-that to turn a deaf ear to these complaints of the colony would be the first step towards throwing it into the arms of the United States.

The motion was seconded by Mr. Baxter, and opposed by

Mr. Adderley, who, admitting that discontent did unfortunately exist in Nova Scotia at the present moment, laid down three propositions, that the allegations of the petition were entirely unfounded; that if they were true, to send out a Royal Commission would be an insane act; and that whatever discontent existed was being removed by a totally different process. In his turn he entered into the history of the Confederation movement, but drew from it the opposite conclusion that the proposition had originated in Nova Scotia, and that it had been carried out with the thorough consent of the people as well as the Legislature. The Imperial Parliament had acted simply as a ministerial agent to give effect to their wishes, and the Act was almost the ipsissima verba of the resolutions of the colonists. Mr. Bright's allegation that the recent elections had been unreservedly against Confederation he contradicted directly, and the discontent which did exist was not greater than was perhaps natural at the commencement of such an experiment, and not greater than existed in the United States when first the Federation was established. To send out a Royal Commission would be to embarrass and paralyze the Colonial Government at a critical moment, and would destroy the monetary credit of the dominion. But the difficulties were rapidly being overcome, and in a little time longer Mr. Adderley confidently expected they would disappear altogether. The influence of Nova Scotia had been almost dominant in the Dominion Parliament; numerous changes had been made in favour of the maritime provinces, and their Freetrade policy was getting the better of the Protectionist leanings of Canada. Confederation was the only alternative of annexation to the United States, for these provinces could not remain for ever in an independent position; and he earnestly urged the House not to sanction the first step towards a reactionary policy.

Mr. Cardwell, lamenting the existence of discontent, appealed to the history of the Confederation to show that, so far from Nova Scotia being taken by surprise, the first proposals had proceeded entirely from her, and it was Canada which had long continued to hold back. When the union of the provinces was carried out it was but natural that discontent should arise from the dislocation of interests and prejudices, and from the assimilation of tariffs and other changes, but it would pass away, as a similar feeling had passed away in New Brunswick. But he protested strongly against a step which would assume that the voice of the Legislature did not represent the people, and would be a hazardous interference with colonial self-government.

The motion was supported by Mr. Aytoun and Mr. Gorst, and opposed by Mr. Karslake; and after a forcible reply from Mr. Bright, was rejected on a division by 183 to 87.

A few weeks later Lord Stratheden took up the cause of the Nova Scotia petitioners in the House of Lords. The noble lord stated at length the grievances of which Nova Scotia complained, and urged the danger of leaving a colony in such a state of chronic discontent when its proximity to the United States might lead to its separation, not only from Canada, but Great Britain itself. No colony had shown more persistent and devoted loyalty than Nova Scotia, and if their lordships hoped that by doing nothing the discontent of the colonists would pass away, he feared they were much mistaken. He advocated a Commission of Inquiry as a means of conciliation for the purpose of examining into the causes of the alleged dissatisfaction.

The Duke of Buckingham, Secretary of State for the Colonies, while regretting that the notice of motion had been so long before the House without action being taken on it, pointed out that the alleged grievances arose entirely from the course adopted by the first Canadian Parliament, and these had been completely removed by the action of the succeeding Parliament. The feeling in Nova Scotia was far from being unanimous against the Confederation; in fact, it was the feeling of a small majority. He pointed out the great advantages which Nova Scotia would derive by joining with her sister colonies. He deprecated any inquiry by Commission, and declared that her Majesty's Government would do all that they could in a spirit of conciliation towards the province, and would use their influence in Canada in favour of a similar policy.

The Earl of Carnarvon vindicated the course which the Government had taken in 1867 (he having been at that time the Colonial Secretary) and cited dates and facts to show that the province was not taken by surprise, but that the course adopted had been approved by the other provinces, and sanctioned by the Nova Scotia Parliaments. The discussion was continued by Earl Russell, the Marquis of Normanby, Lords Lyveden, Lyttelton, and other peers, who were opposed to any Commission of Inquiry. The Marquis of Clanricarde was in favour of that step. Ultimately Lord Stratheden declined to divide the House, and the motion dropped.

On the 28th of April the news of the entirely successful result of the Abyssinian expedition, the capture of Magdala, and the death of King Theodore reached this country. The intelligence was received with the liveliest satisfaction. The complete triumph of our arms under circumstances of great difficulty, in an unknown and distant region, was enhanced by the reflection that the war was undertaken with no object of selfish ambition or desire of national gain or glory, but with much reluctance, in obedience to a sense of duty to our fellow-subjects, and in the interest of humanity. The admirable manner in which the expedition was organized and conducted, combining prudence with daring, and crowning with success a romantic enterprise without any cost of life on our own part, elicited the cordial approbation of the public

at home, and warm feeling of gratitude and admiration towards Sir Robert Napier, the commander to whose skill and energy the result was mainly due. Nor was it an insignificant part of the general satisfaction that an undertaking which every one knew to be of a very costly nature, and from which some anticipated a heavy financial sacrifice, was thus brought to a termination earlier than even sanguine persons had ventured to anticipate, and under circumstances which made the outlay appear even small by comparison with the lustre and prestige which the nation derived from so signal a success. The details of these transactions so honourable to the British arms, will be found in their proper place in another part of this volume. We have here to record the reception which the gratifying tidings met with at home, and the steps taken in Parliament to do honour to the actors in the enterprise. Upon the 2nd of July the despatches from the General Commanding-in-Chief having after some delay been received in England, the thanks of both Houses of Parliament were proposed to be given to the leader of the expedition and his officers and soldiers. The motion was proposed in the House of Lords by the Earl of Malmesbury, who moved "that the thanks of the House be given to Sir Robert Napier, G.C.B., G.C.S.I., for the exemplary skill with which he planned, and the distinguished courage, energy, and perseverance with which he conducted, the Abyssinian expedition, and rescued the British envoy and other subjects from captivity. Also, that the thanks of the House be given to Commodore Heath, R.N., C.B., for the indefatigable zeal and great ability with which he conducted the naval operations connected with the transport of troops and stores, on which the success of the expedition materially depended. Also, that the thanks of the House be given to Sir C. Staveley, K.C.B.,; Major-General G. Malcolm, C.B.; Major-General Russell, Brigadier-General W. Merewether, C.B.; and the other officers of the army and navy, for the gallantry and ability with which they executed the various services which they were called upon to perform throughout these various operations. That the House highly acknowledges and approves the discipline, gallantry, and endurance displayed by the petty officers, non-commissioned officers, and men of the navy and army, both European and native, during these operations, and that the same be signified to them by their respective commanding officers."

Earl Russell, in seconding the motion, said the expedition was undertaken at the right moment, when forbearance had reached its limit, and nothing was left but to vindicate the honour of the country. This had been done in a most triumphant manner, and in Sir Robert Napier the British army had another name to add to the roll of distinguished men who had helped to carry the fame of England over the globe. When, however, he called to mind the character of the invaded country, and the season in which the operations had been conducted, he thought it was a merciful interposition of Providence that the expedition had not been pro

longed. Although not included in the vote, he felt bound to say that in his opinion the Government were also entitled to the gratitude of the public.

The Duke of Cambridge characterized the expedition as a series of unbroken successes from beginning to end. Officers and men, from the highest to the lowest, had done their duty, whilst their chief had shown himself not only competent to command, but to express in modest and interesting language the exploits of his force. That morning, when he had the honour of shaking Sir Robert Napier by the hand, the impression produced on his mind was that the gallant general thought nothing of himself but every thing of his troops.

The Earls of Longford and Ellenborough having also expressed their admiration of the qualities of the force employed,

The Earl of Derby joined in the general tone of approval and gratitude that had welcomed the return of the victors from Abyssinia. In his opinion no expedition had ever been undertaken by a Government with a higher sense of its absolute and unavoidable necessity. Its object had been successfully attained, and Sir Robert Napier and the troops under his command were entitled to the gratitude of their country for the distinguished services they had performed.

The motion was unanimously adopted.

In the House of Commons the First Lord of the Treasury made a similar motion. Mr. Disraeli in his speech described the enterprise as one of the most remarkable military successes of the century, and dwelling upon the conduct of the commander, observed that he had exhibited as much diplomatic ability as military skill. The present was not the first or the second time that Sir Robert Napier had received the thanks of Parliament for his services; happy was the man who had thrice thus been honoured by his country. Passing next to the services of the naval force under Commodore Heath, he praised the promptitude, skill, and efficiency displayed in buoying and lighting the Abyssinian waters, transporting troops and stores, supplying the army with water, and organizing and equipping a rocket brigade which took part in the whole of the operations. There had been instances of rapid marches and triumphant field operations that had produced greater sensation; but if regard were had to the exhibition of military virtues, he doubted whether the qualities of patience, endurance, and good temper, combined with gentleness and docility under the most trying circumstances, had ever been more strikingly exemplified by any troops. He congratulated the country, not so much on the success, as on the character of the expedition. When it was first announced foreign critics were not wanting to attribute sinister designs to this country; but the sequel showed that we had asserted the purity of our purpose in an age of selfishness, and had shown how a great nation could vindicate her motives of humanity. He felt persuaded that the expedition to Abyssinia would add lustre

to the name of England, and beneficially influence the future history of the world.

Mr. Gladstone, who seconded the motion, said that he did not claim for the expedition precisely the same kind of fame as that which attached to actions in which desperate conflicts were waged with an equal or nearly equal valour-between nations or armies possessed of all the resources of modern warfare; but he reminded the House that we lived in an age in which, if it could not be said of the soldier, it must be said of the commander, that mere fighting, however arduous, mere tactics, and mere strategy, had becomethough, perhaps, still vital and essential-almost a secondary part, certainly by no means the whole apparatus required to make a successful general. The conflict had been carried on with nature, with distance, with climate, and with all the diversities and difficulties presented by one of the most peculiar portions of the earth's surface. Referring next to the action of the Government at home, the right honourable gentleman said that the country was indebted to them for the wise choice of a commander, for the unsparing liberality with which they had made the resources of the country available for the purpose in view, and for the care and forethought with which all the necessary provisions had been made. Especially were we indebted to the Secretary of State for India; and, lastly, we were indebted to the Government for the firmness and decision with which, from first to last, they had persisted in acting in accordance with the enlightened mind of the nation in confining the operations to the legitimate purpose of the expedition. Whilst acknowledging that all had done their part, it was, he continued, impossible not to dwell with peculiar interest on the character of the man who occupied the foremost place on the canvas. Without him we could scarcely have hoped that the expedition would stand upon record as a rare example among those occasions when a nation resorted to the bloody arbitrament of war, in which not one drop had been added to the cup of human suffering that forethought or humanity could spare, and in which the severest critic would find nothing to except to.

The resolution was adopted by acclamation.

It remained for the Crown and nation to express in a substantial manner their appreciation of the services of the leader of the Abyssinian expedition. The Sovereign conferred on Sir Robert Napier the dignity of a peerage, with the title of Lord Napier of Magdala, and a message was sent to the two Houses of Parliament recommending that provision should be made to enable the new peer to support that dignity. A resolution granting an annuity of 20001. a year out of the Consolidated Fund to himself and the next surviving heir male of his body was moved and carried, without a dissentient voice, in both Houses.

Another occurrence in which Parliament was called upon to address the Crown not in terms of congratulation but of sympathy and regret, was of a very different complexion from the glorious