hor do we feel assured of our ability to recommend persuasively what we fancy we know. In writing on Lite rature, or on the Arts, it is a sufficient object to expose what is wrong; but in political discussion, we apprehend, it is mischievous to do so, unless we can at the same time enounce what would be right-for, as a political constitution is a matter of practical necessity, it would seem to be unfairly assailed by speculative objections, unless these are accompanied by demonstrations of practicable improvements.

But demonstration in politics is, we believe, impossible;-it cannot be given, and were it given, would not be accepted. The whole institution, or science, or whatever else it may be called, originates in human error, and infirmity; prejudices are its necessary means, and illusions of all sorts its natural auxiliaries. Politics have but little, comparatively, to do with man as he naturally wishes to be, or justly ought to be, or with things in their general properties, but chiefly relate to the actual, accidental condition of society. They are, moreover, inextricably connected with personal interests: candid opinion, therefore, can scarcely be brought to bear upon them, for every individual is, in some measure, a party to every question that can be agitated. Upon political questions there is always to be observed a most suspicious and disheartening tallying of sentiments with personal situations: Mr. Denman takes God to witness, that he believes the Queen pure in heart and conduct; while Sir John Copley is honourably indignant at her depravity! Lord Liverpool, whose integrity is only questioned by the dregs of faction, leans to the side of conviction; and Lord Grey, no longer an eager partizan, maintains she ought to be acquitted. How idle, then, to talk of conscience and principle as easy and obvious guides to what is right in politics! It might have been easily predicted, before her Majesty talked of coming over to this country, that the Lord Chancellor would be against her, and Alderman Wood for her:-conscience and principle, therefore, we see, may mislead in this labyrinth-for surely one of these individuals must be

wrong.

Perhaps the fact is, that politics, at the best, are but a necessary evil: absolutely necessary, but still an evil. If this be the case, the only rule of right that can be applied to them, is that of keeping strictly within the limits of the necessity. The human intellect is clearly more subjected to the influence of time and place in forming political opinions, than it is with reference to any other class of sentiment, except religious creeds. If Mr. Wilberforce had lived in the days of Augustus, he would have had slaves in his house,-only taking care to treat them well. On the other hand, Cicero, had his life been delayed till now, would, beyond a doubt, have joined Mr. Brougham, or taken his place, in carrying through Parliament the slave-trade felony bill; yet in one of his speeches, we find him fixing the time of a particular occurrence by coolly observing, "this happened at the hour when the cries of your chastized slaves are always heard in your mansions,”meaning, say the commentators, about one o'clock of the day,-and the orator seems to have been quite unconscious of the inhumanity of this daily infliction, or the injustice of slavery.-Lord Castlereagh, when he introduced the bills of last year against the Press, professed a regard for its freedom infinitely more liberal than any thing that ever dropped from Bacon or Sir Matthew Hale; yet it would be gross flattery in us to say, that we believe his lordship possesses a more liberal mind than fell to the lot of either of the two persons just mentioned. May not the difference be, that Lord Castlereagh yields his feelings to a necessity, which the dispositions and intellects of the others have helped to introduce in the lapse of time?

We are far, however, from thinking, that it is only people's opinions, as to wrong and right in politics, that change with different ages of the world;-these qualities themselves vary, according to the varying condition of society. There is no foundation for the science in absolute nature, as there is for all the other sciences,-and, therefore, there is no possibility of considering it but in strict dependance on local and temporary circumstances. If Newton's philosophy be, as we believe, ground

ed in truth, it holds quite as good to explain the phenomena of the uni verse, in the island of Ceylon, as in the island of Great Britain; but the same cannot be said of the British constitution, supposing it to be, as we believe, the paragon of constitutions. We have now before us the Annual Register for 1819, in which there is the official account of the quelling of a rebellion against the British flag in that island, and of the execution of two of the rebel chiefs. One of them, Keppetapole, is said to have "met his death with a firmness worthy of a better cause:"—such is the phrase of the Gazetteer, and it is the customary one in regard to all such unsuccessful attempts; yet the two Ceylon chiefs did but make resistance to a foreign invasion, and it is generally considered a natural right to do so. It is very likely, however, that the happiness of the inhabitants of Ceylon, and the advance of human improvement, ought to be considered as benefited by the extinction of this insurrection, and the transfer of the government of the island into British hands. The execution, therefore, of the native chiefs, may have been politically proper; though they had a political right to raise the banners of revolt! In the same way, James would have acted with perfect political justice had he condemned, in case of victory over the revolution, the whig lords for high-treason; yet these whig lords, we now say, gloriously maintained their political rights, and, by triumphantly doing so, have rendered us, their posterity, debtors to their memory of gratitude for all our political blessings!

This uncertainty, and apparent inconsistency, arise from this,-that there is no such thing as absolute right or wrong in politics:-resistance is a question of prudence, a high authority has declared; if so, subjugation is the consequence of power. There is not any one fixed principle in politics, derivable from the nature of things, to guide the understandings of men, and silence their passions, prejudices, and interests. Some have said, that man is born free, and, therefore, has a right to remain so; but it is untrue that he is so born: he is born to immediate dependance and pain. He protests against life, by his cries,

the moment he enters into it: no thing like voluntary suffrage is exercised by him when the most serious and heavy of engagements is imposed upon him. Others have said, that man is born under absolute power (his parents'), and therefore ought to remain under it :-but this is not true either,-for nature implants an instinct of affection in the parental breast, to qualify and restrain the power in question,-above which, in fact, it often gains an ascendancy,-while, except in some monstrous cases, it leads to an irrepressible self-denial and devotion in favour of the weaker party. History does not make it evident, that princes have a similar instinct towards their native subjects, far less towards their conquered enemies.

There can, therefore, be but little certainty, or comfort, in writing on politics, for they are naturally uncertain and uncomfortable. There is scarcely a point of their practice that may not be traced to an abstract absurdity or injustice; yet they are essential to the existence of society, and are intimately entwined with all we say, do, and think. They indi cate, too, the strength or the weakness of nations; their health, or their infirmity. As connected with national character, they approach to more pleasant topics of discussion; and, in particular instances, they involve animating considerations, demand urgent appeals, and give opportunity for inculcating useful lessons. A publication, like ours, professing to reflect the actual features of the time, must be considered imperfect if it excludes them; and, besides, we really feel ourselves responsible to our readers for affording them something like fair representation, and candid inquiry, on subjects so obscured by misrepresentation, and so abused by fraud. We are not very sanguine of making converts to doctrines; but we do think it possible that we may be able to shake the strength of inveterate prejudice in naturally well-disposed minds,-and induce some people to consider and reflect over the public occurrences of the time, steadily, seriously, and impartially, who have hitherto been accustomed to break away into violence, on one side or other, at the mere sound of names, as on a signal which

they were engaged to obey, rather than as acting under the influence of rational investigation. We can scarcely expect to convince, or at least gain individuals, in the teeth of their plainest interests; but we may, perhaps, in a degree, modify the view which persons take of their interests. That very zealous support which is to be traced to personal profit, or preferment, received or looked for from the authorities of the state; as well as that pertinacious dissent which issues either from mercenary motives, from a morbid constitutional vanity, or a natural malignity, we have no hope to influence. They who thought Wellington disgraced by the hisses of a mob which dispersed in confusion when he stopped his horse to look at them; they who deem the Queen's answers to her addressers noble compositions, and Mr. Cobbett an authority in politics, being quite beyond our reach, will not be aimed at in our observations. On the other hand, if a man be a court-chaplain, or a head clerk in a public office, or an army agent, or be placed in any similar situation of relationship to the fountain of good things, we are far from impeaching his personal sincerity in his opinions; nor do we see any thing in his circumstances to hinder him from being a very honest and estimable member of the community; but we must consider him, with reference to political discussion, as rather to be argued about, than with. His feelings have their natural bias, and this very bias is one of the elements of the system we have to examine in its various bearings. There is no illiberality in saying this: English law recognizes the existence of certain affections, which, without being at all discreditable to the bosoms in which they have a place, tend to incapacitate a person from fairly discharging certain public duties. By committing the decisions of legal trials to twelve common men, rather than to the twelve learned judges; by making the place of judge a place for life, instead of dependant on the pleasure of the crown; by giving the accused certaiff advantages in the forms of the proceedings against high treason, as a counterbalance to certain disadvantages attending a charge of this nature, the British Constitution acknowledges

the prejudices and partialities that spring up in the mind under the generating influence of place and profit, and corrects their practical effects. Are we to be more tender in our observations than the law is in its enactments? The other day, at Kensington-(and we quote the fact as one of the signs of the times, as well as an illustration of our present argument) -an address to His Majesty, tending to persuade him that the late proceedings against the Queen had excited no feeling of disapprobation in the breasts of the loyal and honorable amongst his subjects, was hastily got up, and signed, at an early hour of the morning-viz. before breakfast. This meeting was convened under the active interference of a respectable gentleman, who is one of the first clerks of the war office; who receives Commissariat half-pay, in addition to his salary, by the special favour of the Crown, and pensions in addition to both. The persons present were few, and the majority of them were bound to the cause by ties similar in their nature to those confining the individual who took the chair. Now we would appeal to our readers, sitting at their firesides, whether such an address can be justly considered as proving any thing more on one side, than an article in the radical weekly journals proves on the other? There certainly is nothing like candour, or perception of the truth, evinced in these vulgar journals: they are not the organs of intellectual and independent expression, but the channels of scurvy feeling, and malignant humour; yet, though they may be more calculated to excite our dislike than the orderly effusions of praise to which we have opposed them, they are not more worthy of our distrust. Both are equally unfaithful in their evidence; and when we regard the coarse venality displayed in the herd of servile publications,-backing the natural and not unblameable attachments of those who are snugly placed amongst "existing circumstances," we are afraid the offensive steam of corruption will appear, but too plainly, soaring and mixing with the incense-cloud of grateful adulation.

Nothing that we have said as to the general uncertainty and instability of what are called political

principles, can apply against attempts to examine the practical propriety of particular measures,—though, we confess, we have thrown out enough to prevent any sanguine hope of arriving at demonstration or unanimity. Still, however, though we cannot pretend, nor indeed would wish to establish the right of universal suffrage, it may be within our jurisdiction and ability, to illustrate the bad character and bad consequences of such proceedings as have lately thrown the nation into disturbance :-it may be permitted us to compare the conduct and talents of particular public men; to endeavour to deduce from these their respective capacities for serving the nation;-to seek to fortify what are unanimously regarded as the best and strongest points in the national character;-to abash, or at least expose the viperous front of disaffected faction, and the brazen countenance of venal flattery;-urgently to address the sense of integrity, and patriotic affection, when the foundation of manners is assailed, and the supports of good faith and confidence shaken, throughout their whole social union, by glaring instances of dereliction from honour and decency, displayed amongst the conspicuous classes, or on the elevated stations of society. Without pretending to as certain the conditions of the original social contract; or rather disbelieving that there ever was, or could be, one entered into, it may nevertheless be permitted us to examine the connection of public energy with the degrees of public liberty; and of the stability of the institutions of government, with their popularity and happy influence on the mass of the governed. Without debating the principles of the union between church and state, it may not, perhaps, be deemed altogether presumptuous in us to suggest, that the members of the body of established clergy do injustice to their high calling, and give advantage to the scoffer, when they become heated and violent instruments to forward the purposes of worldly authority, in a suspicious coincidence with the views of private interest: and, on the other hand, we may, we hope, be allowed to say a word in behalf of the instincts of human nature, and the wants of the human soul, when liberality in poliVOL. III.

tics is attempted to be connected with hostility to general religion, and the philosophy of improvement is turned from its fair direction, to point towards licentiousness of manners, and consequent domestic desolation.

Upon which of the points of opinion, to be gathered from the preceding observations, can any really honest man be prepared to quarrel with us? Nor are we without a hope of effecting something more than merely sheltering ourselves from absolute hostility: our own most decided conviction is, that until such sentiments and feelings are drawn forth from that privacy, where doubtless they now exist to a far greater extent than their silence gives superficial observers reason to suppose, and become a principle of action, uniting in strenuous endeavour, for the country's welfare, the respectable understandings, and fair and faithful intentions which constitute and characterize the core of the British community, the country must continue plunged in growing evils, and hecome every day more and more involved in disheartening circumstances of disagreement, of deterioration, and jeopardy. It really would almost seem as if a revolution of manners was already begun amongst us; and if there be any thing at all certain in politics, it is that such a revolution is the invariable forerunner of a general change in the institutions of society. A change of this sort in this country, if produced by the present visible agents of alteration, must be for the worse:-there are no symptoms whatever, calculated to beget confidence in the effects of any political metamorphosis produced under the auspices of those who are now actively endeavouring to bring one about. Such of the radical reformers as are sincere, seem to be men of pert and vain tempers; with nothing of the old English masculine cast of character-that freedom from affectation, that instinctive philosophy, the pride of which is its harmony with common sense, and its triumph amendment without subversion. They are of alien breed: they do not look to the past with natural affection; they do not feel the weight of the ancient glory of England; they are accustomed to espouse the calumnies of her enemies; they are not sensible 0

of the responsibility which her name throws on those who would even modify the institutions under which its renown has been accumulated. They are not national in their feelings and tastes; they have vivacity, but they are of shallow hearts, and are without imagination. Mr. Hobhouse, a smart man, is an example of what we mean:* his books, his speeches, his opinions on religion, are all alien in their style to the English character. A more meagre principle than an English soul animates his moral and intellectual being altogether: there is a flippancy about his thoughts which ill-suits with the rancour of his language. He is worthy to be the historian of the "hundred days," but for England, whose history is composed of centuries, his powers are too small. At Rome he busied himself with criticizing dates and names; and in this, as in other respects, he has shewn himself more fitted to play the part of a French philosopher than of an English patriot. His place is Paris: there he shone, and was much admired :-there he would eclipse Sir Francis Burdett; but in the English House of Commons he will never command or deserve that respectful attention, from a host of adversaries, which is given to his colleague, and brother reformer.

England would become another and inferior country to that which it has been, were its future destinies to be modelled by such hands; and the worst feature in her present condition, is the almost nullity in the state, of the individuals who in public business would be the representatives of her genuine character. We allude to certain men of fortune, rank, and talent, animated by the spirit of her history, faithful to that path of improvement which she has so sedately and successfully followed,-alive to the spirit of enterprize which distinguishes the present time, yet too mindful of their country's dignity to think of submitting her to unnecessary risks, or even of running hazards for improvement in the reckless manner of nations that have all to gain and nothing to lose. The courtiers, on one side, and the disaffected on

the other, have contrived to destroy the influence of genuine statesmen altogether; and the public are consequently divided in a very unhappy way. A great proportion of the people,-comprising much of what is most respectable in private life, and secure and stedfast in society,support the persons occupying the established places of government,not in the exercise of a sagacious and discriminating conviction of their rectitude and wisdom,-but as the least of two evils,—as leaning to the safer side,-to keep the semblance of property and order together, and continue old names and customs, threatened as they think all these would be with subversion and ruin, were unnecessary opposition to afford an advantage to the schemes of the men who imported Paine's skeleton as the symbol and standard of British Reform. On the other side is placed the comparatively small, but active party of those who are disaffected in heart and soul to the present system of society; who have in view its complete up-breaking; who covet a new partition of goods, and would bring this about by an entire change of opinions and institutions. The former and larger division are guilty of the inconsistency of respiting the action of British goodsense and independent sentiment-to which the long stability and enduring strength of the country are chiefly to be traced with the wish of contributing to the permanency and tranquillity of the state! It is very bad reasoning indeed that leads to this conduct; the experience of history is all pointed against it,—but every day there is afforded another, and still more striking proof of its incorrectness. The mere courtiers are much less incensed against the disaffected personally,—and the disaffected shew much less absolute anger against the courtiers, than both these parties display against the individuals who stand between them. These are such high-minded moderate politicians as are animated by the spirit of the British Constitution; who acknowledge it to be a spirit of liberty and improvement;