396 
for one penny and half a farthing per pound 
(we {peak from the beft information, that 
of a gentleman juft returned from that ca- 
pital), and the citizens of the new repub- 
lic lament that their corn is at too lowa 
price for the farmer to obtain a living by his 
induftry, and anxioufly with to export fome 
to England. ‘This war, however, inter- 
diéts this needful fupply. Were we at 
“peace with France, bread might here be 
fold for eightpence or ninepence the quar- 
tern loaf, and allow of a large profit to 
the Enghfh importer. 
The deluded people, taught by the mi- 
nifters of delufion, are crying out againft 
monopolizers and foreftallers, but are ig- 
norant of that which gives life and power 
to thefe, their fuppofed enemies. The 
monopolizers of the day, however numer- 
ous, and however baneful, are but the 
vermin which are bred and fupported in 
the hofpital in Threadneedle fireet 5 and 
if ever the people of England be eman- 
cipated from the mifery under which they 
groan, they mult, as the firft effentials of 
their falvation, obtain peace with France, 
and payments in fpecie from the manufac- 
turers of paper money. 
Your’s, &c. 
Loudon, Nov. 17, 1800. R——=n. 
rer SRR Se 
To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR, 
| T has been remarked by thofe who 
Jt confider language in connexion with 
manners and vpinions, that, from the 
fhades of difference which words often ac- 
quire in paffing from a primary tongue to 
_ derivative ones, inferences may be deduced 
concerning the modes of thinking in differ- 
ent countries. Examples in confirmation 
of this pofition may eafily be found; but 
the ufe of the words which are the fubjeét 
of this letter, may, at firft fight, appear a 
remarkable deviation from it.  Leéle, 
Lealta, in Italian; Loyal, Loyaulté, in 
French, have the fignification of frank, 
Sincere, faithful, honeft; whereas, in Eng- 
hith, dayal and loyalty (evidently derived 
from the above) are, and have long been, 
entirely limited to the fenfe of fidelity and 
attachment to a king; except that by a 
kind of metaphor our poets have fome- 
times applied them to the fame affettions 
towards a mi/lrefs. I doubt not that ma- 
ny perfons have been much furprifed at the 
frequent ule of the word loyally made by 
the French in their public addrefles fince 
they have dilcarded monarchy; for our 
newlpaper tranflators, not knowing the 
true meaning of theterm, long rendered it 
into theliteral Englith. But the fenfe in 
which they have applied it is by io means 
On the Words Loyal and Loyalty. 
[Dec. 15. 
modern or republican. Indeed, it is fo_ 
ancient that it had begun to be obfolete ; 
and the revolutionifts feem to have re- 
vived it in order to throw an air of an- 
tique plainnefs and integrity over their 
proceedings. The motto of one of our 
old noble families fays, Loyaulté n'a honte, 
‘¢ Faithfulnefs, or honefty, incurs no 
fhame.’’ I will not anfwer that even the 
poffeffor would, at prefent, tranflate it fo ; 
yet that fuchis the primitive fenfe, can- 
not be doubted. Moliere, in his ** Tar- 
tuffe,”’ ironically names a Norman ferjeant 
at mace, Monf. Loyal; upon which one of 
the characters remarks, 
Ce Monfieur Loyal porte un air bien déloyal. 
This Mr. Honeft looks much like a knave. 
It is eafy to conceive how a word im- 
plying fidelity in general, fhould come to 
be exclufively applied to what might ap- 
pear the higheft and moft important exer- 
tion of it; but who would have thought 
that Exglazd fhould have been the coun- 
try in which every idea of faithfulnefs in 
public concerns fhouid be funk in exclu- 
five devotion to the intereffs of a king? 
Does not this feem to confirm the doétrine 
which has been thought fo obnoxious, 
that monarchy is the only eflential part of 
the Englifh conftitution ? For were it, in 
reality that mixture of different fovereign 
powers, or, {till more, that radical fove- 
reignty of the people, whtch a certain 
party has been fond of reprefenting it, the 
application of the term Jsyalty to attach- 
ment to the royal authority alone would 
be a high degree of incivifia, if not a 
{fpecies of treafon. In the American con- 
teft, though the fupremacy of the Britifh 
Parliament was nominally the point at 
iffue, yet the fovereignty of the king was 
really the object in view, and the terms 
loyalift and royali/? were ufed as perfectly 
fynonymous. At the prefent day, it 
cannot efcape any obferver, that loyalty is 
the great paflion of the nation, and tsincul- 
cated from the bench and the pulpit as the 
prime public virtue, and a duty fearcely 
inferior to piety towards the Supreme Be- 
ing. This I ‘only mean to remark as a 
trait of national character ; juft as Virgil 
has done with refpeét to his bees. 
Preterea regem non fic AZgyptus, et ingens 
Lydia, nec populi Parthorum, aut Medus 
Hydafpes, 
Obfervant. GEORG. iv. 
Befides, not Egypt, India, Media, more 
With fervileawe, their jdo/ ding adore. 
DRYDEN. 
Dryden goes on to paint this paflion of 
loyalty in colours which he feems to have 
derived from the court of Charles II. raq 
ther than from Virgil’s Georgics. ~ 
The 
