number of victims at once, the leather sack which was to contain the heads was ample. While the axe was descending upon some, the others awaited their turn at the foot of the scaffold. Hérault de Schelles and Danton were of these last; they were conversing together when the executioner told Hérault to mount. Hérault and Danton approaching each other to embrace, the executioner prevented them. Va, cruel, said Danton, nos têtes se rechercheront dans le sac. There is a meeting and scene of some interest related in the Memoirs, which took place between Robespierre and Danton a little before the fall of the latter. At length Thermidor brought the turn of Robespierre himself, and his fall put an end to the reign of terror. What were the sentiments and conduct of French socie ty, emerging from those times of blood and crime?-Hear again Lombard. "To the rage for carnage succeeded, in Paris, the rage for pleasure. The pavement was still red with blood, when games, feasts, spectacles, and balls, became a frenzy. Balls!-you would not believe it, if an hundred thousand individuals were not there to vouch the fact: -There were balls, to which one could not be admitted, unless he had lost some one of his family upon the scaffold, and where one could not dance without ha ving the hair cut like those going to be decapitated; if one had not, in short, according to the expression of the day, les cheveux à la victime." An anecdote of a very different kind is the next we meet with in the collection; it is of the late Pope, Pius the Seventh. He was traversing the great gallery of the Louvre. The crowd fell prostrate as he passed, to receive his benediction. Two puppies, thinking to do something admirable, affected to hold themselves upright and unmoved, and began to smile and titter as the Pontiff approached them.Messieurs,' said Pius to them, the benediction of an old man is not to be despised.'" The answer of Pius to the threatening emissary of Buonaparte, who found him at his frugal dinner, is equally dignified. "Monsieur," said he, "a sovereign that needs but a crown a-day to live upon, is not a man to be easily intimidated." Under the Directory, Lombard found himself judge in the Court of Cassation, from whence he was taken by Talleyrand (for want of a better) to act ambassador, or, in other words, pro-consul, in Holland. The old memoirist dwells with great self-complacency on those times of his grandeur, and remarks, how easy it would have been for him to have covered himself with orders and decorations. "Ajoutez a cela la decoration du lis, qu'on donnait pour rien; celle de l'éperon d'or, qu'on a pour trois sous; et du lion d'Holstein, qu'on rend six blancs: voila le fils d'un directeur de la poste aux lettres changé en constellation." Among the acquaintances of Lombard at this time was Kosciusko, who had come to Paris with a proposal of raising Polish regiments for the Directory. His proposal was accepted, and the regiments were raised. But in the meantime arrived the 18th Brumaire, and the fall of the Directory; the leading power was Napoleon, and the Polish hero waited on him. "Buonaparte was yet lodged at the Luxembourg, when Kosciusko, still in pursuit of his project, waited on him, accompanied by his two aids-de-camp, Kidnadvitz and Dombrouski. Jealous of everything great, the first Consul affected to address the two aids-decamp, and turned his back on Kosci usko." The only historical points on which any light is thrown by these volumes, are the death of Pichegru, who, they assert, was strangled, by Buonaparte's order, in prison;-the assassination was put off for a day, and the appointed criers, uninformed of the change, began to proclaim a whole, full, and particular account of Pichegru's suicide, till they were set right by some agents of the police, that Pichegru's suicide was put off till the morrow. The other one discussed is the 18th Brumaire, accompanied with remarks on Las Cases, which, however, we shall not trespass on-We have been inundated with reviews and articles on the subject. THE WEST INDIAN CONTROVERSY, No. III. Though Honesty be no Puritan, it will do no hurt. THERE has just appeared in the 38th Number of the Quarterly Review, a paper of very high merit, "On the condition of the negroes in our colonies." This essay is evidently the work of an able hand, the result of laborious, and, above all, dispassionate investigation. It is composed in a style of calmness and clearness which undoubtedly presents a very remarkable contrast to that in which the authors of the African Institution pamphlets have (with scarcely an exception) indulged themselves. The writer gives a distinct view of the questions at issue, and also of the main facts hitherto adduced on both sides concerning them: he points out the spirit of tumultuous exaggeration that has uniformly been exhibited on the one hand;-and commends, almost while he laments, the feelings that have, comparatively speaking, left those who act, and have all along acted, under the influence of this unsuitable temper, in the full and entire command of the arena of popular discussionthe press. The philosophical principles on which these questions must eventually be decided, are laid down and illustrated with much logical precision, and a liberality of feeling worthy of the age; and altogether, the impression which this paper leaves, is perhaps as nearly as may be, that under which the Members of the British Senate ought to come to such specific discussions, as the Buxtonian agitators are most likely to force upon their notice at the commencement of the ensuing session. We confess, then, that, so far as the senatorial intellect is concerned, enough seems already to have been done as to those parts of this great subject on which the Quarterly Review has thought fit to touch. In a few instances, indeed, we dissent from the writer; but, on the whole, we are disposed to say, that his Essay is a masterly and unanswerable one, and that it has exhausted the subject, in so far as it has gone, with a view to men in Parliament. In two respects, however, we con SHAKESPEARE. sider this Essay as altogether defective. In discussing the matters at issue, regarding the actual condition of the negroes, the author has written too exclusively for the highest and most intelligent class of readers; and, secondly, what is of yet higher importance, he has abstained entirely from the most difficult and perilous part of the whole subject before him. Far from us be the vanity of supposing that we are capable of supplying these deficiencies; at present, indeed, it is from particular circumstances impossible for us even to make an attempt towards this: But without entertaining any views of this sort-with the most perfect feeling that at this moment any such views are altogether out of the question as to ourselves we may nevertheless presume to say, that we have the materials in our possession, and to think, that by indicating the nature of these materials, something may be done, we shall not say by, but through our means. We are of opinion, then, that the Quarterly Review has written a paper which, from the manner in which things are condensed, and from the total absence of quotation, will scarcely produce its right effect, unless among those who have the external as well as the internal requisites, for filling up the blanks for their own use as they proceed in its perusal. He presupposes a measure of knowledge which the whole history of this controversy, up to this hour, shews not to exist at all; herefers to books which are in few hands; considers that debate as understood to the bottom, which was but cursorily read at the time, and has since been forgotten by many, and misrepresented by many; in a word, loses sight of this great fact that the parliamentary proceedings in regard to these matters have uniformly been the result of ignorant noise and clamour out of doors that the agitators, even when they are Members of Parliament, uniformly write and publish the pamphlets before they come into the House to make their speeches and that, of somehow or other many ineffably inferior persons have acquired a temporary and factitious sort of credit that serves the turn of the moment; and the flattery even of a Buxton or a Macaulay, not always been treated as it should have been. Mr Brougham, then, adopts boldly, in the Edinburgh Review, the very simple and satisfactory argument on which Mr Clarkson rests the whole substance of his late pamphlet. It amounts to this: Every man has an in-born indefeasible right to the free use of his own bodily strength and exertion: it follows that no man can be kept for one moment in a state of bondage, without the guilt of ROBBERY: therefore, the West Indian negroes ought to be set free. This is an argument of very easy comprehension, and the Edinburgh Reviewer exclaims, with an air of very well enacted triumph, "Such plain ways of considering the question are, after all, the best!" course, the business of those who would The great artifice of the agitators, has been to say or insinuate, that the whole of this affair is quite easy and simple of comprehension-that it is a matter in which any man who possesses common sense and human feelings, qualified to judge de plano-that minute details are of no importance in reality-that the great outlines are clear, and that they are sufficient to all intents and purposes. This is always a cunning method of procedure, when the object is to work upon the multitude. It flatters ordinary nary people to be told that they know all that there is any need for knowing. Above all, such flattery is delightful, when it comes from men of acknowledged intellectual eminence. Mr Brougham is indeed the only man of those who have recently taken any lead in this scheme, that can be justly held entitled to such a character as this; but Ingenious Quaker, and most ingenuous Reviewer! If this be so, why write pamphlets and reviews full of arguments and details, or pretended details of fact? If every West Indian planter is a thief and a robber, why bother our heads about the propriety, the propriety forsooth, of compelling him to make restitution? If the British nation is guilty as an accessary both before the fact, and in the fact, of THEFT and ROBBERY, why tell the British nation that they are the most virtuous and religious nation in the world, and that they ought to restore what they have stolen and robbed, because they are so virtuous and so religious? The affair is so base, that it will scarcely bear looking at for one second. What! long prosing discussions about whether we ought to cease to be thieves and robbears, now, or ten years, or a hundred years hence! Was ever such a monstrous perversion of human powers? Sir, that estate is not yours-it is your neighbour's estate, and you have no more right to cultivate it, or any part of it, for your own behoof, than the man in the moon. You must restore this estate to its rightful owner - Immediately? No, not immediately. Your neighbour ought to have the acres, and he knows that he ought to have them. They are his right, he has been long deprived of the estate -his father was deprived of it before him. The family have all been brought up in a way quite different from what would have been, had they been in possession of their rights. They have formed habits altogether unlike what those of the proprietors of such an estate ought to be. They have been accustomed to poverty, and they are an ignorant, uneducated family. You must not give up their land immediately. No-the poor people would certainly go and get drunk, if you gave them their land. They would play the devil in all the ale-houses. In short, they would be injured in their health and morals, by the immediate possession of their estate. Indeed, it may be doubted whether the present man ought ever to get his land at all. His son is young; he may be sent to school, and taught reading, writing, arithmetic, &c.; and then, when he comes of age, you may give him the estate which you have robbed him ofyou may then cut robbery, and give him his property; or, if he turns out a wild young man, perhaps it might be as well to let another generation still pass before you give up the estate. You, therefore, must, from a regard for the best interests of this family, continue, in the meantime, thief and robber of their goods. Let the young men be hedgers and ditchers on your estate, as they have been; let the young women continue at service. But you must improve the parish school; lower the schoolmaster's wages by degrees, so as to let all these young people have an opportunity of picking up some education. Be kind to them-promote the best hedgers and ditchers to be coachmen, and even bailiffs, if you find them trust-worthy: By all means, make the well-behaved girls of them lady's maids and house-keepers. By this means, the family will gradually get up their heads a little; and, at some future period, it may be found quite safe and proper to give them all their rights. The present people, to be sure, will be dead and rotten ere then-but how can you help that? You are not the original thief, you know, you can't answer for all the consequences of a crime, into which you may be said to have been led by your own parents, and by the whole course of your own education. No, no-it would never do to give up the stolen goods at once. As I said be fore, it would certainly turn the heads of all these poor people-the parish would be kept in a state of hot water by them. Perhaps they would take it into their heads to bother you, even you, with law-suits and prosecutions for damages and by-gone rents, &c. &c. Time must be allowed for taming them; they were always a hot-headed family. IN DUE TIME YOU OUGHT TO DESIST FROM YOUR PRESENT CRIMES. Such substantially is such cannot be denied to be the "plain and simple" argument of Mr Clarkson, and his disciple Mr Brougham; and so is it applied by themselves to the subject which, plain and simple as it is, they have taken such huge pains to elucidate. Of Mr Clarkson's heart we have the best opinion possible; and we have an excellent opinion of Mr Brougham's head; but really, looking at the matter as they have been pleased to set it forth, it appears, we must own, somewhat difficult to suppose, that either a sound head, or a feeling heart, could have been in any way consulted in the promulgation of this exquisite farrago. The absurdities in which these apostles have involved themselves are so glaring, that a child must smile at them; and yet it is upon such arguments that the public of 1823 are called to force the British Parliament into a measure, or rather into a series of measures, by far the most delicate, as regards principle, and by far the most perilous, as regards effect, of any that ever engaged the attention of an enlightened political assembly in any age of the world. It is upon such arguments that a complete revolution of the whole domestic, as well as political relations, in the whole of these great colonial establishments, is demanded; a revolution involving, if we are to listen for a moment to the proprietors of these islands, the absolute ruin of all their possessions; a revolution, the perilous nature of which is confessed by these men themselves in the language - the indescribable, ineffable language-which says to all the world, "This revolution must be: JUSTICE demands it-RELIGION demands it: but we confess, that in spite of Justice and Religion, it must not be Now." If such imbecilities had been introduced where none but Britons were to be entertained with them, it might have been of little consequence. The fallacy of the outset might have been sufficiently manifested by the gross absurdity of the conclusion, and a laugh been all the issue. But only to think of men, rational men, being capable of gravely and deliberately publishing such views, after they knew from all experience-ay, from the experience of blood itself-that the promulgation was virtually to be for the minds of the negroes in the West Indies, as well as of the amis des noirs at home. Theft and robbery declared to be the undeniable sins of the masters on whose fields they labour, around whose couches they watch! The cool insolence too, mixed up as if for the express purpose of fastening a spur to the galled side of Fury! Absolute emancipation proclaimed to be no other than the unalienable right of man; and yet a calm, contemptuous argument, about the emancipating when! We believe the pages of history may be ransacked in vain for anything worthy of being set by the side of this glorious amalgation of all that is feeble in folly, and all that is reckless in profligacy; and, to pass over the Quaker, we venture to hope, that when Mr Brougham quoted, with approbation, in December 1823, a toast about "success to the next negro insurrection in the West Indies," he laid upon his own shoulders a burthen which no other man in England (we mean no other held responsible among rational men) would have run the risk of for all the wealth of Potosi. We earnestly hope that there is no other Brougham! The dismal nonsense which lies at the bottom of all this has been so completely answered in the philosophical and masterly pages devoted by the Quarterly Reviewer to the true history of labour, and the changes which, from the nature of things, do in every society take place, in regard to the mode of rewarding labour, that it would be worse than idle to go into any part of that argument now and here. In addition, however, to the philosophical and historical answer which that able writer has given to the great preliminary assumption of the absolute criminality of compelling any man to labour, we shall take the freedom to quote three several passages from as many writers of the very highest authority; passages, one of which has been quoted before by Mr Canning, and another by Mr Marryatt, but the third of which is from a work that was only published in London about a week ago. We shall quote the words of PALEY, as they were introduced in the Buxton debate by the words of CANNING: [The "honourable member" whom the secretary alludes to is the worthy brewer himself.] himsel "The honourable gentleman begins his resolution with a recital which I confess greatly embarrasses me; he says, that the state of slavery is repugnant to the principles of the British constitution, and of the Christian religion. God forbid that he who ventures to object to this statement, should therefore be held to assert a contradiction to it! I do not say that the state of slavery is consonant to the principles of the British constitution; still less do I say that the state of slavery is consonant to the principles of the Christian religion. But though I do not advance these propositions myself, nevertheless I must say, that in my opinion the propositions of the honourable gentlemen are not practically true. If the honourable gentleman means that the British constitution does not admit of slavery in that part of the British dominions where the constitution is in full play, undoubtedly his statement is true; but it makes nothing for his object. If, however, the honourable member is to be understood to maintain that the British constitution has not tolerated for years, nay more, for centuries, in the colonies, the existence of slavery, a state of society unknown in the mother country, that is a position which is altogether without foundation, and positively and practically untrue. In my opinion, when a proposition is submitted to this House, for the purpose of inducing the House to act upon it, care should be taken not to confound, as I think is done in this resolution, what is morally true with what is historically false. Undoubtedly the spi rit of the British constitution is, in its principle, hostile to any modification of slavery. But as undoubtedly the British Parliament has for ages tolerated, sancwhich tioned, protected, and even encouraged a system of colonial establishment, it well knew slavery to be the foundation. "In the same way, God forbid that I should contend that the Christian religion is favourable to slavery. But I confess I feel a strong objection to the introduetion of the name of Christianity, as it were bodily, into any parliamentary question. Religion ought to control the acts and to regulate the consciences of governments, as well as of individuals; but when it is put forward to serve a political purpose, however laudable, it is done, I think, after the example of ill times, and I cannot but remember the ill objects to |