iH^ 



ErroneauM View* of thtt HdiuLurgli Revifu; 



[Jul>rl, 



^the pure ftit t>l" his native ftel<ls.-T-WhU<( 

 , tJie Ibriuer dwindles iutoa mere breatli- 

 ' iug machine, the latter is every day 

 , coutemplaling the wonderful plieuo- 

 laeoa ol° aatiire, whicli, if lie has oue 

 spark of inielligence, mnst tend to 

 elevate liis mind to Ibe great Author 

 , of nature. While the former easily 

 . yields to the teiuptatioBs and vicious 

 examples with which he is surrounded, 

 the latter unassailed by them continues 

 his peaceful and virtuous career in 

 the midst of his quiet and nseful 

 , occupations. No wonder then, tlmt 

 a country having more than two thirds 

 of its population employed in comnier- 

 cial and manufacturing ouc«ipations, 

 .should liave more crimes to Ooast of 

 ^: jlhan one in which the proportions are 

 reversed. Thus, from the table an- 

 ^nexed, we find that from the year 1813 

 ^ to I8I7, boih inclusive, the number of 

 •;, jcoudemnatious in France, having a 

 '.population of 29 millions, was 29,359 ; 

 yhile for the itarae years in England 

 * »nd Wales, having a population ot only 

 ,t*n mjlliuns, the number is 28,183! 

 ''Of tliese in France, the number con- 

 ',4emned to death was I7I8; in Eng- 

 'land, no less than 4016; considernbly 

 ^tnore than double ! Of these, to be stire, 

 .only about a seventh part were exe- 

 cuted; but that makes no difference 

 ' in the comparative statement. 



Here then, independent of all theory, 

 ' we have the question clearly decided, 

 ;, that an agricultHval population is far 



S (referable to a commercial and manu- 

 acturing one. Indeed, we look upon 

 It as one of the greatest curses of the 

 SLOBiovs Pitt system, that it con- 

 vertetl England intoone vast workshop, 

 thereby augmenting the population of 

 the towns, out of all proportion to that 

 of the country ; and the consequence 

 of which has been, that when foreigu- 

 ' ers did not chuse, or were no longer 

 '■able to purchase our manufactures, the 

 ' manufacturers themselves were reduced 

 to a state of misery, froni which there 

 is little prospect of any permanent 

 relief so long at the present system con- 

 . tinues. 



In pages 10 and 11, the reviewer 

 states the want of sonic intermediate 

 body between the king and the people; 

 (or, «ays he, " although tliero are Aris- 

 tocrats, there is no Aristocrac)- ;" none 

 of those whom the Jeffery and Brougham 

 scliool call the natural leaders of the 

 people. What a pity ! — none of those 

 illustrioiig Whigs, who with the word 

 Hberlij always in their mouths,, haive 



never wished that th^ people shtMi Id 

 have (heir share of it ; — who e.stablishe<l 

 that great engine of oppression, th« 

 B<ink of England, laid the foundation 

 of the national debt, and bletaed us 

 with the institution of septennial par- 

 liaments ! — What a pity ! None of these 

 whig patriots in France, " to hold the 

 balatiee^'' between the king and the 

 people! — Why, does the reviewer sup- 

 pose, that for want of an aristocracy 

 "• the king, if he be warlike, will soon' 

 find means to over-iule the legisla- 

 tare:'' or, that " sliould the peojile 

 gain the asremlancy, and establish 

 something very like a republic,a soldat 

 kenvenr will in due time become th« 

 master?" Has Mr. Reviewer forgot 

 that there is a certain country on tlte 

 other side tlie Atlantic, in whitrh 

 " something very like a republic '* has 

 existed upwards of forty years, and of 

 which, as yet^ no soldat heuveux has 

 " become the master?" 



As to the '•'• peculiar arfroeity ami 

 extravagance of the revolution that 

 ensued,^'' the t-ause of ii is to be sought 

 for in thepecidiar atrocity atnl extrnooh 

 gance of the preceding government^ 

 and in the peculiar atrocity and extra- 

 vagance of the unwarrantable attack 

 made upon France by the despots of 

 Austria and Prussia, and other powers 

 which subsequently jomed them is 

 their holy alliance against liberty. 



The reviewer seems to regret, with 

 Mr. Mounier, that Lewis the Ifith 

 did not show more energy, because 

 if he had done so, he might, perhaps^ 

 have found means to retain his power. 

 Whether he might have done so or not 

 it is not now worth while to waste time 

 in conjecturing ; but we have no doubt 

 that had he been less of a hyj)Ocrite, he 

 might have i-etained not only his head 

 upon his shoulders, hut a considerable 

 share of power, to boot. Lewis was a 

 good-natured, weak fool, and unfor- 

 tunately for himself, deeply versed in 

 hypocrisy ; one day, swearmg through 

 thick and thin to maintain the consti- 

 tution, and the next day setting off 

 with an intention to join the wretched 

 emigrants arrayed in arms against their 

 counti-y. In short, the upshot of the 

 reviewer's suppositions is this, that had 

 Lewis acted uprightly, like a wise man, 

 instead of hypocritically, like a fool, 

 things might have turned out differ- 

 ently. This uoboily will be disposed 

 to deny; but when have kings in a 

 similar situation ever acted honestly, 

 or w'Rfeii win fliey «ver'doi sb"?".'W^e 

 ■^ . ._ : '-leave 



