ico 
of his country, he left it for the Indies, 
and exclaimed, as he looked back upon 
Litbon from the veffel, “ Ingrata pairia, 
zon poffidebis ofa mea.’ But though he 
had left Europe, he found its fociety and 
its evils at Goa, and in more than one 
poem he expreffes his abhorrence for that 
Babylon, and remembers and laments 
the Sion he had left. The wifeft of us 
often look back upon the days that are 
gone, with regret, becaufe the little anxi- 
eties that imbittered them are forgotten ; 
and,whilf we are alive to all the cares and 
difquietudes of the prefent, we remem- 
ber ouly the enjoyments of the paft: as 
the traveiler looks back upon the vale 
that he has journeyed ; its fertile extent 
and woods and waters are beautiful, and 
he remembers not with how many a 
weary ftep he traverfed it. 
The lines which Mr. Haftings infert- 
_ed in the Englifa Lufiad are not, I be- 
heve, generaily known, and. I will, 
therefore, conclude with them. 
has been prophefying the victories of 
Pacheco; fuddenly é 
The lofty fong, for palenefs o’er her fpread, 
The nymph fulpends, and bows the languid 
head; 
Her falt’ring words are breath’d on plaintive 
fighs : 
s¢ Ah, Belifarius ! injur’d: chief,” fhe cries, 
«¢ Ah wipe thy tears; in war thy rival, fee, 
«¢ Tnjur’d Pacheco falls defpoil’d like thee ; 
<¢ 1) him, in thee, difhonour’d Virtue bleeds, 
‘¢ And Valour weeps to view her faireit deeds, 
«¢ Weeps o’er Pacheco, where forlorn he lies 
“¢ T.cw on an alms-houfe bed, and friendlefs 
ies: 
Yer fhrinx not gallant Luiian, nor repine 
That man’s eternal deftiny is thine ! 
Whate’er fuccefs th’ adventurous chief befriends 
Fell Malice on his parting ftep attends : 
On Eritain’s candidates for Fame, await, 
As now on thee, the fern decrees of Fate: 
Thus are Ambition’s fonde? hones o’er-reach’d, 
One dies imp:ifon’d, and one lives impeach’d. 
gy Ss 
The lines of Mr. Hafiings follow here : 
Ee 
What fadden anger’s this? How have I 
reap’d it? SHaKsPeare, Henry VIII. 
To the Editor of tbe Montoly Magazine. 
Sar 
i AM fully aware that the long conti- 
nuance of controverfy, in a periodical 
puolication, feldom fails to become dall 
and unimterefiing ; but, when an indivi- 
dual chatlences 
cular fubjeét, I held it to be, at leaft, a 
enefs to hear diverfity of 
opinion with temper-and moderation; 
Reply concerning Large Farms. 
Thetis: 
[Augs 
and, under this impreffion, J confefs my 
furprife’ at obferving the afperity with 
which your correfpondent, N. B. has 
criticifed my obfervations on the fubjeét 
of large farms, in your Magazine for 
June, p. 438: 
Upon his firft criticifm I beg leave to 
remark, that confidering his firft pofition 
-as he wifhes it te be confidered, collec« 
tively, fo far from confuting, ferves to 
Jirengiben my argument: namely, that 
by darge farmers withholding their corn 
from market, the price is thereby en- 
hanced, and the /mal! farmers compelled, 
for the reafons I have ftated, to difpofe 
of their ftock. 
He does not. difprove my argument, 
that “ public benefit cannot arife from 
individual accumulation ;” and, I con- 
fefs, lam too blind to fee its irrelevancy : 
for I cannot conceive it poffible that the 
profit of individual accumulation can be 
productive of public bereft, when the 
primary caufe of fuch profit is the great 
pewer which theipeculator maintains ayer 
perfons of inferior property to himfelf. 
I deny that “ monopoly and extor- 
tion”’ (thofe words fo dijcordant to N. B.’s 
refined ear) are applicable to the dealings 
of the fair trader: i is furely juftifiable 
for every commercial man to carry his 
merchandife to the be& market ; but he 
has zy right to compei the’ {mall tradef= 
man to difpofe of his goods under the 
market price, for the poor confideration 
of being paid ready moncy—this, however, 
is a practice fiill in exiftence; and, if it 
is not ‘a fy/tem of monopoly and extortion,” 
J-am ignorast of the true figaification of 
the termss:*? 
I think it is evident that. N. B. did 
not advance his arguments (May, p. 361) 
with a fair intention of having them 
ditcuffed ; and he appears to me to be 
fo ftrongly rivetted to his own opinions, 
that it would be time grofsly mifemployed 
to endeavour to convince him of their 
fallacy ; and alfo chat any other pofition 
than that which he has laid down can 
be true : under fuch circumitances, con- 
troverfy would only produce an increale 
of that rancour end pofitive contradiétion 
manifefted in his laft paragraph ; nevér- 
thelefs, 1 would with him to underftand, 
that I {corn to fhrink ignobly from the 
temperate inveftigation of fo important a 
fudject ; bur, until he advances fome more 
Jold proof of the re@atude of his opinions, 
he fhall find me sfleaible as himfelf 
(though I hope more open to conyittion) 
at prefent, “ froma reafon which muft be, 
and 1s, obvious io hole who cuafider contra= 
aiciion 
