there were amongst our Adullamites many who fretted and fumed, and were distressed and discontented because, when Earl Russell formed his Government, they were neglected and passed by. But, perhaps there is a more subtle analogy. David and his friends were outcasts, and two courses were before them. They could go over to the Philistines, but this course was repugnant to them. They were still Israelites, though not of Israel, and so they determined to form an independent party. And as with the old, so with the new Adullamites. They, too, might go over to the Philistines, but were not prepared for so extreme a policy; and they, too, were determined to set up for themselves.— (Illustrated Times, August 25, 1866.) The nickname from Mr. Bright was received with acclamation as singularly appropriate, but, we are reminded by Notes and Queries, not original in its application, for the followers of Charles James Fox were years long since alluded to with reference to 1 Sam. xxii. 2. Sir Walter Scott, in Waverley, compared the recruits of Prince Charles Edward to the inhabitants of the Cave; and in Old Mortality, Balfour of Burley speaks of his place of refuge as his Cave Adullam; and a more obscure and indirect example occurs in Red Gauntlet. The example in Waverley is the most direct in quoting the Adullamites as "every one that was in distress, and every one that was in debt, and every one that was discontented," which the Vulgate renders, bitter of soul. The similar political application seems to have been ever present in the mind of Sir Walter Scott.

The cave is described as approached by a small grotto, which leads to a natural winding gallery some 30 feet long, and thence to a noble natural chamber 120 feet long, and from 20 to 45 feet wide. This is the Cave Adullam, thus further described by a visitor: "There is ample space here

and in the recesses round for several hundred men, and when we consider its all but impossible approach, the ease with which it could be defended from the attack of what would be an overwhelming force elsewhere, its comparative nearness to Bethlehem, and weigh the evidence for and against the accuracy of the site, we come unanimously to the conclusion that tradition is in this instance right. Here it was that David longed for 'the water of the well of Bethlehem, which is by the gate,' when that village was garrisoned by the Philistines; and along this cleft in the rock the three mighty men' came, after they had broken the enemy's lines, obtained the coveted water, and were bringing it in triumph to their chief."-Dickens's All the Year Round.

POLITICAL Drifts.

A contributor to the Contemporary Review for January, 1871, sees, "through a glass darkly," the tendency of the British Empire to dissolution. He says:-" At this moment we are drifting to the disintegration of our Empire. Few believe it. Few have seen the great currents sweeping away off beyond the horizon, commencing their vast circuits even at the antipodes, but ere long the cyclone will burst upon us, and every one, especially the chief officers, will acknowledge a divine wind, and calmly resign themselves to see the vessel rocked and blown to pieces, saving themselves, no doubt, 'some on boards, and some on broken pieces of the ship. And so it came to pass that they——' I should like to know where our island of Melita will be, and whether the barbarians are likely to be civil. Meantime, I pray your earnest attention to the matters hereafter to be submitted, too conscious that my voice is weak in contest with the now

boisterous elements of Drift, but having faith in my soul that these matters are serious and true."

Semi-political writers in our public journals are most addicted to these portentous forebodings, the collapse of which is sometimes very ludicrous. On a certain Christmas we remember a long and loud wail in a Liberal newspaper of very large sale and circulation among influential classes. The writer declared "the sun of England's greatness has set for ever." The proprietor of the journal in which this solemn declaration appeared, and who first read it there, grew uneasy at the alarm it would occasion to his many thousand readers. Nothing of the sort: the violence of the statement proved its best antidote. The readers ate their Christmas dinners in peace, and not a single objection was received by the editor to his political foresight.

THE INTELLECT OF THOUGHT AND ACTION.

Abraham Tucker relates of a friend of his, an old special pleader, that once coming out of his chambers in the Temple with him to take a walk, he hesitated at the bottom of the stairs which way to go-proposed different directions, to Charing Cross, to St. Paul's-found some objections to them all, and at last turned back for want of a casting motive to incline the scale. Tucker gave this as an instance of professional indecision, or of that temper of mind which having been long used to weigh the reasons for things with scrupulous exactness, could not come to any conclusion at all on the spur of the occasion, or without some grave distinction to justify its choice.

TO LIBERALIZE.-LIBERAL.

The Marquis of Lansdowne introduced a useful word, which was warmly adopted in France as well as England—

to liberalize: the noun has been drawn out of the verb-for in the Marquis's time that was only an abstract conception which is now a sect; and to liberalize was theoretically introduced before the liberals arose.

The Quarterly Review once marked the word liberalize in italics, as a strange word, undoubtedly not aware of its origin. It had been lately used by Mr. Dugald Stewart, "to liberalize the views."

It is curious to observe that the word liberal, as an adjective, had formerly, in our language, a very opposite meaning to that of our noun. Our old writers use it synonymously with "libertine or licentious." Archdeacon Nares quotes "frank beyond honesty," and Johnson explains it, "liberally, adv. licentiously." A "liberal villain" occurs in Shakspere's Much Ado about Nothing, and The Fair Maid of Brixton.

FATHERLAND AND MOTHER-TONGUE.

Disraeli, in his Curiosities of Literature, "claims the honour of one pure neologism. I ventured to introduce the term Fatherland to describe our natale solum : I have lived to see it adopted by Lord Byron and by Mr. Southey. This energetic expression may, therefore, be considered authenticated, and patriotism may stamp it with its glory and its affection. Fatherland is congenial with the language in which we find that other fine expression of Mother-tongue. The patriotic neologism originated with me in Holland in early life."

WHAT IS CLIQUE?

You go to call on somebody, and are shown into a drawingroom, where the lady of the house is sitting with other visitors, engaged in conversation. At your entrance, a chill seems to

fall on the company; one person takes up a newspaper, another a photograph book, and so on, while the lady of the house enters with you into a discussion on the weather. She, perhaps, tries to make the others join in, but they only respond in monosyllables. You, of course, take an early opportunity of going away, and hardly have you left the room than you hear the buzz of voices and the sound of mirth rising behind you. You feel decidedly "snubbed;" and why? Because these people were all intimate with each other, and not knowing you, they deemed it suitable to behave as though there were some good reason why they never could, or should, know you, as if in a secret bond to each other not to admit a stranger into their fellowship. Yet, ten to one, if you met any of them under other circumstances, they would be charmed to make your acquaintance, and you would find them very pleasant. It is simply that they formed, for the time being, a "clique," and you were an outsider. "Clique" is indeed, in sober earnest, the bane of English society; it is this which makes the chief difference between us and our Continental neighbours, and we would venture to ask, as they would do, "A quoi bon ?" What is the use of habitually treating all strangers as if we believed them to have the scarlet fever ?-John Bull Journal.

TYRANT.

Dr. Latham, in his edition of Johnson's Dictionary, says: "The original meaning of the word tyrant was by no means so suggestive of violence, arrogance, and cruelty as the present. The use of the modern words, tyrant, tyranny, tyrannical, has been as vague as that of most other political terms. The term tyrant is properly limited to the government of one man who is sovereign, and the proper application of the term