has such profound contempt, were distinguished members of the last Liberal Cabinet-a Cabinet which disestablished the Church of Ireland, which established an admirable system of national education both in England and Scotland, which abolished the unjust practice of purchasing commissions in the army, and which altogether effected more reforms, and did more hard work than any Government had achieved in the same space of time before, or than the present Government seems likely to accomplish in the future. It is too much that four illustrious members of such an illustrious Cabinet, are to be sneered at and ridiculed as 'Whigs,' by this, the most junior member of the Government, because they have dared to have an opinion of their own. Fortunately, other people of more judgment than Mr. Russel, refuse to be led blindfold and unresisting wherever even Mr. Gladstone may choose to lead them, however deeply they respect and admire that great statesman. We are convinced that, in one instance at least, the opinion of the country has been on the Whig, rather than on the Radical side. Since Mr. Forster resigned, the course of events has surely proved to every unprejudiced mind that he was right and the Government The chief point of difference between them was that he wished the Coercion Bill to precede the Arrears Bill, that he desired to have the means of preserving law and order before any concession was made in the way of releasing Mr. Parnell. He resigned, and within a fortnight the murder of Lord Frederick Cavendish, though not really worse than that of Mrs. Smyth, or of many others which had taken place before, forced the Government instantly to introduce the Bill which Mr. Forster had wanted. As if still further to show that the Chief Secretary realised the situation in Ireland in a manner that none of his colleagues did, the recent revelations in connection with the Phoenix Park trials, have proved that the country was at that time in a far more dangerous condition then was supposed, that repeated attempts had been made to assassinate Mr. Forster himself, and that Mr. Parnell, whom the Government had persisted in releasing, even at the cost of losing Mr. Forster's services, had been involved in the grave suspicion of assisting and encouraging the 'secret'-or in other words,

wrong.

'murder'-societies of Ireland. We are convinced that the country endorsed Mr. Forster's views on the occasion of his resignation. There is not a more truly Liberal constituency in the kingdom than Glasgow, yet in the course of last winter Mr. Forster was accorded one of the most enthusiastic receptions. when delivering a political address to an enormous audience in that city, which it has ever been the good fortune of a statesman to meet with. He was too generous to make any reference on that occasion to the recent unfortunate disagreement between the Government and himself, but his reception was undoubtedly intended as a mark of encouragement and approval of the line of action he had adopted. In truth, Mr. Forster on that occasion occupied the Whig or 'mean' position between the two extremes. He did not consider like the Tory that the existing state of the land laws was satisfactory in Ireland, that everything should remain in statu quo, and that all that was wanted was a firm and vigorous application of buckshot and martial law, but neither was he of opinion with the Radical, that immediate concession was the only cure, that everything was to be granted in response to murder and outrage, and that peace was to be purchased at any price. He was determined that submission should precede concession, that the law should be vindicated and obedience to it enforced before reform was thought of, and he resolutely refused to release from prison men steeped to the lips in treason,' unless they expressed contrition for the past, and promised amendment for the future.

Indeed, in our opinion, the Radical extreme on the Irish question is further removed from the mean' than the Tory. To keep things as they are' may be inexpedient and even unjust, but it is not so immoral and disastrous as to encourage in any way the idea that lawless outrage will be rewarded, and that the best and simplest method of getting the land laws reformed is to shoot the landlords. It must be admitted that Mr. Gladstone's remark in one of his speeches-though, doubtless only a slip of the tongue that attention had been called to the state of Ireland and to the position of the Irish Church, by the Clerkenwell outrage, was most unfortunate. If it is to be supposed that the Disestablishment of the Irish Church was achieved by shoot

ing policemen, it is not unnatural for an Irish tenant to try the same method of improving his position; and it cannot be denied by any unprejudiced critic that the Government have wandered from the 'mean' position not towards the extreme of severity but towards the extreme of leniency. It is to be hoped that in future the old theory and practice will prevail, and that reforms will be introduced solely because they have been proved to be just and necessary, and not even indirectly in response to lawless agitation and murderous outrage. The line of conduct followed by the Government as regards the Highland Crofters, for example, seems to us to have been eminently wise and judicious. In consideration of their illiterate and to a great extent helpless condition, they have issued a Royal Commission to inquire into their grievances, which, if found to exist, they will no doubt take steps to remedy, but in the meantime they insist upon, and have enforced, obedience to the law.

We are pleased to find our theory of the mean' in politics confirmed by one who had himself taken no small part in the government of his country, and whose opinion and reputation for sound judgment on such questions are second to none. The following passage is taken from Macaulay's History of England, Chap. I.:

'From that day (Sept. 10th, 1641), dates the separate existence of the two great political parties, which have ever since alternately governed the country. In one sense indeed, the distinction which then became obvious had always existed, and always must exist. For it has its origin in diversities of temper, of understanding, and of interest, which are found in all societies, and which will be found till the human mind ceases to be drawn in opposite directions by the charm of habit, and by the charm of novelty. Every where there is a class of men who cling with fondness to whatever is ancient, and who, even when convinced by overpowering reasons that innovation would be beneficial, consent to it with many forebodings and misgivings. We find also every where another class of men, sanguine in hope, bold in speculation, always pressing forward, quick to discern the imperfections of what exists, disposed to think lightly of the risks and inconveniences which attend improvements, and disposed to give every change credit for being an improvement. In the sentiments of both classes there is something to approve. But of both, the best specimens will be found not far from the common frontier. The extreme section of

the one consists of bigoted dotards; the extreme section of the other consists of shallow and reckless empirics.'

That is to say, the extremes in politics are bigoted dotards and shallow and reckless empirics, and the 'mean' or just position lies between them. And as it has been in past history, so it will be in time to come. Whether the question be reform of the Land Laws, the connection between Church and State, Local Option, or what not, there will be a mean or moderate position between two extremes. So on the question of war the Whig will steer between the 'Jingo' who 'swaggers down the High Street of Europe,' and Mr. Bright who seems willing literally to purchase peace at any price. And though a writer in the Fortnightly (No. 6) informs us that the future belongs to the Radicals alone,' and that 'there is not the faintest symptom of moderate Liberalism striking any responsive chord of sympathy and approval in the great constituencies,' we venture to predict that moderation will always 'strike a responsive chord' in the breasts of Englishmen, Scotsmen, and sensible Irishmen alike. Ever since England had a history, Moderation has been the leading characteristic of her politics. We have never been hurried into the terrible excesses of our neighbours across the Channel, and we have consequently not been afflicted with the violent reactions which inevitably follow. The history of the British Empire has been one of slow, steady, but constant progress, and has been, on the whole, but little affected either by the obstruction of 'bigoted dotards,' or by the experiments of 'shallow and reckless empirics.'

At the present time, certainly the position of 'moderate' Liberals is somewhat peculiar. They have at the head of their party one who holds a position of eminence such as has probably never been held by any politician since the days of Pitt. To the dignity and influence imparted by age and by half-a-century of Parliamentary experience, Mr. Gladstone unites an amount of physical energy and endurance to be envied even by one in the prime of life; an intense earnestness of character which seems to carry him through any quantity of physical or mental toil; a power of language which has seldom been equalled even in the glorious history of the British Parliament; a high and lofty moral character which.

extorts respect even from his most bitter opponents; a keenly sensitive and appreciative temperament which cannot fail to attract all with whom he is thrown in contact; and last, but not least, a splendid genius which seems equally at home when translating the beauties of Homer, or when preparing a financial statement for the House of Commons. When we contemplate the marvellous versatility of the man, and reflect upon the enormous variety of subjects he has studied, and of occupations he has engaged in with the utmost success, we feel inclined to ask if such a rare combination of talent was ever bestowed upon any politician before.

Age cannot wither him, nor custom stale
His infinite variety,'

were a description as applicable to him as to the Egyptian queen of ancient days.

No wonder, then, that such a man is practically the Government, that he alone holds the scales between the Radicals and the Whigs, and that whichever side he may happen to favour wins the day. Every one is liable to error, and in our opinion Mr. Gladstone has, on more than one occasion, but specially with reference to Ireland, placed the weight of his enormous influence on the extreme rather than on the moderate side of his followers; but whether that be so or not, there can be little doubt that the extreme men have power only when Mr. Gladstone thinks proper to support them, and were he removed from the sphere of active political life, the connecting link between the extreme and the moderate men would be weakened if not broken, and Liberal members of Parliament would not improbably have to take their choice between the Radicals and the Whigs or moderate Liberals. We have little doubt that the 'mean' will gain the day, and that however much bigoted dotards' and 'reckless empirics,' may sneer at 'Whiggery' and 'Whiggism,' that great and illustrious party will continue to be in the future as it has been in the past, the true support and backbone of the State, and the only safe pioneers of progress.

Note. Since the above was written, we have had put into our hands another contribution to the subject in the shape of 'The Radical Programme I.'