1802.]) 
gmifreprefentations of the paft, nor interro- 
gatory imfinuations concerning the preient, 
fhall provoke me to renew the difcuffion. 
Here, therefore, the fubject might have 
been permitted to reft, had not Mr. Bel- 
tham given an erroneous conftruction to a 
paragraph in my former letter, to which 
i feel myfelf called upon to reply. I am 
‘Suppofed to have {poken “ with fome little 
degree of petulance of that great orna- 
ment of his country and of human na- 
ture, the Duke of Bedford.” Its ne- 
ceflary, therefore, for me to declare, that 
I had not the Jeaft intention, in any part 
of that letter, either petulantly or other- 
wife, to allude to that illuftrious charac- 
ter. It would have been firange, indeed, 
if I could have fpoken of him as Mr. 
Belfham has fuppofed me to have fpoken. 
During my political life, though total- 
ly wnconneéted with that nobdleman— 
tho” neither enlifted under his banners, nor 
affociated with his party, I vindicated his 
‘ character without courting his patronage ; 
and.it appears, that Mr, B. himfelf was 
not unacquainted with the independent 
warmth, with which I afferted the honor 
of the then reprefentative of the houfe of 
Ruffel. It would, therefore, be ftrange, 
indeed, if, after having fo long withdrawn 
mylelf from all parties, and party conten- 
tions, and from all the prejudices that at- 
tach to them—and if, afier fate, alfo, 
had fo prematurely withdrawn that noble- 
man from the fphere of his a€tive utili- 
ties, I had regarded his manes as the ob- 
jets of petulant and farcaftic reproach. 
Very different, indeed, are the fenfations 
with which I have contemplated the lols, 
and the memory, of the great patren of 
Britith agriculture: and on the melan- 
choly event of his premature diffolution, it 
was with nofmall difficulty, that refrained 
myfelf from pouring forth my emotions 
in public tellimony to the merits of a 
man, who feems to have clofed hke a 
hero a life that had been devoted to vir- 
‘tue. But the world has taught me a part 
of its bafe.leffon. Prudence was to be 
¢onfulted rather than the honeft emotions 
of the foul; and before the tear was 
dropped on the ccenotaph of. departed 
yirtue, or the laurel was hung upon the 
maufoleum, it was necefiary to. confider 
whether malevolence might not conftrue 
it into a tribute of faction; or accule 
me of fill confecrating to party that 
fcience which I havedevoted, impartially, 
to ALL MANKIND. 
It is my fate, however, not to be per- 
mitted to be filent. I muft proclaim my 
admiration, er be fufpecied of malignant 
Ces, 
Frankfort Eafter—fair. ¢ 
afperfion.. The alternative precludes de- 
liberation. ; 
In the mean time, ir is neceflary to ob- 
ferve, that, as far any thing perfonal was 
intended by the allufion, in my former 
letter, to the foul-narrowing influence of 
pwty patronage, it was not the Duke of 
Bedford who was prefent to my mind, 
when the obfervation efcaped my pen. 
-Lnever knew that the Duke of Bedford 
was confidered as the particular patron of 
Mr, Belfham. I never could confider the 
Duke of Bedford, as capable of patrs- 
nifing the paragraph that called forth my 
animadverfions. In this refpeét, indeed, 
it feems, I was not miftaken. I have the 
teftimony of Mr. Belfham himfelf, that 
the illufrious charaéter in  queftion 
thought, and /poke, of me in a very dif- 
ferent point of view from that in which 
Mr. Belfham, (at a “time when he knew 
little or. nothing about me,’’) thought 
himfelf authorifed, to reprefent me upon 
the record of his hiftory. It muft, confe- 
guently, have been from fame other fource 
of ** mifinformation or miirepreientation,”” 
that Mr. Belfham. derived ‘¢ the prejudi- 
» that feduced him into thete ‘ in- 
cautious expreffions.” 
Thus much, Sir, I havethought neceflary 
to fubjoin in replication tothe author of the 
“Memoirs of George the Third;” not from 
any defire to prolong a perfonal controver- 
fy (for which, indeed, 1 have~ neither 
time nor inclination)—but that I might 
remove 2n injurious mifapprehenfion, 
whieh, (at leaft after fuch {uggeftion) 
may, perhaps, have extended itfelf, to 
other minds. And thus much, indeed, 
I fhould have rejoined immediately upoa 
the appearance of Mr. Belfam’s reply, 
if indilfpenfable engagements, and the 
laborious duties of my new -profeffion, 
had not denied the requifite leifure. 
Your’s, &c. 
J. PHeLwaLe. 
Alnwick, Fune 26, 
13¢c2. 
For the Monthly Magazine. 
‘ACCOUNT of the FRANKFORT EASTER 
FAIR, 1802. 
W,{ROM ‘a fearcity of money, and a 
in want of buyers, there was a great 
ftagnation of trade at this fair. ‘The un- 
certainty with refpect to their future def- 
tiny, which fiill hangs over the fouthern 
provinces of Germany, could not fail to 
render many {peculations abortive, and to 
keep back the hands of thoulands who 
wifhed to become purchefers. The ap- 
prehenfions of the clergy, in the Ecclefiaf- 
tical States, were evinesd, by the many 
» fplendid 
