to provisions which at first sight might seem surprising; but, on the other hand, there was not a provision in the present Bill that was not justified by precedent in this country as well as the soundest policy. In this country the practical result under every welldrawn settlement was, that the tenant for life could sell an encumbered estate this Bill gave that power in Ireland, but under the guard that the tenant could not make encumbrances to bring about a sale for he could not sell on ac count of his own encumbrancesand that the title was not to be indefeasible till after five years. This term of limitation had a precedent in the Land Clauses Consolidation Act. He proposed to add a provision that every person interested in remainder under settlement should have personal notice of sale. He also proposed to provide that the Lord-Lieutenant should have power to appoint serveyors to estimate estates sold under the Bill, and to see that proper prices were paid.

Sir John Romilly ended by ob serving that the creation of a middle class in Ireland could not be effected till land in portions of 100 acres each was made easily purchaseable. He would not be indisposed to extend a similar Bill to England.

Mr. Sadleir supported the amendment. Colonel Dunne added some objections to those urged by the other opponents. Mr. Henley thought that the Bill struck at the root of all property; the ma. chinery must be either unjust or nugatory. The best way to improve Ireland was to give increased security to life and property.

Mr. Stuart entered into a detailed legal criticism of the clauses,

agreeing in substance with Mr. Henley as to the principle of the Bill.

Mr. Monsell strongly supported the Bill. He said it would be absurd to stick at technicalities in the present wretched condition of the tenants of encumbered estates. The Bill was also supported by Mr. P. Wood, Mr. Fagan, and Mr. C. Villiers. Opposed by Mr. Newdegate and Major Blackall. On a division the amendment was negatived by 197 to 52. It was then read a third time.

The amendments made in the House of Commons having been remitted for consideration to the House of Lords, the Lord Chancellor, on the 31st July, proposed the adoption of them, as materially conducing to the efficiency of the measure. He expressed his opinion of the proceedings in Courts of Equity in significant terms.

He entertained great respect for the Court of Chancery, but would not willingly enter that Court as a suitor, nor advise his friend to do so; in his opinion, therefore, the power of sale without the intervention of the Court of Chancery was a valuable addition to the Bill.

Lord Stanley entered into a detailed examination of the additions that had been made to the Bill, and condemned them as constituting, in fact, a new measure since the Bill was last in that House. He would move, if any one would support him, that the Bill be referred back to a Select Committee. Lord Monteagle expressed his reluctance to oppose the Bill; but it was so completely altered by the Commons, that he concurred in the desire for a reference to a Select Committee, in order to procure the

opinions of Irish lawyers on the new clauses. The Earls of Ellenborough and Glengall concurred. The Earls of Wicklow and Devon, the Marquis of Lansdowne and Lord Langdale supported the

amendments. On a division the House resolved, by 27 to 10, to consider the amendments: and they were agreed to without further contest.

THE

HE security which under the protection of Providence this country derives from its free and popular constitution was never more signally exemplified than during the year of political agitation and disorder of which the memorable events are commemorated in this volume. While almost every throne on the Continent was emptied or shaken by revolution, the English monarchy, strong in the loyal attachment of the people, not only stood firm in the tempest, but appeared " even to derive increased stability from the events that convulsed foreign kingdoms. In the most perfect constitution of society indeed, as it is impossible to extirpate the passions and vices of our common nature, disaffection, in a more or less degree, is always latent; and, as often as circumstances present the occasions of disorder, there will be found no lack of turbulent and unruly spirits to take advantage of them. It is at such periods that the sound ness of a nation's political sentiments and the reality of its attachment to the constituted authorities is brought to a searching trial. A system which has been supported only by the strong hand of power, or by that allegiance which is the creature of habit rather than of reflection, is unable to withstand that contagious fever of innovation which spreads from country to country, under the impulse of any extraordinary movement in the human mind. On the other hand, a loyalty, based on reason and conviction, and an enlightened appreciation of the benefits derived from

well-tried institutions, proves a sure bulwark in the hour of trial against the machinations of conspirators and anarchists. Such was the lesson exhibited by England in the revolutionary era of 1848. The agitation which derived its impulse from the convulsions of the Continent prevailed only so far as to disturb for a moment the serenity of her political atmosphere. Awed by the overwhelming strength and imposing attitude of the friends of order, the mischief subsided almost as soon as it appeared, and the cause of rational freedom was materially strengthened by the futile efforts made to undermine it. When a knot of obscure and illdisposed malcontents would fain have played off in our metropolis the scenes which had been enacted with such sanguinary effects in Paris and Vienna, their insignificance was demonstrated, and their menaces rendered impotent by the firm and imposing attitude of the loyal and well-affected inhabitants arrayed in the defence of peace, property, and order.

The 10th of April was the day which the disciples of physical force, organized under the banner of Chartism, had announced for a grand display of their strength and numbers; a demonstration by which it was intended to overawe the Government into a concession of their demands, as the only means of averting a violent revolution. But the day which was to have been signalized by the jubilee of democratic licence terminated in the most decisive triumph of the Throne and Constitution. Without the slightest collision between the

authorities and the people, without a blow struck, or a drop of blood shed, nay without the appearance of a single soldier in the streets of London, uninterrupted peace and order were maintained, and the vaunted demonstration passed off quietly and safely. The result was not only to reassure all those persons who had trembled for the stability of the social fabric at home, but to strengthen the cause of constitutional liberty all over the world, and to accelerate that reaction in favour of moderate and sober counsels, which naturally succeeds to a revolutionary ebullition. But, although all danger to the institutions of this country was shown to be at an end, it was in the power of the mischievous and ill-disposed, availing themselves of the general excitement of the times, to give some trouble and annoyance to the Government. Meetings were held for the promotion of the so-called People's Charter, at which a great deal of seditious and revolutionary language was spoken; and, if these efforts to excite the ignorant and misguided failed of their effect, it was certainly not from any want of will in the turbulent demagogues who took the part of leaders. Nor was the mischief confined to mere speech-making and seditious publications. Tumultuous assemblies, consisting for the most part of the refuse of a crowded city, thieves, pickpockets, and other disorderly characters, took place in some parts of the metropolis; windows were broken, some shops plundered, the police were assailed with abuse, stones and missiles, and the peaceable inhabitants put in terror for their safety. Although the civil force always proved a more than sufficient match for these riotous

mobs, it was not always in its power to prevent the destruction of property, and the suspension of business, occasioned by such disturbances, while the necessity of constant vigilance in several quarters of the metropolis at once proved very harassing to the police. The contagion spread to some of the large manufacturing towns both in England and Scotland, and in some parts of the country the Chartist gatherings and demonstrations created a good deal of apprehension. Happily, however, all these commotions passed off without any serious explosion. The Government meanwhile kept a careful watch upon the progress of the movement. A few of the more violent leaders and speech-makers were arrested and committed for trial, and every preparation was made for vigorous action in the event of an outbreak taking place. The transactions that were occuring out of doors became the subject of occasional discussion in Parliament, and led to the introduction of some new legal securities for strengthening the hands of Government and enabling them to deal more effectually with persons engaging in designs against the public peace. We shall notice in this chapter some of the more prominent debates relating to these events.

On the 10th of April, the day on which the Chartist procession to Kennington Common took place, Mr. Feargus O'Connor presented to the House of Commons a petition signed, as he alleged, by 5,706,000 persons, and another supplementary petition signed by 30,000, praying for the enactment of what were called the Five Points of the Charter; namely, Annual Parliaments, Universal Suffrage,