THE MAGAZINES.

THE Fortnightly is decidedly the most readable of the magazines this month, though not so much on account of the general level of its articles as owing to the extremely bright

and entertaining essay on " Courage," by Lord Wolseley. Of this paper it is, indeed, not too much to say that it is a perfect model of how a soldier should write upon the soldier's virtue,— the article is practically confined to military courage. Full of striking stories of brave deeds and sayings of fearless men, and written in dashing, nervous English, the interest never flags for a moment throughout the thirteen pages of the article. No doubt there are plenty of things laid down therein as absolutely true which in reality are only par- tially true, and some of the statements will not bear too close analysis. These, however, are hardly faults, for the reader will not look for an accurate metaphysical disquisition on courage, but rather wants to hear about courage from a man who not only is himself brave, but has had a peculiarly large and long experience of how other men behave when they are called upon to show of what mettle they are made. Lord Wolseley, on his second page, makes a statement which, though we have no doubt it is perfectly true, is somewhat startling. Cowardice, he says, " is the most subtle of mental diseases, the existence of which may never be known to any but the man whose heart it gnaws at. When the day arrives on which all hearts shall be open, we shall, I am sure, be astonished to find that many of those who have passed muster in our ranks as brave men, will plead in extenua- tion of sins committed, the astounding fact that they were cowards by nature." As an example bearing more or less directly upon this, Lord Wolseley later on tells a curious story. He once, he says, knew well a man whom he had often seen under fire, and who never showed himself anything but a fearless soldier. It happened to this officer to be ordered to take part in a dangerous assault. The operation failed, and with heavy loss, and among those supposed to have

been killed was the aforesaid officer. When, however, Lord Wolseley went next morning to attend the funeral of those who had died in the assault, he, to his delight, found his friend quite unharmed and looking especially cheerful, while he gave

a perfectly reasonable account of his escape. Years after, however, Lord Wolseley learnt that, as a matter of fact, the man had behaved badly upon this occasion, " and had taken shelter under cover, allowing his men to go forward whilst he skulked in the rear." Strangest of all, on the very morning when he appeared so cheerful, he had just come from con- fessing his cowardice to his commanding officer. "The secret was too much for him to bear; he could not keep it, so he made a clean breast of it, telling the tortures he had so long endured in striving to keep a bold face before the world, while craven fear gnawed at his heart." Though we cannot find space to notice a tithe of the interesting things said by Lord Wolseley, we must at least quote his very striking account of General Gordon :--

" In writing of courage, it is impossible to omit a reference to my friend and comrade Charley Gordon. His courage was an instinct, fortified by faith in God and in a future life. This life had no intense pleasures for him, and he shrank from the applause of men. He did whatever came to his hand with all the loyalty of an English gentleman, and especially with the earnestness and zeal of a servant of Christ. The world was to him a sort of prison, beyond the precincts of which lay that New Jerusalem from which his waking thoughts, and very dreams even, never wandered. Whilst in this mundane prison, he tried to do God's bidding with that unbounded sympathy for the sufferings of all animal creation, that was one of his most remarkable characteristics. And yet, he had absolutely no regard for human life. To die, to be killed, or to kill, was as natural, as much a matter of course to him, as to be born. He eared nothing for his own life, and could not understand why others should set any value upon theirs. It always struck me when conversing -with him that he was, more than any man I ever knew well, made up of opposite qualities. The God whom he

worshipped was at one time the sternly just God described in the Old Testament; at another He was the God of love revealed to us by Christ. Not that these two conceptions contradict each other, rather is each the complement of the other; but yet the union of such widely different qualities which seems to us natural, necessary even, in God, strikes us as strange in a man. And so the union in Gordon of stern severity and exceeding gentleness always seemed to me to be extraordinary. It was not that Gordon was simply brave in action, but that danger had actually and positively for him nothing terrible about it. There is a curious page in his Khartoum diary where he discusses the question of whether he should, or should not, allow the Mandi to take him alive. Death to him was really the open door to a new life, and whether he passed through it in action or under any other circumstances was all the same. Death to him was merely a release from all the paltriness of human life. When shall we see his like again ?"

Before leaving Lord Wolseley's article, we will notice twb stories of that absolute insensibility to danger which some men show. One story is of an officer who, when relieved from duty in the lines before Sebastopol, would never take the trouble to go home through the trenches, but preferred to take "a bee-line for camp, exposed for many hundred yards to a heavy rifle-fire from the advanced works of the Russians." That man was Sir Gerald Graham. Another delightful story is of a sea-captain in command of a battery, also at Sebastopol, who made it his invariable practice to walk about with his telescope under his arm, quarter-deck fashion, " behind his battery, on the natural plateau of the ground, where he had little or no protection from the enemy's fire." " He was not only always cool, but most particularly courteous; and there was this well-known peculiarity about his grace of manner, that the hotter the fire and the greater the danger, the more suave, or, as his men used to say, b—y polite,' he became."—Mr. Swinburne's poem on the Armada, though, like so much of his later work, marred by diffuseness, is in many ways a noble

poem. The fifth of the parts into which it is divided is perhaps the best, some of the verse, indeed, being full of •a. deep and true music. Spirited, too, is the account of how the

vanquished Armada, tempest-tost and hard-pressed by its enemies, was swept along past the English coasts :-

"Past many a secure unavailable harbour and many a loud stream's mouth,

Past Humber and Tees and Tyne and Tweed, they fly, scourged on from the South."

" A Visit to President Brand," by J. E. C. Bodley—we pre-

sume the gentleman who used to act as Sir Charles Dilke's private secretary—contains many curious things about South Africa. We can only notice, however, the strange story of how President Brand's knighthood was delayed a year, and how the late Speaker was made a Knight Grand Cross of the Bath :—

" In 1882 he had conferred upon him the honorary Grand Cross of St. Michael and St. George, as an acknowledgment of his services to England. The President would have received his knighthood the previous year, after the conclusion of the Transvaal Convention, but for a curious accident. An influential member of the English Ministry, who appreciated his assistance, wrote on a piece of paper, ' Brand ought to be knighted,' put the suggestion into a dispatch-box, and sent it to 10 Downing Street. What happened there is not within my knowledge, but a Gazette appeared some time afterwards containing, not the name of President Brand, but an announcement that the Grand Cross of the Bath had been conferred on the Speaker of the House of Commons. An honour so appropriately bestowed could not in any sense be described as a knighthood by mistake, though it was John Brand of Bloemfon. tein who was in the Minister's mind when he wrote his terse memorandum."

The National Review contains an article by Professor Gold- win Smith, entitled " The Invitation to Celebrate the French Revolution," which, for force and picturesqueness of language,

will compare with anything that even he has ever written. Professor Goldwin Smith, speaking from the • standpoint of " a Radical," prophesies against the horrors and the failures of the French Revolution. With what he says as to the baseness of revolutionary heroes, the weakness of the King, and the criminal follies and political intrigues of the Queen, we most

heartily agree ; when, however, he comes to apply the moral he draws from the French Revolution to modern English politics, we must protest most strongly both against his con-

clusions, and against the facts to which he looks to confirm.

them. Professor Goldwin Smith takes the most gloomy and pessimistic view possible of the situation in which we stand at

present, and evidently looks to the future -with terrible un- easiness. " Supreme power has," he says, " been handed over to great masses of ignorance, gullibility, and discontent," while at the same time there exist no constitutional safe- guards in our institutions. Next, party government is in a

hopeless state of disintegration, and " in the British House of Commons we have four or five sections not one of which is able to support an Administration." Surely this is exaggeration, and we must say dangerous exag- geration, though Professor Goldwin Smith, of course, has the best possible intentions. The best way to prove the exaggeration is to state the facts. We tried the worth of our new democratic Constitution in 1886 under circumstances extremely unfavourable to a rational and a right action being taken by the country, and what was the result P The democracy gave as satisfactory an answer as could possibly have been wished to Mr. Gladstone's scheme for national disruption. A majority of something like 170 among the representatives of England, Scotland, and Wales was sent back to maintain and enforce the law in Ireland, in opposition to the majority of repre- sentatives from Ireland who were hostile to the cause of Union. Do not let us then call the householders names till they have done something worthy of our ire. It is the same with Professor Goldwin Smith's complaints as to party government. Instead of party government giving way under the tremendous strain of 1886, it may be said to. have given a wonderful example of its strength. The present Ministry rests on no less sure a foundation than any of its predecessors, and probably in no previous Parliaments have battles been more closely fought upon strictly party lines. Our old party system was shattered, it is true, in 1886 ; but in less than six months, what was virtually another system was formed, the fragments having been united so as to form once more two compact bodies of political opponents. But quarrel as we may with Professor Goldwin Smith's theories, it is impossible not to be pleased with the language in which he states them. Could anything be better put than the phrase in which he speaks of a Government " which is nothing but the momentary crest of a wave in the rolling sea of House of Commons faction " P —One of the best papers in the National Review is Mr. St. Loe Strachey's argument for the abolition of the Irish Vice- royalty. He tells the history of its accidental retention at the time of the Union, of its condemnation in principle, of the great majority against it in the House of Commons when Lord John Russell proposed its abolition nearly forty years ago, and of the accidents which again prevented its abolition. He urges most justly that it is more than ever an obstacle in the way of tree Unionist policy, and in the way also of wise decentralisation and of sound administration. No student of the great problem of the day should neglect to read Mr. Strachey's convincing article. —Under the head of " More Tillage," the National Review opens its pages to a statement of the stalest of the stale argu- ments of the Protectionist party. How long, we wonder, will men go on recommending a moderate duty on corn as the only remedy for agricultural depression, and urging in its favour that such a duty would not raise the price of corn P Can they answer the question,—What good will the duty do the farmer if it does not raise the price of corn P The Nineteenth Century is decidedly weak this month, though Mr. Lilly's paper, on one point of which we have elsewhere commented adversely, is even more effective than usual.—The article, " Who Owns the Churches P" by Pro- fessor Jessopp, in_ which he deals with many matters, though chiefly with the way in which the churches have been injured by too zealous restorers, is also a telling one.—Miss Beatrice Potter's account of "East London Labour," though heavy reading, is full of sound and valuable information. It would be impossible here to condense her remarks, but we may say generally that she exonerates the middlemen from the charge that it is to their rapacity that the miseries of the cheap clothing trade are due. Though she does not say so in so many words, it is pretty evident that Miss Potter means to point to the conclusion that the entrance of foreign labourers should be stopped.—" The Geographical Distribution of British Intellect" is an impressive instance of how far the unreasoning passion for statistics—any statistics rather than no statistics--can be carried. The result of the article is to show that one man in every 22,000 in Scotland, one man in every 30,000 in England, one man in every 49,000 in Ireland, and one man in every 58,000 in Wales, gets into Men of the Time,—i.e., becomes distinguished for something or other. The examination of these statistics county by county is the further concern of the article.—After this, readers will find even " The New Cure for Growing too Fat,' " by Dr. Burney Yeo, is cheerful.—Professor Goldwin Smith concludes in the present number his essays on " American Statesmen." The article contains two admirable verbal portraits,—one of Webster and one of Andrew Jackson. Webster's oratorical powers receive a very high eulogium, while " the unlettered barbarian," Andrew Jackson, is depicted in all the most unlovely colours which the artist can mix on his palette.

The Contemporary is decidedly heavy. The most promising article by title is undoubtedly " Mr. Forster," by Justin McCarthy, M.P. Naturally the reader will look for a strong and telling defence of the Nationalist Party for their attacks upon Mr. Forster, and will expect to see the Parnellite case convincingly stated. Disappointment will be the only result of such hopes. Mr. Justin McCarthy entirely ignores all the difficulties in his path, and simply contents himself with strings of weak platitudes upon Mr. Forster and his acts, such as —" He had come into the midst of a great social revolution, and he did not know it :" " Mr. Forster was disappointed with the Irish people, the Irish people were disappointed with Mr. Forster; each exaggerated the defects of the other."—In " The True Policy of National Defence," Colonel Maurice urges the fact that, though England has no Army in the Continental sense, she has nevertheless in her Fleet a power which can, as it were, be expressed in hundreds of thousands of men, and can allow her to make alliances with foreign Powers on equal terms. This is his reasoning. Italy has a seaboard so immensely long, that to protect it from attack from France, 300,000 men would be absolutely necessary. If England, however, agreed to protect this coast-line, she would set 300,000 men free to march across the frontier. An English alliance is, then, worth 300,000 men to any group of Powers of which Italy makes one. In the same way, Germany has to keep 200,000 men to protect the Baltic coasts. If England guarantees these coasts, these 200,000 men can be set free. The English alliance, then, is worth 500,000 men to the Central European alliance. This fact. Colonel Maurice seems to think, gives us the power to make an alliance with the Central Powers which will protect India from Russian attack. We very much doubt it. Of course, the Central Powers will gladly promise anything for our help. The question is,—Will they keep their promises P Let us put a case. Russia attacks England in India, but makes no move in Europe. Are we to believe that Germany and Austria will immediately enter upon such an enterprise as the invasion of Russia in the style of the Great Napoleon P Of course, they would do no such thing. Austria, indeed, might make the situation an excuse for extracting a secret treaty from Russia allowing her to get another great slice of Turkey. Other help we should get none. Instead of Austria and Russia treading on the dragon's tail to make him turn back, they would watch the result of the struggle as one in which they could not lose, which ever side ultimately won.

Blackwood contains some readable papers. The best is, perhaps, " The British Museum and the People who go There." What may be called the romances of the museum, such as the stories of the Portland Vase and the Shapaira, forgeries, are extremely well told. A good story is given of an official who, overburdened with questions by the public, once answered the question, " Why is the museum closed P" with the remark, " Because one of the mummies is dead, and the officers are attending the funeral."—Mr. Story's paper on Michael Angelo cannot fail to please, so marvellously full of human interest is the record of the painter-sculptor's life. The style of the essay is, however, somewhat overdone.—The magazine closes with an account of an old contributor, Mr. Gleig, the well-known friend of the Duke of Wellington, who, though born in 1796, only died last month.

In all respects, the best paper in the August Cornhill, which has, on the whole, a poor and padded look, is " Who Wrote Dickens's Novels P" Sarcasm at the expense of Mr. Ignatius Donnelly, in the form of skits, has been very abundant, if not superabundant, of late ; yet this naively humorous demonstration that Mr. Gladstone must be the true author of Dickens's novels will while away an idle hour agreeably enough.—" The Home of Turkish Tobacco " is also good.

" The Reproach of Annesley," by the lady who styles her- self " Maxwell Gray," of which we have the second instalment

in the August number of Murray's Magazine, promises to be an improvement, in the matter of style at all events, on The Silence of Dean Maitland.—Admiral Colomb contrives to give some crumbs of novelty as well as of good sense in a paper on " Naval Volunteer Defence."—There is humour in " Just for the Fun of It," an American story of cross- purposes, which is concluded in this month's Murray; but it is hardly up to the standard of its very able author, Mr. Paul Cushing.—It must be said of Mr. Morley Roberts, who gives a narrative of " Hunger and Thirst in Australia," that he has the power which Lamb attributes to one of the Elizabethan dramatists, of " moving a horror." Altogether, this is an excellent number of Murray's Magazine.

Perhaps the most notable paper in an admirable number of Macmillan's Magazine, is one containing recollections of the late John Campbell Shairp, by his friend Lord Coleridge, in the form of a letter to Shairp's biographer, Professor Knight. It is appreciative, and although unctuous, is not unduly or ungracefully so. Lord Coleridge describes Shairp as " more poetical than his poetry, more affectionate than his letters ; fuller of charm, weightier in influence, than even his best and ablest writings."—In an article discussing Imperial Federa- tion unfavourably, under the title of " Straining the Silken Thread," Mr. Goldwin Smith makes this rather curious re- mark,—'- I do not see why there should not, in course of time, be an Anglo-Saxon franchise including the United States." —Mr. Harold Perry gives an interesting article on Gibraltar, which shows among other things how, as a fortress, Gibraltar ought to be improved and, so to speak, modernised.—Mr. Sidney Colvin's " On Some Letters of Keats " is well worth reading ; and of the lighter papers in the new Macmillan, " Confessions of a Gardener " is the most readable.