JET. 27.] MELVILLE'S IMPEACHMENT. 315 



article on the Corn Bill. The very unnecessary intro- 

 duction of L.'s book there, in a manner which gave a 

 most erroneous idea of H/s general opinion of the 

 book, must have had the effect of making L. conclude 

 that he had succeeded in his end of obtaining a 

 favourable verdict from the reviewers in general. The 

 notice tended to counteract this. I own I was the 

 more astonished at the remark in Horner's article, 

 from the circumstance of his having told me repeatedly 

 that my review erred in not being severe enough 

 that he himself would have been more bitter that he 

 wished to review the observations in the next number, 

 and that he meant to have a former compliment to L. 

 erased in No. II. Hence, again, I must say I feel 

 obliged for the notice in No. IX.* 



" All the world talks all day about the 10th report : 

 it is more universally enjoyed than any publication I 

 ever remember to have seen, and not a voice is raised 

 in Melville's behalf even by ministerial people.! If 

 fame may be credited, Pitt has written him a dry 

 letter, and the Doctor J means to vote against him. But 



* See 'Edinburgh Review,' October 1804, art. 15, "On the Bounty 

 upon Exported Corn," at p. 205 is this passage : " The different em- 

 ployments of national capital, and the progress in which they naturally 

 succeed each other, or alternate, form a subject on which we are not yet 

 in possession of a complete theory, though a beautiful sketch was drawn 

 by Dr Smith, to which many original remarks have been added by Mr 

 Brougham in his work upon Colonial Policy, and some happy illustra- 

 tions by Lord Lauderdale in the last chapter of his late publication." 



f The Tenth Report of the Commissioners of Naval Inquiry, ordered 

 by the House of Commons to be printed, Feb. 13, 1805 the foundation 

 of the impeachment of Lord Melville. See State Trials, xxix. 550 et seq. 



I The Doctor i.e. Addington. 



