COBBETT'S WEEKLY POLITICAL REGISTER. VOL. XIX. No. 49.] LONDON, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 19, 1811. 1505] [Price 18. [1506 substance of what was said in answer to SUMMARY OF POLITICS. PARLIAMENTARY REFORM. The Meeting, lately held at the Freemason's Tavern, was, let us hope, the beginning of a series of efforts, which will end in the accomplishment of this grand object." The nation has witnessed several struggles made before; especially those of the FRIENDS OF THE PEOPLE and of the Corresponding Society. The former of these gave up, being unable to withstand the torrent of abuse that was poured out against it; and the latter was stifled by means, for the use of some of which the actors obtained a bill of indemnity, but neither which means or the actors will, I trust, ever be forgotten. -Things are now a good deal changed. When the Corresponding Society was stifled, the Revolution was at the full boil in France; the streets of Paris were (owing principally to the war carried on against the French people in the name of their king) stained with human blood; all law and order, all security to either property or person, seemed to be at an end; and, every one looked upon France as destined to fall a prey to the kings who had coalesced against her, and by whom it was #expected she would be torn limb from limb, and divided, or, at least, plucked of her fairest plumes and most essential means of self-defence.This was the state of things at the time when the Corresponding Society was stifled. In answer to that Society, who asked, be it observed, for nothing but reform of parliament, and who were never proved to have had any other object in view; in answer to that Society, it was said by the Antijacobins, What, do you want to put " England in the horrid state in which "France now is? The revolutionists in "France began by asking for reform; having got one step, they proceeded to "another, 'till, at last, they have murdered the king and his wife and son and "sister; and, after having done that they are now murdering one another, "having declared war against all law, property and order." This was the acts, as Mr. Fox said, and such acts as I need not name, were committed upon this ground! Once persuade a people to prefer their present ease and enjoyments to the permanent freedom of their country, and you have only further to persuade them that what you do is absolutely neces sary to the preservation of that ease and those enjoyments: when you have done this, you may do what you like; for they will stand by, and, as Casca says of the rabble of Rome, shout forth your praises though you were to cut the throats of their mothers. This reasoning in the way of analogy was wholly fallacious; for, there was no comparison between the two countries in regard to a reform in the government. But, the fallacy was a convenient one for the enemies of reform, who failed not to make a most dextrous use of it, and who assumed as a proof of the revolutionary designs of the English reformers, that they openly professed their wishes for the success of the revolutionists of France, and even, as long as they dared, contributed in a pecuniary way towards the success of that cause. This was, by the Anti-jacobins, cited as proof that the English reformers wanted to see that done in England which had been done in France. This was another fallacy; but it was a convenient one for the enemies of reform; and as those enemies found it no very difficult matter to make a vast majo rity of the people of property fear for that property, the Corresponding Society was stifled without exciting any great opposi tion, and with that Society was stifled, for that time, the great cause of Parliamen. tary Reform.-The state of things, I repeat, is now changed. We have seen the ters; that they serve merely as an instrument for taxing the people and passing laws to compel them to be conscripts; that, in short, they are no more the representatives of the people of France than they are of the Indians in America: if this be true, which I do not, by the bye, at all dispute, there can be no fear that the English reformers would now be disposed to imitate the example of the French, however they may have been disposed this way at the time when France called herself a Republic, and had proclaimed principles, of which every friend of freedom must have heartily approved. result of the French Revolution; and, al- | though we have seen, that, in its progress, it has caused no small part of the property of the country to change owners, we have also seen, that it has not made France a prey to the enemies (no less than all the nations of Europe) coalesced against her; that they have not tore her limb from limb; that they have plucked out none of her plumes, nor robbed her of any of her means of defence; but, on the contrary, that they have all; yea all of them, this nation excepted, fallen before her, humbled themselves in the dust at her feet, and have had to bless her generosity for their The Reformers, therefore, cannot existence. Here, then, is one part of now be accused of having the same views the old Anti-jacobin argument completely with the enemy, as they were in 1794, the refuted. Time has proved to us, that re-enemy has a government which the Eng form, even if it lead to total revolution, to mad democracy, and end at last in military despotism, does, under every change, at every stage of its progress, tend not only to preserve the independence of a country, but to make it victorious and to bring its enemies to its feet. Besides, the dread of contagion must now be removed. French principles, it was feared, were at work in the breasts of the reformers; and that, if reform was once begun, it would soon get into an imitation of what was going on in France. The contagion of French principles was an object of horror. But, in this respect also, the state of things is wholly different from what it was. The French Republicans or Jacobins or Levellers or Reformers, call them what you will, are no more. They have no longer a political existence. The men are alive, in body, or some of them, at least; but, as political beings they have long been defunct. The piece of clay, called ABBE SIEYES, is still, I believe, in a state to move about and to serve as a sort of mill whereby a portion of the fruits of the earth are again returned to the element whence they sprang; but, ABBE SIEYES the politician is as dead as Pitt or Kenyon or Melville.- -France is become a military despotism; at least, so it is said. I do not know it, nor have I any faith in what is said about it by our venal prints; but, if what they say be true; if it be true, that there is a simple military despotism established in France; that the laws do, in fact, emanate from the will of the sovereign alone; that the legislative assemblies are a mere sham; that they are absolutely nothing but tools in the hands of the sovereign, or his minis lish reformers hate; and, Oh! strange to tell! the Anti-jacobins of England; the Anti-reformers; the Associators against Republicans and Levellers are wishing for what? What are they now wishing for? Why, for a revolution in France; aye, they actually live, they exist, upon the hope of an insurrection and revolution is France. This is their daily bread. They have nothing else to depend upon. Her is a change! They, who, for years, cried aloud and ceased not, against insurrection and disorder and revolution and anarchy, and who preached up obedience to the higher powers, who called upon the people to associate and subscribe and fight and inform, to make all sorts of exertions and all sorts of sacrifices, in defence of order and law, of regular government and social order: these very men are now filling their imaginations, feeding their fancies, staying the longing of their ar dent minds with the hope of seeing another revolution in France! They, who dreaded nothing so much as revolution; they who, in answer to all that was said against the despotisms of Prussia, Austria, and even Turkey, said "it is better than "revolution;" they, who were ready to justify any thing upon the plea that it was necessary to prevent revolution; they, who cursed the name of liberty, because it had been used for the purpose of effecting revolution; they, who when they saw Eng land deserted by her allies in the war against France, and saw her impoverished and in difficulties to her lips, still cried out against treating with her, because her government was revolutionary; these men, aye, these very men, are now praying, day and night, for another revolution in France; and, if you examine them closely, you will find, that, at bottom, it is upon this and this only, that they build whatever hope they have of the country's finally escaping subjugation by France! This is a change indeed! Nine years war, ending in 1802, costing us in taxes and loans, not less than SEVEN HUNDRED MILLIONS OF POUNDS STERLING, and some hundreds of thousands of lives; all this to repel revolutionary principles; all this to keep down the spirit of revolution; all this to prevent the contagion of French principles from reaching England; all this for Regular Government and Social Order; and, now we see those who were the advocates of that war, resting their political salvation upon the hope of seeing another revolution in France; and even going so far as to say, that we need expect no peace until such revolution shall take place, whereas they before told us, that no peace was to be had, because there was a revolution going on in France! Was there ever, then, change more complete than this? In short, the whole is changed, as to both countries, except only, that the Parliament of England remains what it was at the time when "the "Friends of the People" gave up, and when the more sturdy and sincere Corresponding Society was stifled.It is impossible for any one to excite alarm now as to the propagation of French principles; no man in his senses can be made to fear the effect of republican principles in England; the time cannot be pleaded as unfit, for when will there be a fit time if that time is not now, seeing that the "hurricane of revolution," as it is called, is over, and that we have before us a most salutary lesson as to the conquences of going too far.Therefore, there is now nothing to offer against reform but that which will serve at all times, namely, that CORRUPTION IS NECES. SARY TO THE SUPPORT OF OUR GOVERNMENT, a doctrine, which, though it has been openly avowed, is certainly the most infamous that ever was heard of. To me it appears difficult to form an idea of any thing so slanderous upon a government, any thing so seditious, as to say of a government, that corruption, that the continual existence and practice of corruption, is necessary to its existence? I appeal to the reader; I appeal to the considerate and moral amongst men; I appeal to that principle of rectitude, which, if not stifled by vice, lives in every man's breast; I appeal to conscience and to honour, whether it be possible to invent a libel upon government more infamous than this? And, to those who hold this doctrine, and yet affect to be anxious for the preservation of the kingly government, I put this question: what can you invent, what can any man invent, what could the united invention of all the geniuses in the world invent, so likely as this doctrine, to work the utter destruction of that government ? What! in order to preserve a thing, will you insist that its existence necessarily implies the existence of corruption? In order to make us keep a thing up, will you tell us, that, in keeping it up, we necessarily keep up corruption? Oh! monstrous! What a base people must we be, if we are to be induced to support the government upon this ground! To suppose that a government can long exist upon such a basis is to suppose the people of England to be what the French called "demoralized;" it is to suppose them out-laws of virtue; it is to write the word wretch upon each man's forehead; it is to call upon the world, in the name of virtue and of honour, to extirpate the whole race of us from the face of the earth. Taxes! Flogging! What are taxes and what is flogging; what are they to what we should deserve, if we were so base, so infamously base, as to be induced to love a government to the support of which Corruption was absolutely necessary? What, then, shall we say of those; what will our Sovereign say of those, who openly and explicitly declare, that the government under which we live is not to be carried on without corruption; and, what, especially, shall we say, when we reflect, that those who tell us so, those who hold this doctrine, do, at the same time assume the appellations of " King's friends" and of " loyal men," while they hold forth to the world as enemies of the King and the whole scheme of government, all of us who contend, that Corruption is not necessary to the existence of that government, but, that the kingly power and dignity can be maintained, that the parliament can be efficient for its purposes, and that the whole of the government under which we live and that has descended to us from our forefathers, can be carried on upon principles of morality, and that nothing of an infamous nature is necessary to be done to support either the prerogatives of the King or the powers of the parliament? This is our doctrine; this is the doctrine of the Reformers; and, yet those who oppose us have the impudence to hold us forth as persons endeavouring to subvert the go it were calumny to say of the government that it can be maintained without Corruption, and not calumny to say that it cannot be maintained without corruption! Let us suppose these different sentiments put into the opening of two different Addresses to the King. Let us suppose the Anti-jacobins approaching him thus: "Sir, "Conscious that your throne cannot be "supported, or the affairs of the state car"ried on without a constant violation of "numerous statutes; conscious that bri"bery and corruption; that perjury and "subornation of perjury; that many of "the crimes the most hateful to man's in"herent nature as well as the most distinctly accursed in that Scripture on our "faith in which we build our hopes of eter"nal salvation; conscious that the almost "constant commission of these crimes, by "great numbers of your Majesty's subjects, "is absolutely necessary to the support "of your Majesty's throne and to the ex"ercise of the powers of government, we "beseech your Majesty, &c. &c. &c. &c." vernment by the means of calumny; as if | " &c. &c. &c."- -Reader, what would you say of a King to whose ear the former of these could be more pleasing than the latter? A King, did I say; far be it from me to suppose that there ever will be a King in England with regard to whom the hypothesis could, for one moment, be put. Nay, it is hard to believe, that any man upon earth, under whatever circumstances placed, could hesitate for one moment as to which of the two he would prefer. Indeed, to suppose any one capable of preferring the former to the latter, is to suppose the existence of a monster to put whom out of the world would be the duty of every man who had it in his power. What, then, shall we think of those, who scruple not to hold such language; who openly avow their conviction, that corruption is necessary, absolutely necessary, to the support of the government; who tell us, in so many words, that with out corruption, the government could not go on; and who, embodying their diabolical doctrine into one close figure of rhetoric, assert, that "the rotten boroughs "are the sound part of the Constitution;" herein, with a boast "saying to corruption "thou art my father;" and adopting the horrid sentiment of the king of hell," evil "be thou my good"?What shall we say of such men; and yet, the reader must be convinced, that this is no exaggeration; that this is no more than the well known truth; that it is a truth that cannot be denied. Heretofore excuse: were made; by some the corruption was denied; by others the reform was said to have danger in it; some said the cure was said to threaten us with greater mischiefs than the disease; others that the time was not proper; never, never 'till the year 1809 were there found men of such bold, such barefaced infamy as to avow the corruption, to assert that it was necessary to the support of good government in this country, and that to put an end to the corruption would be to endanger the exist ence of the government, or, at the very least, to render it less efficacious for the good of the people.--Those who hold this doctrine are the true Antijacobins ; they are of the full-blood. They are the same set, who; twelve years ago, had And let us suppose the Reformer approaching him thus: "Sir, Conscious that, of all the maxims of the Holy "Scriptures, none is more true, or more "worthy of being held in remembrance, "than this: that "the throne shall en""dure which is established in righteous""ness;" conscious that to support the "throne of your Majesty and to carry on "the affairs of your government, no"thing can be more conducive than an "obedience to the statutes, the inculca"tion of morality amongst the people "at large by the example of the nobility and gentry, and especially by those "who are members of parliament; con"scious that bribery and corruption, and "all the manifold crimes thence flowing, " and extending themselves amongst great "numbers of your Majesty's subjects; "conscious that these crimes, thus ex"tended, must have a necessary tendency "not only to corrupt the morals of the "people but to obliterate from their minds "all sense of public duty, and, of course, "all love of country, and all sense of duty "towards their King, as the guardian of "the rights and honour of that country; "conscious, that, from this cause the "stability of your Majesty's throne must "be shaken, the lawful powers of the "government enfeebled, and the country "thereby exposed to invasion and subjugation, we beseech your Majesty, &c. Regular Government, Social Order, and "Our Holy Religion," everlastingly upon their tongues. This set, however, we know. Their views and designs are not disguised any more than are the means, by which they would see those designs car ried into effect. With these writers there is no disguise, because no disguise will any longer serve their turn. The TARTUFFE, in Moliere, is a hypocrite till detected and exposed, but when he finds that hypocrisy will no longer serve his turn, throws off all attempt at disguise, turns bully, and those who have hitherto been his dupes he threatens with the use of the means that their folly has placed in his hands. The Anti-jacobins, however, we understand. That hateful, that persecuting, that relentless set," epithet of an almost divine code.". who, if they had the power, would each of them surpass a Robespierre, or, which is worse, any of those monsters, who for the sheer love of gain, have depopulated whole countries; this set we know, and that is something. But, we have other enemies at work, and these more formidable than the Anti-jacobins, because their principles are, in the main, good; and because they even profess themselves friends to Parliamentary Reform. "labour from the fingers of the unfortu "nate slaves. Not even in the presence "of the master could any beyond a certain " number of lashes be imposed; and even the degree of force was limited. No contusion "or effusion of blood was tolerated; if any "such took place, that was esteemed a "misdemeanor; and if repeated the slave "was taken from under the controul and pro"tection of his master. Such was the Or"dinance to which Mr. Smith applied the -But these I shall mention more fully in my next, having now placed in a fair light the odious and diabolical doctrine of the necessity of corruption. This is negro-flogging. This is the manner, in which slaves are treated under Spanish laws; and, I believe, our own laws for the treatment of slaves are as mild, if not more A few lashes; no effusion of blood; no contusion even; the number of lashes fixed; even the degree of force fixed! And this for slaves, observe. This is the law for the flogging of slaves. So. FLOGGING SOLDIERS. The following Regimental Order, issued it appears on the eleventh of this present month, does great honour to the Royal Duke, whence it has proceeded, and as such I put it upon record, and beg leave to call the particuFLOGGING NEGROES.The following lar attention of my readers to it." The passage from Mr. BROUGHAM's speech "Duke of Gloucester cannot allow the upon the Trinidad question has struck me "present commanding officers of the two as very interesting, and as worthy, at this" Battalions of his Regiment, the honouratime, of the particular attention of the people of England." Mr. Brougham" "next argued, that the Ordinance of 1789 "ble Major-General Stopford, and MajorGeneral Sir John Dalrymple, to resign "their respective commands without offer. ing to them his warmest thanks, and expressing his entire approbation of every part of their conduct, during the time "he has had the honour to be Colonel "of the Third Regiment of Guards.―― "The first Battalion, under the orders of was unquestionably a part of the Spanish law. It was an order of the King, con"ceived in the most distinct terms, and commanding the very council by which "it was said it ought to be confirmed, to "consider it as law, and administer it accordingly. It had been called by Mr." Major-General Stopford, has acted up "Smith an almost divine ordinance, and, comparatively speaking, it was so, for it "afforded much greater protection to the "slaves than any law of ours. The mas ter and steward only were permitted to inflict a few lashes, not the driver; and "they were inflicted too only by way of "punishment, and not to quicken the Negro's hands by the effusion of his "blood, as in our other West India "Colonies where the British constitution "and laws were not established, as in this "country.Another regulation in this "Ordinance, was, that no one but the mas ter or his steward should be entitled to "execute the sentence. Cart-whips could "not exist in Trinidad for the purpose "of quickening the hands, or extorting "to the distinguished character of the re"giment upon the different services on "which it has been employed, has dis"played that heroic gallantry for which "his Majesty's Guards are renowned, and "whilst the Battalion has merited the |