the master of the insolent colonels of 1858.

Reeve's own view of the questions at issue may be gathered from the letters
which he wrote to the 'Times,' [Footnote: January 19th, _The Policy of
France in Italy_; April 28th, _The Policy of France_, both under the
signature of 'Senex.'] and more fully, more carefully expressed in the
article 'Austria, France, and Italy' in the 'Edinburgh Review' of April.
In this he distinctly combats 'what is termed the principle of
"nationalities"' as unhistorical. The theory is, he says, 'of modern growth
and uncertain application;' and he goes on to show in detail that it is not
applicable to any one of the Great Powers of Europe.

'Of all the sovereigns now filling a throne, Queen Victoria is undoubtedly
the ruler of the largest number of subject races, alien populations, and
discordant tongues. In the vast circumference of her dominions every form
of religion is professed, every code of law is administered, and her empire
is tesselated with every variety of the human species.... But above and
around them all stands that majestic edifice, raised by the valour and
authority of England, which connects these scattered dependencies with one
great Whole infinitely more powerful, more civilised, and more free than
any separate fragment could be; and it is to the subordination of national
or provincial independence that the true citizenship of these realms owes
its existence.... It is the glory of England to have constituted such an
empire, and to govern it, in the main, on just and tolerant principles, as
long as her imperial rights are not assailed; when they are assailed, the
people of England have never shown much forbearance in the defence of them.
Such being the fact, it is utterly repugnant to the first principles of our
own policy, and to every page in our history, to lend encouragement to that
separation of nationalities from other empires which we fiercely resist
when it threatens to dismember our own.'