that success in life depended on comprehending it. The spirit of the age may be an unsound and injurious spirit; it may be the moral duty of a man, not only not to defer to, but to resist it, and if it be unsound and injurious, in so doing he will not only fulfil his duty, but he may accomplish his success in life. The spirit of the age, for instance, was in favour of the Crusades. They occasioned a horrible havoc of human life; they devastated Asia and exhausted Europe; and, in all probability, in acting in this instance according to the spirit of the age, a man would have forfeited his life, and certainly wasted his estate, with no further satisfaction than having massacred some Jews and slain some Saracens.

have

What then, gentlemen, is the spirit of the age in which we ourselves live; of that world which in a few years, more or less, you will have all entered; where you are to establish yourselves in life; where you to encounter in that object every conceivable difficulty; perplexities of judgment, material obstacles, tests of all your qualities, and searching trials of your character ; and all these circumstances more or less affected by the spirit of the age, an acquaintance with which will assist you in forming your decisions and in guiding your course?

It appears to me that I should not greatly err were I to describe the spirit of this age as the spirit of equality; but equality' is a word of wide import,

6

under which various schools of thought may assemble and yet arrive at different and even contradictory conclusions. I hold that Civil equality—that is, equality of all subjects before the law, and that a law which recognises the personal rights of all subjects—is the only foundation of a perfect commonwealth-one which secures to all liberty, order, and justice. The principle of Civil equality has long prevailed in this kingdom. It has been applied during the last halfcentury more finely and completely to the constantly and largely varying circumstances of the country; but it had prevailed more or less in Britain for centuries, and I attribute the patriotism of our population mainly to this circumstance, and I believe that it has had more to do with the security of the soil than those geographical attributes usually enlarged upon.

Another land, long our foe, but now our rival only in the arts of peace, thought fit, at the end of the last century, to reconstruct its social system, and to rebuild it on the principle of Social equality. To effect this object it was prepared to make, and it made, great sacrifices. It subverted all the institutions of the country: a Monarchy of 800 years whose traditionary and systematic policy had created the kingdom; a National Church-for, though Romanist, it had secured its liberties; a tenure of land which maintained a valiant nobility, that never can be restored; it confiscated all endowments, and abolished all corporations;

erased from the map of the soil all the ancient divisions, and changed the landmarks and very name of the country. Indeed, it entirely effected its purpose, which was to destroy all the existing social elements and level the past to the dust. This experiment has had fair play, and you can judge of its results by the experience of eighty years.

It is not in Scotland that the name of France will ever be mentioned without affection, and I will not yield to any Scotchman in my appreciation of the brilliant qualities and the resplendent achievements of its gifted people. We are not blind to their errors, but their calamities are greater than their errors, and their merits are greater than their calamities. When I heard that their bright city was beleaguered, and that the breach was in the wall, I confess I felt that pang which I remember, as a child, I always experienced when I read of Lysander entering the City of the Violet Crown. But, gentlemen, I may on this occasion be permitted

to

say that of all the many services which France has rendered to Europe-Europe, that land of ancient creeds and ancient Governments, and manners and customs older than both-not the least precious is the proof she has afforded to us that the principle of Social equality is not one on which a nation can safely rely in the hour of trial and in the day of danger. Then it is found that there is no one to lead and nothing to rally round. There is not a man in the country who can

:

assemble fifty people. And rightly since for an individual to direct is an usurpation of the sovereignty of the many. Those who ought to lead feel isolated, and those who wish to obey know not to whom to proffer their devotion. All personal influences are dead. All depends on the Central Government, a sufficient power in fair weather, but in stormy times generally that part of the machine which first breaks.

Civil equality prevails in Britain, and Social equality prevails in France. The essence of civil equality is to abolish privilege; the essence of social equality is to destroy classes. If the principle of equality at the present day assumed only these two forms, I do not think there would be much to perplex you in your choice, or in your judgment as to their respective results. But that is not so. The equality which is now sought by vast multitudes of men in many countries, which is enforced by writers not deficient in logic, in eloquence, and even learning, scarcely deigns to recognise civil equality, and treats social equality only as an obsolete truth. No moral or metaphysical elements will satisfy them. They demand physical and material equality. This is the disturbing spirit which is now rising like a moaning wind in Europe, and which, when you enter the world, may possibly be a raging storm. It may, therefore, be as well that your attention should be called to its nature, and that you may be led to consider its consequences.

The leading principle of this new school is that there is no happiness which is not material, and that every living being has a right to a share in that physical welfare. The first obstacle to their purpose is found in the rights of private property. Therefore, they must be abolished. But the social system must be established on some principle; and, therefore, for the rights of property they would substitute the rights of labour. Now, the rights of labour cannot be fully enjoyed if there be any limit to employment. The great limit to employment, to the rights of labour, and to the physical and material equality of man, is found in the division of the world into states and nations. Thus, as civil equality would abolish privilege, social equality would destroy classes ; so material and physical equality strikes at the principle of patriotism, and is prepared to abrogate countries.

Now I am addressing a race of men who are proud, and justly proud, of their country. I know not that the sentiment of patriotism beats in any breast more strongly than in that of a Scotchman. Neither time. nor distance, I believe, enfeebles that passion. It is as vehement on the banks of the Ganges as on the banks of the Clyde, and in the speculative turmoil of Melbourne as in the bustling energy of Glasgow. Why is a Scotchman proud of his country? Because the remembrance of it awakes a tradition of heroic exploits