"fulfilment of their predictions, and their | quence of pursuing such and such mea"true jacobin ferocity, by demanding that "Ministers "shall be brought to the block." "It is not their country that they love, "but their party; it is not the enemies of "their country that they hate, but their po"litical opponents; the men whose talents "and characters keep them down.". Now, if the Reformers really did wish to keep the public mind in a ferment; if they did really wish to inflame and agitate the people, what must have been their satisfaction at seeing the above-mentioned prosecutions commenced? It is by those prosecutions that the public mind has been excited into a ferment, and that the people have been inflamed and agitated, and not by any thing that the Reformers have said or done; for, unfortunately, what they say has but little effect upon the people, who have enough to do to meet the misery of the moment.- -And as to seasons of calamity and distress, whose fault is it, if there are such seasons? The Reformers have had no hand in producing calamity and distress; for they have had no power. Their advice has been scorned; they have wished for and recommended a set of measures the opposite of those which have been adopted; if their advice had been followed, there would have been no stoppage of those channels of intercourse, which were before open, and through which so many persons were fed; if their advice had been followed there would have been no armies to support in Sicily, Spain, and Portugal. You will say, that their advice was foolish; very well; but, as you did not follow it, acknowledge, at least, that they have had no hand in producing the calamities and distress, of which you talk; and, acknowledge further, that they have a fair right to lay these calamities at the door of those who rejected their advice. -But, they are charged with exulting in the fulfilment of their predictions. It is very natural and very proper for men to point out to those, who have rejected their advice, the consequences of such rejection; but, it by no means follows, that they rejoice at these consequences. The farmer comes into the field to his harvest men, and tells them it will rain by such an hour, and that the corn will be wet, unless it be got in before that hour. The rain comes; the corn is not got in; he then reminds his men (who have been dilatory) of his prediction; but, is he, therefore, to be said to exult in the fulfilment of it?. We have said what would be the conse

sures; and if those measures are pursued, and the consequence arrives, are we not to point out the fulfilment of our predictions, without exposing ourselves to the charge of rejoicing at the mischief that has happened?--The Reformers are here accused of" demanding that Ministers shall be brought to the block." I have never seen any such demand in print, I have never heard it verbally made, I have never heard any man destine them to such a fate, nor do I believe that any Reformer in the kingdom would care one single straw what became of the Ministers, provided he could see a House of Commons chosen as freely as Sir Francis Burdett was chosen for Westminster and as his Brother will be chosen for Southwark. This talking about the block is a trick to scare people. A mere invention; but an invention that will answer very little purpose; for, the writer may be assured, that the days of terror are past; all the terrors that he or his abettors could conjure up would not extract a sixpence from the pocket of the most timid creature in the kingdom. The day is gone by when the people were made to believe, that it was necessary to give their money to placemen and pensioners in order to prevent the French from making them Atheists. That day is past never to return; and so is the day for exciting a dread of revolutionary horrors. The alarming, the terrifying, system is worn out; and to attempt to revive the use of it is only to expose the party to ridicule. If Paine were to write twenty such books as he wrote before, there would be nobody found to burn him in effigy. But, the Reformers do not, it seems, hate the enemies of the country so much as their political opponents. In the Scripture a very pithy question is put: "who is my neighbour ș And, it is equally proper for us to ask, "who are the enemies of the country?" The French, to be sure. Oh, yes! but the country may have other enemies. A man is not our neighbour merely because he lives at next door; nor are people our enemies merely because they are foreigners. No: but, the French are at war with us. True, and they are, in that sense, our enemies; and, let the cause of the war be what it may, it is our duty to defend our country against these enemies. But, it does not follow, that the country may not have other and even greater enemies, or, at least, more wicked and worse-designing enemies, than the open foreign enemies

fighting us with it: and we may with as much reason expect to see him give up his army to us as give up the Continental System. He is resolved, that England shall no longer trade with the Continent. He well knows, that her influence there | has always arisen out of that trade. His object is to prevent her from having any influence there; and, as the means of accomplishing this object, he will, if he can, and it appears that he can, prevent her from enjoying any longer that trade. This is a fixed and settled thing. He had not the power of cutting off our trade with America; that was beyond his reach; he could not march his troops into the American sea-ports in order to shut out English goods. No: that was a thing too much for him; and, that we have, by our measures against the Americans, kindly caused to be done for him. America was open to us though the Continent was shut; and we have induced the Americans to shut it themselves; and thus to aid, in the most effectual manner, that system which our great enemy has adopted as one of his modes of warfare.--I have, for my part, no notion, that the Americans will go to war. It would be very inconvenient to them, and could do them no good. They will, probably, pass some laws that shall more effectually annoy us in the way of trade and commerce; but, if they continue to do what they are now doing, it will, perhaps, better answer their end. They will carry on less external commerce than formerly, and they will every day want it less and less.It is said, it has been urged by some writers in the way of complaint against the Americans, that they permit the French to capture our vessels and carry them to American ports, while they will not permit our ships of war to go into their ports at all. The state of the case is this: the ports of a neutral state are open to the ships of war of all belligerents; and, if no dispute had ever existed between us and America and Napoleon and America, the ships of war of both would have been, at all times, permitted to enter her ports, and to carry in their prizes. But, when we passed our Orders in Council and Napoleon his Decrees, America, by way of show her resentment, prohibited the ships of war of both nations from entering her ports; declaring, at the same time, that the prohibition would be taken off as soon as those violations of her neutrality should cease. The decrees of Napoleon have been re

pealed; and, therefore, to his vessels returns the right of entering the American ports with or without prizes; but, we have not repealed our Orders in Council, and, for that reason our right of sending ships of war into the American ports bas not returned. There is no partiality here. The measure is the same towards both belligerents. We find an advantage, doubtless, in refusing to repeal our Orders in Council; and, if so, we cannot expect to enjoy, at the same time, the advantages that would attend the assenting to such repeal.

MR. WHITE'S SUBSCRIPTION.--Nothing is calculated to give greater encou ragement to the friends of freedom than the meetings, which have taken place in behalf of Mr. FINNERTY and Mr. WHITE, both of whom distinguished themselves by a gallant defence of the rights of the press. -The latter, which took place on Monday last, consisted of about 200 persons, and was, in all respects, worthy of the CHAIRMAN, Sir Francis Burdett, whom we always find at his post, when the liberties of Englishinen, which he seems born to defend, call for the exertion of his abilities. He availed himself of this occasion to repeat those opinions, which he stated with so much force and effect, during the debate, last winter, upon Ex-Officio Informations and the conduct of the Attorney General, and which opinions are, thank God, daily gaining ground. Indeed, what, compared to this subject, are all the discussions about wars and commerce? Nay, what are wars and commerce themselves? What would complete success in both be, if we were not at liberty freely to scrutinize the conduct of public men?- Mr. ALDERMAN WOOD, another true friend to the liberties of his country, was appointed by the meeting to be Treasurer of the Subscription. Other gentlemen were appointed to receive, but I am not in possession of their names. I see great subscriptions for the Portuguese, who, in my opinion, have, all the whole nation put together, not so good a claim upon us as either Mr. Finnerty or Mr. White. Others may think differently; and let them follow their taste. As, however, there are not likely to be, for Mr. White, very many collections in the Churches, under the direction of the Clergy, it becomes the friends of the freedom of the press not to neglect any means that they have in their power to further the object of the late Meeting. It must

generally be of small sums that considerable | Parliament would plead in favour of our subscriptions consist. There is scarcely a unfortunate exiles, some of whom have large town where there are not Clubs of been nearly nine years far from their some sort or other; reading societies, home, their families and business.-We or periodical meetings of some kind. If have seen by the documents in our newsin each of these a trifle was subscribed papers, published at Mr. M'Kenzie's reby each member, the aggregate sum turn, that our Government had consented, would be very considerable; and, when-1st, To exchange according to their the losses and sufferings of Mr. White are considered, I cannot help hoping, that there will be found, in many, if not in all the large towns, some persons ready voluntarily to become collectors of sums too small to be forwarded singly. At Chichester, at Nottingham, at Coventry, at Northampton, at Norwich, at Chester, at Sheffield, at Frome, at Bath, at Bristol, and at many other places, I know there are such men; and I will not believe, that it is necessary to say any more to induce them to use their best exertions in such a cause.

WM. COBBETT.

State Prison, Newgate, Friday, 6th December, 1811.

PRISONERS OF WAR.

SIR;-The different matters introduced into your very excellent Paper, are treated in such a perspicuous manner, that I have wished long ago, that such an independent and good writer as you would give his opinion upon a subject, which has yet, I think, never been presented in its true light, and still lies in the dark, though a very interesting one to the public at large, and to many families in particular. The subject 1 allude to, is the exchange of Prisoners of War, which particularly calls upon our humanity.-What the bulk of us know about it, is, that a negociation has taken place at Morlaix, and that the result was, (as it has been said) that if there was no exchange, it was intirely to be attributed to the French government. If, in impartially investigating this subject it should appear, that an exchange of Prisoners is incompatible with the honour and welfare of the British nation, it would give our unfortunate countrymen in France the great consolation, that, if they suffer, it is for their country; and, in this case, there is not one among them who would not be proud of his sufferings. But if, on the contrary, the exchange is practicable, and not disadvantageous, then the long injustice committed against our brave soldiers would appear palpable, our eyes would be opened, and there would be liberal minded persons, who in

ranks, the English travellers detained in France since 1803.-2dly, To send without exchange, 3,000 French prisoners for the Hanoverians who capitulated in 1803, and entered afterwards into the British service.-3dly, To send without exchange, 1,905 Frenchmen composing the garrison of Cape François, who capitulated to us in 1803, (and who have been sent to France a few months ago).-4thly, To exchange the Spaniards and Portuguese against French prisoners in this country. These terms were mutually agreed upon by both governments; and when they had settled the delicate points which had been in contest for so many years, it could hardly have been expected that they should not have understood each other upon the mode of evacuation of the Prisoners.-The plan of evacuation proposed by the English government, was to exchange the English first, by sending one thousand Frenchmen at once, for an equal number of Englishmen, and so on till the exchange of Englishmen was effected. Afterwards, the French were to take a thousand Spaniards to Cadiz, and receive an acknowledgment of their reception; they were then to come to England, and carry home a thousand Frenchmen.-The French government objected to our plan from this motive; because, when all the English prisoners should have been returned to their homes, they could have no security for the continuation of the exchange, with respect to those French prisoners who should then have remained in England; and, besides, in sending the Spaniards to Cadiz by a thousand only at a time, the exchange of the French prisoners now in England could not have been terminated in less than

eight or nine years; a term, before the expiration of which, there is a great probability that our British army would have quitted Spain and Portugal, in which case the Spaniards and Portuguese would be the subjects of the Emperor of the French.-The plan of the French was to exchange the English proportionably with the Allies, and to exchange them by three thousand at once; one thousand

plaintiff in the cause. I say, I approve of this Verdict, even upon the supposition that the writing, for which Mr. White was prosecuted, was really a Seditious and Mischievous Paper, for which the wilful publisher might legally be prosecuted and punished; and I approve it for the very reason that seems to have induced the Jury to give the verdict of Not Guilty, or because Mr. White was not the evilminded, or intentional publisher of it, as he is charged to be in the information. He therefore, not being guilty of the crime of commission with which he was

found guilty of it by the Jury. But it is possible that he may have been liable to a prosecution for a much smaller offence, which would have been a crime of omis sion, in neglecting to superintend and ex

English and two thousand Spaniards or Portuguese, by which means neither government could have any interest in breaking off the exchange. Let us see now, then, what has broke the treaty. In adopting our own proposals, one month at least would have been necessary to bring home all our countrymen; while, in adopting the plan of the French government, three months, only at the most, would have been necessary for the whole exchange of 50,000 prisoners on each side. -Hence then the only disadvantage in this case on our side, would have been, that those of our countrymen who had re-charged in the information, ought not to be mained longest in France, would only have remained two months longer than those who had been exchanged first.Now, Sir, were these terms so hard and dishonourable, that it is preferable to let our countrymen remain in an eternal cap-amine the several papers published in his tivity, rather than comply with them? Journal, before they were sent to the Are the enormous expences this country press, in order to prevent the publication is at, in maintaining and keeping 50,000 of any thing of a dangerous and seditious French prisoners, a matter of no moment? tendency, as it was his duty to do, and An expence amounting to considerably he must be supposed to have undertaken more than one million sterling a year; to do, when he entered his name in a and, would it not be a material advantage public office as a publisher of a newsunder our present circumstances, to have paper according to a late act of parlia an army of 50,000 English and Spaniards ment. There ought therefore, as I conto dispose of in the most essential man-ceive, to be in every information against ner?-I know, Sir, if you would under- a bookseller, or other person that publishes take this subject it would undergo a pro-a seditious paper, two or more sepaper investigation, and every circumstance would be made clear as the day. For my part, I cannot possibly see any motive, grounded on public good, for preventing the exchange from taking place. If you are of my opinion, I hope, Sir, that it will not be said hereafter, that twenty thousand Englishmen, who have shed their blood for their country have perished in captivity, without Mr. Cobbett having said a word upon the subject.-I have the honour to be, Sir, Your most obedient servant, CANDIDUS.-November 30th, 1811.

LIBEL LAW.

SIR-I am one of the many persons who approve of the verdict of Not Guilty, given by a late Jury on the prosecution of Mr. White for a Libel, or, rather, to speak more correctly, for a Seditious Libel for the word Libel alone (as Sir Francis Burdett has, in a late very excellent speech, observed,) means nothing more than a book, or writing; and, in the proceedings in the Ecclesiastical Courts, it means the declaration, or plaint, of the

rate charges or counts; the one charging him with knowing the contents of the paper, and publishing it with a malicious intent to produce certain mischievous effects; the other charging him with neglecting to examine it and satisfy himself that it can have no mischievous effects, before he publishes or sells it, as a bookseller or publisher ought to do: whereby the charges would describe distinctly the different degrees of guilt which may possibly have been incurred by the publisher; and the Jury would find the publisher to be guilty of that particular offence which was charged in the count to which the evidence produced against him applied. It seems to me, that it is only by this careful way of stating the charges in the informations, that the degree of guilt incurred by the publisher can be ascertained, and the ends of justice fully attained. For the guilt of publishing a seditious paper admits of a great number of different degrees, and, in some cases, is no guilt at all; as, for example, in a bookseller's porter, who carries a bundle containing a dozen, or more, copies of a sedi