192 Pokwbele's Grecian Profpects. - Report of the Clergy of a District in the Diocese of Lincoln. - Speech of Thomas Jones, Esq. IN our animadverfions on the Critical Review, we have, once or twice, afferted, and had occafion to produce proofs of the af sertion, that, whilst the praise of the English and the cenfure of the French are most obnoxious to its disaffected authors, the gentleman, who hath any way diftinguished himself for his attachment to his king and country, can expect from them no quarter, in whatever shape he comes forward; whether as a prose-writer, he follow the track of Goldsmith or of Pennant, or as a poet, he chaunt claffic numbers in the manner of Pope or of Spenfer. Of this affertion, a fresh proof is now furnished by the critique on Polwhele's "GRECIAN PROSPECTS." It is with indignation, that the Sans-culotte critic before us hath noticed the tale which Mr. P. had detached from the poem as defective in the unities." If "UNFOUNDED SLANDER OF THE FRENCH" (cries this Robespierre of a reviewer) and UNFOUNDED PRAISE OF THE ENGLISH be repugnant to truth and justice, something more solid than the poetic unities is offended by this feeble fiction!!!"* The man's ideaş of "truth and juftice" are evidently drawn from the Godwinian Philosophy. That such an avowed enemy of his country should be permitted to remain unmasked is a circumstance which we cannot but lament. After quoting eight fianzas, to which he makes no exception, the hypercritic observes, that the stanza of Spenfer is peculiarly unfit for Mr. Polwhele's poetry." Surely, if he would wish to be consistent with himself, he ought to recollect his report of Mr. Polwhele's happy management of the stanza of Spenser, in "the Influence of Local Attachment." "We hesitate not to pronounce (says he) that the poem is executed in such a manner, as to do credit to the author, and give pleasure to his readers. The verse is always elegant; often brilliant; a great deal of pleasing descriptive poetry is happily introduced in the various illustrations which present themselves; the stanza is well managed, and free from that monotony, which, in feeble hands, it is apt to fink into," &c. &c. &c.+ What says the Critical Reviewer to all this? Truly "the Local Attachment" was published without a name: and we doubt not but the critic was greatly chagrined at the discovery, that the poem was Mr. Polwhele's. The notice of " the Report from the Clergy of a district in the Diocese of Lincoln," &c. is glaringly jacobinical. "The Report comes out (fays the pretended critic) under very fufpicious circumstances."" If fuch a meeting was ever holden, the name of the district is not communicated to the public. We can scarcely believe See Crit. Rev. for Aug. 1800. P. 448. that that fuch a meeting ever took place." "The heads of the church, will be careful that examples of irregularity do not proceed from their own body." "The powers of the church are, at present, sufficiently ample: and the spiritual exertions of the clergy will prevent any inroads on the establishment from ignorant and illiterate preachers: at the same time, it will be difficult for the legislature to interfere in the discipline of a meeting-house, without infringing that toleration which it has ever been the pride and honour of the Hanoverian family to maintain."; We have, elsewhere, observed, that Methodists and Jacobins have one common interest. On "the Speech of Thomas Jones, Esq. M. P." the reviewer is pleased in expatiating. "Mr. Jones thinks, that the minifters are fighting merely for the sake of the Bourbon family; and, if they are not, he desires to know, for what object on earth the people of England are groaning under an unprecedented and inquifitorial system of taxation."* Bardomachia, Poema Macaronico-Latinum, 4to. 1s. Johnfon. London. 1800. Bardomachia; or the Battle of the Bards. Translated from the Original Latin. 4to. IS. Johnfon. London. 1800. ١٠ UR readers need scarcely be told, that these productions relate to the ruffian attack made by the wretch who calls himself Peter Pindar on the refpectable author of the Baviad and Mæviad. They have at least one characteristic of poetry, fiction, for not the smallest regard to truth is observed in any part of the account here given of the transaction, in as miferable doggrel, both Latin and English, as the stupidity of modern times has produced. The evident object of the author, Dr. GEDDES, (who does not prefix his name to the book but who causes it to be proclaimed in every bookseller's shop,) is to place on a par two inen who are as unlike each other as genius and dullness, virtue and vice, The design is worthy the daring and frantic arraigner of the inspiration of the holy writers, of the divinity of the Holy Scriptures; of a man, who, to use the words of an energetic writer, "sweeps away, in the very tone of idiot effrontery, the divine authority of both the codes of Scripture, and involves the New Testament with the Old in his comprehenfive range of reprobation," Yet is this wretched effusion of classical dotage hailed, by the Monthly and Critical Reviewers, as the genuine production of genius; and they have even the folly to quote passages, which give the lie to their praises. By the latter of these congenial critics, the Bardomachia is proclaimed to have " by far the advantage of all the productions to which this fertile theme has given birth," and the See C. Review for Aug. 1800, P. 477. author author is, forfooth!" a learned and facetious divine who has formerly amused us with fimilar effufions." The former, well knowing his man, would not "be so very faftidious as to require a rigid attention to dull matter of fact;" a pretty apology for lying truly! The lax morality of this critic is wonderfully in unifon with the feelings and the principles of his favourite author. But it is too much to be told that "his Latinity evinces an intimate acquaintaince with the claffics;" and that "his English manifests equal talents and play fulness." Not that we mean to impeach the classical knowledge of Dr. Geddes; but most certainly the lines before us display no proof of that or any other species of knowledge, except, indeed, a know. ledge of the art of falfification, in which the doctor is known to be an adept, although it has pleased Dr. Griffiths's fage reviewer to wis-reprefent him as " celebrated for works in the highest department of biblical criticism." We shall conclude our remarks on these miferable productions with an epigram which has been put into our hands by an intelligent and estimable friend. On Dr. Geddes's Bardomachia. "The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God." The celebrated Speech of the Hon. C. J. Fox, with the Proceedings of the Meeting at the Shakespeare Tavern, on Friday, October 10, 1800, being the Anniversary of bis first Election for Westminster. Wberein be sbews the improper Conduct of Ministers, in continuing en unjust War, that bas fpilt our Blood, squandered our Treasure, * contracted a Load of National Debt we are unable to bear, and reduced the People to then present deplorable Situation!!! Fourth Edition. To which are added, Two much admired Songs, fung at the above Meeting by a well-known Whig. Jordan. London. TE know no one of the whole fraternity of the lower class of skilful in the compofition of a title page to a feditious pamphlet, as the miferable being who proclaims himself the pubJither of this wretched farrago of inflammatory and libellous declamation, collected from the Jacobin prints of the day. As the publisher of Paine's Rights of Man, the fundamental doctrine of which Mr. Fox here maintains, this man, who acted as the tool of another, escaped punithment; he has fince suffered imprifon ment for publishing fome other libel; but neither the imp nity which he experienced in the first instance, nor the correction which he received in the last, has made any impreffion on his mind, or produced any alteration in his conduct; he still perfeveres in col lecting lecting all the filth of the Jacobinical sewers, and administering it, in various forms, to his patriotic customers. Since Mr. Fox has thought proper to quit the fenate for the tavern, and to continue his occafional harangues at the convivial board, he has had less occasion for the impofition of restraints on his fertile imagination, or for the limitation of his tongue to the repetition of what the Monthly reviewers would call dull matters of falt. Where a man incurs no danger of contradiction, unless he be under the influence of integrity, he has neither motive nor temptation to adhere to the truth. If this be a correct report of Mr. Fox's speech, the licentia mentiendi was never exercised to a great er extent, as our readers will acknowledge, when they shall have read fome of the assertions which we shall extract from the pamphlet before us. After an appropriate eulogy upon himself, (after the manner of Mr. Erskine, who was present, and applauded him,) in which he obferved, that he was "an honest man," (an observation which, of course, he deemed neceffary,) and had followed " a system, just, liberal, and comprehensive," he told his friends that he could not have secured "the approbation of his country," (a Whig's country. it seems, is his club) "unless he had formed his conduct upon general principles applicable to all times." Certainly no one, who has the leaft acquaintance with the public life of Mr. Fox can deny, that his principles are applicable, not only to all times, but to all questions, and to both fides of every question; for there is scarcely any one grand political question which has been brought into difcussion within the last five and twenty years, in which Mr. Fox has not decidedly committed himself on bolb fides; as for inttance, the question of Parliamentary representation, on which he has at one time maintained, that the sense of the nation could only be afcertained by the voice of Parliament, and at another, that it could only be collected out of Parliament; at one time, that the Members of the House of Commons were bound to obey the maodates of their immediate constituents; and, at another, that being representatives of the aggregate body of the people, they were not bound to obey the instructions of particular electors, but to confult the real interefts of the community at large. Such principles may be truly faid to be comprebensive, in the most extenfive fignification of the term. Mr. Fox talks of "rights which are the birth-right of man, antecedent to the e ablishment of any particular form of government." These can be no other than the rights of Adam, either before or after his fall, when he exercised absolute authority over all the inhabitants of the earth; rights, of course, which cannot be enjoyed by any man who has the misfortune to be born after the "eftablid ment of any particular form of government." But these are mere verba et voces; for Mr. Fox evidently alluded to man's ponical rights, because he immediately afterwards refers to the affertion of fuch rights by the Americans in the last war. This, however, is declamatory rant, merely calculated for the purpose of deception, for for Mr. F. must know, that no man can have any political rights but such as result from political establishments; in other words, fuch as are secured to him by the laws of his country, which constitute at once the fource and the security of all political rights. But this interpretation will not bear Mr. Fox out in his argument, which, taken in its only obvious sense, affirms the right in question to be the right of oppofing the laws, the right of rebellion; yet how fuch right could exist " antecedent to any particular form of government," it is not very easy to conceive, since, without a government of fome fort or other, there would be neither motive to rebel, nor object of rebellion. No matter; Whig orators are not to be stopped by the obstacles which common sense or common honesty interposes to the wishes or designs of common men; and this rhodomontade served, as well as any thing else, as a preface to the declaration that he, Mr. Fox, "did not hesitate to declare in Parliament in favour of America, and his wishes for the fuccess of those men who were then ftigmatized as rebels!" Who were not ftigmatized, Mr. Fox, but who were declared by our Sovereign and his Parliament to be rebels, and who were notorioufly in a state of open rebellion at the time? And was this declaration of protection and encou agement of rebels to be made with impunity? Nothing was so disgraceful to the administration of Lord North, as the toleration of this abuse and profligacy, which nearly amounted to treafon, and the forbearance to impeach the man who dared to utter such language. The war which was entered into for the purpose of punishing thefe rebels, and for restoring them to a proper sense of duty to their fovereign, Mr. Fox afferts to have been only a war " to gratify that party which existed then, and exifts now in this country; a party that hates liberty, and would employ the arms of this nation to suppress it wherever it has diffused its blessfings or endeavours to extend its influence!!!"-As we are neither intoxicated with the fumes of wine, as might probably be the case with Mr. Fox's Whig friends, nor have yet drunk of the waters of Lethe, we can very well recollect what that party was which existed then, and what that party is which exists now in this country, The first was the party which compofed Lord North's administration, and supported the American war; the last, the party which compofed Mr. Pitt's admi niftration, and supported the present war. Now at the head of this last party are many of those men who acted with Mr. Fox in oppofition to the ministry of that day, and who, according to his own acknowledgment, were as great friends to liberty as himself, while very few of the former party have been in power fince the prefent war; aud that party, it must never be forgotten, that bated li berty, was the very party with which he afterwards coalefced and acted! Wepass over the stale tricks of afferting that the war is carried on for the fole purpose of restoring the House of Bourbon, in defiance of truth, and in contradiction to the most folemn and repeated declarations ofhis Majesty's Minifters in both Houses of Parliament; of infifting that |