throw the Autocracy. As we have already said, it has no hold on the peasantry, and it naturally does not find converts among the enormous class of officials, whose daily bread depends on the maintenance of the present régime, and who are fairly satisfied with their lot. The badly-paid, minor tchinovniks may join the Nihilists, but they were at all times the most despised class in the community, and have absolutely no power or influence to cause them to be seriously feared. Nihilist conspiracies may at any moment remove the Tsar or any of his officials, and in times of disturbance from other causes, such blows would have their influence, but by themselves they would have no effect. Alexander II. was succeeded by his son as naturally and quietly as if he had died of old age, and the Nihilist movement in Russia gained no ground by the success of its desperate enterprise. As regards the heterogeneous collection of 'nationalities forming an important proportion of the population of European Russia, we have in a former article, on the Races of European Russia,'* dealt fully with this subject. Here it will suffice to remind our readers, that the Tsar has some fifteen millions of more or less discontented, non-Russian, subjects in Europe alone. Of these the most important and numerous section are the Poles, but from the nature of the case it would be quite impossible for England at the outset of a campaign to promote or assist a rising in Poland. The Poles have had some severe lessons in insurrections. They are quite ready to fall on Russia when they see a chance, but that chance they will only believe to exist when a foreign army is occupying their country, and has already defeated the Russians in the field. Russia's internal enemies, the races unwillingly subject to her rule, Finns, Poles, Germans, Jews, Lithuanians, and numerous others, form a deep fringe round her European frontiers. But these races are scattered, have no common faith or language, no rallying-point, and no organization. The power of Imperial Russia is organized and concentrated, and her bondsmen must bear their yoke until she has been humbled by a foreign foe. The long-deferred day of reckoning between them will, however, surely come, and great will be the surprise of those who speak of Russia as a solid compact Power, when, on the first sign of her defeat, her numerous enemies among her own subjects will display their deep-rooted hatred of her rule. Russian administrative corruption has long been a by-word, and the hopeless condition of her finances is well understood, * See 'Quarterly Review,' vol. 156, pp. 216, foll. at at least in England. Neither corruption nor want of money would, however, seriously influence the opening operations of a war, but both would tell in the long run, and combine, with other causes we have mentioned, to assist England in a prolonged struggle. Half the sufferings of the Russian armies during the last Turkish war were due to administrative incapacity and corruption, and there is no reason to suppose, that any great improvement has taken place in a system which owes its defects to the vices of the national character. As regards financial difficulties, these would, in the first place, be met by increased activity in the Government Bank-Note printing establishment, and secondly, and with absolute certainty, by failure to pay the interest on foreign loans. By these measures Russia, though completely bankrupt, would struggle on for some time, but it must be remembered that financially, she begins now where she left off after the last Turkish war. In the critical moments of the present Bulgarian difficulty the value of the Russian paper rouble has again fallen to the lowest point reached after the Plevna disasters. Financial considerations were as influential as any others in procuring Russia's acceptance of the Berlin Treaty, and similar difficulties would soon be felt in a new war, and would daily increase as the struggle was prolonged. The internal condition of Russia is a subject so large, varied, and interesting, that, in an article like the present, it is only possible to touch lightly on the chief points affecting the question immediately under discussion. We trust, however, that we have brought forward sufficient arguments to show, that when engaged in a long struggle with England, such as the latter can easily maintain, the Tsar would find that the continued presence of foreign enemies on Russian territory was not the only danger with which he would have to contend. In conclusion, we hope that we may have done something towards tranquillizing the fears of those who, whilst recognizing the dangers with which Russia threatens us, tell us that we are powerless to avert them. We too recognize the great dangers which gather round us; we are no advocates of war; but we hold, that the best way to meet a danger is to study its nature and to face it resolutely. We have therefore endeavoured to impress on our readers the nature and reality of the perils which threaten us from Russian aggression; and, in support of our statements, we have been glad to refer to the evidence of so valuable and independent a witness as Mr. Benjamin. But, though fully sensible of the gravity of the situation, we have no fear for our country. England can hold her own whenever whenever she makes up her mind to action. No friendly hand was outstretched towards Bulgaria till England spoke. The liberties of the Principality appeared to be hopelessly at the mercy of the Tsar, till Lord Salisbury's stirring words at the Mansion House rang throughout Europe. Then, but not till then, it was found that other countries were of one mind with England. Outraged public opinion in Europe gladly recognized the voice and echoed the sentiments of the old champion of national liberties, and even the proud Tsar was forced to pause and consider. If English policy is conducted with prudence, and English statesmen, trusting and trusted by their countrymen, are ready to act promptly when necessary, it is Russia that has cause to fear, and not England. The British Empire is solidity itself as compared with the Empire of the Tsar. The circumstances of the case permit England to-day to meet Russia with far greater certainty of success, than if she engaged in a war with any other firstclass Power. But to secure success, Englishmen must continue to believe in themselves, their own powers and resources-they must remember that the Russians must not have Constantinople—and they must put away all superstitious fear of the Russian bugbear. Above all, England must be prepared for the struggle which she cannot avert. She must resolutely take up the task of putting her house in order; and the acknowledged deficiencies of her armed forces must be remedied without a moment's delay. If patriotism is still a national virtue, and we are confident that it is shared by Radical, Whig, and Conservative alike, let us insist on instant and prudent preparation. Englishmen of all classes are ever ready to accept sacrifices necessary for the maintenance of their Empire and their independence. And the statesmen who doubt it will find, that they have lost sight of the strongest and best sentiments of a free and ruling nation. ᎪᎡᎢ . ART. X. - Petition addressed to the Hebdomadal Council for the Foundation of a School of Modern Literature. Oxford: Printed at the Clarendon Press, 1886. T is with no small satisfaction that we are able to announce, versities has not been without effect. The serious deficiency, which it pointed out in an important department of education, is now generally acknowledged. The necessity of endeavouring to supply that deficiency is admitted on all sides, and the opinions, which three months ago we appeared to be alone in maintaining, have been corroborated by such a consensus of authoritative opinion, that it would be impossible for any Council of educational legislators to disregard them. It will be remembered that what we advocated was this: the recognition on the part of the Universities of the claims of the Litera Humaniores, in the proper sense of the term, to a place in the curriculum of Academic study. We pointed out, that the time had come when it was necessary to distinguish between a literary and philological study of the Greek and Roman Classics, between their interest as monuments of language and their value as the expression of genius and art. We urged the claims of our own literature to a place in the curriculum of the same school, not simply on account of its growing importance as a subject of study throughout the kingdom and in the colonies, and the consequent necessity of the Universities providing adequately for its interpretation, but because of its intimate, its essential historical connection with ancient Classical literature, and because of its efficacy as an instrument of culture, if studied side by side with and in the light of the literatures which nourished, moulded, and coloured it. We showed how by thus associating the three leading and master literatures of the world, and by thus encouraging a liberal and enlightened treatment of them, each would gain in interest and value, as each would gain in efficacy and vitality: the study of the Greek and Roman Classics would at once, we contended, be placed on the only footing on which in inodern times it is possible to justify it; and the study of our own literature, rescued from the degradation into which pedantry, dilettantism, and sciolism have sunk it, would be raised to its proper level in education. We were of opinion, therefore, and are still of opinion, that if, under these conditions, English literature were admitted to a place in our Universities, a great deficiency in the economy of Vol. 164.-No. 327. R Modern Modern education would be supplied, and the classical side of education would immensely gain. But nothing, we are convinced, could be more disastrous-disastrous alike to culture, to learning, to letters-than to attempt to substitute our own literature and the literatures of the modern world for those of Greece and Rome, or even to admit those literatures to a place in the curriculum-we are speaking of the Honour curriculum— unless in close association with the ancient Classics. Culture would suffer for what competent judge, from Jonson to Arnold, has ever had two opinions about the relative educational value of the archetypal masterpieces of antiquity and the noblest monuments of Teutonic and Romantic Art? Learning and Taste would suffer: for what exegesis could be historically and critically sound, which did not trace formal characteristics to their origin, did not apply the standards and touchstones common to those who have been truly initiated and rightly taught? Letters would suffer necessarily and inevitably, necessarily and inevitably as effects follow causes. We entirely agree with Dr. Craik that, if the study of English Literature be not inseparably connected with the classical curriculum, the Universities will do wisely, both for their own sake and for the sake of education generally, to continue to exclude it from their Schools. It is therefore with just alarm that we hear, that the Hebdomadal Council at Oxford are, in obedience to a petition recently presented, considering the desirableness of founding a School of Modern Literature, a school in which English Literature is to hold a prominent place, and in which Classical Literature is, if retained at all, to be retained as a subordinate or optional subject. Now, if any confidence could be placed in the firmness and wisdom of University legislators, they might be safely left to decide this question for themselves. But, unhappily, no such confidence can be placed in them. During the last ten years, their Councils have been torn by two factions the one representing the spirit of progress and experi ment, and labouring to adapt University education to the practical requirements of modern life by developing it on the positive and scientific side, the other clinging with uncompromising tenacity to the old methods and to the old traditions. So far the two parties, though constantly opposed to one another, have not come into any violent collision. The modern party have refrained from meddling with the questions in which their opponents are most interested, the constitution and economy of the Classical Schools, and have contented themselves with providing for the subjects which more immediately concern them for |