By reason of his connexion with Geneva, Reeve had all along necessarily felt the keenest interest in the negotiations between France and Sardinia, which he had discussed in an article on 'France, Savoy, and Switzerland' for the April number of the 'Edinburgh Review.' He had possibly already intended to visit the 'debateable land' as soon as the Review was sent to press, or very possibly the advisability of doing so was suggested in this interview with Lord Clarendon. At any rate, on April 4th he started for Paris, and, after seeing his friend Pourtales, went on to Geneva in company with Sir Robert and Lady Emily Peel. By the 12th he was back in Paris, where, on the 15th, he had long interviews with Fould and Thouvenel, the minister of foreign affairs, the minutes of which he wrote out at considerable length, and two days afterwards read them to Lord Palmerston. He reported to Palmerston that Thouvenel was willing to make 'a reasonable adjustment of the Swiss frontier,' which he believed meant 'an extension of the Swiss territory to the Fort de l'Ecluse and Saleve.' Palmerston, however, refused the overture, saying, 'We shall shame them out of it.' 'So,' added Reeve, in relating the affair, 'neither he nor the Swiss got anything at all.' _From Lord Brougham_ _Cannes, April 20th._--I hope my account of J. Austin will appear in the 'Law Magazine and Review.' It is written _con amore_, though very far from such an article as I could have wished to make it. The letter of Mrs. Austin was invaluable, and I inserted her very words in more instances than one; but your mention of the effect produced by the publication now out of print was still more valuable. I only trust that it may all be printed correctly, for it must be too late for me to have proofs. The roguery of L. N. and Cavour exceeds all belief; but they have cheated one another, and have probably overreached themselves. The _lies_ they tell about the Nice vote are unheard of even in the time of Napoleon I. We believe here that thousands of Piedmontese having no residence were sent to vote. However, there is a real majority, though nothing like the unanimity pretended. In Savoy there is entire unanimity. I suppose Normanby believes the Tuscans have not voted for their annexation; but he believes whatever anybody writes to him from Florence. _To Lord Brougham_ _C. O., May 16th._--I cannot remember any passage in Macaulay's writings which can be called an attack on Henry V. In the Introduction to the 'History of England' there is a passage in which he speaks of the French wars of the English kings, and speculates on the results which might have ensued if the conquests of Henry V. had not been lost by Henry VI. Perhaps this is what Lord Glenelg meant; but I am writing from the office, where I have not the books to refer to.