have been found bafe or wicked enough to defend or palliate the atrocities of this ufurper; atrocities furpaffing even thofe of his worthy predecellor, Robespierre. Unable to enflave or conquer this country, the French revolutionary rulers have, in their difappointed rage, invented a fyftem of regular calumny against the British minifters; and the 'death of every rebel or regicide, whom the vengeance of individuals or of factions plotted or inficted, have by them been afcribed to British counfels. The known moral characters of English fiatesmen wanted no juftification, and they defcended therefore to none. Let the minifters continue their dignified and becoming filence, and let the British public evince their high honour, intrepid courage, and unfhaken loyalty, for which they have long been renowned, by configning to merited contempt and abhorrence all works like the Annual Review, and all authors like Arthur Aikin, whofe direct tendency is to praife Jacobins, and to extol the lurking affaffin Buonaparté into the high fpirited patriot. Since the preceding obfervations were put into our hands, we have received the following Letter, which we infert without alteration, premifing only that we have never yet feen Mr. Barré's publication; and reminding that gentleman that we neither vouched for the authenticity of all the facts ftated in the Revolutionary Plutarch, nor bestowed unqualified praises on the Sketches on the intrinsic Strength, military and naval Force, of France and Russia, &c. SIR, TO THE EDITOR. Tis generally understood that the honourable functions of Reviewers, so effential to the progrefs of literature, are thofe of analyting new publications, contradicting and refuting erroneous and falfe ftatements, pointing out the grammatical faults of a vicious narrative, and of beftowing due praises on, or attaching blame to, fuch works as they deferve. But, above all, the duty of Reviewers is that of being rigorously impartial. When, therefore, fuch Reviewers are found who, inftead of strictly fulfilling thofe honourable functions, either through ignorance, negligence, or malice, condemn works and authors without attempting or condefcending to contradict or refute one single fact stated in their narrative, it must be candidly acknowledged that fuch pretended Reviewers can only be confidered as blind party-men, devoted, and perhaps tools, to a faction; or that their voluminous Reviews are, to ufe their own words concerning Dr. Wittman's work, only intended to pick the pockets of the public; difgracing thereby the profeffion. That inch are the Reviewers who have undertaken the talk of The Annual Review, and History of Literature for 1903; Arthur Aikin, Editor. Vol. II. London: Printed for T. N. Longman and O. Rees, Paternoster-row, 1804; the following facts will completely prove:-In Page 510. Art. 15 and 16, thole sapient and impartial Reviewers, after noticing an anonymous publication entitled The Revolutionary Plutarch, and my History of the French Consulate under Napolean Buonaparte, have thought proper to comprite the e two widely different publications under one fingle remark, beginning with the word -Fear is always cruel, which are followed by fome obfervations on ancient and modern hiltory, totally unconnected with the object of their re view, as far as it relates to my mork. They then go and terminate their pretended analysis by faying: In the late war and in the present, the British ministry has been loudly accused of participating in, and encouraging those plans of assasination, which have been directed against the person of the chief magistrate of France. Let the ministry, if they can with truth, vindicate themselves from so black a charge, by a solemn and authentic disavowal; and let the British public show the high honour and intrepid courage for which they have long been renowned, by consigning to merited contempt and abhorrence all works, together with their authors, whose direct tendency is to degrade the generous and high-spirited patriot (BUONAPARTE) into the lurking assassin. I have already faid, that The Revolufionary Plutarch, with the celebrated pamphlet of "Killing no Murder," is a publication widely different from mine; and feveral refpectable perfons can bear ample teftimony of my having blamed many of the erroneous and exaggerated statements contained in this work, which I thould certainly have contradicted and refuted, had it appeared before the publication of my book. How then could these publications fo totally different in their nature, be confounded under one head? I have positively disclaimed be ing a party-writer; and the perufal of my book may easily convince the candid reader that I have been impartial. I have stated facts, the most important of which I have, and must have witneffed, fince it is well known that I have ferved in the French army, and that I lately held a fituation in Paris under the French government. I have faithfully detailed the boasted administration of the great Buonaparté, as the fure means of degrading that generous and high-spirited patriot into, what he really is, a lurking assassin And I do pofitive affirm and acknowledge, that fuch has been the direct tendency of my work, which perhaps the Reviewers have never read. Í have faid that my narrative was grounded on authentic documents which Ì had brought from France eighteen months ago, when Buonaparté was at Havrede-Grace, where I faw him laft. And, above all, I have offered to produce thofe documents when required; after having completely refuted many erroneous statements of an anonymous publication, upon which the Reviewers have beftowed many praifes. This anonymous publication is called Sketches on the intrinsic Strength, Military and Naval Force, of France and Russia, &c. faid to be printed at the Hague, 1803. And I truft that my refutation is fuch as to leave no poffibility of a reply. But these enlightened Reviewers have thought proper to fay that his (the anonymous writer's) statements are entitled to confidence, from the pledged assurance that he speaks "from scular evidence, having within these twenty months visited every department of that ast republic." Is there any thing that can more fully evince the unaccountable partiality of thefe Reviewers? The statements of an anonymous writer, whofe work is faid to be printed in a foreign country, and which bears no name of either publisher or printer, are entitled to confidence from his bare pledged assurance, whilft the ftatements of a man who openly and frankly gives his own name, acknowledges the fituation he has held under the French government, and offers to produce authentic documents, are to be consigned to merited contempt and abhorrence! Who has affured the Reviewers that their favourite anony→ mous writer has not impofed upon the public? I leave them to answer this question. But, Sir, I cannot dismiss this fubject without lamenting the want of memory and confiftency, as well as capacity, on the part of those who have affumed the high and important office of literary cenfors. In their first volume for 1802, they have beftowed praifes on the work of Sir Robert Wilson, Wilson, who has been the firft man in England to expofe to merited abhorrence the generous and high spirited patriot, Buonaparte, whom he degraded into the lurking assassin, for having malfacred the prifoners of war, and poisoned the French foldiers fick at Jaffa. I haftened to tranflate this work into French. It is true, that in their analysis of Sir Robert Wilson's work, these Reviewers took little notice of its moft important contents, which had even attracted the attention of Buonaparte, and of his ambassador in London, as it is proved by his diplomatic note of the 29th of March, 1803, addressed to Lord Hawkesbury, and to which Sir Robert Wilson made a spirited reply. But these gentlemen have deemed it expedient to treat as a tale thofe heinous crimes of Buonaparte, when published by Dr. Whittman in 1803. Doubtless they were better informed. I leave them to decide on this well known fact. Indeed, Sir, in addition to what I have stated in my narrative, the attrocious murder of the unfortunate Duke d'Enghuien has conftituted Buonaparte a real lurking assassin. Reviewers fhould know, that the law against emigrants condems to death only those who are found on the French territory without a permiffion from the French government.How could then the Duke d'Enghuien be condemned to death, when he was feized in a foreign country? Is then not Buonaparte a lurking assassin? They will, perhaps, anfwer this queftion. I fhall now conclude by obferving, that in thefe hints I wish it to be understood that I do not wave the right of fubmitting to an English court of juftice and an English jury, whe ther this unjust and unwarrantable conduct to me does not deferve another fort of admonition. And I fhall terminate this letter by altering only a few words of their laft fentence, by faying-And let the British public show the high honour and intrepid courage, for which they have long been renowned, by consigning to merited contempt and abhorrence all works, together with their authors, whose direct tendency is to extol the lurking assassin (Buonaparte) into the high-spirited patriot. No. 2, King-street, Iflington, I am, Sir, your very humble fervant, I SIR, MISCELLANEOUS. TO THE EDITOR. Condemned Cells, Shrewsbury Caftle, April 27, 1804. ́GNOBLE must be that mind which does not glow with the love of fame. The character of an hero has ever been my aim, and had not the smell of gunpowder been particularly offenfive to me, I might perhaps have proved a great military character. Stratagems and ambush, plots and midnight fchemes were my delight, and while Ulyffes and Diomede, Nifes and Euryalus have lived in poetic hiftory, I fee no reason why my name should not be tranfmitted to pofterity, with honourable eulogy. Indeed the Newgate Calendar, the Annals of the Old Bailey, and many other learned pubfications have, with honeft zeal, endeavoured to perpetuate the daring ex-. ploits and bold adventures of our honourable fraternity. Though an hero, I have, as my abode teftifies, been unfortunate, and my career has been rather abruptly terminated. A few unenlightened citizens, under the influence of prejudice, have rather mistaken my conduct, and by their error, am I deftined, on Saturday next, to the cord. As the days of chivalry are not quite paft, it is some confolation that Shrewsbury Caftle gives eclat to my confinement, he confinement, and I do not feel afhamed as if my letter had been addressed from a gaol. While t is affords nie nuc. confolat on, and my mind anticipates, with m ch fatisfact cn, the idea of being handed do in to pofteity as no common robber, the pe ufal of a poem lately published, and criticised in your review for March, has cr ated me much uneafiness intimate fr end of Haynes, whom on my laft excurfion I taw dang ing on Hounslow heath, had a foul congenial to my own; fame was his darling object; and frequently, when the myrmidons of Juftice Bond, the knights of Bow-ftreet, had nearly arrested our daring fteps, frequently have we derived confolation, from the hope that our hair breadth efcaps and numerous perils would reader us equally confpicuous as the illuftrious ack Shepherd, or Sixteen-ft ing Jack. Vain however was all our expectations, groundless all our hopes; for Aberfhaw has ufurped the glory of Haynes, and all his honours are blafte', all his glory forgotten That the gentleman who publifhed the fuppleme tary epifle to the correfpondee between Mr. Bowles and Mr. Adams, was the friend of Aberfhaw and the rival of Haynes, is a matter of notoriety; but I thought te lion preyed not on carcases, and that enmity was buried in the grave, with the remains of our foe; but, alas! poor Haynes was not buried, and enmity ftill lives. Pray, Sir, i make it part of my latt dying fpeech, p ay, Sir, interm that gentleman, he has been guilty of a fatal mistake, and as it may miflead fome future Newgate Annalift, I beg to correct him thus: Read, " Thus a determined Aberfhaw we fee." "Till in due time his juft deferts he gains, And Hounflow Heath receives the mifcreant's laft remains." Where fill the robber hangs in iron chains, Whose name, Sir, was not Aberthaw, but Samuel Haynes. If a reprieve fhould extend my days beyond the pub ication of your next number, to know that you have done juftice to the memory o my dear unfortunate friend, and rescued his name from oblivion, it will much oblige, Your's, until death, WILLIAM FORFEIT. TO CORRESPONDENTS. "Quondam Cognitus" is informed, that it is perfectly confiftent with. the plan of our work, to admit letters and eff ys on mifcellaneous subjects. We are obliged to a correfpondent who has directed our attention to an obfcure publication, in which we are attacked. TO OUR READERS. Our readers are referred for our Summary of Politics to the Preface to our: Seventeenth Volume, which appears in the Appendix, publifked on the First of June, and containing a Review of Foreign Literature, with a Table of the Titles, Authors' Names, &c. of the publications reviewed in the volume. THE ANTI-JACOBIN Review and Magazine; &c. &c. &c. For JUNE, 1804. Urbem Romanam a principio Reges habuere. Libertatem et consulatum -L. Brutus inftituit. Dictature ad tempus fumebantur; neque Decemviralis poteftas ultra biennium, neque Tribunorum militum confulare jus diu valuit. Non Cinnæ, non Sullæ longa dominatio; et Pompeii Craffique potentia citò in Cæfarem; Lepidi, atque Antonii arma in Auguftum ceffere; qui cuncta difcordiis civilibus feffa nomine Principis fub Imperium accepit. Tac. Ann. in principio. ORIGINAL CRITICISM. An Account of the Island of Ceylon, containing its History, Geography, Natural Hiftory, with the Manners and Cuftoms of its various Inhabitants; to which is added the Journal of an Embaffy to the Court of Candy. Illuftrated by a Map and Charts. By Robert Percival, Efq. of his Majesty's nineteenth Regiment of Foot. PP. 420. 11. 85. Baldwin's. 1803. THIS Quarto. HIS account of the Ifland of Ceylon was written before the Hiftory of the Cape of Good Hope, by the fame author, which was reviewed in our last Number, though it did not fall into our hands till after the publication of that hiftory. It contains a very elaborate and interesting description of the ifland, which feems calculated to become one of the moft valuable appendages to the British empire in the Eaft. Captain Percival, having refided three years at Ceylon, and having directed his attention, in a particular manner, to the best means of acquiring every fpecies of information, that could throw any light upon its hiftory; upon its actual ftate; upon its ftrength; its natural productions; its commercial advantages; its local circumftances; its military and political importance; the cultivation of its foil; and the manners and difpofitions of its inhabitants; and having, moreover, enjoyed the best opportunities of personal obfervation; qualified himself, in the beft poffible way,, for the compofition of an authentic, and moft ufeful, account of a fettlement, at least as valuable and important, as any of our late acquifitions in India; and which, with proper cultivation and improvement, may increafe, very confideriy, in value and importance. No LXXXII. VOL. XVIII. I In |