66

"by the country, and divided against one "another; their very leader-he who "commanded the finances of the nation, declaring himself innocent because he "was ignorant. Behold the picture of a "British Ministry! Why should Buonaparté wage hostility against the country of which such men are the Minis"ters? What need has he of his great power and talents to cope with their insincerity to themselves, and their incapacity in their offices? men who were "unanimous that their inefficient colleague "should be dismissed, yet allowed him to "remain in power-allowed him to con"duct the greatest Expedition which "ever left our coast, on which the eyes of England were fixed, and the fate of

66

"

tion. To be sure, both parties, the INS and the OUTS, are opposed to such Reform; but it is, at present, only the OUTS that make representations respecting the conduct of the Honourable House; and, therefore, it is with them, that we have now more inmediately to do.-There are two notable pieces, upon record, coming from the mouths and the pens of these our adversaries. The first is a Speech of Mr. Ponsonby, and the second, an article in the Edinburgh Review.- -Mr. Ponsonby is looked upon as Captain General of the regularly disciplined and embodied army of Opposition; and, the Edinburgh Reviewers may be regarded as Auxiliaries in the same cause, the very heart's blood and soul of which, is, a prospect of place and profit.- -Mr. Ponsonby, at the time Europe depended-lest they should hurt when Mr. Madocks made his motion for "his feelings! Men who were content to an Inquiry into the selling of Seats, both "send our brave soldiers to their gravevoted and spoke against inquiry into the con- content to squander the treasures of the duct of Lord Castlereagh and Mr. Perceval, country-content to tarnish our national though Mr. Madocks pledged himself to "name, in the hope of finding some coprove the truth of his charge. So far from "lourable pretext for reconciling the Noble appearing to think, that the country ought" Lord's feelings to his incapacity! Where to be dissatisfied with that refusal to in- "was their consideration for the honour quire, Mr. Ponsonby appeared to think," of their country? Where for the fame that the country had no right to meddle with such matters; and, the Honourable House resolved, 310 to 85, that they would enter upon no inquiry into the matter.Very well but, now, bearing this in mind, let us hear what Mr. Ponsonby said about" present Administration, and demanding inquiry, relative to the Walcheren Expe- "the confidence of that house, desire it to dition. His words are of great import- "abstain from all inquiry into their misance here. They are, remember, words fortunes, till he should think proper to coming from one of those, who voted give it his information. We have inagainst inquiry, when the Charge, against"deed experienced many calamities. the very same ministers, was, having sold, actually sold, Seats in Parliament."An Inquiry," he said, "was indeed ne"cessary: not however to ascertain whe"ther the Expedition was a calamity or "not, but to ascertain to whom the ca"lamity was imputable. This was the "only object of the proposed Inquiry, "and condemnation would of course fol"low the discovery. Condemnation of "the culprit, whoever he might be, was "indeed imperiously demanded," The enemy has declared (said Mr. Pon"sonby) that the Genius of France con"ducted the British army to perish in "the pestilential marshes of Walcheren." No; it was not th Genius of France, but the Demon of England-a weak, "divided, distracted, and incapable ad"ministration; ill thought of by all, and suspected by themselves; contemned

"

|

"of the army? Where for the feelings "of the people who had committed such "a trust into their hands? and yet now " is it to be endured, that one of those men "should be transferred to the head of the

We have tolerated innumerable suffer"ings and privations; but if this demand "is this night acceded to; if such a mi"nister obtains the confidence of this

house, then malignant men enough may "be found in the nation, to pronounce its "greatest calamity-SUCH A HOUSE OF "COMMONS!"--- Very well, the Honourable House has now enquired, and decided. They have decided, too, that there was no ground for censure; and, instead of censure, that there was ground for approbatión. The House have decided, not only that the scuding forth of the Expedi tion was not wrong, but that it was right, and that it was right also to keep the Sol| diers in Walcheren, after the sickness began to make its dreadful ravages. Now, then, upon what ground is it that Mr. Ponsonby and his party can call upon the people to make applications for the removal

"

66

"nominy, and weighed down with almost "intolerable burdens-to the very brink "of destruction:- but the King is very "old,' and he has reigned above half a century.'-It now remains to be seen, "whether that PARLIAMENT, which stands in no need of reformation—which is a fair representative of the people of England— "which speaks the sentiments of the country "-will be satisfied with this set-off'; "and once more acquit the Ministers of "all blame for their recent mismanage"ment.

66

Holding, in common with the "Parliament itself, the doctrine of its "purity and of its sufficiency to save the "State, we cannot anticipate such a de"cision. But if, unhappily, we should "find ourselves mistaken; if, again, every "measure and every minister be covered "over with its approbation, then we will "venture to predict, not that the Government "is acquitted, but THAT THE PARLIA"MENT STANDS CONDEMNED; and we shall most unwillingly be compelled to I appear in the foremost rank of those who must acknowledge that they are convinced "and converted. For it is needless to disIguise the matter. A refusal to punish "the authors of our misfortunes can only "mean one of two things-either that "there has been no blame incurred-or "that it is inexpedient to declare it, be66 cause such a resolution would drive the guilty persons from the Government. "In the one case, the Parliament will "show that it is not the Representative of "the Country; in the other, we shall have

of those ministers, who planned, executed, and persevered in the Expedition? Ground enough upon the principles of the Refor mists; but, upon no other principles whatever. -But, now let us hear the EDINBURGH REVIEWERS, who abused the Reformists, and who, in their very last Number, have represented them as little better than anarchists. These Reviewers, who have been but very little other than merc political partizans; mere tools in the hands of the Opposition; these men, some of whom have been stuffed into the Honourable House and into places, have been the most active opponents of Reform of Parliament. Let us now, therefore, hear what they said, when they were looking forward to the result of the Inquiry which has now taken place. The passage, which I am about to insert, is from "Remarks upon the Conduct of the War" published by them in the Number for October last. They" (the partizans of the ministers) "have admitted all their failures to be I complete and fatal; they have confessed, that the opportunities which they "have lost will in all likelihood never re"turn. After a few wretched attempts "to divide the blame among themselves, "in shares different from those in which "the country is disposed to apportion it, "they have been compelled to allow that themselves it must all be dividamong ed, and upon them alone must the re"sponsibility rest. They have not dared "to deny, that the prospects of the Con"tinent are become more dismal than "ever; that its confidence in England is" a conclusive proof that the Ministers of gone; that the map of Europe, from "Moscow to Paris, and from Lapland to "Calabria, offers to the eye only a col"lection of States, aggrandized by her hostility, or ruined by the perilous ruined by the perilous" bounty of her alliance. Abroad and "at home-which way soever the eye can turn, our rulers have amply admitted, that our affairs are only not despe"rate, and have themselves come for"ward to declare, that the empire is re"duced to a state of difficulty, from which "there can be at least no precedent of "its ever having escaped in former times. "And after all these confessions, their only excuse, the only attempt they -This was what they said. These were "make to regain the confidence of the the words of a set of writers, who, in their "people, is to tell us, "that the King has very last Number, have had the impu""reigned fifty years. They have ruined dence to talk about what they call the "our allies; they have failed in every violence of SIR FRANCIS BURDETT and bis "plan: they have brought us through followers; and who have had the dupli"slaughter and disgrace, loaded with ig-city, in that same Number, to call upon

"

"the Crown are irremoveable. The re"sponsibility of her rulers, that fairest fea"ture in the theory of the Constitution, "will be no longer even a name, wherewithal to round parliamentary periods; and "the people will thenceforward recognise, "in the great Council of the Nation, not "the guardian of their interests, and the

champion of their rights, but a well contrived "instrument of taxation.-The consequences "of such a decision, therefore, will be "productive of incalculable mischief; it "will complete the alienation of the Coun"try from the Government, and shame away "the boldest defenders of the present system."

66

64

the Whigs to step forward, and save the "responsibility is a complete sham; that the country from that violence, which, they "Parliament is not the guardian of the affect to believe, is likely to tear the people's interests and rights, but merely "monarchy" to atoms.I beg the rea- a well-contrived instrument of taxation; der to observe here, that this article was "and that the recent decision has compublished before the parliament met, and, "pleted the alienation of the people from the of course, before any inquiry could have government ? Will you now say this? been begun. These writers say (before Your answer is uncertain; but, one of the inquiry has been begun) if the parlia-three things is very certain; namely, ment does not punish the ministers, we will that you will now make this charge against then say, that the parliament itself is a the Parliament, or that you will retract corrupt and worse than useless body. your charges against the ministers, or that These gentlemen wish the ministers to be you will prove yourselves to be amongst punished; and, if the parliament should the very basest of mankind.-—————If the first, not punish them, they say, that, in such then you have something more to do, in case, they predict, "not that the govern- fulfilment of your promises to the pub"ment is acquitted, but that the Parlia- lic. You have then openly and zealously "ment stands condemned; that responsibi- to join those, who call for a Reform of the lity will no longer exist, even in nume; that, Parliament; you have then to "appear "thenceforward the people will recog- "in the foremost rank of those, who must "nize, in the great council of the nation, "acknowledge that they are convinced and "not the guardian of their interests and "converted." Welcome you certainly will "the champion of their rights, but a well be unto us; but, let us hope, that we shall "contrived instrument of taxation; and that, hear no more of that fine-spun politico"the consequences of not punishing the philosophy, which discovered so many "ministers will be productive of incalcu- beauties in corruption. Now, as to the "lable mischief, and will complete the uli- decision itself, which is, at the same time, a "enation of the country from the government, decision in favour of the ministry's continu **and shame away the boldest defenders of the ation in power, what is it to the nation, "present system. -Well; the ministers unless some prospect of better treatment are not punished by the parliament. They had been held out by the Opposition? are not only not punished, but not cen. During the whole of these long debates, sured. Nay, the very acts, for which the not a man of them has, that I have heard Reviewers say they ought to be punished, of, expressed one single sentiment in fahave received the approbation of parlia- vour of the people. They have made no ment.- -Oh! how I long to see the next advances towards the people: but, on the Number of the Edinburgh Review! What contrary, have pretty clearly demonwill its authors now say? Will they now strated, that they still entertain all those assert positively what they before asserted feelings and views, which, on the everconditionally? Or will they eat their memorable 12th of May in the year of Juwords as fast as decency will permit? bilee, induced them to echo back the cry The wary loons thought there was no of" Make a Stand!" Make a stand! "It danger in their predictions of October" is time to make a stand against popular last; they thought they were quite sure, "encroachment!" Popular encroachment! after the pistolling match of the privy- Yes, they did, both sides of the Honourcounsellors, that the ministry could not able House did, call it " popular encroachstand; they themselves had not the small- "ment," when a member offered to prove, est idea of the vast powers of that influ- that the king's servants had sold a Seat in ence, which they had before described as that House: the open, fair, explicit denecessary for the support of "cur goodly claration, that this offence had been com"fabric" of government; they wrote, mitted, and an offer to give proof of it at in fact, just after the Putney Heath duel the bar of the House; this was termed had taken place, at a moment when all" popular encroachment," and the House, the shallow-brained politicians looked upon a total change of ministry as certain; or, never would they have written as they did. But (addressing myself now to them,) Gentlemen, will you now stand to your word? Will you now say, "that ☛ the Parliament stands condemned; that

310 to 85, voted that the member's proofs should not be produced at their barBorne down, as the people have been, still they have some recollection; and, "while memory holds her seat" in their brain, never will they, or can they, forget the treatment they received in the night

66

This is the condition, and the sole condi tion, upon which the people can be prevailed upon to "stir" in favour of any set of public men.-— say in this very paragraph? Why, he -What does Mr. Perry says, in plain meaning, that the ministers have been convicted of impudence, and that they are tried delinquents. Well! If this be true; and if the House have, nevertheless, acquitted them, and, not only acquitted them, but expressed its approbation of their conduct; if this be so if Mr. Perry's description be a true one, for what would he have the people stir? "To carry. "their case of the public situation of the

Empire to the feet of the Throne." jargon, if not for the purpose of disguising But, what is this? Why use this law-like the real meaning? The case of the public pompous word empire? It is a kingdom that. "situation of the Empire." And why the we live in and no Empire. Our sovereign days, is a king and no Emperor. But, of late "our Geese are all become Swans." Our language is fast becoming sublimated out of its senses. Every one above a mere handicraftsman is an "esquire;" the women down to the very scullion wenches, are all "the ladies;"and our country, which has enjoved somuch happiness and renown under the title of Kingdom, is now, it seems, to be called an Empire: and, we have, God preserve us! an IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT !"

of the 11th and the morning of the 12th of May, in the year of Jubilee. Let any man, who has the common feelings of a man, look back to the proceedings of that night, as they stand recorded in Vol. XV, page 737, of the POLITICAL Register, and then wonder, if he can, that the people care nothing at all about which party is in power. "The peo ple do not stir," say the OUTS; and, they have the impudence; the barefaced impudence; the profligate assurance; the base insolence, to ascribe this inactivity, on the part of the people, to the people's being corrupt; to the circumstance of corruption being 66 more dense at the bottom "than at the top." Stir! What should the people stir for?---The MORNING CHRONICLE of the 2nd instant, has an arti cle, upon this subject, well worthy of notice." It was universally reported yes"terday, that a change in his majesty's "councils is forthwith to take place; and "it is expected that the house will ad"journ for a few days to give time for the arrangement, and for the re-election of the new ministers.-It may, however, "be only street report, and have its rise "in the deep conviction on the public mind, "that though with an apparent majority on "Friday night ministers were in reality "beaten. Whatever may be their deter"mination on the event of the inquiry, "whether pertinaciously to adhere to office "as they are, or by some miserable which I was dragged by the use of the To return from this digression, inte "changes of place, or by some disgrace-word Empire, for what, I again ask, should "ful compromises of principle, to make any of the people stir, in the way of petiup a hotch-potch of convicted impudence tion to the throne, if the ministers, who "with tried delinquency, it is high time for have been approved of by the House of "the counties and great cities of the united Commons, really be what Mr. Perry has kingdom to meet and carry their case of described them to be? What would be the "the public situation of the empire to the fect use, in that case, of petitioning against the of the throne, as the last means of retriev-ministers? What good purpose could it ing his majesty's affairs, and effecting "the salvation of the empire."- -One can hardly say, positively, what is meant Perry; but, really, there does not appear -I mean no disrespect towards Mr, by the Counties and Great Cities meeting to me to be common sense in the proposi and "carrying their case of the public situation. Let us try it a little. Petition, the "tion of the Empire to the feet of the King. The Counties and Great Cities are "Throne;" but, if the English of it be, called upon to bestir themselves; they are as I suppose it is, that it is high time for told, that it is "high time" for them to go the Counties and Great Cities to meet and petition the King to turn out the INS but, for what? What are the Counties and to the feet of the Throne with petitions; and put the OUTS in their places, the Great Cities to ask at the hands of their Morning Chronicle may be perfectly sa- king? Why, MR. PERRY clearly wishes tisfied, that the Counties and Great Cities them to ask for the dismission of the will do no such thing; until the OUTS sent ministers. The king's answer would, shall give the people a specific pledge, that doubtless, be: "No; I cannot think of they will do their utmost to procure a Re-that, because the House of Commons, form in the Representation of the people." your representatives, have, after a month's

66

answer? what sense would there be in it ?

pre

"

"

"

"as clear as the sun at noon day, that, as "far as relates to the subject of your pre"sent application, a mere changing of my "servants would produce no public good, "no security, no chance of advantage, "nothing that would, in any degree, re"dound to the honour of my crown or to "the happiness of my people."Now, MR. PERRY, though the Attorney General complimented you, and with great justice, on your ingenuity, I do not believe you possessed of ingenuity enough to make even a show of reply to this. In short, you would find yourself penned up so' completely, that you must either retire in silence, or say, at once: "Well, may it, "then, please your Majesty, to change your servants and to recommend a Re"form of the House at the same time."

-To this the king would, doubtless, answer: "Here again, your application "does not appear to be warranted by "sound reason, if you mean, that I should "choose as my new servants, those who "were lately my servants; for, though I "find their names in your list of the mi

"cannot but bear in mind, that they are "not, any more than my present serv"ants, friendly to that Reform, for which

inquiry, and a week's debating, decided, "that my servants have done nothing "wrong; and, instead of censure, your "said representatives have conferred on my "servants decided approbation." Would not this shut, would it not glue up, the mouths of the Counties and Great Cities? What man of them all would have the folly to pretend that such answer was not satisfactory? Would you, Mr. Perry, say, in reply: "Yes, but, may it please "your Majesty, though your servants had "an apparent majority, they were, in reality, beaten?" Perhaps you might say this, and, repeating the words of your own paper of the 3rd instant, you might add:"That, when the list of the ma"jority, who voted in favour of ministers, on Saturday morning, is examined, it "will be found that the advisers of the Expedition have no cause for triumph; "that the number of persons holding political "offices, those who held similar offices when "the Expedition was undertaken, together. "with persons holding places in the household "during pleasure, and the sons and bro"thers of persons holding offices during plea-"nority upon the last great Votings, I "sure or relatives of the four Advisers, amounts to SEVENTY-THREE; and that "there are also to be added to these, Ge"nerals on the Staff, and persons holding of"fices immediately connected with Government, "and the number of whom, as will be "seen by the list published yesterday, is very considerable."- -Whereunto the king would have no hesitation in answering in words somewhat to this amount :"Oh! so, then, it is not of my servants "that you do, in fact, complain, so much as of my faithful Commons, and of my people's representatives. And, not so "much of their conduct upon this occasion "as of the manner in which the House of "Commons is constituted. Your complaint" 'is, in fact, that the House contains a great number of persons, who, from their "situations under the crown, must naturally be under the immediate controul "of my servants. This is a very cogent "reason for an application to me for a re"commendation to the House to reform itself; but, no reason at all for an application to me to turn out my present servants; because, whoever I "should appoint in their room would, if your allegations be true and your in"ferences fair, have just as many members "under their immediate controul as are "under the immediate, ontroul of my therefore, it is

"

present

you now apply; but, on the contrary, "are the persons who have the most fu"riously attacked all those, who have "stood forward to call for such Reform. -Therefore, first, a compliance with "your application for a change of my "servants, would, as appears from your "own statement, be of no use, unaccom

66

66

panied with a recommentation of a "Reform of the House of Commons; and, secondly, a compliance with your application for a change of my servants, "accompanied with such recommendation, would be of no use, unless I were to "choose my new servants from amongst "those, to whom your friends are more "directly opposed, and towards whom

they evince more bitterness than towards "" my present servânts.". -There can be no answer found to this. Even the metaphysics of the Edinburgh Reviewers would not afford the means of forming, of kneading up, even a quirk to bear against it.Ridiculous, however, as this notion of petitioning the king is, it has, I see, the sanction of the Chairman at a recent meeting of that poor old Rump, called the Whig Club. LORD HOLLAND, who was the Chairman alluded to, is represented as having said "that, since he

103