vehemently stirred up; for as we have already said, he is constitutionally of gentle de

meanour.

It being a grand point with the liberal to appear wiser than other folks, he has a great notion of metamorphosing himself into a walking Cyclopædia. He therefore applies himself to a multitude of studies, and, if his time and opportunities permit, he ceases not until he has gone round the whole circle of science. Of course he never attempts to master everything; neither is it to be expected that he should; he is well pleased if he half learns the rudiments of half the things he turns to; for it affords him more satisfaction to have a smattering of knowledge upon a many subjects than perfectly to understand a few. Hence the liberal is commonly an amusing sciolist. And we venture to affirm without fear of contradiction, that, if, after a hard day of mental exertion, you wish to ease your brain without giving it absolute repose, you cannot

find a more agreeable pastime than a talkative liberal.

The crotchets of the liberal, sturdily maintained as they are, so long as they suit his purpose for the time being, are nevertheless ever changing, ever new. And could you embalm them, as it were, in a "blue book " one year, and thus preserve them until the next, you would marvel at the wonderful discrepancy which you might then observe. But, says the liberal, we are movement-men: we aim at progress. And, certainly, they are consistent; their professions and their practice harmonize perfectly. All men are movementmen; nobody can well be otherwise in this world of change. But the peculiarity of the liberals consists not in simply moving forward with the course of events, the advance of arts and sciences, the increase of civilization, diffusion of knowledge, and the like; but in their obliquity of motion, and circumgyration about an unattainable centre, and their attempts at what may be termed impossible

movements.

Their grand aim be it ob

served, has, throughout all generations, been to prove that there was a fallacy, in the generally received impressions with regard to the laws of meum et tuum. This is the point towards which, in all ages of the world, they have been driving, sometimes by one route, sometimes by another; but it is a point to which (notwithstanding some rather close approximations) we hope and believe they will never attain. It is rather amusing to give ear, now and then, to the droll, if not contradictory arguments (?) by which they try to support this notable fancy. Sometimes it is the possession of power, sometimes the possession of wealth, which they touch upon; but their conclusion is always the same; the power is never in the right hands, the tin is always in the wrong pockets. And hence they deduce a corollary such as might naturally be expected, which is neither more nor less than this, that "those shall take who have the power, and those shall keep who can."

Now, granted men have nothing to lose, it seems to us that this is a very congenial doctrine, at least to such as enjoy a grand appetite for plunder, and have sturdy frames to elbow their way through the push and the crush of a crowd. But where a man is quietly disposed, wishing to live in peace with his neighbours, content with what he has, and not oblivious of the eighth commandment-to say nothing of the tenth, we humbly submit that not all the logic nor all the rhetoric, not all the sophisms nor all the slang, not all the roguery nor all the rant of all the liberals, can ever prevail in reconciling him to a precept so entirely opposed to his old-fashioned, antique notions of morality and justice. Still, though the liberals must be aware, that put the case as they will, they never succeed with such men, yet so extremely satisfactory to their own minds, does their modification of the law of property appear, so convinced are they of the great obtuseness of other people, and so

confident in their own powers of argumentation, that no sooner do they find one sophism fail, than forthwith, nothing daunted, they have recourse to another.

It is really quite curious to observe the multiplicity and variety of means which the liberal employs to establish this favourite position. It is not often that he goes so far as to advocate in a frank and candid manner, the direct and forcible transference of authority or wealth from one set of hands to another, though he has been known to do this on some exciting occasions. And it is a still rarer thing for him plainly to recommend lawless pillage. He is not bold enough openly to contend that wrong is right, and right is wrong; any more than he would venture to assert that white is black, or black is white. But he would do what is practically tantamount thereto, by an ingenious formula constructed after this manner: gray is almost black, purple is almost gray, blue is almost purple, green is almost