was his neighbour on the other side, said in a loud whisper, "Comment, milord, pouvez vous parler à cet homme la? ne savez vous par qu'il a commençe sa cariere comme tambour?" Such, indeed, is the kind of answer which I often received when indulging a pardonable curiosity, I make enquiries respecting the present situation of those who,a few years back, as the leaders of your victorious amies, figured with so much eclat on the Theatre of Europe. The obscurity of their birth seems, in the eyes of these hereditary grandees, to render them so unworthy of notice, that neither their military glory, nor even their present devotion to the cause of legitimacy can form an excuse for speaking of them with interest, or treating them with respect. I deplore with you the absurd homage paid in England as well as in France to mere rank, I mean when it is unaccompanied with virtue, talent, or valour. Still, though I acknowledge that both countries may afford traits of such weakness, I think I can see a strong line of distinction which may be drawn between the prejudices of the two nations. I do not think that any excellence, however eminent, whether civil or military, could, in the eyes of a Frenchman of the old school, place a person of low origin precisely on a footing with the representative of an illustrious house; while with us distinguished national services, and great professional merits, are not only rewarded with the highest honours which the Sovereign can bestow, but those, who so deservedly obtain them, enjoy the full importance and consideration attached to their newly acquired rank. Nor do I think that a Thurlow or a Nelson were viewed either with envy or contempt, even by the proudest of our Peers, because the one was the son of a butcher, and the other that of a country curate. Here, on the contrary, I find that a returned emigrant, because he really is, or pretends to be, the descendant of a noble family, not only fancies himself superior to the most renowned hero who does not possess the advantage of birth, but also, that he is entitled to claim as a matter of right any place or office which may be vacant, no matter how little qualified he may be to hold it by age, education, or previous habits. Such a man complains loudly of the ingratitude and injustice of the government, when to his pretensions are preferred those of a candidate very inferior to him in the quarterings of his arms, but in every other respect more fitted to discharge the duties of the place with credit to himself and benefit to the public. On such occasions I hear the disappointed noble vent his indignation in terms like these: "Comment me refuser! un homme, comme moi une personne de ma naissance et de mes pretensions, et de donner la place à un parvenu, à un enfant de la revolution, dont le pere a peut-être été laquais, quelle injustice! quelle infamie que le pauvre Roi est trompé! Every speech of this kind ends with abuse of the ministry and pity for the King, for while his majesty wisely considers all his people as equally entitled to his protection, and allots his favours according to the respective merits of the claimants, two thirds of the old noblesse will not believe it possible, that the monoply of all the offices of state is with his free consent withheld from them. The wish of the party (here called the Ultra Royalists) is not to add to the Prerogative of the Crown, in order to encrease its splendour or its security, but to get back into their own hands, exclusively, the helm of the state. A lady, well acquainted with the sentiments of that faction, said to me, one day, "La France a eté heureusement gouverné pendent dix siécles par des preux Chevaliers.Pourquoi donc veut on les priver à presant d'un pouvoir si lègitime ?” But after observing how little the members of the ancient aristocracy have learnt in the school of adversity, I must with the impartiality of a calm observer be permitted to add, that those, who call themselves the friends of freedom, have equally disdained the lessons traced by experience in characters of blood. Though the events of the Revolution prove to demonstration that Written before the late changes in the administration of affairs at Paris.' licentiousness is the parent of des potism, I daily meet with persons who, both in their writings and in conversation, recommend the wild est theories of democratic equa lity. And while it is self-evident that if the Bourbons were driven from the Throne, at this moment, either the Allies would again enter France, and treat it for the third time as a conquered country, or that the military, by whom alone such a Revolution could be effected, would restore the iron despotism of Napoleon; the advocates of civil liberty are the professed enemies of the present establishment. Not philosophical enough to reflect that the mild character and debilitated person of Louis XVIII. are circumstances peculiarly favourable to the formation of a liberal government under the auspices of a monarch, who has neither the means nor the inclination to conciliate a powerful army: they ridicule the infirmities and peaceful virtues of their amiable Sovereign, and would willingly exchange him for one of those scourges of mankind who, under the name of heroes, rule their own subjects with a rod of iron, and spread over the rest of the world the horrors of war, famine, and desolation. It is true that the King is more popular than the other members of his family, but I am sorry to add that this popularity is rather comparative than positive. In short, I find your politicians, on both sides, deserve the title which has been given them of" Ultras." I seldom venture to express an opinion on these matters, but when I do, I am called a friend of anarchy by the Aristocratical party, and an advocate of despotism by the Liberals; nor can I persuade these fiery puritans of either faction, that the moderation they condemn arises from an anxious wish to see France, in common with the rest of the world, enjoy the blessings of rational freedom. I have not time to resume the subject of your last letter; but I cannot conclude with, out assuring you that I heartily dis approve and condemn the establish ment of such Societies as Almack's and the Argyle-street Rooms, and all similar attempts which tend to introduce German distinctions into English society, I am happy to perceive that while you discover the foibles you are not insensible to the merits of my countrymen, and that, all the higher classes are not condemned for the faults of a few. Continue, my dear de Vermont, to cultivate the acquaintance of such families as Mr. Gourville's, and be lieve me, examples of similar un contaminated yet polished manners are by no means rare in England. Recollect that one profligate Lord, or one abandoned Countess, makes twice as much noise as a hundred per sons of corresponding rank, whose virtues are only known to a small circle of admiring friends, while the latter carefully conceal their charities, and avoid saying or doing any thing which may draw on them the eyes of public curiosity. Among persons of the most exalted rank in England examples of every kind of excellence may be found; and, in the numerous class of well-born and well educated gentry, there are thousands who would have done honor to any situation however ele vated, the knowledge of whose merits is confined to their families, their school-fellows, their fellow collegians, and immediate neigh bours. Adieu, C. DARNLEY. LETTER XVI. From the MARQuis de VermoNT to SIR CHARLES DARNLEY, Bart, London. MY DEAR DARNLEY, You complain in your last letter that our French politicians run into extremes; or, to repeat your phrase, which is in the mouth of every body, that they are all Ultras." Can you be surprised that after a revolution which called into play the strongest passions of the human heart, and during the progress of which some lost their fortunes and dearest relatives, some from the highest pinnacle of wealth and grandeur were hurled into the lowest abyss of poverty and wretchedness, and others again were as suddenly raised from insignificance to riches and import ance, that none should be able to discuss with calmness those public questions which to their eyes ap pear still big with similar eventful changes? The two great parties, into which those who reflect at all on such topics in France have been divided for the last thirty years, remain as positive and as inflexible as ever in their opposite opinions. The original opposers of the revolution, in spite of their own private suffer ings and the varied calamities of their country, retain their original prejudices against the changes which were then introduced, because they try to convince their fellow citizens, as well as themselves, that all these evils had one common origin-the propagation of liberal opinions. They, therefore, raise their voices with redoubled zeal against the dissemination of doctrines which, according to them, must always be attended with similar consequences. Those on the contrary who think that the revolution was brought about by a variety of causes, many of which were inevitable, and that the subsequent misfortunes of France were generated rather by a misapplication of principles, fundamentally right, than by the natural effects of a more enlightened form of government, are still the strenuous advocates of the latter; because, as you truly observe," Licentiousness is the parent of Despotism," rational freedom is the precursor of good order, peace and happiness. But, without denying that our French Quidnuncs on both sides are Ultras, permit me to observe that the name is equally applicable to two thirds of your politicians; and you will agree with me that a want of moderation on such subjects is a greater fault in England, where you have been so long accustomed to the blessings of Liberty, than in France, where we are tyros in the science of political economy, and still smarting under the recollection of recent sufferings. Indeed it amuses me much to observe, that while the excellence of your constitution is contended for by all your coun trymen, (however they may differ on other subjects) almost every body has some alteration or improvement to suggest, though, were it attempted, it might hazard the safety of the noble edifice so generally admired. Your government-men, as they call themselves, par-eminence, while they profess the warmest attachment to the existing laws, are the first to find fault with the proudest characteristics of your envied system of policy. If a philippic in an opposition newspaper excites their anger, they deplore the freedom of the press, though without the latter there could be no public opinion; and without public opinion, how nugatory were all your charters and statutes in favor of popular rights? If the Minister finds himself checked in his career of ambition or extra vagance by the eloquence of his opponents in the House of Commons, these same politicians lament that so much valuable time is lost in making long speeches; and many a broad hint is thrown out as to the propriety of putting some wholesome restraints on the licentiousness of parliamentary debates. If a riot occurs, or a few blows are exchanged at a County Meeting, the folly and danger of suffering such assemblies are talked of in terms more suited to the courtiers of an absolute Sovereign, than to the subjects of the freest state in Europe. If the author of an alleged libel is acquitted by the tribunal, to which the wisdom of your laws has deputed the examination of such questions, the trial by jury is spoken of with contempt; and if a person, found guilty of a similar offence, receives no excessive punishment at the hands of the judges, even those venerable magistrates are accused of partiality. Ifa Demagogue becomes troublesome by his harangues or his writings, a strong wish is expressed, though England is generally speaking in a state of the most perfect repose, that your admirable law of Habeas Corpus should be again suspended; and if a mob in the streets be guilty of some trifling disturbances, these professed admirers of the Constitution recommend the military being im mediately called in to suppress them. While such is their own mode of shewing their attachment to the institutions of their ancestors, they stigmatise with the name of Radicals all who presume to recommend the slightest correction of those manifest abuses which time has introduced, and seem entirely to forget, that one of the great causes of the perfection of your government is, that it was not the creature of speculation, but the work of successive ages-that it was brought by degress to its present excellence; and that it possesses within itself a perpetual power of renovating its exhausted strength. In short, while these noisy advocates of the British system of jurisprudence pronounce it the noblest monument of human wisdom, they shew all the inclination, though happily they possess not the power, to deprive it of those principal props, properties, and peculiarities, which constitute at once its strength and beauty. and no character so sacred which is not at times made the subject of the most wanton and scandalous attacks, are astonished at the possibility of maintaining peace, and good order, while such publications issue daily from the press, these persons assert, that there is no channel left through which the people may be enlightened, and taught to know their real interests. Though it is evident, from the comparative prices of the public funds of different countries at this time, that the monied peopled of Europe prefer four per cent in England to seven or eight in France, Austria, or Prussia, we are told that Great Britain is on the verge of bankruptcy. Though the mighty capitals accumulated and employed in commerce, manufactures and national improvements, make the riches of this Island the wonder of the world, and though no per son travels through your provinces, or passes a week in your metropolis, without viewing with surprise the general appearance of comfort and decency which all ranks of your people display, these politicians inform us (because your agricul tural and mercantile interests, after several years of unexampled prosperity, are now experiencing a temporary reverse of fortune), that the whole nation is reduced to beggary. For all these pretended evils what A great majority of your trades- is the remedy they prescribe? Anmen and manufacturers, and a very nnal Parliaments and Universal small minority of your peers and Suffrage. That is to say, in the full gentry, run into the opposite ex- enjoyment of a free press, of the treme-they, too, pretend that they trial by jury, of the Habeas Corpus are enthusiastic admirers of the Act, the right of petitioning and constitution of their country, but it of holding public meetings, though is not the constitution under which under some restrictions lately introyou attained your present unexam-duced (which, as an admirer of your pled prosperity, but a constitution of ancient constitution, no one deplores fancied perfection, such as at no more than myself), these bold experiod of your history you ever perimentalists would risk all such possessed, and such perhaps as it is essential blessings on the very unnot permitted to the weakness of certain chance of a national revohuman nature to command in any lution. I say revolution, because stage, however advanced, of politi- your ablest writers and most expecal organization. rienced statesmen have proved to Blind to the innumerable advan-demonstration, that the representatages which, in spite of all its defects, the system of government as now administered, still affords, they contend that you are no longer free. Though foreigners in reading your numerous newspapers, and observ. ing that there is no rank so elevated Eur. Mag. April, 1823. -I think, when you recollect the run of ordinary conversation in England, you will allow that the language used by two thirds of ministerial men is such as I have described; and those who talk in this way are surely no less entitled to the name of Ultras than the corresponding class of politicians on the other side of the channel. tions of the Commons were at no period of your history chosen for so short a term as one year, and that the right of naming them was never exercised by the people at large. are Such visionary reformers certainly Ultras of the same school Q with our French Liberals; and, like them, are disposed to run every hazard in pursuit of fancied perfec. tion. Indeed, I meet with but one class of men in this country who show by their conduct as well as their words, that they fully appreciate the constitution under which they live. I mean that small but truly respectable party who are commonly called the Old Whigs. Equally abused by Aristocrats and Dema gogues, they count in their ranks no trifling proportion of the ancient nobility and landed property of England; besides which, many of them are acknowledged men of the most distinguished ability and most extensive information. Not a few are the immediate descendants of those to whose patriotic exertions you owe all the blessings of the Revolution of 1688. Professing the same sentiments as those of their illustrious ancestors, they have laboured on all occasions to preserve unaltered those popular privileges which are the main springs and noblest cha, racteristics of the British Constitution; and while they have viewed with a jealous eye every attempt to destroy the rights of the people, on the pretext of preserving you from division and revolution, they have with equal firmness resisted all those theoretical improvements, which, intended to beautify it, hazard the safety of the venerable pile. That these real friends of rational freedom should find but few admirers only proves what has been before observed, that moderation is no less out of fashion in England than in France; and that the exer cise of that virtue is confined in both countries to the wise and good, whose number is no where very large. But I must now stop. I have unintentionally been drawn into a politi cal discussion, a subject very foreign from those on which we have agreed to correspond. Yet politics are so connected with your manners, and monopolize so large a proportion of every conversation which, occurs at your tables, that, in taking a view of English society, it is almost im possible to exclude that topic. Adieu! and be assured of my unchanged and unalterable attache ment,. DE VERMONT. MORNING.-A FRAGMENT. Ir is the glowing hour of morn: Through which the whisp'ring breezes rove; The brooks in gentle murm'rings flow, Shall shew, like this, EDWARD. |