putable, -a good which will make up for many and many an evil;' and the passages where he says, So unequivocal are the advan'tages of an election, to the people at least, that I should suppose 'there are very few persons unconnected with the late ministry who must not rejoice at the prospect. To chuse our representatives, is among the most precious of our rights. It is our just franchise; and can there be a voter in the whole kingdom who 'objects to have an occasion to exercise it? Can the exercise of it come too often?' &c. &c. In the same tone he quotes, with warm approbation, the excellent speech of Mr Frend (vol. XII. p. 10.) in which it is stated, The public demands that the members of the House of Commons be the representatives of the 'public, not the choice of a few private individuals; that Parliaments be frequent, so that the members may not lose sight of 'their duty to their constituents,' &c.

Mr Cobbett's great modern theme, however, is his detestation of placemen and pensioners; and the leading argument-if we must call it argument-of his late Numbers, is directed to show, that there can be no salvation for England till every individual of this hateful description be excluded from the Houses of Parliament. This, so far as we can gather, is the sum and substance, the beginning and end of the reform by which alone we can be saved from destruction. We are wearied now of turning over the close printed pages of his former Numbers for doctrines exactly opposed to this. We are very much mistaken, however, if they are not to be found there; and are perfectly positive that no hints of this new creed are to be met with in any writing of his published so long as two years ago. This, of itself, is quite decisive as to the state of his former opinions. Placemen and pensioners have sat in Parliament for upwards of a hundred years; and yet Mr Cobbett had been ten years a patriotic journalist in this country, before he found it necessary to say one word against this dreadful abuse. He will scarcely pretend that there are more placemen now in Parliament than there were three years ago; and if their existence there be now so mortal to the constitution that nothing short of their total expulsion can give us a chance for its preservation, it surely must have been his duty to have proposed such a measure before Sir Francis Burdett put it into his famous address to the Electors of Middlesex. The merits of the doctrine itself we shall consider immediately. We are now speaking only of Mr Cobbett's consistency in insisting on it as obviously indispensable to our salvation. We have just fallen by accident upon the following passage, in an abusive letter to Mr Wilberforce in December 1802, in which the propriety and legality of placemen sitting in Parliament seems to be pretty clearly taken

for

for granted. Discoursing of Parliamentary disinterestedness, he says Though present experience teaches us that some men certainly wish for office, to gratify their own covetousness and vanity; there are others, and, I trust, a far greater number, who, in their pursuit of power, are actuated by the noble motive of 'advancing the power and happiness of their Sovereign and their country. That considerations of a private nature,-the desire of 'posthumous, and even of present fame, may mix themselves a'long with this great leading public motive, I allow :-But, Sir, I defy you to show me, in the conduct of a placeman of this description, any presumption that he has made the choice of his electors subservient to his own interest or aggrandisement, which ' will not apply with equal, or with greater, force to yourself,' &c.

There is only one other subject, we think, upon which Mr Cobbett used formerly to enlarge with such frequency and zeal as to make it one of the fair characteristics of his peculiar opinions; we mean his ardent love and veneration for the person and family of the Sovereign, and for royalty indeed in general, In his earlier volumes, there is much fulsome cant and disgusting raving of this sort; but since he has embraced the creed of Sir Francis Burdett, this fine spirit of devoted loyalty seems to be pretty well evaporated. In his number for 24th March 1807, he defends the toast of our Sovereign the People,' given at one of the worthy Baronet's dinners, and says, he has no other objection to it than that it is not of plain unequivocal meaning. He treats with considerable derision a loyal correspondent, who had said, he trusted every true Englishmen would shed the last drop of his blood in support of his King;-tells him the King has about 200,000 gentlemen in red and blue jackets whose business it is to support him, and that he is able to take care of him, self; and that such views of devotion may be reasonable and manly when we see the King giving up any point whatever, however loudly called for, or from whatever quarter. After this he proceeds to justify the party at the said dinner for omitting to drink the King's health;-contends that this is merely a voluntary expression of admiration of his conduct,-and that, for his own part, since the introduction of so many Hanoverian soldiers, the exemption of the King's property from the incometax, and one or two other suspicious things of the same description, he has not felt quite so much of that admiration, and does not choose voluntarily to come forward with expressions of that sentiment, &c. (vol. XI. p. 436.) Is it too much to say, that the zealous advocate of the Bourbons, and of all their connexions, might have been expected to speak of the sons of his own Sovereign in terms of less contempt and acrimony? His observations

CC 3

observations on the Dukes of York and Clarence, though we had no great objection to their substance, are certainly too much in the style of the professed enemies of royalty.

We have dwelt on this subject too long; but we conceive that the charge of inconsistency is made out completely and though we do not by any means marvel, as Mr Cobbett is moved to do on a similar occasion, how a man can hold up his head, or even exist, under the proof of such glaring tergiversation,' we do think ourselves entitled to say, that the proof which we have now detailed should disable his judgment, and detract from his authority, upon all the subjects to which that proof is applicable. Whatever influence or reputation he may have acquired by his earlier writings, should operate against the doctrines which he is now employed in promulgating; and all the effect which his arguments have produced on his admirers, should turn to the prejudice of the maxims to which he now requires their assent. A man who had never been zealous for his party or his opinions, may desert them without much reproach; but it must always be an awkward evolution for one who had been distinguished for confidence and clamour, and who has no sooner made the transition, than he renews the violence and abuse which he had formerly exerted on the opposite side. By the uncharitable, such a man will always be regarded as a professional bully, without principle or sincerity,-whose services may be bought by any one who will pay their price to his avarice or other passions ;and the most liberal must consider him as a person without any steadiness or depth of judgment ;-accustomed to be led away by hasty views and occasional impressions ;-entitled to no weight or authority in questions of delicacy or importance; and likely to be found in arms against his old associates on every material change in his own condition, or that of the country.

The only important question, however, as we have more than once intimated already, is not whether Mr Cobbett's recent doctrines are reconcileable to those which he formerly maintained, but whether they are reconcileable to truth and to the interests of the country. It is only with his recent doctrines the current series of his opinions that we have any interest or concern ;—his earlier volumes are beyond our reach ;-they have done their work of mischief or utility, and passed away ;--and the effect which they have produced, can no longer be either enforced or counteracted. He has been busted, however, for some months past, in a task which is not yet finished, and is still in the act of enforcing certain positions, the general adoption or rejection of which, may produce, as it appears to us, very important effects on the interests and happiness of the whole community. It is not too late, therefore, to inquire, whether those effects are likely to be pernicious

ar

or salutary, to detect what is deleterious in the nostrum that is just handing out among the multitude,—and to exhibit an antidote to the poison, of which the doses are at this moment making up. -We have not the slightest hesitation in saying, that the doctrihes maintained by Mr Cobbett, for the last four months, and especially since he has espoused the cause of Sir Francis Burdett, are in the highest degree pernicious and reprehensible; and that it is solely for the purpose of exposing and discrediting them, that we have been induced to enter upon our present irksome task. The sum and substance of our objections to the recent hambers of the Political Register, is, that they are all obviously intended to beget a distrust and contempt of every individual connected with public life, except only Sir Francis Burdett and his adherents, to spread abroad a general discontent and disrespect for the constitution, usages, principles and proceedings of Parliament, to communicate a very exaggerated and unfair impression of the evils, abuses and inconveniences, which arise From the present system of government, and to hold out the absolute impossibility of correcting or amending these, without some great internal change, of the nature of a political revolution. Under the present system, Mr Cobbett maintains, that our only rational feelings, are contempt and detestation of our rulers, and despair of any relief or improvement, except by its total subversion: and with this impression, it will easily be understood, that he looks forward to a revolution, not only without sadness or dismay, but with a kind of vindictive eagerness and delight. He foretells it with much confidence and complacency; and does his utmost, we must say, to accomplish his own prediction. The natural conclusion from all this is, that a state of things, so miserable and so desperate, is not worth contending for; and that foreign conquest would not be so very great an evil as our rulers would fain persuade us to imagine. We do not say, that Mr Cobbett directly draws this last conclusion; but it seems to follow inevitably from his premises; and he does make use of expressions, which satisfy us that he has had it in contemplation, without being much appalled or startled at its aspect. We shall, first, endeavour to satisfy our readers, that we impute these doctrines to our author upon sufficient grounds; and then we shall consider, in how far it is possible for him to justify them on the score either of patriotism or of truth.

As to the proof of the fact, it might perhaps be sufficient to refer, in a general way, to the import of the passages we have already had occasion to quote from the recent Numbers, and particularly to those in which the author expresses his entire assent and approbation of Sir Francis Burdett's addresses to his electors.

In these addresses, as well as in Mr Cobbett's defence of them, both the parties who now divide Parliament, are stigmatized as equally possessed by a sordid spirit of self-interest and individual aggrandisement; and, though differing in every thing else, disposed to unite heartily against any one who might attack the system of jobbing and corruption to which both of them are devoted. Now, these parties, it is to be observed, include every one member of either of the Houses of Parliament; and, indeed, every one individual who is at all known to the public in a political capacity,-except only Sir Francis Burdett," and those who professedly adhere to him. Yet both these parties, and all their adherents, are uniformly represented, in the work before us, as corrupted, venal wretches, intent upon fattening on the public money, and never quarrelling in earnest about any thing but their shares of it. The present Ministers, and their adherents, are honoured with the appellation of ousted Treasury clerks, and the no popery faction; while all who are opposed to them, are massed under the general name of the rump of whiggism,' and treated with a still more plentiful share of contumely and abuse.

?

That these censures do actually apply to the whole Legislature, and were really intended to have this extensive application, is manifest, we think, from the terms in which they are conceived; but Mr Cobbett has left no room for doubt on the subject, and has delivered his sentiments of the whole collective assembly, in terms that admit of no misconstruction, After saying of the late Parliament, that for its treatment of Mr Paul alone, it deserved a death something more than political, and that its proceedings would have become an assembly of bashaws, he adds, I rejoice that it no longer exists. I rejoice that I have an opportunity of speaking my mind of it. But its successor!-No matter! I care not for that, &c. &c. Of this successor, however, he favours us with his sentiments by and by, in pretty plain terms. In speaking of the motion for adding Sir Francis Burdett's name to the committee of finance, he says, With respect to the rejection of Sir Francis by the House, the thing was quite natural. It was what the people would in such a case expect. Had he not been rejected, I should have been extremely sorry; because it would have led me to suspect that all was not right. vol. XII. p. 50. In a subsequent number, he is pleased to say, I see not the least room to suppose, that any insinuations, however foul, can sink the character of the House in the opinion of the country. No, the House is not to be affected by insinuations of any sort. Its character has long been such as to set all insinuations at defiance, I venture to assert, that its character is far beyond the reach of detraction,' &c. &c. p. 74. After this, we need not quote any of his

6

sneers