Ganem. The peafant, Sir, Whom we did question, at the mountain's foot, Your daughter, as we trace it, must have journey'd. • Bulcazin. They fhall not reft. Have I not shared their labour? He who first murmurs on his march, dies for it. By Mahomet, I fwear! if I do hear A fingle Moor bewailing the fatigue His coward body fuffers, on the instant, [Exeunt." We have chofen this scene because the character of Bulcazin is the creation of Mr. Colman, and affords fufficient proof of the power which he poffeffes in delineating character, and developing the ftrong paffions of the heart. MONTHLY CATALOG U E, For A PRI L, 1795. S POLITICS, &c. Art. 16. A Letter to Mr. Sheridan on his Conduct in Parliament. By a Suffolk Freeholder. 8vo. 15. Stockdale. 1794. HOULD this pamphlet be found (as has been afferted,) to come from the pen of the author of " An Idea of the prefent State of France," the merits of the two performances will, perhaps, be compared, and be deemed very different. It may be thought that, while in that work he difplays a capacious, in this he exposes a narrow mind in the one, he ftudied to convince his countrymen of the neceflity of union, and of a fufpenfion of all complaints about grievances, during the continuance of a danger which threatens every thing dear to them in the other, inftead of endeavouring to foothe and gain over perfons of great powers and weight, both in the councils of the nation and the opinion of the public, he adopts a plan of irritation, calculated only to wound their fenfibility, without informing or convincing their understanding; he ufes cauftics where, in all probability, lenitives would better ferve his purpose, if his real purpose were to melt oppofition into a patriotic unanimity. In reviewing the conduct of Mr. Sheridan, and other leaders of the party oppofed to adminiftration, during the last feffion, he fpeaks of the motives of those gentlemen in the most opprobrious and infulting terms. Can that man have patriotism in his heart, whofe pen is employed in lacerating the feelings of thofe whofe oppofition he may wish to filence, if he be not anxious to procure their fupport? He may fay, it is his object to lafh them, and to place them in fuch a light that they may lofe the credit which they poffefs with a great part of the public: but judgment fhould have whispered to him that this could have been better done by argument than abuse, if he had reason on his fide. To fcold and call names may fuit the lowest order of women: but a man, a man who pretends to enlighten a nation with refpect to its * See our last Review, p. 287. moft most important concerns,-ought to disdain fuch a mode of proceed ing; and a juft and honourable man would not be forward to bring that fpecies of charge against another, which, from its nature, even the most honourable and most innocent muft always find it the most difficult to repel; we mean a charge which afcribes actions, in themselves not criminal, to base and unworthy motives. Such a charge the author has brought against Mr. Sheridan and many of his adherents in both houses of parliament. We will notice fome of his attacks, and leave the reader to estimate the mind which was capable of forming them. Speaking of the perfons fentenced by the court of feffion in Scotland to tranfportation, and now on their voyage to Botany Bay, as alfo of those who, when the pamphlet was written, were in Newgate and the Tower, and of the war in which we are engaged, he thus addreffes Mr. Sheridan: To give every kind of fupport to thefe voyagers, after their con viction; to deter the judges who fentenced them from doing their duty on fimilar occafions, by the groffeft calumnies; and to deal out en couragement to untried traitors, by boldly denying the exiftence of feditious and treafonable practices, has been invariably your conduct, Mr. Sheridan, in the laft feffion of parliament. Nor have your unfortunate countrymen been the only objects of your virtuous exertions; your generous care has been extended to the great and gallant nation with which we are engaged in war, and all the powers of your mind have been employed to counteract the energy of public spirit in individuals, and to obftruct every measure of government.' He then proceeds to notice thofe who fecond Mr. Sheridan in this meritorious conduct. Lord Stanhope he defcribes as profeffing himfelf a real Sans Culotte, funk in the dregs of republicanifm, and breathing nothing but mischief and madnefs.' The Duke of Grafton he characterites by querulous imbecility,' and the Marquis of Lansdowne by tortuous ambiguity.' He profeffes refpect and veneration for the memory of the late Lord Guildford, and proves the fincerity of his profeffions by abufing the fon and heir of that noble Lord. As Mr. Sheridan is the hero of the piece, however, the author takes much more notice of him, and honours him with a greater fhare of abufe. Having paid a tribute to the memory of the late Lord Guildford, he thus continues his address to Mr. Sheridan: You will pardon me, I am fure, this digreffion, because you are too noble minded to envy another the poffeffion of virtues which are of no value in your estimation, and form no part of the articles of your political creed. You have no narrow attachment to your country, no unneceffary loyalty to your fovereign, no weak anxiety for a conftitution which you frequently declare is not worth preferving. But you poffefs a magnanimity which defpifes the opinion of the public; Mr. Fox good-naturedly vindicates your veracity, you gallantly affert your own candour, the French applaud your unbought defence of all their proceedings, and the English give you credit for a patriotifm, that embraces the interests of every kingdom but England and the allies of England.' Hh 3 • It It is not neceffary to make a formal defence of Lord Hood; you have at present only calumniated him, and menaced him with an inquiry which you dare not profecute.' : It would be too difgufting to follow the author through all bis various attacks on Mr. Sheridan's conduct during the lat feffion; we pretend not to be either the panegyrifts or the defenders of that gentleman; he may have been as wrong in fome inftances as he was right in others but, whether right or wrong, the author profecutes his charges in a manner that can answer no good purpofe, while it dif graces literature, truth, juftice, and good breeding, by fubftituting fcurrility for argument, and affertion for proof. We will therefore here close our remarks on this publication, as far as it concerns the member for Stafford and other members of oppofition: but we must take notice of fome pages prefixed to this letter, and addressed to us. The exact ftate of the cafe between the author and the reviewers is this: in our account of his "Obfervations on the Conduct of Mr. Fox," (Rev. for Mar. 1794, p.343,) we afferted that he grofsly mifreprefented the fpeech of that gentleman. In a private letter to us, under the fignature of " a Suffolk Freeholder," he complained of this, and in a very peremptory manner called for an apology; obferving that the ftatement which he had given of Mr Fox's fpeech had been derived from a publication called The Senator. This was fhifting the guilt of mifreprefentation from himself, and affording ground for an opinion that he had not intentionally helped to propagate a falfe report. therefore advised him to be more cautious in future on the choice of the documents on which he founded a charge again't any public man; and, to foothe his wounded fenfibility, we paid him a compliment in the following words: "We are perfuaded that he must have been mifled by an erroneous account of the speech to which he refers; for it is a fair prefumption that the man, who exacts an apology for a mifreprefentation, is himfelf incapable of wilfully misreprefenting another." We appeal to the general fenfe of mankind, whether any one who had the feelings of a gentleman, and who wifhed only to vindicate his own character, would not have confidered this as handsome and fatisfactory proceeding on our part. The Suffolk Freeholder would not acknowlege it to be fuch; on the contrary, in a second letter, he called it, evafive and unfatisfactory," and perfifted in his demand of an apology. With this we peremptorily refufed to comply, ftill relying moit firmly on the account of Mr. Fox's fpeech given to us by one of our accomplices,' (as the author politely styles him,) who heard it delivered; and on the firength of which we then afferted, and yet continue boldly to affert, that in this writer's former pamphlet that fpeech was most grossly misrepresented. We were, however, difpofed to refer the whole matter to an authority which we conceived to be the only one that could decide without appeal. We accordingly propofed, in our anfwers to correfpondents, (May 1794) to lay before Mr. Fox himself the Suffolk Freeholder's pamphlet and the report of the debate on which it was founded, together with our review of the former, and our explanation of it in our answer to the author's first letter; declaring that by Mr. Fox's judgment we would abide, provided the Suffolk Freeholder would do the like; and pledging pledging ourselves to make to him the amende honorable, should that right hon. gentleman fay that in our review his fpeech was mifreprefented, and not in the pamphlet of our adverfary. On the other hand, we expreffed our expectation that, fhould the award be the reverfe, the Suffolk Freeholder would then make to us an apology, proportioned to the pertinacity and peremptorinefs with which he had called for one from us. This fair propofal he has rejected; for, he fays, the reference to Mr. Fox is not fo much to be depended upon, as accounts taken from the mouth of the speaker in writing, and immediately given to the public in works by no means unfavourable to Mr. Fox.' We did not know, before, that accounts of fpeeches were written down in the Houfe of Commons; we were aware indeed that (contrary to the orders of the House) notes were fometimes taken to refresh the memory of the reporter: but ftill we thought that more reliance might be placed on the recollection of the member who made the fpeech, than on the report of it by a perfon who, from the very nature of his employment, is obliged to facrifice a great deal to dif patch. It is true that inftances have occurred, in which the ears of the reporter were so remarkably fharp as to hear more than a member uttered; nay to hear, at the distance of a mile and a half from St. Stephen's chapel, a fpeech that was never delivered, in a debate that never took place. We have been told of a speech, (which, as a proof of fuperior accuracy, was given in the firft perfon,) that was put in the mouth (we think) of the late Lord North, on a queftion which had been fixed for difcuffion on a particular day. The motion was ftated, and the fpeech of the then premier reported at full length, as if in his own words, in one of the daily papers: but, unfortunately for the character of the reporter, the expected difcuffion did not come on; the noble Lord did not open his lips that day on the subject, and the House adjourned almost immediately after the Speaker had taken the chair. Has our Suffolk Freeholder ever heard of this anecdote ? can his memory furnish him with any faint recollection of it? does he understand us? Le fage entend à demi mot is a true adage, which we take the liberty of whispering in our author's ear; we fall fee if he can wifely take a hint, and never let us hear more of his complaints about mifreprefentation, nor of his demands for apologies. Should he, after this, deem it prudent to renew the attack, we think that he ought, if he has a particle of manliness about him, either to ufe fuch language only as one gentleman ought to use to another; or boldly pull off his mask, that thofe whom he prefumes to call by opprobrious names may have an opportunity of telling him, to his beard, how a foul-mouthed writer deferves to be treated. Art. 17. The Speech of the Right Hon. Charles James Fox, in the House of Commons, March 24, 1795. On a Motion "That the Houfe do refolve itself into a Committee of the whole Houfe, to confider of the State of the Nation." To which is added, a cor. rect Lift of the Minority. 8vo. IS. Debrett. If it should be afted why fo hopeless a motion was brought forwards in parliament, and enforced by all the orgorical but unavailing powers of the eloquent mover, Mr. Fox has himself provided an answer to the question, in the conclufion of his admirable speech:- Whether a Hh 4 Committes 1 Committee of inquiry is granted or not, I fhall at leaft derive this fatisfaction from having moved for it, that I fhall fhew to the people of England that there are still fome men in the great council of the nation, who anxiously wish to have an opportunity of proving to them, what is their real fituation, and of doing every thing in their power to avert, if poffible, the farther calamities of war, and effufion of human blood.' Art. 18. Confifcation confidered; or Doubts on the Propriety of plundering our Friends. 8vo. 1s. 6d. Owen. 1795. We have frequently heard complaints of the plundering spirit of our troops, as manifefted in the islands which, in the present war, we have taken from the French in the Weft Indies. It has been faid that to this impolitic as well as bafe conduct, we are in a great meafure to afcribe the recapture of Guadaloupe; and the author of this very fenfible pamphlet is of opinion that we may, with too much reafon, apprehend that Martinique, &c. will follow; and which may not be all. If the account here given by an anonymous but, apparently, wellinformed writer fhould remain unrefuted, we fhall make little fcruple, however unwilling, of admitting the truth of his reprefentations; humiliating as the circumftances muft prove to our national pride, and grating to our feelings and jealoufy for the honour of the English name and character. We are the more concerned to find that, when the author speaks of the fordid fyftem of peculation' adopted by our army and navy in the French Weft Indies, he does not, by any means, exempt the Chiefs from his accufation; though he guardedly adds that he prefumes not to charge the blame of thofe tranfactions even on them, unt 1 time and an inquiry, which he trufts will foon be inflituted, shall decide whether they acted by order, and under inftructions, or of their own mere motion.' We hope, indeed, that fuch inquiry will be foon and ftrictly made, that the truth may be known to the whole world, and juice done to the oppreifed. Should the charges here brought again it our victorious troops be fubftantiated, and reparation to the injured yet with-holden, the blafting of their laurels will be the fmallest part of the confequence; for, on the great, though not always juft, principle of retaliation, there may be too much reafon to apprehend a poffibility of the moft dreadful confequences to ourselves, not only in the Weft Indies, but even in Europe! In reviewing the proceedings of our army in the French islands, and comparing them with thofe of the French in the laft war, when lefs propitious events had put our islands into their poffeffion, the author fays, he feels humbled by a comparison + fo difgraceful to the It is fyftem, government fyftem, and mal-administration, not the want of military difcipline, that is here the fubject of complaint: nor are the neceffary vouchers wanting. In this comparative view, the conduct of the truly noble MARQUIS DE BOUILLE rifes with that just and honourable diftinction which has fince been grateful and handfomely acknowledged in this country. British |