had produced, and which no wisdom could have removed. They were equally beyond the control of both folly and wisdom. Lord Chatham might have delayed, as Lord North undoubtedly accelerated it. The claims of the colonies grew with their growth, and, of course, strengthened with their strength. The most moderate ministry and the most complying Parliament would have soon come to a stand. More would have been claimed than would have been granted, and less would not have contented.

overawe.

lution have no other apology. The force
sent to Boston was large enough to
provoke, but too small to
The curb applied was strong enough to
irritate, but was likely to snap at the
first plunge which that irritation would
cause. When the experiment came
to be made, Gen. Gage found that he
could not send Col. Grant's comple-
ment of troops over eighteen miles
without imminent hazard. In the next
experiment, three times that number
reached Bunker's Hill, only through
an excess of carnage.

Mr. Izard says, in one of his letters, that "the king seems to be struck with horror at the idea of treating with Congress." This was in 1775, about one year before the Declaration of Independence. At that time, proper endeavors at conciliation would probably have succeeded. Lord North, as a man of sense, may have known what endeavors were proper. There was but one way then open, and that way could not be taken, because the king regarded it with horror. This royal repugnance may have saved the independence of the colonies. It was certain to defeat all advances towards conciliation, even if Lord Howe had had the discretion and dignity to address General Washington by his title. Whether the stupid fastidiousness which led him to substitute "Mr." for

But these letters show that there was, near the outset of the Revolution, a medium behind the throne, which, like a window of stained glass, discolored the light that fell upon it. "John Barleycorn" was the standard of, not only the length of the inch, but of the length and breadth of nearly every royal measure. Lord Bute is the putative father of the Stamp-Act, which, like a little leaven, soon leavened the whole lump; and Col. Grant, another Scotchman, when it became necessary, in consequence of this rising, to send to the colonies a military force, said that one regiment could sweep them from Canada to Georgia. Lord Chatham would have laughed such an assertion to scorn, and Lord North, probably, did not believe it was founded in truth. It is probable, however, that the king did so believe. He had been educated as an English-General," originated in this repugman, and no doubt knew something of English history; but his family had come to the throne after the Roundheads had passed away. Any one of the family which had been expelled to make room for his family, would have understood the colonies. Any Stuart would have recollected that there was a large infusion among them of the sturdy spirit which had brought Charles I. to the block, and governed Britain from that Charles to the second Charles, with an outstretched arm that made all Europe tremble. Constant manifestations of this spirit had been given by the colonies. It had showed itself in unnumbered struggles. Hardfought fields could not have showed it more strongly. Few men, therefore, in England, could have been misled by the gasconade of Col. Grant. George III. must have been among that few, as the military measures which were taken at the opening of the Revo

nance, or in the pride or weakness of the commissioners, the effect was the same. When the first step is an insult, a second step is not often permitted to be taken. The course of the mother country had raised up a Continental Congress. A general revolt necessarily produced such a result. There must be a general head, and that head was the Congress; to that alone any appeal, under the circumstances, could be made. An appeal to any separate state would have been hopeless; to distinguished individuals equally so.

Neither states nor individuals could be applied to without an imputation of treachery. There was but one way open, therefore, to open pacification, and that way was the Continental Congress, but the commissioners could not take that way. The king's horror closed it up.

There can be little doubt that much of the wrong that was done in the times

we are alluding to, was done by the king, notwithstanding his constitutional incapacity to do any wrong. Mr. Izard says that "Doctor Hunter, a Scotchman, who is continually about the king's family, says publicly, that the four New-England Provinces ought to be extirpated." The king did not say this, and may not have thought it; still, a remark of that kind would not have been made in the royal purlieus, if it had been liable to rebuke. The atmosphere of the court must have been genial to such ill-weeds, or they would not have sprung up there.

Some may be deterred from patronising a continuation of these letters, because the preliminary notice of the editor leads to a probability that the acts or opinions of Franklin will be brought into question. Whether it was judicious in the editor thus to sound the alarm in advance, it is not for us to determine. It. was certainly frank and fair. The present volume contains nothing of this bearing. Even if it did, it would not have been the less acceptable to us, though entertaining the highest veneration for the memory of this distinguished patriot and philosopher. If the charges which those letters may contain were a fresh imputation, the case would be different. This is the publication of letters which were written seventy or eighty years ago. They speak the opinion of individuals at that time. Such opinions had their warrant then, and were honestly expressed. That warrant may no longer exist, and the opinions may all have been proved to be unfounded.. All this may be true, and still the letters be generally acceptable. The reputation of Franklin is now independent of all imputations of this kind. His public course in France has been viewed and reviewed in all its phases through more than fifty years, and is now well understood. What these letters will develope we do not know. We may, however, conjecture, without much chance of error.

It is known that many prominent men of America believed they saw, in Franklin's course while in France, some cause for censure or disapprobation. This remarkable man was made pet in Paris. His mind, his discoveries, his country, and even his costume, all contributed to render him an object

of general interest. He was almost unique in all these respects in that kingdom where rarities of all kinds found so much favor. His influence at the court was powerful, and it was always exerted in favor of his country. And his exertions there, on the whole, were undoubtedly more beneficial to this country than those of any other man. These services, in her time of need, will never be denied, nor can their reward be taken away. Still, it has been alleged, that when the question of final arrangement came, the lukewarmness or hesitation of that court were not met by Franklin with the same zeal and independence which marked the course of other Americans there, over whom the blandishments of the Parisian saloons had less influence, and who were more fresh from the scene of action, and better knew the sentiments and temper of the American people.

It was a season when shades of difference in opinion might well have floated around. Indeed, none probably approached the great questions which then were to be settled with minds made up. Such pre-determinations had excluded all chances of adjustment. Some strings were to be let down, others to be raised; otherwise harmony had never been attained. France had been liberal and kind in her aid, and she naturally, when the time of compensation arrived, looked for a corresponding return. Franklin may have rated her services too high, (though that could hardly have been done) while others, perhaps, rated them too low. Franklin saw only the noble and generous ally of America; others saw only the antagonists of Great Britain. Each saw the true color of the shield as it presented itself to their view, without probably being aware that the two sides had different colors.

We will now bring these desultory remarks to a close. Our object has been to raise, as far as in our power, in the public estimation, the character of letters of the description now before us. We regard them with great respect: they are likely to give us more truths in one page than a dozen pages of other writings. Objections to the correctness of history are innumerable. It is a stream that never receives all its tributaries until it ends; something, in every age, is pouring in on one side or the

SONNET.

BY THE AUTHOR OF "THE YEMASSEE," "GUY RIVERS," &C.