promote their truest interests, in equitable unison with the interests of their dependants. Protection-the monopoly of the home market of corn subsistence-is irrevocably passed away, so as to cast a dark shade of either folly or fraud upon those misguided men who would agitate for its possible restoration. The potato is also gone; not, indeed, in the sense of a total discultivation of that valuable esculent; but the system which was founded on the long recognised fact, that potatoes had become the staple food of the petty holders of land, is on the eve of annihilation. Ask any well-judging proprietor of land, whether he thinks it practicable that a family can be sustained now upon the produce of two, or three, or four acres of land, and he will at once admit that this is entirely out of the question; and therefore rent is equally out of the question. Soon-fearfully soon-it will be urgently pressed upon proprietors whose cultivable land is loaded with small tenants, What are we to do? Our answer to such a query is, Do justly-examine whether, among your presently distressed dependants, there are not many persons to whom additional land for reclamation might not be safely granted on such terms as would stimulate honest effort. If a rich man plans the reclamation of large breadths of idle land, his instrument of enterprise is capital, wherewith he can put in action the labour of others; but the poor man's capital is his industry; and how effectual is the energy of such humble reclaimers of land, may be witnessed at this hour, on some of the rocky ranges that overhang the eastern shores of Sutherland; and under every kind of disadvantage, it may be added-for the Duke of Sutherland, influenced by exceedingly bad advisers, rigidly refuses leases except to his colossal sheep-farmers, who bestride the straths formerly fertilised by numerous small occupants. We e may here remark that we can never see the reasonableness of drawing a distinction between the large and the small holder of land, in the matter of leases. What confuses the mind of many a theorist, is the constant harping upon capital, as if no man is worthy of any certainty of tenure, except he can swagger at an auction sale with an overflowing purse, replenished, it may be, by virtue of a cash-credit from a too credulous bank! Capital, sound, unborrowed command of money is no doubt an excellent thing in farming, as well as in every other productive pursuit; but we presume that all capital must be the result of the twofold element-industry, coupled with self-denying thrift.

Give a poor man such a prospect of assured permanence as shall draw forth his industry and skill in reclaiming, cultivating, and improving an allotment suited to his powers, and you will secure the same proportional amount of profitable labour bestowed on land, as can be reckoned upon from richer and more extensive cultivators. 'Tis true, you must not look for the agricultural marvels of Auchness, as described by canny Caird of Baldoon; but there may be good farming where there is no grand farming; and the lowly lot of the many may prove safer than the splendid pretensions of the few. Speculative high farming is shown to be occasionally attended with severe vicissitudes; and when a farm of 500 or 600 acres is returned abruptly upon the hands of a proprietor, inconvenience is much more severely felt than ever can be experienced in consequence of pressure upon small farmers. may also be fairly inquired, whether high farming is ultimately so beneficial to landlords? We do not profess to be stored with much agricultural knowledge; but we know this much, that high farming must necessarily be exhausting in its stimulative processes. Bad farming may certainly stint the productive powers of the soil; but it is equally true, that the forced exuberance of successive seasons may lead to the impoverishment of land, just about the time when it comes into the repossession of the proprietor.

It

We have indulged in these somewhat desultory observations, in order that the part we have so honestly and independently taken, in pleading the cause of the poor and the oppressed in the Highlands, may not be exposed to misconstruction. The doctrine we hold is simply this-that the interests of landlord and tenant are inseparable; and that whoever foments feuds between parties so closely connected, is an enemy to social tranquillity and improvement. We have always maintained, that a judicious and liberal proprietor fills a patriarchal position, than which nothing can be more honourable, or more calculated to diffuse prosperity and happiness. There can be no necessity for Acts of Parliament to better the relation which should subsist between the generous landlord and the grateful tenant. It is on this account, too, that we quarrel so lustily with the Scottish system of thrusting factors into the place of their principals. We are not for dispensing with factors. On the contrary, we deem it needful that a large proprietor should employ a trustworthy mediatorial manager, who should devote himself to the useful details practically belonging to

the administration of property. But we are for considering such persons as responsible servants; not mongrel masters; not iron functionaries, armed with authority which they abuse, and favoured with facilities which they wrest to purposes of sordid oppression, and personal aggrandisement. We hope it will not be thought egotistical that we should advert to some prevalent misapprehensions of our published strictures regarding mismanaged proprietorship. Because we found fault with Lord Macdonald's partial sacking of Sollas, and his Lordship's sheriff-constrained agreements to secure compulsory emigration: because we stigmatised the heartless conduct of Mr Baillie towards his starving serfs at Glenelg or honestly deplored the infatuation of a really kindnatured laird—Mr Lillingston of Lochalsh: becaused we ventured to strip off the tin-foil which is made to glitter on the Sutherland Coronet of the "good Duke," and showed up the hollowness and fallacy of Mr Loch's pretended" improvements,"--we would caution our readers from rashly assuming that we intended to frame a general indictment against the important body of Highland proprietors. That there may be something to blame with the best of them, men of sense and candour would be the first to acknowledge; but indiscriminate censure of a whole class never can be consistent with truth and fairness; and therefore we disclaim that sort of desolating discontent, which roves "from Dan to Beersheba," and finds nothing for honest approval. Another charge against us, is the alleged impossibility of a stranger being competent to form a judgment upon local themes; and, that, in short, we have scribbled about what we are thoroughly ignorant of. Our only reply shall be couched in the remark, that a stranger may be capable of passing a just judgment upon facts; and that, although strangership may be a bar to minute information, it is, upon the whole, favourable to one usefully exercised quality, namely, IMPARTIALITY.

QUACK D'ISRAELI's Latest Nostrum.

WE entertain a very moderate respect for the regular state physicians, who are so handsomely feed for physicking this plethoric empire; but we have an absolute loathing of the Mock Doctors, who, having taken democratic degrees, and shuffled themselves into a sort of sham professional notoriety, are continually

advertising their universal specifics for the abolition of all political diseases. D'Israeli, the Jew-Gentile romance writer, and House of Commons enlivener, is a practitioner of this latter stamp. During the recess he was engaged in hawking his patent medicines about the rural districts; and he generally contrived to pop in upon poor farmers, "much bemused with beer," after their market dinners; and puffed off his little medical wares with the bronze flippancy which characterises his auctioneering eloquence. Last week he chose to exhibit in the senate, and although his fresh Balm of Gilead is not a whit better than any of his former curatives; he certainly succeeded in calling a larger amount of attention to his new simples, we may venture to call them.

Our readers will perhaps remember that the opening of the session was signalised by a financial piece of braggadocio on the part of the ministers, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was likely to have a surplus of revenue, little short of two millions, at his disposal; and that the good guardian of the public-purse was somewhat at a loss what to do with his treasure-trove. This was enough for the vehement and voluble D'Israeli, who can say with Othello, "upon this hint I spake;" and speak he accordingly did last week for several hours, with the benevolent intent of helping the Government to allocate the new-found fund, in such a mode as would prove most satisfactory to the Protectionist party. Three doses in the shape of resolutions were prescribed by Doctor D'Israeli to the House of Commons. The effect of the first would be to transfer to the consolidated fund the whole expense of the establishment of the Poor Laws; the second would transfer to the consolidated fund about half a million of other charges; and the third would place upon the general revenue of the united kingdom, the cost of maintaining and providing for the casual poor. The Doctor, moreover, declared with great fairness, that all this should be considered as but one of the measures which he contemplated for the health and cure of the body politic. Our readers will see at a glance that this recipe is in fact a revocation of the Poor Law system of Assessment; and that if the proposition were adopted, the present provision for the parochial poor must undergo a perfectly sweeping change. This class of considerations, however, Mr D'Israeli did not condescend to notice; his whole object being to win a little catch-penny popularity by suggesting a scheme ostensibly for the relief of the "agricultural interest." His

speech, therefore, and a succession of speeches, pro and con, were all partisan harangues, each orator availing himself of the occasion to disgorge his declamatory nothings concerning the distressing difficulties and no-difficulties of the passing time. The vapid, bootless character of two prolonged debates cannot be adequately described. We have Sir James Graham's statistics of his Netherby domains; Mr Wilson's dull repetition of his dissertations in the Economist; and then comes Mr Gladstone, the pillar of English Church and State Jesuitry, who, finding that his old "pastor and master," Sir R. Peel, has lost his chance of a third premiership, is evidently setting up for himself, and hopes to be carried into Downing Street on the shoulders of the protectionist palanquin bearers. The next interminable talker is the Tamworth Janus, who has one face for free trade, and another visage for protection rents. Sir Robert having exhausted all the usual sources of national prosperity, comes to the succour of the agriculturists by avowing himself the champion of brick-making! Other wiseacres may dive into mines and collieries for the extrication of national wealth, and suggest fallacious remedies for the relief of distressed farmers; but Sir R. Peel has one infallible specific for all our wants and woes: let other sages go where they may, but Sir Robert betakes himself to the brick-kiln! If bricks are allowed to be made ad libitum, without duty, and without the meddling measurement of impertinent excise-officers, Sir Robert Peel assures all men, women, and children, that national prosperity will be almost too great to be borne! How can surplus riches be more beneficially employed than in permitting bricks to fly about in perfect freedom!

Unluckily, at the close of two night's debate, Lord John Russell rises, big with the fate of D'Israeli's resolutions, and Sir Robert's bricks. The Premier, in a very complimentary style, praises all the orators in succession, and is very happy in extolling Sir Robert Peel's devotedness to free-trade, which his lordship well may; for, had it not been for that faux pas, Lord John would not now have sitting-room on the Treasury bench, After this routine of eulogy, the grand secret is at length disclosed; all the debaters of every party, and every shade of opinion, from Doctor D'Israeli to Doctor Peel, had founded all their sagacious suggestions on the assumed certainty of a SURPLUS; when, Ho!

K