pendence. At the time of the late costly war of interference, it was the fashion to attribute this state of things to Austria, and to make that government solely responsible for the prostration of Italian nationality. But it was forgotten, or parties pretended to forget, that the papacy is the first cause, direct or indirect, of the loss of that nationality. For several ages the independence of Italy appeared to increase with the increase in temporal power of the popes, because at that time they marched at the head of civilisation; but after having shone for a brief period, the Italian nation fell into the lowest rank of Christians, when papacy, herself giving the example of a mortal corruption, lost all religious activity. The political influence of the court of Rome, which, under Gregory VII, aspired at universal domination, became fatal to Italy, and was the origin of its own servitude. Has not the government of the popes, says M. Vernes, also ever shown itself the worst of governments? So far from serving as the home of liberty, ecclesiastical principles have ever shown themselves averse to it. Pius IX., a more generous than enlightened pope, would never have given his people a constitution if he had foreseen to what the concessions he made would ultimately lead, and the changes they were calculated to effect in his system of government. When he became aware of these facts, he drew back terrified before his own work. " but The Church has, no doubt, preserved a certain sacerdotal activity; it has lost all elements of administrative and political progress. The priests have no confidence save in priests, and the Church does not voluntarily resign itself to the new state of things, which would oblige it to content itself with spiritual dominion, and would interdict it from the monopoly of civil rule. །་ ་་་་་ The idea has been emitted of making the Pope the president of an Italian confederation, of conferring upon him a kind of protectorate of the whole peninsula, diminishing his temporal power at the same time that his political responsibility is exalted. But, asks M. Vernes, is such a transfiguration of papacy capable of realisation? Have we not in such a proposition an imaginary papacy created to meet the wants of a cause whose partisans feel, more than they avow it, that the chief object to its triumph is at Rome? Much reliance was placed in the semi-official pamphlet which suggested this arrangement, upon the opinions of the illustrious Piedmontese writer Balbo; but it was omitted to quote that Balbo, while in favour of a policy of confederations, and admitting that such are the best means of conquering independence, and alone capable of upholding it, also adds: "Popes, powerful auxiliaries in such an undertaking could not be made the chiefs of it." Where, besides, would be the limits of the temporal and the spiritual? They have only succeeded up to the present time in making of a good cause a cause for revolution, and of turning all the Italian governments in the same direction, that of the oppression of intelligences and characters. This mischievous co-operation resembles in its effects that of the southerly winds, which enervate the whole peninsula. If the interests of Italy were thoroughly understood, all efforts would be directed towards suppressing, not extending, the temporal power of the popes; there ought to be at Rome merely a supreme pontiff, and not a sovereign, for, so long as a priest-king shall reign in the Eternal City, Italy can never be enfranchised. Such are among the chief causes of the prostration and servitude of Italy; the natural corollary is, that not revolution, but religious and political reforms are imperiously demanded. It is easy to propound this in our country, but far less so, and far rarer, is it to find such sentiments expounded on the Continent. M. Vernes does not, however, hesitate to take the matter up in all its ultimate bearings. "If Italy," he says, saw her intellectual supremacy vanish so quickly, at the same time as her independence, it is because she remained a stranger to the Reformation. Deprived of that new force, torn by political and ecclesiastical factions, without faith or shame, incessantly ruined by the frenzied egotism of an ambitious multitude, and the prostitution of consciences-a work of the popes rather than of princes-this country was soon no longer more than the shadow of its former self-the great shadow, as it might be called, in the present day." This is speaking out boldly, in a language characteristic of what we have already called attention to-the rapid march of Protestantism in France in modern times. M. Vernes proceeds to tackle Balbo, the upholder of Christianity as the great basis of all human progress, but the enemy of reform; and he argues that, in comparing the different Christian nations with one another, so as to appreciate the influence of reform upon each, he takes up this question simply in an intellectual point of view, forgetting that which constitutes the very basis of humanity-its moral grandeur. The Ultramontanes themselves, we are told, admit the superiority of the religious and social principles of the Protestants, but they attribute this to the gradual introduction among them of Romanist tendencies. That is to say, they arm themselves with arguments against Protestantism drawn from the very success of that Protestantism itself. They cannot deny the preponderance and universal development of Great Britain as a Protestant country, as compared with the intellectual and moral darkness of the descendants of the Borgias and the Medicis, so they denounce Protestantism as the mother of socialism, communism, and of all the guilty errors that have arisen to trouble modern society. Unfortunately for the denunciations of the Ultramontanists, the facts of the case disprove their asseverations, for whilst Austria, Italy, Spain, and France were being undermined by socialism, Protestant nations, as England, Prussia, Holland, and the United States, were untouched by it. Balbo himself admits that Protestant nations have more morality than the Romanist, and he looks upon England as charged with the great apostolic mission of modern times. Another distinguished Italian, Leopardi, has asked: "Why is it that Italy, which remained as utter a stranger to reform as Spain, allowed its supremacy of previous ages to be ravished, and itself to fall into that state of degradation from which it has never since been able to rise?-Because she lost her independence. But why did she lose it ?-Because she was corrupt. If so, why did not her Catholic orthodoxy preserve her from corruption?-Because, apparently, that orthodoxy, deprived of the vivacious forces of reform, was powerless in giving it virtue as a means of independence, any more than independence as a means of virtue." The givers of advice repeat to the oppressed Italians: "Let independence be your aim, but virtue your means." But where, says M. Vernes, shall they obtain that virtue which is recommended to them, save in creeds that are more capable of giving a spur to individual and public activity, to notions of right and justice, and to those inspirations of moral Christianity which can alone raise and maintain a nation? "Religious renaissance is the sine quâ non of political renaissance." As Gioberti said: "Christian nations may be struck down with sickness, but they cannot utterly perish." It may be a long and painful trial, but Heaven orders for the best, and either moderates or precipitates events as He sees best fit. A LAY OF ST. STEPHEN'S. Of honourable senators Who fill St. Stephen's seats, Two Kings, a Duke, a Marshall, too, A Noble Palmer and a Knight, We've Fellowes, Merry, Rich, and Wise, Long, Hardy, Lowe, and Thynne, Of Manners, Moody, and D. Mure, Old Adam, Walter, Davey, Paull, George, Herbert, Gregory, James— Some are past Baring, some Ar-nott, The Hayter neighbours shuns: Debtors in vain protection seek 'Gainst three confounded Dunnes. Millers with Mills our favours beg, A Butler, Cartwright, lots of Smiths, A Goldsmid sure is out of place, He finds, 'mid Elphin-John-Glad-stones, Two genuine Salts, with Pennant spread, Nor dread the Leeke or Tempest Kane,¡1‡ A Collier offers Coke, and Coles, All wise men fly from Bond or Deedes, Horsman can Fox or Roebuck Hunt, Though Horsfall on the Clay or Beach O'er Greenwood, Freeland, Marsh, and Hills, *ba vood grad ngem_wel ↑ „jedt agai On-slow by Longfield, past the Brooks, f1 h° ༈ { By Bridges or by Forde, The Traill they follow North or East, 1 Or on the Western hoard,ving do 1 put o Booth's at hand with table spread,tobuz of The Head-lam feels the Steel; zatem spum dugd get to ni:st d Potts promise Pease, a Peacocke, too, With bits of candied Peel. There's Ball or Barrow for your use, ig noncin Ledés A Lever and two Lockes, A Gore-stained Brand in case of Warre, A pastoral Crook is Close at hand, Hope sheds a cheering light; In case of need you e'en can add God save the Queen and Parliament ! Confusion seize those asses Who cry "Reform'!" because this House T 1 Mingle-Mangle by Monkshood. but made a mingle-mangle and a hotch-potch of it-I cannot tell what.BP. LATIMER's Sermons. HERO AND VALET. A THAT no man is a hero to his valet-de-chambre, is a mot attributed to Marshal Catinat by some, by others to the Prince of Condé. That there are claimants besides, is a thing of course. The spirit of the adage may be found in all sorts of writers-though not exactly embodied in so trim and epigrammatic a shape as here. Akin to it, in scope and moral, is the Persian saying, quoted by Mr. Morier's hero-that in the maidan, or the public walk, at the sight of thy handsome cloak every one makes way, and saith, "Mashallah!" while at home every child can count the holes and darns which it covereth. Montaigne says, for instance, that "few men have been admired by their own domestics"-which remark he makes with a view to enhance the glory of Aquilaus, who used in his journeys always to take up his lodgings in the temples, that the people might be able, if they chose, to pry into his most private actions. It was a sort of challenge to all the valetdom in the city, to come scrutinise the Hero to the top, or bottom, of their bent. The act might be rendered in Lady Hero's lan guage-strained, however, more than enough, and sc Is it not Hero? Who can blot that name The man might be portrayed, without any such wrested meaning, in In short, he was a perfect cavaliero, And to his very valet seem'd a hero.|| Voici, says Massillon, ce qu'on découvrait de certains héros vus de près. "L'homme désavouait le héros; leur réputation rougissait de la bassesse de leurs mœurs et de leurs penchants; la familiarité trahissait la gloire de leur succès." We may generally observe, says Addison, that our admiration of a famous man lessens upon our nearer acquaintance with him; and that we seldom hear the description of a celebrated person, without a catalogue of some notorious weaknesses and infirmities. "The reason may be, because any little slip is more conspicuous and observable in his conduct than in another's, as it is not of a piece with the rest of his character, or because it is impossible for a man at the same time to be attentive to the more important part of his life, and to keep a watchful eye over all the inconsiderable circumstances of his behaviour and conversation."** Valetdom is not only watchful but Arguseyed-at least for peccadilloes and undress foibles. * Hajji Baba in England, vol. ii. ch. xxxvii. See Plutarch. Beppo, st. 33. † Essais, 1. iii. ch. ii. § Much Ado about Nothing, Act. IV. Sc. 1. Massillon, Sermons. ** The Spectator, No. 256. |