192 Polwbele's Grecian Profpects.-Report of the Clergy of a Diftri& in the Diocese of Lincoln.- Speech of Thomas Jones, Efq. IN N our animadverfions on the Critical Review, we have, once or twice, afferted, and had occafion to produce proofs of the af fertion, that, whilft the praise of the English and the cenfure of the French are moft obnoxious to its difaffected authors, the gentleman, who hath any way diftinguifhed himself for his attachment to his king and country, can expect from them no quarter, in whatever fhape he comes forward; whether as a profe-writer, he follow the track of Goldfmith or of Pennant, or as a poet, he chaunt claffic numbers in the manner of Pope or of Spenfer. Of this affertion, a fresh proof is now furnished by the critique on Polwhele's GRECIAN PROSPECTS." It is with indignation, that the Sans-culotte critic before us hath noticed the tale which Mr. P. had" detached from the poem as defective in the unities." If "UNFOUNDED SLANDER OF THE FRENCH" (cries this Robespierre of a reviewer) and UNFOUNDED PRAISE OF THE ENGLISH be repugnant to truth and juftice, fomething more folid than the poetic unities is offended by this feeble fiction!!!"* The man's ideas of "truth and juftice" are evidently drawn from the Godwinian Philofophy. That fuch an avowed enemy of his country fhould be permitted to remain unmasked is a circumftance which we cannot but lament. After quoting eight flanzas, to which he makes no exception, the hypercritic obferves, that the ftanza of Spenfer is peculiarly unfit for Mr. Polwhele's poetry." Surely, if he would with to be confiftent with himself, he ought to recollect his report of Mr. Polwhele's happy management of the ftanza of Spenfer, in the Influence of Local Attachment." "We hefitate not to pronounce (fays he) that the poem is executed in fuch a manner, as to do credit to the author," and give pleafure to his readers. The verfe is always elegant; often brilliant; a great deal of pleafiug defcriptive poetry is happily introduced in the various illustrations which prefent themselves; the ftanza is well managed, and free from that monotony, which, in feeble hands, it is apt to fink into," &c. &c. &c. What fays the Critical Reviewer to all this? Truly "the Local Attachment" was published without a name: and we doubt not but the critic was greatly chagrined at the difcovery, that the poem was Mr. Polwhele's. The notice of the Report from the Clergy of a district in the Diocese of Lincoln," &c. is glaringly jacobinical. "The Report comes out (fays the pretended critic) under very fufpicious circumftances." "If fuch a meeting was ever holden, the name of the diftrict is not communicated to the public. We can fcarcely believe See Crit. Rev. for Aug. 1800. P. 448. + Crit. Rev. for September 1796, Pr. 19, 20, that that fuch a meeting ever took place." "The heads of the church, will be careful that examples of irregularity do not proceed from their own body." "The powers of the church are, at present, fufficiently ample: and the fpiritual exertions of the clergy will prevent any inroads on the establishment from ignorant and illiterate preachers at the fame time, it will be difficult for the legislature to interfere in the difcipline of a meeting-houfe, without infringing that toleration which it has ever been the pride and honour of the Hanoverian family to maintain." We have, elsewhere, obferved, that Methodists and Jacobins have one common interest. : On the Speech of Thomas Jones, Efq. M. P." the reviewer is pleafed in expatiating." Mr. Jones thinks, that the minifters are fighting merely for the fake of the Bourbon family; and, if they are not, he defires to know, for what object on earth the people of England are groaning under an unprecedented and inquifitorial fyftem of taxation."* Bardomachia, Poema Macaronico-Latinum, 4to. 15. Johnson. London, 1800. Bardomachia; or the Battle of the Bards. Tranflated from the Original Latin. 4to. Is. Johnfon. London. 1800. UR readers need fcarcely be told, that these productions relate to Pindar on the respectable author of the Baviad and Mæviad. They have at least one characteristic of poetry, fiction, for not the smallest regard to truth is obferved in any part of the account here given of the tran faction, in as miferable doggrel, both Latin and English, as the Atupidity of modern times has produced. The evident object of the author, Dr. GEDDES, (who does not prefix his name to the book but who caufes it to be proclaimed in every bookseller's fhop,) is to place on a par two inen who are as unlike each other as genius and dullness, virtue and vice, The defign is worthy the daring and frantic arraigner of the infpiration of the holy writers, of the divinity of the Holy Scriptures; of a man, who, to use the words of an energetic writer, "fweeps away, in the very tone of idiot effrontery, the divine authority of both the codes of Scripture, and involves the New Teftament with the Old in his comprehensive range of reprobation," Yet is this wretched effufion of claffical dotage hailed, by the Monthly and Critical Reviewers, as the genuine production of genius; and they have even the folly to quote paffages, which give the lie to their praifes. By the latter of thefe congenial critics, the Bardomąchia is proclaimed to have " by far the advantage of all the productions to which this fertile theme has given birth," and the See C. Review for Aug. 1800, P. 477. author author is, forfooth!" a learned and facetious divine who has for. merly amufed us with fimilar effufions." The former, well knowing his man, would not be fo very faftidious as to require a rigid at. tention to dull matter of fact" a pretty apology for lying truly! The lax morality of this critic is wonderfully in unifon with the feelings and the principles of his favourite author. But it is too much to be told that "his Latinity evinces an intimate acquaintaince with the claffics; and that "his English manifefts equal talents and play fulness." Not that we mean to impeach the claffical knowledge of Dr. Geddes; but most certainly the lines before us difplay no proof of that or any other fpecies of knowledge, except, indeed, a know. ledge of the art of falfification, in which the doctor is known to be an adept, although it has pleafed Dr. Griffiths's fage reviewer to mis-reprefent him as " celebrated for works in the highest department of biblical criticifm." We hall conclude our remarks on thefe miferable productions with an epigram which has been put into our hands by an intelligent and eftimable friend. On Dr. Geddes's Bardomachia. "The fool hath faid in his heart, there is no God." So ran the Royal Pfalmift's facred lines ; And Geddes vindicates the eternal rule. He fcoffs his Maker-there the Arbeißt shines ; The celebrated Speech of the Hon. C. J. Fox, with the Proceedings of the Meeting at the Shakespeare Tavern, on Friday, October 10, 1800, being the Anniverfary of bis firft Election for Westminster. Wherein be bews the improper Conduct of Minifters, in continuing an unjuft War, that bas fpilt our Blood, fquandered our Treasure, contracted a Load of National Debt we are unable to bear, and reduced the People to then prefent deplorable Situation !!! Fourth Edition. To which are added, Two much admired Songs, fung at the above Meeting by a well-known Whig. Jordan. London. E know no one of the whole fraternity of the lower class of Whigs, fo fkiltal in the compofition of a title-page to a feditious pamphlet, as the miferable being who proclaims himself the pubJither of this wretched farrago of inflammatory and libellous declamation, collected from the Jacobin prints of the day. As the publifher of Paine's Rights of Man, the fundamental doctrine of which Mr. Fox here maintains, this, man, who acted as the tool of another, escaped punithment; he has fince fuffered imprifon ment for publifhing fome other libel; but neither the imp nity which he experienced in the firft inftance, nor the correction which he received in the laft, has made any impreffion on his mind, or produced any alteration in his conduct; he still perfeveres in col lecting feating all the filth of the Jacobinical fewers, and administering it, in various forms, to his patriotic cuftomers. Since Mr. Fox has thought proper to quit the fenate for the tavern, and to continue his occafional harangues at the convivial board, he has had lefs occafion for the impofition of restraints on his fertile imagination, or for the limitation of his tongue to the repetition of what the Monthly reviewers would call dull matters of fact. Where a man incurs no danger of contradiction, unless he be under the influence of integrity, he has neither motive nor temptation to adhere to the truth. If this be a correct report of Mr. Fox's fpeech, the licentia mentiendi was never exercised to a great er extent, as our readers will acknowledge, when they fhall have read fome of the affertions which we shall extract from the pamphlet before us. After an appropriate eulogy upon himself, (after the manner of Mr. Erikine, who was prefent, and applauded him,) in which he obferved, that he was an houeft man," (an oblervation which, of courfe, he deemed neceffary,) and had followed "a fyftem, juft, liberal, and comprehenfive," he told his friends that he could not have fecured" the approbation of his country," (a Whig's country. it feems, is his club) "unlefs he had formed his conduct upon general principles applicable to all times." Certainly no one, who has the leaft acquaintance with the public life of Mr. Fox can deny, that his principles are applicable, not only to all times, but to al queftions, and to both fides of every queftion; for there is scarcely any one grand political queftion which has been brought into dif cuffion within the last five and twenty years, in which Mr. Fox has not decidedly committed himself on bolb fides; as for inttance, the queftion of Parliamentary reprefentation, on which he has at one time maintained, that the fenfe of the nation could only be ascer tained by the voice of Parliament, and at another, that it could only be collected out of Parliament; at one time, that the Members of the House of Commons were bound to obey the mandates of their immediate constituents; and, at another, that being representatives of the aggregate body of the people, they were not bound to obey the inftructions of particular electors, but to confult the real interefts of the community at large. Such principles may be truly faid to be comprehenfive, in the most extenfive fignification of the term.. Mr. Fox talks of "rights which are the birth-right of man, antecedent to the elablishment of any particular form of government." These can be no other than the rights of Adam, either before or after his fall, when he exercifed abfolute authority over all the inhabitants of the earth; rights, of course, which cannot be enjoyed by any man who has the misfortune to be born after the “ eftablidh ment of any particular form of government." But these are mere verba et voces; for Mr. Fox evidently alluded to man's potisical rights, because he immediately afterwards refers to the affertion of fuch rights by the Americans in the last war. This, however, is declamatory rant, merely calculated for the purpose of deception, for for Mr. F. muft know, that no man can have any political rights but fuch as refult from political establishments; in other words, fuch as are fecured to him by the laws of his country, which constitute at once the fource and the fecurity of all political rights. But this interpretation will not bear Mr. Fox out in his argument, which, taken in its only obvious fenfe, affirms the right in queftion to be the right of oppofing the laws, the right of rebellion; yet how fuch right could exift" antecedent to any particular form of government," it is not very easy to conceive, fince, without a government of fome fort or other, there would be neither motive to rebel, nor object of rebellion. No matter; Whig orators are not to be ftopped by the obftacles which common fenfe or common honesty Interpofes to the wishes or defigns of common men; and this rhodomontade ferved, as well as any thing elfe, as a preface to the de claration that he, Mr. Fox, " did not hesitate to declare in Parliament in favour of America, and his wishes for the fuccefs of those men who were then figmatized as rebels !" Who were not stigmatized, Mr. Fox, but who were declared by our Sovereign and his Parliament to be rebels, and who were notorioufly in a state of open rebellion at the time? And was this declaration of protection and encou agement of rebels to be made with impunity? Nothing was fo difgraceful to the adminiftration of Lord North, as the toleration of this abufe and profligacy, which nearly amounted to treafon, and the forbearance to impeach the man who dared to utter fuch language. The war which was entered into for the purpose of punishing thefe rebels, and for reftoring them to a proper fenfe of duty to their fovereign, Mr. Fox afferts to have been only a war to gratify that party which exifted then, and exifts now in this country; a party that hates liberty, and would employ the arms of this nation to fupprefs it wherever it has diffused its bleffings or endeavours to extend its influence!!!"—As we are neither intoxicated with the fumes of wine, as might probably be the cafe with Mr. Fox's Whig friends, nor have yet drunk of the waters of Lethe, we can very well recollect what that party was which exifted then, and what that party, is which exifts now in this country. The firft was the party which compofed Lord North's adminiftration, and fupported the Ame rican war; the laft, the party which compofed Mr. Pitt's adminiftration, and fupported the present war. Now at the head of this laft party are many of those men who acted with Mr. Fox in oppofition to the miniftry of that day, and who, according to his own acknowledgment, were as great friends to liberty as himself, while very few of the former party have been in power fince the prefent war; aud that party, it must never be forgotten, that bated li berty, was the very party with which he afterwards coalefced and acted! Wepafs over the stale tricks of afferting that the war is carried on for the fole purpose of restoring the House of Bourbon, in defiance of truth, and in contradiction to the most folemn and repeated declarations of his Majefty's Minifters in both Houses of Parliament; of infifting " that |