Sixteenth began! As the latter of these sovereigns surrendered France to revolution and anarchy, so has the former delivered over Germany to pillage, spoliation, and subversion." If this true statement of the cause of the failure of the Confederacy formed by Mr. Pitt, do not completely exculpate that Minister from the false and calumnious charges preferred against him by the writers and the scribblers of the day; we confess our inability to ascertain the meaning of the term exculpation. We have already said, that the author overrates the abilities of Buonaparte, and we repeat the assertion; indeed he appears to us to have taken success as the criterion of merit; and to ascribe to the talents of an individual, events which have proceeded from a combination of circumstances, many of them fortuitous, but chiefly deriving their united force from the treachery or imbecility of those whom the Usurper has had to encounter. Certainly the facts above stated are alone sufficient to destroy his conclusion; since if Buonaparte really possessed the qualities which he ascribes to him, he never would have placed himself in a situation in which his ruin was only averted by the pusillanimity or folly of his enemies. We most solemnly protest againt the appellation of Great, which he assigns to the Corsican Usurper; first, for the reason already stated; and secondly, because no man, so steeped in guilt, so drenched with the blood of the innocent, so overwhelmed with crimes as Buonaparte is, can possibly, without a monstrous perversion of language and of sentiment, be so described. Indeed, in our opinion, success in the accomplishment of a plan, however grand, however gigantic, cannot be considered, with a view to ascertain the merit of the person by whom it has been accomplished, distinct from the means by which that success has been obtained; and we shall ever contend, that goodness is an essential constituent of greatness. Besides, whoever knows Buonaparte, must know, that the qualities of his mind are as opposite to every thing which constitutes' greatness, as those of his heart are remote from goodness. Of his conduct the following is a succinct, but pretty accurate delineation : "Combining the two extremes of despotism and of democracy an Emperor in France, but in act a Jacobin; ever affecting to offer peace, while he lets loose the ravages of war; courting the people, at the same moment that he insults the Sovereign, or outrages the Government; brandishing in one hand the sword, but dexterously concealing in the other the wires of anarchy or revolution; converting the press to every nefarious use, though exclaiming against the abuse of that weapon, when directed to expose his own villations of faith or treaty; greedy of glory, but regardless of reputation; he resembles nothing which Europe has beheld in past times, and can neither be compared to Attila, to Clovis, nor to Charlamagne. We might be led to fancy that Milton, in describing the King of Terrors, by prophetic anticipation pourtrayed this new Monarch, sprung like a phantom from the ashes of the French Revolution, shadowy, unde finable, and terrific. The other shape, If shape it might be called, that shape had none, 1 Fierce as ten furies, terrible as hell, And shook a dreadful dart. What seemed his head, The likeness of a kingly crown had on.” In our apprehension, Shakespear, in this case, had a more prophetic spirit of anticipation, than Milton, for certainly if Napoleone Buonaparte had sat for the following portrait, drawn by the hand of our bard, the likeness could not have been more correct or striking. "A murderer, and a villain: A slave, that is not twentieth part the ty the That from a shelf the precious diadem stole, We cannot concur with our author in thinking that the death of Buona parte will have no sensible effect on the stability of his empire. Nor do we conceive how, when he ascribes so much to the personal qualities of the founder of that empire, he can maintain that the absence of those qualities will not affect it. We admit, indeed, that every means has lately been adopted for giving it strength and stability; but so many millions are interested in its destruction, who are now restrained solely by the fear imposed by the sanguinary and ferocious spirit of the usurper from attempting.it, that there are surely solid grounds for believing that his death will be productive of some material change. Some means of defending the country against invasion are suggested, into the merits of which we cannot enter; though the plan for allowing an annuity to the families of such as might in such an event, fall in the field, however laudable, would, we fear, entail such an expence, as a country, already labouring under a vast weight of taxes, could not possibly bear. But nothing could exceed our astonishment on reading the passage, in which the author declares the sentiments of the Common-Council of the City of London to be almost decisive of the character of a minister. AlTuding to the division in that body, on the motion for erecting a monument to Mr. Pitt; he observes: "This nearly poised division of sentiment on the merits of a minister, so soon after his decease, in a meeting composed of the principal municipal magistrates and delegates of the first commercial city in the world, who must be, supposed capable of well ap preciating his title to praise, is deserving of notice." We could scarcely persuade ourselves that the author was serious. Does he really believe the Common-Council to be composed of competent judges of the merit of a statesman? If he do, his credulity, or his ignorance (we mean on this point) must be great indeed. Besides, does he not suppose that the accession of Mr. Pitt's political opponents to power must have had a material influence on the decision? We suspect he knows but little of city politics. Without denying that the present administration possess a considerable portion of intellect, we must totally dissent from his position, that with the exception of Lord Hawkesbury, Lord Castlereagh, and Lord Melville, the late ministry possessed no talents; and that they will soon relapse into oblivion: an oblivion which in all probability will never be disturbed." This is the dictum of party, and not the language of truth. The late debates in Parliament must surely have convinced the author of his error; for for in them the whole country will admit the weight of ability was greatly on the side of opposition. But, we believe, no one, before him, ever ventured to question the talents of Mr. Canning. Those, too, of Mr. Percival have shone conspicuous. While, on the side of ministry, with the exceptions of Messrs. Fox, Sheridan, and Windham, what display of abilities have we witnessed? After the remarks on the press, which we extracted above, our readers will probably partake of the surprize which we experienced on reading the following passage. "But, I repeat it, if we desire to remain at peace with Buonaparte, let us beware how we venture to treat him, with the same freedom as we do George the Third! He is made of other materials, he cannot stand the severity of the press, whether it be applied to his person, his title, or his actions. He will resent with the sword the insults offered by the pen. Those who know the secret history of the infraction of the late peace, know that the asperity of our diurnal publications operated deeply to produce, and to accelerate the final rupture. They know that the heart of Napoleone was ulcerated, if I may so express myself, by the corrosives of the British press.” This is followed by an advice to the government, to discourage all attacks upon him; and a more notable scheme for destroying the freedom of the press, for poisoning the sources of history, and for depriving future ages of the most salutary lessons and the most wholesome examples, could scarcely be devised. If the nation will submit to be so silenced, its independence will not be worth defending, it will be fit only to become the tributary slave of Napoleone Buonaparte. How would our ancestors have blushed for the degeneracy of an Englishman who had broached such degrading sentiments as these! But this writer need have no apprehension on this score; the trial of Peltier may have convinced him that the meek, the mild, the benignant state-doctor Addington took care to provide a permanent remedy for all the evils resulting from the liberty of the press, if employed in a manner offensive to the sanguinary assassin of Jaffa. As nothing, however, which we could say on this subject, will be received in good part, or be secured against the charge of prejudice, we shall oppose to the author the sentiments of one of the most distinguished, and most honourable members of the present administration. "The topic here alluded to (the character of Buonaparte) is so closely connected with this subject (the subject of peace with France), that the argument is evidently defective without it. An opinion indeed prevails, and is insisted upon by persons of much apparent wisdom and gravity, that any inquiry into the conduct and merits of the First Consul is unbecoming and improper; unsuited to the dignity of a great assembly, and incapable of being made conducive to any useful purpose. To many, however, it may seem that just the contrary of this is the fact; that in the history of the world, an instance can hardly be found of any one, whose personal qualities were so much a subject of general concern, and consequently so proper an object of inquiry; and that the occasion of all others, when such an inquiry must be most proper and necessary, was that in which we were preparing to sign a treaty of peace with the person in question, founded expressly upon our confidence in his character, and entrusting to the issue of our judgment in that respect, the whole of the interest, welfare, independence, and even existence of a great empire." NO. XCVI, VOL. XXIV. Mr. Mr. Windham's Speech on the Address on the Preliminaries of Peace, November 4, 1801. Appendix pages 93, 94. Mr. Windham then enters into a brief review of the atrocities committed by Buonaparte, duly characteriz ing them as he proceeds; and, adverting to his conduct in Egypt, justly represents it as a "singular combination of all that is great and all that is little,—all that is great in guilt and mischief, all that is little and despicable in the means of its execution." Let the author of these Thoughts attend to the following striking facts, which, we little thought, would ever again be applicable to this country. "Such is the deplorable baseness of mankind, such the abject homage, which men are willing to pay to crimes attended with success, to wicked. ness united with power, that none of the acts committed at any time by the agents of the French Government, seem at all to have hurt their reception in the world, either collectively or individually. Their oppressions and crueltics excite no indignation; their low and scandalous frauds no contempt; their treacheries no distrust. In the case of the person here in question, you would swear, that his perfidies became him, and that, like one of Horace's mistresses, the more false and faithless he shewed himself, the greater was his train of followers among the admiring and adoring Governments of Europe." "There is a perfect contest for the honour of being betrayed by him. The examples of those unfortunate and confiding countries, who have been already reduced and undone, produce no caution, inspire no terror. "After the remark, made at the beginning of this note, it will hardly be asked, of what use is it to notice these facts? It is of some use to know betimes, the character of the person, who is in a fair way of becoming our master, and who, in fact, is so already, as far as relates to a perfect ascendency over those who direct our councils *. But it is of great use in another view, to point out to notice, such parts of the history of the First Consul, as those which we have been speaking of. It is of consequence to know, who it is that particular persons admire. If it be true, that a man is known by his company (noscitur à scio) it is equally true, that some judgment may be formed from those whom he extols and looks up to. What, it has been asked, must be the priest, where a monkey is the god?' What must be the admirer, where the object of admiration is a person capable of such a proceeding as the pretended conversion to Mahomedanism? It will be admitted, probably, that this is not to come in, in the heroic part of the character. But I wish to know, with respect to a large class of his admirers, the enthusiasts of liberty, the asserters of rights, the respecters of the independence of nations, the abhorrers of war, the lovers of peace and pacific arts, the exploders of military fame,what in their estimation is the heroic part, or what they would point out as the subject of their panegyric? Is it possible that they can hold out to us, as This was written during the administration of the sage Mr. Ad. dington.-REV. an an object of admiration, the character of a man, whose mérit, whatever its amount may be, must. in kind be that of a soldier and a conqueror ; whose sole occupation has been war, the foundation of whose fame and power was laid wholly upon military exploits; who unites in himself all that these persons profess to abhor in an Alexander and a Cæsar; who has been at once the conqueror of foreign nations, and the subverter of the liberties. of his own? These things shew, beyond a doubt, what, for the greater part, these eulogiums on the character of the First Consul really are. They are, either the base abject homage paid by the generality of mankind to successful crime; or the insidious praises of men who, under the mask of liberty, patriotism, and respect for rights, are seeking to gratify their own spleen or ambition, and preparing the downfall of their country. Whatever credit may be due to him for military talents, and whatever certainly is due to him for decision, boldness, vigilance, address, capacity for great though wicked enterprizes, it will be difficult to account otherwise than is above done, for the sort of praises which we hear, and the quarters from which they come." Idem, ibid. p. 100, 102. These are the sentiments of a genuine patriot; they had our hearty concurrence and applause at the time; and we have yet seen no reason to change our opinion. No subsequent occurrence, not the usurpation of the imperial dignity, the seizure of the iron crown of Lombardy, of the kingdom of Naples, and the Republic of Holland, no, nor yet, the coldblooded midnight murder of the gallant DUKE D'ENGHIEN, has produced any alteration in our sentiments, either in respect of the character of Buonaparte, or of the propriety of calling the public attention to it on any proper occasion. Mr. Windham, we think, has fully confuted the author's opinion that such discussions can answer no good purpose. There are some other weak points in his pamphlet, which we have not room to expose. Among these are the strange notion, that Mr. Pitt's death is a favourable circumstance for the conclusion of an honourable and a permanent peace; and the advice to send some person as Ambassador to France who is agreeable to Buonaparte. We should be glad to see the man who would stand for ward to claim the situation on such a recommendation! It is lamentable to witness this base, groveling, pusillanimous spirit! It makes us almost ashamed of our country. A Letter to Mr. Cobbett, on his Opinims respecting the Slave Trade. By Thomas Clarke, A. M. Prebendary of Hereford. 8vo. Pp. 114. Hatchard. 1806. WE have had frequent occasions to observe, that there is no public question of any magnitude, respecting which so great a difference of opi nion prevails among public men, as that of the Slave Trade. The present author attacks Mr. Cobbett's notions on the subject, and particularly a letter to the Bishop of St. Asaph contained in the first volume of the Political Register. That letter was written by a respectable, and very intelligent man, the late Governor Franklyn, and was originally inserted in the True Briton. As far as we know, it has remained unanswered till the present moment. We still think, that there were much sound argument and much good sense in that letter, nor have the arguments of Mr. Clarke changed our opinion. We shall not enter into that part of his tract, which contains personal reflections on Mr. Cobbett, who is very well able to O 2 fight |