it is "the cessation of slaughter and a sabbath from the shedding of blood." But, "we know," it is repeated, "that the lives of men are reckoned for little or nothing in the calculations of our mercenary politicians." Were it not for "the folly and wickedness of our ministers, a peace, it is insinuated, might be made with Buonaparte "likely to be more permanent than any peace we ever made with any of the Capetian kings." But, it is added, have never yet fairly tried whether he be willing to remain at peace. WE DO NOT YET KNOW whether his anomalous constitution do not unite the military ardour of Alexander with the PACIFIC PROPENSITIES OF AUGUSTUS!!" (Vol. 12, p. 541—546.) ———The "income tax,” they say, "is the opprobrium of English finance;" that "no mun pretending to a regard for civil liberty, or to a shadow of independence in the choice of parliamentary representatives, can avoid EXECRATING THE AUTHORS AND ABETTORS OF THIS TAX:" that the additions lately made to it by its extention to small incomes, are the WANTON CRUELTIES OF INEXPERIENCED IGNORANCE," and "WRING EVERY EQUITABLE AND COMPASSIONATE HEART." (Vol. 8, p. 430.)

In "the present pensioned-list of men who are appointed to direct the helm of the state in this stormy period, we are apt," say these critics, "to think that we see, what we had never before observed, the abstract qualities of selfishness, fatuity, and ignorance; personified!" (Vol. 11, p. 439.) These men, we are informed, rushing forth from their entrenched camp of sophistry, venality, and corruption," "completely outwitted" the late ministers, and obtained their post by "machinations more sinister and nefarious than those which hags are said to practise on the coast of Lapland." These monsters, since they came into office, have devised and prosecuted measures of "cruelty and injustice," which were "never yet exceeded in the annals of iniquity: measures which were not only in other respects most impolitic and absurd, but which have reduced us to the "extremity of disgrace," "completed the alienation of neutrals, excited the indignation of friends as well as foes," and rendered our country "THE SCORN, THE HATRED, AND THE BYEWORD OF THE WORLD. They are "sordid, purblind, penny-wise and pound-foolish politicians; sworn enemies" of all improvement, and utterly incapable of it themselves. "To endeavour to make them either wiser or better by instruction or reproof, is," we are told, “like an attempt to communicate sight and feeling to stocks and stones." &c. &c. (Vol. 11, P. 295, 415; 12, P. 174, 540; 13, P. 191, 213; 14, P. 42.) Such is this honest critic's method of speaking of an administration in which a Canning and a Perceval, an Eldon and a Mulgrave, occupy exalted stations! an administration who in the leading principles of their procedure tread in the steps of the illustrious Pitt, and whose zeal to do their utmost for us has only been equalled by their rigid adherence to what is honourable, and their laudable readiness to afford assistance to every other nation struggling in support of its independency: an administration voluntarily selected by our most upright and patriotic king, at that dignified moment of his reign, when, under circumstances the most critical, his virtue and intrepidity remained inflexible, although assailed by those who had been forced upon

him as his advisers: an administration who, in conjunction with this best of sovereigns, are our only bulwark against the demolition of our venerable church, and the rekindling of the flames of Smithfield.

Let not the reader, however, suppose, that equally outrageous abuse has not been lavsihed upon every other administration which passes under the review of these journalists. That prodigy of talents and disinterested patriotism, the illustrious Pitt, with his associates in office, are honoured with their full share of it. They were a "miserable junto, who had acted with him in his last most inglorious and unfortunate administration." His counsels were "mischievous;" his measures "have dissolved the ancient constitutions of Europe." Under his infatuated domination "the ridiculous system of forming coalitions against France" commenced; our taxation became oppressive; our rights were perverted; the war was continued to gratify those who "bellowed for loans and contracts;" and Britain left "hovering on the edge of an abyss;" on the very verge of irremediable ruin: &c. &c. (Vol. 8, p. 177-191; 11, P. 294; and above.)

Nor, if we may credit these reviewers, were the ministers who succeeded Mr. Pitt in the smallest degree better, but in many respects most grievously worse. No, Sir, those ministers of whom we now hear such exalted panegyrics, "whose general conduct" these critics have now the impudence to say had their "warmest approbation,"; and whose immediate recal to their stations they now represent as the only possible chance for the salvation of our country; (Vol. 14, P. 36.; 11, P. 439.) these very ministers were, in 1806. when actually in office, as vehemently abused by . them, as ever Mr. Pitt had been, or as it is possible for any ministers of his majesty whatever to be. Mr. Pitt, their remarks then were, "has been succeeded by a motley body, whose oratorical virtues have been melting down from the first moment of their approach to St. James's." On the appearance of the work which was recognised as "the manifesto of the new administration," the people, we are told, "crowded to view the errors and evils from which, they hoped, they were immediately to be delivered. weeks and months glided away, and not the slightest symptom of alteration appeared; nay, the public discovered that in changing men they had little hope of materially changing measures; that in the movements towards foreign negotiations; in measures to produce internal union; in the system of taxation; and in the disposal of places and appointments; though the name of the late minister was traduced, his spirit still influenced and ruled the country: and the pamphlet was then "generally considered a ministerial apology for doing nothing." "Instead of treading back the steps of the former minister," in regard to the propositions of Buonaparte, Mr. Fox, it was said, "adopted his plan and his language; " that he imitated the conduct of Mr. Pitt in a proceeding which he had bitterly reprobated; " and that in proportion as the peril of our situation had increased, the error of Mr. Fox respecting Prussia was enhanced beyond that of the former minister respecting Spain." Nothing," it was added, "could be more erroneous than the

་་

expectations of the people from these men, "and the nomination of the new ministry proves to be a nomination of new persons only." These successors of the late ministers were said to be "the advocates of similar errors, and the puppets of similar machinery." Speaking of "their conduct to foreign nations, in domestic arrangements, and in those which regard the colonies," which must include all important measures, it is said, that "in most of these circumstances they followed implicitly the steps of their predecessors, .. with the additional absurdity of appealing to European powers buttoned up in the pockets of Buonaparte." They are charged adding to, instead of withdrawing, the burdens and oppressions" of the people; and with "committing the adjustment of these galling evil to a young and inexperienced minister, who adopts ONLY THE FAILINGS OF HIS UNFELLING PREDECESSOR." (Vol. 8, P. 178—186.)

...

also with "6

رو

now he

Now, when these gentlemen are again bawling in opposition to government, our critic speaks much of their wise and salutary measures;" and reflects with unbounded complacency on "that liberal, enlightened, and comprehensive scheme of foreign as well as domestic policy which they had determined to pursue; tragically bemoans their dismissal from those places of power, "from which," he tells us, "it is not probable that they would have been dismissed, if (angelic creatures, who would have supposed it!) they had been less disinterested, less upright, and less wise." Now, in short, these dismissed ministers possess "all the talents," and all the virtue, and are the last hope of the empire. (Vol. 11, P. 325, 439; 14, P. 42.)— When they were in office, his account of them, it appears, was the very reverse of this. His language respecting them then was: "Whatever self-adulation may allege. whatever the flattering flippancy of their newspapers may affiria; their efforts, their measures, and their actions prove them INCOMPETENT, when brought to the lofty and gigantic standard of the Tuilleries." Nay, then he had the assurance to tell us, that this very ministry did not possess "the cry elements of political science." Then he laments, that "while a weak premier is lavishing expense on the decoration of palaces to which he knows not who may shortly succeed: while a *** is rummaging the three kingdoms for the smallest circumstances of patronage or power; the ministers for foreign affairs, on each side the water, are playing the parts of the spider and the fly:" and insinuates, that no means are employed for our salvation, "beyond the sonorous orations of the minister for foreign affairs, the buffoonery of a dramatic manager,” or "the puns of the war minister;" beyond "shameless self-adulation, consisting principally of Irish gasconade." Then is their. whole system of procedure scoffed at as infinitely absurd; and they are represented as " trusting their domestic safety to catamarans;' "combining the wonderful effects of discipline and indiscipline against troops covered with scars and intoxicated with trophies; showing" Buonaparte the different consequences of contending with a military orator and military pedant, and with a Sydney Smith;" "affecting, by a tawdry species of oratory, to make heroes of shop

keepers and men-milliners, and of the panders of brothels and club-houses: " &c. &c. (Vol. 8, p. 182-188.)

66

Then the reputed abilities of Mr. Fox" are said to have been greatly over-rated in every capacity but that of an orator," and "the distinction with which he was treated in France was not," we are told, "owing to his character, but (who ever doubted it?) to a plan proposed by Talleyrand and adopted with enthusiasm by Buonaparte to FOSTER AT ANY EXPENSE A CONSIDERABLE PARTY IN THE ENGLISH PARLIAMENT AGAINST THE ENGLISH GOVERNMENT." Then "the slow and very limited capacity of Lord Grenville always followed the events of the French revolution at a great distance.

All his measures were therefore misjudged, and all his emissaries injudiciously selected." . . . Because, as it is remarked, while "Genius discerns merit, petty knavery employs its proper representatives, and ignorance and folly are always ignorantly and foolishly served." And, it is added, "the late, minister devised a melancholy legacy to the public, if it be true that he made it his dying request to his majesty to be advised by Lord Grenville in the choice of his ministry.' Then 66 the conceits, and jokes, and contrivances of a Windham, are not worth the paper on which they are printed: and there are not ten men in Britain, left to their choice, who would entrust themselves to such conceits." Then it is sarcastically said, that when the names and appointments of this ministry were submitted to his majesty, he archly observed, "Would not this list of clever fellows be improved by the intermixture of more men of character?" and was answered, "The French ministers and agents are not distinguished by their good characters." Then, in this critic's judgment, "the circumstance of the worst omen and the greatest astonishment is, that a prince of real genius, of extensive knowledge, and the highest accomplishments, should commit all his future hopes to such men." Then we were solemnly forewarned, that if some fitter characters, persons of real and practicable wisdom, some acknowledged and popular minds, should not soon be employed, to engage the hearts of the people, the past evils of French outrages will be comparative happiness to those which may be inflicted on Britain: and the misery of ages will be the certain consequence." &c. &c. (Vol. 8,

P. 184-190.)

66

some

These extracts might suffice abundantly to show, that however outrageously this reviewer reviles his majesty's present ministers, he has at least abused with equal virulence every other administration which is the subject of his notice. Perhaps it will not be recollected, that, in the greatest overflowings of his malignity, he has never charged the present gentlemen with receiving favours from Talleyrand and Buonaparte for promoting their views in the English parliament against the English government. The above extracts might also serve abundantly to show the unparallelled effrontery of this critic, who can now in the same publication so highly extol the discarded ministers; who can now gravely tell us, that "the character of the late ministry, their intellectual ability, their patriotic exertions, and their moral worth, may for ever defy" the most

دو

66

i

hostile attacks upon it! (Vol. 11, p. 324.) As, however, he would now be thought to admire equally their talents and their virtue, and is indignant at all persons who think differently of these gentlemen, behold him, astonished reader, at another time scoffing at the idea that such "heroes of wisdom and integrity" are to save us, and that corruption is to expire uunder their strong and pure hands;" even when aided by the vigilant eyes of their relations, creditors, and dependents." Behold these paragons of wisdom, virtue, and disinterestedness, representer in this same work, as “rotaries of dissipation, luxury, and ofligacy," calling in vain "on the numerous classes of oppressed labour and industry, for union and patriotic energy; as men bursting in hungry crowds into the abandoned places of their predecessors, and proclaiming with indecent folly their long and gormandising festivities; . . . continuing and increasing the shameful burthens of sinecures, extravagant pensions, and fraudulent superannuations;" as, besides adopting the absurd principles and conduct of former ministers, guilty of "the enormous folly of rousing the courage and uniting the enthusiasm of the people by oppressive taxation in favour of profligate rapacity, and the waste and profusion of random and ill-concerted measures. Learn, from this same source, that under their domination, "boys" were enabled "to sport with the burdens of an industrious people, and the locusts harboured in the train of oratorical adventurers to thrive by their miseries;" that they committed "the adjustment of those galling evils to a young and inexperienced minister who adopts ONLY THE FAILINGS OF HIS UNFEELING PREDECESSOR; "that additions to the property tax were made by them, "by its extension to small incomes," which "are the wanton cruelties of inexperienced ignorance,” and wring every equitable and compassionate heart." (Vol. 8, p. 184—190, 430) &c. &c. &c.

Such was this critic's description of those ministers, when in office, whose recal to their places he now represents as the only hope of the empire! Such, as it hath been quoted above, is his description of his majesty's present ministers! And sưch is his account of the present state of our admired constitution, and of our general state of bondage and oppression! What idiots then they are, who have so long been dreaming that this is a land of unexampled liberty and happiness! How incapable are such persons of contemplating political institutions, and human perfectibility, in the new and resplendent light of the Tuilleries!

But is it not hence plain, that the damning sin, in this writer's estimate of our public characters, is the being in office? Tories and whigs, Pittites and Foxites, buffoons and cynics, his angels in opposition, are all, we see, equally devils the moment they become the servants of his majesty, and a branch of the government. And what must not be the mischiefs occasioned by such writers? For my own part, Sir, I do seriously consider the avowed partisans of Buonaparte as friends, and their efforts as harmless, when compared with these vipers in our bosom, and the constant emission of their subtle poison. Under the pretence of rousing our indignation against weak and wicked ministers, they disembogue their jaco