THE VISION OF JUDGMENT. BY QUEVEDO REDIVIVUS. SUGGESTED BY THE COMPOSITION SO ENTITLED BY THE AUTHOR OF "WAT TYLER." "A Daniel come to judgment! yea, a Daniel! PREFACE. IT hath been wisely said, that "One fool makes many;" and it hath been poetically observed "That fools rush in where angels fear to tread."-POPE. If Mr. Southey had not rushed in where he had no business, and where he never was before, and never will be again, the following poem would not have been written. It is not impossible that it may be as good as his own, seeing that it cannot, by any species of stupidity, natural or acquired, be worse. The gross flattery, the dull impudence, the renegado intolerance, and impious cant, of the poem by the author of "Wat Tyler," are something so stupendous as to form the sublime of himself-containing the quintessence of his own attributes. So much for his poem-a word on his preface. In this preface it has pleased the magnanimous Laureate to draw the picture of a supposed "Satanic School," the which he doth recommend to the notice of the legislature; thereby adding to his other laurels the ambition of those of an informer. If there exists anywhere, except in his imagination, such a School, is he not sufficiently armed against it by his own intense vanity? The truth is, that there are certain writers whom Mr. S. imagine like Scrub, to have "talked of him; for they laughed consumedly." I think I know enough of most of the writers to whom he is supposed to allude, to assert, that they, in their individual capacities, have done more good, in the charities of life, to their fellow-creatures, in any one year, than Mr. Southey has done harm to himself by his absurdities in his whole life; and this is saying a great deal. But I have a few questions to ask. 1stly, Is Mr. Southey the author of "Wat Tyler?" 2ndly, Was he not refused a remedy at law by the highest judge of his beloved England, because it was a blasphemous and seditious publication ?* 3rdly, Was he not entitled by William Smith, in full parliament, "a rancorous renegado?" + 4thly, Is he not poet laureate, with his own lines on Martin the regicide staring him in the face? And, 5thly, Putting the four preceding items together, with what conscience dare he call the attention of the laws to the publications of others, be they what they may? I say nothing of the cowardice of such a proceeding; its meanness speaks for itself; but I wish to touch upon the motive, which is neither more nor less than that Mr. S. has been laughed at a little in some recent publications, as he was of yore in the " Anti-jacobin," by his present patrons. Hence all this "skimble scamble stuff" about * [These were not the expressions employed by Lord Eldon. He laid down the principle that "damages cannot be recovered for a work which is calculated to do injury to the public," and suspecting Wat Tyler to be of this description, he refused the injunction until Southey succeeded in obtaining damages in an action. Wat Tyler was written at the age of twenty-one when Southey was a republican, and was entrusted to two booksellers, who agreed to publish it, but never put it to press. The MS. was not returned to the author, and in 1817, at the interval of twentythree years, when his sentiments were widely different, it was printed, to his great annoyance, by persons who were supposed to have obtained it surreptitiously.] † [Mr. William Smith, M.P. for Norwich, attacked Mr. Southey in the House of Commons on the 14th of March, 1817, and the Laureate replied by a letter in the Courier.] [Among the effusions of Mr. Southey's juvenile muse, is a laudatory "Inscription for the Apartment in Chepstow Castle, where Henry Martin, the Regicide, was imprisoned thirty years." Canning wittily parodied it in the Anti-jacobin, by his well-known "Inscription for the Door of the Cell in Newgate, where Mrs. Brownrigg, the 'Prentice-cide was confined, previous to her Execution."] "Satanic," and so forth. However, it is worthy of him"qualis ab incepto.” If there is anything obnoxious to the political opinions of a portion of the public in the following poem, they may thank Mr. Southey. He might have written hexameters, as he has written everything else, for aught that the writer cared-had they been upon another subject. But to attempt to canonise a monarch, who, whatever were his household virtues, was neither a successful nor a patriot king,-inasmuch as several years of his reign passed in war with America and Ireland, to say nothing of the aggression upon France-like all other exaggeration, necessarily begets opposition. In whatever manner he may be spoken of in this new "Vision," his public career will not be more favourably transmitted by history. Of his private virtues (although a little expensive to the nation) there can be no doubt. With regard to the supernatural personages treated of, I can only say that I know as much about them, and (as an honest man) have a better right to talk of them than Robert Southey. I have also treated them more tolerantly. The way in which that poor insane creature, the Laureate, deals about his judgments in the next world, is like his own judgment in this. If it was not completely ludicrous, it would be something worse. I don't think that there is much more to say at present. QUEVEDO REDIVIVUS. P.S.-It is possible that some readers may object, in these objectionable times, to the freedom with which saints, angels, and spiritual persons discourse in this "Vision." But, for precedents upon such points, I must refer him to Fielding's Journey from this World to the next," and to the Visions of myself, the said Quevedo, in Spanish or translated. The reader is also requested to observe, that no doctrinal tenets are insisted upon or discussed; that the person of the Deity is carefully withheld from sight, which is more than can be said for the Laureate, who hath thought proper to make him talk, not "like a school-divine," but like the unscholarlike |