extreme case of conquest by force, would not observe towards him and towards the city the usages of conquering armies; and therefore he wanted to enjoy the sweets of empire to the last, and afterwards, when he had secured his own safety, to proclaim the virtue of his system, and to boast that kingdoms, not republics, condescend to terms. For which obstinacy, which may be characterised as sheer barbarity, since it costs a people their blood, and not even a scratch or a single discomfort to those who harden their hearts, he was lauded by those who deem it an honourable and holy act to sacrifice the lives of men at the shrine of capricious factions, to save, as they say, the honour of their flag, just as formerly it appeared to other fanatics, and still appears to some, a holy thing to burn men's bodies, in order to save their souls. Wherefore the faithful bravos of the Triumvir, the braggadocios and the crack-brained, did not give themselves up for conquered, but, on the contrary, went about making an ostentatious boast of security, as if by violent protestations they could defy fortune, and command victory. They were heard to say that they would lay a train under St. Peter's, and blow it up, together with the Vatican and all the monuments of Catholic faith, and of the empire of the Popes-a mark of hatred which degenerates into madness when it descends from men and institutions to hurl menaces on stones, and on the monuments of the arts. But they were, after all, only signs of fatuity, those daily vows made by the Government, the Assembly, and the Mazzinians, to bury themselves beneath the ruins of Rome,

because superhuman resolves and heroic exhibitions of despair are the fruits of silent and not of loquacious resolutions; they are examples either of pure barbarism or of perfect civilisation, not of a civilisation such as ours, refined in its epithets, feeble in its affections; and I note this, because I think Italians ought to be corrected not only for other vices, but also for this, of employing the resounding phrases of the Homeric muse, which harmonises but ill with the effeminate and mercantile phraseology of modern prose. An age more eager for riches than for liberty and national honour, can still admire savage deeds and cruel devastations, when perpetrated to save the liberty and the honour of a country, but it laughs at resounding vows and at stage heroes. And when it sees that these proclaimers of wonders and of horrors, content themselves, after all, with destroying hedges, gardens, and country-houses, as they did in Rome, and that the most violent amongst them neither lay trains nor set fire to them, but at last slink off to a land of safety, to promise new wonders, and preach new cataclysms, the world looks on and smiles. Away, then, once for all, with these mountebank follies! Mature, Italian youths, your designs in silence, mature them in wisdom and virtue. Study, grow in religion, in purity of life, in health of body and of mind; exercise yourselves in arms, and in that day which the Lord shall send, revenge Italy, and do wonders, and, if it be necessary, make the world tremble by your heroic deeds, but cease to look upon the perils of your country as a show, on its misfortunes as a spectacle! Modest words and proud deeds!

Even the pretext of waiting until the French Government should pronounce publicly upon the articles proposed by Lesseps had no longer any foundation, since M. de Courcelles, the new Envoy of France, had written to M. Degerando the following letter, which was sent by him to the Triumvirs, and by them to the Assembly:

"Mr. Secretary,

"Head-quarters, Villa Santucci, "13th June, 1849.

"When I arrived at Head-quarters I found that the Roman Government, in its answer of yesterday to the last intimation made by General Oudinot, had declared that, in its opinion, the renewal of hostilities, before it could be made acquainted with the will of the French Government, relative to the articles agreed upon with M. Lesseps, would be a violation of the rights of nations.

"I maintain that the proceedings of M. Lesseps have been officially condemned ever since the 26th of May, by a letter from the Minister for Foreign Affairs, and that another letter of the 29th of the same month entirely took away all authority from the mission entrusted to M. Lesseps. And if M. Lesseps was recalled on the 29th of May, how could it be in his power, on the 31st of May, to conclude articles, which in any case required ratification, with the Roman Government?

"This is the simple fact as regards the ratification. A new Ministry called into office at the beginning of June, did me the honour to invest me with the mission extraordinary in which I am engaged at the present moment. I left Paris on the 6th of June, a little while after the return of M. Lesseps, and I can therefore affirm anew, that the Government of which I am the interpreter, did not hesitate for a moment to reject the articles of which I speak.

"The narration of these facts, my presence in the camp, the powers with which I am accredited, sufficiently testify that the Roman Government would be very much mistaken, if it ima

gined it could justify the continuance of a resistance so contrary to the true cause of Roman liberty and to the interests which it fancies it is defending, in the expectation of an impossible ratification. It is my opinion, Sir, that you ought, in every possible way, to confute this error of the Roman Government; France has only one object in view in this painful struggle; viz. the liberty of the revered Head of the Church, the liberty of the Roman States, the peace of the world. The mission which has been entrusted to me is essentially liberal, and is protective of the people reduced to such extremities. My instructions are entirely conformable to those of General Oudinot."

Mazzini sent a reply to this letter, dated the 15th :

"Sir,

"The letter which M. de Courcelles has written to you, under date of the 13th, and which you have been pleased to communicate to me, does not invalidate, in any degree, the resolution taken by the Roman Constituent Assembly, and this you must have seen at a glance. The date of such and such French despatch signifies little; it is of small importance whether M. Lesseps was or was not re-called when he subscribed his name to the Convention of the 31st of May. single word is a reply to everything. The Assembly knew nothing; it never received an official communication of those despatches.

One

"The diplomatic question is thus laid down by us. M. Lesseps was Minister Plenipotentiary of France on a mission at Rome. He was as much so on the 31st of May, so far as we are concerned, as he was before. Nothing had reached us which could make us think otherwise. We therefore treated with him bonâ fide, as though we were treating with France herself. And this confidence cost us the occupation of Monte Mario on the night of the 28-29 May. Engaged with M. Lesseps in a discussion purely pacific in its character, being heartily desirous to avoid everything which might precipitate the minds of any towards a solution contrary to our wishes, and not

being able to bring ourselves to believe that France would initiate its protectory mission by the siege of Rome, we remained passive. At every fresh movement made by the troops-at every partial movement, tending to restrict the military cordon, and to advance, step by step, to positions which otherwise we should have been well able to defend, M. Lesseps told us that the French Generals were only desirous to allay the fierce excitement of their troops, wearied of inactivity. He entreated us, in the name of the two nations and of humanity, to avoid all hostile encounters, to place entire confidence in him, and not to fear the consequences. We yielded willingly. For my own part, I am sorry now we did, not, however, that I fear for Rome, because within her walls are the courageous breasts which will defend that which good positions would otherwise have protected. The Convention between M. Lesseps and ourselves was signed on the 31st of May, at eight o'clock in the evening; he then took it to the camp, assuring us that he looked upon the signature of General Oudinot as a mere formality, about which there was not the least doubt. We were all overjoyed. Things began to resume their natural course between France and ourselves.

"General Oudinot's despatch, containing his refusal to sign the treaty, and reiterating his conviction that M. Lesseps, in signing it, had overstepped his powers, reached us, I think, in the night.

"A second despatch, dated the 1st of June, at half-past three o'clock in the afternoon, and signed by the aforesaid General, declared to us on his part, that the event had justified his determination, and that in two despatches, emanating from the Minister of War, and from the Minister for Foreign Affairs, and dated the 28th and 29th May, the French Government announced to him that the mission of M. Lesseps had come to a termination.

"Twenty-four hours were granted us for accepting the ultimatum of the 29th May. On the same day, M. Lesseps, as you know, sent us a communication in which he said, 'I maintain the Convention signed yesterday, and I am going