appear to form a natural division without any effort, exclusive spirit, or feeling of jealousy. Individuals seem naturally to congregate with those who suit them best. There is nothing of the mixture of persons of incongruous stations, habits, and education, which, even according to the most favourable accounts of society in America, must be repugnant to the taste and comfort of individuals bred in the classified society of Europe: and there is no mixture in the same individual of manners and habits drawn from very different sources and situations, and which do not at all harmonize together,—a mixture more commonly found among the English than any other people. There is nothing to pretend to, and therefore no pretence. The one class has no preference above the other, in power, or wealth, or comfort, or influence; and to appear to belong to the one class rather than to the other, could never enter the

mind of any one. The ease and similarity of manners in all persons, rich or poor, and their habitual civility to each other, arise from this equality. They mix together as little as in other European countries. The clergy, the public functionaries, the half-pay officers, the rich, the educated, do not habitually associate with the present proprietors, or the retail dealers in the country. It is a matter of taste and congruity, however, not of any feeling of superiority.

Our entertainment consisted of a procession of about forty sledges, in which we drove a few miles into the country, and had tea and coffee at a public house, and we returned to a ball and sup

per in the village. It was six o'clock in the morning before our gay doings concluded. We had abundance of wine and punch, yet I did not see a single instance of excess among the sixty or seventy persons present. If I had not known that the company was composed entirely of the tradesmen and dealers of the little town, their journeymen, apprentices, wives, and daughters, I should not have discovered it from their appearance or deportment. The ladies were as well dressed, and danced as well, and the gentlemen as considerate and well-bred towards each other, as in any other society. It was evident that it is habitual to this class, as well as to the higher, to behave with propriety in their ordinary family intercourse, and that they had not to assume a set of manners foreign to their usual habits. This class in Norway, not being pressed by competition to give that unremitting attention to business which the same class must give with us, have in fact more leisure, enjoy more social intercourse, and are more polished. Good manners go deeper down through society than in other countries.

The Norwegians are unquestionably a loyal people, attached in the highest degree to their sovereign and his family. There is, however, an excessive jealousy among all ranks of the slightest infringement of their national independence by the sister kingdom of Sweden. This spirit, which was probably excited by the weak and abortive attempts to amalgamate the two countries, displays itself sometimes on the most trifling occa

sions. The great coats lately issued to a Norwegian regiment happened to have yellow buttons instead of white as formerly. Yellow is the national colour of Sweden; and this was seriously noticed as an attempt at amalgamation. On the official

seal of some Swedish department, and on some coins lately struck in Sweden, the arms of Norway, a lion, are quartered with those of the province of Gothland, a flowing river, under the arms of Sweden; just as the Hanoverian horse and Irish harp are quartered on some of our coins under the English arms. This, which probably arose from the fancy or taste of the seal engraver and designer, was reported and resented from one end of Norway to the other, and will probably influence the spirit of the next Storthing. The Norwegians use a distinct commercial flag, but daily regret that they have no separate commercial relations and diplomatic representatives abroad. The inferior place which their national devices, as the flag, the arms, and the style, occupy in all situations in which the junction of the kingdom with Sweden brings them together, is a subject of constant annoyance. The Swedish government shows many childish and impotent indications of dislike to the constitution and independence of Norway. It is not by such a spirit that the amalgamation, even if desirable, could be promoted. The 17th of May is the anniversary of the adoption of the Norwegian constitution. It is celebrated at home and abroad by every Norwegian. But the troops, and the public officers immediately under the control of the ex

ecutive government, exhibit on that day no appearances of public rejoicings. The officers, however, not under the control of the executive, as those of the custom-houses, display then the national flag. The glaring opposition and disrespect to the national feelings is deplored by all wise and moderate men, who are the more firm in resisting even the smallest innovation proposed from such a quarter. This spirit displayed by the Swedish cabinet has consolidated the Norwegian constitution more perfectly in twenty years, than could otherwise have been done in two hundred; for opposition naturally begets opposition, and when applied fruitlessly, begets an increased determination to hold fast to rights. It is an idle dream on the part of Sweden to expect that, by such means, a nation consisting of but one class of people is to be amalgamated with, and governed by, one in which a numerous aristocracy and a corporate body of clergy are the legislators.

Among the subjects of great discontent to the Norwegians is one not altogether so unimportant as may at first sight appear. In all public acts, monuments, seals of office, &c., the King is styled Charles XIV. He is undoubtedly Charles XIV. of Sweden, but of Norway Charles III. A case in point is that of James VI. of Scotland; who, upon the union of the crowns, became James I. of England, and after his accession all deeds or acts were under the title of James VI. of Scotland and I. of England. The Swedish cabinet appears, therefore, to be wrong, as far as precedent should regulate,

such matters. If Norway were a feudal country, in which all title deeds to estates ran in the name of the king, such a misnomer might produce in time very great confusion. If even His Majesty had occasion to sue a party in an English court of law, as Napoleon sued Peltier, and sovereigns often prosecute loan contractors and other parties, and if such suit were entered under the style of Charles XIV., king of Norway, it would, probably, occasion the loss of the case. Nay, if a Norwegian subject had occasion to file a bill in the English Court of Chancery, with affidavits made before a Norwegian consul, or other competent authority, whose commission to take such affidavits ran in the name of His Majesty Charles XIV., King of Norway, very great delay and expense, at least, might result to the Norwegian subject. The act of union of the two crowns, and the proof that Charles XIV. of Sweden was also XIV. of Norway, would be required. In the event of naval war in Europe, in which, as in the last, neutral vessels had often claims for detention, unjust capture, &c., pending in the English Admiralty courts, it might occasion great delay, as no court of law could repel such a weighty objection as a mistake in the commission under which the affidavits and certificates that determine the case were taken.

February, 1835.-There is a very simple and very ancient way of assembling the people in this country for public business. A budstick, or message-stick, of the size and shape of our constable's baton, is painted and stamped with the royal arms,