utmost exertion of the government, was not able to raise an army against invading hordes.

Whenever we shall have executed our railway to the Pacific, nothing of it will be seen at one moment and by the physical eye, that differs from the rails of any other road, and the vulgar will be struck far more by a palace at Versailles, or a column of Trajan; unless, indeed, a pointing hand were hewn in granite, at San Francisco, with the words, To the Atlantic, and another at some Atlantic city, with the words, To the Pacific; and even then the real grandeur of the road would not be perceived by the physical eye.1 And so it is with capitals.

We live in an age which has justly been called the age of large cities. Populous cities are indispensable to civilization, and even to liberty, though I own that one of our problems yet to be solved is, how to unite the highest degree of individual liberty with order, in large cities,

But absorbing cities, cities on which monarchs are allowed to lavish millions upon millions of the national money, always belong to a low state of general national life, often to effete empires. The vast cities of Asia, imperial Rome and other cities prove it. On the other hand, it is an unfortunate state of things in which one city rules supreme, either

No one will charge the author, he trusts, with political iconoclasm, that has read his chapter on monuments in his Political Ethics.

The Age of Great Cities, or Modern Society viewed in its Relation to Intelligence, Morals and Religion, by Robert Vaughn, D. D. London, 1843.

by an overwhelming population, as Naples, or by concentration, as Paris. Constant changes of governments seem almost inevitable, whether they are produced by the people, as in the case of Paris, or by foreigners, as in the case of Naples.

A comparison between Paris and London, in this respect, is instructive. London, far more populous, has far less influence than Paris; and London, incomparably richer, is far less brilliant than Paris. Monarchical absolutism and centralism strike the eye and strive to do so; liberty is brilliant indeed, but it is brilliant in history, and must be studied in her institutions.

Great as the influence of Paris has been ever since the reign of the Valois, it has steadily increased, and those who strove for liberty were by no means behind the others in their worship of the capital. This singular idolatry was actually acknowledged by several resolutions of the representatives of the people, during the late republic.

The intense influence of Paris, together with the wide-spread system of government, every single thread of which centers in Paris, is such that, in 1848, the republic was literally telegraphed to the departments, and adopted without any resistance from any quarter, civil or military, which cannot be explained by the often avowed horror of the French at shedding French blood, since blood was readily shed to elevate Louis Napoleon. The same causes made it possible for the republic, apparently so readily and unanimously adopted, to be with equal

readiness apparently changed by eight millions of votes into a monarchy.

It has already been admitted that centralism, by the very fact that it concentrates great power, can produce many striking effects which it is not in the power of governments on a different principle to exhibit. These effects please and often popularize a government, but there is another fact to be taken into consideration. Symmetry is one of the elements of humanity; systematizing is one of man's constant. actions. They captivate and become dangerous, if other elements and activities equally important are neglected, or if they are carried into spheres to which they properly do not belong. The regularity and consistent symmetry, together with the principle of unity, which pervade the whole French government, charm many a beholder, and afford pleasure not unlike that which many persons derive from looking at a plan of a mathematically regular city, or from gardens architectonically trimmed. But freedom is life, and wherever we find life it is marked, indeed, by agreement of principles and harmony of development, but also by variety of form and phenomena, and a subordinate exactness of symmetry. The centralist, it might be said, mistakes lineal and angular exactness, formal symmetry and mathematical proportions, for harmonious evolution and unrestricted vitality. He prefers an angular garden of the times of Louis the Fourteenth to a living shady grove.

Centralism, and the desire to bring everything under the influence of government, or to do as far as possible everything by government, has fearfully

increased from the moment that the imperatorial absolutism was declared;3 while, at the same time, a degree of man-worship has developed itself, which makes people at a distance almost stand aghast. The same hyperbolical, and, in many cases, blasphemous flattery, which reminded the observer, in the times of Napoleon the First, of imperial Rome, has been repeated since. No one who has attentively followed the events of our times stands in need of instances; they were offered by hundreds, and of a character

4

3 According to the latest news even the dead are under the control of government, not in the sense of Sidney Smith, by paying taxes, but no one can any longer be buried in Paris except by a chartered company, standing under the close inspection of the police department.

4 Churchmen and laymen, as is well known, vie with each other on such occasions. The blasphemous flattery offered by some dignitaries of the church to Napoleon the First was frightful. We have seen the same when there seemed to be a question who could bid highest in burning incense to the present new Cæsar. The Lord's prayer was travestied. The following "proclamation" is taken from the "Concorde de Seine et Oise," of October, 1852, because it is not one of the worst:

"Town of Sèvres. Proclamation of the Empire.

"Inhabitants-Paris, the heart of France, acclaimed on the 10th of May for its emperor him whose divine mission is every day revealed in such a striking and dazzling manner. At this moment it is the whole of France electrified which salutes her savior, the elect of God, by this new title, which clothes him with sovereign power: 'God wills it,' is repeated with one voice-'vox populi, vox Dei.' It is the marriage of France with the envoy of God, which is contracted in the face of the universe, under the auspices of all the constituted bodies, and of all the people. That union is sanctified by all the ministers of religion, and by all the princes of the church. These addresses, these petitions, and these speeches, which are at this moment being exchanged between the chief of the state and

that would make the most hardy former tory-worship of the person that wore the crown appear as an innocent blundering; but we cannot pass over the fact that an infatuated yet large part of a nation have for the first time in history, so far as we know, called ideas after a man of action. "Napoleonic ideas" has become a favorite expression. Not only newspapers use this term a late one condemned free-trade because "free-trade is no Napoleonic idea"-but men whom we have been accustomed to look upon with respect have fallen into this infatuation. All

France, are the documents connected with that holy union; every one wishes to sign them, as at the church he would sign the marriage-deed at which he is present. Inhabitants of Sèvres, as the interpreter of your sentiments, I have prepared the deed which makes you take part in this great national movement. Two books are opened at the Mairie to receive your signatures: one of them will be offered in your presence to him whom I from this day designate under the title of emperor. Let us hope that he will deign to accede to the supplications which I shall address to him in your name, to return to the palace of St. Cloud through our territory, by the gate of honor which we possess. The other book, which I shall present for the signature of the prince, will remain in your archives as a happy souvenir of this memorable epoch. Let all the population, without distinction, come, therefore, and sign this document; it sets forth that which is in your heart and in your will.” This document is accompanied by a formal proclamation, appropriately signed-" Ménager, mayor."

Plain dealing, however, obliges us to remember, along with such extravagances of foreigners, the repulsive flattery in which some individuals indulged when Mr. Kossuth was among us. Nor must we wholly forget the language of some editors at the time of general Jackson's administration. But these were erratic acts of individuals, and, however disgusting, were not officially received by government.

6 Mr. Chevalier.