Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

constitution, and outrage popular rights and privileges-he is still a most upright public servant. Let this party, for the sake of private gain, reverse its principles-it still acts from the best intentions. Let that party, in order to obtain possession of power, labour to overthrow all the institutions of the countryits motives are still most praiseworthy. With these people, you must call vice virtue, and crime innocence; if the cabinet traitor confess his guilt, you must insist that he has committed none; if the cabinet despot perpetrate his iniquity before the whole world, you must attest his purity in despite of the evidence of your senses; you must declare it impossible for a minister to feel interested motives, and for a party of public men to be actuated by any thing but patriotism. Should Mr Peel sell his country to a foreign one, or the Duke of Wellington seize on the crown by force of arms, or the Lord Chancellor advise the Sovereign to annul the constitutionshould one party of public men offer to surrender public freedom, or another unfurl the banner of rebellion, such people would see in all this nothing beyond a little venial error of judgment.

In conformity with this, if the public mind be excited in their favour, they make it matter of regret; if petitions be prepared, they solemnly disavow all participation in it: they wash their hands of the strong language used in one quarter, and the strong proceedings resorted to in another: each must dissent about as much from his brethren, as from his opponents. They fight the battle in friendship and love, therefore they must employ.neither weapons nor

blows.

Then, although they dissent from the principles of their opponents, they dissent equally from opposite ones. They do not approve of the new system, but they do not wish to return to the old one-free trade in silks is not to their mind, but they are opposed to prohibition-theirs is some middle course-some moderate system equally distant from both extremes. In reality they have no principles; they surrender just as much as makes what they retain

worthless; they advise that truth and protection shall be compounded with sufficient error and destruction to deprive them of all efficacy. To crown the whole, they admit that their opponents may be right in the abstract, and are unquestionably men who combine the highest talents and acquirements with the first virtues.

What are the fruits of all this? To the prevailing faction of public men, official, and otherwise, all distinctions between right and wrong, purity and guilt, are destroyed. The Minister may range round the whole circle of iniquity-the party may sell both the crown and the people-and the faction may openly plunge to the lowest depths of crime, in perfect certainty that their opponents will spontaneously testify to their unsullied honour and incorruptible patriotism.

The effects would not be so pernicious as they are, if it were imitated by the opposite side; but the latter is sagacious enough to avoid the folly. The Holy Fathers and their press, in return for the meek and honied compliments, load the public and private character of the Duke of Cumberland with the most horrible charges-represent the Eldons and Newcastles to be equally imbecile and corrupt-and assert the Sadlers to be wholly destitute of both ability and integrity. If in Parliament the Broughams and Burdetts cease for a moment to vituperate the bigotry and dishonesty of those who differ from them, it is only to compassionate their lamentable ignorance and want of understanding. Huskissons, on being lauded by their opponents for their great talents and spotless intentions, charge these opponents with being egregious simpletons, who are actuated by the worst motives. All who dissent from them are in the mass held up to public derision for incapacity, and to public hatred for want of principle.

The

Thus then in effect the testimony of both sides is, that the Holy Fathers and their followers can do no wrong, and that they monopolize all the talents and virtues; while their opponents can never be right, and are utterly destitute of intellect and honesty. The right side practically joins the other in destroying its own

character and power. The public man cannot be profligate, without obtaining honours and rewards; and he cannot be consistent and upright without covering himself with disgrace and punishment.

To this may be, in some degree, ascribed the infatuation which prevails amidst the less exalted classes. The landowner assents in Parliament to the most absurd doctrines touching agriculture, which his own eyes have again and again proved to him are utterly false. The farmer agrees to doctrines which he knows from ample trial will be ruinous to him. The merchant and manufacturer applaud doctrines which they know from daily experience to be wholly erroneous. And the working classes support doctrines which are confessedly to take away their wages, and which they know from sad experiment must plunge them into want and wretchedness.

I say, in some degree, because the infatuation is too extraordinary to be accounted for on natural causes.

If the charge be cast on me, that I speak from party feelings, I shake it from me with scorn: the public man lives not whom I follow; the party has no existence which can give me opinion. If the accusation be made, that I speak from prejudice and bigotry, I spurn it from me into the teeth of my accusers. As to interest, I scarcely need mention it; those who know any thing must be aware, that he who takes the path which I do must look for his reward solely to his own conscience.

Am I, that I may escape being called a party-man, to follow the profligate and traitor, and assist in destroying the constitution; propagating error and delusion; sacrificing the public weal to party cupidity; and filling the empire with loss and wretchedness? Am I to tell my country to trust in those who have betrayed her; to hope in those who have overwhelmed her with calamity; and to follow those who are leading her to destruction? Am I to be silent when faction is preying on her vitals, and every thing dear to her is in jeopardy?

I am boast though it be too much a patriot.

Am I, that I may not be charged with prejudice and bigotry, to re

verse the definitions of right and wrong to laud insincerity, treachery, and apostasy-to war against honour and consistency-to assert that black is white, and light is darkness-and to make sordid enmity to public interests, and utter disregard for principle, the first of virtues in the public man? While the swindler is still punished by law, am I to hold the wretch innocent who plunders his country, by obtaining office or party power under false pretences? While the murderer still forfeits his life by his guilt, am I to be the eulogist of the public men and parties who, for personal profit, continually strike at the existence of the empire?

I am too much the friend of honour and morals.

Or, for the same cause, am I to substitute names for things, and to judge from empty appellations, instead of actual nature and consequences? Am I to be the blind worshipper of abstract doctrines, in utter contempt of what their application produces? When I see that Catholic Emancipation has converted that which was merely a question of internal regulation into one of rebellion and civil war has changed that which made the influential part of the Irish people the firm friends of England, into a matter of deadly contention between the latter and Ireland, as separate nations--has practically severed Ireland from England, and dismembered the empire, am I to be its panegyrist, because the principles from which it emanated are called liberal and enlightened? Am I to applaud that which has sacrificed the foreign interests of my country, and destroyed her influence amidst other nations, merely because it is called liberal and enlightened policy? Am I to support laws which demonstrably have plunged half my countrymen into ruin and misery, because it is said, they are founded on liberal and enlightened principles? Is it, because the doctrines on which the empire is governed, are called liberal and enlightened, that I am to embrace them, when the evidence of my senses shews that they have destroyed its power, stripped it of its supremacy, dissolved the union of its parts, and given it, for prosperity

and happiness, bankruptcy, hunger, and suffering? Am I to be the champion of what are called liberal opinions, because they are so called, when I have demonstration before me that their application, in every instance, both at home and abroad, has yielded only calamity and wretch edness?

I am not sufficiently afflicted with madness.

Or, am I to abjure principles, and vituperate systems, merely because they are called bigoted, antiquated, and obsolete? Am I to abandon the maxims and policy of my fathers, because they are covered with vulgar calumny, when I am surrounded by proofs that they made my country the first of nations-that they gave her as much happiness as grandeur -that, while they filled the coffers of the capitalist, they blessed the labourer with comfort and abundance -that they poured their benefits impartially on all ranks and callingsand that they were not more productive of riches and plenty than of religion, morals, honour, patriotism, and all the virtues?

I—even I—have too much understanding.

Or, am I to forsake proved truth, and embrace self-evident falsehood? Am I to believe that the landlord's rent, and the farmer's profits, will be increased, in proportion as the prices of agricultural produce are reduced that the manufacturer's gains and trade will be enlarged in proportion as his prices are lowered, his markets are glutted, and his protection against foreign competition is taken away-and that the labourer's command over necessaries and comforts will be extended in proportion as his wages are diminished and his employment is destroyed? Am I to believe that the general rate of profit will be the highest, when the distress of the agricultural half of my countrymen is the greatest that the ruin of the home-trade will benefit the foreign one-that losing prices will yield the best profits that the trade of this country will be increased by the surrender of it to foreigners-and that the consumption of agricultural produce, manufactures, and merchandise, will be the greatest, when the means of consumers for obtaining them are the

smallest? Am I to believe, that if this country buy abroad, it can give nothing but goods in payment-that if France sell to this country for money, it will cause other nations to buy a proportionately greater quantity of British goods-that if America refuse to take such goods in payment for her commodities, this will compel foreign Europe to take the whole quantity she refuses in addition to its usual purchases-that capital and labour can never want employment-that the destruction of their employment is the best means of preserving them from idleness— and that the more deeply and comprehensively the population is sunk in penury and barbarism, the greater will be the measure of national trade, wealth, and prosperity? And am I to believe ten thousand similar fictions, equally gross and monstrous? I cannot so far unman myself.

Or, am I to insist that agriculture ought to be sacrificed to manufactures and commerce-that the shipowners ought to be ruined to increase the profits of the cotton and woollen manufacturers-that protection ought to be given to one trade, and denied to another-and that the great majority ought to be stripped of property and bread, for the benefit of the contemptible minority?

I am too much an Englishman to advocate the atrocious robbery and confiscation, the inhuman tyranny and oppression.

Or, am I to maintain that it is the object of trade to ruin and hunger my fellow-creatures, that it ought to be extended by creating general bankruptcy, and depriving the working classes of food and raiment, intelligence, morals, and virtue-and that every thing which distinguishes man from the beast of the field ought to be sacrificed to it? Am I to teach that the labourer ought to starve that his employer may become rich, and that the vast mass of my countrymen ought to be bound to indigence, want, and misery, for the benefit of the few individual exceptions? Must I lie and slander that public suffering may be concealed and preserved from remedy-swear that the insolvent trade is flourishing, and the destitute workmen are in employment -protest that loss is profit, and want is abundance-and blast the charac

ter of those who are famishing, that the hand of charity may not reach them? Must I call on the Ministry and Legislature to spurn from them the supplications of suffering mil lions, and reply to the prayer for relief, by creations of additional ruin and misery? Is it to be mine to labour to make the government of my country the most savage tyranny that ever cursed civilized nation-an unheard-of compound of barbarism and cannibalism, steeled against the common feelings of humanity, delighting only in destroying property and food, competence and comfort, and think ing its crimes incomplete if they spare women and children ?

I thank my God! I am too much a Christian.

I oppose the new system, not because it is new, but because it is at variance with all reason and experience because it is founded on phy

sical impossibilities because it is
confessedly to destroy property and
bread, prosperity and comfort-be-
cause it wars against all the best feel-
ings and possessions of human na-
ture and because in its application
it has produced nothing but appal-
ling evils to the state, the population
in the body, and the individual. It
is not because the old system is old,
but because it stands on principles
which have been formed by experi-
ment-because it is in harmony with
the actual condition of men and
things-because it professes to yield
benefit only, and benefit impartially
to all-and because in its application
it blessed my country with an un-
exampled measure of power, glory,
wealth, trade, prosperity, and happi-
ness: It is from all this that I still
remain,
ONE OF THE OLD SCHOOL.
London, Dec. 8, 1829.

DESULTORY REMINISCENCES OF MISS O'NEILL.
BY TIMOTHY CRUSTY, ESQ. M.A. AND F.p.s.

"THE debût of the greatest promise, since the days of Mrs Siddons!" I exclaimed, laying down the pages of that rich production-the Court Journal. Is Miss O'Neill so soon forgot? Is she quite merged in Mrs Becher? Well, well! I ought to have known, at my years, that

"To have done is to hang Quite out of fashion, like a rusty mail In monumental mockery."

I took up the Times and the Morning Herald from the club table, in the club-room of the country town of O, and looked for the large letters that pointed out so intelligibly Miss Fanny Kemble's debût. "What, all in the same story!" I cried rather testily, "Let us see what my sapient friend, Mr Jerdan, will tell us in his oracular organ of wisdom-the Literary Gazette, which is sometimes (Heaven help us!) full of not very airy litter!-Well, positively, he is bewitched too! Now I would bet any wager that this girl, this Fanny, or Fan, is no such mighty wonder. Handsome she cannot be-nay, I fear, it is too plain that she is rather plain; for had she possessed but a hundredth part of the personal charms of Miss

دو

O'Neill, (I hate to call her Mrs Bech-
er,) the papers would have raved
about her form and face. Now they
glide as gingerly over that matter, as
a skaiter over suspicious ice,—and it
is all her genius-her genius, for-
sooth. But truly we ought to be con-
tent with what we can get; and I do
not wonder that even a plain bun
should seem bride-cake to the thea-
trical public, after their long starva-
tion.' I must here pause to let the
reader a little into my character. I
will not mince the matter-I am an
old gentleman,-I glory in the title.
Many a person at my age, and with
my (I must say) rather youthful look,
would call himself a middle-aged
man-perhaps even a man in the
prime of life; but I scorn such half
measures. I have passed my grand
climacteric, and therefore am an old
gentleman. Does not my candour
deserve that I should claim all the
privileges of one? I have no notion
of being virtuous for nothing.
great privilege, then, which I claim-
in all companies and under all cir-
cumstances, is that of speaking my
mind. Now, old as I am, and pos-
sessing, too, (I must say,) a great deal
of observation, I never yet found that

The

things which were loudly praised from the very first by the many-headed multitude, did ever truly possess intrinsic merit. Timid and hesitating was the first tribute of newspaper applause to my ever-beloved Miss O'Neill;-a Miss O'Neill, as they called her a promising debutantea very tolerable performer. All this din of praise about this girl awakes my suspicion. Besides, my dear reader, to confess to thee, and thee alone, a truth, I am aware,-(for I must say that I have a great deal of self-knowledge)—I am aware, I say,

that

"One fault I have above the restWith contradiction I am blest." I do hate to hear a hubbub of praise about any thing-except my matchless picture by Corregio; it always stirs my bile. This partly results from my long experience; for I never yet was told by a friend, "I will introduce you to a charming person whom you are sure to like," but I found this said charming person perfectly detestable. At this point of my meditations, my servant in his orange inexpressibles brightened up the club-room by his glowing presence, and bowing, respectfully (as he is wont to do) presented me with three letters, on a silver salver, brought from my own house, as was proper. "All with the London mark, I see," thought I. "Now I shall perhaps hear something more near the truth of this Fanny Kemble. Um Baker-street, that must be from Lady Dorothy, my cousin;-I shall not hear much truth from her. The next, I see, is from my city friend, Mrs Dykes of Hounsditch-she will tell the truth-as it appears to her; -and this, though last, not least, is the cheery handwriting of my fidus Achates, my alter idem, Frank Proser. By him I will abide ;-however, I must give the ladies the precedence, I suppose. Indeed, it is better to read their nonsense first, and reserve Frank's letter as a restorative. And first, let me make free with this pretty green seal, on which is engraved a head of Eolus puffing forth a zephyr, with the motto, Je meurs en soupirant,'-a device of my lady's own invention, as she informed me. If I did not open this letter from the court end of the town-this perfu

med envelope, which whispers whence it stole its balmy spoils, viz. de chez Delcroix-before the city dame's square emblem of her own form, I should expect that the elegant billet would fly with horror out of the window." So saying, I took from the right-hand pocket of my coat (I love to be particular) a green morocco case containing an almanack and divers useful instruments, and thence I selected a small (yet strong) pair of scissors, wherewith I carefully (as is my custom) cut round the emblematical seal. It would have been a sad pity to have split Master Eolus's head in two. I then read thus.

"MY DEAR COUSIN,

"Sir Thomas being, as usual, indisposed to epistolary exertion, I take my pen to alleviate any anxiety you may feel respecting the health and welfare of our family. [The deuce a bit anxiety have I felt, muttered I.] My sweet Glorvina has caused me many a trembling moment of late, from a slight tendency to pulmonary affection. The dear girl has less appetite-[indeed, thought I, I am glad to hear it]-less appetite than she is wont to exhibit ordinarily; and the roses have been, in some degree, usurped, upon her cheeks, by the hues of their paler sisters of the field. [Very pretty indeed!] With this exception, we are all much the same as when we had the pleasure of holding converse with you in the metropolis. [Alias, of seeing you in London. Will the woman never write her plain mother tongue?] Some slight metamorphosis has indeed taken place with regard to Sir Thomas; but I flatter myself that you will opine it is a change for the better. I have at length prevailed on him to make experiment of Barr's Roman Toupee-an unrivalled invention for the concealment of that defect which caused the illustrious Julius Cæsar to wear a coronal of laurel. [Julius Cæsar and Sir Thomas! Well done!] As Barr not unaptly says, his locks may now defy inspection. But how is it possible that I can think, speak, write of anything but the enchanting Miss Fanny Kemble! [So, here we have it!— a good beginning, by Jupiter!] She is indeed perfection-a miracle of talent-a prodigy of genius! Thrice

« ZurückWeiter »