crude and ill-digested schemes, but those who supported Lord Palmerston when he made a display of the power of England in support of the Don Paoitico claim, and those who expressed approval of EarlRussell's efforts for the reconstruction of the Government of that country, si-, lenced every remonstrance. The voice of reason was drowned by their absurd clamours. Constitutional changes, as applied by Whig professors, are, they pretend, the sole remedy for all the evils to which 10rcigix (iOVOIIIMelkts are expoeed.