however the Southerns may legislate, the thoughtful inquirer is not turned aside by those "fundamental laws" of the Confederacy which Federal writers, like Mr. Noel, are so fond of parading. The three principal are these and we state them lest it should be supposed that we wished to hide any portion of the case :— "No law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.-The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States, and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in such slaves shall not be thereby impaired.-In all such territory (all new territory), the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognised and protected by Congress and by the territorial governments, and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and territories shall have the right to take to such territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or territories of the Confederate States." But, persons who claim for Mr. Lincoln's proclamation the merit of having practically annulled the proslave portions of the old Union Constitution, unfairly deny to the South the credit of the changes wrought by events, and sure to follow upon the attempt to govern the Confederate States as a separate nation in time of peace. If Mr. Lincoln issued his emancipation edict to surround himself with popularity and promote enlistment, the Southern President stated thus broadly the principles we have quoted, in order to rally the white population of the South the more enthusiastically round the palmetto flag; and he, too, as the war has made progress, has been obliged to shift his ground. He has accepted the services of negroes in semi-military employments, necessity forcing him so far in the direction of emancipation. Nor do we see the least reason for doubting that, rather than yield to the "hated Yankee," the Southerns would declare all their slaves free, either to secure assistance in the field, or to procure the intervention of foreign powers in their favour. Enough has been said, therefore, to show that

even as a slavery question, the problem is not so simple of solution as the Noels and Beechers imagine.

There is that in the title of Mr. Williams's book which carries us beyond the superficiality and feebleness of the work on which our previous observations have proceeded. "The Rise and Fall of the Model Republic" is a fair subject now for the thoughtful essayist, since "fall" it certainly has done, whatever the irate Mr. Cobden, and the only less querulous Mr. Bright, may have to say on the matter. Into whatever form of government the residual States ultimately sink, the Republic is gone, the "model" is broken, and Europe can no longer be desired to look westward for the perfection of political institutions. Mr. Williams is the author of a previous work published during 1863, entitled "The South Vindicated." It was not a very satisfactory book. It had too many of the faults of Mr. Noel's "Rebellion in America." It seemed to have been, to use a builder's phrase, run up in a hurry. The writer, besides, bore himself less as a judge than as a retained advocate. The volume before us, however, is better worthy of his pen. Mr. Williams served the old American Government as its minister to Turkey, and though removed to a distance so immense from local strifes and hatreds, seems to have imbibed as thorough a dislike to the Yankee as any resident in the Carolinas. He sets out certain propositions, however, as the points he hopes to prove, which show him still true to Republicanism. He does not think the Union broke down in consequence of the internal difficulties caused by slavery. Slavery, as he supposes, rather tended to preserve it.

Nor can he think that the "free institutions" of the country had any thing to do with the catastrophe. One of the titles of his second chapter is, "The fact of the rupture of the Union does not prove the inefficiency of Republican Government." But, strangely enough, Mr. Williams proceeds to show that to this very cause, and to none other, the failure was owing. The Presidential election, he says, was the Pandora's box, which attracted and collected within itself the various elements of ill, only to expand, develop, and then scatter them broadcast through the land."

The plan to be followed in providing a chief executive head for the government was long a subject of discussion with the "fathers of the American Union." Much diversity of opinion prevailed regarding it, and the method finally adopted, of electing the President by a popular vote, was much objected to by the sagest of those great men. It is remarkable, at the same time, that the evil which they feared would arise from such a mode of choice has not resulted, while a worse has arisen in place of it. They apprehended that the President might become corrupted by the possession of power, and endeavour to secure himself permanently in the office of which the Constitution gave him but a brief tenure. No American President, however, has attempted a Napoleonian coup d'etat. On the other hand, what the "fathers" never dreamt of happened. The struggles for the presidential chair contaminated the whole body of political aspirants, and affected injuriously the character of all public men. In course of time, obscurity and insignificance "became a surer passport to the presidency than the highest abilities of statesmanship." "Many feared that the President might perpetuate his power by the employment of the appliances of office; yet none of the wise men who framed the Constitution had any apprehension that, before the lapse of half a century, the re-election of an executive chief, after one term of service, would be rendered impossible by the determined opposition of previously disappointed or expectant office-seekers.' But, however the members of the Constitutional Convention may have thought, the election of the President by a direct vote of the people was the essential principle of Republicanism, and would be contended for as such to-morrow. So that the author cannot admit the evils resulting from thence, and at the same time allege that Republicanism has not failed.

It is true, that the original plan contemplated an Electoral College; but it became a nullity, because it was simply inconsistent with the Republican idea. In very few years, the choice fell into the hands of the people directly, and has so continued. Nothing could be stronger, in fact,

than Mr. Williams's language with regard to the demoralizing influence of the quadrennial plebiscite.

"Greater even than the material injuries inflicted was the moral influence of these elections upon the popular mind. A majority, without reference to qualifications or integrity, or honesty, was endowed with the prerogative of conferring supreme power. The people were taught to accept the expression of the will of the majority as the will of Omnipotence. The voice of the people, thus announced, was the voice of God. Constitutional limitations were

considered as unwise and unjust restrictions politicians and place-seekers, more or less upon the prevailing popular sentiment; and boldly or covertly, announced the doctrine, that the will of the people, as expressed by a majority, or even scruples of conscience, in regard to certain constitutional obligations, justified a violation of the oaths of office which the elected official was required to take on entering upon the discharge of

his duties."

This expresses in brief what all observers of American politics have seen illustrated in the party conflicts of that country during the last quarter of a century at least, but it also effectually overturns the writer's Republican position, and warns him, as a Southern, to guard against similar evils by a political organization in the Confederate States tending more towards the old monarchical institutions, which reject the perilous novelty of universal suffrage. Mr. Williams's description of the Party Conventions, and of the manner in which they choose their presidential candidate, is graphic and even amusing. He reports or composes a typical congratulatory address (spoken by the friend of the nominee after everything has been arranged), in which the direction of the references is easily understood. The speaker dwells upon a characteristic incident of the early life of the embryo President, amid peals of cheering: distinguished among all the stalwart youths of his native country as an unrivalled rail-splitter,"

"He was

"Our next President (loud cheers)-he who, in the providence of Heaven, and by the fiat of the American people, will be shortly called to fill the most exalted station ever occupied by man on the green surface of God's footstool (tumultuous and long-continued applause), having been informed that a poor widow, residing in his neighbourhood, had met with the heavy

for their own execution. They had obtained their own places by the application of the party guillotine to those who had preceded them, and after all, there was an appearance of fairness in the arrangement which satisfied the consciences, while it kept open the avenues of hope to multitudes who were looking with longing eyes to the enjoyment of perquisites which had been long sought for, but which, somehow or other, had always eluded their grasp."

We are not entirely unfamiliar in these countries with the depraving effect of "place-hunting" upon party politicians; but let any one consider what would be the result to the public morals, and the honour and safety of the nation, if, when the Liberals went out, and the Conservatives came in, or vice versa, every petty official were changed, down to the tide-waiter, or subordinate clerk, the country being governed in periods of four years alternately, by these and by those, each set of plunderers anxious only to make the most of his tenure of spoliation. Those who hope to profit by this system are not likely to seek to change it; so we may take it as certain that the plan of choosing a President by seniority from the Senate will never be adopted, unless the Americans become more convinced of the failure of the Republican system than we have any reason to believe even the most thoughtful among them are. The history of their presidential campaigns has many ludicrous and painful episodes, the issue turning commonly upon no political or social principle, and the victory being not unfrequently won by an artful calumny against the opposing party, circulated in the nick of time through every journal in the country, often by the free employment of money.

At the best of times the considerations presented to the popular mind were most successful when most exciting, and fanaticism and violent passions became the instruments of presidential ambition. But the people loved to have it so. They even delighted in the turmoil and at this moment a large section of them are keeping up their hearts with the consolatory thought that Abraham Lin. coln's term is coming to an end, and that it may be their turn next to riot and grow fat in Washington.

Mr. M'Henry's book on the Cotton Trade is too large a subject for such

discussion as there is an opportunity of entering upon in this paper. It is, however, worthy of the closest attention. The facts and figures stated by him-we are bound to say with impartiality-dissipate a number of current fallacies, among which we have no hesitation in classing the dream of a cotton supply from the East Indies sufficient to render Lancashire independent of the Southern States of America. The writer reminds the English public that India, unlike the Southern Confederacy, is a manufacturing as well as a producing country, and that a considerable proportion of our supplies from thence have been a lessening of the stocks on hand, under the operation of high prices. In 1861, out of 6,000,000 bales of cotton said to have been produced in India (the statement is very doubtful, and two million bales would, probably, be a more correct estimate), we got under 1,000,000 bales, the rest having been manufactured, notwithstanding the large importation into India of British manfacured goods.

"To the minds of many persons (says Mr. M'Henry) it is quite clear that the people of England must consent to abandon the cotton trade, or again turn their eyes westward for supplies. An argument has recently been brought forward, however, that Great Britain might be better off without the industrial pursuits of Lancashire, and other districts having similar occupa

tions, or, at least, that their advantage to the country has been greatly exaggerated; and this theory its advocates attempt to substantiate by referring to the large Governmental returns since the trade became diminished. They omit to take into consideration that the people of this country held three years' supply of American cotton, and goods and yarns made therefrom, at home and abroad, which had been 'laid in' at a rate of under sevenpence per

pound, and that, for the last two years, that

accumulation has been dealt out' to meet

the demand at unprecedented profits—thus constituting an equivalent to a most gigantic monopoly. It will be remembered that, in April, May, and June, 1861, many of the exporters of Manchester goods were compelled to suspend payment by reason of their inability to dispose of their shipments, except at ruinous sacrifices, while others were on the verge of bankruptcy. The 'time' granted by the creditors of the houses that had failed gave them an opportunity to take advantage of the rise in prices, and they sold out at handsome profits. They thereby were not only able to

resume payment, but found themselves in possession of a large surplus; whereas, had the Southern crop of 1861-3,500,000 bales--been let loose, such a further reduction in the value of their merchandize would have ensued as to have caused their hope less downfall, and an universal distress, of a different character from that which is existing, would have prevailed in all the manufacturing districts, sensibly affecting the whole commercial and financial interests of the kingdom."

In 1860, the consumption of cotton in machine goods, throughout the world, was estimated at 2,400,000,000 lbs., and of this, the raw material was contributed by the Southern States of America to the extent of 1,650,000,000 lbs. These figures, though only an approximation, are sufficient proof that India cannot be expected to supply to England the loss of the Southern fields a fact which has an important bearing, both upon the political and the labour question in America.

We are glad to turn from these discussions on the drier order of facts and questions, cursory as they are, to dip into two other books, just published, in one of which, at least, much interesting matter is to be found. Our reference is not to Mrs. Greenhow's narrative of her imprisonment at Washington during the "the first year of abolition rule," but to Colonel Fremantle's sketches and pleasing story of his "Three Months' Tour in the Southern States." Mrs. Greenhow may be dismissed with little more than the statement that she is rather a strongminded lady, of the most violent Southern sympathies, who, at the period of the origin of the war, resided at Washington, and employed herself in obtaining, by all the means within her power, information, military and otherwise, calculated to be of use to the Southern leaders. She appears to have been successful to such a degree as to make herself an object of special dislike to the Republican Government. She helped to spoil the Northern plan for conducting the first battle of Bull's Run by communicating it to General Beauregard, and seems to have found no difficulty in inducing Federal officers to betray to her the most important secrets. Her book is of the most sensational" description throughout, and if the author be a fair speci

men of any large class of the Southern ladies, they are only less formidable enemies than their lords. After reading the vitriolic sentences of Mrs. Greenhow, when she is in her highest vein of angry denunciation of the Yankees, we can easily see our way to endorse the statement that "the Confederacy owes as much to its female as to its male population.' Among other passages in the book that we may perhaps venture to say are particularly feminine, there is one in which Mrs. Lincoln is "photographed." According to the Southern limner, she is a "short, broad, flat figure," with sallow, mottled complexion, light gray eyes, scant eyelashes, and thin pinched lips. She wears a scornful expression," it appears, since she became Presidentess

66

for Madame Lincoln does really exercise, according to Mrs. Greenhow, considerable power in the State. Among the lively pencillings of the Southern censor there is also a very womanish and waspish account of the same lady's personal appearance on the occasion of the presentation which took place when "Old Abe" came into office. The ladies of the foreign ministers having arrived en grand tenue at the White House, were ushered rather unceremoniously into one of the reception rooms, where, when speculation had wellnigh exhausted itself, the wife of the first citizen appeared-"a small, dowdylooking woman, with artificial flowers in her hair." The lady who writes thus tartly of her Yankee sister has given us her own portrait as a frontispiece, and we may be allowed, probably, so far to imitate her style as to add, that her own beauty is not by any means of a character to astound us. Here is a story we think we saw something of before, but it loses nothing, of course, as told by Mrs. Greenhow:

"Mrs. Lincoln asserts with great energy her right to a share of the distribution of the executive patronage She had received as a present, from a man named Lammon, a magnificent carriage and horses, promising him in return the marshalship of the district of Columbia, one of the most lucrative offices in the gift of the Executive. Mr. Lincoln had, however, determined to bestow it upon another applicant, who had also paid his douceur [it is but just to say, that the writer offers no proof of these assertions, which