Mr. Gladstone's appearance and manners much in his favour. He is a fine-looking man.

He

is about the usual height, and of good figure. His countenance is mild and pleasant, and has a highly intellectual expression. His eyes are clear and quick. His eyebrows are dark and rather prominent. There is not a dandy in the House but envies what Truefit would call his fine head of jet-black hair.' It is always carefully parted from the crown downwards to his brow, where it is taste

fully shaded. His features are small (?) and regular, and his complexion must be a very unworthy witness if he does not possess an abundant stock of health.

Mr. Gladstone's gesture is varied, but not violent. When he rises he generally puts both his hands behind his back; and having there suffered them to embrace each other for a short time, he unclasps them, and allows them to drop on either side. They are not permitted to remain long in that locality

The question of National Education being introduced by Ministers in the House of Commons, on the 14th of June, 1839, Lord Stanley delivered a powerful speech against the proposals of the Government, and concluded by moving an amendment to the effect, 'That an address be presented to her Majesty to rescind the order in council for constituting the proposed Board of Privy Council.' Lord Morpeth de

hanging down before him. Their re-union is not suffered to last for any length of time. Again a separation takes place, and now the right hand is seen moving up and down before him. Having thus exercised it a little, he thrusts it into the pocket of his coat, and then orders the left hand to follow its

example. Having granted them a momentary repose there, they are again put into gentle motion; and in a few seconds they are seen reposing vis-à-vis on his breast. He moves his face and body from one direction to another, not forgetting to bestow a liberal share of his attention on his own party. He is always listened to with much attention by the House, and appears to be highly respected by men of all parties. He is a man of good business habits; of this he furnished abundant proof when UnderSecretary for the Colonies, during the short-lived

administration of Sir Robert Peel.

In the year 1839 Mr. Gladstone upon two occasions addressed the House on a topic collateral with that of slavery. He strongly opposed the Jamaica Government Bill, for the suspension of the Constitution, introduced by Sir S. Lushington, characterising it as inconsistent and inexpedient, inasmuch as it would perpetuate the disunion which existed between the different classes of the community. He asserted that it would undermine the

While his lordship held his own views respecting the doctrines of the Roman Catholics, and also respecting the Unitarian tenets, he maintained that as long as the State thought proper to employ Roman Catholic sinews, and to finger Unitarian gold, it could not refuse to extend to those by whom it so profited the blessings of education. After speeches by Lord Ashley, Mr. Buller, Mr. O'Connell, and others

in the course of which allusions were made to Mr. Gladstone's work on Church and State the member for Newark addressed the House. He would not flinch, he said, from a word he had uttered or written upon religious topics; he claimed the privilege of contrasting his principles and trying their results in comparison with those professed by Lord John Russell, and of ascertaining the effects of both upon the institutions of the country, so far as they operated upon the Established Church in England, Scotland, and in Ireland. Turning upon Mr. O'Connell,

who had expressed a great fondness for statistics, Mr. Gladstone said the use he had made of them reminded him of an observation of Mr. Canning's. He had a great aversion to hear of a fact in debate, but what he most distrusted was a figure.' He then went on to prove the inaccuracy of the hon. member's figures. Replying to Lord Morpeth's declaration concerning the duty of the State to provide education for Dissenters so long as it fingered their gold, Mr. Gladstone said that if the State was to be regarded as having no other function than that of representing the mere will of the people as to religious tenets, he admitted the truth of his principle, but not if they were to hold that the State was capable of duties, and that the State could have a conscience. It was not his habit to revile religion in any form, but he demanded what ground there was for confining the noble lord's reasoning to Christianity. Referring to the position held by the Jews upon this Education question, he read to the House a passage from a recent petition as follows:-That your petitioners feel the deepest gratitude for the expression of her Majesty's most gracious wish that the youth of this country should be religiously brought up, and the rights of conscience respected, while they earnestly hope that the education of the people, Jewish and Christian, will be sedulously connected with a due regard to the Holy Scriptures.' Mr. Gladstone asked how was the education of the Jewish people, who considered the

New Testament an imposture, to be sedulously connected with a due regard to the Holy Scriptures, which consisted of the Old and the New Testaments? To oblige the Jewish children to read the latter would be directly contrary to the principles of hon. gentlemen opposite. He would have no child forced to do so, but he protested against paying from the money of the State a set of men whose business would be to inculcate erroneous doctrines. debate the Government carried their motion by a very small majority. Two years later Mr. Gladstone again spoke on the unpopular side, when he opposed the Jews Civil Disabilities. Removal Bill. He was on this occasion answered by Mr. (afterwards Lord) Macaulay in a speech of great point and force. The Bill was carried in the Commons, but lost in the Lords.

At the conclusion of the

In the session of 1840 an important debate on the war with China was originated by Sir James Graham, who moved the following resolution:— That it appears to this House, on consideration of the papers relating to China, presented by command of her Majesty, that the interruption in our commercial and friendly intercourse with that country, and the hostilities which have since taken place, are mainly to be attributed to the want of foresight and precaution on the part of her Majesty's present advisers, in respect to our relations with China, and especially to their neglect to furnish the superintendent at Canton with powers and instructions calculated to provide