ples which ten years ago I brought with me from my native country had become in any degree weakened; on the contrary, every year passed in nearer observation of European systems has served to confirm them. My misgivings arose at the almost unquestioning uniformity with which 'the organic forms of the American Republic were accepted as representing the model of self-governing society. To substitute a Senate for the House of Lords and a President for the Queen appeared to be the fixed aim of the great majority of those who avowed Republican principles. Having been these many years convinced that the Senate and the Presidency are serious anomalies in the American Republic, and that the healthy progress of that country has been impeded by them, I availed myself of an invitation to deliver an address before the London Dialectical Society to briefly indicate my views in this regard. In that address I spoke of the normal belief that popular government naturally organised itself into two branches of Legislature and a President as a Republican

Superstition,' and though the phrase was sharply criticised, it still seems to me a true one.

France has advanced to the momentous and critical phase which is now absorbing the attention and exciting the sympathy of the most earnest and thoughtful friends of human liberty throughout the world. Republicanism in some form has become the necessity of France. That the lifelong Monarchist who now presides over that nation should be showing a determination to build up the Republic is a sufficient indication that the forces acting in that direction are irresistible. The great problem has become now the form in which the Republic shall be organised. And knowing that the law of mechanics that a machine is no stronger than its weakest part, is equally true of political constitutions, it can only be with anxiety that an American can hear the many rumours. that the President of the French Republic is aiming, not only to preserve the Presidential office, but also to secure the addition of a second legislative Chamber to the Government over whose

organisation he has such controlling power. It is these rumours which give an ominous sound to the address of the President of the Council-General of Avignon in September last, wherein, speaking as the organ of M. Thiers, he said: 'The President trusts that the French Republic will one day become a worthy sister of the Republic of the United States.' There are incidents in the early relations between France and America of which the citizens of both countries have every reason to be proud, which have long invested the governmental forms of the United States with a charm for French statesmen and a prestige for the French people. The critical admiration of De Tocqueville, and the less discriminating eulogium of M. Laboulaye, have contributed to that general satisfaction with which the holding up of the Transatlantic Republic as a model by the President's representative at Avignon has been received by the Republicans of France. It may seem unpatriotic for an American to deprecate any such fate for France as that which M. Thiers promises; but I

believe that the love of one's country which seeks to correct its faults, and to prevent those faults from misleading other nations, is truer than that whose motto is 'Our country, right or wrong.' A patriot cannot serve his country better than to do his best to purge it of error, and to make its influence an unmixed benefit to mankind.

I may be asked why it is that, if the evils to which I call attention in these pages really exist, they have not already been subjects for denunciation and discussion among the distinguished statesmen and political thinkers of the United States. Why should it be left to an unofficial and obscure American in London to discover them? I answer, I have not discovered them. I have often heard similar expressions and criticisms fall from the lips of Americans at whose feet I have rejoiced to sit. But it is true that I find myself unable to fortify my positions by printed essays, or by Congressional debates. The reason why I cannot bring authorities is, so far as the statesmen and politicians of the United States are concerned,

somewhat humiliating, and so obvious, that I am almost tempted to pass them by. The American politician does not criticise the Senatorial or Presidential office, because he hopes to fill both. That the great reformers who have signalised their devotion to a noble cause by refusing all official connection with the Government, so long as its flag protected slavery, may be explained by the consideration that they have had to pass their lives in the thick of battle, and could hardly spare attention to enquiries which, apparently, were not urged upon them by the matter in hand. I say apparently, for I shall show in the following pages that the struggle in which they fought so bravely was not only prolonged, but finally transferred, from the arena of debate to that of war by the constitutional defects which I have felt impelled to press upon the attention of European Repub

licans.

I am, my dear M. Blanc,

&c. &c.

M. D. CONWAY.