let it be shewn, that the mass of the people in Holland, in Italy, and in Germany have suffered from the change which their go formation of those abuses, which have produced its subjugation. "This act of rigour," says one of them, speaking of the affair of Copenhagen, "has already elicited an elec-vernments have undergone, before we talk 66 tric spark, which has given a shock to the "morbid feelings of the Continent; and, if we boldly follow it up with correspondent measures may yet accomplish much to"wards its deliverance. It may be the means of separating Russia from an alliance, which she is already beginning to 66 contemplate with disgust; which is a foul "stain upon her honour; and which if con"tinued, will involve her in inevitable de"struction. It may also be the means of awakening Austria from her ruinous trance, and of stimulating her to concert measures, which may eventually contri"bute to redeem the violated rights of man"kind. -As for Bonaparte, he may con"tinue safe as long as his armies continue 66 66 may require a respite from the perils of "battle, and the fatigues of the camp. "The favour of the multitude, even under a legitimate government, is a frail and pe"rishable possession; with his title to it, can we then expect it to be impregnable? "A feeling of interest in the power and prosperity of the government, may, moreover, be subdued by the miseries of personal subjection, and the splendor of "national glory may be eclipsed by the "clouds of individual affliction. These 46 causes are possibly secretly producing "their effect, and the mine may explode in "the citadel of fancied security. Should "the tide of popular indignation once deci dedly turn against him; should the pressure of suffering once become so intense as to enflame the enthusiastic contagion "of generous despair, and stimulate the de"termined resolution of just revenge, this "monster may still be condemned to pay the "tremendous forfeit of his unparalleled "crimes."That electric spark, of which this writer speaks, has escaped my observation; nor have I seen any signs whatever of a separation of Russia from her alliance with France. "Awaken Austria from her "trance!" Awaken her to what? What measures is she to concert for the redemption of the violated rights of mankind? And, besides, what does this writer mean by rights and by mankind? Who are the persons that have suffered from the conquests of the French ? Let this first be shewn; of the violated rights of mankind. I do not say, that they have not suffered; but, a writer who assumes a tone like this, and. who bids us hope for the deliverance of Europe, should prove to us first, that the peo-. ple of Europe wish to be delivered. ——— Still, too, though in the face of experience to the. contrary, we are invited to hope for safety from the hatred of the French people to their sovereign, for endeavouring to stimulate them to hatred against which sovereign, be it, remembered, that, in our own courts of justice, Mr. Peltier was tried and convicted,. to the clearly expressed satisfaction of this, same writer and his numerous associates, including the editors of the Edinburgh Re-, view, the latter being quite lavish of their abuse upon him! But, what foundation have we for this hope? Is there any authentic document, whereon we can lay our finger, and say, "here is a proof that the people of France hate Napoleon ?" Is, there any such proof of an exasperation in "the public mind; of the miseries of subjection; of individual affliction?" If there be any such proofs, let us have them. 66 -It is curious, too, to see "the favour of the multitude" first represented as “a frail and perishable possession," and, in the very next sentence, to be told, that, "if the tide of popular indignation once "turn against him, the monster may yet "be condemned to pay the tremendous for"feit of his unparalleled crimes." I like. this last, idea best; and, may all the unpunished tyrants, whether military or civil,, whether ruling by the sword or by the terrors of unjust judgment, take warning by the times! But, I see no symptoms of discontent in France. The causes of Napoleon's destruction are, possibly, we are told, "se cretly" at work. Possibly, indeed, but we know nothing of it; and there may, possibly, be no such causes in existence. The terrors of his despotism" may, for aught I know, be great, but, be that as it may, these terrors are exercised, by Frenchmen themselves; and, as to the probable, designs of his generals against him, though such designs may be entertained, it is very evident that he fears them not; or we should not see him leave France for six months at a time. Princes do not leave home, when they suspect that they have rivals there, particularly if those rivals are amongst their generals. He is at this moment travelling to Italy, while he is sending a general to take, possession of Portugal. And yet, we are to believe, that his crown totters upon his head. In almost the same breath, we are desired to believe, that the royal family of Portugal are beloved, nearly to adoration, by the people; and then we are told, that that people stand and look on, indifferent spectators, of the expatriation of that same family. Nay, now that the pinch is come, it is. by these same writers, conjectured, that the royal family will hasten away before the French have actually entered Portugal, lest that circum"stance being known, might encourage the "populace to commit acts of violence and "outrage."Let us not be deceived any longer. Napoleon is quite sufficiently established in power at home, and is the most formidable enemy that England ever had to meet. Our means both of defence and of offence are surprisingly great, when compared with our population; but, if the hour of invasion comes, and come, first or last, it will, in some part or other of the kingdom, those means will avail us nothing, unless the people are chearfully disposed to employ them; and, for them to be so disposed, they must be convinced, that a change of govern ment would be for the worse. They must be well convinced of this, or, like the people of Portugal, as described by the Morning Chronicle, and now described by the Courier, they will look with perfect indifference at the confusion and the dismay of the government, and will only wait for actual invasion, as the signal for committing acts of viol nce and outrage. Those who thrive upon corruption may wrap themselves up in the hope, that no day of reckoning will ever come; and, they may flatter themselves, that the people will always submit to the effects of those corruptions, rather than run the risk of greater evils. But so hoped and so reckoned all the corrupt combinations in the countries upon the continent ! The letter of DUN SCOTUS, inserted in my last sheet, at page 657, shall be attended to in my next; but, in the mean while, I must observe, that the words of the preamble of Mr. Whitbread's bill cannot, in fair dealing, be separated from the main object of the whole set of poor bills, with which that gentleman menaced us'; nor from the speech, with which he introduced the parochial school-bill. True, the education was to produce good morals, but this merely for the purpose of preventing laziness and those other vices, which more inmediately tend to increase the poor-rates. Botley, Oct. 29, 1907. } WEST INDIA COMMERCE. SIR, You deserve the thanks of your country, for your masterly and truly English publications, concerning the course which we ought to pursue respecting our Domination of the Sea, and particularly to. wards America; that country which, as you observe, has succeeded the Dutch in milking the cow, while others were fighting for the horns. I have lately seen a pamphlet rela tive to this subject, published under the smooth title of "Oil without Vinegar ;" and I send you some remarks which occurred to me on reading it. The oily author sets out with a fulsome parade of impartiality, that naturally excites those suspicions, which the sequel of his work so fully verifies. He tells us, (p. 6) that having lived nearly as long in England as he did in America (his native country), he feels a great attachment to both nations, and thinks he feels a tolerable degree of impartiality, and confesses he is very desirous of preventing hostilities between the two nations." I cannot say, that I be lieve him to be equally correct in these two representations of his feelings. I.can readily admit, that he "feels a tolerable impartia lity towards both countries;" that is, that he does not care sixpence for either, except in so far as his selfish interest is concerned; and, I can believe, that he may be “very desirous of preventing hostilities between them," by the sacrifice of the rights and interests of England, as conceiving that his selfish interest may be hurt by the maintenance of those rights and interests. But no man can serve two masters: and that he or any other person can at the same time feel a great real attachment to two nations, I think as little credible, as that a woman can be strongly attached, and preserve a loyal fide. lity to two husbands at the same time. I feel no such amphibious indifference, and put no faith in such impartial advisers. Ta borrow an image of Mr. Burke, I would not leave to such an arbitrator my right to a fish poud, being well convinced, that if he gave me the land, he would give the water and the fish to my adversary, and that his only object would be to render the transaction subservient to his own advantage. If the professions of these half-and-half gentry are true, what are they but beings released from the strongest tie of social connexion, who when they change their climate shift off their allegiance with their clothes, whose country is that region, where they can for the moment make the largest gains, and who in discussing the conflicting claims of nations are swayed from the balancing impartiality. of their own apathy, by the smallest influence of their selfish interest? If their professions are untrue-I shall only say " troduction of Mr. Shirley's answer, which "An open foe may prove a curse, "But a pretended friend is worse." One most striking feature in this curious performance is the uniform and total want of attention to fairness or accuracy, with which every matter of every description great or small-of fact or of argument-of history or of conjecture-is represented. In p. 13, the author says, that "he finds in the report of the committee of the House of Commons" (see your Register of August 22, for the Report without that part of it called the Appendix)" the examination of a Mr. Henry Shirley, who he concludes is a West India planter." Now, Sir, by these words "he concludes" the fact is evidently intended to be left in doubt. What then shall we think of the accuracy of this oily gentleman, when turning to the Report itself, p. 66, we find that the very first words uttered by Mr. Shirley, and the whole of his tessimony, shewed, that he had been a planter from the year 1773, to the day when he appeared before the committee; and that he had resided in Jamaica as a planter 20 years? In p. 14, the author, Mr. Mascall Medford, after saying that "there seems to be much candour and good sense in Mr. Shirley's answers," professes to annex part of the examination of Mr. S. consisting of two questions, with the answers to them. The latter question and answer he gives thus. Question, "Would the British planter's market for rum be injured by a monopoly of their supply being granted to the British North American colonies?" Answer. "It would make the planter still more dependent on the British merchants, who cannot be very indulgent in such times as these. They seem to pity our case, but they add to our miseries by always deriving a profit from our dis-writer; but, before I shall have done with tresses." Knowing Mr. Shirley to be a man of an uncommonly clear head, and acute understanding, and presuming that the members of the committee of the House of Commons were not perfect ideots, I could not believe, particularly when by the perusal of Mr. Mascall Medford's own pamphlet, I had learned to set a proper value on his authenticity.I could not believe, that Mr. Shirley should have uttered, or that the committee should have been satisfied with such words, as an answer to such a question. Upon looking into the Report, p.67, I found that Mr. Mascall Medford, had, agreeably to his system, suppressed twenty seven lines out of thirty; and, in truth, given only the in sugar this same chapter, I believe you and your is, that supposing what he had said to be ever so true, it is nothing to the purpose. The owner of the sugar, the person who immediately suffers, is the planter. The planter's distress is the primary grievance, it is the prominent object exhibited in the Report. The merchant suffers only through the planter. The interests of the planter and the merchant are by no means identified. In some cases they are directly opposite. This Mr. Mascall perfectly well knows; his whole pamphlet proves that he knows it. In p. 14, he quotes with approbation the expression of a planter, "they" (the merchants) "add to our miseries, by always deriving a profit from our distresses." Pp. 15, 16, are filled with whining hypocritical expressions of pity for the extortions, which the planters suffer from the merchants: he calls the merchants "blood suckers, who are draw as to 1803 for one estate) which are printed in the report. These abstracts specify the cost of the articles sent from England, the amount of the expences incurred in the island (consisting of hired labour, taxes, lumber, salt fish, meat, flour, medical attendance, tradesmen's bills, salaries and commission to the persons having the care and conduct of the estate, &c.) the quantity of rum, and the quantity of sugar made yearly during the whole period. An average is then drawn of the British and insular expences per annum, from which is deducted the annual average money for which the rum was sold. An annual average is then drawn of the quantity of sugar made, and the average expenses over and above the whole money received for the rum is then divided by the average number of cwts. of sugar, in order to ascertain what is the proportionate cost of one cwt. These eighting the planter's existence from them :" he estates appear to be situated in two of those large divisions of the island called parishes; and they differ in size and other circumstances. Accordingly, the expences incident to them differ also; those on the least expensive (enjoying some very peculiar advantages) yielding an average of only 12s per cwt. and those on the most costly an average of £1. 8s. 4d. per cwt. of sugar, the general average being 20s. 10d. I confess to me this exposition seems to be clear, candid, and satisfactory but it will not do for that paragon of correctness, that model of veracity Mr. Mascall Medford. Let us hear his objections. The first is, that if the cost of making the sugar be 20s. 10d. and the expence incident to its transportation to this country and sale here be 15s. per cwt. (and the document inserted in Mascall's own appendix, No. I. proves that it is somewhat more) the cost of making, bringing it hither, &c. is greater than the average selling price. This, as applied to the coarser sugars has for a considerable time been undoubtedly true. And, yet," says Mr. Mascall, we see the West Indian merchants living like princes," which gives occasion to this ingenious gentleman for some fine writing about "iron bridges, wild beasts in the tower, bears, toads, and tortoises, which" it seems, "exist on nothing, but do not get fat, while the West Indian merchant lives on less than nothing and gets very fat." Now, Sir, I know nothing of these " West Indian merchants who live like princes," and, I think, after what you have seen of Mr. Medford, you will admit that a man without being very unreasonable, may ask this gentleman for some proof beyond his bare assertion of any thing which he advances; but, the fact invokes providence to interfere against their extortions: and, yet, in pp. 30, 31 of this same book, this same man alledges the wealth of the merchant as a proof of the prosperity of the planter, the wealth of him whom he describes to be an oppressor, as a proof of the prosperity of his victim. If this slippery gentleman shall say he means to include planters under the word merchants, I assert it as an indisputable fact, that many of them (I do not say all, for some of them have other resources besides their West Indian estates) are in the very jaws of absolute want. This is notorious amongst all who know any thing of West Indian concerns. In the report in question, it is proved over and over again that their estates bring them in debt. Mr. Shirley, p. 66, proves that an estate on which he had expended £170,000 yielded him last year about £5,600. The legal interest (6 per cent.) upon £170,000 is £10,200 per annum; so that here was a deficiency of £4,600: but there are many still stronger cases. Mr. Wedderburn, p. 23, gives an abstract of the receipts and exexpences upon an estate in Westmoreland, Jamaica, for the year 1801, and the five following years. It appears that, on an ave rage of the first five years of this period, the annual receipts exceeded the annual outgoings by a balance of £2,827. This estate Mr. Wedderburn states, cost the proprietor a great deal more than £50,000, so that £2,827 the annual excess of receipts above the actual outgoings would be a great deal less than the legal interest of the money laid out. But in the last year 1806, the total receipts were £3,866, the outgoirgs £4913; so that not only the proprietor did not receive one farthing by way of interest on the mission on the two shillings and sixpence increase in the gross price. Mr. Mascall says, we see West India merchants living like princes; but, when they come before the parliament they have got the whining | cant of beggars." To such an insolent insinuation of wilful false testimony given upon a solemn investigation, directed against such a body of men, I suppose the West Indian merchants will not condescend to make any reply: but, I will observe, that the evidence of the merchants examined, carries with it the strongest internal marks of authenticity. All who were interrogated concurred in stating, that one cause of the diminished consumption and the reduced price of sugar, was the high duties upon it. Now, Sir, I have already shewn that an increase of duty, unless it does produce a diminution of consumption and of price, is a measure of advantage to the merchants. Here, therefore, unless what they say is strictly true, they are speaking in direct opposition to their own interest; and in such a case, surely one should be inclined to give credit even to Mr. Mascall Medford himself. His next objection to Mr. Wedderburn's statement of twenty shillings and ten pence, as the ave rage cost of making an cwt. of sugar is, that capital expended, but over and above that total loss his estate was an additional charge to him of £1047. This I take it was by no means a singular case; and all the persons examined concur in stating that the distress of the planters is general. In fact, the planter whose estate produces ordinary or inferior sugar (which is the case with most of the estates in Jamaica) must, if he have nothing but such an estate to depend on, be actually starving. He must sit with his family around him contemplating the prospect of irremediable ruin. When he beholds his children, he must sigh to reflect that he gave them an education, calculated to qualify them for that condition of life to which they were born, but which can now only aggravate the poignancy of their sufferings under the degradation to which they are condemned. In these circumstances, to be mocked with taunts of prosperity and wealth, to be told that his fat and thriving looks prove he must have " an art beyond that of the bear, who subsists by sucking his paws, or that of the toad who lives without light or food," is a sort of insult, which, I suppose, no man will be required to submit to in silence; and which (for the credit of our common nature, Mr. Cobbett,) I kope no man living is capa ble of offering, but Mascall Medford, Esq. of Philadelphia.—I have said that the interest of the merchant and the planter are by no means identified; they are, however, very frequently intimately connected, particularly in those cases (by far the most numerous) in which the merchant is the mortgagee of the planter's estate. Still, even in these cases it is plain, that any great distress must first fall upon the planter, nay, be may be absolutely ruined by the seizure of his estate; the Negroes and stock on which may yet be just sufficient to pay the merchant his debt. I have said too, that the interests of the merchant are sometimes directly opposite to those of the planter. I will give an instance, merchants charge their commission on the gross proceeds of the articles which they sell: let us suppose a duty of five shillings per cwt to be laid on sugar, and that in consequence of such duty, the gross price of sugars should rise half a crown. per cwt. above what they were before: in this case it is evident, that the additional du-ly to write, he must know they have borne ty would be paid in equal shares by the planter and the consumer, the former receiving (neat) half a crown less for every cwt. that he sqld, and the latter paying half a crown more for every hundred weight that he bought; but the merchant would not participate in the planter's loss. On the contrary, he is a gainer to the amount of his com among the chief expenses of the 20s; 104 are loss upon bills of exchange drawn 03 England, and the interest of the money advanced." Now, is it credible (I do not mean to you, Mr. Cobbett, for you tell us you are conversant with American morality) to any one unacquainted with American mo rality, is it credible, that when this man wrote this paragraph, he had before him, as his pamphlet proves that he had, the Report of the West India committee containing Mr. Wedderburn's documents, setting forth every item both of supplies from Europe, and expenses in the island, by which it ap pears, that not one single farthing of expence was incurred by bills of exchange drawn on England,' and that no charge whatever was made for interest on capital, or even for loss upon Negroes, though it is distinctly stated that such a loss was annually incurred? As to bills of exchange upon England, if Mr. Mascall knows any thing of the subject upon which he has taken upon himself so flippant a premium ; and if he does not know any thing of his subject, he should at least have suppressed his flippant pretensions, to instruct the world:-His next objection is to the precision of the average costated to be 20s. 10d." Indeed," says he "if the president of the board of agriculture had been asked,if he, amongst the hundreds of volumes |