VOL. V..No. 1:]

[ Price 10D

2]

AN

ANALYTICAL AND COMPARATIVE VIEW,

Sc. &c.

Of two Pamphlets, lately published, the one entitled, " Cursory Remarks upon the State of Parties, during the Administration of Mr. Addington, by a NEAR OBSERVER;" and the other entitled, "A Plain Answer to the Misrepresentations and Calumnies contained in the Cursory Remarks of a Near Obbserver, by A MORE ACCURATE OBSERVER."

(Continued from Vol. IV. p. 917.)

IV. The conduct of the New Opposition in Parliament.

With respect to this part of the subject, if the answer had been silent, I should not have thought it necessary to include it in my examination; for, the remarks, which the Near Observer has made on the parliamentary conduct of those gentlemen, who compose what has been called the New Opposi Lion, always appeared to me to be so weak, and, indeed, so evidently absurd, as not to stand in need of an exposure. But, when a work, written with some talent, and, to all appearance, coming from authority, professes to be an answer to another work, it is very natural to conclude, that whatever is left not answered, is unanswerable. Therefore, as the pamphlet of the Accurate Observer is entitled "a plain Answer to the Misrepresen"tations and calumnies of the Cursory Re"marks of a Near Observer," the author will, it is reasonable to suppose, be, by his readers in general, regarded as having, to the best of his knowledge and abilities, answered the bole of those misrepresentations and calumnies; and, as he has, in reality, attempted to answer only that part of them which bear upon the character and conduct of his principal; as this course (a course by no means either generous or just) has been pursued by the partisans of Mr. Pitt, it seems necessary that his omissions should be supplied. Yet,

[2

had he observed a strict silence with respect to the members of the New Opposition; had he excluded their characters and their parliamentary conduct entirely from the discussion, I certainly should not have been the man to drag them into it. But, while he was reminding his adversary, that "no species of "falsehood is so certain of passing current "in the world as that which has some de

66

gree of truth for its foundation," he appears not to have forgotten another maxim equally true, that "no malice is so likely to "succeed as that which assumes the garb of "friendship." He has introduced the members of the New Opposition merely as creatures, or things, destined to the uses (sometimes not the most honourable) of Mr. Put: here, they serve, like his own Cinque Port volunteers, to swell out his train, to be "set

up upon a hill to make a show;" there, he considers them as regulars, and marches them on to meet the enemy now, they are rolled before him in the capacity of a mante let to cover his sap; then, they are piled up into a parapet of sand-bags. Whatever be the character or form, in which they appear, for Mr. Pitt's purposes, and for those purposes alone, do they seem to be employed; and, when these purposes do not require that they should be defended, so far is the Accurate Observer from attempting their defence, that he often tacitly admits the justice of the censure, sometimes joins in, and improves upon, the misrepresentations, and, in one or two instances, adds to that calumny, which, agreeably to his professions, it was his duty to endeavour to refute. So that, in this part of my task, I shall have to answer both Mr. BENTLEY and Mr. LONG, who, though they have, like Peachum and Lockit, throttled, and would willingly strangle each other, can so far master their mutual hatred, as to co-operate most cordially against the members of the New Opposition. The Near Observer has introduced seven of these gentlemen, namely, Lord Temple, Mr. Grenville, Dr. Laurence, Mr. Elliot, Mr. Canning, Lord Grenville, and Mr. Windham; only the three latter of whom have been at all noticed by the Accurate Observer. How he has no

ticed them we shall see by-and-by; but, first, it is necessary to speak of those whom he has omitted.

Lord Temple is charged, by the Near Observer, with demanding places for his family: "Lord Tempe demands places for "his family (insatiable family!) and his family insist upon naming the King's ministers."It was, surely, the duty of a writer, who professed to auswer the whole of the Cursory Remarks, to contradict this false and malicious assertion; or, if it was regarded as a falsehood too barefaced to merit a serious contradiction, it was his duty to notice it as such, especially as he must have been aware, that the falsehood, though barefaced and base, was by no means one of those wi ch the Addingtons valued the least. But, we uniformly find this writer ready to sacrifice any and every other person to the purposes of Mr. Pitt.-The Near Observer, in bringing les charge against Lord Temple, has omitted the where and the when; but, he, no doubt, alludes to the debate of the 24th of November, when his lordship made use of expressions, which were, by Mr. Sheridan, tortured into a demand of places for his family, but which neither contained nor would bear any such meaning. The New Opposition had, in the course of the debate, been accused of wishing for war, at any rate, in preference to peace, on any terms; a charge, the truth of which Lord Temple denied. "The object of our arguments is," said he, to open the minds of the people แ to their danger; to show them into what "hands their country has fallen; and, to "convince them, that, while it remains in " such bands, there is no hope of success in war, nor of honour and security in peace.

Much remains to be done; and, "in other bands, much may be done, not by

engaging in a hazardous war, but by real * firmness."- These are the expressions, which the Addingtons and Bragges have construed into a demand of places for the Grenville family; into a claim, on the part of that family, to name the ministers of the King! The Accurate Observer, who undertakes to answer misrepresentations and calumnies, ought, one would think, not to have passed over this part of his opponents remarks. Nor, would it have been a departure from his office, if, in answer to the exclamation of, "insatiable family!" as applied to the Grenvilles, he had given his readers some account of the great merits, of the talents, the integrity, the long and eminent services of that family. And, having been forced upon this subject, he might and ought to have shown, that the Addingtons (I will not call them a family) and their end-.

less train of hungry relations, have already possessed themselves of three times as much of the public wealth as the Grenvilles ever enjoyed; besides having debased the character and enfeebled the power of the government, by filling the public offices with persons, whom the people must despise, and towards the supporting of whom in upstart idleness and insolence, they cannot and they will not chearfully contribute.

Mr. Grenville and Dr. Laurence are accused, by the Near Observer, of having cried incessantly for war, till war became evidently inevitable, and then, of having "turned suddenly "as the wind."—The passage of the Cursory Remarks, which I here allude to, is as follows: Mr. Thomas Grenville de"clared, that there was no man more ready "or more eager to vote for the address," [on the King's Message of the 8th of March], especially if it should be likely to procure peace and tranquillity; and, Doctor Laurence professed his wishes were for peace!!! He expected it should be proved, that the war, if it must now be "renewed, was indispensably necessary to "the safety and honour of the Empire !!!"

- If these expressions, these exact words, had been made use of by Mr. Grenville and Dr. Laurence, what inconsistency would they have discovered? These two gentlemen objected to the peace of Amiens for several reasons; but a principal reason was, that it gave us so small a hope of lasting peace and tranquillity; and, the address which, on the 13th of May, 1802, both of them voted for, advised his Majesty to adopt such measures as might tend to render durable the tranquillity, which he had, by so many sacrifices, graciously intended to restore to his people. Would it, therefore, have been turning like the wind, if the same persons, who, from such motives, voted for that address, had, from the same motives, supported the address in answer to the King's Message of the 8th of March, 1803 ? ——But, during the debate in question, neither Mr. Grenville nor Dr. Laurence expressed any wish either for peace or war. Their opponents in doors, and the vulgar without doors, anticipated much triumph, on their part, at the prospect of seeing a speedy end to that peace, which they had so strongly and so justly reprobated. But, they were careful to discover no such triumph, and to remind their hearers, that the principles, on which they had condemned the peace, had never warranted their adversaries in representing them as bent upon war. Mr. Grenville said, that " he should chearfully vote for the address,

"which he wished to see carried with per"fect unanimity, because it would thereby "be the more likely to convince the world "that we were able and willing to defend "our rights, which conviction was the " means best calculated to produce a stare "of real peace and tranquillity." Was this turning about? Was this "shifting sud"denly like a sail?"--Dr. Laurence stated his wish to obtain some information as to the grounds of the war; and trusted, "that, when those grounds came to be pub"licly known, they would be found suffi"cient to convince the world of the justice "of our cause." He further observed, that,

"

"opinion, but that he had even conde"scended to become the official instrument "and organ of measures which he disap"proved and condemned. It always re"mained, however, to be accounted for, "both by this Right Honourable Gentle"man and Mr. Elliot. why they felt them"selves more obliged to declare their op"position at one time than at another; why "they could submit their docile consciences "to the hand of Mr. Pitt, and shew such a "restive spirit of mutiny under the guidance of his successor !!! It will be said, "that they were in office at one time, and "out of it the other; but, if this is an excuse, it follows, that to be neutral in things you disapprove, is less blan.eable "than to be active in them; and that you

plunge the nation in war, it never had "existed for a moment; and, that one of "the reasons why he disliked the peace

was, that it evidently, directly, and ra"pidly tended towards the event, which "had so soon arrived."-Was this shifting suddenly about? And, with such means at hand, was the defence of Mr. Grenville and Dr. Laurence a task too laborious and too difficult for the Accurate Observer.

Mr. Elliot also is charged by the Addingtons with shifting suddenly about upon this occasion, and, together with Mr. Windham, with having opposed the Irish militia law, for the purpose of embarrassing the ministers, in their warlike preparations. "Both "these gentlemen," says the Near Observer, were now discovered to be adverse "to the system and principle of militia "forces altogether, an opinion which did

46

66

not so much surprise the admirers of the "constitution and of that constitutional "force, upon any other ground, as because "in their official situations, they had se"verally appeared the most zealous advo"cates and promoters of this species of

army. Mr. Elliot, who now opposed recruiting the Irish militia at four guineas 61 per man, was reminded by the Attorney

General for Ireland, that he himself (Mr. "Elliot) had brought in a bill for recruit"ing it at six guineas; and Mr. Windham

66

was put in mind that during the time he "had been in office, the militia in England "had been augmented to an unprecedent"ed degree, and the militia of Scotland "and Ireland instituted and begun!! Thus "it appeared, that it was not solely in the "instance of the negotiations at Lisle, but "in great general measures of domestic "import, executive government and legis"lation, that the manly, consistent Mr. "Windham, had not only lent his name, "countenance, and authority against his

66

may originate measures you condemn, "but not suffer others to promote them, "afterwards."―Here are misrepresentations and calumnies, an answer to which one might have reasonably expected from an Answerer, who assumes an appellation descriptive of great accuracy of observation. But, no: the defender of Mr. Pitt could, in the present instance, find no materials whereon to work which is the more surprising as, in hunting through the parlia mentary debates for facts wherewith to rebut the accusations against Mr. Pitt, he must have seen the speech, which Mr. Elliot made, at the time, in answer to these very misrepresentations and calumnies; for, they are, after all, a mere rechauffée of a dish, and a most disgusting one too, which had originally been served up from the Treasury Beach. The debate, alluded to, was on the bill, passed last March, for granting a bounty of four guineas a man to such men as were willing to serve as militia-men in Ireland. To talk of the "constitution" and of "constitutional force," in such a case; to call men raised by bounty, militia-men, requires no small portion of even that assurance, with which the Addingtons are so super-abundantly gifted. But Mr. Elliot's speech is so full and satisfactory as to every point, its sentiments have been so fully verified in the time which has already elapsed, and it contains such an useful lesson for the future, that I shall cite it almost entire. "He had," he said, "no objection to the

against the institution. Accordingly, by "the present bill, the principle of a militia

64

66

was abandoned; for it proposed to raise "18,000 men, not by ballot, but by bounty. "This force, therefore, had no other affinity to a militia than that it was to be rais"ed in counties, and was to be commandedby officers nominally militia colonels. It "would be strictly an establishment of "fencibles. What were fencibles but corps "raised within particular districts, and offi"cered by gentlemen of landed property "connected with such districts? The force, "therefore, proposed to be raised, would be "in principle nothing but a fencible esta"blishment of the worst species, because "formed on such terms of service as would

pecuniary means of the country would scarcely be adequate to sustain it, but "which was also calculated to produce, in "other points of view, the most prejudicial "effects on the service. It had been ob"served, in the course of the debate, that

in the late war the militia had been most "successfully applied to the recruiting of "the regular army. He was glad that

measure had been mentioned, because he "should have selected it as a complete il"Justration of the truth of the argument he was stating. In the course of the late

war, so much of the population of the kingdom had been locked up in defen"sive corps, that the recruiting service was so entirely suspended, that it was found necessary to dissolve a considerable proportion of the local force to supply the "alarming deficiency of the regular army. "The expedient was certainly not to be "justified on any principle, but the urgency "of the occasion. The emergency, how

ever, was pressing, and he felt that every "tribute of public gratitude and applause was due both to the energy of the coun"cils which devised the measure, and to "the patriotism of the officers who gave "their co-operation to it. But he believed "it would not be proposed to adopt it as a "general system of recruiting. He was

persuaded such a system would not be "avowed. If indeed it was understood, "that the colonels of militia were ready "to lend their regiments to the recruit"ing of the line, it might in a certain degree diminish his objections to the present measure, though he could by no means bring himself to think, that a systematic application of the militia to the recruiting "of the line would be a judicious course of "proceeding. However, he should not "then take up the time of the House by "enlarging on that subject, since he was "confident such a system would not be as"serted as practicable. Mr. Elliot next "adverted to a remark which had been "made by his right hon. and learned friend "the Attorney General of Ireland, and "which he could not notice without some "apology to the House, as it had little re"lation to the merits of the present ques"tion, being entirely an argumentum ad ho"minem. His learned friend had stated, "that Ire (Mr. Elliot) had expressed no dis"approbation of laws of a similar tenden66 cy while he sat in the parliament of Ire"land. It was true that, while he was in "that parliament, one or two acts passed, "authorising a levy of volunteers by boun"ty in augmentation of the militia. "had, however, always entertained consi"derable prepossessions against that sys"tem of military policy, and experience "had confirmed them. But his learned "friend had really spoken, as if he (Mr. "Elliot) had been a principal instrument in "forming the militia of Ireland. Now the "fact was, that he was appointed to the "war-office in Ireland in the summer of "1796, at which period the militia had "been raised between two and three

66

He

years, and he found it armed, arrayed, "and encamped. What did his learned

66

"friend conceive he should have done in "such circumstances? Did he mean to "suggest that he ought, from his place in parliament, to have proposed the dissolu❝tion of the establishment in the midst of "war? That he believed would not have "been thought a very safe or well-timed "measure, But the case was now wide"ly different. On the conclusion of the "late war, the militia establishment of Ire"land was disbanded, not disembodied, "but actually dissolved; and the question "before the House was, whether the in"stitution was to be revived in a shape "calculated, at a most critical conjuncture, "to cut up the general recruiting service by the very root. He could not conclude "without making an observation on what "had fallen from the Secretary at War, "who had imputed to him, that, after "having sounded an alarm through the country, he was now throwing obstruc❝tions in the way of the public service. He "must remark, that it did not very well be"come the right honourable gentle man to "reproach him with alarms, just at the "conjuncture when his Majesty's minis

66

66

ters, though rather late to be sure, began "to participate in those alarms. He how"ever, avowed the intention of giving the “alarm upon the present bill. He was "most anxious to impress parliament with "a full sense of its dangerous tendency; "for, if there was a measure more calcu "lated than another, to prostrate this coun"try at the foot of a foreign foe, it was "surely that which, in the present perilous "crisis, should contribute to the annihila"tion of the recruiting means of the em"pire. It had been insinuated both against "his right honourable friend (Mr. Wind"ham) and himself, that they were now "endeavouring to cast a damp upon the "ardour of the country. This was cer"tainly a new charge against his right ho"nourable friend and himself. Neverthe"less, it might be well founded. They "might have changed their conduct. He "trusted, however, they would be found "consistent. He believed, there were no "two members of that House more desi"rous of calling forth the mind and spirit "of the country than his right honourable "friend and himself. But there might be "a difference of opinion in respect to the "best mode of accomplishing that object. "It was, he thought, a part of true wis"dom, as well as of genuine courage, to "look at the impending danger in its full "extent. There was no piety in the delusion which covered it, either from the

"parliament or from the people. In order to apportion our efforts to the emergen"cies of our situation, we ought to know "the full measure of our peril. In the " event of a fresh contest the country ougl t "to be prepared for great and trying sa"crifices. He had never represented war "otherwise than as a great calamity, but "he had stated, and he retained the opi"nion, that it might prove a less danger

66

66

66

ous, and certainly a more honourable pre"dicament, than a perseverance in a series "of submissive councils. If the country "was roused to a full sense of the peril of "its situation, and was made to understand "the real ground and principle of the con"test, (for he earnestly deprecated the in"jurious policy of sliding the nation into a war in darkness and obscurity,) he was "persuaded that we should find in the pec"ple that prudent, courageous, persevering, patient, fortitude, which had carried "this country through many arduous and "painful struggles. He was convinced "that, with an adequate impression of our "danger, and a due consciousness of the "justice and soundness of our cause, we "should, with one united effort resolve, "either successfully to support the ancient "fabric of our laws, rights, liberties, and "independence, or to perish under the "ruins of an edifice, which no ingenuous 46 or rational mind could be anxious to sur"vive; for beyond it there was no retreat,

no refuge, no consolation. It was mat“ter of awful reflection, that if this country "fell, the last asylum of the civilized work!

66

66

was gone. These were the reasons which "induced him to wish that we should, as far "as we were able, preserve the means of "the nation collected and unimpaired. It was a painful task to him to object to any arrangement connected with the defence "and security of the country; but he did "not make an exaggerated statement or "his opinion, when he declared that, if a "beard of French general officers had sat "for the purpose of devising the most ef "fectual mode of sapping to their founda"tion the military strength and resources "of this empire, they could not, in his "judgment, have contrived a measure bet"ter adapted to the accomplishment of "that object, than the resolution contained "in the report upon the table."—Not much more than three months after this speech was delivered, and before the Irish militia were half got together, every inte'ligent man from that country, not influenced by a job, either in existence or in embryo, was ready to declare openly, that, unless