1831.] Mr. Sadler and the Political Economists. 541 



misses the inquiry with a sneer. He takes one table out of a multitude ; 

 chooses some part that suits his object ; twists that part until it bends to 

 his design ; and then, having ingeniously shewn that the brick has a 

 flaw, condemns in a most victorious manner the architecture of the whole 

 house. He finds Mr. Sadler tracing his subject laboriously step by step 

 through its regular gradations, and proving his statements to demonstra- 

 tion as he goes along ; and seeing that he cannot rebut Tacts, except by 

 some disingenuous and dishonest artifice, he exclaims, " Oh ! this looks 

 -very well ; but let it be remembered that Mr. Sadler has packed 'the 

 cards after his fashion ; we shall see how they turn out wlien we have 

 shuffled them a little." This shuffling (a word most felicitously chosen) 

 proves to be no other than a picking and choosing of such cards as will 

 tell but one way, and so arriving at a mighty triumphant conclusion, on 

 a general law, by the result of an examination of partial particulars. He 

 is his own Polonius,* arid cries out, " It is mighty like a whale !" while 

 his ear takes up the echo, and his pen writes down that it is a whale. 

 He brings no facts of his own, but avails himself of Mr. Sadler's. He 

 has no power to illustrate the subject, and exhibits no farther cleverness 

 than that which comprises the tact of decomposing the materials before 

 him, and fabricating them into other forms. In the management of all 

 this he is adroit, and takes care not to betray to the mass of the lookers- 

 on that sleight of hand by which he shuffles the aforesaid cards. But 

 we have detected him. We are enabled to expose the tricks by which 

 he mystifies the public : and they are tricks unworthy of literature, and 

 degrading even to Old Blue-and-Yellow. 



The particular tricks of this Reviewer have been already exposed else- 

 where,* and it would be but an idle expenditure of space to enter into an 

 elabofate consideration of them here. It is sufficient for our purpose to 

 furnish a specimen of 'his logic, and to shew how he reasons on and 

 from figures. Here is a characteristic exhibition of his logic. 



" The theory of Mr. Malthus, says Mr. Sadler, cannot be true, because 

 it asserts the existence of a great and terrible evil, and is therefore incon- 

 sistent with the goodness of God. We answer thus : we know that there 

 are in the world great and terrible evils. In spite of these evils, we be- 

 lieve in the goodness of God. Why may we not then continue to believe 

 in his goodness, though another evil should be added to the list ?" Edin. 

 Review, No. CIV. p. 507- 



Now this short sentence contains a falsification of a simple fact, and 

 an illogical deduction from that falsification. Short as it is, it is never- 

 theless wonderfully comprehensive. In the first place, Mr. Sadler never 

 said that Mr. Malthus's theory could not be true, because it asserted the 

 existence of a great and terrible evil, and that it was therefore incon- 

 sistent with the goodness of God. On the contrary, Mr. Sadler said 

 that the evil asserted by Mr. Malthus was inconsistent with the goodness 

 of God, and that, therefore, Mr. Malthus's theory could not be true. We 

 see how easily the web can be unravelled, and how poor this creature 

 looks when we come to expose his artifices. But granting this falsifi- 

 cation to our despicable arguer, let us see what he makes of it. He says, 

 we know there are great and terrible evils, and yet in spite of these evils 

 we believe in the goodness of God. Why then, he adds, with his usual 

 chuckle, may we not continue to believe in his goodness, though another 

 evil be added to the list ? Does not the man see that confidence in the 



* See a pamphlet published by Ridgway, which refutes the article that appeared 

 in the last number of the Edinburgh Review. 



