There is no doubt that the state of public affairs is more serious than it has been since 1851. [Footnote: _Sc._ in France, before the _Coup d'etat_.] The meaning of what has lately been going on in public, and of the secret plots which have been hatching for a long time, is very clear. As to France, I say nothing; for, after all, she has the chances of success, which will smooth away many apparent difficulties. But the peace of Europe depends on Germany and on England. Shall we succeed in maintaining it? The attitude of England is, I think, good. Without any hostile demonstration, she has shown very clearly that she will be no party to any breach of the treaties. Lord Cowley's mission to Vienna has been arranged between him and the Emperor, but I have no faith in it. It is merely a device to make people think he is acting in agreement with the English Cabinet, and so conceal a scheme to which the English Cabinet is totally opposed. Opinion here is unanimous against French intervention in Italy. Unfortunately, we are in a very bad position at home. The Cabinet is deplorably weak, and it has just lost two of its principal members. The Reform Bill, brought in yesterday, raises more questions than it answers; but it will probably serve to give prominence to the dissensions in the Liberal party. 'Tis a real misfortune; for a disunited party cannot assert any influence in Europe. Lord Brougham is returning to Cannes, though with little inclination to stay among such grave causes of anxiety. So long as France is free to act by sea, the road to Italy does not lie through Var, but in the ports of Toulon and Marseilles. Shall you soon be hearing the guns of the second Marengo? The action of England at this important crisis was curious, but characteristic. The destinies of Europe were shaking in the balance; the fortunes of France, of Italy, of Austria, probably also of Prussia, and very possibly of Russia, were at stake; so the English Government thought it a suitable opportunity to tinker the constitution and introduce a Reform Bill--which nobody seems to have wanted--mainly, it would seem, to 'dish' the Whigs. It was, however, they themselves who were dished. Mr. Henley, the President of the Board of Trade, resigned on January 27th. So also did Mr. S. H. Walpole, [Footnote: Mr. Walpole died, at the age of 92, on May 22nd, 1898.] the Home Secretary, who wrote to Lord Derby: 'I cannot help saying that the measure which the Cabinet are prepared to recommend is one which we should all of us have stoutly opposed if either Lord Palmerston or Lord John Russell had ventured to bring it forward.' None the less, the Bill was introduced on February 28th. On the second reading it was negatived; a dissolution and a general election followed; and on the meeting of Parliament, in June the Ministry were defeated on an amendment to the Address, and resigned.