The Press. — London, England, 1856-05-10 00:00:00

C 43d of Parliatneat voted addresses of thanks to Queen!ARNE on that occasion. LOA ARK/IDEEN, however, has a curt and arrogant way of settling everything. His cynicism would be more caustic if it were less °welted. We are living in times when ques tions cannot be settled by a -reference to what " Mr. Pitt," or " Mr. Fok," said or thought about them. So limited appears to be the information of this veteran diplomatist about the Treaty of Utrecht, that he seems to be ignorant of the important fact that Lord BOLINGBROKE himself (one of its makers) was of opinion that there was a strong and justi fiable ground fur the clamour a,gainst the treaty. In his " Letters on the Study of History," Lord BotmenoxE, using the free dom of a historian's pen, wrote in the closet, "If placed in the same circumstances again, " I would take the same resolution, and act "the same part." But ho then continues, " Notwithstanding this, I shall not be sur prised if you think that the Peace of Utrecht " was not answerable to the saceess of the " war, nor to the effects it made on it. I think " so myself, and have always owned, even when it "was making and made, that I thought so." And he states at length his reasons for that opinion. (" Letters on the Study of History."—Letter viii.) We observe, also. that Mr. HAr.t..km, in his " Constitutional History," so tar from "sanctioning" the Treaty of Utrecht, says, " It is impossible to justify the course of that "negotiation which ended in the Peace of " Utrecht. It was at best a dangerous and. " inauspicious concession, &0., &e." (" Constitu " tional History," Vol. iii. p. 21.9, Bth edition.) And his hard words applied to BOLINGBROKE we shall not repeat. So much for Lord Aemt- DEEN'S loose notions about the Treaty of Utrecht I It is the' characteristic of red-tapist poli ticians like Lord ABERDEEN to think that they can silence adversaries by supercilious asser tion. Freezing indifference of manner does not always represent calmly-penetrating intel lect, and Lord ABERDEEN ought to know so much. Ho has kno sledge, experience, long training, but he has no practical sagacity, and he might be a little less arrogant in his de meanour towards personages who are his equals in all things, and his superiors in some. He is not un orator, he is not a great states man, he is not an efficient ruler of a connec tion, and he will be chronicled in history only as "an austere intriguer." He does not believe in "popularity," which is a diplomatic mode of indicating his own opinion about himself. His estimate of " popularity " can scarcely be tested by his own experience of that most de ceitful but delicions elixir under which so many strong intellects have reeled. Lord ABERDEEN in his frequent harping about the hollowness of " popularity," reminds us of what CURRAN said to a barrister who professed to despise " mere popular esteem." " Ah! my " dear friend, that is a liquor of which you " have rarely taeted7 ouuttui wf 610 THE LITERARY FUND. Ma. AlAemamt, in ono of his best known essays, has drawn a graphic and gloomy pie ta:ire of the state of literary men in the latter half of thti ieWt:tpe4tli eentury, when the old race of patrons it4yl egastal.„f4„,uxist, and,,the modern class of wealthy ,publishers had , arisen. But it may be well to bearin.mind that there were certain features of literary life iu the era of Boon and SAVAGE which would in some degree counterbalance the disadvan tages under which they otherwise laboured. If the gains of authors were smaller, and their life harder then than now; if the handsome fortunes realised by modern authors were then tinknown; if the writer altogether par took more of the character of an adventurer than le -compatible with existing custom—we must recollect, also, that the system of remu neration was regulated on a different princi ple —one, perhaps, not so.favorable to the ao aumulation of wealth as that which prevails at present, but doubtless better calculated in THE many respects to preserve an author from actual want. If a bookseller liked a woik he purchased it outright, with much less regard to the name that would appear on the titlepago than he has now. PALEY, for instance, sold the first • production of his pen for LOON: Where is the publisher now who woald give the like sum for the work of an unknown author? At present the system is entirely different. Authors are generally remunerated by a share of the profits of their productions, and, if successful, they ' can' melt redeive any money from such profits for some years, and in the mean time they fall into serious embarriaeonents,.or are driven for support to periodical literature, the chtiins of which leave very little time for the pursuit of learned research or the pro secution of original thought. Furthermore, it is not every writer whose genius is adapted for the rapid and lively composition which such literature requires; while, on the other hand, the precarious nature of such employment renders it a must fragile staff to lean upon even to the most skilful and experienced workman. Literature, then, we must own, at the present day, is a hazardous profession to a man who has no capital. Yet it is just be cause they have no capital that nine men out of ten make it their profession. The satisfactory gathering at the Literary Fund dinner last Wednesday, and the amount raised, show that the public are not indifferent to the claims or difficulties of the professors of literature. But may not the question be raised whether the resources of the Literary Fund cannot be made available for a different class of applicants than those to whom its bene fits are at present confined? As now admi nistered, the Fund is wholly eleemosynary. No man who shrinks from being a recipient of public charity can look to it for aid. Yet such a man will frequently be the one most deserving of assistance. In a profession so precarious as literature, and so full of ups and downs, the class must be large whom it would be desirable to aid with as little injury as possible to their self-respect. But no inau in the full possession of his bodily and mental vigour can accept alms from his equals without his self-respect being injured. Might it not, therefore, be possible to introduce the element of loans into the Fund with satisfactory results ? Many instances would, doubtless, occur in which the borrower would be unable to repay the money advanced to him ; but very few, we think, in which he would not strain every nerve to do (so. The principle of honour is strong among men of letteis. Witness such characters us SOCTHEY and SCOTT, who both killed themselves in support of their inde pendence. Though no valid security were taken, the intamy of a wilful defalcation would , so far exceed that of an • ordinary debtor and creditor transaction, that no man would be able to hold up his head who repu. diated•a debt, through want of legal obligation, which he was able to discharge. Simply stated the ease stands thus :—The applicants for relief to the Literary Fund luny be broadly divided into two classes—the men who are hopelessly broken down, and the men who are struggling with temporary difficulty, and have fair prospects of recovering them selves, and of ' occupying au independent position in the literary world. The first class are fit recipients of charity. The second class require sympathy and temporary support rather tha n alms. .• If it wan the first class only that the Literary Fund professed to relieVe, its operation woull be unexceptionable. But the reverse is notoriously the case. We think we may confidently say that its beneficence is most largely extended to the second class. Anti what is.the result?. Lif.Whiry men of at. 'lost independent spirit land their spirit' is commonly no bad indication of thelYttbility) will not consent to aplt h lor:'eleemcisynat7 assi s tance, be their distresh What it may. They will'steuggle with failing health, they will contend with the most crushing embarrassment, they will sustain every form of privation, till heart or brain, or both, give way through the strain, rather than they will stoop to beg. They die in braving the difficulties which meatier minds bend to, and live. Say they aro wrong, that their SATURDAY, pride is in fault, that their view is erroneous —still such is , thei fact; and this sensitive class of mind is of a nature that you cannot alter, that you cannot teach. Its excellence —a n d it is among the highest excellencies of huma nity—is so blended with its error, that both must be taken together. On the other hand, there aro literary men, or men connected with literature, whose sensi bility is leis keen, who have sunk to that point at which they cease to consider alias a degradation, who care not by what means they supply their wants so long as they are supplied, and who find a ready means of banishing from their minds unpleasant thoughts should any such obtrude themselves. Careless, or nearly careless of the future, they live by expedients, and become incapable of any serious effort to raise themselves from their abject condition Now, let the administration of the literary Fund be kept us secret as it may, it does trans pire that it is to men of the character we have last described that a very considerable portion of its charity is devoted. Of the two classes we have indicated, which is the most deserving of relief? Every one will say, the first. Of the two classes, which obtains by far the larger portion - of relief ? Every one mix ing in literary society will say, the last. Between what should be the object of the Fund and what is its actual practice there is then great opposition. And it does seem very worthy the attention of those who are most directly concerned in its management whether some scheme cannot be devised by which the class which is the most deserving of our sym pathy shall meet with most practical assist ance. We do not say that the system of loans would answer, but we think it worth a trial, as it seems to us probable that a very large amount of assistance might in this way be afforded to the most deserving class of literary men at a comparatively small expense, and in a manner that would be most cre ditable to both parties. PROGRESS OF' IRELAND.—In Thorn's "Irish Alma. nac," a work replete with useful information, there are many statistical facts indicative of the social re volution quietly proceeding in Ireland. The total value of the live stock was in 1841 only 19,399,8431., but in 1851 the amount hal risen to 33,508,3711., and this rise seems to be steadily progressing. The number of holdings of land below five acres has un dergone what must be considered a most beneficial decrease. In 1841 the number of such holdings was 310,373, but in 1854 had fallen to 80,976. Between five and fifteen acres, the number which in 1849 was 252,778, was in 1954 only 179,140. On the other hand, the lsrger class of holdings had proportionably increased. Between fifteen and thirty acres, the number which in 1849 was 70,333, was iu 1854 187,040, and the holdings above thirty acres, the class must beneficial to a country, had risen from 48,023 in 1849 to 154,106 in 1854. The revenue of Ireland shows a satisfactory increase; it reached 5,802,3171. fur 1833, against a revenue of less than four Millions and a halt' for the thirty years previous. The commerce of the Irish ports is improving. The tonnage entered inwards was 1,944,285 in 1840, and was 2,601,780 in 1854. The savings -banks deposits, after great depression consequent on the years of famine, seem now steadily increasing. In 1840 they had sunk as low as 1,200,27314 iu 1853 they were 1,586,0101., and are now probably much niore. The poor rates, which in 1846 reached 1,674,7931., bad sunk in 185-1 to 926,1541. Railway receipts are in creasing; puwnbroking is on the decline; and by every test which can determine the : social state of a country', Ireland, after the terrible ordeal of the years of famine, is now steadily advancing in industrial ptosperity. Not the least eatistietory feature of her improvenient is the publication of the very complete and useful volume which records these facts. The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Belgium stated in the Chamber on the 7th, that he had prepared a reply to the accusations against Belgium expressed in the Contaess at .raris on the Bth of April, which he should preauut as soon as the official ratification of the treaty and protocols had been received, and emphatically stated that the Government would never " propose any such change in the Belgian constitution as was then intimated.