Doer. The arm is dependant on the head; the head is not dependant on the arm.

Take away

the arm, the head may be sound and useful still: but take away the head, and of what good will the arm be then? In like manner you may remove the Warrior, and the state will flourish notwithstanding; whilst without the Statesman, it will sink into decay and ruin. The Statesman needs the Warrior but rarely; the Warrior always needs the Statesman. Give an army to a General, without instructions from the state, and unless that General be a Statesman too, he will embroil where he ought to pacify, punish where he ought to conciliate, and rouse revenge instead of producing submission. We have been told that a great Warrior is a perpetual type of heroism to his fellow-men: but let me put this question: Suppose that great Warrior should be (as great warriors have generally been) cruel, inhuman, bloodthirsty, and tyrannical, is he then a type fit to follow? Is such a man worthy of imitation valuable in the state? Or is he not rather the most dangerous member of the community? a poison-seed cast into the ploughed heart of society, bearing evil fruit a thousandfold? Compared with the Statesman and the Poet, the Warrior appears to me the least estimable of the three. I have now then only to decide between the other two. I own that I

incline towards the Statesman. I look upon the great Statesman of a nation as the head of its thought and philosophy, the guide of its energies, the centre and representative of its emotions, passions, and ambitions. I call to mind what our own great Statesmen have done for this country; how they have led it through perils of war and revolution that seemed overwhelming, and in defiance of all, have established its prosperity upon a rock: and, consequently, I feel that the man who can do this deserves the highest esteem that can be awarded to human exertion. For the Statesman, then, I vote.

FOURTH SPEAKER.- Sir, if the palm of merit is to be accorded to that one of the three men before us who accomplishes the greatest palpable and immediate good to the community of which he is a member, I should unhesitatingly place it on the brow of the Statesman. He is the pilot who, seeing clearly and estimating carefully the dangers that surround the vessel, steers it safely through them all: and if we can understand the value of such a helmsman in a ship at sea, we can readily conceive the important service that the pilot of the state performs for the community he guides. His value is felt and seen, too: the quiet, the contentment, the harmony, existing in the country are proofs of his ability and power,

which speak to all at once, and at once challenge admiration.

But I think we should not judge thus superficially. We must look deeper than this, if we would reach the truth. It is not the most evident merit that is always the worthiest. Quiet influences often do more than noisy ones. The deepest rivers always flow the most silently. And looking beneath the surface of the question now in hand, I seem to think that the Poet does more true and valuable service to the community than either the Soldier or the Statesman. I do not speak of the mere Rhymer, of course: I mean the real and great Poet, the earnest apostle of Truth and Beauty; the man who, speaking to the divine part of humanity, lifts it above its mean and grovelling passions, and allies it to what is pure and noble. and noble. The Poet's office is one of the highest that I know. It is to purify the heart, to elevate the moral sense, to calm the perturbed spirit when agitated by its earthly trials, to refresh the tired soul with draughts from the spring of Eternal Beauty. The Poet is a voice ever speaking to our immortal part, ever telling us that earth is not our final home. Were there no such voice to speak to us, our souls would become stupified and lost in the perplexing cares and sordid ambitions of the world: but as it is, the Poet continually reminds us of our great and lofty

destiny, and so leads us more nobly to fulfil it. We have a threefold life; a physical, a mental, and a moral life; of these the last only is immortal. The Warrior leads our physical part, the Statesman our mental part, and the Poet our immortal part. For this reason I hold that the Poet's is the highest mission of the three.

FIFTH SPEAKER.- Sir, With much that was admirable and eloquent in the speech of the gentleman who has just resumed his seat, I think there was also much that was visionary and unproved. The Poet should do all that our friend has described, but does he? I submit that this is yet unshown. Will the gentleman maintain that all great Poets have purified the world, elevated the moral sense, and kept chaste the human heart? Are there no licentious Poets? no sceptical Poets? no misanthropic Poets? What was Ovid? What was Shelley? What was Byron? Will our friend pretend to say that Ovid is an apostle of morality -that Shelley is a teacher of holiness-that Byron is a promulgator of philanthropy? Sir, if the Poet's office is to teach what these men teach, I must say that I do not believe it to be beneficial to mankind. It seems to me that at best the good which the Poet does is visionary. We do not see, we cannot trace, his influence; and how, then, can we say with certainty, that it is vast and

good? I think we act much more wisely in bestowing our esteem upon men whose work is perceptible, such as the Warrior and the Philosopher or Statesman. We see what the Soldier

does, and what the Statesman does: between them, therefore, our judgment must lie. I give my vote, without hesitation, to the Warrior. He may not perhaps mean the most good, but he effects the most. He is the means of extending commerce and civilization, he is a hero, and the creator of heroes, he introduces order, discipline, and regularity into the state, he is the fearless protector of his country's rights, and the architect of its renown. History seems to say to us that a country always flourishes most under military rule. Rome proves this: so does Sparta: so does our own country. Rome was happiest when her legions were the most victorious; Greece was greatest when Miltiades and Leonidas led its arms to victory; and England was mightiest when Cromwell's strong arm ruled its destinies. The Statesman's office is a great one, doubtless ; but the Warrior's seems to me even greater. I, for my part, would cheerfully give up our Chathams for our Nelsons. To the Warrior, then, I give my voice.

SIXTH SPEAKER.-Sir, I do not wonder that so many of our speakers have adopted the cause