rd bombard-ed--and how it was
all bombard and bombast. The name of Lord Palmerston reminds me that
conversing after dinner with some Belgians, the topic introduced was the
great dearth of diplomatic talent in a country like England, where
talent was in every other department so extremely prominent. It was not
the first time that this subject had been canvassed in my presence by
foreigners. Naturally envious of our general superiority, it is with
them a favourite point of attack; and they are right, as it certainly is
our weakest point. They cannot disparage our army, or our navy, or our
constitution; but they can our climate, which is not our fault, but our
misfortune; and our diplomacy, which is our fault, and has too often
proved our misfortune also.

It certainly is the fact, that our diplomatic corps are very inferior,
and this can arise but from one cause; the emoluments which have been
attached to it having rendered admission into it an advantage eagerly
sought by the higher classes as a provision for the junior branches of
their families. Of course, this provision has been granted to those to
whom government have felt most indebted for support, without the least
regard to the important point as to whether those who were admitted were
qualified or not; so that the mere providing for a younger son of an
adherent to the government may have proved in the end to have cost the
country millions from the incompetence of the party when placed in a
situation requiring tact and discrimination. This evil is increased by
the system of filling up the vacant appointments according to
seniority--the exploded and absurd custom of "each second being heir
unto the first." Should any man have proved, upon an emergency, that he
was possessed of the highest talent for diplomacy, it will avail him
nothing--he never, under the present system, will be employed--he cannot
be admitted into the corps without having entered as a private secretary
or attache. It would be monstrous, unheard _of_; and the very idea
would throw Lord Aberdeen on the one side, or Lord Palmerston on the
other, into convulsions. Is it therefore to be wondered at our being so
deficient in our diplomatic corps? Surely if any point more than
another requires revision and reform, it is this; and the nation has a
right to insist upon it.

It may be asked, what are the most peculiar qualities necessary in a
diplomatist, taking it for granted that he has talents