Sir Archibald Alison seems to think that Lamartine cannot be numbered among the great historians, since, like the classic historians of Greece and Rome, he has not given authorities for his statements, and, unlike German writers, disdains foot-notes as pedantic.  But I observe that in his “History of Europe” Alison quotes Lamartine oftener than any other French writer, and evidently admires his genius, and throws no doubt on the general fidelity of his works.  A partisan historian full of prejudices, like Macaulay, with all his prodigality of references, is apt to be in reality more untruthful than a dispassionate writer without any show of learning at all.  The learning of an advocate may hide and obscure truth as well as illustrate it.  It is doubtless the custom of historical writers generally to enrich, or burden, their works with all the references they can find, to the delight of critics who glory in dulness; but this, after all, may be a mere scholastic fashion.  Lamartine probably preferred to embody his learning in the text than display it in foot-notes.  Moreover, he did not write for critics, but for the people; not for the few, but for the many.  As a popular writer his histories, like those of Voltaire, had an enormous sale.  If he were less rhetorical and discursive, his books, perhaps, would have more merit.  He fatigues by the redundancy of his richness and the length of his sentences; and yet he is as candid and judicial as Hallam, and would have had the credit of being so, had he only taken more pains to prove his points by stating his authorities.

Next to the insolvable difficulties which attended the discussion of the Eastern question,—­whether Turkey should be suffered to crumble away without the assistance of the Western Powers; whether Russia should be driven back from the Black Sea or not,—­the affairs of Africa excited great interest in the Chambers.  Algiers had been taken by French armies under the Bourbons, and a colony had been founded in countries of great natural fertility.  It was now a question how far the French armies should pursue their conquests in Africa, involving an immense expenditure of men and money, in order to found a great colonial empire, and gain military eclat, so necessary in France to give strength to any government.  But a new insurrection and confederation of the defeated Arab tribes, marked by all the fanaticism of Moslem warriors, made it necessary for the French to follow up their successes with all the vigor possible.  In consequence, an army of forty thousand infantry and twelve thousand cavalry and artillery drove the Arabs, in 1840, to their remotest fastnesses.  The ablest advocate for war measures was Thiers; and so formidable were his eloquence and influence in the Chambers, that he was again called to the head of affairs, and his second administration took place.