The question which next occupies the Baron is that of primogeniture. In France, since the Revolution, the right of. primogeniture has not existed. The influence of custom has, however, conferred a sort of preference on the eldest son, in giving him the right of pre-emption of the shares of his brothers and sisters, in the case of landed property. The Baron does not approve of our preserving this right of primogeniture, and argues against it at great length. He does not, however, we think, attach sufficient importance to its influence, in preserving from minute subdivision the lands of a country. He refers us to France, as a proof that such a consummation would not occur: but we do not consider that France is exactly, as yet, a case in point, unless it could be shewn that though the law authorized equal division, the more potent influence of custom did not interfere to prevent it. The Baron will readily agree with us, indeed he admits it, that a Spartan division of properties would be a step towards barbarism; that in small farms neither scientific agriculture nor the comfort and consequent independence of the farmer can be expected. The day has gone by, when Johnson would be thought to talk common sense, in distinguishing, as a period of happiness, those ages

"When every rood of ground maintained its man.' And we are quite beyond the time, when Goldsmith's leading theory in his Deserted Village could be considered as any thing else but an elegant piece of political niaiserie. Of one thing the Baron may be assured, that the system among us works well in practice. If the younger sons of our nobility and great proprietors were restricted from engaging in the honorable pursuits of commerce, and debarred by their high birth from seeking other professions than those connected with the Court, then indeed would they become a burden on the land. As it is now, they are stimulated into exertion; and the man of humble birth is not ashamed of engaging in labors, which he sees shared by the sons and grandsons of the proudest men of the empire. Had they been all sure of a provision of some sort without such exertion, it is probable that they would not generally make any; and the distinction between the aristocratic caste parcelling among themselves a given sort of property, which, under those circumstances, would rarely pass away from them, and the working roturier, instead of being diminished by the measure which DE STAËL and many other theoretic writers think would effect an equalization of classes, would be in reality enlarged. The Baron candidly admits, that the feeling not only of the great but the humble in

England is against him, on which head he tells an amusing story.

A French iron-master, travelling in England some years since, to learn the progress made there in the manufacture of iron, went down into a coal-mine, in one of those districts where radical opinions were most generally diffused among the people. When in its subterranean galleries, he conversed with the workmen on the nature and duration of their labour, their wages, their food, and all the particulars of their way of life. The workmen on their part, interested in the conversation of a man who displayed an accurate knowledge of their concerns and wants, and engaged also by the liberality of the opinions he displayed, inquired in turn into the state of the labouring people in France. "How many workmen do you employ?" said they." Four or five hundred." "That's a pretty good number: and what wages do they earn? What does it cost to feed and maintain a family in the part of France where you live?""Their wages are lower than yours: but this is more than made up to them by the cheapness of the necessaries of life.""You are right," said the miners, after having made a little calculation among themselves, which convinced them, that in reality the condition of the workmen was better in France than in England: "but how long do they work Eight hours on an average." every day ?". "No more! And what do they do the rest of the day?" "They cultivate their land, and work for themselves.". What do you say, their land? Then they have property? they have ground, they have houses of their own?". "Certainly at least most of those have, whom I employ." At these words astonishment was depicted on every countenance. "And this land," said the most intelligent of the miners, "what becomes of it at the father's death ?" "It is divided among his children.”. "What, equally ?" "Of course, or nearly so."-"But a small plot of ground, divided among several children, must be reduced to nothing?" "No; for if one of them be not rich enough to purchase the shares of his brothers, the ground is sold, and passes into the hands of some person, who can keep it entire and improve it."

-

Here the conversation ended: but the two ideas, of workmen who were landholders, and of an equal division among the children, had so powerfully struck the English miners, that on the following Sunday they formed the subject of a regular discussion at one of those clubs, in which men, even of the lowest class, meet to read the news, or converse on their common interests; clubs, where the forms of sound deliberation are much better observed in general, than we find them in France in political assemblies of a much higher cast. After a long debate, the matter was put to the vote; and the majority decided, that it was no doubt advantageous for workmen to be landholders; but that the inheritance should go to the eldest son, and not be divided.

Here, then, we have workmen, low-born, radicals in their opinions or political sentiments, who decide against an equal participation,

ticipation, and in favour of the rights of primogeniture. It would be difficult to adduce a stronger proof of the universal sway of this mode of thinking in England.'

Our news-papers occupy much of the Baron's attention. Nothing in fact can be more dissimilar from one another than the French and English Journals. The former are meagre in their collection of facts, -jejune and cowardly in their observations. A news-paper-controversy in Paris, between an Ultra paper and a Liberal, is one of the most amusing pieces of helplessness in the world. The arguments are nothing more than mere bandying about of first principles, which here would be hardly thought in place in a school-boy's theme. The Ministers are frightened by squibs, which the poorest paper in England would not print, the Opposition are horrified at doctrines, which would in this country be only deemed worthy of laughter. Our neighbours have not yet learned the value of the press, of whatever party they may be. But the remarks of our author, however valuable to continental readers, contain nothing which would appear interesting to us, to whom all the details are familiar. He scarcely makes any allusion to individual papers, except in one short paragraph, where the feeling of his political friends in England breaks out in a very bitter, and, we may add, a very just denunciation of John Bull. He tells a pleasant story of the late Lord Londonderry, which we shall quote in the original, for the raciness is somewhat lost in the translation.

En fait de nouvelles politiques, la publicité est tellement de droit commun, qu'un ministre envoie souvent aux journaux celles qui lui parviennent, avant même qu'il les ait communiqué à ses collègues. Il m'est arrivé par hasard de me trouver dans les bureaux de Downing-Street, au moment où un diplomate récemment débarqué en Angleterre, et encore tout frais émoulu de l'école de Ratisbonne, venait demander à Lord Castlereagh, s'il n'avait point reçu de nouvelles. "Comment, lui répondit le ministre, des nouvelles! Oui, sans doute, et de très importantes; tenez, voici la seconde édition du Courier qui paraît à l'instant; lisez-la, vous en saurez autant que moi."Je n'oublierai de ma vie la figure de ce diplomate stupéfait d'une manière si simple de faire connaître ce qui doit être connu de tous. Quoi! semblait dire su physionomie, pas une note, pas un office, pas un mémorandum, rien qu'un journal à envoyer à ma cour! je n'aurai ni la dignité des réticences, ni les plaisirs de l'indiscrétion.'

The remainder of his work is occupied with parliament and public meetings; of which the Baron says, the parliament itself is only one of an upper order, with more power and solemnity, but in reality as much resting upon public opinion. On the great question of parliamentary reform, he differs toto cœlo

I i4

from

from the disciples of Mr. Jeremy Bentham, not only in the details but the principles on which their theories are founded. The ridicule with which he covers some of the minute contrivances which are continually generating in Mr. Bentham's head is capital.

Neither is he much enamored of the moderate theory of reform, stoutly defending the borough-system, chiefly on the ground taken up by Mr. Canning.

In fact, the necessary consequence of a uniform system of elections, even when founded on the most rational bases, is to give the majority not merely its due preponderance, but absolute power. And it is easy to conceive, how a momentary aberration of popular opinion is as capable as a Machiavelian contrivance in the measures of government, to exclude from the national representation those men, the highest of all in intellectual rank, to whom the search of a truth is as much a natural want as a duty, and whose minds are as superior to popular passions as to the seductions of authority. Now men of this description, such as áre commencing their career, as well as those whose names are already illustrious, find in the great diversity of elections, and in the influence of an enlightened aristocracy, a certainty of being elected.

It was through this influence that most of the great men of England first gained entrance into parliament. Powerful friends, carly discerning talents yet unknown to the public, opened for them a career, which perhaps would long have remained closed to them, had they been obliged to wait till their reputation had acquired the suffrages of their fellow-citizens. It is through the same influence, that in the present day the first orators of the opposition Mackintosh, Brougham, Scarlett, Abercromby, &c. are seated in the House of Commons; and we may even maintain, without falling into paradox, that, with regard to the general weal of England, it is better they should thus obtain seats, than by means of a county election or that of a large town. It is by meditation, or by eloquence, that men of superior talents are called to serve their country; and daily intercourse with too large a number of constituents would consume much valuable time, which interests of a higher order claim. These affairs of detail are more advantageously placed in the hands of great landholders, who, in the management of their private fortunes, are brought into habitual intercourse with a number of citizens, with whose interests, wishes, and habits, they thus become acquainted.

'Let us not forget, here, an essential remark: it is, that the best champions of the people's cause, the true interpreters of their sentiments, are not members taken from among themselves, but men who, independent both by their fortunes and their station in society, feel themselves animated with a generous ardour to defend the rights of the weak, and a lively sympathy for the sufferings of the poor. Sir Francis Burdett, Mr. Bennet, men sprung from the first families in England, are those who raise their voices

most

most loudly in defence of the labouring classes; who, in the midst of the House of Commons, protect poor journeymen against the severity of an absolute master, and spread even over poor chimney-sweepers the omnipotent ægis of parliament. Would a member taken from the lower ranks of society have equal weight, even though sent to the House by the freest election? Assuredly not.

In this respect, Sweden furnishes a curious example. The peasants, as is well known, there form a separate order in the national representation, and their deputies to the diet must be chosen from among themselves. What is the consequence? Being destitute of experience in business, and the, talent of public speaking, their delegates feel themselves in some measure obliged to vote in concert with the nobles, and allow themselves to be guided by their influence; while wealthy and enlightened deputies would secure to the deliberations of their order the actual independence which they want.

What is of importance to the people is, not the being represented in this or that numerical proportion, or by men more or less approximating the class by which they are elected, but that its voice should be heard: it is especially, that some democratic elections, by uniting large bodies of people at a single point, should make them sensible of their strength, and remind their governors that they are not to be braved by them with impunity. As to the greater or smaller number of meetings of this kind, the question is of secondary consideration. The salutary movement of a Westminster election is not confined to the precincts of the metropolis: all the people of Great Britian feel its vibration.'

The Baron proposes a plan of reform according to his own ideas, which is marked by a great deal of good sense.

This, I think, I may say with confidence, that the end which ought to be pursued in England is to increase the influence of the middle classes.

And in this view, without making any alteration in the rights at present enjoyed by the county electors, the new members to be returned on the hypothesis of reducing the number of boroughs, it appears to me, might be advantageously left to electors possessing a higher qualification, but including moveable as well as landed property, This innovation seems to me naturally suggested in a country, where so large a portion of the public wealth is of this kind; and, by placing the elective franchise in the hands of richer and more enlightened citizens, it would furnish, I think, a simple as well as efficacious means of destroying corruption, and diminishing the exorbitant expenses incurred in the present elections.

A reform of this kind would not only be the most equitable in a time of tranquillity, it would also be the most prudent in a period of revolution. For if ever, which God forbid, turbulent factions should threaten the public quiet in England; if the poorer classes, urged by a demagogical rage, should rush to spoil the