and Buckstone.

In Archbishop Whately's 'Historic Doubts,' we find that the existence
of the first emperor can be disproven by the very train of argument
employed to deny the apostles. Let me suggest the converse of this mode
of reasoning, and ask, Is there a word you can say for the Viceroy
you cannot equally say for the actor? Have you an argument for him who
governs St Helena that will not equally apply to him who struts his hour
at the Haymarket?

I perceive that the writer of a letter to the 'Times' advocates the
claims of the ex-Governors, on the plausible plea that it is exactly the
very men who best represent the dignity of the station--best reflect the
splendour of the Sovereign--who come back poor and penniless from the
high office: while the penurious Governor, who has given dissatisfaction
everywhere, made the colony half rebellious by his narrow economies,
and degraded his station by contemptible savings, comes back wealthy and
affluent--self-pensioned, in fact, and independent.

To meet this end, the writer suggests that the Crown, as advised
thereon, should have a discretionary power of rewarding the well-doer
and refusing the claim of the unmeriting, which would distinctly
separate the case of the worthy servant of the Sovereign from that of
him who only employed his office to enrich himself.

There is a certain shallow--it is a very shallow--plausibility about
this that attracts at first sight; and there would unquestionably be
some force in it, if dinner-giving and hospitalities generally were the
first requisites of a colonial ruler; but I cannot admit this. I cannot
believe that the man who administers India or Canada, or even Jamaica
or Barbadoes, is only an expatriated Lord Mayor. I will not willingly
consent to accept it as qualification for a high trust that a man has
a good cook and an admirable cellar, and an ostentatious tendency to
display the merits of both. Mind, I am no ascetic who say this: I like
good dinners; I like occasionally--only occasionally though--very good
dinners. I feel with a clever countryman who said he liked being asked
out to dine, "it was flattering, and it was nourishing;" but with all
this I should never think of "elevating my host" to the dignity of high
statesmanship on the mere plea of his hospitality.

We have had some able men in our dependencies who were not in the least
given to social enjoyments, who neither understood them for themselves
nor thought of t