« ZurückWeiter »
by the public, are grossly erroneous— that no man in the nation can make correct arithmetical calculations except himself—and that the calumnious and groundless attacks which he is in the practice of making on absent individuals, are exceedingly just and praiseworthy. He may then move for permission to place on the table a series of calculations, shewing, 1. That the national debt is more by one hundred and eighty-two millions than it really is. 2. That to expend ten thousand pounds on a building on shore, is to expend twenty thousand on a number of seamen at sea. 3. That two and two are five. 4. That armies and fleets should be lessened in proportion as territory is extended, and that the number of public servants should be diminished with the increase of public business. 5. That his own popularity is just eighty-nine times greater at present than it was before he became the object of public derision. And, 6. That the supporters of the Whigs are one hundred times more numerous than they were two years ago. He may then make the following motions:—1. That hebe appointed sole financier and accountant to thestate, and to every individual in it. 2. That that horrid old nuisance the Church of England be destroyed, and that Uichard Carlile be made director-general of the nation's conscience. 3. That utter ignorance of a subject be regarded as a member's best qualification for making a long speech on it. And, 4. That every detection of his errors in calculation and opinion be regarded by the House and the nation as a proof that he cannot err. His zealous friend, Air H. G. Bennct, being, of course, his constant seconder.
Let Mr Hobhouse move, that Don Juan and Tom Paine be used in our churches instead of the Prayer Book and the Bible.—Lord Nugent, that a dukedom and pension be decreed him for his glorious exploits in the Spanish war.—And Mr Peter Moore, that the nation be indicted for perjury, because it will not buy " A Voice from England, in reply to A Voice from St Helena."
Lord Holland may move, that the Bishop of Peterborough be expelled the church for intermeddling with church matters—that the nation may be placed under the care of some eyedoctor, to enable it to see his own
wisdom, and the imbecility of ministers, which have been Bo long clearly seen by himself,—and that nve millions be annually set apart for the maintenance of his distinguished friends, the Spanish refugees. In his speech on the latter topic, he may introduce some droll and pointed story like this: —A distinguished foreigner, whom I have the honour to call my particular friend, asked me the other day—why are the members of your party called Whigs? My answer was—Because our office is to cover with plasters the broken heads of foreign runaways!
I would place a mighty burden on Mr Brougham's shoulders. Whatever the authors of a revolution may be in personal character and principlca, such revolution cannot fail of being in the highest degree beneficial to the state in which it takes place. Every man, or at least every foreigner, who plots the overthrow of his government, and his own exaltation to a share of the sovereign power, is a disinterested patriot, and friend of liberty. It is essentially necessary that the sovereign power in every country be exclusively possessed by factions, for factions cannot oppress and tyrannize. Liberty can only exist under the rule of a faction. That kingdom must of necessity be free, prosperous, and happy, in which the king is stripped of all power, and the sway of a faction is absolute. The same institutions will produce the same effects in all countries, and the English constitution is as well calculated for any other country as for England; for the working of public institutions depends in no degree whatever on the conduct and circumstances of the people. Public institutions ought to be invariably founded on the axiom,—Man is a perfect creature. In proportion as this axiom is adhered to, they will render him perfect, and vice versa. The Spanish Revolutionists, as a body, were embued with the principles of the French Revolutionists,—therefore, it was impossible for the revolution which they accomplished to be anything but a blessing to Spain. Because the constitution was forced upon Spain by the army, it was unanimously called for by the people. Spain can only be free, by having a form of government and a set of rulers which she detests. The friends of revolution throughout Europe are Notoriously infidels, as well as enemies vernments.less immoral and profligate as members of society, than mercenary and unprincipled as public men: Therefore they are admirably qualified for revolutionizing Europe, and remodelling society; and they are the sole friends of knowledge, liberty, patriotism, and philanthropy—the sole friends of mankind that the world contains, save and except the Whigs and Radicals of Great Britain. Mr Brougham must embody all this in a set of resolutions, and prevail on the House to adopt them by a speech of inordinate length, and replete, even to redundancy, with misrepresentations, miscalculations, hideous metaphors, low scurrility, nauseous Billingsgate, and horrible imprecations. He may afterwards move,—1. That it be made high treason to call a man who maintains this, "aBruminagem statesman."—2. That the House do issue an order for beheading the French Minister of Foreign Affairs.—3. That a committee be appointed to ascertain why his public prayer for the destruction of the Bourbons was not granted.—4. That Mr Canning be compelled to hear in silence anything that Mr Brougham may be pleased to say of him.—5. That the community be compelled, on pain of extermination, to forget all the political predictions which he has hitherto delivered in Parliament, the Edinburgh Review, and elsewhere.—6. That the Lord Chancellor be impeached for refusing silk gowns to himself and Mr Williams.—7. That the exelusive power of prosecuting for libel be vested in the Whigs.—8. That if a man call himself a Whig, he be permitted to promulgate any principles whatever, without being deemed an enemy of the constitution.—9. That no man be suffered to call himself a Whig, who is not the libeller of the church, the clergy, and religion—the slanderer of constituted authorities— a clamourer for vital changes in the constitution—an advocate for giving to faction despotic power—and the friend and champion of Europe's infidels and rebels.—10. That our allies be henceforth only known by thenames, tyrants, despots, enemies, and destroyers of the human race, &c. &c.; and that he, Henry Brougham, be forth-'
ofsubstantialmonarchy,andtheirhos- with made the oracle and emperor of
tility is avowedly directed as much the whole universe,against religion as against existing go- I will supply no more motions at They are, in general, not present. These will furnish the Whigi
with ample matter of declamation for more than one session, and they will enable those eminent and distressed persons to bring themselves and their creed more fully than ever before the eyes of the country. If they do not profit by it, let not my charity be vituperated for the failure. I do not seek to trepan them into inconsistency—I propose no new faith for their adoption. So far as general principles are comprehended in my motions, I only translate into plain English what they have again and again, though in a less honest tongue, declared to be their own.
I will honestly own, that I have the good of the State in view, as well as that of the Whigs; but I must now cease to be jocular. A party like this, which makes The Morning Chronicle, The Times, and their copyists, its organs—which spreads its protecting wings over every blasphemer and traitor, from Lord Byron to Carlile— which never has the weapon out of its hands, when royalty, the church, and all the best institutions and feelings of society, can be attacked—which openly/ra/eraizM with the revolutionary factions of Europe—and which boldly maintains, what are called "liberal opinions," to be the only true ones—A party like this is tolerated among us, as an equally honest and harmless one, and with even increasing feelings of indulgence and good will!We see here the mighty magic of a name. There are neither Whigs nor Tories in the land, according to the original meaning of the terms; and assuredly, if any men amongst us can with propriety be called Whigs, these are the Tories. Nevertheless, because the persons of whom I have spoken call themselves Whigs, they are tolerated as well-affected and somewhat clever persons, although their creed manifestly contemplates the destruction of all the principles which the experience of men and nations has proved to be the only true ones. Let them change their name to Liberals, Carbonari, or Constitutionalists, without altering in one jot their conduct and principles, and they will be at once trodden under foot by an indignant nation.
To have a party like this, constantly forcing poison into the bowels of the state, is bad enough; but if it had been the worst, I should have remained silent. The cry of Conciliation is now daily rung in our ears; and by whom? The Tories. And to whom is it addressed? To each other. If this meant only the banishment of party rage, my voice should be among the loudest in propagating it; but, alas! like almost all other political terms now in fashion, it is meant to convey almost any meaning, except its Johnsonian one. The cry is not to the Whigs—Abate your evil practices, but to the Tories—Abate your hostility to these practices. To conciliate,— the principles of the government and its supporters must be modified until they approximate to those of the Whigs, and their tone must be lowered until the Whigs cannot goad them into a word of contradiction; while the principles and rancour of those persons are to remain unaltered. It was notorious that the Spanish revolutionists held principles diametrically opposed to those of the Tories—in a word, "liberal" principles, ». e. in substance, the old Jacobin ones—and that some of them even openly proposed a repetition of the enormities which were perpetrated in France. The Times newspaper actually confessed that the Spanish revolution seemed to be closely following the steps of the Trench one. Yet for purposes of Conciliation, no doubt; while the Whigs trumpeted forth those persons as models of what men should be, the Houses of Parliament and Ministers of England were to affect to sympathize with them—to regard them, as honest, wellprincipled, patriotic men—and to treat them as the bona _fide representatives of the Spanish people. The Protestants of Ireland were to be stigmatized by the Whigs, throughout the last Session, as a faction, a detestable faction, the tyrants of Ireland, the authors of Ireland's wretchedness, &c. &c. and this, unquestionably for purposes of Conciliation, was to be listened to, by Ministers and the House, in silent acquiescence, bating the disbelieved denial of some suspected Orangeman.
Against this system, I, for one, solemnly protest. If, to be liberal and to conciliate, we must abandon our creed, let us still be termed bigots, and dwell amidst the thunders of par
ty madness. If, after all our risks, and sufferings, and perseverance, and triumphs, we are at last to sacrifice our principles, let us, at least, do it like Englishmen, and not adopt the frenchified, Whiggish mode, of fancying that whatever change we may make in our faith, we shall remain the same, so long as we call ourselves Tories. The " Pitt system" was a system of principles, if it had any peculiarity whatever; the Pitt war was a war against principles, and he who would now admit these principles into the grand sphere of European action, is no disciple of Mr Pitt. The last ban was cast upon them, when the High Allied Powers, including England, proclaimed Buonaparte to be a man with whom no faith could be kept—an outlaw. The proclamation was against, not the man, but his principles. It stated in effect, that rulers who held religion to be a fable, and scorned the laws of morality—who practised the doctrines for the guidance of human life, which foreign " Constitutionalists" now maintain—were a curse to the world, and could not be tolerated in it. Be it remembered that it was dictated by experience, and not opinion.
In judging of the Spanish Revolutionists, we must look at the contrivers and heads, and not at those who, after their success, accepted employment under them, and swelled their train. We must look less at what they did, than at what they evidently intended to do, and at what the practice of their creed was sure of accomplishing. Of all Englishmen, dead and alive, Jerry Bentham was the man to whom they decreed public honours. This faet is of itself decisive. If we believe that England could be governed on the principles of Radicalism— that even the practice of the modern Whig tenets would not plunge the state into ruin, we must then, in consistency, fraternise with the revolutionists in question, or, at least, acknowledge them as one of the innocuous and legitimate parties of Europe. But we must then rail no more against Whiggism and Radicalism—against Bentham and Byron, and Hunt and Cobbet :—we must then cease to be Tories and Pittites, and anything but apostate!?. The question will admit of no compromise. If we believe " Liberal opinions" to be fraught with curses to mankind, we must oppose them in Parliament, as well as out of it—in foreigners, as well as in our countrymen—abroad, as well as at home—in governments, as well as in individuals —and in the practice, as well as in the promulgation.
How did the system of Conciliation bear upon the Irish protestants? Those of them who are Orangemen, assuredly formed an association, but there was not a man living who doubted their loyalty—who did not know that their object of union was to defend the Constitution in church and state —and who was not quite sure that their mysteries were of no public moment whatever. What then? Had we no other political associations? Had we not more than one Catholic association—Pitt Clubs—Fox Clubs —a Canning Club—and, above all, a grand Whig Club? In regard to political exertions and baleful principles, how would the Whig Club stand in comparison with the Orange A sso elation? Yet the latter body was spoken of, as though it was the only political combination in the empire, and as though such combinations were pregnant with public rain. It is amusing enough to hear any members of the contending parties in Parliament, rail against party spirit and party fury, but it is actually sickening to hear inch men as Brougham and Burdett raise the outcry. Yet these men, who have been so long the most outrageous party men in the country—who have so long laboured beyond their strength, to inoculate every mechanic and labourer in it, with party madness, ay, and with such madness as would only flame against our best institutions— these men could affect to shake with horror, over the party feelings of the Orangemen, as though they had never before known that party feelings existed in the world. Still no man could be found to whisper,—" Look at home —compare your party principles and party rage with theirs, and blush yourselves into reformation." With respect to the charges that were heaped upon the Orangemen, Ireland has a Catholic Board, which is most anxious to collect every scrap that could be worked up into a complaint to Parliament —she has a disaffected population most anxious to supply this Board with what it seeks—she has a considerable number of members on the opposition
side of the House of Commons, In addition to many English ones, whose pride it would be to lay her complaints before Parliament, yet no proof could be brought forward in support of these charges. Nevertheless the Tories did not venture to say a syllable in defence of the absent objects of the calumnies. It seemed to be understood that the Whigs and Tories of England ought to confederate and squabble at pleasure, but that it was highly unjustifiable for the Orangemen to follow their example,—that it was mighty constitutional for the Catholics to associate for the attainment of their political objects, but quite the contrary for Protestants to associate to oppose them.
In what do we, who are opposed to the Catholic claims, differ from the Orangemen in principle, and in what do the Tories differ from those who are favourable to these claims except on this single point? Did not this conduct then amount to a cowardly desertion of our brethren, and compromise of our principles, for the sake of Conciliation r
These observations can scarcely fail of being of some use at the commencement of the session. They may serve to put the unwary on their guard. Let party rage, if it be practicable, be extinguished—totally extinguished; but let us perish rather than surrender one iota of those glorious principles, that have rendered us the happiest and the greatest of nations. We live in times, which, if philosophy were not exploded, would furnish abundant labour for the philosopher. We look with scorn upon all former generations, as having been composed of dolts and barbarians; and we regard ourselves to have reached the highest point of perfection attainable by man. Where is the justification of our arrogance and boasting? One portion of us, the ultra learned, good, and wise, have discovered that civil and religious liberty cannot exist with civil and religious obedience; and their cry is, in meaning, whatever it may be in phrase, Down with kings and priests—away with the bible and prayer-book—subjects, scorn your rulers.—Ye wives and daughters—ye apprentices, shopmen, and servants of all descriptions, think no longer that lewdness, debauchery, profligacy, and theft, are forbidden by God, or that they are disgraceful in the eyes of man! Those who teach this are the pre-eminently wise and knowing men who look down from their pinnacle of exaltation with mingled contempt and compassion on all who differ from them, and who know that the adoption of their doctrines will fill the earth with the purity and happiness of heaven. The other portion of us who have not kept pace with them in the pursuitof knowledge and wisdom, are still, it seems, more knowing and wise than our forefathers. We must not gag and handcuff those who would fill the world with rebels, thieves, and prostitutes. We must not even dash to pieces their assertions with facts, and their theories with past experiments, and hold them up to the derision of those whom they would seduce to ruin. Oh, no! This would bqjjarbarism and bigotry. We must conciliate; we must hear them in the House of Commons openly attack the Christian religion, attempt to legalize the circulation of blasphemous and treasonable writings; brand the only well-affected and well-principled portion of the Irish people as public enemies; promulgate the most mad and atrocious principles of civil government; and exhaust the mighty powers of language in .investing the
infidels and democrats of the continent with the attributes of perfection. We must hear them do this in polite and complacent silence, lest we forfeit our character for liberality. We should perhaps gain the epithets — monks, parsons, tyrants, serviles, parasites, &c, &c, were we to avow principles hostile to theirs; and therefore we must by all means remain dumb when we can; and, when we are compelled to speak out, we must accompany the confession of our principles with an elaborate, canting, cringing apology, for entertaining them. Oh, man, man! is this all that the exercise of thy wonderful and stupendous faculties can make thee? Is this all the instruction that thou canst extract from the experience of six thousand years, and the miracles which Heaven has spread around thee? Boast no more of thy reason, and of thy superiority over the beasts of the field. Call the worm not only thy brother, but thy superior; for its instinct can teach what thy reason cannot, the means of avoiding injury, suffering, and destruction. I am, Sir, Your obedient servant, Sampson Standfast. London: 8th January, 1824.
LOMBARD S MEMOIRS.
There are two or three points of doubt and darkness in the French Revolution, which will be a great stumbling-block to its historian, and which stand in great need of being cleared. And there are myriads of memoirs pouring forth from the Parisian press, written by actors and subactors in that great tragedy, which somehow or another treat of every subject but the one we are anxious to be informed about. Our minds were quite made up about Queen Marie Antoinette's comparative innocence, and Mad. Campan's silly attempts at exculpation, have, if anything, thrown us back into suspicion. The present King's book has told us nothing, but that his majesty resembles ourself—fond of scribbling, and
good living. Napoleon, with his volumes on Cesar and Turenne, merely puts his finger in our eyes, and we'll buy no more of them. In short, we are disappointed, and begin to think that the best secrets are out, and nothing but dregs and lies left in the foul cask of revolutionary biography. The truth ought certainly to be apparent by this; never were events narrated by so many writers, all actors or witnesses of them,—the most striking scenes described by men just fresh from their horrors. Never were so many different characters, and various talents, all absorbed by the one great object, the unprecedented events of their day; these we have, in their different works, viewed from all sides,
"Mcmoires Anecdotiques pour servir a l'Histoire de la Revolution Franoaise, par Lombard de Lanirres, Ancien Ambassadcur en Hollande. Paris, 1823. Vox.. XV I