from which nothing can detach him. It is this, and the assurance of his faithfulness and sincerity, which have secured to him the confidence of the nation. With this conspicuous virtue he has, at the same time, one equally conspicuous failing. He gives largely, but he seldom gives wholly. He is like the boy who cheerfully presented his friend with an orange, and then asked for a little of the peel. He likes to keep back just a little. This characteristic was seen in the Reform Bill debates of 1866, and has been rather ludicrously conspicuous in the two Church-rate Bills which have borne his name. But the right honourable gentleman improves, and, as was once said of a comparatively worthless man, we are all proud of him.'

But because Mr. Gladstone has made this declaration it does not follow that the Irish Church question is settled. We have been, until now, like an army waiting for the standard of battle to be raised. Mr. Gladstone has raised it, and in words that have gone through the whole Liberal host, has proclaimed the terms of the war. It is no exaggeration to say that he has undertaken the hardest and the most difficult task that has been undertaken by any modern English statesman. Vested interests are remarkable for their tenacity of life, but vested ecclesiastical interests are the most difficult of all to deal with. When no actual danger has threatened the State-Churches their adherents have sometimes wrought themselves up into a state bordering upon savage ferocity in their defence. They have ruthlessly assailed reputations, impeached character, and imputed motives, in a manner that would disgrace any ordinary controversy, and that is utterly unworthy of the discussion of a great religious and national question. Mr. Gladstone, and those who will act most prominently with him, will need all the support that statesmen ever needed in the day of conflict. We ask those whom these words may reach that this support be given earnestly, ungrudgingly, and without intermission. The work to be done during the next two years will, in our judgment, exceed the work that has ever been necessary to carry a great public measure. Happily there are those who can do it, and who have the heart to do it.

It is to be regretted that on this question, which, if it is to be settled at all, must be settled on the basis of principle, Mr. Bright should have uttered words which may yet tend to discord and division; and we wonder that a statesman of his experience should have dreamed, before the battle has begun, of offering terms to the enemy. It is possible, as Mr. Bright knows, to be moderate and practical without being rash, and without sacrificing consistency of principle or wisdom of action.

Duty of Nonconformists.

505

We are perfectly well aware that in questions which excite strong feelings, it is often necessary, in the end, to make a compromise. But there is a difference between doing this reluctantly and doing it spontaneously and cheerfully. For our part we should view with profound reluctance the gift of any money to any of the denominations in Ireland. We cannot see that they have the smallest claim to it, and we should be sorry that the English Government should once again adopt the vicious principle of the payment in any way, of all sects, or of a single sect. This is what Mr. Bright's proposal involves: this is his proposal. It is a pity that he should have said a word, at such a crisis as this, to cause opposition to any part of the proposed settlement of the Irish Church difficulty. It is not, of course, always possible to secure unity of thought with unity of action, but it is possible to avoid provoking disunion.

This particular question now rests, in great measure, with the Nonconformist body in this kingdom. They have before them an opportunity of testifying to their views in such a way as may secure their early and final adoption by the whole English nation. May they have charity of spirit, purity of aim, and strength of arm wherewith to win the victory. May they be worthy of their great principles, and remember that the end of this contest may, as in our judgment it will, do more to purify and extend Christian truth and to bring peace upon the land than anything that has been done in all the ages that are past.

Since the above article was in type Mr. Gladstone has given notice of the Resolutions which he intends to propose on the Irish Church. They are as follows::

( Resolved,

1. That in the opinion of this House, it is necessary that the Established Church of Ireland should cease to exist as an establishmentdue regard being had to all personal interests and to all individual rights of property.

2. That, subject to the foregoing considerations, it is expedient to prevent the creation of new personal interests, by the exercise of any public patronage, and to confine the operations of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners of Ireland to objects of immediate necessity, or involving individual rights, pending the final decision of Parliament.

3. That a humble address be presented to her Majesty, humbly to pray, that with a view to the purposes aforesaid, her Majesty will be graciously pleased to place at the disposal of Parliament her interest in the temporalities of the archbishoprics, bishoprics, and other ecclesiastical dignities and benefices in Ireland, and in the custody thereof.'

We need not say that these resolutions commend themselves entirely to our judgment, and that, in our opinion, they should receive the heartiest support of all the members of the Liberal party, and most especially of the Nonconformists.]

NO. XCIV.

L L

506

CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE.

HISTORY, BIOGRAPHY, AND TRAVELS.

History of the French Revolution. By HEINRICH VON SYBEL, Professor of History in the University of Bonn. Translated from the Third Edition of the original German Work. By WALTER C. PERRY, Esq. In Four Volumes. Vols. I. and II. London: John Murray.

Innumerable as have been the books written about the French Revolution, it is scarcely too much to say that Herr Von Sybel's book is the first and only real history of it we have had. Passionate panegyrics and equally passionate maledictions, magnificent pictures and eloquent moralisings, elaborate critiques and polemical arguments, apocalyptic parallels and rhetorical narratives, abound; but for the first time Von Sybel has seriously and conscientiously attempted to present to us, in the judicial dignity of philosophical history, the causes and character of this great explosion which shook and changed the world. He has traced its causes in the inner life, and long accumulating elements of the past; he has attempted an estimate of its phenomena, neither with the effervescent feeling of national vanity, nor with the prejudiced feeling of foreign hate, but with the conscientious carefulness and calmness of a judge, upon whom has devolved the solemn responsibility of a final historical verdict; and he has intimated its consequences so far as philosophy and the lapse of nearly eighty years may enable. Perhaps a true history of this great convulsion could not have been written earlier. Strong passions excited by it have scarcely subsided even yet; at any rate, they were very powerful when the opinions of men not much past middle life now were formed. Von Sybel is the first historian of the revolution who produces the impression of having so far divested himself of passion as to write with tolerable impartiality. We feel that the causes and relations of events have been thoroughly investigated, and philosophically estimated. The result is, that the inner life of the French people, in its relations to other nations, is thoroughly traced and laid bare to us. The remoter profligacy and despotism and uncalculating selfishness of Louis XIV., and the more immediate folly of Necker and the vanity of Lafayette, are alike estimated in their causative influence. The social, agricultural, commercial, and financial condition of the French nation is patiently examined. The weak king, and the foolish queen, Mirabeau,— the one great statesman of the revolution, Dumouriez, Danton, Vergniaud, Robespierre, and other leaders of parties, together with the different parties themselves, are judged and estimated, if not always truly, yet with solicitous impartiality. The relations of France to other European powers, especially to Prussia, Austria, and Russia, are patiently traced, and the attitude of these powers during the three or four years immediately preceding 1793 is indicated. It is given to no man to judge all things infallibly, and Von Sybel has not, we think, always put things in a true light. As Englishmen, we are the best judges of the representations given of our own policy. We have no reason to complain of Herr Von

History, Biography, and Travels.

507

Sybel's feeling towards England, which is most generous and appreciative, but in some things he has, we think, misapprehended both the feeling and the policy of our statesmen. This, however, is almost inevitable in judgments by other nations. One great fact Professor Von Sybel has conclusively proved, viz., that the responsibility of the European war to which the revolution gave birth, rests entirely with the French themselves. Neither their nation nor their revolutionary government were in any peril of assault from foreign powers. The justification of the war which the French have so persistently urged, is conclusively disproved by the most patient examination of facts. War was a necessity for the revolutionary Government, and therefore it provoked it. Herr Von Sybel never dogmatises, he never indulges in paradox or rhapsody. Whether we accept his judgments or not, he always gives us his reasons for them. His book, therefore, although full of vigour and warmth, is a very careful and elaborate study, demanding serious and thoughtful reading, which, however, it amply repays. The strong philosophical tendency of Herr Von Sybel sometimes leads him to an undue subordination of the narrative to disquisition and to defective portraiture, and renders necessary either previous acquaintance with the history or a reference to other writers. His chief excellence consists in his political estimates of men and things, and his chief contribution to our knowledge is his use of archives, hitherto inaccessible to the historian, by which the secret history of European diplomacy is revealed to us. We know the judgments and feelings with which the astounding events of 1793 were regarded by the Governments of Europe. It is with somewhat of shame that we learn that Herr Von Sybel met with greater difficulties in obtaining access to political papers in England, than in either France or Prússia. He has been permitted freely to search the French Dépôt de la Guerre, and the Archives des Affaires Etrangères, the Staats-Archiv of Berlin, and the papers of the Austrian government in Belgium in the Archives of Brussels. After long and patient efforts he gained access to an important correspondence of the Duke of Brunswick and other Prussian generals and statesmen; and, after a far greater number of tedious and timeconsuming forms than at Berlin,' he did get to 'the desired docu'ments' in the State Paper Office in London. The result is not merely a history of the French Revolution, but a careful panoramic view of the contemporary state of Europe, and a history of the revolution in its relations thereto. Especially is new and valuable light thrown upon the great crime of the last century-the partition of Poland. Herr Von Sybel unravels this dark intrigue with great zest and fulness, and for the first time makes known the secret motives of the various parties to it, especially those of the Czarina Catherine, and of Prussia.

We dare not in this notice venture upon any analysis or criticism of the separate parts of Von Sy bel's history, such as his judgment of the feudalism that the revolution destroyed, or of the communism which it established; his account of the States General, and of the events which led to the massacre of September, 1792; also of the way in which the unhappy king drifted away from the constitutional party, and sacrificed himself by his weakness and folly. Her Von Sybel has no great love for France. His sympathies are strongly monarchical, and he has manifest partialities and prejudices; although he fully recognises the necessity and value of the great movement which liberated Europe by transferring the destiny of nations from the hands of kings to those of the peoples themselves. He is defective in the dramatic power of a great historical artist; he

never rises to passion, nor makes the pulse beat quicker, but he is learned and conscientious. He writes with lucidity and strength, and with admirable common sense. He has a keen historical sagacity and considerable philosophical power, and his work is on the whole the most valuable contribution yet made to the literature of the revolution.

The Massacre of St. Bartholomew, preceded by a History of the Religious Wars in the Reign of Charles IX. By HENRY WHITE. London: John Murray.

It is somewhat remarkable that the history of French Protestantism in the sixteenth century, culminating in the horrible massacre of August, 1572,-the greatest crime and the greatest blunder that any church ever committed-should simultaneously have engaged the pens of two or three historians. Mr. Froude and Mr. Motley have both passed it in review. In our last number we reviewed Mr. Smiles' account of the Huguenots, and now Mr. White comes before us with a careful and elaborate history of the state of religion in France during the three quarters of a century that preceded the massacre of St. Bartholomew. He has rightly judged that the massacre itself is the closing act of a great drama, and that it cannot be understood without a careful study of the religious parties and currents that led to it. The nature of that struggle [which devastated France in the latter half of the sixteenth century] cannot be fairly ' understood unless the condition of the Protestants under Francis I. and his two immediate successors be taken into consideration. In those fiery times of trial the Huguenot character was formed, and the nation gradually separated into two parties, so fanatically hostile that the extermination of the weaker seemed the only possible means of re'establishing the unity of France.' He has accordingly traversed with much research and great care the religious history of the reigns of Francis I. and Henry II.

He would, we think, have done his work more completely had he devoted a concluding chapter to a summary of the results that followed the great crime, so as to have pointed more fully and emphatically the moral that persecution is a mistake, and that the final victory is not with 'the successful persecutor,'-a moral that even yet dominant churches are slow to learn. Mr. White very justly observes that 'Spain and Italy have never recovered from the self-inflicted wounds of the sixteenth century; and if France has suffered in a less degree it is because persecution did not so completely succeed in destroying freedom of thought and liberty of conscience.'

The received theory of the tragedy of 1572 is that it was the execution of a premeditated purpose and plot; a theory maintained by almost all the older historians. Ranke and other modern writers have contended that it was much more spasmodic and accidental than has been supposed, and Mr. White thinks that this view is confirmed by the researches which have recently been made among the archives of Europe, especially the Simancas archives, from which Mr. Froude has drawn such valuable materials for history, and from the letters of Catherine de Medicis. Strange to say, no account of the massacre is to be found in Walsingham's correspondence; the letters which almost certainly relate to it not having been yet discovered. It were, of course, presumptuous for any one to speak dogmatically who has not equalled Mr. White in documentary research; but we may say that we are not convinced by either his evidence or his arguments. De Thou, the Roman Catholic