with a party of shoemakers, and pledged them. This story is alluded to in the old play, "George à Greene, the Pinner of Wakefield" (1599), when Jenkin says:: 66 Marry, because you have drank with the King, But you and yours, to the world's end, Dodsley's Old Plays, vol. iii. p. 45. To our thinking, it seems at least equally probable that this complimentary epithet was bestowed upon the shoe-making craft in commemoration of the victory at Agincourt, which was gained upon the day of its patron saints, Crispin and Crispinian, October 25th. This is, in every Here, however, we have reached our tether's length. point of view, a work of high merit; it has afforded us much enjoyment, and we heartily wish it a most abundant success. ALISON'S HISTORY OF EUROPE. In these pages we have England from 1841 to 1852, but with comments relating to several later years; France from 1841 to 1848; Italy, 1848-9; Germany, 1848-50; Austria and Hungary, 1848-9; and China and the East from 1841 to 1856. Copious are the fields to expatiate upon, and momentous the events in every quarter, and pregnant with many mighty changes for good and evil were the foundations laid within this period for the future destiny of the world. Take it how we may, it offers immense and instructive pabulum for earnest study and anxious application. We set out with England in a miserable condition in 1841; Peel and the Corn-law debates, and the Income tax to avert the financial ruin, occupy large space; in the midst of which we are told that on the very evening when the Minister pronounced his "eloquent appeal (in support of the tax), he had received the accounts of the death of Sir W. Macnaghten and the Affghanistan disaster. Veiling with heroic courage his knowledge of the calamity under a calm exterior and a serene visage, he addressed the assembly as if nothing had occurred to break the even tenor of his way, instead of intelligence having been received of the greatest disaster in British annals." Save us from eulogy. The author's most intense condemnation of the character and concealments of Sir Robert Peel does not strike us with the bitter force of this praise of his "heroic courage," his calmness, and serenity under all the circumstances of his immediate object and this pitiable tragedy. By a calculating apathy, as the author describes it in regard to other concerns, Sir Robert carried the ruinous Bank Act; helped forward the Railway demoralization, which has since tainted to a climax our manufacturers, merchants, bankers, joint-stock company directors and secretaries, and traders of every sort; and, by surreptitiously putting himself at the head of the League, outraged his principles and friends, broke up the Conservative party, which had carried him to his lofty position, and inspired that political gratitude which in six months History of Europe from the Fall of Napoleon in 1815 to the Accession of Louis Napoleon in 1852. By Sir A. Alison, Bart. Vols. VII. and VIII.” induced the unadorned Demosthenic Cobden and the Liberals to combine with the Whigs and ultra-Protectionists to turn him out. On the same night on which the Lords passed the Corn-law Repeal Bill, its originator and his Cabinet were ousted by a division of 292 to 219, a majority of 73 against them in the House of Commons. We have a full description of the Irish famine with all its horrors, from which, between 1846 and 1850, 600,000 human beings perished; whilst from 1846 to 1855 above 1,800,000 emigrated, which calamities are ascribed to the Free Trade legislation. Such an exodus is no doubt unparalleled in history, and our author prints it in capitals that "in ten years after the introduction of Free Trade, and the commencement of the famine, the population of Ireland had diminished by 2,500,000 souls." That there were enough left for O'Brien's ridiculous rebellion is a melancholy and mortifying fact; but that affair, as well as the miserable evanishing of the great Chartist meeting on Kennington Common, and the panic of 1847, we must leave to the taste of omnivorous readers. Before bidding good-bye to old, shattered England, however, we may repeat a remark in the preceding part of our review, viz., that the "Sheriff of Lanarkshire" continues to figure as a very important personage in the discussion of sundry large national questions. It is a weakness of vanity quite unworthy of a philosophical writer, and especially one of such deserved eminence. Neither Hume nor Robertson quoted their private experiences, nor referred to Little Peddlington matters to illustrate universal concerns. Far more to the purpose, and, indeed, of the utmost intrinsic importance, are the multitude of great statistical tables and other documents with which the author has supported his text. They are a perfect treasure for information and reference; any half page of them worth more than the elaborate piece of fine sentimental writing which, in the real book-making or reporter style, is wasted upon the funeral of the tersest of speakers and writers, Arthur Duke of Wellington. As an example of this division of our subject, we select a passage which led to the advent of Lord Derby to his short-lived ministry in 1852, and which is a fair specimen of the author : "It is remarkable that the question upon which the government was most decidedly in the wrong, was the one on which they ultimately went to issue with their opponents, and on which a change of ministry for a brief period soon after took place. It is still more remarkable that this change took its origin, not in consequence of a defeat on any of the great questions of the day, but of a matter personal to one of the cabinet ministers. Lord Palmerston, who had so long conducted the foreign affairs of the country, had become so much elated by the triumphant majority which had carried him through on the Greek question, that he was not only complained of by his colleagues for carrying on matters in his department too exclusively of his own authority, but even fell under the censure of his sovereign for not making her sufficiently acquainted with important public measures, and altering some state papers in material passages after they had been submitted to her approval. In addition to this, the Premier complained of some expressions used by the Foreign Secretary to the Hungarian refugees, as likely to disturb the peace of Europe, and of a conversation held by him with the French ambassador in London, regarding the coup-d'état of December 2, 1851, repugnant to the tenor of the instructions sent by the government to their ambassador at Paris, which was to abstain from all interference whatever in the affairs of France. The result was that Lord John Russell felt it his duty to recommend to her Majesty to remove Lord Palmerston from office, which was accordingly done, and Lord Granville was appointed his successor. "So far Lord John Russell was successful in maintaining the system of non-interference in the affairs of foreign nations, which was the only true policy for the country, and getting quit of a rival in the cabinet, whose abilities he perhaps had some reason to dread. But he had an experienced and skilful antagonist to deal with. Lord Palmerston ere long had his revenge. Notwithstanding the extreme reluctance of the majority of the House of Commons to any augmentation of the army or navy estimates, the government felt so strongly the perilous position in which the country was now placed in presence of the sovereign of France, whose intentions were as yet unknown, that they felt it absolutely necessary to adopt some measure which might in some degree strengthen the national defences. Accordingly, on 16th February, 1832, Lord John Russell brought in a bill, the object of which was to establish a local militia of 70,000 men in England, in addition to a trifling addition of 4,000 infantry and 1,000 artillery to the regular army. The troops were only to be called out for a few weeks in the year, and in the first instance the cost would be only £200,000 a-year. In the second year, however, the force was to be raised to 100,000, and in the third to 130,000, still, however, on the footing of a local militia. Lord Palmerston, who, notwithstanding his daring foreign policy, was fully alive to the defenceless state of the country, and was more conversant than the prime-minister with the necessity of permanent embodiment towards the formation of an efficient military force, moved as an amendment, that the word 'local' should be left out of the bill, besides other alterations of a less important character. The object of this was to render the proposed militia a permanent force, differing from the line only in not being bound to serve out of the country. Probably Lord John Russell was too well versed in history not to know that this species of force was much more likely to be efficient than the other; but he stood too much in awe of the members for the manufacturing towns, and deemed the finances of the country not sufficiently recovered from their long-continued depression to acquiesce in the amendment. He resisted it, accordingly, with the whole weight of government; but a coalition having been formed between the conservative opposition and Lord Palmerston's personal friends, the Premier was thrown into a minority, on a division, of 9, the numbers being 135 to 126. Upon this, Lord John Russell threw up the bill, assigning as his reason for doing so, that the vote of the House was substantially one of want of confidence in the administration, and that he could no longer conduct the government when he had lost the power of carrying its measures. The result was that the whole ministry resigned."―(Vol. viii. pp. 823-825.) Perhaps we have been tempted to the selection of this quotation from its being almost a droll contrast to existing appearances, when we witness these two accomplished gladiators upon the stage (rather countenancing Sir A.'s canon of political immorality) as twin challengers of the whole circus, the very bullies of the Pancratium, or floor of the House, where, as in Rome, temp. Caligula, the new style became popular, and it was held quite fair to contend à l'outrance by wrestling, blows, kicking, and every other punching, knock-me-down art in the science of demolishing an adversary. Our next main topic is France. While, in 1841, England was oppressed with ailments, France was well to do, and prospering under the pacific rule of Louis Philippe. The bourgeoisie had extemporised a king, and he reigned for them; but it does not do to reign for only one class, however respectable. Discontent had been growing, and proletaires, and socialists, and communists, and others beneath the middle line, held it to be unfair to them that the bourgeoisie should have it all their own way, and engross everything that was worth the having. And what added fuel to this flame was the notoriety that corrupt influence was almost the sole resource of the government-the be-all of its system, and in which they had no participation. Such a plan was, perhaps, never before carried to such an extent, at once provokingly exclusive, and vilely inclusive, in the management of mankind. No wonder that the recipients within the pale were not trustworthy, and the non-recipients out of the pale revengeful. The peers were nobodies and powerless; and the majority in the Chamber of Deputies was only held together by the most lavish and profligate corruption, of which scandalous examples were brought to light every day : "The needy circumstances of the greater part of the deputies, and the universal thirst in France for official appointments, was (were) the main cause of this discreditable state of things; both were the direct consequences of the revolution. The great territorial and mercantile fortunes having been destroyed by that convulsion, while at the same time the colonies and outlets in trade and manufactures had, for the most part, been swept away, nothing remained for the rising youth of the country but government appointments, either in the civil or military line. To secure these for themselves, their relations, dependants, or constituents, was the chief object which men proposed to themselves by going into parliament; and the success which attended the step to several, was sufficient to excite an universal thirst for these highly advantageous situations." This was a precious condition, so precious that the author adds, "all the world being so thoroughly disposed to engage in the same practices, and the fortunate intrants being the object, not only of political animosity, but of personal envy,❞—the witches' cauldron boiled over. And the effrontery was equal to the baseness: "The most vehement declaimers against the corruption of the legislature, both in the press and in the Chambers, the loudest approvers of the purity of election, were themselves the most abject petitioners for favours, and not unfrequently the most successful in obtaining them. The system of buying off the Opposition by offices, as well as going into Opposition in order to be so bought off, was brought to even greater perfection on the south than it had been on the north of the Channel. One Opposition chief, who had been particularly loud in a circular to his constituents against the traffic in places, had modestly demanded only THIRTY-FIVE for himself and his brother. Another, equally virtuous and indignant against the prevailing vice, had actually solicited THREE HUNDRED AND FOUR PLACES for himself, his family, and constituents. A third deputy went still further; he had actually obtained THIRTY-FIVE places for himself and his friends, and he had the effrontery to move for an electoral inquiry into the corruption practised by the Government; and on 22nd February 1848 he signed the demand for a formal accusation of the Ministers from whom he had received such favours. a word, it was difficult to say whether the King's Government or the King's Opposition was most thoroughly steeped in corruption, or most ready to sacrifice everything to the attainment of the grand object of universal ambition, the gaining or retaining of offices under the Ministry. The great extent to which this tendency proceeded in France, under the system of uniform suffrage which there prevailed, suggests a doubt whether it can by possibility be checked by any other mode than a representative system, based on different interests, which may set one selfish motive to counteract another."-(Vol. vii. pp. 507, 508.) In Fraud and malversation rioted in every department of the government, from the national treasury to the arsenals, dockyards, custom-houses, army and navy offices, all contracts, and wherever the revenue could be intercepted, or money purloined or stolen. There was hardly a public functionary who was not a rascal, and the disclosures for ever welling up to the surface were flagrant enough to exasperate a people fifty times more phlegmatic than the natives of France. The details furnished by the author are odious and disgusting; our electoral iniquities now shaming the annals of Parliament and disgracing the candidate-apostles of pure legislation, are but trumpery blemishes when compared with the universal ulcerous state of revolutionised and constitutional France. The next "revolution of contempt" was a natural result. But before the crisis many things occurred which influenced it, its shape, and consequences; the wars in Algiers producing a crop of able generals, the death of the Duke of Orleans, and the escape of Prince Louis Napoleon from Ham, may be mentioned among them, though they were only the prologue to an entirely new and different tragi-comic-historic play. Of the latter incident it is worth notice, as of other prophetic dicta (to which we may by and bye refer for the danger of risking them) the "National" newspaper said, "As the escape can never come to prejudice any one, we congratulate those upon it whom it immediately concerns." Ah! short-sighted mortals, short-sighted "National;" it is not given to many seers to peep any way ahead through the blanket of the dark. And neither Louis Philippe nor his advisers, though the sagacious Guizot was their chief, could à priori apprehend the approaching calamity, which unbounded corruption and 160,000 places to bribe with could no longer delay. The intrigue for the Spanish marriages, a breach of pledged faith, lost the king the moral support of England, and caused the entente cordiale to grow "small by degrees and beautifully less;" the shameful kidnapping of Abd-el-Kader, in defiance of the terms of his surrender; the exposures and punishment of so many delinquents of high station in the administration of the revenue; and, as a final spark to light the blaze of the accumulated combustibles, the murder of his wife by the Duke of Praslin, exploded the inflammable materials, and fired the volcano into eruption. The decided Republicans, with their Marrasts, Flocons, Ledru-Rollins, Louis Blancs, Blanquis, Proudhons, Barbeses, Raspails, Alberts, Caussidières, speedily swamped the Lamartines, Garnier Pages, Thiers, Odillon Barrots, and others of somewhat more moderate views, and all were swept within the same vortex, and, after chasing the House of Orleans from the country, had a ferocious struggle for the mastery among themselves, which ended in the most violent extreme and the socialist-communists being put down; but not the latter till the funds of the country were exhausted by paying the hundred thousands of idle workmen who did not work in the Ateliers Nationaux. This enormous strike ate itself out. Lamartine's unprincipled coalition with Ledru-Rollin, Sir Archibald tells us, could not materially alter the course of events, but "remains an enduring monument of eternal truth, that dereliction of principle upon a vital question, however speciously supported, never fails to be fatal to the reputation of public men." And so the watchword of "Labour and Progress" could no longer avail, and indeed the coup de grace had been given, especially to the former, when M. Peupin, formerly delegate of the watchmakers, observed, "I am far from blaming the commission of the Luxembourg, and they would err greatly who would say it has been in fault; can those be culpable who have done nothing!" Yet the Ateliers cost 250,000 francs a-day! the number of ouvriers amounted to nearly 120,000, and about 2,000 did a little work, while the rest were at the beck of the clubs to overawe and coerce the government. "Democracy in France," says our author in choice italics, "had been extinguished by universal suffrage," and the battle of the Barricades, of which there were 3,888, all stoutly defended, was fought, and General Cavaignac, an honest Republican we believe, if there was one among them, was dictator. We grumble at the autumnal breaking up of our London streets by gas and water companies, and new laying pavements, but what would we say if we saw these granite paving stones used as breast-works and missiles, and some thousand barricades impeding our walks from Hyde Park corner to Whitechapel, and from Tyburnia, to Wapping? General Brea and the Archbishop of Paris were brutally murdered by the insurgents; but at last, with prodigious slaughter on both sides, the terrible conflict came to an end, the Socialists were crushed, and victory remained with the military force. Within a few months the star of Louis Napoleon arose. What followed belongs to another history; and what is to follow he would be an inspired being who could predict for the next three months, not to speak of weeks or days. And this leads to the notice of GENT. MAG. VOL. CCVII. 4 E |