pursued, and civil and religious liberty were conceded as their right. Joseph's reign was of short duration, and he was succeeded by his brother Charles, who, in Hungary, reigned as Charles III, but in his capacity of Emperor, he was known as Charles VI. From motives of policy, he pursued a liberal course with his Hungarian subjects, and their constitutional rights were favorably recognized. Some new privileges were granted, and some new organic laws were framed to meet the advancing condition of the nation.

When Maria Theresa, the beautiful daughter of Charles, immediately after her ascension to the throne, found herself involved in war with all the continental powers of Europe, the generous enthusiasm of the Hungarians saved her throne. She, with a tact that her predecessors never possessed, succeeded, by apparent gratitude and generosity, in lulling to sleep their vigilant guardianship of the constitution. Under her reign, there were introduced principles of absolutism that would never have been tolerated but for the love they bore the Empress.

It appeared to be her policy, while she professed to promote her Hungarian subjects to the highest stations of trust, to beguile them of their nationality and their religion. This she effected, in many instances, by presenting them at the Austrian court, and promoting marriages between them and the Catholic beauties that surrounded her ; stipulating that the children of such unions should be brought up in the faith of the church of Rome.

After her death, the violent measures of her son, the Emperor Joseph II, aroused the Hungarians to a sense of their true condition, and awakened again the old spirit of jealousy for their constitution.

He refused to be crowned in Hungary, and would not recognize the constitution, but introduced into the country a German administration. This called forth a protest from all the county congregations, and all the courts and government colleges, against this contempt, on the part of the sovereign, for the fundamental compact that had long existed between the people and their rulers. When this pedantic Prince died, in 1790, bonfires and public rejoicings expressed the gratitude of the people for their deliverance from the power of so unprincipled a ruler.

At this crisis, when the principles of republicanism were shaking the

old thrones of Europe, and France was standing forth as a champion for the cause of democracy, Leopold II assumed the reins of government, and by his recognition and firm adherence to the constitution, attached the Hungarian interests most firmly to his throne. He fully recognized the freedom of the country, and its independence of every other state and nation. Scarcely, however, had he fully established the rights of the people upon a wide and firm basis, when his career was ended, probably by poison, and Francis I, his son, a weak, narrow-minded and selfish Prince, succeeded him. Among his first acts were those of tyranny towards some of the most noble families of Hungary. Still, while the French war lasted, he deemed it advisable to hold regular diets in Hungary, in order that they might vote subsidies of men and money; but when, in 1807, the estates raised their voices against the profligacy of the administration of the finances, and declared in favor of the principles of free trade, they became obnoxious to the Vienna Ministry. In 1812, they refused to sanction the State bankruptcy of Austria, which was a still further source of displeasure, and Francis, like his ancestors, sought to get rid of this formidable "constitution."

He accordingly summoned no more diets, and the regular elections in the counties were no longer permitted; all vacancies in the municipal administration being filled by provisional nominations of the Lord Lieutenant. In 1822, when constitutionalism was also invaded in Spain and Italy, taxes were imposed without the consent of the diet, and a levy of recruits was also demanded. This called for a general protest from the counties, for it had become, not a question involving taxation only, but one of constitutional principle. Francis, finding that it would not avail to execute his determination by force of arms, since he was met by firm but passive resistance, was compelled to yield to the power of the constitution, and govern with respect to its provisions. But the idea of progress was to him synonymous with revolution, and he shrank from all reform. Yet even his conservatism could not keep the spirit of progress wholly at bay.

In 1832, a Reform Diet began to revise single portions of the Hungarian Constitution. The Deputies, though a majority of them were liberal, and desired the melioration of the condition of the peasants,

were strongly opposed by the magnates, who obstinately adhered to the old feudal forms. The Emperor Francis died during the session of this Diet, unmourned by his subjects, to whom he bequeathed, as a token of remembrance, a considerable State debt.

In 1835 commenced the rule of the Archduke Louis, and the subtle Metternich. The policy of Louis was procrastination; that of Metternich repression. He would closely guard all the outbursting tendencies to freedom and if it were impracticable to repress them, he would ferment hostilities among different parties, so as to prevent any centralization of power.

There was still a third man who exercised an influence in the destinies of Hungary-the Palatine, Archduke Joseph, who, looking upon it as his native land, felt for it a deep affection, and desired its true advancement.

In the progress of the Reform Diet, the Liberalists rendered themselves highly obnoxious to the Conservatives, and when the Chancellor, Count Reviezky, a strong friend to Hungarian nationality, was removed, and Count Fidel Palffy, a man without talent, and strictly opposed to all emancipation of the peasantry, was appointed to succeed him, he caused several arrests to be made, and political lawsuits to be instituted. Wesselenyi, Kossuth, and some other young men, were convicted of high treason. The extremity of these measures led to an outpouring of just indignation that frightened the Chancellor and the Presidents of the highest courts to leave their posts and enter the German-Austrian State service. Count Antony Mailath succeeded as Chancellor, a man of liberal principles, pliant, eloquent, and full of promises. His administration, which lasted from '39 to '44, was marked by the recognition of religious equality, and the introduction of bills of exchange. He was at length overthrown by intrigues, and succeeded by the young Apponyi, proud and obstinate, and, from want of experience, easily made subservient to the interests of Metternich, attached to the idea of centralizing the government, and, of course, opposed to the Palatine, Joseph, who strenuously defended the municipal institutions of Hungary.

The Archduke died, after having been for fifty years Palatine, and

in 1847 his son Stephen was elected to the same dignity. He was a man of liberal feelings, and earnestly desired to reconcile the interests of his country with those of his family.

In the same year a general reform of the constitution was in progress, by which the nobles were no longer to enjoy immunities from taxation, and the principle of representation was also to be revised. Kossuth was the leader of this movement in the House of Representatives, and the magnates were almost equally divided. At this juncture the news of the French Revolution reached the ears and stirred the throbbing hearts of those who were contending, inch by inch, for the social and political advancement of the Hungarian people.

We have thus briefly traced the Hungarians from their birth, as a nation, to the threshhold of that mighty struggle that called forth for their patriots the deepest sympathies of the civilized world. We find throughout their whole history, one great idea consistently maintained, constitutional liberty.

Hospitable and magnanimous, there was an onward tendency within the nation that would have placed it in the van of popular reforms, but for the intrigues of the governments that surrounded it, and, in part, swayed its sceptre, so that we are forced to regard this revolution, not as a spasmodic action in behalf of freedom, but as the utterance of principles that had been germinating from the first existence of their nationality.

In our next we shall endeavor to take up the causes of the Revolution, and dwell briefly upon the incidents connected with this memorable struggle of a brave people for the enjoyment of true freedom, guarantied to all by constitutional provision.

The great estate of a dull book maker is biography; but we should read the lives of great men, if written by themselves, for two reasons to find out what others really were, and what they themselves would appear to be.