which leads the way in No. I. This professes to be a Report of Count Bernstorff to the King of Prussia, dated Jan. 29, 1831, on the means of maintaining tranquillity in Germany in the event of an inevitable foreign war, and on the mode and means by which Prussia is to utilize her position and her influence in Germany. The German press has not as yet re-produced this Memoir, either because the English Journals took less notice of it as a purely German affair, or because it was feared that a collision would arise with the Censorship. But this apprehension is unfounded. For considering the Memoir as genuine, there does not in reality appear that any state secret is revealed in it, or that it contains anything that Prussia need disavow, in order not to stand in contradiction with her published measures or declarations. It might not perhaps be entirely unwelcome to some of the defenders of the Prussian system, as showing that in a memoir, which, not destined for any sort of publicity, there was after all nothing more than what is here revealed. That the Memoir is translated from the German is indicated by many things. Among other things appears the phrase "the art and manner," where

it clearly must have been "die art und weise," a mistake, which may be placed by the side of the amusing blunders in Lord Gower's Faust, where his Lordship translates der Kühne Freier, (the bold suitor), by the Bold Friar. But that this Memoir was translated from the German by no means proves that the original was genuine; but what forger would have so repeatedly dwelt on Prussia's using only strong legal means, and employing a strong moral influence for the attainments of her objects? A forgery is generally undertaken in a malicious view; nor do we indeed. see what motive the English publishers could have to put forward an obliged compliment to the loyalty of the Prussian government.

It doubtless is the intention of the Editors to influence the public opinion, even of Germany. If this tendency were to give offence to any party the most convenient way would be to forbid the circulation of these papers. In that case the Governments will have to inform, enlighten and tranquillize public opinion upon those matters on which it has been alarmed or misled (!) The English Editors themselves acknowledge the intelligence of those whom they designate "their op

ponents." It is at the present day far too difficult (however honestly some politicians may cherish the design) to convince the people of the propriety of not asking questions, and of persuading them that their only duty is blindly to follow. Most fortunate is that power which has the least to conceal, for where the greatest secresy prevails, indiscretion most easily arises. And the old, innate failing of human nature,

To seek

Forbidden knowledge, by forbidden means,

is not yet overcome.

More boldly, but not less artfully invented, if invented, are the Despatches of Prince Lieven and Count Matuszevich of June 1, 1829, of Prince Lieven, Jan. 4, 1829, and of Count Pozzo di Borgo, Dec. 10, 1826. Here many passages, and sometimes the complete text of the French original are printed at the foot of the columns. But did it require these Despatches to prove, that it was Russia's interest in those years to occupy France with the Peninsula, and that Russia succeeded in keeping in inactivity one English Ministry after another (Tories and Whigs in the same damnable predicament), whilst she prepared in the East that

which is now ripening before their eyes? It appears that even M. Nebenius must consent to see the production in these pages of his prophecies, that England when she again takes a fancy to stand forward and domineer at sea, will find the Euxine closed. The Dardanelles have become a vital question for the maritime power of England. Hence the efforts of the Editor to keep in the background that which public discussion might draw into the whirlpool of party strife, although he has said enough to allow it to be guessed, that the Tories would do well to adopt the convictions of their political opponents, in order not to see themselves exposed by farther revelations to the hatred of all those who value the honour of

England. The language of the Tory Journals has for several months shown that they understood the state of the question, even before the last very intelligible hint was given. A crisis is at hand, serious and difficult, which threatens to invade the courts and the hearths of the distant, of the unsought, and of the scarcely enumerated, unless Prussia's conciliatory policy, or the inflexible attitude or imposing decision of Austria succeed in conjuring the storm. May that instinctive

impulse point to peace, which has so suddenly moved the heart of Germany, to animate the old arteries of her streams, and to create new paths of communication; an activity from whose busy and still only half conscious action, will spring into life the thousand years dream of the union of the Rhine and Danube.

In several short articles the different versions of the Warsaw speech are exposed with comments.

Most remarkable is the Memoir (i. 57. 92; ii. 114 —155) which, under the title of a Russian Memoir, or a Russian note on the State and Prospects of Germany, has been alluded to in many German Journals, and of which important extracts have been given in the Hamburgh "Zeitschrift fur Politick, Handel und Handelsrecht." In examining the whole article, we are first struck with the circumstance, that it is neither dated nor signed. The superscription says, "This Memoir was composed "under the guidance of a Minister at St. Peters66 burgh, and confidentially communicated to many "German Governments; further it appears to have "been drawn up in 1833, and to have been used "in 1834; probably after the States had acceded "to the Prussian Customs Union." Supposition