376 BTJLWER AND HIS BOOK. 



Mr. Bulwer has somewhere read, was a blockhead. It will not do 

 for our author to draw nice distinctions. The national vanity of the 

 French and English, however different in degree, and however unlike 

 in expression, must be essentially the same passion. As exemplified 

 by Mr. Bulwer, there is no vanity on the Frenchman's side there is 

 no national vanity on the part of the Englishman. The Frenchman, 

 by our author's showing, is proud and vain of his country the 

 Englishman is personally vain. Mr. Bulwer further adds, " He (the 

 Englishman) is vain of his country for an excellent reason it pro- 

 duced him." 



Let us restate our author's proposition. The vanity of the French- 

 man consists in belonging to so great a country ; the Englishman is 

 vain of his country, for it produced him. The consciousness of be- 

 longing to a great country could never create vanity, although it 

 might stimulate it ; and the theory, that an Englishman is vain of his 

 country, because it produced him, is too extravagant to be entertained 

 for a moment. Indeed, the statement, as respects the Englishman, is 

 not so much a matter of opinion as a question of fact. It is not a fal- 

 lacy it is false. 



We have been at some pains to show, that Mr. Bulwer either takes 

 no pains to think before he writes, or that he has not the capacity of 

 thinking, in the philosophical sense of the word. Let us now exhibit 

 how gravely he continues to utter nonsense. He is still comparing 

 and contrasting the vanity of the two nations. 



" The worst of all our notions, as of all our laws, is to be found in 

 the sentiment of property. It is my wife whom you shall not insult ; 

 it is my house that you shall not enter ; it is my country that you shall 

 not traduce." 



We grant that it is upon this principle that we pull a man's nose 

 who insults our wife, and consign to the magistrate the burglar who 

 has entered our house ; and that such acts arise out of a sentiment of 

 property. We should be glad to learn, upon what different principle 

 it is that the Frenchman does the same thing. But I do not resent an 

 insult to my country, because it is mine, in any sense involving a pro- 

 perty in it. because I have no such property. England is my country, 

 as she is my mother who " produced me," but only " in a manner of 

 speaking" I have no property in either. It cannot, therefore, be a 

 sentiment of property that causes me to resent an insult to my 

 country. 



And now let us turn to Mr. Bulwer's view of the English character. 

 The author of " Pelhajn" is inclined to think that we are not quite so 

 independent as the woji*ld generally supposes. He says, 



" It is an old maxim among us, that we possess the sturdy sense of 

 independence ; we Value ourselves on it, yet the sense of independ- 

 ence is often but the want of sympathy with others. 



" There was a certain merchant sojourning at an inn, whom the 

 boots, by mistake, called betimes in the morning. ' Sir/ quoth the 

 boots, ' the day's breaking.' ' Let it break/ growled he, ' it owes me 

 nothing.' This anecdote is rather characteristic ; it shows the con- 

 nexion between selfishness and independence." 



