find that his fellow-men are not so bad as he had supposed them; but with a manifest reluctance to let go his calumny; with such a growl as a cur gives when he is compelled to part with a bone. He let us see that he wished the slander to have been a truth. And yet this person is tolerated among gentlemen, allowed to sit at good men's feasts, and, so far as we can hear, not in any way visited with the displeasure of society for having so disgraced himself!! It is an old remark that the age of chivalry is past, but now the age of honour and truth seems to be fast passing also.

Some few years ago* we deemed it our duty to comment upon the conduct of a right-reverend Bishop who had been frequently known to publicly excuse sin if committed by a poor person. His lordship courted the rabble by making light of their wickedness, as if they were not already only too ready to look leniently at transgressions. He seemed, as we remarked at the time, to be teaching the doctrine that Poverty shall cover the multitude of sins, as a little soft-sawder for the multitude. This was one way of warning men to flee from the wrath to come. But Mr. Gladstone's position is not confined in its operation to poor men. It tampers with the truthfulness of every man who has got a vote.

Unfortunately a large licence has been accorded to public speakers to exhibit passing events in such lights as may suit their own purposes. They avail themselves of this, but, as a rule, their observations and advice are directed to particular instances. It is not only every man's interest, as a responsible being, that he should in all things be truthful;

but it is every man's interest as a social being-that is, it is the common interest of us all that he should scrupulously speak the truth in all things. We know how weak minds are often tempted to err in this thing, and how the strictest principle is required to keep them from offending. Surely it is a wickedness and a cruelty to smooth the way of such towards sin!

Attempts to lower the morality of the population should be looked at, not from a political, but from a judicial point of view. Whoever is guilty of them is an enemy to all. We have not yet reached a time, we hope, when deceit and falsehood may be inculcated with impunity, when men may openly use their talents in the cause of vice. Society will rise and vindicate its rights against the false preacher, be he who he may. When we meet such a one let us close our ears to his words. Let us give him no tolerance even for a moment. But let every honest hand wield the whip which shall lash him from the East to the West! But we digress.

The Minister departmentally responsible for bringing the Lords now into the front place is Mr. Forster; and many are the regrets that we have heard expressed at his having shown so much weakness and so much want of judgment. To Mr. Forster's credit stand recorded many acts by which he showed himself superior to the arts and wiles of party, and in regard to which he bore himself with honest independence. It was not expected that he would lend himself to such a pitiful design as the Compensation for Disturbance Bill; and even his adversaries regret that that affair did not devolve upon some

VOL. CXXVIII.-NO. DCCLXXIX.

U

one of the Cabinet who had no character to lose. The Bill has been a very damaging piece of work, unfair in itself, and most discreditably accounted for, and presented to and pushed through the House of Commons. The Irish

Secretary cannot but feel how much he has suffered in reputation through it; and cannot but sigh as he looks back to the days when, with a firmer mind, he laboured in the Department of Education. He will have now to consider carefully his ways, and to exhibit something of his old vigour and independence, if he would have the country forget this blunder. We owe him something for the manly front he showed to the impudent caucus at Bradford, and wish him better fortune and better sense than to employ himself in doing the dirty work of his party. He is the man who has given their present prominence to the House of Peers.

This transference of the regard of the country to the Upper House throws some little more light on a question which has been a good deal canvassed-namely, the meaning of the last election. It is pretty clear now that the large Liberal majority was not given for the purpose of promoting any fair and reasonable class of legislation, or to abolish any oppressive law, or to remove any galling burden. But it is likely that the more ignorant classes were, by continued iteration, led to believe that the late Government was dealing unfairly by them, and leading them on to much dam

It is also to be presumed that they expected to witness a notable exposure of Lord Beaconsfield's evil doings, and also to receive some not very definitely perceived benefits, if a change of Ministry should take place. They have changed the Ministry, but not attained to any

of these results. They are disappointed, and conscious of having been beguiled into folly, and they fall into an apathetic condition. The rest of the country did not agree in the election at all. And thus the House of Commons seems at present to be a mistake all round, and the Upper House takes the chief place.

It is remarkable, and it tends to prove some muddle in the whole business, that in such a state of things the Liberal leaders should have shown so little capacity for management. If the people could not specify what they wanted, though not indisposed to a little iniquity, and were simply persuaded into returning a Liberal majority, the leaders had the more obligation to avoid false steps, and not to further embarrass a situation which was already sufficiently perplexing. Yet Ministers, as if possessed by a perverse spirit, have, ever since they took office, been going out of their way to find blunders and to commit them. Any prestige which their great majority may have lent them was immediately dissipated by their own illadvised acts. They are labouring in a slough. Mr. Bright promised wonderful benefits to be obtained from the legislation of next year; but with such a stumbling set of leaders as we have got, it is difficult to look to next year with any confidence. Since May last the press has been announcing, at very short intervals, blunder after blunder of the most startling and uncalled-for kind. The most demented of all, perhaps, was the attempt made by the Prime Minister to silence a member of the House of Commons. This was a capital mistake. It brought out in strong relief the Premier's ignorance of men, and his incapacity to estimate situations. Of course every mem

ber felt that the " stopper," then designed for an Irish member, might to-morrow be applied to himself, if the gagging should be carried. The proposal, therefore, found no supporter; and the Speaker informed the House that such a motion had not been made for two hundred years ! !

The wise saw of the Chancellor who reflected on the modicum of wisdom with which states are governed, may thus be fortified by a notable modern instance. But what strikes us more than the blunder (are not the Premier's blunders as common as blackberries?) is the despotic character of his designthe tyranny of it. The designer, forsooth, is the champion of Liberalism; will Liberals abet this proceeding? Our readers probably remember a scene at Dotheboys Hall where Mr. Squeers struck the desk with his cane, and is reported then to have delivered himself as follows: "Now then," said Mr. Squeers mildly, "let me hear a boy speak, and I'll take the skin off his back." We should not describe Mr. Squeers as a Liberal: but thus it is that extremes meet. Perhaps Wackford could have cited Liberalism for his purpose, just as William could recur to the mode of silencing which was in vogue shortly after the scene closed on the middle ages. But, seriously, could any man who might respect Liberal sentiment in his heart have been ready thus to disinter the crushing engines of the past?

Is not his Liberalism a mask? Is not this another proof of his insincerity?

A reference to the events of the past month was not in the original plan of this article, which, indeed, must be closed while August has yet many days to run. But we cannot refrain from some comment on the distressing news which now,

soon after the middle of the month, is, from day to day, arriving from Ireland. That unhappy country is in a ferment, sure enough. The command seems to have gone out among the people, as it did in the camp before Sinai, "Slay every man his brother and his companion." Mr. Gladstone's words, and the wretched Compensation Bill, are bearing sad fruit. The Ministers told us that the ordinary laws. would be found sufficient for securing the peace of Ireland. But peace, clearly, has not been secured, and we await with anxiety the measures which her Majesty's Government may take for its preservation. There is no time to lose: action must be immediate if Ministers would show themselves equal to the emergency. It is fortunate that Parliament has not been prorogued. We trust that it may be determined to do something more than "strike at wretched kernes." The kernes are defying the law, and they must be taught to respect it; but the head of the hydra will not have been crushed until the traitors who are urging the ignorant people to violence have been amply punished. The speech of the member for Tipperary which has been read in the House of Commons simply astonishes by its audacity and truculent character. By the manner in which Ministers may deal with it we may judge of the probability or otherwise of their adopting a sensible Irish policy. Dare they take the bull by the horns, or will they play fast and loose with the agitation already begun in that land? Will they aspire to govern Ireland, or only to manage Irish members? To act vigorously and honestly may cost them some votes: but it will do for their reputation what neither apathy nor hesitation nor confiscatory sugar-plums can achieve.

The foreign policy, too, of the Government with respect to Turkey, is such as furnishes but small ground of hope, and leaves a great deal to be feared. An incautious move has been made in the hope that it would be followed by a result of startling brilliancy. Instead of brilliancy we have had dulness long drawn out; and the result is still far off. Pray Heaven it be not a disastrous one! And of the incapacity shown in India, and of its melancholy consequences, we know not how to speak as it deserves. If responsibility mean anything when applied to the Cabinet, there must be a heavy account to settle regarding India before many months have passed. On all sides clouds hang around the Gladstone Ministry. It needs but for one cloud to break, and the country will feel the grievous error which it refused to see in the spring!

We feel that we have been somewhat discursive in this paper, yet our remarks proceeded fairly from the subject. It is such a significant and suggestive theme, and the action of the Upper House has been recently so much the pivot on which home politics turned, that it was almost impossible to keep

clear of collateral headings. One direction we hope that we have given to thought, and that is towards honestly and patiently examining the great and eminently useful functions which the hereditary Chamber discharges. It stood by our forefathers; and it has recently stood by us in our need. If it were always invariably in harmony with the cry of the multitude it could not perform its duties: those duties must occasionally be unpopular at the time of performance. But when party feeling has passed by and men can dispassionately scan results, then they understand this their venerable institution. And so it is that, when our minds are clear of fretting questions of the hour,whenever we feel, not as partisans, but as Britons, we are always ready to do honour to the Peers. Sure are we that on the next festal occasion when we are asked to toast them, the eminent service which they rendered to us and our liberties in August 1880, will fill every heart with affection and respect. The toast will have a deeper meaning than usual; the sentiment will be of the present as well as the past; and heartfelt will be the shouting after every man has drained his bumper to the health of

It was not to be expected that the matter should be kept out of the county newspaper, or even from those in the metropolis. There was too much of romance in the story, too good a tale to be told, for any such hope. The man's former life and the woman's, the disappearance of her husband and his reappearance after his reported death, the departure of the couple from St. Louis, and the coming of Lefroy to Bowick, formed together a most attractive subject. But it could not be told without reference to Dr. Wortle's school, to Dr. Wortle's position as clergyman of the parish,

and also to the fact which was considered by his enemies to be of all the facts the most damning, that Mr. Peacocke had for a time been allowed to preach in the parish church. The Broughton Gazette,' a newspaper which was supposed to be altogether devoted to the interest of the diocese, was very eloquent on this subject. "We do not desire," said the 'Broughton Gazette,' "to make any remarks as to the management of Dr. Wortle's school. We leave all that between him and the parents of the boys who are educated there. We are perfectly aware that Dr. Wortle himself is a scholar, and that his school has been deservedly successful. It is advisable, no doubt, that in such an establishment none should be employed whose lives are openly immoral;-but as we have said before, it is not our purpose to insist upon this. Parents, if they feel themselves to be aggrieved, can remedy the evil by withdrawing their sons. But when we consider the great power which

is placed in the hands of an incumbent of a parish, that he is endowed as it were with the freehold of his pulpit, that he may put up whom he will to preach the Gospel to his parishioners, even in a certain degree in opposition to his bishop, we think that we do no more than our duty in calling attention to such a case as this." Then the whole story was told at great length, so as to give the "we" of the Broughton Gazette' a happy opportunity of making his leading article not only much longer, but much more amusing, than usual. "We must say," continued the writer, as he concluded his narrative, "that this man should not have been allowed to preach in the Bowick pulpit. He is no doubt a clergyman of the Church of England, and Dr. Wortle was within his rights in asking for his assistance; but the incumbent of a parish is responsible for those he employs, and that responsibility now rests on Dr. Wortle."

There was a great deal in this that made the Doctor very angry,—so angry that he did not know how to restrain himself. The matter had been argued as though he had employed the clergyman in his church after he had known the history. "For aught I might know," he said to Mrs. Wortle, "any curate coming to me might have three wives, all alive."

"That would be most improbable," said Mrs. Wortle.

"So was all this improbable,just as improbable. Nothing could be more improbable. Do we not all feel overcome with pity for the poor woman because she encounter