CHAPTER XX.

O'CONNELL--SMITH O'BRIEN AND MEAGHER--JOHN MITCHELL--INFORMERS--THE CLOSE OF 1848--THE MILITARY--A FRENCH VIEW OF POPULAR COMMOTIONS.

In 1844 there was the most intense excitement amongst all classes, sects, and parties of the Irish community, arising from the prosecutions instituted by the Attorney-General, Thomas Berry Cusack Smith against O'Connell and several others for various alleged violations of the laws in their meetings, publications and other proceedings adopted by them to promote a repeal of the Union. The preliminary informations were sworn before a judge, and none of the police magistrates were called upon to interfere, in any way whatever, from the commencement to the conclusion of the affair. On the 30th of May, the accused were sentenced to certain terms of imprisonments and fines, and they were liberated on the reversal of the judgment by the House of Lords, on the 6th September. A few days before the sentence was pronounced, I dined in company with Mr. John O'Connell, when he stated that they expected to be sent to Newgate or Kilmainham, I advised him to have a special application made to the court to order the imprisonment in the Richmond Bridewell, which was cleanly and spacious, and where they might have access to two extensive gardens. My suggestion was adopted, and the prisoners were sent by a circuitous route, avoiding the great thoroughfares of the city, to the bridewell. In the evening I was going home to my residence in Rathmines, when I overheard a woman loudly expressing to a number of sympathetic listeners, her hearty detestation and curse upon all "who had any hand in sending the Liberator to the same place as that to which Porter sends _his blackguards_."

Thomas Berry Cusack Smith, the Attorney-General, had been nicknamed, "Alphabet Smith," from the multiplicity of his names, and when the judgment of the Queen's Bench was reversed, a ballad appeared to the tune of "The Shan van vocht." A police inspector asked my opinion as to the prevention of it being chanted by the street vocalists, and I advised him against making it more known and more relished by the multitude, as it would be by his interference. It is as follows:--

"Musha, Dan, who let you out? Says the T. B. C. For you're here beyant a doubt, Says the T. B. C. Sure I thought I locked you in, You contrariest of min, And what brings you here agin? Says the T. B. C.

Through the chimney did you climb? Says the T. B. C. For you're up to any crime, Says the T. B. C. There were locks both great and small, Did you dare to pick them all? Did you scale the prison wall? Says the T. B. C.

No, I didn't scale the wall, Says the Dan van vocht, Through the flues I didn't crawl, Says the Dan van vocht, Not a weapon did I take, And no lock I tried to break, Such attempts I'd scorn to make, Says the Dan van vocht.

But might is foiled by right, Says the Dan van vocht, As the darkness by the light, Says the Dan van vocht, My cause was on a rock, 'Twas the law that picked the lock, And I'm free, my bantam cock, Says the Dan van vocht.

Oh! confusion to you Dan, Says the T. B. C. You're a divil of a man, Says the T. B. C. And we're in a precious plight By your means this very night, For you've bothered us outright, Says the T. B. C."

During the progress of the prosecution against the repealers, Tom Steele, who was one of those indicted, interrupted the proceedings several times, audibly contradicting some expressions of the Attorney-General, and annoying him by exclamations and gestures. Tom prided himself on being considered the _fidus Achates_ of O'Connell, and was never so happy as when closely associated with his political leader. It was said, and I believe it was perfectly true, that Smith succeeded in quieting Tom, by intimating that if he continued to exclaim and gesticulate, his name should be struck out of the indictment, and his chance of participating in the expected martyrdom thereby annihilated.

Whilst O'Connell and the other state prisoners were in the Richmond Bridewell, they received a continual supply of the choicest provisions and wine sent as presents by their political adherents. It would be very difficult to particularise any article suited to a luxurious repast, which was not tendered for their enjoyment. I was twice at the prison, on magisterial business, during their detention, and on each occasion I saw materials fit for princely banquets brought for their use. I was rather surprised at one contribution which very soon disappeared. It was half a ton of _ice_, and it did not preserve its consistency, beyond a few hours. I heard from some of the prison officials that O'Connell's meals were generally simple in their material, but that his appetite was healthy and strong. When released from confinement he did not appear to have been weakened by its infliction.

It would not be in accordance with the objects of my reminiscences to advocate or condemn the political opinions or proceedings of any portion of the community, unless they involved direct incitements to, or the actual adoption of, open violence. In noticing O'Connell as a remarkable public character, I may express my conviction that he had a decided repugnance, even in the hottest times of political excitement, to the application of actual force. It may be said that he could "speak daggers," but he was disposed to "use none."

Whenever I had an opportunity to hear him, whether on legal or political occasions, I availed myself of it, in the anticipation of being highly amused, and I was scarcely ever disappointed. I am tempted to detail two or three of my recollections, which have not been noticed by any of his biographers. I am aware that my expressions must be far inferior to his diction, but my readers will not, I hope, be too severe in criticising my inefficiency.

I was present at the trial of a very beautiful young lady who, with her mother and two other persons, was indicted for conspiring to take away a minor from his parents, and have him married to the young lady in Scotland. The prosecution was conducted with considerable acrimony, and the Gretna-Green bride was described as a person of very tarnished reputation, whose favorite paramour had been a _blacksmith_. No proofs were adduced of the imputed immorality, and O'Connell, in a speech for the defence, denounced it as a fabrication "which had not even the merit of originality, but was borrowed from the mythological assignment of _Vulcan to Venus_."

At the commencement of the first viceroyalty of the Marquis Wellesley, a newspaper was started in Parliament Street by a Mr. Hayden. It was called _The Morning Star_, and its editorial articles were almost exclusively devoted to the most disparaging and insulting productions in reference to the Lord Lieutenant or O'Connell. The latter was never forgotten; and every term of obloquy was put in requisition for his diurnal vilification. Firebrand, Rebel, Arch-mendicant, Liar, Impostor, Schemer, were liberally appropriated to him, and even the shape of his hat, and the mode of carrying his umbrella, became subjects of offensive observation. The attention of the Attorney-General was attracted to an article in _The Morning Star_, headed "The profligate Lord Wharton," the writer of which stated that the history of the Wharton viceroyalty had never been fully published, because a true description of such a character would be considered as an incredible exaggeration, but that it might now be produced without any apprehension of such an opinion prevailing, inasmuch as its worst details would be found fully equalled in Dublin Castle under the auspices of its present occupant. A criminal information was filed against Mr. Hayden for a libel on the Lord Lieutenant; and he became extremely apprehensive of a severe punishment, resulting from his very offensive comparison of Lord Wellesley with Lord Wharton. He immediately engaged William Ford as his attorney, and the next step was to retain O'Connell as his principal counsel. The latter agreed to act, but required that he should be left completely free to adopt whatever line of defence he preferred, and to manage the case at his own discretion. The trial was held in the King's Bench before Bushe, the Chief Justice, and the opening statement for the prosecution was delivered by the Attorney-General, Plunket. Sir Charles Vernon, who held the appointment of register of newspapers, was the first witness; and he produced the official copy of the paper containing the alleged libel, and it was read by him for the court and jury. O'Connell was then at the outer bar, and occupied a seat on its front row. He submitted to the judge, that when a document was given in evidence, either party could insist on the entire of it being read. To this proposition the Chief Justice acceded, expressing a hope, however, that his time would not be wasted in listening to irrelevant matter. O'Connell then required Sir Charles to read sundry portions of the paper in which "a person named O'Connell" was made the subject of the most defamatory animadversions. The entire auditory were convulsed with laughter, as he gravely proceeded to elicit ardent wishes for the speedy hanging or transportation of the arch-agitator, the apostle of mischief, the disseminator of disaffection, the mendicant patriot, the disgrace to his profession, and the curse of his country. When the case for the prosecution closed, he proceeded to address the jury, and his speech was replete with the highest encomiums on the Marquis Wellesley, to whose Indian government and diplomatic services he referred as exhibiting all the qualities of perfect statesmanship. He then expressed his surprise at the Attorney-General condescending to notice the publication of a mere newspaper squib, which could not possibly affect the illustrious viceroy. In the paper produced there were several unwarrantable attacks upon some person named O'Connell, who had instituted no proceedings against their publisher, although, perhaps, he was very likely to be affected injuriously by them, especially if his livelihood depended upon his character and reputation. Bitterly as he had been assailed, he had remained quiescent, and so regardless of the invectives directed against him, that it was very probable he had no desire whatever to mulct or incarcerate his assailant, but would rather aid in terminating his anxieties, and sending him _home to his wife and five children_.

At the conclusion of his speech O'Connell left the court. I had been sitting very near him, and went out at the same time. Ford was in the vestibule, and when they met, O'Connell said, "Ford, I hope that I did not make a wrong cast in my closing sentence; _is the fellow married_?"

Hayden was not convicted, the jury disagreed, and the prosecution was not renewed. The publication of "The Morning Star" was almost immediately discontinued.

In 1834, the question of Repeal of the Union was introduced by O'Connell to the House of Commons, and negatived by an overwhelming majority. The principal opponent of the motion was Thomas Spring Rice (afterwards Lord Monteagle) who was then one of the members for Limerick city, and a very general opinion was immediately entertained that he would never be elected there on any future occasion. In the autumn of 1834, I was appointed a revising barrister in reference to tithes, and in that capacity I visited Limerick. I had finished my business, and was preparing for my departure, when about two o'clock in the afternoon, O'Connell arrived at the hotel (which was, I think, Cruise's), and the street was immediately thronged to excess by an enthusiastic multitude. He was on his way to Dublin; but whether he wished to address the people or not, it was manifest that a speech from the balcony was unavoidable. I got as near to him as the crowded state of the apartment permitted, and was enabled to hear his oration fully; but of course I cannot do more than give its general import, and endeavour to describe its effect. He commenced by stating that a report had been circulated that he intended to interfere with the people of Limerick, and to direct, and even _to dictate_, the choice of their Parliamentary representatives. This rumour he denounced as a scandalous, infamous _lie_. He had no wish to curb or trammel them in the exercise of their rights, and he was not such a fool as to attempt dictation to a community too independent and intelligent to yield to any influence except dispassionate arguments suggested by patriotism and conducive to the welfare of their beloved country. Frequent and rapturous cheers from listening thousands evinced their appreciation of his address, especially when he referred to the valorous defence of their city by their forefathers. At length he said that his topics were exhausted, and that he had nothing to add unless they wished him to tell them a _little story_. Shouts were immediately raised for "the story, the story," and he proceeded to narrate that about the beginning of the present century an opinion was very prevalent that the French intended to invade Ireland, and it was considered probable that their fleet would enter the Shannon, and land the troops on the left side of that splendid river, in the vicinity of Limerick. The French had exacted such heavy contributions from the continental states which they had occupied, that very great apprehensions were entertained that their invasion of Ireland would be attended with similar results, and that the industrial resources of the country and the savings of the people would be speedily spoliated. There then lived near Foynes a farmer named Maurice Sullivan, a man of excellent character, religious, sober, thrifty, industrious, and intelligent. He had a loved and loving wife, comely and amiable, who made his home happy by the observance of every domestic duty. On a Sunday morning, they were returning from Mass, and were chatting as to the probability of the French coming over. He said that they would ruin thousands who were then comfortable and contented, and that they would help themselves to everything they fancied. "I have now," he added, "to tell you, my dear Jenny, that I have more money than you knew of. I have had good crops, and the cattle and sheep have thriven well and fetched high prices, and I have laid by close on eight hundred pounds. If a Frenchman came across my savings, he would not ask leave or licence, but plunder me at once."

"Maurice," replied his wife, "I must acknowledge to you that I have put by more than one hundred pounds that I made from time to time by the poultry and eggs and early vegetables. Now that we have made a clear breast to each other, what course shall we take to keep the money safe?"

"Well," said he, "I was down, a few evenings ago, in the old churchyard, and noticed a hole at the corner of the big monument belonging to the RICE family. I think if I got a strong canister or jar, and packed the money in it, and hid it under the monument, closing up the hole completely, nobody would ever think of ransacking such a place as that, or suppose that it contained anything valuable."

"Maurice," replied Jenny, "it was a cute notion of yours, and I am sure that no Frenchman would ever go to root out your canister, but still with my consent not even a farthing shall ever be put there."

"Why, what is your objection?" said her husband.

"My objection is very simple," answered Jenny; "do anything else that you please, but not that, for _I wouldn't trust a Rice living or dead_."

The "little story" was vehemently cheered, and its concluding words became a political maxim amongst the repealers of Limerick. Rice had no longer a chance of election there, but he was returned at the next dissolution for an English borough, I believe for Cambridge. The "little story" appeared to me rather an extraordinary sequel to the disavowal of any desire to interfere, to direct, or to dictate.

In some recent publications I have seen it stated that O'Connell achieved a complete triumph over an inveterate termagant named Biddy Moriarty, whose quickness and copiousness of abusive diction deterred all others from engaging her in any wordy warfare. His success was ascribed to the application of mathematical terms to his vituperative antagonist, who became completely bewildered at finding herself designated a detested parallelogram, a notorious hypothenuse, an octagonal diagram, of rectangular habits and rhomboidal practices. I do not believe that he ever came in collision with the redoubtable Biddy, for the tale of her discomfiture was very rife before O'Connell had attained to great eminence, either politically or professionally, and I have heard it told in the year 1817 in the presence of Curran, who was mentioned as her successful antagonist, and complimented on the effective means he adopted to overcome the incorrigible scold; and I recollect hearing him state that the encounter took place at Rathcormack, in the County Cork. He added, that having declared, towards the conclusion of the verbose strife, that he could never condescend again to notice such "an individual," the exasperated woman replied that he had a power of impudence to say the like, for that she was no more an _andyvigal_ than he was himself.

In reference to O'Connell, I have a very distinct recollection that in 1837-38 he took a prominent part in opposing combinations amongst the working tradesmen of Dublin. He attended public meetings, and spoke of the evils arising from combinations or trade-strikes in the strongest terms. Hostility, amounting to threats of personal violence, was displayed towards him by some of those to whose opinions and proceedings he was adverse. I have heard Joseph Denis Mullen state that he suggested to O'Connell that the course adopted by him might endanger his popularity, to which he replied:--

"When my popularity depends on the surrender or compromise of my conscientious convictions, I shall not seek to retain it." It was in reference to his conduct at that time that the late Lord Charlemont, when presiding at a public banquet to the metropolitan members, of whom O'Connell was one, and proposing the toast of the evening, applied a very appropriate quotation, derived from classic knowledge and suggested by classic taste--

"Justum, et tenacem propositi virum _Non civium ardor prava jubentium_; Non vultus instantis tyranni Mente quatit solida."--[8]

In April, 1835, I had occasion to visit London, and, during a sojourn of about three weeks, I spent several evenings in the gallery of the House of Commons. There had been a recent change of ministry, and the Melbourne cabinet was formed. In the preceding Government Lord Ashley had been a Lord of the Admiralty, and at the time to which I refer, a sergeant-at-law, named Spankey, had been returned, on the liberal interest, for a metropolitan constituency, I believe Finsbury. I happened to be in the gallery one evening when there was not a member of the administration present, and the opposition benches were also unoccupied by any of the leading conservatives. There was no probability of any interesting discussion arising, and the secretary of the admiralty was engaged in moving the navy estimates to which he did not appear to apprehend any objection, as they had been framed at a considerable reduction of the preceding amounts. I was about to retire from the gallery, when Lord Ashley arose, and denounced the proposed votes as having originated in a spirit of parsimony, and as tending to impair the most important element of our national strength. Having delivered a speech, in which the greatest ignorance of their duties, and a most culpable neglect of our naval requirements were imputed to the Government; he was followed by Sergeant Spankey, who manifested the utmost hostility to the administration, and declared it to be unworthy of public confidence or respect. To the surprise of all present, O'Connell arose and expressed his opinion that the estimates had been judiciously framed, and that the Government had evinced a laudable desire to economize the national expenses. He proceeded to say that he was not astonished at the hostility of the noble lord towards an administration by which he had been deprived of power and the sweets concomitant to power; but he was unable to comprehend the motives, or even to imagine the reasons, for the asperity and unmitigated hostility of the honorable and learned member, from whom the Government had not taken any power or official advantages, and to whom, it was believed, that they had offered _his full value_.

"Sir," exclaimed Spankey, "they offered me nothing."

"Mr. Speaker," said O'Connell, "that is exactly what I surmised."

Laughter, loud and of long continuance, followed this uncomplimentary explanation of the Sergeant's worth, and I believe that "Spankey's price" was for some time adapted as a term to signify a total deficiency of value.

Having detailed these few personal recollections, which I hope may not be considered too discursive, I have to approach the incidents of 1848, when the "Young Ireland" or "Confederate" movement occurred. It is not my intention to laud or censure those engaged in its furtherance or its repression, my only object being to state such facts as came under my personal observations, or of which I had official cognizance, leaving to the reader to derive amusement from some circumstances and useful information from others. I think it was on the 21st day of March that the crown-solicitor preferred charges of sedition against Smith O'Brien and Meagher, and required me to make them amenable. When the informations were sworn, I asked him if he had any objection to an intimation from me to the accused, that such proceedings had been instituted, in order that they might appear and give bail to stand their trial without subjecting them to the indignity of arrest. To this course Mr. Kemmis at once acceded; and I called on Smith O'Brien at his lodgings in Westland Row that evening, and found Meagher and several other persons along with him. When I stated the object of my visit, one of the company exclaimed, "Give no promise or undertaking to appear. Accept no courtesy from your prosecutors, but let the Government incur the odium of arresting you." Both of them, however, declined to follow such advice, and assured me that they would attend at the Head Office, at noon, on the next day. They thanked me for the inclination I had exhibited to save them, as much as possible, from personal annoyance; and as I was leaving, O'Brien laughingly exclaimed, "Your urbanity, Mr. Porter, shall not be forgotten; and when the government of Ireland comes into our hands; your official position shall not be disturbed." At the appointed time they gave the required bail, and I returned the informations for trial. They were indicted for sedition, and, unfortunately for themselves, were acquitted. I say "unfortunately," because if they had then been convicted, and imprisoned for three or four months, they would have been unable to engage in the proceedings which eventuated in their conviction for high treason, at Clonmel, in the following September. I think it worth remarking, that when they had utterly failed in their insurrectionary designs, and had been banished to a distant region, I occasionally heard great culpability and folly imputed to them; but in reference to their conduct, the most severe censures were uttered by the lips of him who had urged them to reject the slight courtesy and the forbearance of arrest, to which I have alluded above.

In all the cases of treason-felony which were tried in Dublin, the informations were sworn before me. I had also to issue warrants for the apprehension of the principal organizers of Confederate clubs, and search-warrants for concealed arms. Such transactions were numerous, and the period was one of very fervid excitement. I am therefore proud of being able to declare that no imputation of partiality, precipitance, or undue severity was preferred or suggested in reference to my magisterial conduct. There were several instances in which I refrained from issuing warrants on the evidence of constables or of private informers; but in all such cases the higher authorities were made acquainted with the peculiar circumstances under which further proceedings appeared to be unnecessary or inadvisable, and approved of the forbearance. If a person was known to have joined a Confederate club, or to have made seditious speeches, or to have subscribed to a fund for the purchase of arms, or to have attended meetings for drilling and training; and if it was also known that he had relinquished such associations and practices, and especially if he was desirous of leaving the country, there was no anxiety to prosecute him or delay his departure.

JOHN MITCHELL.

The most important case tried in Dublin was that of John Mitchell, for treason-felony, grounded on his publications in _The United Irishman_ newspaper. He had been committed by me, and on the 27th May he was convicted and sentenced to transportation for fourteen years. The only relic of the period in my possession is his "pattern pike," which was found in his house when the police seized the premises. On the day of his condemnation, I was passing along Capel Street on an outside hackney jaunting-car. At Mary's Abbey corner I was recognized by a crowd of roughs, and saluted with a volley of stones. Not one of the missiles struck me, but the carman received a blow on the point of his left elbow which caused intense pain, and elicited copious maledictions. Police were close at hand, and protected me from further aggression. I suggested to the driver that the stone was not intended for him, to which he replied--"It hurt me all the same. Them vagabonds shouldn't throw stones without knowing who they'd hit."

INFORMERS.

No more offensive epithet can be applied in this country, in the warmest spirit of invective, than that of an "informer." I have repeatedly heard it asserted as a popular maxim, that all informers should be shot. I can truly and deliberately declare it to be my firm conviction, that if all the informers of 1848 were so disposed of, the Confederate clubs and revolutionary associations of Dublin would have been decimated. There were in one great commercial establishment _forty_ Confederates, of whom _ten_ were in communication with the police. I resided at Roundtown, and I would often have preferred walking into town or strolling homeward, when I had to take a seat on a hackney car or in an omnibus to avoid a request to step into Blackberry Lane or turn up the Barrack Avenue, and listen to details of proceedings of which it is highly probable I had been already fully apprised.

A smith, in a town between thirty and forty miles from Dublin, was engaged to manufacture pikes. He made two hundred and eighty pike-heads, and brought them, according to directions which he had received, to a place, the designation of which was peculiarly appropriate for the reception of such articles, for it was the _slaughter-house of a butcher_. They were of the best quality, in respect of materials and workmanship. The industrious tradesman delivered the "goods" to his customer, and was paid fully and promptly. He then made me acquainted with the transaction, and I referred him to the Commissioners of Police. They entrusted its management, or perhaps I might more correctly say its mismanagement, to a superintendent who, instead of having the premises closely watched, proceeded precipitately to seize the weapons. They were packed in strong deal cases, of the contents of which the butcher and his assistants declared that they had no knowledge. Before the Executive came to any conclusion as to what course was to be adopted, the hopes of the revolutionists had been extinguished at Ballingarry. No prosecution was instituted, and the pike-heads were sent to England where, I believe, they were transferred to the naval department.

THE CLOSE OF 1848.

On the 18th July, 1848, Dublin was proclaimed under the Crime and Outrage Act, and a bill was introduced about the same time for suspending the Habeas Corpus Act. When the Government adopted these measures, several of the clubs came to the conclusion that it would be advisable to dissolve. In almost every instance the police authorities were fully informed of such proceedings, and some of the persons, to whom the books and transactions were entrusted, made us acquainted with their contents. The Government was extremely anxious to prevent the formation of revolutionary associations in the provinces; but as soon as the insurrectionary attempt of Smith O'Brien collapsed, the executive became less desirous of exercising severity. It was considered necessary to offer £500 reward for the apprehension of O'Brien, and £300 for the capture of each of his principal associates; but _I know_ that the news of their arrival in a foreign land would have been more welcome in Dublin Castle than the intelligence of their arrest.

The authorities were aware that at a certain place in Sandymount, a suburb of Dublin, nightly meetings were held by some young men who had been engaged in the Confederate movement, for the purpose of consulting on the most feasible mode of leaving the country, and providing the requisite expenses for their departure. There was not the slightest inclination to balk their wishes or impede their progress. Some of them have attained wealthy and important positions in distant lands, and some have returned home, where they may spend their remaining days, undisturbed and undisturbing.

During the first six or seven months of 1848, the superior officers of regiments in Dublin made frequent communications respecting the assiduous exertions of the disaffected to sap the loyalty of the soldiery, and effect an introduction of the military element to their fraternity. Much time and money were applied to this purpose; but, although the sobriety of the soldier was frequently impaired, his loyalty remained intact, and his usual apology for an unsteady step, or for returning late to his quarters, ascribed the fault to "the bloody rebels." "They had made him drink a great lot of bad toasts, and he wouldn't have done so for them, if the whiskey had not been very good." The only instance of disaffection found to exist in a military body was amongst the Royal Artillery at Portobello barrack. An Irishman who had enlisted in London, in 1846, under a false name, induced thirteen of his comrades to join him in forming a Confederate association. Their usual place of meeting was very near to my residence at Roundtown; and the first information which I received concerning them arose from the resentment of a woman. I had some communication with Colonel Gordon, the Adjutant-general of the Ordnance, and we were both inclined to disbelieve the statement which I had received. Eventually, however, we became satisfied of its truth, and acquired such additional evidence as to render the case sufficiently strong to procure a conviction of all the delinquents by a court-martial. I earnestly advised Colonel Gordon to leave them unprosecuted, but to disperse them. He adopted my views, and in a few days not one of the fourteen was in Ireland, neither were any two sent to the same station. In 1861, I saw the principal offender at Gibraltar. He was then a sergeant.

The abortive attempt at revolution in 1848 was decidedly obstructive to the progress of all the industrial pursuits which conduce to the prosperity of a country and the comforts of a community. It also involved the expenditure of vast sums in maintaining military forces, augmented police and constabulary, and defraying the expenses of special commissions. There is only one agreeable recollection afforded by it. Neither side shed blood. Popular violence inflicted no mortal injury, and no victim was demanded by the ultimate restoration of Law and Order. I am now disposed to lay before my readers a short extract from a French author (Le Comte de Melun), in reference to insurrectionary movements. It is from his "Life of Sister Rosalie, the Superioress of the Order of Charity." A work crowned by the French Academy.

"In the ranks of society against which they appear to be more specially directed, insurrections and revolutions suspend profit, diminish revenue, compel a restriction of outlay, and introduce disquietude and torment where security and abundance previously prevailed. But their consequences are far more afflicting and grievous upon those who live with great difficulty upon the labor of each day. The least commotion in the street stops the work, and of course the wages. It changes the difficulties of life into the deepest misery.

"Whatever may be the issue of the movements for which their aid is bespoken, the people are always the dupes and victims of these sanguinary comedies. Whilst many of those who speak in their name, who push them on to the conflict, who breathe into their ears the sentiments of revolution, conceal themselves during the combat, escape the consequences of defeat, and are always foremost to adjudge to themselves the advantages of success; the wretched people are exposed to blows on the field of battle, to prison or exile in case of defeat, to the diminution of employment, and thereby to an abridgment of their resources if they are conquerors--for it requires much time, after a successful revolution, to restore security to capital, activity to commerce, its proper balance to society; and the workman has not, as an inducement to patience, like the heads of parties, portfolios, important situations, and a share in the budget. Then, after having suffered much, and waited long for the day of compensation, the mere individual does not see it arrive, and remains as he was previously--a workman, when he does not become a pauper."

FOOTNOTES:

[8]

The man of firm and righteous will, No rabble clamorous for the wrong, No tyrant's brow, whose frown may kill, Can shake the strength that makes him strong.