put forth soon after by the commission of inquiry into the Karakozof "conspiracy," of an organisation framed to "promote socialist teaching, to destroy the principles of public morality, to shake the faith of the masses in religion, and to subvert the established order of the State." What would the Socialists, Paine Clubs, and heretical preachers of New York say to a denunciation of that kind by their council, ominously connected with an execution?

Turning now to consider the American feeling which has given rise to these interchanges, it may be confidently stated that the Russian nobleman, referred to above, was right in assuming that the idea of the sanctity of nationalities is much weaker in America than in Western Europe. It was this evident apathy, when Italy was falling, that brought down on that country Mrs. Browning's "Curse for a Nation;" and it is this that wrote and that reads Artemus Ward's sneers at the Fenians. The enthusiasm with which Kossuth was received in America fifteen years ago, when he came with the purpose of effecting an Anglo-American alliance against despotism, may seem to disparage this statement. But that welcome, so far as it can be referred to any deep feeling at all, must be attributed to the traditional antipathy to Austria, and particularly to the Hapsburgs, which is now a century old. After the peace of Hubertsburg, Joseph II., the interested ally of England, and rival of Frederic of Prussia, took care to show his hostility to the Americans and to their revolutionary movements. The "House of Hapsburg" became even then a proverbial name for despotism, and "Tories" in those days were taunted with having it for an ally. The feeling has been fostered with some care, and there has even been a clever American book written on "The Crimes of Austria," which has influenced politicians whilst they were yet students. To this feeling-far less Pro-Hungarian than Anti-Hapsburg-Kossuth's transient success was due. Some feeling there has been favourable to Poland, more especially in earlier days when the memory of Kosciusko was fresher; but the crime against Poland has, so far as American statesmen have discussed it, been laid at many doors, equally with that of Russia. There has thus been no particular obstacle to an alliance with Russia arising from her violent suppression of revolutionary nationalities, which were understood to have no higher aim than to set up castes and despotisms of their own so soon as they were free from that of the Czar.

The first decided manifestations of American sympathy for Russia occurred during the Crimean war. I was residing at that time in Washington, where this feeling was very general, and took some pains to search into the causes of it. It was not difficult to discover that the sympathy for Russia mainly emanated from the Russia within

our own borders.

The similarity between serfdom in the one and slavery in the other is too well known to require illustration here. It is more important to remember that both of these institutions existed in vast and sparsely settled regions; that they had organised both territories into a system of immense estates, owned by a few wealthy and powerful men; and that both regions were animated by a passion for extension and aggression. The American Russia had, moreover, held the reins of the United States Government for a quarter of a century, and in pursuing its objects it had frequently come into collision with the moral sentiment of Europe. This sentiment, chiefly represented by England, did not hesitate to utter itself against slavery, against the injustice of the Mexican war, the "filibustering" against Central America, and the sinister designs on Cuba. Hence the Slave-power-then the Autocrat of all Americahad come to cherish a strong animosity against England; and when the Crimean war broke out it at once showed itself against England and in favour of Russia, which had never uttered a word against slavery or against any Southern scheme of extending the area and the markets of slavery. The administration of Mr. Pierce, which was in power at the time, represented exclusively the pro-slavery party, and was particularly hostile to England. Unfortunately the entire country, from Plymouth Rock onward, was covered with so many monuments of the uniformly oppressive course of England toward America, that there was only too much fuel to feed this antiEnglish feeling even in the sections least friendly to slavery. Nevertheless New England, and the States born of her, were too far advanced in feeling to sympathise with the despot in a war between Liberty and Despotism. In the Northern States, the adulation of Russia was almost confined to the New York Herald-then, and always utterly servile to oppressors whilst the Boston press was earnest in its sympathy with the Allies. In New York the fall of Sebastopol was announced in the theatres and received with deafening cheers. But in all the South there was, I believe, not a politician or a newspaper that did not take the side of Russia.

As Antæus would regain his strength by touching the earth, so do wounded monarchs remember their people in times of calamity, and seek to recover strength by contact with them. The Russian Czar evoked a reinforcement of his throne from the plantations. The American slaveholders winced under this grand and sudden emancipation of the serfs, and especially at something said by the Czar about "humanity" when he performed the act. The opponents of slavery at once availed themselves of the prestige of Russia, which the Southerners themselves had so industriously diffused through the nation, and rang the changes upon the greatness and humanity of Russia. The example

of that country was quoted with much effect against the obstinate retention of a similar institution by a republic. And thus the admiration for Russia was for intimate political reasons assiduously cultivated in the North. Amongst the Northern people it no doubt became a genuine though never an ardent nor a universal feeling; but it was not accompanied by any sentiment adverse to England or France. It is also noteworthy that several of the leading Northern papers strongly condemned-whilst none of them approved-the mission of Mr. Fox, and that the enthusiastic demonstrations in Russia have been received in America with a significant silence, with the exception of Mr. Seward's chief organ, the New York Times, which has taken them as a text for an article reminding Europe that America knows how to be grateful to friends.

At length the time arrived when America must turn and grapple with her Russia. And now there came cold blasts from Western Europe, and warm breath from the steppes of Russia. Whilst France was proposing openly to aid the South, whilst Alabamas, manned by Englishmen, were destroying American commerce, whilst every other European nation was either indifferent or hostile, Russia warmly applauded the efforts of America to preserve her Union, and even sent her fleet in the eyes of the world to bear the expression of her sympathies. Under such circumstances it could not be expected that Americans would at once begin to search into the historical records of Russia, or weigh the part she had played in the old domestic controversies of another hemisphere: she did what was inevitable-clasped the only hand that had been extended to her in her hour of darkness.

This sentiment is on the part of the American warm and real, but it means no more than gratitude. Nevertheless there is some reason to think that politicians at Washington and at St. Petersburg are coldly considering how these popular emotions may be utilised. Undoubtedly, in the case of a conflict of either of those two countries with England or France, the other would permit the fitting out within its borders of any number of predatory cruisers by such belligerent.

The indications are, that there will be a reconciliation between Washington and the Tuileries. It is, however, deeply to be regretted that the relations between England and America should be settling down into a condition of vindictiveness on one side, and of proud indifference on the other. It is a sad presage for the world, that the first message sent from New York to England by the Atlantic Telegraph should have been a cold sneer. The chief hope in which the friend of peace can indulge is, that the common sense of England will abandon, whilst such a course would be beyond misconstruction,

The reac

a policy that is not even pennywise. Lord Stanley has, indeed, almost invited America to reassert her claims, in his public speeches. But the United States cannot recognise such expressions, nor ministerial changes; she has many precedents on which to act, and none of them will permit her to renew a claim that has been refused, except when she is in a position to do so imperatively. The fact that the two nations representing the English language, law, and liberty, should, in their respective great historical conflicts with barbarism in the noon of this century, each have found the other sympathising with its enemy, is an anomaly and a scandal; and it will be an evidence of the decay of statesmanship in both nations if they are not startled enough by it to ensure a more honourable record in the future, and transmit no worse result than such natural shame as Titania might have felt on awaking from her grotesque infatuation. Yet it is impossible in the nature of things that any regular alliance can be formed between Russia and America. tion in the United States from a generation of Southern misrule, ending almost in ruin, must for the next generation at least transfer the sceptre to New England; for the South and New England alone represent ideas, the States between the two being, as Wendell Phillips has well said, "like the blank leaves between the Old and New Testaments, taking any impression that the owner for the time being chooses to write on them." New England is to be the directing brain of America, and New England has both culture and character; it has also convictions more than sentiments-convictions whose roots are traceable deep in the heart of that great era from which sprang Anglo-Saxon liberty. They who seek to press the sentiment of gratitude so far as to create a practical and permanent co-operation between the intensified absolutism of the past and the idealistic republicanism of New England, will find the fruit they seek rotten ere it is ripe. Nulla vestigia retrorsum. It was not a new Russia that the Mayflower fought its way across the ocean to establish, but a new England.

MONCURE D. CONWAY.

NOTES CURIOUS AND CRITICAL MADE AT PERUGIA.

Of the eight thousand and odd communes which still compose the municipal life of Italy, there are but few which do not contain within themselves abundant records from which to frame a history, not only complete, but interesting and instructive, of their own individual past; and none of them, perhaps, is richer in materials for this purpose than the city of Perugia. I do not, however, propose to employ them in any such manner here; but only to cull as much from them as may justify the title prefixed to this paper.

The main glory of Perugia still lies in its being the city of adoption of the great painter who, being Pietro Vannucci, is known to all the world, and will be known to all time, as Pietro Perugino. Tardy but almost entire justice has been done to him and to the Umbrian school whose chief and representative he is. I will, therefore, wholly abstain from the purely artistic questions allied and associated with his name, though a great deal even as yet but little known might be said thereupon, and will touch firstly upon two incidents in connection with his story, more novel, and to the English reader probably still more interesting.

The once well-known Cappella del Magistrato is now nothing more than an ante-room, and time has dealt so harshly with its former decorations that it no longer merits a loftier service; but the chamber in which Bonfigli laboured before Pietro devoted to it his much higher powers, has a curious little history attached to it, the interest of which cannot be effaced by the combined efforts of dusty years and French rapacity. It is illustrative also not only of the manners of the age, but of the truth that one age does not in fundamental manners differ very much from another. In the year 1479 a certain Pietro di Galeotto was commissioned by the Priori to paint certain subjects for it, within the space of two years, at the price of two hundred florins; and amongst other things, he was to paint the portraits of his worthy masters, the Priori themselves. If he failed to complete the work within the stipulated period, he was to pay a fine of fifteen golden ducats. Three years passed away, during which Galeotto received some payments on account; but his labour, nevertheless, remained uncompleted. He seems, however, to have been highly prized by the magistracy, probably on account of the nature of a portion of the work on which he was engaged; for on the 29th of June, 1482, I find that yet another year's grace was given to him, on the plea that there had been some contagious disease in Perugia, by reason of which he had struck work and absented himself. Very likely there was some truth in the plea, inasmuch as we constantly find in the time-bargains