Of the merits of this biography as a historical study it is not my purpose to speak. In the first place, the space I have at present at command is inadequate; in the second, this feature of the subject can only be discussed by experts in the matter of Roman history; and, in the third, if a searching criticism were required into the accuracy or inaccuracy of the statements made and the facts propounded, I am not the writer who should be selected for the task. All I desire to do in these brief comments is to point out the illustrations afforded by this remarkable work as to the theory of modern Imperialism. I see that amongst my brother reviewers it is the fashion to regard this book as a simple manifesto in favour of the Napoleonic rule. This theory I believe to be a mistaken one. Amongst men whom action has made famous, no desire is more common than that of achieving a reputation in the world of letters which shall endure beyond the memory of their lives. To be able to say, 66 Exegi monumentum cere perennius is a wish which has agitated the heart of many a man, whose life will be always his best monument. It is impossible to read through this history of the foundation of the Roman Empire without perceiving that its author intends it to rank as a work of sterling historic value, as a book that will be read even when the Napoleons have vanished as completely as the Cæsars. If the Emperor had designed simply to vindicate his own dynasty under a Latin name, he would have chosen some more direct form of vindication, or, at least, would have treated of some one of the many phases of history which afford a closer parallel to his own era and to the part which he has taken in it. Yet, allowing all this, to his own contemporaries the chief interest of the book will reside in the glimpses afforded by it of the Imperial view of things as they are in our years of grace, not in those which date from the foundation of the eternal city. It will be for a future generation to judge of the work by its intrinsic

of a man who has made history and is still engaged in making it, must perforce look for the light it throws on the present and the future-not for that it casts upon the past. And my wish in this paper is to illustrate the moral to be drawn from those passages where the author obviously thought of France when he wrote of Rome, of the Napoleons when he wrote of the Cæsars.

The parallel between the first Napoleon and the first Cæsar seems to me to be by no means the main feature of what I may call the esoteric lesson of this latest treatise on the history of Rome. The volume just published only brings us to the triumvirate of Pompey, Crassus, and Cæsar; and the last named of the three had then scarcely commenced his attempt to overthrow the liberties of the Republic. The real object of these pages is to show that the state of Rome was such that the welfare of the community demanded a change that the forms of freedom had ceased to represent any substantial benefits, and that a saviour of society was called for urgently. A similar defence is far more applicable to the usurpation of the third Napoleon than of the first. Amongst the countless accusations brought against the founder of the Napoleonic dynasty, the one of having destroyed a stable order of liberty to erect a despotism upon its ruins has never been urged seriously. Moreover it must be admitted fairly that in the eyes of Frenchmen the Great Napoleon needs no justification. It is in England only that Napoleonic worship has never made its way. With this scepticism I find no fault; but still I could wish that as a nation we had done fuller justice to what was grand and noble in the greatest of our enemies. To any one who has lived much in foreign countries -it matters little in what portion of the civilized world-there is something absolutely astonishing in the tone which even educated Englishmen adopt when speaking of the Emperor who, in the wild words of Victor Hugo, became at last so mighty that "il gênait Dieu !"

from the injurious effects of boroughmongering malpractices and political jobbery.

Mr. Henry Berkeley, the member for Bristol, who has worn for many years the ballot-mantle of Mr. Grote, and annually delivers a clever and amusing speech on the iniquities of bribers and intimidators, has excluded the Berkeley examples from his catalogues. That is not surprising. His brother Grantley supplies the omission. The many public admirers of the present parliamentary apostle of the Ballot will read with interest some of the notices in this volume of Mr. Henry Berkeley's younger days. He was, it appears, "before his severe illness, of his weight, the best amateur boxer in the kingdom," and, when only sixteen, "went to the Fives Court, under the special introduction of the late Mr. Berkeley Craven and Colonel Berkeley, and with the trial gloves on, set to, and had a great deal the best of it, with one of the well-known pugilists of the day, Caleb Baldwin." It

is further related that the member for Bristol never went to bed, in his youthful days, without suspending the clothesbag, full of linen, to a nail, and hitting at it, right and left, by way of practice, for half an hour together. "The child is father of the man," and the youthful pugilist who tried his prentice hand in punishing dirty-clothes bags has ripened into the hard hitter of the House of Commons against the foul practices of intimidation and corruption.

P.S. Since the above article was in type, we have seen a small pamphlet, which is a Reply to some passages of Mr. Grantley Berkeley's book by his four surviving brothers. The passages replied to exclusively relate to the conduct of their parents and the question of the legitimacy of the elder children. under an alleged secret first marriage, which the late Lord Fitzhardinge failed to prove to the satisfaction of the House of Lords. As in the introduction to our article we have incidentally stated the illegitimacy of a portion of the family as a fact, in accordance with Mr.

decision of the House of Lords, it is, perhaps, fair, in so delicate a matter, that we should give currency to the following declaration of Mr. Grantley's four surviving brothers, one of them being Mr. Moreton Berkeley :

"The surviving brothers do not desire here to discuss the questions involved in the decision of the House of Lords; they simply desire to give to the world their united testimony as against that of their brother-that in their belief the history of the matter given by the late Earl and Countess, under sanction of their oaths, was the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Their father solemnly, in his place in the House of Lords, made his declaration that the first marriage had been solemnised and registered, and confirmed that statement by his oath. Their sons believe

devoutly their parents' solemn declaration. In this belief Mr. Moreton Berkeley shares as strongly as his elder brothers, and they have a perfect knowledge that their brother Craven up to the time of his death held the same conviction."

It is further stated in this pamphlet, that, long after Mr. Grantley Berkeley became a member of Parliament, "he professed to share the belief of the other members of his family in the due celebration of the first marriage."

The four brothers also say :—

"Mr. Grantley Berkeley knows that his father, within a few days of his death, and while in full possession of his intellect, and mindful of the Presence in which he must soon appear, too weak to write, dictated, and with his own hand signed, a letter to the Prince Regent, containing the following words:-'Your Royal Highness was well acquainted with the situation which I had placed my wife and children in by concealing my first marriage in 1785.' This letter was handed to the Prince Regent, who endorsed on it these words,-'I certify the whole of these particulars to be true. G. P.R.' The Prince made a statement to the same effect to Mr. Sergeant Best, counsel for the claimant, but His Royal Highness was not called as a witness by counsel, they supposing his evidence to be a declaration made post litem motam, instead of being, as in fact it was, ante litem motam. The mistake was fully explained in letters now extant, and which have been seen by Mr. Grantley Berkeley.

With the main object of our article this question has nothing to do; the reply of the four brothers does not touch election matters; for ourselves and the public the decision of the House of Lords

THE two agents which have perhaps exerted the greatest influence on the social condition of man are printing and alcohol, both of which were unknown to the ancients. To whatever extent they may have indulged in other excitements, neither Greeks nor Romans were brandy-drinkers or gin-drinkers; and our mediæval forefathers were obliged to restrict themselves to ale, or mead, or wine, till the impatient curiosity of mediæval science hit upon one of the most notable of modern discoveries. We owe it to those old searchers after hidden principles and hidden powers, the alchemists, who incessantly tried experiment after experiment in pursuit of that quintessence of quintessences and elixir of elixirs, the elixir of life. After almost every imaginable substance had been called into requisition, one day it came into the head of an adventurous investigator to put wine in the alembic; and there came from it a spirit of such extraordinary purity, and which displayed such remarkable qualities, that he rejoiced in the conviction that he had at length reached the object of his vows. The exact date of this event, and the name of the discoverer, are equally unknown, but it is believed to have taken place in the course of the thirteenth century. It was no doubt at first communicated only to a few, and then gradually became known to the many; and all, equally impressed with its im portance, believed they saw in it a special intervention of God's providence. They imagined at first that the new agent was destined to be the grand regenerator of mankind, which was supposed to be greatly fallen from its original perfection-that it would free man

firmity, and that it would prolong his life. But no good in this world is without its alloy, and even this fortunate discovery brought with it a cause of alarm. There were those who considered that a novelty so wonderful could betoken nothing less than the near approach of the consummation of all things, the end of this world.

Thus was brandy discovered. At first the alchemists modestly gave it the name, in their technical nomenclature, of aqua vini, water of wine, but this was soon changed to aqua vita, water of life, which expressed better their estimate of its qualities, and which many of them relished all the better, because they imagined ingeniously that it involved a sort of equivoque, or pun, upon aqua vitis, the water of the vine, or of the grape. One of the famous physicians of the middle ages, Arnaldus de Villanova, who is said to have been born about the year 1300, is the earliest writer who mentions aqua vita; and he speaks of it as though it had not then been long known (et jam virtutes ejus notæ sunt apud multos). In a treatise which bears the significant title, De conservanda juventute et retardanda senectute, dedicated to Robert, King of Jerusalem and Sicily, Arnaldus speaks of this liquor, which he says was effective in nourishing youth (juventutem nutrit) and in keeping off the approach of old age. "It prolongs life," he says,

"and on account of its operation in this "respect, it has merited the name of "aqua vita" (prolongat vitam, et ex ejus operatione dici mcruit aqua vita). It was best kept, he adds, in vessels of gold, and could be preserved in no other material except glass. Only one of the anticipations of the old alchemists in

fulfilled-it has produced a vast effect upon social life; but it has certainly neither tended to prolong youth nor to retard old age.

These early alchemists, indeed, do not appear to have foreseen the usage of their newly-discovered spirit as an exciting and intoxicating drink, nor does it appear to have been employed for this purpose to much extent before the sixteenth century. It was considered as a medicinal potion, and, perhaps, in course of time, it began to be taken as a cordial "on the sly." It was probably very expensive, and no doubt a great mystery was made about it; but people who could possess it, and were persuaded that it would preserve youth and keep off old age, would be frequently tempted to take a dose, when they might not in outward appearance be in want of it. The use of aqua vitæ as a drink appears to have increased rapidly during the sixteenth century, until the regular consumption must have become very considerable. It is spoken of as a thing in common use in the plays of Shakespeare, Ben Jonson, and Beaumont and Fletcher; and the 66 aqua-vitæ man," who carried it about for sale, is introduced as a common character. In the comedy of the "Beggar's Bush," by the two last-mentioned dramatists, the aqua-vitæ man calls his merchandize "brand wine," which (meaning simply burnt wine) was the name by which it was known in Dutch, and was the origin of its modern name, brandy. The earliest large manufacture of brandy, in fact, was seated in the Low Countries and Germany. At the close of the seventeenth and the commencement of the eighteenth centuries Strasburg and Nantes were celebrated for this manufacture, at least, it was from those two cities that the best brandies were brought to England.

In Shakespeare's "Twelfth Night," Sir Toby Belch talks of brandy as a favourite drink with midwives; and from that time forwards we may trace among female society in all ranks a gentle leaning towards the exhilarating

conceal the true character of the liquor they were drinking under disguises, and an immense quantity of brandy was consumed indirectly in making what were usually termed "cordial waters," because they were supposed to be taken for medicinal purposes, though some people were plain enough to call them strong waters. It must be remembered that one of the greatest accomplishments of the lady of the house in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was skill in the art of distilling, and that every well-ordered household of any respectability possessed its alembic or still, until the exciseman came to suppress the practice. In that curious book for the illustration of social manners, the "Ladies' Dictionary," published by John Dunton, the bookseller, at the close of the seventeenth century, we are told, under the head of "Distillation," that "Every young gentlewoman "is to be furnish'd with very good stills, "for the distillations of all kinds of "waters-which stills must be either of

tin, or sweet earth; and in them she "shall distil all manner of waters meet "for the health of her household." The essential of these waters always consisted of brandy; but it was disguised and flavoured by a great variety of ingredients, consisting, however, chiefly of herbs. We know tolerably well the composition of most of these cordials, from the receipts for making them, which were soon collected and printed in small books-a continuous series of which exist, beginning with the sixteenth century. These books appear under rather quaint names. One of the earliest I know, printed in 1595, is entitled, "The Widdowes Treasure." The "waters" it contains are called by Latin names rosa solis, aqua composita, and aqua rosa solis. The title of another similar book, printed in the year following, is "The Good Huswifes Jewell," and its cordials are, rosemary water, water imperiall, cinnamon water, Dr. Stephens's water, aqua composita, and water of life-this latter stated to be a great cordial, good especially "for to

THE two agents which have perhaps exerted the greatest influence on the social condition of man are printing and alcohol, both of which were unknown to the ancients. To whatever extent they may have indulged in other excitements, neither Greeks nor Romans were brandy-drinkers or gin-drinkers; and our mediæval forefathers were obliged to restrict themselves to ale, or mead, or wine, till the impatient curiosity of mediæval science hit upon one of the most notable of modern discoveries. We owe it to those old searchers after hidden principles and hidden powers, the alchemists, who incessantly tried experiment after experiment in pursuit of that quintessence of quintessences and elixir of elixirs, the elixir of life. After almost every imaginable substance had been called into requisition, one day it came into the head of an adventurous investigator to put wine in the alembic; and there came from it a spirit of such extraordinary purity, and which displayed such remarkable qualities, that he rejoiced in the conviction that he had at length reached the object of his vows. The exact date of this event, and the name of the discoverer, are equally unknown, but it is believed to have taken place in the course of the thirteenth century. It was no doubt at first communicated only to a few, and then gradually became known to the many; and all, equally impressed with its importance, believed they saw in it a special intervention of God's providence. They imagined at first that the new agent was destined to be the grand regenerator of mankind, which was supposed to be greatly fallen from its original perfection-that it would free man

firmity, and that it would prolong his life. But no good in this world is without its alloy, and even this fortunate discovery brought with it a cause of alarm. There were those who considered that a novelty so wonderful could betoken nothing less than the near approach of the consummation of all things, the end of this world.

At

Thus was brandy discovered. first the alchemists modestly gave it the name, in their technical nomenclature, of aqua vini, water of wine, but this was soon changed to aqua vita, water of life, which expressed better their estimate of its qualities, and which many of them relished all the better, because they imagined ingeniously that it involved a sort of equivoque, or pun, upon aqua vitis, the water of the vine, or of the grape. One of the famous physicians of the middle ages, Arnaldus de Villanova, who is said to have been born about the year 1300, is the earliest writer who mentions aqua vita; and he speaks of it as though it had not then been long known (et jam virtutes ejus notæ sunt apud multos). In a treatise which bears the significant title, De conservanda juventute et retardanda senectute, dedicated to Robert, King of Jerusalem and Sicily, Arnaldus speaks of this liquor, which he says was effective in nourishing youth (juventutem nutrit) and in keeping off the approach of old age. "It prolongs life," he says,

"and on account of its operation in this "respect, it has merited the name of

aqua vitæ " (prolongat vitam, et ex ejus operatione dici mcruit aqua vita). It was best kept, he adds, in vessels of gold, and could be preserved in no other material except glass. Only one of the anticipations of the old alchemists in