females is of the greatest importance. The mother is the best of all the teachers that the labourer's children can obtain. The father is seldom in his dwelling except in the hours set apart for rest, and the care and instruction of the children he resigns altogether to the mother. The children are constantly with her, unless they spend a few hours of the day at school; they must learn from her, as soon as they can lisp, to offer prayers to the Deity; she is almost the only individual who can enforce their regular performance of this duty; and she is the person to imprint on their minds, as soon as they are capable of receiving impressions, the distinctions between right and wrong the leading principles of religion-the primary rules of good conduct-and to compel the practice. She is the model which is constantly before their eyes, when they are every moment learning what they will scarcely ever forget. The clergyman they perhaps cannot understand-the schoolmaster they in all probability dislike and disregard; but they look upon the mother as a being who cannot err, and they religiously believe every word that she utters. Her precepts become so inseparably interwoven with their affection, that they are scarcely ever forgotten, so long as a spark of this affection remains. If the mother be vicious and depraved, it is scarcely possible for human power to prevent her children from being so. It must not be forgotten, that, after the children leave school, the principal purveyors of their literary food will be the Catholic clergy and the Catholic Association. This will be a mighty evil, and the government will not do its duty, if it do not keep the press of Ireland under the most effectual control, with regard both to newspapers and to tracts and pamphlets. If the Catholic Association is to be permitted to make such speeches as it is now in the habit of making, and to circulate them among the peasantry, then, for Heaven's sake! keep the peasantry unacquainted with the alphabet. We are led, by something which lately fell from Mr Dawson in the House of Commons, to conclude these hasty observations with some others, equally hasty, on what is called Conciliation. During the last session, the Whigs applied every epithet of charge and abuse that our language could furnish to the Orangemen; and not merely to the Orangemen, but to the whole body of the Irish Protestants. This was called Conciliation, and no one could be found to reply to it save a disbelieved Orangeman. More followed. First one minister, and then another, rose to declare that the Orange processions were things not to be endured: this was done without a syllable being said in favour of the principles of the Orangemen, and it naturally cast a deep stigma upon them. This was also called Conciliation. The Marquis Wellesley publicly quarrelled with the Protestants-cheered, according to report, the playing of Catholic party tunes at the theatre-and performed other impartial feats; and Mr Plunkett, in the House of Commons, denounced the Protestants as a faction. This was likewise called Conciliation. The ministers then implored Parliament not to say a word, in discussing Irish affairs, that could offend the Catholics-and of course nothing was said of the Catholics and their Associations save eulogy. Colonel Barry, indeed, read the character of the Catholic Association, but Parliament could not on any account pass an unfavourable opinion of this body. This was, moreover, called Conciliation. We hoped that, before this, this unjust and preposterous system had cut its own throat-and we only speak of it, because it seems to be still in exist ence. As to the Orange processions-the processions of a few hundreds of people among seven millions-who defends them, even among the respectable Orangemen? They are in principles highly meritorious, and if they be mischievous in effects, would not a private wish on the part of government, have done as much in putting them down, as public and official reprehension? We say Yes. If the ministers, in their personal intercourse with the heads of the Orange Association, had earnestly requested them to discontinue the processions, and had overlooked the excesses of the ignorant members of the body, the processions would have been discontinued, to the abatement of party spirit, and not to its increase. The conduct of the Marquis Wellesley and Mr Plunkett towards the Protestants, and the repeated stigmas cast upon the Orange As sociation by ministers, coupled with their anxiety to extenuate, pardon, and conceal all the offences of the Catholics, have constituted party-conduct of the worst description, and have produced all the effects that such conduct could produce. They have virtually constituted an offensive alliance with the Catholics, and a fierce attack upon the Protestants, and they have naturally placed the parties in a state of bitter warfare. Never, in the memory of man, did party spirit rage more furiously in Ireland than it has lately done, and the case could not possibly have been otherwise from the conduct that has been adopted by men in power. We blush to think, that the idea, that the Orange Associations produce the Catholic ones, has to be combatted. The Orangemen combine for defensive purposes;-to protect themselves, the Protestant religion, the constitution, the laws, and the government;-ergo, the Catholics combine for offensive purposes,-to put an end to the payment of rents and tithes; take the land from its owners, exterminate the Protestants, destroy the dominion of England, and make Ireland an independent Catholic state. This may, for anything that we know, be very choice logic; but we are men of plain understandings, and it is lost upon us. Those who advance it, should maintain, that loyal associations produce radical ones, that religious societies produce infidels, and that, because we wish to defend the constitution, our neighbours must needs wish to destroy it. We may be told, as we often are told, that the Catholics are quiet, meek souls, who are free from party spirit, and who could do nothing wrong, were they not goaded to it; but the conciliators, the emancipation-men, must pardon us, if we disbelieve it. When we look at the words and deeds of Captain Rock, and at the language of the Catholic Association, and the heads of the Catholic Church, we really cannot for our lives see that the annihilation of the Orangemen would change in one jot their sentiments and conduct. We may no doubt be in error, for, according to the authority of many great men, the operation of causes is directly the reverse in Ireland, of what it is in all other countries. If a government ought to make no distinction between its friends and its enemies-the good and the bad-true principles and false ones, let this be at once broadly promulgated according to the good old English fashion, and let us no longer labour under the delusion that it ought to encourage the loyal and discourage the disloyalto trust and reward according to desert-and to promote the spread of good feelings and principles as much as possible, by kindness and favour on the one hand, and displeasure and coercion on the other. Let it be remembered, that the contest in Ireland is not between Whigs and Tories, but between the loyal and the disloyal, the friends of England and its enemies, a religion that is the nurse of freedom, and one that is hostile to freedom in the highest degree. The secret of all this, we think, may be easily discovered. Some wiseacre or other has seemingly fancied that a quarrel with the Protestants would be in effect a reconciliation with the Catholics-that if the former were cast off by the government, the latter would crowd round it in all the ecstacies of devotion. It seems to have been thought that the parties were both loyal, and both friendly to England; that they merely contended as the Whigs and Tories contend, and that the smile of the Lord-Lieutenant could win the one as easily as the other. The trial has been made; its issue has been a very natural one, and it has yielded to its parents everything but success and honour. As we stated in our Maga zine for April, the Catholic Church is compelled to follow its present conduct-to keep its followers in the state in which they are-by regard for its own power and existence; and a richer bribe than that of the whole body of the Protestants, will not induce it to commit suicide. There is genuine conciliation, and there is spurious conciliation: we have lately had admirable specimens of both. The King went to Ireland as a conciliator-a genuine conciliator. He did not, like the Marquis Wellesley, quarrel with either party on personal, or other grounds; and he did not identify himself with either party :~ he did not, like Mr Plunkett, call either Protestants, or Catholics, a faction; and he did not endeavour to make the one a sacrifice to the other. His conduct was distinguished by the most firm and scrupulous impartiality; and, what was of even more consequence, it consisted wholly of condescension, kindness, and benevolence. This, and this alone, rendered it irresistible to party spirit. Every one knows what effects his Majesty produced, how long these effects endured, and how they were destroyed. Let the King's conduct be contrasted with that which has been followed by some of his servants, and it will be seen, what is really conciliation, and what is party conduct concealed under the name. We should not, after all, have touched on this subject, if it had not been very closely connected with the instruction-we will not say education -of the Irish peasantry. If a people be put under a regular course of instruction, it is of the very first importance that the words and deeds of their rulers should mark as strongly as possible the distinction between good and evil, both in men and things. Ministers are constantly imploring Parliament not to say a word that may give offence to the Catholics; and this proves, what could not otherwise be doubted, that what is said in Parliament finds its way to a large portion of the people of Ireland. Now what are the Irish peasantry to think, when they find that one side of Parliament declares that the Protestants are a vile faction, who only exist to injure and enslave them, while the other side says not a word in contradiction of it; when they find the ministers repeat edly reprobating the conduct of the Orangemen, and in the same breath supplicating Parliament to say nothing against their own; when they find the Protestants vilified in every possible way, while their own atrocities are extenuated, or concealed; and they are made the objects of incessant eulogy? Is this the way to put them out of love with their guilt-to remove their disaffection to destroy their confidence in their leaders-and to teach them to esteem the Protestant, and to judge charitably of his religion? Is this a portion of the system of conciliation of the grand Eady-nostrum which is to tranquillize Ireland? we compassionate those from our souls, whose duty it is to answer the questions. If the words of Parliament find their way to the people of Ireland, let them be such as the people ought to hear. Let them be the words of truth and justice. Let Parliament deal impartially between the parties, let it spare the misdeeds of neither, but do not let it, with conciliation in its mouth, teach the Catholics to hate the Protestants, and to regard their own crimes as justifiable. Let it not, under the mask of conciliation, become the greatest agitator and party leader of Ireland. Let Parliament solemnly point out the distinction between bad men and subjects, and good onesbetween bad feelings and principles, and good ones. Let it solemnly, but with temper, moderation, and benevolence, point out the difference between the two religions, in truth and meritcensure the civil despotism of the Catholic clergy-define the civil and religious duties of the layman, and fearlessly denounce guilt, whether it be civil or religious-whether it be committed by Protestant or Catholic. This might perhaps not be conciliation, but it would be something of infinitely more value. It would be INSTRUCTION, and instruction that would not be lost. It would do more to tranquillize Ireland, than all that conciliation has done to inflame it. We ask no favour for the Protestants. If they unjustly monopolize power and trust in Ireland, let the Irish government be impeached for suffering them to do it-if they obstruct the administration of justice, let them be prosecuted-if they commit guilt which old laws cannot reach, let new ones be framed to punish them-if they be guilty of oppression, let them be held up for it to the scorn of the world; only, instead of the Billingsgate of Brougham, let us have the sober and decisive words of legal evidence to prove it. We say we ask no favour for the Protestants, for it would be a degradation to which we could not stoop, to ask favour from men in authority for those who fight the battles of our holy religion, our constitution, and our country. But we do ask justice for the Protestants. If, when there are atrocious and dangerous parties in the state, as well as praiseworthy ones-false and demoralizing creeds, as well as just ones; and when these are engaged in fierce conflict, our rulers affect to belong to no party and to remain neutral, if it have come to this, at least let them act impartially between the combatants. We ask for justice for the Protestants, less for their own sake than for that of the Catholic peasantry. They may be attacked and vilified by Parliaments, Lord-Lieutenants, Irish Attorney Generals, and Ministers, until the peasantry regard them as unprincipled tyrants, whom it is meritorious to de stroy, and this may bring upon them all the injuries and sufferings to which humanity is liable; but we think that it will bring equally great injuries and sufferings upon the Catholic peasantry, and we think, moreover, that it will cause a loss to both Ireland and England, alike terrible and irreparable. Y. Y. Y. SKETCHES OF THE FIVE AMERICAN PRESIDENTS, AND OF THE FIVE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES, FROM THE MEMORANDA OF A TRAVELLER. It is a great mistake to suppose that the policy of the American government will not be materially influenced by the character of the next President. All nations are more or less determined in their course of dealing, at home and abroad, by the moral and intellectual character of their chief magistrates, whatever may be their title, rank, or authority. The Americans always have been so, and always will be so, whatever they may imagine to the contrary. A bird's-eye view of the successive administrations of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, and Munroe, will establish this proposition in part; and, as we are justified in expecting like effects from like causes, and that what has been will be again, if the first part of the proposition be established, the latter would seem to be a legitimate inference. I have no disposition to meddle with the domestic economy of nations; nor with what is considered the tea-table politics of any country; but it is pleasant to observe the influences of both upon the great human family, and to shew ourselves wiser than our neighbours, in tracing any effect to a cause that has been perpetually overlooked by other men. This is one of those cases. The character of the American government, from the day of its first organization, -has been little else than the character of the man highest in office for the time. And yet the politicians of Europe would tell us, that it is a matter of no moment to the world, whither Mr A, B, C, or D, is to become the - next President of the United States; and the Americans, themselves, have never suspected, and will never admit, that the character of their chief executive officer is, in reality, the character of the government. For my own part, I do not scruple to say, that I could tell under whose administration any important law had passed, or any important treaty had been entered into by the American people, on hearing it read for the first time, although the date were not mentioned, solely from my knowledge of the five individuals, who have been five successive Presidents. WASHINGTON, the first President, made the government like himself, cautious, uniform, simple, and substantial, without show or parade. While he presided, nothing was done for effect-everything from principle. There was no vapouring, and no hivalry about it. Whatever was done or said, was done or said with great deliberation, and profound seriousness. Mr ADAMS was the second President. He was quite another sort of man. He was more dictatorial, more adventurous; and, perhaps, more of a statesman. But look to the record of his administration, and you find the natural temper of the man distinctly visible in all the operations of the government, up to the very moment when he overthrew himself and his whole party by his hazardous political movements. The cautious neutrality of Washington, which obtained for him, in the cabinet, what had already been awarded to him in the field-the title of the American Fabius-was abandoned, by Mr Adams, for a more bold and presumptuous aspect, bearing, and attitude. The quiet dignity, and august plainness of the former, were put aside for something more absolute and regal. The continuance of the American government under Washington, throughout all its foreign negotiations, and domestic administration, was erect and natural, very strong, simple and grave. But, under Mr Adams, although it appeared loftier and more imposing, and attracted more attention, it had sort of theatrical look, and was, in reality, much less formidable. Then came Mr JEFFERSON. He was the third President. He was, undoubt edly, a man of more genius than either of his predecessors. His talent was finer, but not so strong. He was a scholar and a philosopher, full of theory and hypothesis. And what was the character of his administration? Was it not wholly given up to theory and hypothesis, experiment and trial? He turned the whole of the United States into a laboratory—a work-shop-a lecture-room; and kept the whole country in alarm with his demonstrations in political economy, legislation, mechanics, and government. Hence it is, that, to this day, it is difficult to determine whether his administration, on the whole, was productive of great benefit, or great evil to the American people. The most extraordinary changes, transmutations, and phenomena, were continually taking place before their eyes; but they were, generally, unintelligible, so that he left the country pretty much in the situation that his fame at Muclecello is at this moment -altogether transformed from its natural state-altogether different from what it was, when he took it in hand -a puzzle and a problem to the world. To him succeeded Mr MADISONthe fourth American President. He was altogether of a different constitution-loquacious, plausible, adroit, and subtile. Out of his administration grew the war between his country and this. It has been a question much agitated among many sensible men, and respectable politicians, whom I have known in different countries whether Mr Madison, whose temper was neither quarrelsome nor warlike, really wished for, and promoted, and expeded the war, or not? I have heard the same question warmly debated among his countrymen and friends. They had, probably, never seen, or had overlooked the significance of a paper in the "Federalist," (a work produced by Mr Hamilton, Mr Jay, and Mr Madison, in defence of the constitution then about to be adopted by the American people)-written by Mr Madison himself, when a young man, in which he shews, plainly and convincingly, how vast an augmentation of patronage, and, of course, power, the President of the United States would derive from a state of war.. No man saw it so clearly at the time-no man remembered it, after the debate was over, so distinctly, and no man could have profited by it more resolutely than did Mr Madison, when he came to be what, when he foretold the evil, he had no more idea of being, than be has now of being an Emperor-the President of the United States, with ample power to fulfil the prophecy. The next, and last of the American Presidents, is Mr MUNROE, a remarkably plain, sensible man-very honest, and, but for this last message of his, which is wholly unlike anything that he has ever written, or said, or done before, I should be inclined to think of a very prudent, cold, and phlegmatic temperament. Yet, what is his administration, but a history of the man himself-or rather a biography? If all this be true, have we no interest in understanding the true character of the five men, out of whom the next President of the United States will be chosen? My opinion is, that we have, and that we ought to have, and therefore I shall give a sketch, first, of the President now in office, and then, of the five candidates, out of whom one will be chosen to succeed him. Mr Munroe, the actual President at this time, is an old-fashioned-looking man, whose manner is a compound of natural, strong simplicity, and artificial courtesy. He is very awkward, and very affable; with a countenance and address so distinguished for substantial good sense, and downright honesty-like that which we oftentimes meet with in humble life among the uneducated, that if you should encounter him, accidentally, in the company of men of the world, without knowing him, you would take him for a sensible man, quite unaccustomed to such society, and altogether above the folly and affectation of imitating them. But, let some one tell you that this sensible, uneducated man, is no less a personage than the President of the United States, and you would be likely to discover something almost awful in his plainness of manner; something, before whose quiet rebuke the grandeur and beauty of courtly bearing would fall away, like affectation. Yet is it not so?-Mr Munroe is really an awkward man; and so are most of the candidates, at this moment," all, all awkward men." |