in the King's own hand that Lord Loughborough's answer to Lord Castlereagh's paper on the Catholic question was given by him to the King in December.* Immediately upon his resignation, Mr. Pitt authorised Lord Castlereagh to inform Lord Cornwallis of his wish that 'His Excellency, without bringing forward the King's name, should make the Catholics feel that an obstacle which the King's Ministers could not surmount, precluded them from bringing forward the question whilst in office; that their attachment to the question was such that they felt it impossible to continue in Administration under the impossibility of proposing it with the necessary concurrence, and that they retired from the King's service, considering this line of conduct as most likely to contribute to the ultimate success of the measure.' (Letter of Feb. 9. 1801, III. p. 335.) In consequence of this communication, and of a letter which he received from Mr. Dundas, Lord Cornwallis delivered to Lord Fingall and Dr. Troy, two papers to be circulated by them among the principal Catholics in different parts of Ireland. These papers contained positive assurances that Mr. Pitt and his friends would do their utmost to promote the success of the Catholic cause; and even went so far as to say that the Ministers who had retired would not resume office without the prospect of carrying the Catholic question: a principle which, probably, even at that time exceeded their intentions, and on which they never attempted to act.† Mr. Pitt was strong enough, with the assistance of Lord Cornwallis and Lord Castlereagh, to carry the Union, and to extinguish the Irish Parliament. But the success of the Union raised another question, which he was unable to settle; and at the moment of triumph, when the newly created Imperial Parliament was commencing its first session, his Ministry was brought down by the King's invincible objection founded on his Coronation Oath. The important question (says Lord Cornwallis) which has overthrown the long administration of Mr. Pitt, must now sleep; as * Lord Campbell's 'Lives of the Chancellors,' vol. vi. p. 308.323. For a fuller statement of the transaction, see Edin. Rev., vol. ciii. p. 348-56. † See these papers in Cornw. Cor., ib. p. 347. with the explanatory memorandum of Lord Cornwallis in p. 343. The statement as to the pledge was disavowed by Mr. Pitt at the time, ib. p. 346. 350. See likewise Castl. Cor. vol. iv. p. 72. 76., and the correspondence respecting them in 1805 with Mr. Plowden, p. 372., and Plowden's Hist. Rev. vol. i. p. 944. any person who should attempt to bring it forward, would be accused of wishing either to kill or distract the King.' (Vol. iii. p. 349.) In a previous letter to his brother of Feb. 17. Lord Cornwallis speaks of an unexpected blast from St. James's having overset him;' and in another letter to Gen. Ross of Feb. 26., he alludes to the fatal blow being struck from the quarter most interested to avert it.' All doubt as to the true cause of Mr. Pitt's resignation in 1801,-if any reasonable doubt previously existed,—has been removed by the publication of the letters in the Cornwallis and Castlereagh collections. But his motives were distrusted and disbelieved at the time; his course was unintelligible to the public; they could not comprehend why he should resign on account of the Catholic question, but refuse to press it in opposition. Nothing is so difficult' (as Mr. Cooke wrote to Lord Castlereagh with reference to Pitt's course) as to play a refined 'game in politics. The person who plays it is never understood, and is soon deserted.' The King's illness, produced by the agitation consequent on Mr. Pitt's resignation, retarded the ministerial arrangements; and Lord Cornwallis remained in Dublin till the end of May, when he was succeeded in his office by Lord Hardwicke. He then returned to England; and in July received the command of the eastern district, and took up his abode at Colchester. Preliminaries of peace with France were signed at London, on the 1st of October, and Lord Cornwallis accepted from Mr. Addington's government the post of ambassador for the negotiation of the definitive treaty. He sailed from Dover in November, and went to Paris, where he was honourably received, and had an interview with the First Consul. negotiation was conducted at Amiens, with Joseph Bonaparte, and the definitive treaty was concluded in March, 1802. We shall not attempt to follow the negotiations of this unpropitious and short-lived treaty: the account which Lord Cornwallis gives of Joseph Bonaparte is, that he is a very sensible, modest, gentlemanlike man, totally free from diplomatic chicanery, and fair and open in all his dealings.' A picture, containing full-length portraits of the plenipotentiaries and their suites, is preserved in the Hotel-de-Ville at Amiens. The With respect to the movements of political leaders in the English Parliament, during the Addington administration, Lord Cornwallis expresses an opinion in August, 1801, that Mr. Pitt, in supporting Addington at that time, was 'influenced by 'the purest and most public-spirited motives,' but that he had undertaken a very critical and difficult line of conduct, and one that would expose his character to much misrepresenta'tion.' At the end of 1803, he thinks that Pitt was not justified in estranging himself from Addington, after the intimate friendship which had subsisted between them; and that the terms demanded by Pitt, in the negotiation with Addington of the previous March, were unreasonable. In February, 1804, he condemns the coalition between Fox and the Grenvilles as unprincipled; he likewise thinks that the line of opposition to the government which Pitt intends to take is very injudicious, and highly discreditable to himself. He knew the talents of 'the Ministers, or their want of them, as well when he recom'mended them to the public favour, as he does now; if they 'fail from weakness of head, he is bound in honour to them, to the King, and to the nation, to assist them, or at least to 'support them; if their failings proceed from the heart, and they have an intention to destroy the constitution of their 'country, as an honest man he ought to oppose them.' At this time, Lord Cornwallis wished for the chief command in Ireland, and complained that Lord Cathcart was preferred to him. His disappointment was destined to be of brief duration; for at the end of 1804, Lord Castlereagh, who was then President of the Board of Control, again offered him the post of Governor-general. The ambitious and aggressive policy of Lord Wellesley had brought him into violent conflicts with the Directors, and was not approved by the Government; Lord Cornwallis, as the representative of a pacific Indian policy, was applied to in this emergency, and accepted the employment. Early in 1805 he sailed for India, at the age of sixty-six, and he arrived at Calcutta in July; but his bodily powers began shortly to fail, and he died on October 5., at Ghazipoor, on his way to the Upper Provinces. His memory was treated with unusual marks of respect. The Supreme Council ordered the army to wear mourning for three months; a mausoleum was erected to him by subscription at Ghazipoor, cenotaphs at Madras and Prince of Wales Island, and a statue at Bombay. The House of Commons, on the motion of Lord Castlereagh, voted a statue for him at St. Paul's, and the East India Company granted a sum of 40,000l. to his family. Our illustrations of the successive stages of Lord Cornwallis's career have been so copious, that it is unnecessary for us to dwell on his character. His firmness, his integrity, his calmness and moderation, the rectitude of his judgment, his public spirit, and his superiority to petty jealousies and rivalries, com manded the confidence of his contemporaries, and enabled him, in the different spheres of administration to which he was called, to reconcile popularity with a consistent discharge of duty. His two great achievements were that in India he put down the corrupt system of the Company, and that in Ireland he put down the corrupt system of the native Parliament. If in the latter country his wise and beneficent intentions had not been frustrated by the unfortunate scruple of the King respecting his Coronation Oath, he would have been the instrument not only of carrying the Union, but also of removing the Catholic disabilities, and of connecting the Catholic clergy with the state; one of which measures was postponed for more than a quarter of a century, and the other has never been accomplished. ART. V.-1. Jamaica in 1850; or the Effects of Sixteen Years of Freedom in a Slave Colony. By JOHN BIGELOW. 8vo. New York: 1852. 2. Copies or Extracts of Despatches relating to the SugarGrowing Colonies. Presented to Parliament by command of Her Majesty. 1854-1858. 3. Returns of the Quantities of Sugar Exported from the British West India Islands, and Entered in the United Kingdom. Parliamentary Papers. 1858. A HUNDRED years ago, when black men were seldom seen north of the Tweed, an old Scotch gentlewoman meeting a negro in the street, cast up her eyes and hands, exclaiming, Hech, sirs, what canna be made for the penny!' And well might the British people do the same. At a cost, not of one penny, but of five thousand million pennies, we have produced that curious specimen of the human race, the free negro of the West Indies. Such was the outlay. Now, what is the result? What sort of thing have we got for our money? Was that a wise investment of capital? The reply of some high authorities has been given, and is this Our islands, they say, the richest and loveliest in the world, are fallen from wealth to ruin crumbling, deserted, desolate towns empty harbours-trade gone-agriculture at death's door the old staples vanished away - the owners of these once fertile lands languishing in poverty, or dead of broken hearts the negroes, for whom all was done, sunk up to the VOL. CIX. NO. CCXXII. 6 F F 'ears in pumpkin,' growing every day more savage, more idle, more beastly. Such, they tell us, is the work that our philanthropy has worked out under the sun. Is that so, or is it not so? The subject may be somewhat 'Like a good thing, being often told, but yet it deserves some thought. England's giving freedom to her slaves was an act unique in the history of man. We know not where an example can be found of so noble a sacrifice, made by a whole people. As to its prudence, some may think this, and some that; but no man can lay it at the door of any selfish feeling. The people of the United Kingdom believed slavery to be cruel. It seemed to them a breach of the law of love which the Gospel had laid down. For these reasons, and for these alone, they made up their minds to be rid of it. But they were not hurried away by their zeal; they chose to pay the cost themselves; and 20,000,000l. was paid down by them, to get the slaves set free. To us, who saw this done, it may seem an everyday affair. But seen from afar, in the coming ages, it may strike men as sublime. Was it, after all, an act of shining folly? Has it really wrought woe and not weal in the world? It is worth while to find out the true reply to these questions. For if all this were so, then that noble old maxim, that Right never comes wrong,' would be overthrown. Here we have a nation plainly setting itself to do right, because right was right;' because it thought more of what was due to God and man, than of itself. this been a failure, has this done harm and not good, then it may be unwise to do right. Wrong, perhaps, might as well be kept going. The laws of God and the rights of man may be well enough in their way, but should we obey the one, or observe the other, we may find ourselves made fools of. Has We are far indeed from denying that the owners of West Indian property have gone through a time of deep distress. The cry of despair that rose from them in 1847, and the next years, was appalling. Many and many a family once blessed with opulence sank into poverty, while hundreds of others had their fortunes shattered, if not destroyed. No wonder such an overthrow should have been loudly noised, not only through England, but through the world, and that emancipation should be looked upon as having given the death-blow to our once thriving colonies. People were not likely to bear in mind that, however sad these events might be, still the great |