lege, a cruel, impolitic, and abominable breach of faith. In doing this, they (the opposition) give the real publicity to these papers, which otherwise might have remained as effectually hidden on the table, as if they had been still in the porte-feuille. The fact is, that ministers, in their eagerness to shew the difficulties they had to encounter in Spain, care not whom they may injure; and the opposition, equally eager to render ministers odious, care as little about-faith and humanity.

Were we to believe the reformers, and even the whigs, a man capable of conducting the af fairs of the state with honour and success, cannot possibly remain long at the head of them. Instead of application in the cabinet, and solid qualities, an English minister, to remain minister, must have, essentially, dexterity in debate, and the talent of intrigue; qualifications which do not imply that moral reputation necessary to obtain and preserve the confidence of foreign powers; and frequent wars are the consequence. The opposite party says, on the contrary, that the necessity of defending day by day in Parlia ment each ministerial measure, requires so much talent, and so much knowledge of a certain sort, that it is impossible that he who possesses them should have no other; that these perpetual debates oblige them to consider the affairs confided

to their care thoroughly, and in every possible light, in order to secure themselves from disgrace and ridicule, the fear of which is the most powerful of stimulants. That a minister thus employed has, it is true, but little time left for any of the details of his department; but those are entrusted to inferior officers, fitter for them, who are not removed at every change of ministry, and have for a number of years followed the routine of their business. I prefer a minister who can spare only one hour a-day to do the business of the state, but who is obliged to think of it and debate on it the rest of the day and half the night, to the ministers of some other countries, who, to use the expression of a man who knew them well, "se renferment pour tailler des plumes," and when they come out of their retirement think only of their pleasures. When the savages of North America bury their chiefs up to their necks in an ant-hill, make them undergo hunger and thirst and other torments, it is not to give them the qualities necessary for their station, but in order to ascertain that they possess them already.

This system of trials and combats applies no less to the legislative branch of the government. The exaggeration of the debates,the obvious want of candour,-the waste of time, the imprudent disclosures, cannot fail to shock an in

different spectator. A difficult question cannot be investigated properly in a numerous assem bly, and is always considered with reference to party views, rather than with a sincere and unmixed desire of truth; but unfortunately, were it not for party views, the investigation would not be attended to at all. The most inconsiderable individual of such an assembly might in all probability decide on the business before them better, and more expeditiously, if he pleased,—but the danger is, he would not, for want of sufficient inducement. It is thus that the spirit of sys tem in science is useful, however extravagant it may be; the egotistical zeal it inspires leads of ten to the discovery of new facts; establishing not exactly the particular system of the author, but something much better, which had never entered into his imagination.

The judicial branch of government is, like the others, placed in the arena, or on the stage. Examinations of witnesses,-statement of the case, -law arguments,-charge of the judge to the jury,-verdict,-judgment,-all is done audibly and publicly. There is not a doubt that the judge could inform himself of the merits of the case much better in his closet than amidst the noise and bustle of a court, where so many things distract his attention,-on written statements of facts and documents, than on vague and desul

tory pleadings. But, in that case, it is but too likely that, instead of the judge, it might be his secretary who would have to do all this; and that, instead of examining witnesses, he would examine the parties themselves. As to the jury, it is clear that they are not half so able as the judge to decide either on the fact or on the law; and I would much rather trust to him than to them, if these were the only qualifications required; but the twelve men composing the jury are placed in a situation of which habit has not blunted the sense of importance and of moral responsibility, of curiosity,—of interest,—and of awe of the public; and the judge himself, who delivers his charge when they are going to retire to their box, and who knows that so many eyes are upon him, so many ears listening,-may possibly give them very different advice from that he would follow himself, if he had to decide alone,

"On en vaut mieux quand on est regardé
L'œil du public est l'aiguillon de gloire."

The highest department of the British government, the throne, does not indeed commit its dignity in the general struggle; and if exposed, as well as the other branches, to the eye of the public, it is from the top of a pedestal, not in the

vulgar crowd. The royal person is here a fine hollow statue, in which the priests of the temple place themselves to deliver their oracles. He acts only through his ministers; they are answerable, and may be impeached by Parliament; but the King himself can do no wrong; in fact he can do nothing, not even affix his royal seal, which is in the keeping of the chancellor. The King is supreme magistrate, but he does not administer justice, and cannot meddle in any legal processes, either civil or criminal. James I. happening to assist at some great trial, the judge put him in mind that he was not to take an active part in it. The King appoints the judges, but cannot displace them without impeachment and trial, nor can they be impeached without the concurrence of the two Houses. The House of Lords are their judges. Their salary is permanent; and as long as they do their duty, that is to say, as long as they are the strict organs of the law, they are as independent of the King and ministers as these are of the judges; and this is the most important safeguard of public liberty.

The King is the commander in chief of the army and navy; but an express act of Parliament is necessary to establish and enforce martial discipline in the army, renewable annually, and the army is disbanded, ipso facto, at the end