proceedings, and still more at his character. Out of doors the reprehension is universal. Graham, who had announced his opposition to Bankes' motion and his intention to assist the Government, has now communicated to them (through me) that he can pledge himself to no course till he shall have seen all the papers and heard all the explanations on the subject. Bulwer and Isturitz met at Palmerston's dinner on the Queen's birthday, and accosted each other very cordially. It was remarked that the Queen was very civil to Isturitz at the LevÈe. The account of Mitchell's conviction[51] has given great satisfaction here, and compensated for the defeats in the other cases. The good of it is that the Government have proved to the Irish and to the world that they have the means of punishing these enormous offenders, and that they will not be able to pursue their turbulent and factious course with impunity. The three hundred imitators whom Mitchell announced as ready to encounter similar martyrdom will probably not be forthcoming. So far as the system of terror is concerned, which is the only one we can now employ, it is a great and happy event, but it will not contribute to the regeneration of the country, and will probably augment the fund of accumulating hatred against English connexion. Still, anything is better than political impotence, and, before any attempt can be made to introduce those practical improvements which may disarm the Irish of their prejudices and animosities, the power of the law and the Government must be firmly asserted and enforced. An incident has, however, accompanied these trials which is not pleasant to the Government. The Whigs, and Lord John Russell at the head of them, when in opposition, bitterly attacked the conduct of the Law Officers in their jury challenges in the political trials. On this occasion, the Whig Law officers found they must either do exactly as their predecessors had done, or connive at their own defeat. They wisely and properly chose the former alternative, but of course at the cost of exposing the present Government to charges of gross inconsistency. Last night in the House of Commons the subject was touched upon, and John Russell had the imprudence to read part of a private letter from Clarendon, referring to the conduct of the late Government in striking the jury in O'Connell's case as open to reproach. This brought up Graham, who affirmed that the instructions given by his Government and those given by the present Government were precisely the same, which John Russell was obliged to admit. The allusion, however, gave offence both to Graham and to Peel. The former has written me a note about it this morning, by which I see that he is a good deal nettled.