The British review and London critical journal

1. A Letter to the Freeholders of the County of Durham, on the Proceedings of the County Meeting, holden on Thursday, 21st October, instant; and particularly on the Speech of John George Lambton, Esq. M.P. By Rev. Henry Phillpotts, M. A. Prebendary of Durham. 8vo. Hatchard. London, 1819. 2. Letter to John Ralph Fenwick, Esq. By John Davison, Rector of Washington. 8vo. Murray, London.

3. Remarks on an Article in the Edinburgh Review, No. 64, entitled "Necessity of Parliamentary Inquiry." By Rev. H. Phillpotts, M, A. Prebendary of Durham. 8vo. HatchardLondon, 1820.

4. Substance of the Speech of the Right Hon. Lord Grenville, in the House of Lords, Nov. 30, 1819, on the Marquis of Lansdown's Motion, That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the State of the Country, and more particularly into the Distresses and Discontents prevalent in the Manufacturing Districts, and the Execution of the Laws with Respect to the numerous Meetings which have taken place. 8vo. Murray. London, 1820.

5. The Substance of the Speech, of the Right Hon. W. C. Plunket, in the House of Commons, on Tuesday, 23d November, 1819. 8vo. Hatchard. London, 1819.

6. Substance of the Speech of the Right Hon. George Canning, in the House of Commons, on Wednesday, November 24, 1819, on the Address to the Throne, upon the Opening of the Session of Parliament. 8vo. Murray. London, 1820.

THE pamphlets of Mr. Phillpotts and Mr. Davison, at the head of this article, are very short, and the subjects of which they treat are threadbare: there are however, two peculiarities belonging. to them, which have given them an interest in our eyes beyond their temporary matter. The reputation of each of these writers is much above the ordinary standard, and the collateral hostilities in which their interference has involved them afford a fair occasion for many reflections. The production of Mr. Davison is hardly of body enough to sustain a regular criticism in a quarterly journal; and we presume it was from respect for the known ability of the author, coupled perhaps with some fear of what might be the consequence of this direction of his talents, that a celebrated critical journal has taken up arms against it, and a distinguished politician, if the rumour be right, has stooped from his elevation to resume the office of reviewer for an occasional act of vindictive chastisement.

Mr. Davison's letter was written immediately before the Durham meeting for expressing the sense of the county on the transactions of the 16th of August at Manchester, to a friend, who appears to have concurred in the requisition for that meeting, to dissuade him from taking part in it, upon grounds which, it was probably expected, might, by being printed and circulated, extend its effects generally, and help to check the ardour of erroneous impressions and misguided zeal. The pamphlet of Mr. Phillpotts came after the meeting had taken place, and having to condemn the conduct displayed at such meeting, as well as the principle on which it was convened, was, as might have been expected, more pointedly severe in the character of its strictures. It is very apparent that the journal alluded to has, in the review of these little productions, renounced the character of impartiality, essential to the justness of criticism, and taken up that of a party assailant; and, in order that the motive might be the less equivocal, a detached publication of the article has, we understand, been since sent forth in the form of a pamphlet; thus exhibiting the novelty of a judge deciding upon party grounds, and then adopting his own decision as the vehicle of political invective.

It is the misfortune of the times that there is no neutral peaceful corner in the literary world. Party hostility occupies the whole ground, and the dust and smoke of perpetual conflict throws every object into confusion; darkening and perplexing

the moral and intellectual scene. It is a common observation so long acquiesced in as to have been set almost above contradiction, that a state of general excitement and collision is the condition of the public mind most favourable to its developement and advancement. This observation, however, is proba bly, like most others, of a general nature, true only to a qualified extent. To our minds it is not difficult to imagine a state of society, with its various divisions and classes marshalled andi arrayed against each other with feelings so prejudiced, and animosities so unsparing, as to leave no stage for truth or unbiassed reasoning to act their parts upon. In such a state of things every body comes among his fellows prepared for an offensive or defensive war of words, and the disputant that ranges himself on no side but that of truth, especially practical truth, may easily count his auditors. The press that administers to this stimulated, or diseased appetite, must necessarily itself be in a very vitiated state: and thus it is found unhappily true of the present moment, that no journal, nor indeed any publication which treats of temporary events, can proceed with any safety to itselfTM in a middle course, whatever the adage may say to the contrary, or subsist without loss to the publisher, if it attempts to verify its boast of impartiality.

In our consideration of this subject we lay out of the account all that portion of the press which is avowedly devoted to the work of moral mischief; the contentious character of the times, even among men of virtue and repute, is extremely unfavourable to the substantial progress of intellect; strength is wasted in aggression, truth lost in exaggeration, honesty betrayed by passion.

The propriety of these observations has been but too well illustrated by the malevolent inventions which have taken the place of facts in all the late events which have disturbed our domestic peace, or threatened our national security. Had a diseased and factious opposition been out of the way, the late struggles would have exhibited the palpable and simple case of the men of property and the men of none, the proprietors and the plunderers, in opposite columns. Distress from circumstances plainly unavoidable, and profligacy improving the opportunity of a favourable crisis, accidental provocation, and inherent turpitude, constant wickedness and occasional excitation, the credulity of want, and the mendacity of vice, contain the entire secret of the late public events. This is the naked case, and the natural solution of the problem. But when the welleducated and the wise in their generation seize upon the case to assist their views of political ambition or opposition, the subject loses its simplicity, the facts, plain in themselves, are perplexed

by sophistry, and the issues of man's natural depravity are traced to sources with which they have no connexion, in order to charge misgovernment upon those whose crime is their being in office, and keeping others out. A spirit of rivalry that pursues its objects at any expense, does not correspond with that idea of a constitutional opposition in the state, which, in the opinion of some not unwise politicians, holds a necessary place in our system: to a certain extent it may have, and we believe it has, its utility: but where it vitiates the moral relish of what is great or good, where it leads men to " put sweet for bitter, and bitter for sweet;" or even where it creates a determined pre-occupation of mind, and a prescriptive turn of thinking in favour of what is adverse to authority duly constituted; where it usurps the place of national feeling on questions of moment to the peace and prosperity of the country, say what we will, this is a very wretched case for men and Christians to be in. Whatever seeming it may have, or title it may bear, it is radical prostitution of heart. Neither have we any expectation of real good from such an opposition in the way of balance to the state; and we are quite sure that no member of parliament has a moral right on any ground of speculative policy to deliver an insincere or partial sentiment on any subject that calls for his deliberative aid. He may have his political attachments, and he will always have them;-on this ground some prejudices and partialities may be excused; but to adopt what his understanding disapproves, and to act upon pre-determined hostility to all measures of government irrespectively of their value, is to abandon all legitimate claims to common honesty.

We will not, however, deny that much perversity of sentiment may exist where there is no peculiar depravity of heart. The medium through which men of principle sometimes look at political objects is but too apt to falsify their real nature and tendency. And though nothing is so silly and fallacious as the distinctions attempted to be set up between public and private principle, a certain doctrine of expediency, grafting itself upon party-spirit, may account for many gross inconsistencies in the conduct of honourable men. What other reason can be given for the support which infidelity and sedition have of late derived from men of wealth and rank, and “light and leading" in the country.

Our attention has been drawn to these topics not by any of the publications at the head of this article, but by the events, too palpable and obvious, of the period we have just passed. In endeavouring to reason upon these events we have always found the greatest difficulty arising from the simplicity of the case. To doubt whether an overwhelming assemblage of people, of the

« السابقة متابعة »

كتب