point; it stands in the black and white of the concluding chapter of his first series.

We pass over the exclusively English question of the corn laws and the reform bill of 1832, which the author touches upon in his opening chapter. We may be permitted to think, however, that some advantages have followed the introduction of cheap bread, which he is not prepared to admit; and we cannot but trust that some of the spectres which he has conjured up, as the legitimate effects of the partial destruction of the rotten boroughs, exist nowhere but in his perturbed imagination. But we find some consolation in the grand schemes for the amelioration of mankind in general, through the ag grandizement of that English aristocracy which now hails Sir Archibald Alison as a brother, though they look rather oddly in a production of the nineteenth century: these schemes are the abolition of jury trials and of popular education. The statistics brought to bear upon the latter point are appalling. Sir Archibald has shown, beyond all cavil, that the gallows and the spelling-book should go together; for if you educate a man, you will sooner or later have to hang him. Apprehensive of being led to commit some horrible crime, (for we rarely venture to dispute the author's figures,) we had begun to congratulate ourselves upon our limited amount of information, and to take measures for the gradual diminution of our small stock of useful knowledge, when the "Edinburgh" came to our relief, by showing that, for once, Sir Archibald was wrong in his estimates, and that the educated criminals, instead of being double the number of the uneducated, were only in the proportion of one to seven. We should really like to know what sort of image is reflected in the mind of Sir Archibald Alison while he is writing his disquisition upon "the people." The theatrical conception of a Frenchman is an improved species of monkey, who fiddles, dances, and curls hair, speaking broken English on his own soil, withering up at any sort of hostile demonstration against his person, and convulsed by paroxysms of fear at the distant melo-dramatic roar of the British Tar. No man could write as Alison does if he had not a corresponding idea of the people. Something in a smock-frock, that swills beer and "doms the parson" by day, and poaches pheasants and

burns ricks by night, is evidently the authentic Alisonian idea of every unfortunate being who has not the honor of belonging to the landed gentry of England.

It is not to be expected, therefore, that a gentleman of Sir Archibald Alison's habits of thought will have a very exalted opinion of America, or that what he condescends to say of us will be very amiable or very correct. The single chapter in the first series devoted to America was a farrago of nonsensical libel from beginning to end. The marginal references run thus:-"Total absence of originality or independence of thought;" "Spoliation of the commercial classes already commenced;" "Insecurity of life and order in America;" "Peculiarity of American cruelties in this respect;" "External weakness [!] of the Americans;" "Banishment of higher talent from the public service;" "Dependency of the bench," &c., &c. The subject of American manners, so lucrative a theme for the London hacks, Alison dismissed in a single sentence; - "The manners of the Americans are the manners of Great Britain, minus the aristocracy, the landowners, the army, and the established church." The minus quantity is very suggestive; but, as the author evidently intended to compliment us for approaching so near to decency, we forbear any comments.

In the first chapter of the new volume, which is an outline of the whole field that the new series is to cover, Sir Archibald again ventures upon American ground. In order to show the ill effects of democratic institutions, he informs the British public that "the principal States of the Union have, by common consent, repudiated their State debts as soon as the storms of adversity blew, resuming payment only in a few instances, when the sale of lands wrested from the Indians afforded them the means of doing so, without recurring to the dreaded horrors of direct taxation." Considering that to broach a project for the payment of the National Debt of England would be cause enough to send a man to Bedlam in English medical jurisprudence, perhaps this is rather severer language, with regard to the defalcation of Mississippi, than Sir Archibald is entitled to use; his banker would have given him a better account of American investments. We learn, more

over, that "the measures of Congress have been so generally directed by self-interest," that "South Carolina was only prevented from breaking up the confederacy by the quiet conces sion of the central legislature." We may have our doubts as to this; and we certainly do not comprehend the meaning here of the term "self-interest." As a part of the selfish career of unbridled democracy, the author goes on to say, that we seized upon Texas" without the vestige of a title;" that by concealing our title, which negatived our claim, we obtained from Great Britain the half of Maine; that we did our utmost to revolutionize Canada, and were only prevented by a melaucholy tragedy from revolutionizing Cuba; that when the Mexicans took up arms to avenge the spoliation of their territory, we invaded their dominions, and wrested from them the half of all that remained; that during the last ten years, though attacked by no one, we have, by violence and fraud, made ourselves masters of 1,300,000 square miles of territory; that "the very children in all parts of the Union play at soldiers;" and that" democratic passions have found their usual and natural vent in foreign aggression!" And this tirade, which in no single particular contains the remotest approximation to truth, is the sort of history for which the author has been made a baronet! And yet we are coolly told that this warlike republic, whose little army of some fifty thousand men, mostly volunteers, recently conquered a nation of seven millions of people, and won every battle it fought, against whatever odds, would be beaten by England in that third war which he considers so necessary to settle the "adjourned questions" of the last, before we could, to use a western expression, "get our eyes open;" and that it would be conquered in three months if situated on the Continent of Europe, unless it changed its government! It is hardly probable that the circumstances which would thus render a change of government imperative will occur for a geological era or two; but it is just possible that, in case any or several of the governments of Europe should succeed in surrounding us on our own continent, some means of defence would be adopted suitable to the occasion. The author, in his enumeration of the burdens imposed upon France, hardly shows the humble spirit naturally to be

expected of a religious propagandist; we even detect a little exultation in his style of describing "the oriental slavery," to which the converted country was reduced by the Holy Alliance and its insular friend and co-apostolic "soldier of the cross." Eleven hundred thousand men were quartered upon the soil and the resources of France, one hundred and fifty thousand of whom were to remain five years at her own expense, -all to show the confidence that Louis XVIII. had in his faithful subjects. Fifteen hundred and thirty-five millions of francs were extorted, in addition to the expense of maintaining the armies of the continent.. The murder of Marshal Ney, which has left an indelible stain upon all who were accessory to it, is justified, but admitted to have been a mistake. It certainly was not auspicious that the throne of a dynasty, thrust upon France at the point of the bayonet, should have been inaugurated with the blood of the bravest old soldier of the Empire, who had fought fifty battles for France, and not one against her.

The volume now under review is not of so much general interest as those of the former series; and had not its author, who represents a numerous and powerful party of his countrymen, taken this opportunity to present a few additional theories, and to show up his old ones in a more aggravated shape; had he not, especially, gone out of his way to misrepresent America, and hold it up to the indignation of the world, there would hardly be sufficient interest in the book to recommend it to readers upon this side of the Atlantic, and little or nothing in its abstract merits to entitle it to the serious consideration of the reviewer.

We have discussed, with great freedom, the political relations of England and France; and it is time now to turn to this country, and devote our little remaining space to the manner in which our own interests have been affected by recent events. We have taken, for the basis of these reflections, the Inaugural Address of President Pierce, or rather that portion of it that deprecates any foreign interference in the affairs of this continent, and declares any further colonization of it by the European powers to be totally inadmissible. This we take to be a very decided affirmation of the so-called Monroe doctrine,

with additions for the benefit of Young America. confess that, so far as we understand the "Monroe doctrine," it applied to the propagation of the principles of the Holy Alliance, and, as such, it could and should be enforced, if it were at all likely those principles would ever revive in Central America. But apart from the quadrennial epidemic of Young Americanism, we think there is much to be said in favor of restricting, at every hazard, foreign influence within our borders, and even in Central America; and that, in certain cases, all lawful means should be used to diminish such an influence, if incompatible with our interests, which, on the North American Continent, but there alone, we regard as identical with the interests of humanity. Our legitimate sphere of action is confined to this object. We do not apprehend, any more than England appears to have apprehended in the Oregon matter, the blustering denunciation of "those who would sacrifice the honor of their country" by the gentlemen who go for violating treaties, and claiming territory which does not belong to us. Mr. Webster gave the Oregon heroes a sarcastic rebuke, which we should think they might remember, when he told them that, if a smile of derision or a pout were excited in England, it would not be by any ground taken by the conservative side of the house. We believe that the doctrine of the exclusive control of the Central American States to be of too much importance to serve as a mere party catch-word, a "springe to catch woodcocks" or votes. But we believe it is to be settled not immediately, or with any single power, and that the shrewd est, yet boldest, diplomacy will be required. We hope to see the day when the oratorical element in our policy will entirely pass away. Swaggering is no nearer to diplomacy than it is to courage; the instances of its success are not many, and they are as discreditable as they are few. The swaggerer never succeeds twice. If we are to trust the organs of the party which now controls the policy of the country, every individual to whom a foreign mission has been entrusted was "admirably fitted" by nature for that very office, before he was selected by the President. We sincerely hope that this was the case. If an unnecessary war is the result of