West Indians in the present case. A man bought, or inherited his estate, under the Acts of Parliament restricting the importation of foreign eorn. If a purchaser, he paid a price-and if an heir, he paid a jointure, and provisions to younger children-bearing a proportion to the rent of the estate, under the existing law of the land; and he is a ruined man if the present law is to be altered without allowing him compensation. It would indeed be a sufficient answer to such a claim, that if the claimant knew that the value of the estate was kept at an unnatural elevation by an Act of Parliament, he could not fail to know that the same power which made the act, could repeal it; that by at least as much as the holders of land were gainers by that law, the community must be losers; that the law was a bad, a flagrantly unjust law, and therefore would, in all probability, be changed; that knowing all this, he may be happy if he is not called upon to disgorge those gains which the unjust law enabled him to make at the expense of the people, instead of receiving compensation for the discontinuance of these gains. But all this applies to the West Indian planter also, and with still greater force. The proposition to give the planters twenty millions of British money, as a compensation for their being compelled to cease from their oppression of the black man, is one of those things at which posterity will wonder.

Posterity will have more, connected with this matter, to wonder at. The claim for compensation is made, in consideration of slavery having been authorized and encouraged by our ancestors of the 16th, 17th, and early part of the last century, as shown by various acts of Parliament, &c., and the common consent of the nation. "If slavery be a sin," say

the planters, "it is a national sin, and not that of our class only." Were it even so, we might appeal to that maxim of law, which declares that partners in guilt shall have no claim on each other. But our Reformed Commons do not seem inclined to avail themselves of this defence. They seem to admit that because our great-grandfathers, and their fathers and grandfathers, recognised slavery in their laws and usages, we are liable to make good the loss the West Indians think they will incur, when we refuse to permit slavery any longer. This appears a generous undertaking of responsibility to which we might justly object; a magnanimous sharing with the planters the consequences of a guilt, participation in which we might fairly disclaim. But are we really so severe upon ourselves, while we are so generous to the slave-owners? No, indeed; no generous and magnanimous feelings have dictated the Whig settlement of the West India Question. The House of Commons has admitted the claim of the planters on the people of the present generation, on account of what our remote ancestors authorized or permitted; and has paid them with a draft on future generations for the amount ! Past generations did the wrong, and future generations are to pay the penalty. All that the present generation does, by its Reformed Representatives, is taking upon itself to determine the question of our responsibility for our ancestors' improper conduct; find simpletons who will advance the twenty millions to the planters; pay the interest out of the consolidated fund raised by taxes imposed in the inverse ratio of a man's ability to pay them; four-fifths of the taxes falling on articles of universal consumption, and therefore requiring the same amount from the poor man, as from the rich! Verily posterity will have cause to wonder at such generosity of the British Aristocracy, to the slave-owners. Not the least wonderful part of the matter will be, that gulls could be found to advance the twenty millions, under the

thought that posterity will pay such a debt otherwise than by a laugh of scorn.

Had the slaves been set at liberty, instead of being retained in bondage for seven years, (a large segment of West Indian life ;) and had a heavy loss been actually experienced by the change from slavery to free labour, had the proposal been to raise the sum to be paid the West Indians at once, or by three instalments within three successive years, and by an assessment corresponding to each man's income; there would have been fairness in the manner of the compensation. Still, we must have objected to the grant, on the principle that compensation is never to be given on account of the ceasing of a profitable injustice. To render compensation to the planters unobjectionable, it would require to be entirely voluntary. There would be injustice in the Legislature compelling a single unwilling individual to contribute a penny towards bribing one man to resign to another man the property of his own body.

We have confined ourselves in this paper to a discussion of the principle of compensation to the West Indians; not deeming it necessary to say more regarding the amount of the compensation, than that it has been denounced as utterly extravagant,—beyond the actual value of the slaves to be emancipated, at the average prices of the Black-man market; independently of the seven years of slave labour, which the planters are yet to exact, if they can. Upon what principle the slave is to be retained in bondage seven years longer, (it was originally twelve years!) except the principle of sneaking submission on the part of a feeble administration to a set of men, presuming on their feebleness, we are at a loss to understand. The Whigs are too weak, when not backed by the people, to resist the imperious dictation of any band of united monopolists. They are bullied by the Corn-growers, by the Bank of England Proprietors, by the East India Company, by the Dignitaries of the English Church in Ireland, and by the West India Planters. Even those who buy and sell their fellow-man, and compel him to work by the cartwhip, have bullied the Whigs into the grossest injustice to the slaves and to the British nation. And we have no doubt that another set of men, who also deal in human bodies,—the resurrection men,—could bully the Whigs into a grant of twenty millions, and a permission of bodysnatching for seven years more, were they equal to the West Indians in number, influence, greed, and audacity.

If the Whigs hold office much longer, or the Tories establish themselves again in power, it is not difficult to predict what will be the consequence. All the odious monopolies will either be continued, or compensation will be given for their abolition. Millions will thus be added to our annual taxation, and scores of millions added to the National Debt. The thing will break down before long, and the fundholder will be made the scape-goat. We can tell the fundholder-for whose just rights we have been, and will be, zealous advocates-that it is high time he were taking alarm at the proceedings of the Whig Ministry and Whig House of Commons. If we are to have nothing but alternations of the two aristocratic factions in power, the funds will be dissipated by a political whirlwind, sudden, short, and destructive, or by the slower operation of national insolvency. Paid, the National Debt never will be by any but by a truly reformed Parliament, in union with the people, and triumphant over the monopolies. Indeed, this is so plain, that it is often matter of surprise that individuals can be found so credulous as to invest or retain money in the Funds. But the explanation of the fact is speedily found. While

commercial profits are 4 per cent., and good bills are discounted at 2 per cent., as in London, people will undertake all the risk of the Funds; the more knowing, whose example leads the other fundholders, contenting themselves with a keen watch, and a determination to submit to the first loss, to sell out, and replace a knave with a gull.

MEN OF GENIUS AND THE PUBLIC.

Exposition of the False Medium and Barriers excluding Men of Genius from the Public. London: Effingham Wilson.

THERE appears to be in literature a snake-eyed fascination which few can resist. The known ill destiny of authors, the sorrows, the infirmities, and the poverty incident to their vocation are all insufficient to deter them from entering upon the thankless occupation; and fresh aspirants to literary glory are hourly entering the lists. It might be supposed that the perusal of D'Israeli's "Calamities of Authors" had been enough to damp the ardour of the most enthusiastic, and cool into soberness the most besotted: but we nevertheless find them rifer than ever; swarming in very myriads, though ruin the most disastrous stares them in the face, and dissuasion the most warning, counsels them at every turn. They are an intractable race.

Evil, misfortune, ill-luck, by whatsoever name may be designated that common attendant upon the actions of all men to a more or less degree, and of authors, in particular, to the greatest degree, is of course ascribable to a cause. The wretched condition of most men of genius has often been bewailed; though the bewailment seems to have provoked little enough of inquiry into the fatal origin. What Mr. D'Israeli's book has done in the one case, then, the present exposition is intended to do in the other, by presenting an analysis and elucidation of the causes of these evils and a condensed appeal to the collected now of ages, in the hope of calling a fresh and startled attention to the vast heap of gigantic facts that stagnate and choke up the struggling current of long-enduring humanity."

66

The expositor does not confine his observations to literature alone. The drama, music, painting, the walks of genius generally, all claim his attention. He seems to possess a minute acquaintanceship with the working machinery of each department; and mercilessly drags into view those mysteries which are either concealed from the understanding or escape the detection of the ordinary observer. He is evidently in love with his task, and addresses himself to it with a boldness which none but those having an intimate familiarity therewith would be supposed to adventure, and a confidence which none but a good cause would inspire. "Thrice is he armed," &c. Yet he writes in such palpable bitterness of spirit, that if it do not augur personal disappointment to a no common degree, it at least betrays a more impassioned mood of mind than a cool searcher after truth would care to be moved by.

From the first sentence of his exordium to the last of his exhortation, he has written in ink of quassia. He takes a malicious delight in dwelling on "the selfish apathy of mankind;" in showing up the." ignorance and malice of the scoundrel world ;" in giving to a cold-blooded,

heartless generation the narrative of the miseries which have been heaped upon those whose names are eminent in honour; their life-long toil, their disappointments, their cruel poverty, their aggravated trials in sickness and in health, their death-bed loneliness, and their unavailing posthumous fame. All these are consequent upon the folly, jealousy, and self-conceit of the world. It is not in its nature to tolerate or encourage superiority. It is ever prone to find fault with, and wilfully doubt the wisdom it does not itself possess; and he who arrogates to himself a superior intellect is sure to be met with vengeance. "Have all of us been blockheads, say the world, and are we still blockheads, except this man? Down with him!"

Though the unfortunate world receives a tolerably full share of execration, something palliatory may nevertheless be urged in arrest of an over-severe judgment. The world is a sad weak-minded monster, and apt to be led by the nose. It is not intended to be conveyed that the world is the wicked thing it is accused of being; but that, by reason of its inability to form a correct judgment, it is ready to take for gospel any twaddle that impudence, if clothed in a little brief authority, may splutter forth.

With a view apparently as much to exhibit his own qualifications in handling the subject as to bring it clearly to the apprehension of the reader, the first third nearly of the exposition is occupied by preliminary essays on Epic poets and philosophers, literary and dramatic authors, composers and instrumental performers, actors and singers, novelists, painters and sculptors, men of science, original projectors, and inventors -sons of genius all. After a little disquisitorial lore, and some pleasant anecdotage, he comes to the object of his work-the disclosure of those barriers and false media which exclude men of genius from the public.

And first, as touching literature, it is not to be supposed that publishers can give heed to the applications made to them to bring forth the works of every man bitten with the mania for writing. They may be very good men of business, but not literary men; and, consequently, they are compelled to employ a certain personage who rejoices in the name of "Reader," to peruse such MSS. as are offered. By the decision of this august officer is the publisher influenced to undertake or decline a MS.; and on this same "Reader" does the expositor pour forth the phials of his mighty wrath, as being the BARRIER between an author's heart and the public. Never was such a lashing inflicted on mortal man as the "Reader" has gained for himself in the pages before us. He is the thief in the night, the craven that belongs to the countless order of Knights' False Oracles, the bigoted sectarian upon the crutches of knowledge; the pewter-faced, ignorant shadow of a shade; the St. Patrick's own philosopher, without Irish wit; he has a Sawney's cunning, without Scottish ability; a Taffy's turnip-headed understanding, without Welsh honesty; a Cockney's pert wrong-headedness, without English resolu tion. There is not a bit of blame attached to the publisher: he is a most honourable, albeit misled man; "there is no fault in thee, it is thy marplot and thy mischief-maker that is the cause of all." Happily for the unfortunate "Reader," his arch enemy has taken up the cudgels against him in such a spirit of acrimony and invective, that it is impossible to believe that the author himself has not grievously suffered from the misdeeds of one or some of that unloved race; and thus, from passion, prejudice, or intemperance, is disqualified from pronouncing an acceptable sentence. It is difficult to predict what will follow upon this severe

manipulation. The fraternity of "Readers" will be surely goaded to some act by which the rebel shall be put down. Will it be by the employment of his own weapons, or by doing the indignant, and holding a contemptuous silence? We opine nothing, but leave all to their desperate discretion. The advice of our querulous author amounts to the necessity of wresting genius from the harpy clutches of the Reader professional altogether, and giving the office, and we hope the guinea per volume of MS., to the women. "Egad," cries Sir Fretful Plagiary, "the women are the best judges after all.” Our author has a touch of Sir Fretful; yet he brings good arguments. A bookseller's wife discovered the value of Tom Jones, and adviced her husband by no means to let it slip through his fingers; after holding a matron jury, of course, on Molly Seagrim, Lady Bellaston, and all the rest. And, rejected as the book had been with strong condemnation by many of the gentleman readers, she deserves credit. "In such matters," says our author, "women who give fair play to nature are scarcely ever wrong. In a sensible unaffected woman of feeling there is always some of the soundest philosophy in nature." One is gratified to hear of any new branch of intellectual industry opening to women; but we suspect our author, by this compliment, wishes, by a side-wind, to get rid of the Reader, as a functionary, altogether. Once ladies become professional, he will have quite as little toleration for their judgments, as he has for that quintessence of ignorance, presumption, cunning, and malevolence, the BOOKSELLER'S READER. The decline of the drama is attributable to the same withering cause. "The patent theatres have always had-their readers!—the drama, in general, its immaculate censor!" In twenty-eight years, as was proved in answer to the present Chancellor's interrogatory some time ago," only eight successful accessions to our dramatic stock" could be adduced; whilst no less a number than 16,800 pieces presented during that period were rejected! and yet, at this hour, little else than "wild diabolisms and Pandemonian" spectacles "are exhibited." It is to the extraordinary measures of the managerial purveyors of both the large houses that the ruin of the English Drama, and, what is infinitely of less consequence, their own is imputable. The injustice of reproaching the public for withholding encouragement to dramatic genius, is manifested by the fact, that there is no opportunity of worthily bestowing it. The "Barrier” it is that interposes its fatal obstruction; and in no less to dramatic literature than to the performers. Kean was notoriously made the butt of all the blockheads of the theatre," from the first tragedian to the second scene-shifter!" Braham received every species of obstruction in his early career. So with Kemble, Macready, Mrs. Wood. In short, there is scarcely a person of eminence in this department of the drama that has not had to encounter the most formidable difficulties in his ascent to fame.

So also is it found with respect to musical composers and singers. There are many composers whose names are little known at the present day, greatly superior to those who have so long reigned in the ascendant. "While the legerdemain of Henri Herz and Moschelles is executed by half the town, how little is Dr. Crotch valued beyond the audience of the few.' 6 The fact is, that the public have to be educated in music by those "Barriers" mainly, who, to support a selfish monopoly, will give neither field nor favour to genius, however brightly it may burn. It is the "Directors," the "Leaders," the " Double-bass Roarers," that, by the foil of private by-play, and united trickery, can smilingly ruin an