southern coalition to which her principles are opposed. The correspondence of Prince Metternich, at that period, is exceedingly curious; far from pursuing his customary policy of concessions and half-measures, he declared that he was firmly and irrevocably decided to take the most rigorous steps, if they were necessary, to prevent revolutionary principles from penetrating into Italy. M. Casimir Périer, who was at that time president of the council, displayed an equal firmness on his side; and although he did not share the propagandist policy adopted by M. Laffitte, he resolved upon the occupation of Ancona by the French troops. Since that time, a better understanding has arisen between Prince Metternich and the French minister for foreign affairs: the course pursued by the government has been sufficiently repressive to satisfy the chancellor of the Austrian Empire; and since tranquillity has been restored in Italy, the relation of France and Austria may be contemplated with more temper by the former country, and with less apprehension by the latter. Still, the removal of the French troops from Ancona is, perhaps, the object of the increasing display of intimacy and cordiality which has marked the more recent conduct of the Austrian ambassador towards the cabinet of the Tuileries. In the meantime, the French government may be said to have owed its existence to the two opposite characters which it has affected to assume;-at home, it was obliged to boast of having adopted the principles of the revolution of July, in order to retain the support of the liberal party, as long as it required that support;-abroad, its chief object was to abjure the revolutionary designs, which had excited the alarm of all the sovereigns in Europe. To these contradictions, which are more apparent than real, many of the difficulties of its position may be traced.

At whatever sacrifices of consistency, and of political integrity, the stability of the Doctrinaire administration has been obtained, there is reason to hope, from the conduct of the government, and from the recent language of its most accredited supporters, that it will be able and willing to persevere in a line of foreign policy, more bold and salutary than that which it has hitherto adopted. If the Congress of Töplitz was intended to furnish an opportunity to the Northern Powers, of maturing plans which would virtually reduce the

German Confederation to a mere retinue of princes, dependent on Prussia in the North, and on Austria in the South,-if the policy of Russia is henceforward to be the indirect and invisible, but supreme, rule of the German States,-if the same power which has created a commercial league against England, should succeed in putting a political league into motion against France-if, in short, the statements of the pamphlet, which professes to unveil the secret of that Congress, be not unfounded-then the only hope of the liberal states of Europe is, to dissolve the tie which binds Austria to an alliance so prejudicial to her own interests, and to resist throughout the world the arts, the threats, and the demonstrations, which menace the political and commercial liberties of England and of France. Whether this great warfare be carried on in the cabinet, or in the field, it is one which will demand the unceasing exercise of national energy. We have dwelt at some length on the characters of those who direct the diplomacy of France, because they are instruments in the cause we ourselves perseveringly advocate. But it is not merely by diplomatic address, that the objects, which they ought to have in view, can be attained. They will need the support of public opinion;they must seek all the light that can be collected, to guide them onwards; they will, perhaps, require sacrifices of blood and treasure, to defend the barriers of civilisation, the laws of public justice, and the rights of nations.

ARTICLE XI.

A Letter to the Right Honourable Viscount Melbourne on the present State of the Appellate Jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery and House of Lords. By the Right Honourable Sir EDWARD SUGDEN. London: 1835.

IT cannot be denied that the present state of the Chancellorship gives great and general dissatisfaction, to all persons concerned with the administration of justice in the Court of Chancery, or in the House of Lords: and the dissatisfaction appears to us as just as it is general. The reason, however,

urged by the government, for keeping matters in this state is most sufficient. In answer to a question from Mr. Lynch, at the end of last session, Lord John Russell declared that it was the intention of the ministry, at an early period of the next session, to introduce a Bill for the separation of the judicial from the political functions of the Chancellor; and that the present arrangement was merely adopted for the period, which must elapse before that measure could be prepared, and carried. The public hailed this promise with delight. The prospect of that long-desired and useful reform, produced a perfect willingness to put up with the evils which it was necessary to endure in the interval. We cannot doubt that so great a change in so important a matter, had been deliberately weighed and firmly resolved upon, ere it was promised that, in accordance with that promise, it is the intention of ministers, at the earliest period of the session, to introduce a measure, which it would, indeed, be most culpable to delay—that already a bill for effecting the new arrangement has been carefully prepared, after much meditation and consultation of learned men-that it has been much canvassed by the cabinet, and will be produced in a shape of completeness, which will mark that its authors estimate the importance of the task which they have undertaken, and are duly qualified to perform it.

It was not, however, to be expected that ambitious lawyers, or prejudiced politicians, would receive with satisfaction the announcement of a change so great, so conformable to improved, so repugnant to antiquated notions, and so destructive of the splendor of that, which has been always the most brilliant of a lawyer's prospects. Nor was it to be supposed that party men would defer to the general desire for the promised reform, or omit the favourable opportunity, of directing public attention to the evils resulting from the Great Seal being in commission. We were, therefore, not surprised to hear that Sir Edward Sugden-the most ambitious of lawyers, and the most violent of Tory partisans-had written a pamphlet, attacking the ministry for the evils of the present arrangement, and opposing the change, which they contemplate. We were not surprised at finding the indiscriminate praises of his party lavished on their great lawyer's effusion. Had we found it

deserving of any praise-had we found anything in it save the merest common places-had we found even these expressed with vigour or correctness-we should not have withheld our approbation; but this agreeable task has not been reserved

to us.

It is with some difficulty that we bring ourselves to state such an opinion of a work of Sir Edward Sugden's. We cannot help feeling as if it were impossible, that we can be justified in speaking in such terms of the production of a man, whose legal knowledge, and whose intellectual power, in the handling of legal subjects, we very greatly admire. But a long experience has taught the world, that in Sir Edward Sugden's political writings, it is to expect nothing worthy of his legal fame. His zealous hostility to legal reform has before this impelled him into the lists as a pamphleteer: and as a parliamentary debater, he was never loth to make a display of his varied want of information, on any subject that chanced to come before the House. In both capacities he has given the world ample opportunities of judging of him. As a political writer, he has not succeeded in establishing a claim even to mediocrity; and among the proverbial parliamentary failures of lawyers, his has been the most signal. It is thus that the intellectual pride of man is checked, by mortifying exhibitions of the limited range, within which very powerful minds can work with effect, and of their deplorable incompetency to grapple with any difficulties, save those which a long experience has trained them to encounter. This wholesome lesson of humility is most forcibly impressed on us by the exhibitions, which men of great professional eminence constantly make in political discussions. The science of politics-the right mastery of which can only be attained by a mind trained in the best intellectual habits, and stored with the most varied and accurate information-requires, it would seem to be universally agreed in this country, no apprenticeship. Men, whose lives have been spent amid the toils of war, or the perils of the sea-whose minds have been occupied with accounts and schemes of merchandise, or with the arduous technicalities of the law-think themselves instinctively competent to the decision of nice questions in politics, immediately that they

are presented to their attention. Hence the decisions to which they come-hence the prejudices which fill the vigorous minds of skilful warriors and expert jurists-and hence the feeble clumsiness with which they wield the unaccustomed arms of political warfare.

That Sir Edward Sugden, who originally entered on his profession without the advantages of a liberal education, and who, in his rapid rise into professional eminence, has never found time, amid the profusion of business, to repair the deficiencies, of youth-that he should be ignorant of political science, is matter neither of wonder nor of reproach. But the strange thing is, that a man of his acuteness should be so little aware of his own deficiencies, and be possessed of so little discretion, as to reveal them. The unlearned public would do Sir Edward great injustice, if it supposed that his was one of those frequent legal reputations, which are founded on mere assiduous plodding among the cobwebs of the law. On the contrary, Sir Edward is not only justly renowned for his acuteness and power as an advocate, but has acquired even a more solid reputation by his legal writings, which all admit to be the most clear and logical of their kind that have been produced in the present day. It seems, therefore, strange that a writer so powerful, and so lucid in his treatment of legal subjects, should prove so singularly feeble and involved, when he endeavours to grapple with political questions. But it is this unfortunate failing that misleads Sir Edward Sugden. He probably thinks that his dictum will be decisive, without his being at the trouble of stating any grounds for it: and that the British public will pay as implicit deference to a pamphlet bearing his name on the title pages, as the attorneys were wont to yield to an opinion signed" E. B. Sugden."

After declaring, as all party writers declare, that the author does not write as a party man, the pamphlet opens with the ingenuousness, and total absence of pretension, which mark the following observation:

"If, indeed, I were to address you as a party man, it would not alter the spirit or tone of my observations, because I belong to a party who deem it their duty whilst out of power, not simply to abstain from offering any factious opposition to the king's government, but to further the cause of good government in every department, without regard to the persons who constitute the administration."