Thus far as to the constitution of the British nobility and those broad popular distinctions which determine for each nobility its effectual powers.  The next point is, to exhibit the operation of these differential powers in the condition of manners which they produce.  But, as a transitional stage lying between the two here described—­between the tenure of our aristocracy as a casual principle, and the popular working of our aristocracy as an effect—­we will interpose a slight notice of the habits peculiar to England by which this effect is partly sustained.

One marked characteristic of the English nobility is found in the popular education of their sons.  Amongst the great feudal aristocracies of Spain or of Austria, it was impossible that the heirs of splendid properties should be reared when boys in national institutions.  In general, there are no national institutions, of ancient and royal foundation, dedicated to education in either land.  Almost of necessity, the young graf or fuerst, (earl or prince,) conde or duca, is committed to the charge of a private tutor, usually a monk.  The habits of continental universities have always been riotous and plebeian; the mode of paying the professors, who answer to the college tutors of Oxford and Cambridge, has always been degrading—­equally degrading to them and to literature; whilst, in relation to all academic authority, such modes of payment were ruinous, by creating a systematic dependence of the teacher upon the pupil.  To this account may be added, that in all countries, where great elementary schools are wanting, the universities are improperly used as their substitutes.  Consequently these pupils are too often boys, and not young men, in age; whilst in habits, not belonging to the aristocracy, they are generally gross, unpolished, and illiberal.  The great bulk are meant for the professions of the land; and hence, from an early period, the education has been too ecclesiastical in its cast.  Even at this day, it is too strictly professional.  The landed aristocracy resort to such institutions in no healthy proportions; and the reason lies in their too exclusive dedication to the military service.  It is true that, in the rude concussion given to all Germany and Spain by the French revolutionary aggressions, many changes have occurred.  In particular, for North Germany, viz.  Prussia, Russian Poland, and Saxony, such a new and vast body has arisen of civil functionaries, that a new name and classification for this order has been found necessary amongst British travellers and German economists.  But this change has not commensurately affected the German universities.  The military character still overshadows the professional.  The law is in no esteem, and leads to no political consideration.  The church is in the same degradation.  The German pastor is too essentially humble in his social condition to present any resistance to feudal