emper and the states of the Empire; by determining the extent and Limits of the sovereign authority of the German princes; by defining more accurately the competency of the tribunals of the Empire; and, above all, by deciding, in a manner equally just and wise, the most 'ithportant question at that period-the differences between the two religious parties, and assuring to each its rights, its freedom, its possessions, and its due share in the constitution of the Empire, that this treaty became a beneficial and fundamental law for Germany; and such it has remained, notwithstanding the vicissitude of events, even until the moment when, according to the assertions of modern politicians, there no longer existed any fundamental law or law of nations." P. 10.

The effects of subsequent events on this treaty are next ex amined; and these are chiefly confined to the civilisation of Russia, the elevation of Prussia, and the commercial and colonial systems. On each of these subjects we meet with remarks apposite, and worthy of a true statesman; and the notion that the commercial system has been destructive of the law of nations is completely overthrown.

If it be true that the system of commerce and colonization was one of the fruits destined to grow and ripen in the soil of society, the roots of this system must be somehow connected with those of the whole social constitution. The natural propensities of man, particularly those of which the general and constant influence determines the fate of socicty, are seldom found in contradiction to each other. That there should be any great spring of human action in its nature inimical to society; tending to involve nations in endless hostility; to subvert the law of nations, and even render its existence impossible; and finally to bring about the decay and ruin of empires; would be extremely unnatural, and is therefore very much to be doubted. The system of commerce, with all its errors, could not produce such effects, and in fact never has: that in some instances it has been the cause of wars, is certain: but what has not been the cause of war? That it has sometimes created discord in the federal constitution of Europe, will not be denied: but can such a constitution be expected to exist without periodical disturbances? Upon the whole, the system of commerce, with all its consequences, the pre-eminent riches of some countries, their naval power, their foreign possessions, and their new influence (disproportioned to the extent of their European territory), had adapted itself exceedingly well to the former social relations of Europe; and if extraordinary and unexpected convulsions had not, from the year 1789, shaken the whole edifice to its foundations, and loosened every part of it, the question, Does there still exist a law of nations? would probably, at this time, have been absurd, notwithstanding all the changes occasioned or hastened by that system.' P.45.

The aim of the French writer is to show that no system of public law existed either previous to, or at the period of, the French revolution; and, consequently, if that convulsion have prepared the way for one, notwithstanding its temporary evils,

the consequences have been beneficial to Europe. But the pre-sent author, with great justice, denies the position; yet he allows certain points, to which we as readily give our assent.

1st, There existed in the internal social, and domestic state of most European countries, and particularly of the French monarchy, certain discordances, such as might lead to great convulsions, and which, when those convulsions did take place, might in general be looked upon, with reason, as the preparatory causes of them; and secondly, the revolution has had the accidental good effect of discovering and pointing out, in the clearest and most impressive manner, to all governments, the imperfections existing in their former constitutions, or in the ancient federation of Europe.

On the other hand, I am convinced, and I trust that all enlightened persons will now agree with me, that the condition of Europe in the latter times preceding the revolution, was not so desperate either in a social, a domestic, or a, federative point of view, as to lead immediately to violent convulsions, or to render such convulsions desirable; that the French revolution, though facilitated, and in that sense prepared, by many social and political discordances, was by no means a necessary or unavoidable consequence of the state of France, much less of Europe; that this event, with all its dreadful consequences, was occasioned by some obvious errors of the former French government-was continued and completed by the untimely zeal, the ill-advised activity, the inability, the picsumption, or the wickedness of those who, in consequence of these errors, were intrusted with the direction of the public affairs-and was converted into a principle of destruction for all Europe by the improvident measures of the surrounding nations; that, far from furthering the improvement of the condition of civil and political society, this revolution, on the contrary, has interrupted and arrested its progress at a moment when it appeared particularly promising; and that, when considered in a more extensive point of view, the greatest and most lamentable of the evils which accompanied it. was this: before the revolution there only. needed a few wise reforms in the internal constitution of states, and some happy combinations for ameliorating and confirming the federal system, to have raised Europe to a high degree of prosperity and hap piness; whereas now all the means of attaining to this desired object must be sought for amidst a heap of ruins, and drawn forth, as it were, from chaos again.' P. 65.

A masterly view is now taken of the relations in which the several nations of Europe existed towards each other before the revolution of France: the miserable plans of the coalesced powers against her, and their want of unanimity and perseverance, are deplored; and the writer advances, at last, to this true but nielancholy conclusion

The political system which resisted the violence of so many storms until the French revolution, and was strong foundations had defied the vicissitudes of fortune, and the lapse of time, has been converted into a heap of ruins by the revolution, and its necessary companion

the war. Europe, say the friends as well as enemies of the preponderant power; Europe has entirely lost its balance."

P. 215.

The grand question is then examined, whether this balance can possibly be restored? and, to decide fairly upon this point, the present relations between France and the other states of Europe are investigated. Here we also meet with another melancholy picture. The three great barriers of Germany against France-the independence of Holland, the Austrian Netherlands, and the countries between France and the Rhine-are broken down; Savoy is no longer an obstruction to Italy; Switzerland is become almost equally inefficacious; and the Pyrenees vainly rear their heads between France and Spain. What alliances can be formed between her and her neighbours? Those which are nominally so, with relation to herself and most of the bordering countries, are nominally so alone; they have nothing but the name, and are the mere clients of France. Yet England, not France, is represented by M. Hauterive as the natural enemy of Europe; and this brings the author before us to a minute inquiry into the supposed causes of complaint against us, founded on our commercial tyranny in the Navigation Act-the monopoly of Trans-European dominions-and that of British manufactures.

The Navigation Act, though not vindicated as wholly politic with respect to the cabinet which framed it, is justified against. the complaints of other nations; and it is proved

That the British Navigation Act repressed the industry of other countries in one respect only-that of excluding the carrying nations from one of their principal markets; in every other, the commerce and industry of Europe remained unmolested by it.

That_this law was no source of the commercial greatness and riches of England. It operated, on the contrary, like all monopolizing statutes, prejudicially to the industry of the nation; and the extraordinary prosperity at which its commerce has arrived, must be referred to other causes.

The Navigation Act was a wise regulation as far as it encouraged, though at the expense of the ordinary principles of political economy, a branch of national industry, which contributed to the security and independence of Great Britain. A good policy made it contribute indirectly to every source of the welfare and prosperity of the state.

That supposing the Navigation Act to have been unwise, it can never have deserved the title of unjust. For it is neither more nor less than a regulation of domestic policy, for which a nation is not answerable to other powers. But since the wisdom of the act cannot, under the circumstances of England's situation, be called in question, every shadow of an argument against its justice, is, of course, done away.

In as much as the British legislature went even beyond the Navigation Act, in prohibitive commercial statutes, the imposition of heavy duties on foreign produce, and other schemes of mercantile policy; and as far as it fettered the industry of its own and other coun

tries, without being sufficiently justified by more important motives, it proceeded upon blameworthy principles. But what government in Europe can reproach the British nation on that account? The same mercantile policy has prevailed in every country, without exception, even to the present day. But, since the principles of political economy have no where been so thoroughly developed, and so extensively practised as in England; the presumption is in favour of that country, that it has, more than any other, abandoned the confined maxims of narrow minded trade; a presumption which has been confirmed by more than one example, especially in the last twenty years,' P. 306.

With equal justice the charges urged against us, for the supposed monopolies of Trans-European dominions and British manufactures, are refuted. It is shown that no blame can at tach to a nation for its endeavours to improve its commerce and manufactures, both of which are benefits to Europe at large; and, if British industry originally advanced them to a great height, the advantages derived from the convulsions on the continent were such as might be, and were naturally to be, expected from the ruin of commerce and industry, by the natives themselves, of so extensive a part of the continent.

There is therefore nothing in England's commercial system, and in the influence of that system upon the welfare of other nations, which can support or justify the heavy charges brought against her, in her peaceful relations, we see her in constant and perfect harmony with the domestic interests of the social system of Europe. If she have in any way deserved the reproaches of her numerous adversaries, the causes must be sought in other relations; they must be founded on her conduct in war, towards countries not immediately engaged in it; and on the abuse of her well-earned superiority in her oppression of the weak.' P. 357.

So able a vindication of our country must doubtless be flattering to every one who is satisfied with the general rectitude of its conduct, and wishes that the nations on the continent should view it without jealousy or distrust; but, for other reasons, we recommend this work in the strongest manner to all who are and who is there that does not pretend to be ?-interested in the affairs of the state. It is a treasure of political knowledge; not written with a view of indulging any particular Hypothesis, but embracing, as a general question, the mutual relations of the states of Europe to each other, the causes that affect them, and the conduct to be observed for the common happiness of mankind. From our insular situation, from the importance of the house of commons, from the little necessity of general knowledge to obtain a seat in that assembly, and the constant agitation of domestic parties occupying almost universal attention, few among us study what may be called general statistics; and even statesmen might be mentioned, whose whole experience and turn of thought have never extended be

yond the internal affairs of our own island. To secure a borough, or a majority in the house, is of more consequence with them, than an inquiry into those actions which might promote discussion in foreign cabinets, or, by a proper direction, might tend to the external benefit of their country. To such persons, the studies of M. Hauterive and Mr. Gentz may afford very profitable instruction: the accusations of the one are severe, and likely to produce a deep impression against us in the minds of those who are unaccustomed to close reasoning: the refutations by Mr. Gentz are solid and judicious, and open a wide field of political information, by which the reader may not only be guarded against the fallacious doctrines of the French, but derive a variety of sound maxims to conduct him safely through the labyrinth of modern politics.

ART. XII.-Leopold; or, the Bastard. 2 Vols. 12mo. 85. sewed. Highley. 1803.

IN this department of our literary warfare, we are condemned to much tiresome drudgery-to read what never was nor ever will be read-to view a succession of passing spectres, who leave not a track of their existence, and pore over still-born brats that cannot be said to have ever lived. We welcome, therefore, with more than common pleasure, the companionable traveler of our weary way; and, though he may be sometimes a little tedious, or trite and hackneyed in his remarks, we reflect on those with whom our hours are more commonly spent, and hail this new companion as an acquisition. Somewhat of this kind were our feelings in perusing the work before us; and we were not greatly soured by the introduction, which perhaps the author, from good manners, or even policy, might have spared. Why should he step out of his way, to attack those whose aim is to proportion their praise and censure to the real merit or faults of a work, who wish, at least, to be candid and correct? Even in a political view, the writer is in an error; for where is the work that will challenge an inquisitive examination? what writer will bear the probings of critical investigation, without sometimes feeling a smart? Reviewers, however, have been always fair game;' and those who are apparently most callous in public, we have found most acutely sensible in private. We mean this, however, as a hint to our author; and, if we guess at him rightly, he will feel it as we could wish. The Bobadilian independence is often accompa nied by Bobadilian terrors.

We offer these suggestions to the author, in return for those with which he has favoured ourselves. We plead guilty to the charge CRIT. REV. Vol. 38. August, 1803.

2 H