My feelings incline me towards the Poet, but I have not yet heard arguments sufficiently convincing to sway me altogether in his favour. I rose chiefly to dispel, if possible, the false glory that attaches to the Warrior, and if I have in the least succeeded, I shall be perfectly content. SEVENTH SPEAKER. I think, Sir, that we owe much to the gentleman who has just sat down for the very proper light in which he has placed the character of one of the three individuals between whom we are to judge. We are now left to choose, I fancy, between only two. The choice seems to me to be tolerably easy. The Statesman certainly appears to deserve the higher honour. It has been well said that he rules the mind of his country. Besides this, he rules all the external circumstances connected with the condition of the people: he regulates their commerce, their manufactures, their physical and intellectual improvement. He rules by a noble style of Force, too— the force of intellect. By a stroke of the pen, he does more than the Warrior can do in fifty battles. His breath is stronger than the roar of cannon. We cannot see the Statesman to greater advantage than by comparing him with the Warrior. The Warrior leads bodily strength:- actual, tangible force; - the Statesman directs (by invisible power) the minds of men leads their reason - holds the reins of -- their obedience- and represses discontent by the simple force of written law. His parchment conquers more completely than the other's sword. His will binds faster than the other's chains. There is something almost sublime about a great Statesman. He has the keen clear eye to see a nation's wants the wise judgment to devise the remedy the strong bold hand to apply it. Firmness, vigilance, justice, moderation, mercy, dignity, - these are the qualities of the Statesman, and they are, to say the least of them, qualities noble and god-like, qualities which cannot fail to command our admiration. They have secured mine, and for the Statesman I shall vote. - EIGHTH SPEAKER.- Sir, A gentleman who spoke with particular boldness and confidence upon this very difficult subject, said with an air of triumph which did not sit well upon himfor it was simply the triumph of thoughtlessness -not to say of folly - this gentleman said that although the Poet ought to refine the heart, and purify the soul, of man, he mostly, or frequently, fails to do so, and therefore has but a visionary and unproved claim upon our esteem. Are there not- said one triumphant-thoughtless friendare there not licentious poets-sceptical poets— misanthropic poets? Why, doubtless there are: and might I not ask in return—Are there no brutal warriors are there no stupid Statesmen ? Sir, the gentleman has taken false Poets as his sample of true ones, and so has fallen into deep error in his judgment. We are to decide, I apprehend, between the great Warrior, the wise Statesman, and the true Poet, not fix upon bad specimens of either. Judging in this manner, Sir, I presume to add my feeble testimony to the superior service rendered to society by the Poet, as compared with the two other great men. He seems to me infinitely higher than they are. rules and as high as the soul is above the body and the brain, so high is the Poet above the Warrior and the Statesman. The Warrior writes his law (of Force) in blood; the Statesman pens his law on mouldering parchment; the Poet traces his upon the universal heart of man: and while the heart of man exists, the Poet's laws can never die. For they are laws of beauty and of harmony. The law of the Warrior dies with him. Disperse the force he wields, he passes away and is forgotten. The law of the Statesman perishes with the parchment on which he writes it: laws are superseded by laws, as waves are superseded by waves. But the law of the Poet is imperishable: The soul is the domain he it is a law for all time, and will last till time shall be no longer. The works of Alexander are no more-who can trace them? The works of Solon are no more who acts upon his laws? But Homer, like a writer of yesterday, stands fresh and young before us, and shall so remain, when the very names of Alexander and of Solon shall have faded from the memory of man. -- Our NINTH SPEAKER. - I am grateful, Sir, to the last speaker for pointing out to us that we are to judge of the characters before us by their most perfect specimens; and this emboldens me to venture yet a word in favour of that character so much aspersed by some the Warrior. The speakers who have so blackened the military character must surely have forgotten our Cœur de Lions our Cromwells our Blakes Nelsons our Wellingtons! But even if they chose to forget history, was it so difficult to imagine a Soldier-Hero, that they could not even give us an idea of one? that they were obliged to give us false ideas of the character? "Murderers " "Barbarians" "Plunderers:" Warriors always this? Have we heard of no virtuous merciful incorruptible heroes? Is Hannibal a reality - or a dream? Have any here or is the name only a vision of read of Wallace, are my own? Are Cincinnatus, Leonidas, Washing The soldier, Sir, has not been fairly dealt with. Let his detractors imagine an invader landing on our peaceful shores with chains and slavery in his million-hands: let them imagine the wild terror and mad fear that would arise in the hearts of our people: let them imagine our commerce stopped our supplies cut off- our lives threatened: one universal throb of dread in all men's souls. Let them imagine at the darkest moment a hero rising from the mass: instilling courage into the heart, infusing patriotism into the spirit, exciting strength in the arms, — of the people. Let them imagine him forming them into enthusiastic armies - imbuing them with stern and high resolve- leading them with dauntless courage into the field of battle-and directing their strength and valour against the enslaving Foe till he is overcome, forced to fly in defeat, and curbed for ever: and if, after imagining all this, they do not think higher of the Soldier-Hero than they have done to-night, I will give up my defence of him. - - TENTH SPEAKER. Sir, The gentleman who has just addressed us has very eloquently de |