Chapter IX (2)

Previous to the meeting of Parliament, the public was taken completely by surprise by the retirement of Lord Palmerston from the Ministry, and the appointment of Earl Granville as his successor. In the House of Commons explanations took place on the first day of the session. The reply to the Queen's speech was moved by Sir Richard Bulkeley; but, before the question was taken, Sir Benjamin Hall called upon the Premier for explanations of the disruption of the Ministry. Lord John Russell immediately entered upon the subject, and after declaring his former confidence in Lord Palmerston's management of Foreign Affairs, and stating that in 1835, and again in 1845 and 1846 he had strongly recommended him for that department, went on to state his conception of the position of the Foreign Secretary toward the Crown and the Prime Minister. He believed it to be the duty of the Minister to give to the Crown the most full and frank details of every measure, and either to obey the instructions he may receive, or resign. It "did so happen," he said, "that in 1850 precise terms were laid down in a communication from the Queen to Lord Palmerston--in which Her Majesty required, first, that Lord Palmerston should distinctly state what he proposes in a given case, in order that the Queen may know as distinctly to what she is giving her Royal sanction; and, secondly, that having once given her sanction to a measure, that it be not arbitrarily altered or modified by the Minister. The Queen further expected to be kept informed of what passes between the Foreign Secretary and the Foreign Ministers, before important decisions are taken based upon that intercourse--to receive the foreign dispatches in good time, and to have the drafts for her approval sent to her in sufficient time to make herself acquainted with their contents before they must be sent off."--In reply to this communication, Lord Palmerston said he would not fail to attend to the directions which it contained.--As for the Prime Minister, Lord John Russell said he considered him, in fact, responsible for the business of the department. At a meeting of the Cabinet, on the 3d of November, Lord John expressed his opinion on the situation of Europe, which he deemed very critical. There was a prospect of seeing social democracy, or absolute power triumphant on the Continent; and in either case the position of England would be very critical. He thought it necessary, therefore, for England to preserve a strict neutrality, and to exercise the utmost vigilance to prevent any cause of offense being given. Yet very soon after that, Lord Palmerston received a deputation, and listened to addresses containing expressions in the highest degree offensive to sovereigns in alliance with England. Still Lord John said he was willing to take the responsibility for all this, as he thought the Secretary had merely committed an error.--The next cause of difference occurred immediately after the usurpation of Louis Napoleon on the 2d of December. The next day a cabinet meeting was held, at which a request was presented from Lord Normanby, the English Minister at Paris, that he might be furnished with instructions as to the continuance of diplomatic relations with the new Government. In conformity with the decision then made, Lord Palmerston, on the 5th, instructed him to make no change in his relations with the French government. On the 6th, Lord Normanby wrote saying that he had called on M. Turgot, the French Minister, and informed him of this decision, to which M. Turgot replied that it was of less consequence as he had two days since heard from M. Walewski, the French Minister in London, that Lord Palmerston had expressed to him his entire approbation of the act of the President, and his conviction that he could not have acted otherwise than he had done. On seeing this dispatch, Lord John asked Lord Palmerston for an explanation, but got no answer. On the 13th of December, he received a letter from the Queen, requesting an explanation; but Lord Palmerston maintained the same disdainful silence. On the 17th, he received another dispatch from Lord Normanby to Lord Palmerston, complaining that Lord Palmerston should use one language in his instructions to him and another to the French Minister in London, and that while enjoining him not to express any opinion of French politics, he should himself have expressed a very decided judgment. Such a course, he added, subjected him to misrepresentation and suspicion. Lord Palmerston, in reply to this, stated that Lord Normanby's instructions related only to his conduct, and not to opinions: but that if he wished to know Lord Palmerston's opinion concerning French affairs, it was, that "such a state of antagonism had arisen between the President and the Assembly, that it was becoming every day more clear that their coexistence could not be of long duration; and it seemed to him better for the interests of France, and through them for the interests of the rest of Europe, that the power of the President should prevail, inasmuch as the continuance of his authority might afford a prospect of the maintenance of social order in France, whereas the divisions of opinions and parties in the Assembly appeared to betoken that their victory over the President would be the starting-point for disastrous civil strife." Lord John Russell said that this dispatch contained no satisfactory explanation of Lord Palmerston's course; that the merits of the French government had now nothing to do with the case: but that the real question was, whether the Secretary of State was entitled of his own authority, to write a dispatch, as the organ of the Government, in which his colleagues had never concurred, and to which the Queen had never given her sanction. He thought, therefore, that he could not without degrading the Crown, advise her Majesty longer to retain Lord Palmerston in the Foreign department, and he had accordingly advised her to request his resignation, which she had done. In continuing his remarks Lord John expressed his belief that the President of France had acted under a belief that the course he had taken was the one best calculated to insure the welfare of his country; and proceeded to censure the course of the English press toward Louis Napoleon, as calculated to excite the animosity of the French nation, and perhaps to involve the two countries in war. Lord Palmerston replied in a very moderate tone, substantially admitting the truth of Lord John's statements, though denying the justice of his inferences. He repelled the intimation that he had abandoned the principles he had always maintained--that he had become the advocate of absolute power, or in favor of the abolition of Constitutional governments. He concurred in what Lord John had said of the relations that ought to exist between the Foreign Secretary and the Crown, and said he had done nothing inconsistent with them. In regard to the deputation he had received, he admitted that he had been surprised into a false position. His delay in answering the letters of Lord John Russell had been entirely owing to the great pressure of business; and his expressions of opinion concerning Louis Napoleon were unofficial and in conversation. Other members of the cabinet had expressed the same opinions, and under circumstances quite as objectionable, certainly, as those under which his own conversation was held. Lord Palmerston rehearsed the outlines of the policy he had pursued in managing the foreign relations of Great Britain, and concluded by saying that, on quitting office, he left the character and reputation of England unsullied, and standing high among the nations of the world.----In the House of Lords the debates following the reading of the Queen's speech, had greater incidental than direct interest. The Earl of Derby took occasion to speak in very strong terms of what he termed "the injudicious and unjustifiable language of a large portion of the English press upon the French government." He insisted that it was the duty of the press to maintain the same tone of moderation in discussing public affairs which is required of public men; and he styled it worse than folly for the press in one breath to provoke a French invasion, and in the next to proclaim the unpreparedness of the English people to meet it. He was followed by Earl Grey, who expressed his hearty concurrence in what he had said of the press, as did also Lord Brougham. The London journals, and among them pre-eminently the _Times_ and the _Examiner_, have taken up the challenge thus thrown down, and have vindicated the press from the censures of the Lords in some of the ablest writing of the day.

On the 9th, Lord John Russell introduced his new Reform Bill. Its provisions may be very briefly stated. The £10 franchise was to be reduced to £5; the £50 county franchise gives way to one of £20; that of copyholders and long leaseholders is to be reduced from £10 to £5; and a new class of voters is to be created out of those who, resident in either county or borough, pay direct taxes to the amount of 40 shillings. In 67 boroughs additions are proposed to the electoral boundaries; the property qualification is to be abolished, and the oaths of members to be put in such a form as to create no invidious distinctions. A member taking office under the crown vacates his seat; but if he merely changes it, he may retain his representative capacity. The Premier made a speech upon the subject, over an hour in length, and remarkably free from feeling of any sort. The main objections urged to the bill are that it does not concede the ballot, that it does not remedy the evils of unequal representation, and that the changes it does make in the existing law are of very little importance. Notice has been given of an intention to move amendments to the bill which would remedy these defects.----On the 19th, Lord Naas proposed a resolution severely censuring the Earl of Clarendon's employment of the _World_ newspaper to support the government, as being "of a nature to weaken the authority of the executive, and to reflect discredit on the administration of public affairs." The Earl was defended warmly by Lords Russell and Palmerston, both of whom urged that, irregular as the proceeding might have been, it was of trifling consequence compared with his lordship's eminent services to the country. The resolution was rejected 229 to 137.----On the 16th, Lord John Russell introduced a bill for the establishment of a local militia force. He gave a sketch of the recent history of the military organization of England, and set forth the reasons which, in his judgment, rendered it important that some more effectual provision should be made for the defense of the country against possible hostilities. The general provisions of the bill were that persons of the age of 20 and 21 years should be subject to being balloted for as militia men--that one-fifth of the whole number should be chosen--and that they should be drilled for 14 or 28 days each year. The entire force thus raised, he thought, would be about 70,000 the first year, 100,000 the second, and 130,000 after that; the forces could not be taken out of their own counties, without their consent, except in case of invasion or danger. The subject was very slightly discussed at that time, but came up again on the 20th, when Lord John Russell again spoke in support of the bill. Lord Palmerston expressed his entire concurrence in the principle of the bill, but moved as an amendment, to strike out the word _local_ from the title, in order to make the title correspond with the character of the bill itself. Lord John Russell said he could not understand the object of such a motion, and that he should oppose it. After some further debate the amendment was put and carried, ayes 136, noes 125, showing a majority against the Ministry of 11. Lord John Russell expressed great surprise at the vote, and said that he should hold office no longer. The resignation of the Ministry under such circumstances created a good deal of surprise. In the course of three or four days a new cabinet was formed under the leadership of the Earl of Derby--late Lord Stanley--which is thoroughly Protectionist in its sentiments. The Earl is Prime Minister; Mr. Disraeli is Chancellor of the Exchequer and leader in the House of Commons; Mr. G. F. Young is Vice President of the Board of Trade; Duke of Northumberland, first Lord of the Admiralty; Lord John Manners, Commissioner of Woods and Forests; Sir F. Thesiger, Attorney General; Earl of Eglintoun, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland; Duke of Montrose, Lord Steward; Lord Stanley, Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs. It is supposed that the new Ministry will break ground at once against the corn-law policy established by Sir Robert Peel, hostility to which is the only bond of union among its members; and the universal belief is that the new administration will fail to be sustained by the country on that question.

One of the earliest topics to which the attention of the Earl of Granville, Lord Palmerston's immediate successor, was called, was the degree of protection which England should afford to political refugees from other countries. In reply to representations on this subject from the Austrian Government, Earl Granville, in a dispatch dated January 13, spoke of the right of asylum which England always had granted, and could never refuse to political refugees; and added that the English government would, nevertheless, consider any intrigues, carried on there against governments with which they were at peace, as a breach of hospitality, and would not fail to watch the conduct of suspected refugees, and to prevent them from abusing the privileges afforded them by English laws. Prince Schwarzenberg, in reply, expressed satisfaction at the tenor of these assurances, but said, that until the words of the English government were followed by deeds, it would be necessary for Austria to take measures of precaution and protection against the dangers which the ceaseless machinations of foreign refugees on English soil created. The Imperial government would be especially rigid in regard to English travelers, and would, moreover, reserve the right of taking into consideration ulterior measures, if, unhappily, the need of them should still make itself felt.----A terrible disaster from floods occurred in the north of England on the 5th of February. Several of the factories of the town of Holmfrith, near Huddersfield, were supplied with water by large reservoirs, in which an immense body of water had been accumulated. Owing to the heavy rains one of the largest of them broke its banks, and the water poured through the town, sweeping houses away in its path and causing an immense loss of life and property. Over one hundred persons were drowned. Very great injury had been sustained by other towns in that vicinity. In the south of Ireland also, especially in the counties of Limerick and Clare, much property and some lives have been lost by the swelling of the smaller streams.----The dispatches of Earl Grey recalling Sir Harry Smith from the government of the Cape, have been published: they show that his incompetence for the post has been the real cause of his removal, and that the policy of the government is to prosecute the war with increased vigor, so as to reduce the Kaffirs and Hottentots to unconditional submission.----We mentioned in our Record for March, the repulse of the English slave squadron while attempting to ascend the river, to the town of Lagos, on the coast of Africa, contrary to the commands of the chief. Later advices report the renewal of the attempt, and the overthrow of the chief's authority, though at a very heavy cost on the part of the English. The town of Lagos has long been the stronghold of the slave trade on that part of the coast, and the English have directed their efforts toward the suppression of the traffic there. The chief of the town named Kosoko, was actively engaged in the trade himself, in connection with Portugese and Brazilian dealers. He had obtained power by expelling a rival named Akitoye, who sought aid against him in an alliance with the English. When Kosoko, therefore, refused permission to the English to bring their armed boats to Lagos, the commander of the squadron concerted an attack upon the town, with the adherents of the expelled chief. The town was defended with a good deal of skill and bravery, and the assault upon it lasted three days, at the end of which time it was found to have been deserted. The English lost 16 killed and 64 wounded. It is said that the destruction of this town will do much toward the suppression of the slave trade.----A new expedition in search of Sir John Franklin has been resolved upon by the British Government, and Sir Edward Belcher has been appointed to the command. He will leave England about the middle of April, with the four ships which composed Captain Austin's late expedition. His attention will first be directed to Beechey Island, where Sir John is known to have passed the winter of 1845-6. The great object of this new expedition is to examine the upper part of Wellington Strait as far as possible beyond Captain Penny's northwest advance.

FRANCE.

Political affairs in France remain substantially unchanged. The law organizing the Legislative body has been published. The Legislature is to consist of 261 deputies, elected by the people, in the proportion of one for every 35,000 electors in the first instance, with one more deputy for every 25,000 beyond that number. Algeria and the Colonies are not to be represented. All electors are eligible except public functionaries. Every Frenchman of the age of twenty-one, who has not forfeited his civil rights, has the vote.----We mentioned in our last Record the protest of the testamentary executors of Louis Philippe against the decree of confiscation, issued by the President. The Princes of Orleans--the Duke de Nemours, and the Prince de Joinville--have addressed a letter of thanks to the executors, in which they resent with becoming indignation the insults heaped upon the memory of their father, which they say are "especially odious when brought forward by a man who on two different occasions received proofs of the magnanimity of King Louis Philippe, and whose family never received any thing from him but benefits." To the honor of the country which they had always loyally served and would ever love, they say, "these disgraceful decrees, and their still more disgraceful preambles, have not dared to appear except under the _régime_ of a state of siege, and after the suppression of all the guaranties which protected the liberties of the nation." The Duchess of Orleans has also addressed the following brief and indignant protest to the President:--"Monsieur--As I do not acknowledge your right to plunder my family, neither do I acknowledge your right to assign to me a dotation in the name of France. I refuse the dowry.--HELENA D'ORLEANS."----The new Ministry of Police has been organized by decree. The Minister is to have attached to his office three directors-general, who are to appoint inspector-general, special inspectors, and commissaries of police in the departments. Prominent among the duties of all of these officials are those of watching and reporting every attempt to influence public opinion against the government, keeping a close eye on the press and on publications of every sort--upon theatres, prisons, schools, and political and commercial associations. They are all to be under the immediate direction and control of the Minister of Police. The organization spreads a complete network of precaution over every form of public opinion in France.----Louis Napoleon gave a magnificent entertainment to a large number of the English nobility at Paris, on the 1st of February, at the Elysée---the whole party numbering 44. It is stated that after the dinner was over, he took occasion to complain of the attacks upon him in the English press, and to say that he should be obliged to exclude them from France. He also spoke of the rumors that he intended to invade England as absurd.----Jerome Bonaparte is appointed President of the Senate, with the _petit_ Luxembourg as his official residence in Paris, the Palace of Meudon for his country-seat, and a salary of 150,000 francs, besides 800,000 francs for entertaining, a year.----It is stated that Madame George Sand recently had an interview with the President, and made very strong representations to him of the sufferings of the peasantry in the rural districts from the immense number of arrests that had been made of suspected persons, and urgently requesting him to grant a general amnesty. The President is said to have expressed great interest in the subject, but to have declined any compliance with the request.----The decree for the regulation of the press has been promulgated. It is almost needless to say that it destroys every semblance of freedom of the press, and makes it a mere subservient tool in the hands of the Government. It consists of four chapters, and the following are their provisions: (1.) No journal can be published without first obtaining permission of the Government; nor can any foreign journal be admitted into France except by the same permission: and any person bringing into France an unauthorized paper will be liable to a year's imprisonment and to a fine of 5000 francs. Every publisher must deposit caution-money, from 15,000 to 50,000 francs, before he can issue a paper, under heavy penalties. (2.) Stamp duties are imposed upon all journals whether published in France, or introduced from other countries; and the authorities are enjoined to seize all publications violating these regulations. (3.) Every violation of the article of the Constitution which prohibits Legislative reports, is punishable by fine of from 1000 to 5000 francs. The publication of false news subjects to a fine, and if it be of a tendency to disturb the public peace, imprisonment is added. No account of the proceedings of the Senate or Council of State, and no report of trials for press offenses, can be published; and in all affairs, civil, correctional, or criminal, the courts may forbid the publication of their proceedings. Every editor is bound to publish official documents, relations, and rectifications which may be addressed to him by any public authority; if he fail to do so, he may be fined and his journal seized No one can carry on the bookseller's trade, or issue or sell engravings, medals, or prints of any kind, without obtaining permission of the authorities, and becoming subject to the same restrictions as are imposed upon journals. (4.) With regard to existing journals, three months are allowed for them to deposit the caution money required, and to conform to the other provisions of the new law.----The President, by decree, has abolished all fête days except the birth-day of the Emperor, on the ground that their celebration recalls the remembrance of civil discord; and that the only one observed should be that which best tends to unite all minds in the common sentiment of national glory----The Paris correspondent of the London _Times_ reports that a correspondence of general interest has taken place between the governments of France and Russia. It is said that the Czar wrote to his minister in Paris, expressing dissatisfaction at the adoption by the President of the emblems of the Empire, stating that he saw in all these movements the preliminaries of the re-establishment of the Imperial era. While he approved of the _coup d'état_ which had put an end to republicanism in France, he could only regard Louis Napoleon as the temporary chief, and could not approve any attempt to give another and more important character to his authority. It is said that Louis Napoleon replied to this note, when it was read to him, by complaining that his intentions had been misunderstood and misrepresented;--that, in re-establishing the emblems of the Empire, and in reverting to the constitution of the year VIII., he only meant to establish a strong authority in his hands; that the recollections of the Empire constituted his strength, and invested him with popularity among the masses; that there was nothing astonishing in the fact of his seeking in the institutions of the Empire what was certain to re-establish authority in France; that he had no intention of re-establishing the Empire, or of making himself Emperor; that he did not want either, for the accomplishment of the mission to which he had been called; that his title of President sufficed for him; that he had no reason to trouble himself about an Imperial dynasty which has no existence; and that there was no reason for the Emperor Nicholas troubling himself about it.

The relations of France to Belgium are assuming a character of considerable interest and importance. The fact that most of the exiled Frenchmen found refuge in Belgium, excited the fears of the government that they would thence exert a dangerous influence upon French affairs. Strong representations were therefore made to the Belgian authorities, who have adopted every possible means of satisfying the French government, by suppressing distrusted journals, exercising strict vigilance over refugees, and ordering many of them out of the country, or away from Brussels. It is also stated that the Duke of Bassano, the new French envoy to the Belgian court, has been authorized to demand from that government the removal of the monumental lion erected by the British government to commemorate the battle of Waterloo, and to demolish the other trophies. The rumors of hostile designs on the part of Louis Napoleon, have led to the publication of an official denial in the _Moniteur_. That article states that the French government has addressed no demands whatever to foreign powers, excepting Belgium, where it was necessary, in order to prevent a system of incessant aggression. It has not armed a single soldier, neither has it done any thing to awaken the least susceptibility in its neighbors. All the views of the power in France are bent upon interior improvements. "It will not depart from its calm demeanor, except on the day when an attack shall have been made on the national honor and dignity." The London _Morning Chronicle_ states, as a fact of considerable historical interest, that, as early as 1849, Louis Napoleon distinctly solicited General Changamier to join with him in such a usurpation as he has since achieved, offering to make him Constable of France, with a million of francs a year and the palace of the Elysée for a residence; and that he was met by a peremptory refusal.

SPAIN.

An attempt to assassinate the Queen of Spain was made by a priest named Martin Marino, on the 2d of February. The Queen was proceeding along the principal gallery of her palace toward the grand staircase, intending to go out upon a fête occasion, for which splendid preparations had been made, when she was approached by the priest, who kneeled to present a memorial. Her Majesty reached out her hand to take it, when he suddenly drew a dirk and made a stab at her side. Her arm, however, partially averted the blow, though she was severely wounded. She leaned against the wall, and one of her aids came up just in time to prevent a second blow. The assassin was arrested and confessed the crime--saying that his object was to render a service to humanity; and denying that he had any accomplices. He was tried on the 3d, and sentenced to death by strangulation. On the 7th, he was executed by the _garote vil_. He conducted himself with the most brutal indifference, refusing any of the usual offices of religion, and abusing all who came near him. The Queen suffered considerably from the wound, but was convalescent at the last accounts. Several arrests had been made, of persons suspected of having been concerned as accomplices with him, but no evidence was found to implicate any.

CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE.

No events of special importance have occurred in any of the continental nations. All the governments seem to be more or less agitated by rumors of differences with England and France, and their policy is somewhat affected by them. The suspicion of hostile intentions on the part of Louis Napoleon toward Belgium has enlisted a good deal of suspicion, and letters from Brussels, dated the 19th February, state positively that a convention had been entered into, by which Russia agrees to furnish 100,000 men for the defense of that territory in case it should be invaded or seriously menaced by France. Prussia has also promised similar assistance, and the Prince de Ligne is said to be now in Berlin for the purpose of arranging the details. These important statements, however, do not seem to be made on authority sufficient to command full credit.

In AUSTRIA, it is said, that Prince Schwartzenberg is preparing a general statement of the views of Austria concerning the state of Europe, and an indication of the line of policy which she will pursue. The mediation of Austria between Sardinia and the Pope has also been proposed, and amicable relations are again to be established between the Sardinian and Austrian governments. A new treaty has been concluded, by which Austria is to supply Russia annually with large quantities of salt.

In SWITZERLAND the only movements of importance relate to the demand made by the French government that the Council should promise hereafter to expel any fugitive who might be designated as dangerous. The Federal Government, while firmly refusing to enter into any such engagement, avowed its readiness to take all proper and necessary precautions against the sojourn of political refugees in Switzerland becoming a source of disquietude to neighboring states. An official report on the subject states that in June last there were but 235 political refugees in the Swiss states, and that they were all under the strict _surveillance_ of the police. Those who had taken any active steps likely to compromise the interests of other states, had been promptly expelled. There was a great deal of public interest manifested throughout Switzerland concerning the relations between their country and France, and considerable apprehension prevailed that their rights and liberties might not always be rigidly respected.

The government of the Duchy of HOLSTEIN was formally transferred by the Commissaries of Prussia and Austria to the Commissary of Denmark, Count Reventlow-Criminil, on the 8th of February, in an official conference held at Kiel.

In both GREECE and TURKEY there have been changes of Ministry. In the former country the change has no general importance. In Turkey, it is significant of reaction. Reschid Pacha, the most liberal and enlightened minister ever placed at the head of affairs in the Ottoman empire, has been dismissed, and is succeeded by Raaf Pacha, a man upward of eighty years of age, who was prime minister in 1838. The negotiation in regard to the Holy Sepulchre has been abandoned, and the French minister was to leave Constantinople forthwith.

Editor's Table.

Science, it has been said, is essentially unpoetical. It must be acknowledged, nevertheless, that it not unfrequently furnishes some of our choicest similes. Homer had, indeed, long ago compared thought to the lightning; but how much more definite, and, on this account, more effective, is the kindred simile drawn from the discovery of the modern electric telegraph. And yet, is there not here something more than simile? Is not the communication from soul to soul literally, as well as figuratively _tele-graphic_, that is, _far-writing_, or _writing from afar_? We hope to interest our readers by a brief examination of the query we have started.

An identity might, perhaps, be shown in the very medium of communication, so far as the process has a material medium. There is no difficulty, and no danger, in admitting that the electric fluid may be the agent in the cerebral and organic transmission, as well as in the galvanic battery. But it is mainly in the process itself that we may trace the striking correspondence between the two modes of intelligence. The primary element of all thought is a spiritual _emotion_. The end of all communication, mediate or immediate, is to produce the same emotion or feeling in another soul. To this every other step is subordinate. Even thought is not so much an end, in itself, as is the spiritual feeling, or exercise of soul corresponding to it. This spiritual emotion, then, must first be brought under the form of a conception, or an objective picture, without which it can not be distinctly read and understood, even by the soul in which it first exists, much less communicated to another. So far the process is strikingly the same with that adopted in the telegraphic dispatch. The soul, by its own spiritual energy, first turns the emotion or feeling into a thought. It translates the thought from the abstract to the concrete, from the intuitional to the conceptive. It brings it down into the soul's chamber of imagery, and imprints it on the brain. In other words, the message is reduced to writing and given to the clerk at the station-house, who translates it into telegraphic signals. The more immediate transmitting power is now set in operation. An influence is imparted from the brain to the nerves (or wires) of the vocal organs. It is continued to the lungs, and sets in motion a current of air. This impinges on the outward atmosphere, and is carried on through successive undulations until it reaches the other station for which it was designed. It enters the office-chamber of the ear, communicates with the other cerebral battery, and then writes off from the auditory nerve or wire, the signals which, by the other logical and linguistic faculty, or the clerk at the second station, are translated into the pictorial symbols understood by all, and thus written on the second brain. The spiritual inhabitant to whom it is directed, again translates it, in a reverse order, from the verbal to the conceptive, from the conceptive to the emotional--the intuition is spiritually _seen_--the emotion is _felt_--and thus the circuit is completed.

This is substantially the process every time we hold intercourse by means of speech. The operation is ever imperfect in all, and more imperfect in some than in others. We make mistakes in translating our own intuitions and emotions. We make still greater mistakes in taking off from the wires, and in re-translating the conceptual language which brings to us the feelings and intuitions of others. But there is no other way. The author of our spiritual and material constitution hath literally _shut us up_ to this, and we can not get out of the limits within which He has confined our intercourse with other spirits. Clairvoyance boasts of having broken through them, or over them; but clairvoyance is yet a fact to be established. Even, too, if it has any claims upon our belief, it will doubtless be found, in the end, to be only a stenographic shortening of some of the steps, without being, in reality, any more an _immediate_ action of mind upon mind than the ordinary process.

Spirit can only communicate with spirit through outward symbols, and by more or less steps, all of which may be regarded as _outward_ to the most interior effect. By long familiarity this circuitous chain assumes to us the appearance of directness. But in truth we never see each other; we never hear each other; if by the terms be meant our very _self_--our very spiritual form, our very spiritual voice. Even to our human soul may be accommodated without irreverence the language which Paul applies to the Deity. Even of us it may be said, although in a far lower sense, "_Our invisible things are only understood by the things that are done_," even our temporal power and humanity. Each soul is _shut up_ in an isolation as perfect, in one sense, as that which separates the far distant worlds in the universe. Had there been round each one of us a wall of adamant a thousand feet in thickness, with only the smallest capillary apertures through which to carry the wires of telegraphic signals, we could not, as to the essential action of the spirit, be more secluded than we are at present. We say the essential, or first action of the soul--for doubtless there may be various degrees of difficulty or facility in the modes of mediate communication. But in this more spiritual sense each one of us exists by himself. We live apart in utter loneliness. The seclusion of each spirit knows no infraction. Its perfect solitude has never been invaded by any foreign intrusion.

To one who deeply reflects on the fact to which we have been calling attention, the first feeling, and a just feeling too, might be one of pride. The dignity of our nature would seem enhanced by such a constitution. Each man's "mind is his kingdom," in which he may be as autocratic as he wills. It makes even the lowest in the scale of humanity such an absolute sovereign within his own spiritual boundaries, so perfectly secure, if he please, against all foreign intervention. It sets in so striking a light what in its physical and etymological, rather than its moral sense, may be styled the _holiness_--_the wholeness_, _hale-ness_, or _separate integrity_ of each man's essential being. It is in this point of view, too, that to every hale mind the pretensions of clairvoyance must appear so inexpressibly revolting. We allude to its assumption of having the power of committing what, for the want of a better name, we can only characterize as spiritual burglary--in other words, of breaking into our spiritual house, and taking its seat in the very shrine of the interior consciousness. What can be more degrading to our human nature than to admit that any other human power, or human will, can at any time, and from any motive, even for purposes of the most frivolous amusement, actually enter this inner sanctuary, turning the immortal spirit into a paltry show-house, and rudely invading, or pretending to invade, the soul's essential glory, its sacred and unapproachable individuality?

There is, however, another aspect of the thought in which it may give rise to a very different, if not an opposite emotion. There may be, too, at times, a feeling of the deepest melancholy called out by that other consideration of our spiritual solitude, of our being so utterly alone upon the earth--a feeling which has never been set forth with so much power and, at the same time, truthful simplicity, as in the touching language of inspiration--"_The heart knoweth its own bitterness, and a stranger meddleth not with its joy._" And then, again, although we would in general shrink from it as a painful ordeal, there are periods when we long for a more searching communion with other spirits than can ever be expected from the most intimate methods of mediate intercourse. There are periods when we are irresistibly drawn out to say--O that some other soul were acquainted with us as we think we are acquainted with ourselves, not only with our fancied virtues and our mere real sins, as they appear imperfectly manifested by misinterpreted signals from within, but with our very soul itself. Yes, there is sadness in the thought that we are so unknown, even to those who would be thought to know us best--unknown alike in that which makes us better as in that which makes us worse than we seem;--for we are all better, and we are all worse than we appear to our fellow-men.

And here, we think, may be found an argument for the existence of Deity, built on stronger and more assuring ground than is furnished by any of the ordinary positions of natural theology. It is an argument derived from one of the most interior wants of our moral constitution. There is no doubt that in our fallen state a feeling of pain--at times of intense pain--may connect itself in our minds with the recognition of the Divine idea; but there is also an element of happiness, and, if cherished, of the highest and most serious happiness, in the thought that there is One Great Soul that does penetrate into our most interior spirituality. There is one Soul that is ever as intimately present with us as our own consciousness--that holds communion with us, and with whom we may hold communion, in a manner impossible for any other. There is One that thinks our thoughts, and feels our feelings, even as we think them, and as we feel them, although, along with this, in another manner, too, of its own, that transcends our thinking "even as the heavens are high above the earth," and is as far removed from all the imperfections of our own spiritual exercises. There may seem an inconsistency in this apparent mingling of the finite and the infinite in the Divine Nature, but it is the belief of both which unlocks for us the meaning of the Scriptures, and sheds light over every page of revelation and of providence. There is a higher Soul that pervades our spiritual entity, not as an impersonal or pantheistic abstraction, but as the most distinctly personal of all personalities--not as a mere Law of nature, but as a Father "who careth for us," as a Guardian "who numbereth the very hairs of our heads," as a Judge who taketh note of every thought, and gives importance to all our forgotten sins, while He is, at the same time, present with, and caring for every other individual soul in the universe. As in some previous musings of our Editorial Table, we might have adverted to the Divine physical power as the ever-present dynamical entity in the seeming vacuities of space, and binding together the isolated material worlds, so here we may regard the Higher Spiritual Presence as the true bond of union among all those isolated souls that fill the spiritual universe. Thus viewed, the fact of such communion would be the highest truth in philosophy, as a belief in the reality of its possible consciousness would be the highest article of faith.

HISTORY IS PHILOSOPHY TEACHING BY EXAMPLE.

The thought has been deemed so profound as to give rise to some discussion respecting its origin. As a definition, however, the maxim is liable to serious objection. It presents, rather, the uses, or the chief use, of history, than the essential idea. The individual memory may also be said to be _philosophy teaching by example_; but then it becomes only another name for that experience which is but the application of remembered facts to the guidance of the future life. So history may be called THE WORLD'S MEMORY--the memory of a race--of a nation--of a collective humanity.

It is in vain, then, for us to say what facts, in themselves, _ought_ to constitute history. The matter is settled. It is not what any philosophy, or any theology, or any science of history may deem _worthy_ of remembrance, but what has actually been thus remembered, or is now so entering into the common mind as to form the ground of memory in the future. The parallelism in this respect between the individual and this national, or common mind, is striking and complete. The true history of each man is not so much what he has done, as what he has thought and felt. The thought is the _form_ of the feeling, and the act merely the outward testimony by which both are revealed. It is not, therefore, every act, or _doing_, which enters into his history--not even those which have formed the greater part of his constant daily exercise--but simply such as for any reason have made the deepest impression on the inner man, and which, therefore, stand out in the records of his memory when all else has perished. What this chronicles is the man's veritable history. However important other parts of his conduct may appear externally, this is his true spiritual life. It is the record, the imperishable record of that which has reached and stirred the depths of his soul, while other acts, and other events, have had their lodgment only in the outward un-emotional existence.

Such memory, or such history, may not be what it ought to have been; it may not be the measure of accountability. All that we insist upon is the fact, that, whether right or wrong, it is the true history of the individual, because it is his real life. But then there are degrees of memory. It is not always, in all its parts, either present to the mind, or capable of recall at will. Still, what has once in this manner truly _affected_ his soul, has by this become a part of it, and can, therefore, never be lost. Like some old historical record it may be laid aside for a season, but sooner or later must it come forth, and claim its place as belonging to that individual personality into which it enters as a constituent and inseparable portion.

The parallel may be traced to almost any extent. Like the memory of our earliest years, so is the dawning history of a young world or nation, except so far as positive revelation has shed its light upon it. Both are _mythical_. In other words, facts are remembered, not as they are in themselves, but as seen through the magnifying and coloring influence of the emotional medium with which they are ever afterward associated. Like stars observed through a densely refracting atmosphere, they stand apart, each in its own seclusion, and hence they loom upon the vision without any of those mutually connecting associations that belong to our subsequent thinking. There is, too, in both cases, the same chronicler--the pure remembrance, a _tradition_ unaided by any of those outward helps that are afterward employed. At a later period more regular annals succeed this mythic handing down of isolated facts. The state has its formal remembrancer, its [Greek: syngrapheus], or historical _arranger_ of events in a _connected_ story, and in their mutual relations. Corresponding to this, then, arises in the individual that orderly habit of thinking which produces associations, having a similar effect in causing a stricter union between the outer and inner relations of the soul.

Again, there are times when the man gets to himself what may be called an _artificial_ memory. He would change the natural flow of thought, and determine what he _will_ remember, and what he _ought_ to remember--forgetting that before he can effectually do this he must be changed himself in the innermost springs of his being. He studies mnemonics. He manufactures new laws of association. But this effort ever fails in the end. Nature will have her way. The old course of memory will return; and with it the spiritual history of the man will go on as before.

So, too, the state or nation may have its artificial periods, and its systems of political mnemonics. The mythical, the epic, the heroic, and not only these, but the later, yet not less thrilling chronicles of stirring events that carried with them the whole heart of the national humanity, give way to statistics, and documents of trade, or tables of revenue, or in a word, to what are deemed the more important records of _political economy_. Here, too, there may be an attempt to change the course of nature, and make that to be history which never can be such, except at the expense of some of those attributes, which, although liable to great and dangerous perversions, are still the noblest parts of our humanity.

Such artificial records of history may be highly useful in their connection with the interests of particular classes and occupations. The time also may come in which they may gather around them an antiquarian value, blending with some of the more universal emotions of our common nature. But aside from this, although they may furnish rich materials for other departments of useful knowledge, they are not history, simply because they lack that catholic element, by which alone they enter into the common memory, and thus become a part of the common national mind.

Some say the world has heretofore been all wrong in the matter. History has been but a record of wars, of tumultuous national movements, of theological dogmas, of religious and political excitements. It has been but the biography of monarchs and royal families, or a narrative of popular commotions as connected with them. It has presented us only with names of isolated pre-eminence. The time has now come when we "must change all that." The daily pursuits of the masses, and all the statistics of ordinary life--these ought to have been history, and good writers will henceforth make them so, not only for our times, but for the periods that are past. "The history of the world," it has been said, "is yet to be written." But, alas! for these plausible and philanthropic reforms, there are two serious obstacles in the way. In the first place, the records of such matters as they would make the grounds of history are too scanty and uncertain, because they never have had that catholic interest which would give them an abiding place in the common national memory. In the second place, it will be equally difficult to secure for them such lodgment in the universal thinking of the present age, or of ages yet to come. Not that the world will always continue the same, or that there will not be ever new matters of genuine historical interest. The course of things and thinking may greatly change. Wars may cease. Monarchy may expire. Even democracies may become obsolete. Such changes may be for the better or the worse. Faith may go out. Those religious dogmas and discussions, which politicians and political economists have regarded as such useless and troublesome intruders into the province of history, may lose their hold upon the mind. Still our essential position remains unchanged. It will not be what the masses severally _do_ but what _moves_ the masses, not their _several_ occupations and pursuits, but what has a deep and moving interest for the common national soul, that will constitute history. The wars of the White and Red Roses were the true history of England for that period, because they were the only subjects that could be said to occupy all minds alike. It was not because the chronicler forgot the masses, and thought only of the great, but because he wrote for the masses, and for the masses not only of his own time, but of times to come.

Events may have more or less of a personal connection with monarchs, but it would not follow from this that the history which records them is a history alone of kings and statesmen. It is only so far as they and their acts were the representatives of the national heart, and the national thought, that they came down in the national memory, and the national records. The separate ordinary pursuits of men may, in one sense, occupy more of our ordinary thinking, but the other or historic interest we recognize as being of a higher, a more exciting, and even a more absorbing kind, because belonging to us, and felt by us in common with multitudes of other souls. The mechanic or farmer may consult books of a professional or statistical nature, but _as history_ they will be ever unreadable. Even in the workshop and in the field, although the habitual current of his thoughts may be upon what would seem to him the nearest, and therefore the more important concerns of life, these other elements of history will yet have the greater charm, and occupy a higher place both in his feelings and his intelligence.

It is what he thinks _with others_ that constitutes the higher life of his being. Hence the tendency of the popular mind, in all ages, to be absorbed in the recital of deeds most remote from the daily associations of ordinary life. Hence the popularity of the rhapsodist, the minstrel, the chronicler, and, in our own age, of the Magazine and the Newspaper. Hence, too, in the more free and popular governments of modern times, the universal devotion to what is called _politics_. Why is the farmer more excited by an election than by the sale of his wheat? Most false as well as unphilosophical is the view which would ascribe this to any calculating patriotism, to any utilitarian vigilance, or to what is commonly called an _enlightened self-interest_. The mechanic thinks more of politics than of his trade; for the same reason that led his ancestor to the crusade or the tournament. Instead of being the offspring of utilitarian views, this _public spirit_ is often most blindly destructive of the _private_ interest, and most directly opposed to all the teachings of that political economy which recognizes its own utilities as alone the true and rational ends of human action. In a much higher sense, too, is all this true, when a religious element enters into the common or catholic feeling.