SPECTATOR'S LIBRARY.

Pourres,

Izelautt and its Rulers since 1829. Part the Third Netohy.

MII•CELLANEOOS LITERATURE,

Rhymes and &cone...lions of a Hdud Loom Weaver. By william Thom. of Is- verury. Smith and Elder ; Menzies, Edinburgh.

FICTIoN.

The Free Lance. By Daniel M'Carthy. Author of "The Siege of Florence." Masamello." fec. In three volumes Bentley. Pamm..3y, Uptun's Physioglyphics Fisher and Co. Joy SNILE LITERATURE,

The Settlers in Canada. Written for Young People. By Captain Marryat. In two

volumes Longman and Co.

THE THIRD PART OF IRELAND AND ITS RULERS. THE Second Part of this vigorous slapdash publication brought down the review of Ireland and its Rulers to Lord MULGRAVE'll Viceroyalty. The present volume gets very little further in its narrative of events. " For reasons," writes the author, "which he is sure will be appreciated, he has felt unwilling to comment upon the transaction of last year while legal proceedings affectinF the liberty of several persons were still before the courts of law.' We are not so sure that this mock delicacy will be appreciated in the way the author seems to expect ; for who is be that he should form an exception to the rest of the world? The House of Com- mons felt not the slightest scruple in discussing the subject ; Lord Joins RUSSELL did not scruple to declare in the face of the nation that Mr. O'CONNELL had not had a fair trial ; and though few other persons of character were found to emulate the indecorum of this offshoot of the house of Bedford, no one either publicly or privately, by word or by pen, hesitated to notice the "conduct of the Irish Tribunes," or of the Administration, except those judicial persons whose decision, it was supposed, would settle the writ of error. The truth seems to be, that the author of Ireland and its Rulers prefers reserving his judgment till he can judge by the event. Under these circumstances, he might as well have reserved his volume ; for it bears evident marks of stuffing, and is conse- quently deficient in matter, (at least in matter appropriate to a four-volume book, although well enough as a series of articles,) and, though striking and readable, fails in leaving much impression, except in isolated passages.

The contents are more miscellaneous than heretofore, with less of direct relation or coherence in connexion. The volume opens with "Lord Normanby and his Times," which had been treated previously : but the writer returns to his theme, for the purpose of supplying former omissions; and hits the literary Lord very hard, in an examination of the causes which led to his popularity, and an estimate of his statesmanship. Neither do the Melbourne-Whigs escape flagellation, for their tampering with the Revolutionary faction of Ireland, and their actual misgovernment as shown in its results. These subjects are further pursued in a survey of Lord ESSINGTON'S Adminis- tration; and, under the title of "A Real Insult to Ireland," the job of Plain Jons CAMPBELL is exhibited at large. These topics, with a chapter on "Young Ireland," close the strictly historical matter of Ireland and its Rulers; unless notices or cha- racters of Mr. DRUMMOND, Sir MICHAEL O'Lodnixs, and Lord PLurrxEr, may be said to relate to this principal subject. The re- mainder of the space, which was probably designed for the PEEL Administration, is eked out by articles that might have appeared anywhere as well as here,—a character of the genus "Irishman," and two papers on "Seeing Irish History." The first is wordy, and not very real; the second artificial, but clever and effective. The author carries his reader to the top of a high hill, and, setting the land before him and the glories thereof, divides the property of the country within ken into three classes ; showing how little of wealth or respectability belongs to the Lower or Irish Nation, and drawing two practical conclusions from his survey—the stability of the British power, and the unchangeableness of the Irish character.

AN IRISH PROSPECT.

But come, this sad view, if we will study it rightly, can be turned to a moat cheerful conclusion. There is a wholesome and elevating Intsrs1 to be drawn from what we have seen in this political landscape; -.um' we mayturn its suggestive associations to a most useful account After six centuries of rebellion and civil war in Ireland, the British Power stands unshaken and unimpaired. Sept after sept of native Irish has been borne into oblivion. Innumerable rebel houses of the Anglo-Norman race have been extirpated. Faction has risen after faction, to perish like its prede- cessor. But there stands the British Power, invincible to its assailants; and while we see around us the crumbling ruins of Irish political nationality, we can discern innumerable effigies of the British empire, which show no signs of weakness or decay. Just as we look yonder at Buttevant Abbey all in ruins, the last resting-place of the Anglo-Norman De Barnes, Preudergasts, and Meades, and of the native Irish Mac Carties, O'Halys, and O'Donegans, and as we see standing by its side the British barracks, full of that soldiery before which the legions of Revolutionary France were compelled to recoil ; while the Irish are totally disunited—broken into two nations—there stands the British Power, presenting a single front, and supported by the unanimous re- solve of every party and creed, every class and rank in Britain, to maintain vigorously its existence on the Irish soil.

On the other hand, the Irishman has kept one thing which is still fresh, ex- uberant, and full of life. He has lost all his political nationality, but he has retained his distinctive and peculiar personal character, which he has resolved never to give up. The Englishman during six centuries has always fought for power—he has succeeded. The Irishman has fought most frequently for the sake of pride. The Englishman, not satisfied with Imperializing Ireland, wished to Anglicize the character of its people, and has completely failed, for he warred against nature. There is no natural cause to prevent Ireland being a component part of the British empire ; but there are in Ireland various causes which will always operate to make its natives distinctive and peculiar. It is madness for the English Imperialist to strive to obliterate Irish character; in doing so he makes the existence of his authority a perpetual insult to the feel- ings of all the country.

In a literary point of view, this Third Part is not equal to the First, and scarcely to the Second ; not merely from its being a continuation—a repetition of the same subject in the same style— but because the more striking points were selected at first, and we have now, if not the leavings, yet the inferior parts. Some of the falling-off in general character must also be ascribed to the undue expansion of this Part—the manner in which it has been padded out to make a volume. The peculiar style of the writer, and the attention just now attracted to Irish subjects, however, render the book as readable as its predecessors ; whilst there are occasional passages that exhibit more depth of thought and soundness of con- clusion—more philosophy—than, we think, this writer has dis- played before. Such is the contrast between

OPINION AND SENTIMENT.

There is a saying of Fletcher of Saltoun's, which has been quoted until one LI weary of hearing it—" Give me the making of a people's songs, and I will care little who shall make its laws." Young Ireland defends itself with this saying. It says that it assumes a mission of national propagandism, and that it is content " Martemque aceelolere canto." But with all respect for Fletcher of Saltoun, political power does not depend upon sentiment. "All power," says Hume, "even the most despotic, rests ultimately upon opinion." But no two things with an apparent resemblance are in reality more different than sentiment and opinion. They differ as widely as feeling does from conviction, or fancy from reason. Sentiment is vague, opinion is definite. One is transient, and liable to a thousand changes; the other varies its phases only with corresponding alterations in the circumstances from which it has been evolved. One derives its birth from only a few of the mental faculties ; for the production of the other, all the powers of the mind are required. The first expires in eloquence and expression ; the other lives in induction and ideas. Sentiment is a flower—a toy—a thing of taste—it is beautiful or loathsome ; opinion is a tool—a weapon—a thing of use—it is formidable and dangerous. Sentiment is often involuntary ; but opinion is a matter of WILL—hence its enormous power.

Thus, in polities, authority built upon opinion is not endangered by the tide of sentiment, any more than some castle on the sea-shore is in peril from the foam and spray of the angry ocean, that impotently lashes its foundations. What a quantity of sentiment was in favour of the Jacobite party ! but how light made Walpole of their Highland bards, and all the angry prejudices and mournful recollections of the followers of the Stuarts! For there was much sentiment against the Hanoverian dynasty, but opinion was in its favour. So too, in France, what a quantity a sentiment has been poured forth against "the system," as Louis Philippe and his family are called ; but what can the senti- ment do ? Or look to Italy, with its laws made by Austria for centuries, despite of all its glorious songs, its imprecations against foreign tyrants, and its sentitnents against alien sway.

And thus, in Ireland, the sentiment of all the Lower Nation is hostile to England ; but whatever of opinion exists in it may be termed as favourable to English authority. If there be six centuries of tyranny to justify Anti. English sentiments, there are also six centuries of victorious Imperialism to justify the persuasion, that, for weal or wo, England and Ireland are bound to- gether by indissoluble ties ; and to give abundant cause for entertaining the opinion that it is vain to resist the British Power, and that it is much better to try and have a century or two of peace, social development, and popular im- provement, than a dreary continuation of baffled attempts, discomfited hopes— a beggared population—a brokenhearted country. But "Young Ireland" prefers to remember and to hope, than to observe and to reason. It likes to Indulge in sentiment, and is averse from forming a -cool and wary opinion.

Young Germany dreams—Young France quarrels—Young England says prayers—Young America swindles—and Young Ireland sings.

The same knowledge of Irish society, and the more striking and obvious characteristics of Irishmen, are visible now as formerly ; but not always, we think, so well done—the material is less and the labour greater. The following, however, is close, smart, and various in its successive traits of the Irish sycophant.

LORD NORMANDY'S ADMIRERS.

When Lord Mulgrave bad come to Ireland, and had leagued himself with the Corn-Exchange party, what a triumphant air did the Mulgravizers exhibit towards the supporters of that short-sighted statesman the ignorant Lord Wellesley, and that feeble young nobleman Lord Stanley ! The upholders of " the Lichfield House Compact" carried themselves most jauntily, and with conceited ignorance prattled about the inestimable qualifications of Lord Mul- grave as a statesman. "One of the first men of the age." "Lord Mulgrave, no doubt, is the most rising genius of the day." "Oh! Sir, there's no man at all like him." "Pooh ! the Marquis Wellesley was a blind old fool to this man." " Wisha! by Gor ! may be he'd as give us the Belisle." " Och I bad luck to his inimies, shore we know that his honour's motto is 'Ireland and her righta, or the world is in a blaze." And then, in addition to the chorus of the Castle Whigs ;1. la Mulgrave, some shabby fellows who had grown rich on the patronage of Lord Angies::; would curse their former friend, and spout forth some rhapsodical blarney about "the janius of this farfamed littherarury Lord- Liftinviant." And then some vaunting Mulgrave Whiglings would mince their small enthusiasm about "the man of the time ! "—meaning poor Lord Normanby. And then some Protestant barrister, who had never been known for his attachment to Liberal principles of any kind—perchance some creature who had actually refused to sign a petition for Catholic Emancipation—would burst forth in a strain of rhetoric run mad about "the genuine virtue of the mighty man blazing even brighter than the wondrous radiance of his Mu- =loafing intellect ! U" and so on. Even down to the lowest of the Whig "pisantry "—for the peasantry were to all intents and purposes as good" W higs " as the people who inflamed their passions, and invoked all prejudices, religious and political, in their aid—the cry was about the immortal Lord Normanby.

THE NORMANDY RULE.

It was natural for Lord Normanby and the mere Melbourne-Whigs to have -supposed that the process of Mulgravaing the Irish was successful. Estimated by shouts and hurrahs, it was a grand policy ; but considered with reference to the permanence of the empire, it was a shallow and shortsighted scheme, if it had no other instruments of government than what were exhibited during its continuance. The Melbourne- Whigs never saw that it was a demagogue power which was the cause of their popularity in Ireland. Some of the shrewd men of the party perceived it, though of course they would not have publicly admitted it.

If, however, it be still contended that the Normanby Government was as successful as its panegyriste assert, it may be again asked, what became of the whole scheme when Lord Ebrington was made Viceroy of Ireland? Why could not the Mulgravizing plan have been more permanent ? Was it really worth 10 little, that merely changing the Viceroyalty from Normanby into Ebrington caused so serious a difference in the manner with which the Irish masses com-

ported themselves towards the latter nobleman ? • •

Lord Fortescue is not to be blamed for the state of Ireland during his feeble administration. A system of government had been set up in Ireland in 1835 upon what might be termed suicidal principles. Not to aim at securing the support of whatever is fairly entitled to be called a public, but rather to seek at winning a pkbeian popularity, appeared to be the object of the ridiculously- overrated Viceroyalty which had been appointed upon the accession of Lord Meltourne to office in 1835. The French Revolution sufficiently shows that when the controlling power called '• Government" seeks to vie in plebeian po- pularity with the vague, reckless, and irresponsible authority of demagogueisin, the very success of its endeavours becomes the cause of its ultimate downfall. It familiarizes the popular mind with a standard of right by which no govern- ment can be tried for a course of consecutive years. In appealing to popular passions for aid, it invokes its own natural antagonist; and, like an actor who overdoes his part in seeking to win the applause of the spectators, it remit the danger of provoking censure that will interrupt its most praiseworthy efforts.

And such was the fault of Lord Normanby's statesmanship, if such it is to be called. His Viceregal Administration adopted what might be termed the ethics of a theatre-

" The drama's laws the drama's patrons give;

Fur they who use to please must please to live."

But no Ministry can make "to please" its cardinal object. A Government has necessarily to check, control, and resist popular inclinations, wherever prudence shows that compliance is attended with hazard. Such functions are inconsistent with the object to please." The greatest and best statesmen that the world has ever seen have never made "to please" the main end of their political existence. What is reasonable, and not what is pleasing—what is wise, and not what is popular—are the objects of a true statesman's am- bition.

Any one even of ordinary foresight might have foreseen that the Normanby system would have been attended with a remarkable recoil. That such was the case, no man has a better right to know than Lord Fortescue. The very moment that it became necessary for his Government "to live" without show- ing that its sole aim was "to please," the whole Normanby regime was knocked to pieces.

WHIG GRATITUDE.

Nor were there wanting those who saw in the treatment of Plunket by the (Melbourne) Whigs that characteristic indifference to old and faithful servants which may with too much justice be imputed to the Whigs. The greatest states- man their party ever had was never admitted to the Cabinet; and when he was compelled by his principles to sever himself from the Foxitea, with what venom and slander was the reputation of Burke assailed! Against Sheridan's admission to the Cabinet the Whig pride revolted, though his claims were generously urged by Charles Fox. In 1812, the most flattering proposals were made to Mackintosh by Mr. Perceral. But in 1827, when the Whigs bad the power of nominating four members to the Cabinet, great was the surprise of George Canning at finding that the name of Mackintosh was not among those pre- sented to him. In 1830, the Whigs could find, no other way of honouring such a man as Mackintosh than by presenting him with a Commissionership, which he had refused twenty years before ! Such was the manner in which they re- quited the services of a valuable life, given to their cause by one of the pro- foundest intellects and most benignant natures that ever shed ustre on a party. Thus, too, an Attorney-Generalship was generously (!) offered in 1830 to the man who had actually dragged the Whig party up the hill, and tugged it over its difficulties. Thus, too, the long and faithful services of Henry Parnell were disregarded and passed over, and others with not half of his abilities promoted over his head. And thus Pluuket, in advanced life but in full possession of his powers, was hustled off the bench in order to make room for the illustrious Lord Campbell.

There is much hitherto truth in the following remarks upon the inaptitude Young Ireland has shown for its vocation ; for it has done less than Young England, and its " phrases" seem likely to have far less immediate results upon society and opinion. But the judgment of the Lords may alter all this, and enable Young Ireland practically to refute our author's estimate, if they are really anything more than mere penmen, or unconscious but useful tools of an agitation for pocket-purposes; for " the nature of the war is changed, and requires hot pursuit." It adds to the difficulty and dangers, but also to the glory, that they must make the first move.

A FAILING OF YOUNG IRELAND.

On the very starting of its system of national propagandism, how cu- riously it refutes its own teaching, and its own mode of reading history! It says that a nation must begin with deeds, and that the moral and intellectual development will follow. Yet Young Ireland shrinks from anything like a deed. It says, we must be content to remember, and to make the people re- member—to learn ourselves, in order that we may instruct the people : let us be content to utter sentiments—record grievances—portray sufferings—enun- ciate principles—unfold schemes ; let us reflect—calculate—aspire—ay, every thing but ACT. Others, at a future time, must do that. Young Ireland teaches that a nation must commence with actions. Its own part is to moralize—in order that actions may follow. Thus it at once confesses by its conduct that it is speculative, and not practical—illustrative, and not active ; in short, that it chants mighty deeds of other days, without doing any of its own, and that it seeks to instruct Irish posterity how to be- have to England, its ow n part being to speculate and record—to think—to

sigh—to scold—to denounce—but not to lift a hand. * •

Anything but acting up to the sentiments uttered and aspirations poured forth with so much genius of expression and so much literary talent. Thus Young Ireland seeks its action in demonstration—in illustrating pas- sione—exciting hostile spirit ; but not imitating in practice any of the heroes whom it celebrates. It sings against the Irish Arms Bill- - Let each door be unbarred, "Deliver your arms, and then—stand on your guard!"