a small but talented body, foolishly adhering to a defunct name, who arrogated to themselves the license of the winds of heaven. Lord Palmerston, who had appealed to the country for support, and who apparently had gained it, and vaunted the result not a little, was smitten, like another Frankenstein, by his own created anomaly. The Conservatives alone could carry on the Government, and they could only do so, according to Parliamentary usage, through the forbearance of the Opposition.

Placed in such a difficult position, and having such a tremendous responsibility laid upon him, Lord Derby, with manly straightforwardness, did not attempt to disguise the weakness of his following. Inferior statesmen would have boasted of their strength, and talked vaguely but cheeringly about their promises of support. He took a very different course. He told Parliament that, in a crisis, or rather a state of disorganisation hitherto unparalleled, he had, by Her Majesty's desire, and for the sake of the country, undertaken to form an administration; and he asked no further favour than that they would judge him impartially and candidly by the acts of his Cabinet. These were, of course, open to criticism and censure. He did not seek to escape the ordeal to which all ministers are exposed. He did not entreat his opponents to spare him because his following was comparatively weak. All he expected was that they should abstain from factious opposition, and from embarrassing by party cabals the only Government which was possible under the existing circumstances.

For a time it appeared as if the House of Commons was really willing to accept and abide by that arrangement. The great bulk of the Liberal party showed, or at all events expressed, no disinclination to give the Ministry a fair trial; and although more than once ominous mutterings were heard from those benches usually occupied by the Whig magnates and ex-officials, which sounded to the attentive listener like preludes of a coming storm, these again subsided. The Whigs were quite ready for mischief, but they

could not all at once communicate that amiable disposition to the Radicals, who were not by any means averse to an extension of the period of their exclusion from office. So angry indeed were the former with the quiet attitude of the latter section of the Liberals, that they began, with their usual dexterity and unscrupulousness, to circulate reports of a private understanding between the chiefs of the Radicals and the Ministry, and to insinuate that Mr Bright had a most extraordinary and unaccountable influence with members of the Cabinet, and a singular knowledge of its plans!

If the Ministry had contented themselves with doing very littlefor pursuing which course of conduct they might have appealed to Whig precedents-if they had exhibited few symptoms of vitality, and performed nothing beyond the bare ordinary functions of a Government-we do believe that they might have held office for a considerable period without being seriously molested. But they had far too high a sense of duty to follow so ignominious a course, There was much work before them, not only of that kind which is constantly arising out of the political exigences of the day, but heavy arrears caused by the unskilfulness, negligence, and procrastination of their predecessors. They addressed themselves to the performance of that work with a degree of zeal, energy, and success which has been rarely equalled. They undertook practical and useful, not theoretical reforms. They infused new life into every department of the public service, so that in a very short time it became apparent that they were far better administrators than the Whigs had ever shown themselves to be. That their diligence, courtesy, and attention won for them golden opinions from all sorts of men, has not been denied even by their bitterest opponents. The leading journal, indeed, even while exercising its influence against them, has been constrained to acknowledge that if judged by their works alone, Ministers are entitled to the public confidence. It is to their faith or political profession that the Times takes objec

tion. We shrewdly suspect that the majority of mankind will hardly coincide with the able publicist in his estimate of the relative value of profession and works in connection with terrestrial matters. We are of the number of those who hold by the ancient opinion that performance is always a much better thing than profession-that the man who does his duty is at all times, and in every place, a more profitable servant than his fellow who merely talks about it. Fluellen could not have uttered such brave words and sonorous crambo as flowed from the lips of Ancient Pistol at the bridge; but he went into the thick of the fight, when the pick-purse was skulking in the rear. Recent occurrences have taught us to look with some suspicion on those protesting gentry. We have seen managers of banks who inaugurated the opening of their fraudulent concerns with prayer, and eminent city men who enjoyed a reputation for superior sanctity and godliness, condemned to prison and the hulks for nefarious swindling practices. We have also known instances in which statesmen, whose political faith the Times would doubtless uphold as highly orthodox, have shown themselves exceedingly tardy in performing that which they had promised with alacrity, and even precipitation. Therefore if the merit of works, that is, of a proper, conscientious, and diligent discharge of their duty, be accorded to Ministers, the metaphysical objection, we apprehend, can have very little weight. It is in truth not one whit more tenable than the reason which was assigned by the Athenian voter for ostracising Aristides, when he admitted that he had nothing to urge against the man, beyond a certain disgust engendered by hearing him applauded for his justice. Let the publie note well and remember this. When, in 1852, Lord Derby formed a Ministry, there arose from the Liberal ranks a derisive shout at the alleged incapacity of the men who were selected to fill the various offices. The red-tape veterans sneered at them as ignorant pretenders who knew nothing of the craft of statesmanship, and declared that they were not competent to conduct the public business for a single week.

one.

That administration was but a short It was terminated within ten months from its commencement by a combination of the opposing forces; but within that brief period the Conservatives had proved to the country not only that they were fully competent to discharge the ordinary functions of government, but that they were bent upon introducing salutary practical reforms which their predecessors had evaded, and were determined that every department of the public service should be brought into the highest state of efficiency. So well, indeed, did they perform their duty, that the Liberal party took alarm lest those same ignorant pretenders who had gained admission to the temple of office without pronouncing their peculiar shibboleth at the door, should ingratiate themselves too much with the public, and that they should suffer by the contrast. For years they had been trying to persuade the country that a Tory government was impossiblethat if it was attempted everything must go to utter wreck and ruinthat tyranny, jobbery, and corruption of the grossest kind were the certain consequences-that the liberties of the people were in danger, and much more to a similar effect. appeal to the recollection of every man if such were not the results which were predicted for the country if Lord Derby should accede to office. He did accede, and within ten months they were fain to combine and sink mutual differences in order to eject him and his colleagues from office, not because those predictions had been fulfilled, but because the Government was rapidly becoming more popular than was at all convenient. The intrigue succeeded; the Derby ministry was displaced; and Lord Aberdeen ruled over a Cabinet composed of men of all shades of political opinion. The immediate result was the Russian war, and that manifestation of official helplessness which so roused the wrath of the nation. We do not wish to remove the sheet which has been decently spread over a mangled and unsavoury subject. We shall not ask the public to recall the sensations of disgust created by the unparalleled nepotism of that ex

We

alted liberal Lord Panmure-or those of pity not unmixed with contempt which rewarded Lord John Russell for his sorry diplomatic appearances. We shall not do more than allude to Lord Palmerston's playful phantasmagorial glimpse of a Reform Bill which was never drawn, or his introduction into the Cabinet of an Irish peer, who had much better have reinained elsewhere. Out of such materials, however and we have not enumerated or glanced at a tenth part of them-we might, without resorting to the art of the special pleader, frame such a case, fortified by such powerful evidence, that no really unprejudiced man could deny our conclusion that the Derby administration in 1852, was much superior in point of administrative talent, zeal, honesty, and reformation of abuses, to those of which Lords Aberdeen and Palmerston were respectively the heads. Without any elaborate case, we ask if this is not substantially true? Let any man, whatever be his politics, think over the transactions of the last seven years, and we are confident that his opinion will coincide with ours. Well, then, is it the will or wish of the country that those who have governed and can govern well, should be displaced to make room for men who have shown that they cannot govern?

That is the real issue to be tried. The Whigs of course will deny it, for they reckon upon an immediate accession to power, and are as restless as squirrels when the filberts are ripening in autumn. The advanced Liberals-such of them at least as are sincere, and not mere Whigs in disguise will not admit it; and why? Because good government is not their object; they wish to Americanise our institutions. In that they will never succeed. The old tree is far too deeply rooted to be overthrown by any effort of theirs. If it did fall, they would be crushed by the weight of its descending boughs. The thing is demonstrable, and ought to be apparent to every man of common sense without the ceremony of a demonstration. Our social state is pyramidal. It rests upon the foundation of the working-classes, which is far the broadest, and gradually

tapers upwards towards the pinnacle. Give the lower strata the power to move effectually, and you create or invite an artificial earthquake which may bring down the whole edifice in ruin. The leading Democrats—we intend no offence by the phrase-are for the most part men of capital who employ many workmen. Supposing manhood franchise to be the rule, each workman would, politically, have the same influence in returning a member to the House of Commons as his master. If master and man were agreed, all might go pleasantly enough. When wages were high, and all things comfortable, the master manufacturer might walk to the poll with a following behind him far more numerous than that of any Highland chief in the bygone age of feudalism, and, by inscribing his name first, might derive glory from the length of his tail. But are the interests of master and man, of employer and labourer, identical? It is no sufficient answer to say that they ought to be identical; for we are not living in Utopia, but in a busy world where passion, and prejudice, and self-interest, sway the thoughts and the actions of men, and create mutual suspicion. We all know that they are not identical. Is it possible to forget or overlook those combinations of the working-classes which, under the form of STRIKES, ever and anon paralyse the operation of almost every branch of industry throughout the land? We have seen strikes among the cotton-spinners, the ironfounders, the colliers, and the miners. Among the smaller trades, strikes are so common that it is a rare thing when none can be specified. Bricklayers, printers, tailors, shoemakers, all know by practical experience what is the significance and effect of a strike, what heart-burnings it engenders, and what enormous losses it occasions. That these are great social evils no one has attempted to deny, and yet few will be bold enough to assert that they can be remedied by direct legislation. It is impossible to regulate wages, to dictate arbitrarily to the employer what he shall give, or to restrain the demands of the workman. The mere attempt would bring us at once within the

pale of Communism; and even a partial realisation of the idea would be utterly ruinous to the empire. Let, however, the system of manhood suffrage, or any other which will give the working-classes the preponderance of political power, be adopted, and mark the result. From the day when that shall take place, the mutual relations of the employer and the workman will be changed. The latter will be able to dictate wages; the former must either withdraw his capital and abandon his occupation or submit. An absolute majority of electors of the same class will, to a certainty, return representatives pledged to what they consider their own immediate interests. It cannot be otherwise. The Act of 1832 gave the monopoly of political power in many places to the tradesmen and shopkeepers; and the framers of that Act were very sanguine that, in gratitude for such a boon, the electors would thereafter make choice of such candidates only as should be acceptable to the leaders of the Whigs. What was the consequence? For a period, but a very short one only, the wishes of the Whigs were gratified; the reaction, however, soon came, and the electoral majorities, obeying their natural instincts, shook off the yoke of the Whigs, treated them with absolute contumely, and returned as members to Parliament men of their own class and occupation. Take Edinburgh as an example. It enjoys a high intellectual reputation, it possesses a famous university and flourishing schools, and it is of further importance as being the centre of the courts of law. The Edinburgh Whigs, especially the lawyers, took a very prominent part in the agitation which preceded the passing of the Reform Act of 1832. They were in fact the leaders of the movement in which the citizen shopkeepers played only a subordinate part. When, therefore, the Act had become law, and two members were allotted to Edinburgh, the Whigs naturally enough considered these seats as peculiarly their own, and they resolved henceforward to return only men of eminence. The first members were Francis Jeffrey, then

Lord Advocate, and the Right Honourable James Abercromby, afterwards Speaker of the House of Commons. The next candidate proposed and carried was Sir John Campbell, then the English Solicitor-General. After him came the Right Honourable Thomas Babington Macaulay, with whom was associated a gentleman who has always commanded the respect and esteem of the whole community, Sir William GibsonCraig. Such were the political arrangements of Edinburgh down to the year 1847. The members returned were all Whigs of eminence -men who were well qualified, from intellect, official rank, and social position, to represent any constituency, and to them no exception could be made. They were not, however, always returned without a contest. The Conservative party deemed it their duty to make an early trial of strength, but the result showed them that they had no chance against the serried array of the Whig lawyers and citizens. These contests led to a close inspection of the register, and, as was afterwards discovered, an elaborate classification of the electors according to their occupations, political opinions, and polemical tenets, for objects which very soon became apparent.

Thus far the alliance of the citizens with the Whig party had remained unbroken, but there were evident symptoms of restiveness on the part of the former. They had no absolute objections to urge against the candidates offered to them by the Whigs, but they complained that they had too little share in the preliminary deliberations. They alleged, truly enough, that everything was arranged "in the Parliament House" that is, by the lawyerswithout concert with the Council Chamber. They also hinted, with what truth we know not, that since the Whigs had been helped into office, the lawyers of that political persuasion had not been nearly so affable as they were in the days of the reform agitation-that they gave themselves airs which were both ludicrous and offensive-that they invariably took precedence and en

grossed the monopoly of talk at public meetings with many other charges and insinuations of the like kind touching the arrogance of the Liberal portion of the noblesse de la robe, the pert rustling of whose bombazeen was becoming odious to the civic ear. Custom, however, exercises a wonderful power in controlling rebellion. People will grumble a long time before they pluck up courage to become really demonstrative. Once let the horse be used to bit and bridle, and he will trot along cannily enough without rearing, if you do not curb him too tightly, But the Edinburgh Whigs committed the mistake of supposing that the urban hackneys whom they had so long bestrode were leather-mouthed, whereas they were in reality extremely tender about the jaws. The riders did not remember, or had not the wit to perceive, the deep moral conveyed in Lieutenant Jinker's lamentations for his fallen captain, the valiant Laird of Balmawhapple. "He had tauld the laird a thousand times that it was a burning shame to put a martingale upon the puir thing, when he would needs ride her wi' a curb of half a yard lang; and that he couldna but bring himsell (not to say her) to some mischief, by flinging her down or otherwise; whereas, if he had had a wee bit rinnin' ring on the snaffle, she wad hae rein'd as cannily as a cadger's pownie." As ill luck would have it, the Whigs rejected the snaffle, persisted in using the curb, and so the accident occurred.

Gifted with many brilliant qualities as an author and an orator, Mr Macaulay lacked the art of making himself popular as a man. At first the Edinburgh constituency was well pleased to be represented by so distinguished a character; and a very little exercise of care and attention would have made him secure of a seat so long as he chose to occupy it. But Mr Macaulay did not relish personal intercourse with tenpounders. He belonged or affected to belong to that haughty section of the Whigs, who, imitating the aristocratic grandeur of their Corypheus Earl Grey, hold themselves aloof from vulgar contact, and sickened at

the breath of the multitude. He rarely visited Edinburgh, took no active interest in its affairs, was not at the beck of every town-councillor, and seldom spoke in the House of Commons. Let us say in justice to him that he was much better employed. He was then writing his History.

Were the malcontent citizens to blame if, when saddled at the bidding of the oligarchical Parliament House to carry a member who would neither visit them, eat with them, drink with them, nor speak with them, they grew restive, reared tremendously, and at last threw off the burden? We cannot say that they were. Their patience had been too much tried-their vanity had been terribly galled. They made the effort and succeeded. The Parliament House lost for ever the nomination to at least one of the seats for the metropolis of Scotland. At the general election of 1847, Mr Macaulay was defeated; and Mr Charles Cowan, a respectable citizen and manufacturer, was sent to Parliament in his stead.

Somewhat later Edinburgh repented, and reinstated Mr Macaulay, who took the honour very coolly, and did not mend his ways in consequence. The citizen party then resolved to appropriate the other seat also, and succeeded in returning Mr Adam Black, another citizen, to represent them along with Mr Cowan.

We have given this short sketch of the political history of Edinburgh for the purpose of proving our assertion that in every large constituency that class which commands an absolute majority, will return representatives of their peculiar interests, and will, when that is possible, choose the representatives out of their own number. The ten-pound citizen shopkeepers of Edinburgh form an overwhelming majority of the constituency.

If manhood suffrage were adopted, or if in any other way the workingclasses should obtain a preponderance of political power, they would in like manner return men to represent their immediate interests ouly, in which case direct taxation would be imposed to such an extent that confiscation would be the apter term, and