Great Powers when they guaranteed the integrity of the new kingdom which they were receiving into the political system of Europe. But a country relying wholly on the forbearance and protection of other states for its security, is placed in a position altogether incompatible with self-respect. It was, therefore, arranged that Belgium should possess a national army, and that certain fortresses should be kept up. These obligations the Belgian nation freely took upon itself. The Belgian army, which does not press unduly on the finances of the country, ought to be a considerable one; and it is the recorded opinion of the great Duke to whom Belgium owes so much, that fortifications are of far greater importance to the country since its separation from Holland than before. They were intended to deter a powerful neighbour from even contemplating aggression. Antwerp well garrisoned would afford time for other Powers to come to the support of a people whose territory had been invaded, and whose independence was threatened. The opinions of Mr. Cobden on the defences and the destiny of Belgium are about as valuable as those with which he is in the habit of favouring his own countrymen upon similar topics. The uncalled-for obtrusion of his sentiments in reference to a people whom he considers as destined to political annihilation, is, as he has probably discovered, no less repugnant to their pride than it is insulting to their patriotism. The frequent alliances which have taken place between England and the provinces which now constitute the Kingdom of Belgium prove that the political interests of the two countries are almost identical; but moral affinities are often more efficacious in uniting nations than treaties. An ardent love of liberty, a taste for natural scenery, an enthusiastic attachment to agriculture, an appreciation of domestic comfort, and love of a country life, characterise alike the people of Belgium and England. If it should be asked, what interests of England would now be jeopardised if Belgium should ever pass into the possession of France-we reply, the same as when Napoleon I., with a just appreciation of its importance, declared that Antwerp, in the pos session of France, would always be a loaded pistol directed at the heart of England. The new conditions under which maritime warfare must be waged greatly increase the force of Napoleon's celebrated saying. The vast amount of iron, coal, dock accommodation, and machinery which Belgium would place at the command of France renders it impossible that England should ever acquiesce in such an annexation. A remarkable addition to the testimony of Napoleon as to the value of Antwerp in the hands of France is to be found in the recently published volume of the Emperor's Emperor's Correspondence. He there reiterates his opinion that the possession of Antwerp would be of immense importance to France, and assigns as one reason for that opinion, that shipbuilding could there be carried on with safety during a war with Great Britain. We entertain no doubt of the loyalty and good faith of the Emperor Napoleon III. in his present political relations with England; but he must be a bold politician who would venture to predict the action of France in any succeeding phase of her revolution. The sagacity of the King of the Belgians is acknowledged throughout Europe. He has emphatically declared that the acquisition of the boundary of the Rhine involves the ultimate seizure of Belgium. The possession of the Rhenish provinces could only be effectually secured by the annexation of Belgium. It must be obvious that without it the position of France would be strategically untenable, if she should ever possess herself of that long-coveted territory now held by Prussia to the west of the Rhine. The defence of her provinces is the more immediate duty of Prussia; but the interests of England are scarcely less involved in their protection. The best security of Belgium lies in the total absence of any pretext for aggression on the part of her powerful neighbour. The population have expressed no desire to form an integral part of the French empire; and, even if they had, the interests of the other European States would overrule such predilections, and require that the last territorial arrangement should not be disturbed. But the people of Belgium are proud of their independence; and it would be a hazardous experiment to apply to this State the notable expedient of a plébiscite to test its political preferences. To reduce it to servitude by the trick of the ballot would be beyond the skill even of the most experienced adept in that modern device. There may be a few traditions which connect the people with France, but the condition of Belgium in 1862 differs entirely from that of 1795. The people would certainly never willingly exchange their free institutions for a despotism, although that despotism might make them participators of the glory of France. Belgium only desires to pursue her industrious career, and to enjoy her free constitution. It might have been more conducive to the interests of Europe if the permanent union of Holland and Belgium could have been effected, and the two countries formed into one homogeneous state; but insuperable obstacles presented themselves to the amalgamation, and it is the duty of statesmen to acquiesce in such a solution of the political problems which present themselves as uncontrollable events bring about. The The influence of the Belgian revolution upon literature and science has been very marked. The intellect of the people received a great impulse by the civil and religious liberty which they acquired. More important publications, in every branch of human knowledge, have issued from the press since 1830 than in the 150 preceding years. Coincident with their revived nationality has been the desire of the Belgian people to study the history of the past, and to restore the use of a language in which many great writers have embodied their thoughts, and conferred a literary immortality upon their country. M. Dele pierre, in his useful work which stands at the head of this article, has given an account of many writers who ought to be better known than they are to English readers. Nor has the effect of political independence been less marked in giving increased importance and higher development to art. While the painters of Holland have been content with that traditionary style which is represented in its well-known school, several of the painters of Belgium have soared into loftier regions. We took occasion in a recent number* to comment on this contrast between Holland and Belgium, and the decline of art which followed generally upon the decay of political power and national prosperity in the Low Countries; and we pointed out that, while there had been no revival in the condition of Holland as respects art, the successful struggle for political independence, and the national prosperity which has been its result, had given a decided im pulse to painting in Belgium. The crowded state of the Belgian gallery in the International Exhibition, and the attraction which the powerful pictures of Gallait, Leys, and other eminent painters never fail to present, show that these great artists possess the power of affecting the popular mind as well as of exciting the admiration of intelligent connoisseurs. The Belgian gallery must, we think, have taken the world by surprise. It would be impossible here to enter upon a critical analysis of its contents, which have been elsewhere sufficiently discussed; but, in justice to Belgium, we could not omit to notice the very marked development which has taken place within the last thirty years in a country so illustrious in the annals of painting. There is perhaps scarcely any country in Europe which excites so little interest in casual visitors, notwithstanding its many attractions, as Belgium. The traveller passes often hurriedly through it to more inviting lands, casting perhaps a rapid glance at its garden-like landscapes, and seeing too often only in the distance *No. 218, p. 494. its noble cathedrals and grand civic edifices, florid with sculptured symbolism, and the pride of former generations. But who that has ever lingered on the banks of the Meuse can forget the succession of enchanting scenes which recall some of the glorious pictures of Claude, and are as suggestive to the devotee of art as to the lover of nature; or the more contracted but scarcely less lovely valley of the Vesdre, whose bright and shallow waters pursue their rapid course under the shadow of richly-wooded hills crowned with picturesque and tasteful châteaux? The magnificent old towns, long the wonder of Europe, rich in the treasures of art and in historical associations, still present objects of inexhaustible interest, and are worthy of the highest admiration. Comparatively deserted now, they were once trodden by industrious multitudes who supplied Europe with most of the luxuries and the conveniences of life. The stillness of their quiet streets, once filled with the busy hum of men and alive with political agitation, is now scarcely broken but by those chimes whose music has been heard by so many successive generations, and which, while they proclaim the flight of time, seem to speak of ages that are gone, and to connect the present with the past. For our countrymen the fields of Belgium possess an interest which time can never destroy; on them the best blood of England has from time immemorial been freely shed to secure the independence of Europe, the essential condition of her own. A Sovereign must be endowed with high qualities whose political influence is in an inverse proportion to the extent of his dominions. King Leopold has displayed on the throne of Belgium the same moderation, propriety, and good sense which marked his short connexion with England. To his true conception of the position and duties of a constitutional King, Belgium is chiefly indebted for the tranquillity which it has enjoyed since its independence. It is to be hoped that his important life may be long spared for the benefit of his country and of Europe. The State whose infancy he has nurtured, although devoid of the imposing greatness of other kingdoms, possesses some attractions peculiarly its own. As a truly constitutional monarchy it stands almost alone on the continent of Europe-but it stands by the side of a despotism to which it is an object at once of cupidity and dislike. As a Roman Catholic State it exhibits to the world an example worthy of all respect, of a people retaining its ancient faith, yet struggling successfully against the domination of an Ultramontane priesthood. As an industrial country it possesses ample capital, admirable roads and canals, charitable institutions formed not merely to relieve, but but to prevent destitution, an elastic revenue, a soil turned to the most profitable account by laborious industry, laws judiciously framed and well administered, and a generally prosperous and contented people. ART. V.-1. L'Histoire du Consulat et de l'Empire. Par M. A. 2. Les Misérables. Par Victor Hugo. Deuxième PartieCosette. Tome iii. Bruxelles, 1862. DISCUSSION took place between the members of a jury at the Great Exhibition of 1851 on the award of a Council medal. It was urged by a distinguished Frenchman that that medal ought to be given to one of his countrymen, not on account of the superiority of the articles that he exhibited, but because he was esteemed in France to be the first manufacturer of such articles. It was in fact impossible, for that reason, to send him back to his country without such a medal. The same principle -which we fear is a national characteristic-of allowing impartiality to give way to expediency, is prominently displayed in both of the works before us. The authors differ, indeed, widely from each other in the treatment of their subject, as they notoriously do in their views and aspirations. The one, a statesman of the Monarchy, issues a separate volume on the campaign of 1815, as part of a pretentious History; the other, a statesman of the Revolution, introduces a detailed rhapsody on the battle of Waterloo into the pages of a romance. M. Adolphe Thiers, as might be expected, denounces Napoleon as a bad politician; and M. Victor Hugo, who brings a mind not to be changed by place or time,' and continues to advocate le droit' against la loi,' asserts that his downfall was directly due to Divine interference in consequence of the misery which he had caused. But they are both writing for French readers. They evidently concur with Dr. Johnson and older writers in believing that men are willing to credit what they wish, and encourage rather those who gratify them with pleasure, than those that instruct them with fidelity.' They have both felt that it would be impossible to represent Napoleon otherwise than as a perfect military hero in command of perfect soldiers, and that it was necessary to prove the reverse, as far as possible, regarding the opponents against whom he rushed headlong to destruction. Their ingenuity and their honesty have been sorely taxed in the attempt; and the romance of the historian is more incorrect as well as less vigorous than that of the novelist. M. Thiers 153 |