is more visible,' are his words, 'than the great difference between the morals and industry of the manufacturing poor in France, and in England. In the former, they are sober, frugal, and laborious. They marry, and have flocks of children, whom they bring up to labour.' The general tenour of the observations in Arthur Young's well-known Travels in France,' about thirtyfive or forty years later in date than Dean Tucker's pamphlet, are to the same effect. It is not possible, and it would not be desirable, to proceed to a more detailed comparison between this country and its nearest continental neighbour. Of all investigations into the condition of social life, those of the comparative prosperity, far more of the comparative morality, of nations, are the most difficult to bring to a satisfactory conclusion, even with the aid of a most complete and exhaustive inquiry. The different branches of the subject shade off like the features of an extended landscape. Boundaries, which at a distance appear well marked and sharply defined, are often found, when approached more nearly, to shade off into each other with countless and delicate gradations. Yet sometimes, too, a closer investigation shows, masked by a natural similarity of form on either side, a gulf unseen, because sunk beyond the ken of ordinary observation, but forming a complete barrier of separation. So, between the standard of life in this country and France there exists on this most vital point, and till France changes we trust there ever will continue to exist a fundamental difference, the vast results of which are shown in the aggregate by statistical computation, while the roots lie deep in the different motives swaying the individuals of each nation. These motives. in France are grounded on the laws governing the rights of inheritance and the distribution of property. They are laws which exalt selfishness into a virtue, and reduce prudence to the level of a vice. Far different has been the vigorous selfreliant course of England, a course which has retained increasing numbers in greater comfort at home, and has yet sent increasing numbers as colonists abroad. The boldest course has been the safest course. The British Colonies, under judicious administration, form the best supports of the British Empire. They are likewise the best markets for our produce. This country stands, as shown by the Census, high in national prosperity. But we must not allow ourselves, while looking at things in the aggregate, to be blind to the conditions on which our prosperity is based. It is not on the mine, the loom, or on accumulated wealth, that our well-being is really founded, or which can be relied on for providing the basis on which it may continue. Other nations, infinitely below us in the scale, are 202 nevertheless nevertheless far more highly gifted with the unused elements of wealth than we are. Our prosperity has been won by the unceasing efforts, by the unflinching exertions of our people. It can only be preserved by maintaining a high standard of individual character. IN ART. IX.-Parliamentary Debates, Session 1875. N the palmy days of Mr. Gladstone's majority, no charge was more freely levelled against the Conservative opposition than that they had no policy. No doubt they were not prepared to make a bid for office by any promise of legislation akin to that of Mr. Gladstone. But even at that time, when the prospects of the party were most gloomy, when few ventured to anticipate within any reasonable time the 'swinging back of the pendulum' of popular favour, its great and never-despairing leader, in a famous speech at Sydenham, gave utterance to what he described as the hereditary or traditionary policy of the party -the maintenance of our institutions, the preservation of our empire, and the improvement of the condition of the people. What was then uttered without any immediate prospect of being called upon to give effect to it, is becoming an accomplished fact. The sympathy of our colonies with the mother country, and the interest of the people of England in the maintenance and consolidation of the Empire, have again been recognised. The ties which kindred and common interest have formed are being drawn closer together; and the selfish policy, not of any political party, but of Mr. Gladstone and the Liberal leaders, which bid fair to disintegrate the Empire, has been abandoned with the cordial approbation of the country. The late Lord Lytton, himself thoroughly acquainted with Colonial administration, declared that from the time of the accession of the Gladstone Government to power, we must date the rise of an irritation, a disturbance, an unsettlement in the principal portions of our Colonial Empire, which it would task their statesmanship to allay and remove. They succeeded,' he wrote, 'to the administration of that vast empire when it was singularly tranquil and loyal; they contrived in the space of a year to destroy that tranquillity and to endanger that loyalty.' Happily that state of affairs exists no longer. The declarations of the Colonial press during the present year cannot possibly be mistaken. Our Colonial fellow-subjects have been gratified beyond measure at the increased attention which has been given to questions affecting their interests, at its outward expression in Her Majesty's speech from the throne, and at the active support and warm sympathy of Lord Carnarvon and his colleagues. For years, too, the working classes have witnessed almost the whole time of Parliament devoted to the elaboration of fundamental changes in the Constitution, which were to them of little moment, until at last they might have been tempted to cry out that the governing power of this country knew little and cared less for the real happiness of the lower classes, and that the small but really vital reforms which they desired could not, except perhaps by force, be obtained from their own representatives. They have now seen the reins of power pass into the hands of men who believe that the first and foremost duty of Government is to secure the social welfare of the people, and that statesmen can afford to despise democratic agitators, if the comfort and happiness of the mass of the population in what are called comparatively minor matters is adequately attended to. Such, then, has been the deliberate policy of the Government of Mr. Disraeli, and there are ample indications that it has not only obtained the cordial support of his parliamentary majority, but that it has also been satisfactory to the country. The end of his second session of office finds him with an undiminished party, and with no sign of decreasing confidence. His followers are united and enthusiastic in support of their policy and of their leader. The great Liberal party, on the other hand, has neither a programme nor a leader. To talk of its being divided into three great sections is to give no idea of its real disintegration. The position of our party,' said Mr. Bright, in February of the present year, 'if we look around, is not one which affords altogether the most pleasant prospect. (Hear, hear!)** We should think not. The cheers gave expression to the widespread feeling of satisfaction amongst Liberals of various shades at their own exclusion from office, even for a long period. And though Mr. Bright went on to speak of his party as 'tolerably unanimous,' it would be difficult to indicate any policy, hardly any prominent political topic, upon which any real unanimity exists. Can the Church be said to be in danger when a deliberate attack upon it, uttered with the well-known eloquence of a statesman returning at a crisis in the history of the Liberal party to resume his active duties in Parliament, failed to meet with the smallest response in the country? The carefully prepared and powerfully expressed argument of Mr. Bright disappointed many Liberals just as * Meeting at Reform Club, Feb. 5, 1875. much much as the extraordinary declaration of the Radical Mayor of Birmingham had disgusted them, when he urged that the downfall of the Church was to be effected by appealing to the love of personal gain which animates every citizen, and to the passions and prejudices which more particularly influence the poor and uneducated. At the first blush it may seem that this is not exactly the kind of question which will stir the working classes to enthusiasm, and bind them to the Liberal cause'! Mr. Chamberlain is not far wrong. Even Mr. Bright himself appears now to see how useless for the practical purpose of rallying the Liberal party is the effete cry of down with Establishments; and having been recently called upon by certain anonymous Radicals to invent a grievance for the ensuing autumn campaign, he has advised that common ground for the joint action of the various sections of the party is to be found in Parliamentary Reform. But when Mr. Forster, with reckless and acknowledged disregard of the consequences which must necessarily follow the adoption of household suffrage in the counties, gave it in emphatic terms the weight of his great authority, the leader of the great Liberal party could not make up his mind on the subject, and Mr. Lowe voted against it. The result of this debate made it apparent to many members of the party that, as a supplement to the adoption of household suffrage, some scheme for the redistribution of seats must be matured. But utterly unable to make practical suggestions or to agree amongst themselves as to what that scheme should be, they hit upon the extraordinary expedient of asking for a Royal Commission-to be presided over by Lord Greyto examine into the crude ideas of these political quacks, and to settle a future policy for them. There is no prominent question more unripe for settlement, or towards the elucidation of which less has been contributed than that of Parliamentary Reform. Take the land again. Has any advance been made towards the adoption of any definite line of action? Has such an object been promoted, when upon the vital question of permitting entire freedom of contract-to our minds the key of the whole positionthe leader of the party and Mr. Lowe separated themselves from the bulk of their followers? But what Mr. Trevelyan denounced as the Tiverton and Taunton doctrine' has prevailed. Liberalism is to be kept in abeyance until, as is fondly hoped, the reaction shall have expended its force. Its new leader is to hold a watching brief. His chief duty is to be that of careful criticism.' Almost any one would do well enough for what is avowedly only a period of transition. Lord Hartington, therefore, entered under consider- After a well-graced actor leaves the stage, so Lord Hartington has hardly received from his own party proper recognition for the manner in which he acquitted himself. In spite of mistakes such as his weak and vacillating speech upon the Bill to amend the Irish Land Act, and his unfortunate reference in his eulogium upon Lord Charles Russell to the Liberal bias of that official-his moderation, his hardheadedness (as Mr. Bright called it), and common sense have produced a favourable impression. And upon more than one occasion, notably in the debates on the Peace Preservation Act, he has shown his fairness and consistency by the support which he gave to the Government, in spite of his colleagues. He has exceeded expectation, he has filled the office as well as any man of his party could have done, and yet he has not led. At the meeting to which we have already referred, Mr. Charles Villiers expressed his belief that the choice of a leader would fetter no man's judgment. It certainly has not done so. Opposition benches have become Liberty Hall. Every one has pursued his own crotchets in his own manner and at his own time; and the only man who perhaps has shown steadiness in the pursuit of a definite object, and who has ever been on the watch for possible combinations by which his adversaries might be placed in a minority, his rivals shown to be incapable, and he himself to be indispensable, is Sir William Harcourt. The Hardly, however, had the new leader warmed to his work than a new element of disturbance was suddenly introduced. His illustrious predecessor was politically neither dead nor sleeping. To some it had seemed that an overwhelming dread of Papal aggression had entirely engrossed a mind for which religious speculation had always had a special attraction, and that the greatest orator of the day had permanently abandoned the field in which he was pre-eminent for one in which he had always failed to obtain more than a qualified success. Το him, like Roscommon, 'the wit of Greece and Rome were known, And every author's merit but his own.' But it was not to be so. No sooner had the unambitious Budget of 1875 been given to the world than he superseded Lord |