The kind of outrage of which they have been guilty is not exceptional, but in accordance with their standing customs and ordinary mode of behaviour. It is highly probable, therefore, that after the treaty has come into operation, and Englishmen begin to expose themselves without any great precaution to the private or public hostility of the Chinese, acts may again be done which will rouse the fury of the English public, and the memory of those who have now died and suffered will be invoked to justify the exaction of a startling and terrible punishment; and thus a pretext for a fresh interference by arms in Chinese politics may be derived from the promptings of so legitimate and generous a feeling as that which is awakened by the recital of the tortures which have recently hurried our countrymen to an untimely grave. We can only hope that the indemnity to the families of the deceased, which has been most properly exacted, will act as a sedative to this excitement.

The New Zealand war is a much smaller source of anxiety, but it is alarming to many English families, and suggests many disquieting thoughts. The mere repulse of so many British soldiers by so few savages is humiliating, but it is not very extraordinary, and no doubt can exist as to the final issue of the contest. The Caffre war lingered on for a long time, and cost many lives and many millions of money; but at last soldiers with a genius for the style of warfare, like Cathcart and Eyre, and expeditions organized on a great scale, overcame the utmost efforts of barbarians backed by every advantage of a wild and unknown country. The Maoris are certain to be either exterminated or coerced into the quiet of despair. But consequences may flow from the contest which will cause much regret. The ecclesiastical authorities will probably be driven into a position which will be a heavy blow to missionary enterprise. They have pronounced the natives right in the dispute which has led to the war, and they

appear to have even justified the Maoris in their appeal to arms. This, it must be feared, will either end in a lamentable hostility between the English settlers and their spiritual leaders, or else the natives will complain that the religion of the white priests only teaches them to be just as long as their countrymen are not in danger, and that barbarian converts are deserted in their hour of need. It is also difficult to see how the Home Government can continue to pre-serve its present relations to the colony, and claim a right to protect the natives against the English settlers. When once it is found that the natives redress their supposed wrongs by violence, the adjustment of the very delicate and complicated questions raised by native rights can scarcely be secured by the tedious and elaborate process of referring the decision to a tribunal at the antipodes of New Zealand.

Few things connected with India have lately been so satisfactory as the mode in which Sir Hugh Rose has dealt with the 5th Europeans. He had to combat not only a dangerous spirit of mutiny in the soldiers, but a want of purpose and determination in those whose duty it is to see that mutiny is repressed. As he pointedly observed in his order regarding the mutineer who suffered the punishment he so richly deserved, the worst offenders were always reported to have an excellent character. The members of courts-martial could not be induced to pass a strong sentence; or if the sentence was strong enough, they added an inconsistent recommendation to mercy. It is true that it was the wavering clemency of the Supreme Government in India that had bewildered the judgment of the tribunals charged with the examination of military offences. But things had come to a pass which made it absolutely necessary that a man of firmness and long-sighted severity should come to the rescue. Hugh Rose has shown himself equal to the task; and by carrying into execution the sentence of death

Sir

passed on Private Johnson, and by the skilful and sudden manœuvre which enabled him to get rid of the 5th Europeans for ever, he has shown that there is at least one man in India who is worthy of his post.

Exactly the contrary impression is produced by the defence of his insubordination which Sir Charles Trevelyan has recently published. No statement could possibly be less to the purpose. He takes credit for all the improvements which subsequent inquiry and matured experience have introduced into Mr. Wilson's measures, and asks us to admit that every change for the better which has been subsequent in time must have been owing to his factious appeal to the press against his superiors. He also insists that his opinion of the military force required in India must be the right one, and that if he says it can be reduced, any one who is instrumental in retaining a larger force than Sir Charles Trevelyan judges to be necessary, is guilty of the injustice towards India of burdening it with needless taxation. It is quite irrelevant to discuss whether Sir Charles Trevelyan is right or wrong in his plans of finance or in his estimate of the force required to keep India in order. He was not recalled because he was wrong in finance, but because he was guilty of a flagrant act of insubordination. He acted exactly as the permanent Secretary to the Colonies would act if he addressed a circular to the New Zealand papers, stating that whatever the Duke of Newcastle might think, it was his private opinion that the natives were in the right in the war, and ought to fight until they obtained justice. Sir Charles Trevelyan was in fact a good man in his wrong place. He went out with the conviction that it was his mission to be a blessing to the people of India, and that his own estimate of his position absolved him from all responsibility, and from the discharge of his duties to his superiors: and the consequences of the delusion soon showed themselves. His appointment was a

VOL. LXIII. NO. CCCLXXIII,

127

creditable one to the Government that made it, because he was known to be an able and honest man, and with a strong interest in Indian affairs; and it was quite right to try whether he was really fit for high office out there. We only hope that his discreditable failure will not be made a pretext for appointing henceforth men of mere routine, and of less than average abilities. Sir Charles Trevelyan stands alone, and no one in or out of England except himself thinks that he was right. There is therefore little danger that his example should be emulated; and the class of public servants to which he belongs may receive the legitimate reward of the able performance of their duties without any fear lest another governor of Madras chosen from their ranks should attempt to turn the weapon of the press against his own chiefs in the hour of their greatest difficulty and danger. Sir Charles Trevelyan has many friends who have been attached to him by his high and generous private character: and he may look forward to being restored to some post of safe and subordinate activity. But it would be most disadvantageous to the public interests that sympathy for private virtues even so great as those of Sir Charles Trevelyan should be allowed to confuse our judgments as to the nature of the step which he took.

The Income-tax is not very welcome at Bombay; and the last accounts inform us that the Bazaar has been closed. In order to avoid being taxed on their profits, the traders decline to earn them. The Government has only to leave them alone and they will soon be tired of quarrelling with their breadand-butter.. This closing the Bazaar is a trick familiar in India. Not very long ago it was tried, as some of our readers may remember, at Allyghur. For three whole weeks the Bazaar was closed, and this was a very long time for the natives to hold out. At the end of that time some of the principal shopkeepers came to the magistrate in charge of the district and

I

said that they only wanted one thing. No allusion was made to the original cause of discontent. The one thing wanted was that the magistrate should save them the disgrace of giving in. They implored him to ride through the town with a body of police, and order the shops to be opened. The request was granted. The magistrate took his ride; and the merchants, after protesting that they would never have yielded to anything but force, opened their shops, and were as happy and contented as they had ever been. Barring out is not likely to answer better with Hindoos than with schoolboys.

The changes introduced into the political machinery of France by the decree of the 24th of November have been received with general satisfaction. The Liberal party have wisely determined not to reject a little because they have not got all they want, but to use that little as well as they can. In the first place they deserve great encouragement from the circumstances under which the concession has been made. The accordance of a certain amount of freedom to the representative body in France cannot be looked on as an isolated act. It is part of a general change that is creeping over Europe. After the Revolution of 1848 came a period of despotic reaction. Prince Schwarzenberg at Vienna, and the Manteuffel Ministry at Berlin, acted as lieutenants of the Emperor Nicholas in crushing out every trace of liberty in Central and Eastern Europe. This state of things was, however, broken up both by the flux of opinion, which in times of social security always sets more or less strongly in the direction of liberty, and also by the Crimean war. If sometimes we are disposed to think that the Crimean war cost us more than it brought us, and are tempted to speak of it as an expensive mistake, we ought in fairness to remember that it has been the precursor of the reviving liberty of Europe. The freedom of Italy would have been an impossibility

if the power of Russia had not been broken; but when Russia withdrew from the direction of the despotic party beyond her own borders, a liberal reaction quickly showed itself. The Ministry was changed in Prussia, and the War of Independence began in Italy. At last even Austria has been forced into a new path, and the Charter of the 20th of October raised Austria into the rank of a country which, if it did not possess a free government, was sure soon to obtain one. It was impossible that France should remain out of this current of changed opinion. There was something ludicrous in the inconsistency of France exporting liberty to Italy and not retaining any for home consumption. It was also rather humiliating to Frenchmen to think that Germans and even Austrians should be in advance of France. For once French writers have been obliged to admit that their continental neighbours, on whose opinions they claim to act by a sort of divine prescription, were acting as their guides and teachers. They look round and find freedom is the order of the day; and those who most sincerely long for the restoration of freedom in France are encouraged by this, and observe that what is now granted is not the fruit of an arbitrary caprice, but the recognition of a general movement from the influence of which the Emperor felt that France could not escape.

The proposed changes will also probably lead to further changes. The three principal novelties now introduced are the liberty to debate on the address at the beginning of each session, the reporting in full of all speeches, and the institution of Ministers whose business it will be to defend the measures of the Government. Debates on the address are not very effectual means of ascertaining the opinion of a country, as no two members need refer to the same point, and the Government can almost always escape from an attack that is too vague and general to be effectual. But the Opposition

will now have an occasion when they will be no only able but expected to review the general policy of the Government. The institution of what are termed porte-voix Ministers can scarcely be permanent, and must lead the way to some sort of Ministerial responsibility. The three Ministers who have been selected for this difficult office-MM. Billault, Magne, and Baroche-are all men of some ability, and they will scarcely bear to defend measures in the preparation of which they have not shared. A mere spokesman can hardly do justice to the conceptions and plans of a real working Minister; and the Minister himself, who is really responsible for the measures submitted to the Assembly, will be the first to complain if the provisions which it has cost him so much trouble to prepare are defended with insufficient knowledge, ability, or zeal. The porte-voix Minister will be continually trying to make himself a working partner in the formation of Government measures; and the porte-feuille Minister will be continually longing to speak for himself. Thus there will be a strong tendency to melt the two offices into one; and if once Ministers in the actual charge of departments of State appear before the Assembly, the days of Ministerial responsibility cannot be far off.

How

fast this process will be accomplished depends probably not on the conduct of the Assembly, but on the general turn of events in Europe. If the liberal movement continues to gather strength and a great war is avoided, Constitutional changes may come to light very quickly in France. But it is by no means impossible that war may intervene to carry the whole thoughts of the nation in another direction, and postpone the triumph of freedom. The Emperor is the sole arbiter of peace and war, and if he thinks things are going too fast at home, he may prefer putting himself at the head of his army to engaging in peaceful conflicts with the Opposition.

The circular addressed by Count

129

Persigny to the Prefects, ordering them not to oppose the election of members of former parties, would be much the greatest gain the Opposition has won, if only there was a reasonable prospect of its being carried into effect. That Count Persigny himself is sincere there can be no doubt. He really means that the Prefects should not abuse their authority, and he wishes that a few at least of those whose names are known throughout Europe should lend a dignity by their presence to an Imperialist Assembly. But the Prefects will not accept the lesson of toleration unless it is positively driven into them. A candidate known to favour the Government is their candidate, and their local reputation is staked on his success. If he is beaten, they are beaten too. They have been accustomed to influence elections so long and so largely that they will be unable to refrain from exercising the

power that is familiar and dear to them. All that can be expected at first is, that the grosser acts of electioneering should be discarded, that the electoral lists should be drawn up with moderate fairness, that voters should not be intimidated on the day of polling, and that an Opposition vote should not be considered as tantamount to an invitation to the police to put the voter under strict espionage. The Opposition may then win a few more seats than they possess now; and if they force the talking Ministers to explain the course taken by the Government, and themselves make able speeches in reply, and those speeches are faithfully reported, public opinion may perhaps be awakened as fast as it is desirable that it should be awakened in France.

Count Persigny has also celebrated his advent to the Ministry of the Interior by granting an amnesty to the press, and by promising that greater liberty shall be allowed for the future. His deeds are better than his writings in this instance; for he thought it advisable to accompany his amnesty by the issue of a missive designed to prove that there was no liberty of