Cobbettites say to the wolves, "Promise not to eat mutton, and you shall have the charge of the flock." For what but mutton would the wolves trouble themselves about the flock?

What is to be thought of Reformers whose sole object is the repeal of the Malt and Assessed taxes? Submitting to the grievances of the Church and the Corn Laws, they make this wretched composition! Would the Tories suffer the Church to be separated from Mammon, and the Bread Tax to be abolished? No: Mr. Cobbett does not dream of any yielding in those directions: but possibly he reckons on some invasions in another, and that the fundholder will be mulct the amount of the remitted taxes. All the old Tory abominations will then thrive; the extravagances, the profligacies of the State will be unabated, and the public creditor will be the sufferer. Magnanimous speculation! Repeal the Assessed and Malt Taxes, and the Cobbettites pledge themselves to support a Tory Ministry! The Tory Ministry would thus be left free to continue its old courses of waste and tyranny; and to keep up the system precisely as it exists, by cutting down,-not pensions and salaries, not army and navy estimates, but the fundholders' dividends; an operation which cannot be supposed distasteful to the Cobbettites. Imagine the baseness of suffering the continuance of all the abuses and profligacies of our State, and letting the means of maintaining them fall on the public creditor; for such would be the effect, if the deficiency in the revenue, from the repeal of the Malt and Assessed taxes, were to be dealt with by a cormorant Tory Ministry, having a body guard of two hundred Cobbettites, and having the resolution to make sacrifice of anything and anybody, rather than trench upon the perquisites of office. The simple meaning of the bargain, "the Government for the repeal of the Malt and Assessed taxes," is plunder of the fundholder. It is that end which graces the project to the projectors. Many of the Tories, and the majority of the country gentlemen, would jump at the plan. The people, however, will not be tempted into this snare. The Assessed Taxes should, and inevitably must be reduced, and, in part, (the Window Tax,) abolished; and we have therefore no temptation to put ourselves in the hands of the desperate quacks, who would repay themselves threefold for every concession they made, according to the proverbial policy of throwing a sprat to catch a herring.

THE MONTHLY OBSERVER.

Few subjects have excited the public interest more strongly than the condition of children in factories; and after all that has been said and written on the matter, how wonderfully little is it understood! The Morning Herald, for example, implores statesmen to remember, that in treating this question, of the age to which protection should be extended, "they have to deal with one of the holiest feelings of our nature-paren

tal solicitude." Do not let us mistake the objects of sympathy. The children have all claims on our consideration; they are helpless unconsenting victims of all the evils of premature labour; but the parents' case is not so clearly one for sympathy. Who is party to the infants' labour? who makes the contract? who receives the wages s? The parent. The prevailing "parental solicitude" is, we have reason to believe, a very different sentiment from that which the Herald describes as one of the holiest feelings of our nature: the "parental solicitude," is to get twelve or thirteen hours' wages for ten hours' work. Reckoning on the same amount of wages, the "parental solicitude"is for shortening the term of labour: the "parental solicitude" is to spare the child's labour, if the child's wages be the same. But mark that, if the wages fall in proportion to the reduced term of labour, the "parental solicitude" will be to return to the long labour and the full wages. I speak generally: there doubtless are parents who love their children's good better than money, and who will be content with the smaller wages for the less labour; but in general the greed of present gain prevails. Indeed, the existing practice proves my assertion. Parents are consenting parties to the excessive labour; they have perhaps no alternative but to consent to it, or to bear the burden of supporting the child in idleness; and which do they prefer? The case is hard, and the feeling produced by it is hard. The masters do not fail to avail themselves of this fact. They say, " Is it credible that the parents would consent to an employment of their children, described as so cruel and injurious?" There is but one answer: money and general practice: the one tempting, the other sanctioning; and both together making strange work with nature. From the language commonly held, it might be supposed that the manufacturers tore children from their parents' houses, as slaves have torn Africans from their native shores. The parent's part in the vicious system is seldom observed, though it is in default of the natural case that the Legislature is called upon to protect the child, and to put the squandering of its strength and health beyond the reach of the parent's authority. It is the fashion to expend all virtuous indignation on the manufacturer's unscrupulous pursuit of gain; but I ask, What would have availed his unscrupulous love of gain if it had not found a corresponding appetite in the parent? If nature had maintained her laws, she would have needed no help from the Legislature. It is true that the parent has the excuse of poverty: but the plea is only good in mitigation; for it admits that the temptation of money is stronger than the motives to protect the child from injury: and thus proves the comparative weakness of the "parental solicitude" of which the Herald writes. But some one here observes, "The child would starve if not employed in the factories; the parent cannot support it without that help." How do parents support their children where there are no factories? They live less comfortably; and is the child sacrificed for the improved comfort? But the remark of the necessity of giving the employment to the child, cannot justify the parent's consent to the excessive labour of the child, and vindicate, at the same time, the "parental solicitude;" for if parents generally had been true to their duty, the practice of over-work could not have obtained ground: the practice having obtained ground, parents cannot hold out against it and get employment for their children. But how did it obtain ground but by the failure of the parental care? It is obvious that, if every parent in a manufacturing town had determined, "my child shall not work for more than ten hours," no infant labour, exceeding that term, could have become customary.

MALIBRAN is the present rage of the theatrical and musical world. All rave, or affect to rave, about her. She is admired in both the senses of the word. Exaggeration is her characteristic; and her exaggerations are dramatic "readings made easy" to the public. I speak of her now as an actress. All her expressions are written in round text, which they who run may read. They are not false, but they are greatly magnified; the dullest cannot miss the meaning; and they well may admire one who has made them understand. There is a performer now on the boards whose favour has been mainly owing to his making himself distinctly heard in the gallery. He has a loud voice, and clear articulation. Malibran's popularity is of the same sort. She makes what she is about plainly seen. She does not strain the sight: if it misses her one moment it has another opportunity of catching the meaning; she hangs upon an expression in gesture or action, as speakers repeat an argument, to take the chance of its impressing at one instant those whom it has failed to strike at another. In the Somnambula, for example, when Amina is discarded by Elvino, Malibran jumps up on him— throws herself round his neck with a brisk, resolute action that will not be denied, and fairly hugs him by coup-de-main. Here is an expression of vehemence, the character of which, taken in connexion with the scene, is not to be mistaken; it is as plain as the jumping up of a Newfoundland dog, upon his master's appearance after some short absence. Unacceptable are the caresses, but it is vain to cry "Down :" jump Juno will. The people are in raptures at so natural a display of abandonment to the emotions. But see the action without the dramatic context, and it would not be easy to assign the character of it. See it on Greenwich Hill on Fair-day, and no gentle cause would be assigned to it; but seeing it where we do, we know what it means. Presently Amina is seen pushing, and scuffling, and scrambling: see it in the streets and you would say, "There is a woman fighting;" but knowing the story, we know that she is striving to cling to the feet of the man she loves. Malibran is at pains to show that she is doing this, not in the usual dainty stage manner, but earnestly; and she shows this by making a set-to of it that would do no dishonour to the vigour and resolution of a basketwoman. She exaggerates love till it looks like war. The public say, How fine! The piece anchors them to the meaning, and they see the meaning liberally magnified. I remember, in the Gazza Ladra, to have seen Malibran muffling up the fugivive father in his disguise; after she had wrapped the cloak round him, she continued pawing him all over, much as a monkey would do in mimicking the arrangement of a dress. This action (which was utterly unnatural, as observation is dreaded, and it would have attracted attention and excited suspicion from its oddity and the familiarity with a supposed stranger) was vehemently applauded. Thus are performers of superior capacities spoiled; the public, too obtuse to apprehend their true germs of excellence, seize upon their faults as their distinguishing peculiarities.

Some one, behind the scenes of the opera-house, being amazed at the enormous size of the butterflies prepared to flit in the Ballet, asked the stage-manager the reason of their extraordinary aggrandizement: (they measured about two feet from wing to wing.) The answer was, that if they were not so large they would not be seen from the galleries, where butterflies were more thought of than in the boxes.

Malibran represents this butterfly effect. Her expressions are of an exaggeration for the most dim and distant eye. Yet she has genius,

Parts of all her performances are of great force or beauty; but she misplaces her triumph in extravagance; misplaces it for her fame with the judicious few, but places it most successfully for the applause of the groundlings.

In her singing, the same course of error is observable. Able to do much faultlessly, she is yet constantly attempting more than she can perfectly accomplish. Her most ambitious efforts show not the triumph but the limit of her powers.

It is the fashion, even up to this late hour of Ministerial disgrace, to claim great allowances on the score of the intentions of Ministers. The common appeal is this,-" True, they are indolent, imbecile, incapable; but their intentions are unquestionably good. They mean well in all cases; but they are too idle, too fond of their own ease to gird up their loins and set themselves about the mastering of any subject." Now what is the value of the intention which is accompanied with this indolence, if it be an intention at all, which I doubt? An intention, implying desire and exertion to second it, is of some merit; but an intention which lacks resolution,-which wants the very heart of purpose,—seems nothing better than a sickly wish. Most men wish well to the world; but the common fault is that they withhold their exertions, and give nothing but their wishes. A man's intention to attain an object is to be inferred from his manner of setting on towards it. One of our modern travellers observed an Englishman daily roaming about the streets of Florence, in great trouble of spirits. After having long remarked his dejected wanderings up and down, the traveller asked him the cause of his uneasiness? The man answered that he was far from England, and had no means of paying for his conveyance. Why," answered the traveller, "if you had walked towards Calais, the distances I have daily seen you wandering about Florence, you would have been there before this time." It could hardly be said that this man had the intention to go to England;-he had the wish, but not the resolution and energy to make an intention. An intention implies the adoption of appropriate means; and in that important respect it is admitted, that Ministers fail.

The Times observes-" We have asked the question a hundred times over, and still wait patiently for a reply: Suppose the Peers and the Nation are in direct opposition to each other upon a point esteemed of high importance to the People, which must give way, the Nation or the Peers? There is no getting over that one argument."

Is it an argument? It is a glance at the surface of the question. If, as The Times appears to think, the Peers should give way to public opinion, to what end do they possess their high and irresponsible powers? Their powers in this case would be but snares and stumblingblocks to them and the nation. If they are only to go with the tide, why not let the tide run without them? The question is reduced to this: Either the Peers are peculiarly qualified (by some mysterious causes unknown to us) for their judicial and legislative functions, or-they are not. They are invested with authority because of some superior fitness for the exercise of it; or they are invested with authority without any superior fitness for the exercise of it. They are legislators because their judgment is more to be depended on than the judgment of the commonalty; or

they are legislators though their judgment is not more to be depended on than the judgment of the commonalty. One of these positions must be agreed to: if the affirmative, then it is to be considered whether the House of superior wisdom and capacity of deciding on public affairs should defer to the opinion of the less qualified public. For what does it hold its authority, if not to make the better judgment, or higher skill it possesses, pre

vail?

But if the negative be asserted, if it be certain that the Peers have no superior qualification, no peculiar fitness for the exercise of their authority, then, the question is, Why do they possess their irresponsible powers? Why are they permitted to retain their undeserved eminence in legislation?

Either the Peers have that in them which should sanction their resolves even against popular opinion, or their authority has no foundation in reason and usefulness. They deserve one of two things,-OBE

DIENCE or ABOLITION.

The pilot is at the helm; he holds a course against the opinions of the crew, The Times calls upon him to perform his office according to the judgment of those who have not his office; if he be fit for his post he is entitled to implicit trust; if he be not fit for his post, the rational proceeding is to remove him altogether, and not to put the guide under guidance. If the crew, down to the cabin-boys and swabbers, can direct him, no good service is to be had at his hands.

The question is not, as stated by The Times, whether the Lords should yield to the people, or the people to the Lords, when opposed on any point deemed important; but whether the hereditary legislature is an institution promotive of good government, or compatible with good government. It is upon this comprehensive question that the country will have to decide. Nothing can be more idle than the protracted complaint that the bramble don't bear grapes. We know well enough what it bears, and it is childish to continue to rail at the fruit: it is time to pass judgment on the tree.

In consequence of an informality in administering the oaths to witnesses, about a hundred trials at the Middlesex Sessions are null and void. It seems that witnesses going before the Grand Jury should be sworn in the presence of the Magistrates: (in many places it is customary to swear them in a corner of a Court.) The Magistrates in such cases pay no attention to the ceremony, and the witnesses pay no attention to the Magistrates; yet there is thought to be a virtue in the Magisterial presence; or if it be not thought that there is any virtue in the Magisterial presences, the practice has been as if such a thought were entertained. At Clerkenwell, the first step in innovation and irregularity was the administration of the oath without the presence of the Magistrates; but the Magistrates, though not in the nasty close closet in which witnesses were sworn, were in the house; and it was probably reasoned that this degree of neighbourhood gave the necessary force to the oath. But the beginning of change is like the letting out of water; and lo! it came to pass that the oaths were administered not only not in the presence of the Magistrates, but not under the same roof with the Magistrates; and then they lost all force! Many of the witnesses at the last Sessions were sworn when the bench of Magistrates had adjourned, and were not in the Session House. The trials, according to the judges, were therefore void;