"Prussia prepares us to suspect that the "nature of the treaty between Russia and "France is of a very different nature from "what-but we will not anticipate."— No: do not anticipate, I pray you. The assurance of your fears will come soon enough for you. You thought! But we told you not to think so and you called us "Jacobins and Levellers. If we were to laugh at you now, how could you blame us; unless you proceeded upon the maxim of the Addingtons, that when, in the teeth of our prediction and advice, you bring ruin upon the country, that very ruin ought to make us hold our tongues? Unless you pretend, that, having been despised and abused by you, in the hour of your imaginary prosperity, is a ground whereon for you to claim compassion and indulgence at our hands, in the hour of your confusion and distress? I remember your past conduct. Your insolence is, and will be, fresh in my mind. I have put up. on record your base endeavours to prepare the public mind for an Attorney-General prosecution of the ridiculer of the Potsdam Oath; and I now laugh at the eighteenth article of the treaty of Tilsit, which article makes you weep. -Hanover is a subject of speculation with these sages. Han "over," says the Courier, of the 3d instant, it is suspected by some, will be inI corporated with the kingdom of Westphalia. We do not believe it. The placing it in the hands of the Spaniards "shews that it is meant to be ceded to us in "return for the cession of our conquests in South America. Bat will any man say that, in the present state of the Continebt, we ought to give any thing for "Hanover? Could his Majesty re-possess "it as an independent state? Whatever im"proveinents were made in it during a " state of peace, would only be so many in"citements for the French to overrun and

pillage it in war. We should be in the "situation of men sent to improve the coun

"

try for the benefit of others; and, be"sides, one of the conditions annexed to "the restitution of it would be, that it "should join the Rhenish Confederacy. Do "we wish to see a King of England in the "condition of a vassal of Buonaparté, and "forced, as sovereign of Hanover, to join "France against Russia or Austria, with "both of whom he might be in the strictest "alliance and amity as king of England?"

Yes, we shall, I think, see the man that will say that we ought to give something for Hanover, that Hanover which a Lord told us, some months ago, ought to be as dear to es as Hampshire. When this happens I will

recall the thoughts of the editor of the Courier, who has, upon this occasion, certainly been writing without due instructions. If Mr. Fox (alas! poor Fox!) could see reason for our going to war for Hanover, I leave the reader to guess how easily those sharp practitioners, Lords Eden, Hawkesbury and Castlereagh, and Messrs. Canning and Pe.ceval, will find out reasons for surrendering colonies for the same object. No: we have not done with dear Hanover yet; and, I am greatly deceived, if we shall not yet hear the Courier revile those, who shall dare to ubject to the making of English sacrifices for the sake of retaining it.If any thing, at this day could surprise us, it would be, that our ministers still persist in the sending of their expeditions to the Baltic. That they may succeed in nothing that they undertake elsewhere is more than I would say even of them; but, it is, I think, impossible, that an expedition to the Baltic should produce any thing to this country but injury, except as far as relates to the employing of the Hanoverians. They, indeed, may effect something for us; but, I am greatly afraid, that they, even they, will find no opportunity of getting at the French, and of making a last effort for the deliverance of Europe!"→→→→ Nothing dismayed, however, the no-popery heroes and their partizans continue to send forth their accusations against the late ministers for not having done sooner what they are doing now. The two errors which the late ministry committed, with regard to the continent, were, their demand of Hanover, which, observe, drove Prussia into a quarrel with France, and their remittance of £80,000 to Prussia. They must, one would think, have been morally certain that no efforts of ours could save either Prussia or Russia. From the first to the last, there was no probability, that Prussia would not be subdued. With my scanty means of information, I was in possession of knowledge, upon which I would have betted a thousand to one, that neither the Prussians nor the Russians made head against the French for a single day. The late ministers must have been acquainted with the state of things; and, if they had, nevertheless, granted subsidies, and sent out expeditions to the Baltic, would they not have deserved the execrations of the country? If we could have sent out 40,000 men, it would have been sending them to certain defeat and disgrace. To pretend, that the overthrow of the Russian and Prussian armies could have been prevented by us, is, perhaps, the most shameful instance of hypocrisy that ever was witnessed, even on the part of no-popery, or of Mr. Hypocricy Per

sonified. This Lazarus, at the head of all his saints and all his fools, at the head of all his Lazaroni, would scarcely, one would think, venture to feign to believe, that an English expedition would have prevented the peace of Tilsit. Yet are these men impudent enough to blame the late ministers for not wasting the blood of our army, and the money of the people, in the war which has just terminated! For the purposes of party even the Foreign Secretary has accused his predecessors, that is to say, "his Majesty's government," of want of faith towards the Emperor of Russia; he has imputed to them the cause of the peace of Tilsit; and, as the Morning Chronicle has well observed, he must be in a delicate situation, when, as Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, he comes to defend the conduct of his own government towards Russia! Here we have an instance of the baneful effects of place-men being suffered to sit in the House of Commons. In their wrangling for place, out comes every thing that can make a figure in debate. If the successors of a ministry, who had acted unwisely or unjustly towards another nation, were not in parliament, and had no war of words to carry on there, they would, of course, take care to keep secret, as far as they could, such want of wisdom or of justice; but, as things now are, this can never be expected; and the poor country is situated as a gentleman would be, who should employ two stewards alternately, the chief business of one of whom being to discover flaws in every bargain or contract made by the other, without the least consideration as to the injury which such discovery might produce to their harrassed employer. Even in the discussions respecting the misfortunes, as they are called, of the continent, the predominant motive evidently is, the working out of praise or of cen. sure of the two factions respectively. Every thing turns upon this pivot. Place and profit are the objects, before which all others vanish like a shadow.- With respect to the effect, which the stipulations of the peace of Tilsit may have upon England, I apprehend, for my part, no other than that which every one must fear, namely, the leaving of Napoleon at leisure to plan his intended attacks upon England, and particularly upon Ireland, where, as it has been openly avowed in parliament, a French party exists. The loss of trade and commerce, which some persons are so alarmed at, has no terrors for me; for, the loss of that trade and commerce which the closing of foreign ports can take from us will never do us any harm. Com

mercial men, headed by a commercial minister, have succeeded in persuading this cozened nation, that almost all its taxes are paid by them. In my next, I shall endeavour to uncozen my readers upon this head; and I do flatter myself, that I am able to prove, to the conviction of every human being, the determined Pittites excepted, that, if every port in the world was closed against us as effectually as it is possible to close it, the strength and real riches of our country would not be thereby diminished. I can easily discover reasons enough in such men as Pitt for propagating a contrary belief; but, I am quite unable to discover any one reason for our adopting it.I must return, for a moment, to the Emperor of Russia, in order to notice the progress, which the London papers are making in their abuse of him. The Morning Post, of the 4th instant says: " It "is reported, that the Russian Senate sent "for the Emperor Alexander, for the par

66

pose of hastening him from Tilsit. It was "supposed, that this was not done with any "view of applauding his conduct; and "there are many, who, having a perfect knowledge of the Russian character, do

not hesitate to say, that, should it appear "that Alexander has acted contrary to the "wishes of his people, the consequence may "prove FATAL to him. So prevalent was "this idea yesterday, that five guineas were

66

given, to receive 100 if the Emperor "Alexander should lose his life in a mouth. A considerable sun was subscribed on the "speculation. The Russian nobility, most "of whom compose the senate, derive their "revenues from the commerce of the empire, and whenever that is cramped, they uniformly become not only dissatisfied but 'ferocious."- This is a pretty broad hint to these ferocious gentlemen to kill their Emperor; that " young and noble minded "and high-spirited monarch," who exchanged vows upon the tomb of the Great Frederick, in the church at Potsdam! And now these varlets would murder him! Or, rather, they would instigate others to do it 1 It is plain" Alexander" now. No longer

our august ally," for not sending troops and subsidies to whom the late ministry are (in the same breath with these maledictions against him) bitterly reproached.. Mark, too, this Emperor is to be killed, if he has "acted contrary to the wishes of his peo"ple. And yet this Morning Post calls me Jack Cade!This betting upon the killing of the Emperor of Russia is truly characte ristic of the bett-makers. Now that they are pretty certain that he will, for a while, check their projects of gain, they would sub

Scribe their six-pennies to take away his life. Let the pretended cause be observed too. The Russian nobility derive their revenues from commerce; when that is cramped, they become ferocious; that will now be cramp ed; of course they will become ferocious; and the Emperor will be the object of their ferocity. This is, too, a pretty amiable picture of nobility, especially of commercial nobility, of banking-house and loan-jobbing | Jords.- -When the Emperor of Russia receives this Morning Post, and gets some one to read it to him, what will he think of us? What will the "ferocious" nobility think of us? Never was there any thing so base and infamous as this London press. This particular paper calls itself, as I believe it is, the paper of those who stile themselves the "fashionable world." Let any man find me, if he can, any thing so bloody-minded and cowardly as this in the annals of even French democracy. These are the sentiments of the fashionable world, are they? This writer is the associate of John Bowles in defending "regular go"vernment, social order, and our holy "religion." Is this a specimen of their religious sentiments? They give the poor Emperor but a month to live. Mercy upon those who offend a commercial nobility!

SIR HENRY MILDMAY.- A correspondent, whom I know to be a friend of Sir Henry Mildmay, has communicated to me some remarks upon the publications which i have made with respect to the transaction of Moulsham Hall, and also an authentic docament of some importance in the question, which document has not yet been publisked. --Though this correspondent has made, against me, no direct charges, it is not to be disguised from me, that he thinks I have acted, if not unfairly, at least with an overdegree of zeal as an accuser of his friend. But, persons, thus circumstanced, should recollect, that, if I were to consult the feelings of the public men, of whom I speak, and of whom I must speak, or hold my tongue altogether; if I were to stop, in each case, till I have an opportunity of hearing the private explanations of the parties, or of their friends; if I were to do this, I should certainly be able to render the public but very little service, and should, indeed, be a creature as perfectly useless as a well-meaning member of parliament, who wears the bride of a wife whose acquaintance consists of the families of placemen, pensioners, and public robbers. One exception, taken by my correspondent, is, that, while the wasting of millions pass unnoticed by me, this little thing of Moulsham Hall is taken up

with avidity, and dwelt upon at great length and with uncommon force. Now, I know of no millions that are wasted without my taking notice of them. I have noticed the waste of money upon the Volunteers, in the Army, in the Navy, in the Barrack Department, in the Loan Department, in the Civil List, in the Collection of Taxes, upon the Speaker's House, upon St. Margaret's Church, upon the East India Company, upon the merchants of Granada, upon Sierra Leone, and, indeed, though the enumeration would be without end, there is no waste of the public money, which has come to my knowledge, of which I have not, in some way or other, made public mention. But, it is not the amount of the sum so much as the nature of the case, and the situation of the parties concerned, that renders a transaction worthy of particular and repeated notice. Sir Houry Mildmay is not a man like the Trotters and the Davisons. He is a man of high station. He is a member for a county, and he has just made his son a member for a city. He has, at public political dinners, stood forward as the champion of one of the factions. He has taken upon him, in the like public manner, to extol the administration and the principles of Pitt, and has asserted, that whosoever shall tread in the footsteps of that man, shall have his support. In short, he has come forth, with all the weight which his family, his character, and his property can give him, to recommend, to vouch for, and to uphold one of the factions which are dividing the power and the riches of the nation between them. Such a man has no plea on the score of private feelings. He challenges inquiry and discussion in respect of every thing that he says or does, or that he has said or done. If, for instance, I were to whince and whine and complain when the editors of the London daily press write against me, should I not be laughed at? The very idea is ludicrous. Not only must every man, who thus puts himself forward, expect to have his character and actions inquired into, but they ought to be inquired into and publicly discussed; because it is right that the public should be able to judge of all the probable as well as apparent motives of every one who takes upon him to be their guide.

-And, as to the amount of the sum, though, in the whole, it was but 1,600 yet the circumstances were curious and interesting. The transaction served to show how the public money was wasted in a branch of expenditure which had heretofore escaped notice. Besides which my correspondent must excuse me, if I have my feelings too, and if, after having been called a " jacob'

and leveller," I seize hold of transactions best calculated to prove to the world that my accusations against the wasters of the public money are not groundless. Some men have been awed into silence by being reproached and vilified. That is not my way. Let the hirelings call me jacobin and leveller as loudly as they please; and the louder their accusations the more strenuous are my endeavours to prove, that, whether jacobin and leveller or not jacobin and leveller, my principles are sound, or, at any rate, that my charges are true. To defend one'self is not to be revengeful. We complain, that the public money is wasted; they accuse us of jacobinism; we become more indefatigable in our exertions to prove the reasonableness of our complaint; they then call us revengeful. What they want us to do, is, to plead "not guilty my lord", to waste our time in proving our own innocence. But, that is not the way for me. The way to prove that I am innocent of making groundless complaints is to produce proof upon proof that my complaints are well-founded; and, my correspondent must not be surprised, if, in the producing of these proofs, I pay very little respect to persons.- -So much as to the reasons for my taking up the transaction of Moulsham Hall; and now for the transaction itself, which I will again, in substance, describe as it stands represented in the authentic documents, published in the fourth report of the Commissioners of Military Inquiry.In October, 1803, Sir James Craigg, commanding in Essex, fixed on, as a spot for military works, some lands belonging to Sir Henry Mildmay in right of his wife, close by the mansion called Moulsham Hall, at which mansion Sir Henry was, by the will of the ancestor,, obliged to reside three months in every year. To occupy these lands for this purpose the government was empowered by an act of parliament, which provided, that in such cases a jury should be called to award damages to the party whose land should be occupied. No steps were, previous to the occupation, taken to call the jury. The Jands were occupied by Sir Henry Mildmay's consent, and the works were forthwith constructed. The first step that Sir Henry took, was, to request of the ministers (the Addingtons) to bring in and pass a bill to excuse him from a residence to which he was obliged by the will of his ancestor, that is to say to nullify the condition, or, at least one of the conditions, upon which he held for the life of his wife an estate which he estimates at eleven thousand pounds a year. An act of parliament, the grand panacea for

all difficulties, was obtained, and, to be sure, one cannot help being enchanted at the easy politeness with which Messrs Pole Carew and Vansittart talk of getting this act for Sir Henry dispatched, seeming not even to cast a thought upon what the parliament might think of such an interference with the tenure of private property. I do not say, that it might not be proper, in an extreme case to nullify a will by an act of parliament; but, Mr. Pole Carew talks of the thing as one would talk of a leave to ride over a field; and just as if Mr. Addington was the sole proprietor of that field. Sir Henry himself, in his memorial talks much about in the same strain. "I considered," says he, that I had a claim upon the go

vernment to relieve me, by law, from a "residence which their own measures, for "the public safety, had rendered untena"ble". He therefore made an application to this effect "to Mr. Addington's govern "ment". Just, you see, as if there had been no parliament to consult! Just as if Mr. Addington's government niade the laws, and could make what laws they pleased! This gives us a pretty correct notion of the light, in which Sir Henry Mildmay must have viewed that parliament, of which he himself was a member. And then comes Mr. R. Pole Carew, who says to Sir Henry: I have made it my business to see Mr. "Addington this day upon the subject, and am directed by him to acquaint you, that, if you will have the goodness to direct your agent to communicate with Mr. Vansittart, he shall be extremely ready to do, on his part, what may be be proper to give effect to your wishes.". And not a word about the parliament any more than if it had been composed of a set of footmen and grooms, who received yearly pay for their attendance and their votes.- Since I have digressed so far, I may as well say, in this place, what occurs to me as to the propriety of this step, on the part of Sir Henry Mildmay.- -The ground was occupied in October. In November, having experienced

દ

great inconvenience from the numbers of "military brought near the place, in expec"tation of invasion, and having known "foot-pad robberies to be committed in the

very field next adjoining his garden, the "residence became intolerable", and, therefore, he applied to be released from it. This might be very natural; but, did not others experience inconvenience as well as he? And, when the people were call ed upon to make such extraordinary sacrifices, was he to make none at all? When necessity was pleaded for tax

ex

ing the poor equally with the rich, as they were at that moment taxed by the ballot for the army of reserve, was he to submit to no sacrifice at all? I shall be asked, perhaps, what good he could have done in Essex. The good of example, at a moment when" invasion was expected." Queen Elizabeth, when threatened with invasion by the Spaniards, finding that some persons were preparing to flee from this very coast of Essex, "swore by God, that if she knew "those persons or might know of any that "should do so hereafter, she would make "them know and feel what it was to "be cowards in so urgent a cause.*** I do not mean to impute cowardice to Sir Henry Mildmay. I have not the least reason to suspect him of that weakness; but, I am satisfied, that he ought to have reflected, that, if his inconveniences were greater than those of most other men, so also was the property which he had to preserve; and, that, if such men as he fled from inconveniences, others could not be expected to remain in the face of danger. It is in times of trouble that the great and the rich ought to stand forward and animate others by their example. If all the rich men, all the proprietors of the soil, were, in a time of " **pected invasion," to quit the parts of the coast where works and troops are found, were to go off and leave their lands to be defended by others, who would say, that the lands, if successfully defended, ought not to appertain to those others? I hope, that the rich, in case of danger would not fiee from the coast; and, I also hope, that, upon reflection, Sir Henry Mildinay will think it right, as soon as the act and lease have expired, to return to Moulsham Hall, there to reside agreeably to the sacred condition up. on which he received so large an estate.To return to my narrative: Sir Henry Mildmay, having obtained, by law, and at the public expense (for the poor public had to pay fees to its own clerks for the passing of the bill), during the session of 1803-4, the award of damages by a jury, and the letting of the house to the Barrack office, remained, as far as appears from the documents and evidence in the fourth report, unmentioned until May, 1804. In that month he bargained with the government to take the House as an officer's barrack, at 4001. a year. In August the jury assembled to award damages for the land. They awarded 13001. for the first year for 31 acres of ground, and 600l. a year for every year af terwards. When General Hewett, the Bar

See Cobbett's Parliamentary History of England, vel. 1. p. 892.

rack master-general, was directed to close the bargain for the house, he remonstrated against it as a waste of the public money, in answer to which he was told by Mr. Brownrigg, that it was thought necessary to take it, in order" to remunerate Sir Henry Mildmay for the loss of his residence." Sir Henry Mildmay is asked, by the Military Commissioners, for what the jury awarded him so large a sum as 6001. a year for 31 acres of land? His answer is, that they gave him 2001. for the land, and 4001. a year to provide him with another place of residence.

-Now, said I, it is, then, evident that he knowingly received payment twice for the same thing; once in the award of the jury, and once in the lease of the House with the Barrack-office; and, accordingly, I characterized the transaction as a job.Nothing was published in reply; and, here it was that Sir Henry Mildmay was badly advised; for, having stood forth as the champion of a party, not without some little promising as to what he would do in inquiry into abuses, it was not for him to despise public opinion, nor any thing that was likely to have an effect upon that opi nion. When parliament met, however, he moved for a memorial, which he had presented, on the same day, to the Commissioners of Military Inquiry, and which memorial was inserted in the Register at page 52 of the present volume. In his speech he said, that the transaction could be no job, because it took place under Mr. Addington's administration, for whom he never gave a vote in his life. But, I proved, from the documents, that the proposition for the renting. of the house and the assembling of the jury. both took place under the Administration of. Pitt, for whom he always voted. And there. was something very suspicious in his waiting for nine months, and then making the proposition and calling the jury, imme-. diately after Pitt came into office. my correspondent has now communicated to me a copy of a letter from Mr. Brownrigg to Sir Henry Mildmay, dated on the 12th of April, 1804, which states, that, even in the preceding November, the Duke of York had applied to Lord Hobart for authority to rent the House, and that the authori ty had been obtained.. So that, the bar. gain for the house was begun under the Administration of Mr. Addington, the conclu sion of it, under Pitt, was a matter of course, and, therefore, the transaction evi, dently was not what is called a job, which phrase is employed to designate a transaction, wherein votes in parliament are obtained, either directly or indirectly in exchange for

But,