memoirs — and in collected or straggling | society rests. Though he is never anecdotes of the wrangles, intrigues, and timid, nor prejudiced, nor bigoted, his cabals, which, springing up in the secret piety, not prudish and full of antiquated recesses of courts, shed their baneful in- and affected tricks, presents itself with fluence on the determinations of sovereigns, the fortune of favourites, and the tran- an earnest aspect, and in a manly form; quillity of kingdoms. But that statesmen obedient to reason, prone to investigaof all ages, like priests of all religions, are in tion, and dedicated to honest purposes. all respects alike, is a doctrine the propa- The writer, a clergyman, speaks of gation of which he left, as an inglorious himself as a very independent man, privilege, to the misanthrope, to the recluse, who has always expressed his opinions to the factious incendiary, and to the un- without any fear of consequences, or lettered multitude. For himself, he thought any hope of bettering his condition. it no very extraordinary stretch of pene- We sincerely believe he speaks the tration or charity, to admit that human nature is everywhere nearly as capable of truth; and revere him for the life which emulation in good, as in evil. He boasted he has led. Political independence of no very exalted heroism, in opposing the discouraged enough in these times calmness and firmness of conscious integ- among all classes of men- is sure, in rity to the shuffling and slippery movements, the timid profession of the church, to the feints in retreat and feints in advance, doom a man to eternal poverty and the dread of being over-reached, or detected obscurity. in attempts to over-reach, and all the other humiliating and mortifying anxieties of the most accomplished proficients in the art of diplomacy. He reproached himself for no guilt, when he endeavoured to obtain that respect and confidence which the human heart unavoidably feels in its intercourse with persons who neither wound our pride, nor take aim at our happiness, in a war of hollow and ambiguous words. He was sensible of no weakness in believing that politicians, who, after all, 'know only as they are known,' may, like other human beings, be at first the involuntary creatures of circumstances, and seem incorrigible from the want of opportunities or incitements to correct themselves; that, bereft of the pleas usually urged in vindication of deceit, by men who are fearful of being deceived, they, in their official dealings with him, would not wantonly lavish the stores they had laid up for huckstering in a traffic, which, ceasing to be profitable, would begin to be infamous; and that, possibly, here and there, if encouraged by example, they might learn to prefer the shorter process, and surer results, of plain dealing, to the delays, the vexations, and the uncertain or transient success, both of old-fashioned and new-fangled chicanery."—(Vol. I. pp. 209211.)

There are occasionally, in Philopatris, a great vigour of style, and felicity of expression. His display of classical learning is quite unrivalledhis reading various and good; and we may observe, at intervals, a talent for wit, of which he might have availed himself to excellent purpose, had it been compatible with the dignified style in which he generally conveys his sentiments.

With all these excellent qualities of head and heart, we have seldom met with a writer more full of faults than Philopatris. There is an event recorded in the Bible, which men who write books should keep constantly in their remembrance. It is there set forth, that, many centuries ago, the earth was covered with a great flood, by which the whole of the human race, with the exception of one family, were destroyed. It appears, also, that from thence a great alteration was made in the longevity of mankind, who, from a range of seven or eight hundred years, which they enjoyed before the flood, were confined to their present period of seventy or eighty years. This epoch It is impossible to read this singular in the history of man gave birth to the book without being everywhere struck two-fold division of the antediluvian with the lofty and honourable feelings, and the postdiluvian style of writing; the enlightened benevolence, and ster- the latter of which naturally contracted ling honesty with which it abounds. itself into those inferior limits which Its author is everywhere the circum- were better accommodated to the spect friend of those moral and religious abridged duration of human life and principles upon which the happiness of literary labour. Now, to forget this

event, to write without the fear of
the deluge before his eyes, and to
handle a subject as if mankind could
lounge over a pamphlet for ten years,
as before their submersion,-is to be
guilty of the most grievous error into
which a writer can possibly fall. The
author of this book should call in the
aid of some brilliant pencil, and cause
the distressing scenes of the deluge to
be portrayed in the most lively colours
for his use.
He should gaze at Noah,
and be brief. The ark should con-
stantly remind him of the little time
there is left for reading; and he should
learn, as they did in the ark, to crowd
a great deal of matter into a very little
compass.

Philopatris must not only condense what he says in a narrower compass, but he must say it in a more natural manner. Some persons can neither stir hand nor foot without making it clear that they are thinking of themselves, and laying little traps for approbation. In the course of two long volumes, the Patriot of Warwick is perpetually studying modes and postures: the subject is the second consideration, and the mode of expression the first. Indeed, whole pages together seem to be mere exercises upon the English language, to evince the copiousness of our synonymes, and to show the various methods in which the parts of speech can be marshalled and arrayed. This, which would be tiresome in the ephemeral productions of a newspaper, is intolerable in two closely printed volumes.

Again strange as it may appear to this author to say so, he must not fall into the frequent mistake of rural politicians, by supposing that the understandings of all Europe are occupied with him and his opinions. His ludicrous self-importance is perpetually destroying the effect of virtuous feeling and just observation, leaving his readers with a disposition to laugh, where they might otherwise learn and admire.

“I have been asked, why, after pointing

out by name the persons who seemed to me most qualified for reforming our Penal Code, I declined mentioning such ecclesiastics as might with propriety be employed in pre

paring for the use of the churches a grave and impressive discourse on the authority of human laws; and as other men may ask have determined, after some deliberation, the same question which my friend did, I to insert the substance of my answer in this place.

"If the public service of our church should ever be directly employed in giving effect to the sanctions of our Penal Code, the office of drawing up such a discourse as I have ventured to recommend would, I suppose, be assigned to more than one person. My ecclesiastical superiors will, I am sure, make a wise choice. But they will hardly condemn me for saying, that the best sense expressed in the best language may be expected from the Bishops of Llandaff, Lincoln, St. David's, Cloyne, and Norwich, the Dean of Christchurch, and the

President of Magdalen College, Oxford. I mean not to throw the slightest reproach upon other dignitaries whom I have not mentioned. But I should imagine that few of my enlightened contemporaries hold an opinion different from my own, upon the masculine understanding of a Watson, the sound judgment of a Tomline, the extensive erudition of a Burgess, the exquisite taste and good nature of a Bennet, the calm and enlightened benevolence of a Bathurst, the various and valuable attainments of a Cyril Jackson, or the learning, wisdom, integrity and piety of a Martin Routh."- - (pp. 524, 525.)

In the name of common modesty, what could it have signified whether this author had given a list of ecclesiastics whom he thought qualified to preach about human laws? what is his opinion worth? who called for it? who wanted it? how many millions will be influenced by it? and who, oh gracious Heaven! who are a Burgess, -a Tomline,-a Bennet,―a Cyril Jackson, -a Martin Routh?-A Tom,-a Jack,

a Harry,-a Peter?-All good men enough in their generation, doubtless they are. But what have they done for the broad a? what has any one of them perpetrated which will make him be remembered out of the sphere of his private virtues six months after his decease? Surely, scholars and gentlemen can drink tea with each other, and laudatory cackling! eat bread and butter, without all this

Philopatris has employed a great deal of time upon the subject of capital punishments, and has evinced a great

finds it "necessary'
volume.

pp. 215. With a Narrative of the Events which occurred in the Enterprise of the Earl of Argyle in 1685. By Sir Patrick Hume. London, 1809.

to publish this

All this sounds very chivalrous and affectionate; but we have three little remarks to make. In the first place, Mr. Fox passes no censure on Sir Patrick Hume. In the second place, this publication does by no means obviate the censure of which Mr. Rose complains. And, thirdly, it is utterly absurd to ascribe Mr. Rose's part of the volume, in which Sir Patrick Hume is scarcely ever mentioned, to any anxiety about his reputation.

In the first place, it is quite certain that Mr. Fox passes no censure on Sir Patrick Hume. On the contrary, he says of him, that "he had early distin

THIS is an extraordinary performance in itself; but the reasons assigned for its publication are still more extraordinary. A person of Mr. Rose's consequence-incessantly occupied, as he assures us, "with official duties, which take equally," according to his elegant expression, "from the disembarrassment of the mind and the lei sure of time," thinks it absolutely necessary to explain to his country the motives which have led him to do so idle a thing as to write a book. He would not have it supposed, however, that he could be tempted to so ques-guished himself in the cause of liberty;" tionable an act by any light or ordinary consideration. Mr. Fox and other literary loungers may write from a love of fame, or a relish for literature; but the official labours of Mr. Rose can only be suspended by higher calls. All his former publications, he informs us, originated in "a sense of public duty;" and the present, in "an impulse of private friendship." An ordinary reader may perhaps find some difficulty in comprehending how unequivocal testimony which Mr. Fox Mr. Rose could be "impelled by private friendship" to publish a heavy quarto of political observations on Mr. Fox's History : — and for our own parts, we must confess, that after the most diligent perusal of his long explanation, we do not in the least compre-ancestor of his deceased patron. hend it yet. The explanation, however, which is very curious, it is our duty to lay before our readers.

Mr. Rose was much patronised by the late Earl of Marchmont, who left him his family papers, with an injunction to make use of them, "if it should ever become necessary." Among these papers was a narrative by Sir Patrick Hume, the Earl's grandfather, of the occurrences which befell him and his associates in the unfortunate expedition undertaken by the Earl of Argyle in 1685. Mr. Fox, in detailing the history of that expedition, has passed a censure, as Mr. Rose thinks, on the character of Sir Patrick; and, to obviate the effects of that censure, he now

and afterwards rates him so very highly, as to think it a sufficient reason for construing some doubtful points in Sir John Cochrane's conduct favourably, that "he had always acted in conjunction with Sir Patrick Hume, who is proved by the subsequent events, and indeed by the whole tenor of his life and conduct, to have been uniformly sincere and zealous in the cause of his country." Such is the deliberate and

has borne to the character of this gentleman; and such the historian, whose unjust censures have compelled the Right Honourable George Rose to indite 250 quarto pages, out of pure regard to the injured memory of this

Such is Mr. Fox's opinion, then, of Sir Patrick Hume; and the only opinion he anywhere gives of his character. With regard to his conduct, he observes, indeed, in one place, that he and the other gentlemen engaged in the enterprise appear to have paid too little deference to the opinion of their noble leader; and narrates, in another, that, at the breaking up of their little army, they did not even stay to reason with him, but crossed the Clyde with such as would follow them. Sir Patrick's own narrative, so far from contradicting either of these statements, confirms them both in the most remarkable manner. There is scarcely a page of it that does not show the

Now,

jealous and controlling spirit which | Cochrane; and said, that their ignowas exercised towards their leader; rance and misconduct was, though not and, with regard to the concluding designedly, the chief cause of his failure. scene, Sir Patrick's own account makes infinitely more strongly against himself and Sir John Cochrane, than the general statement of Mr. Fox. So far from staying to argue with their general before parting with him, it appears that Sir Patrick did not so much as see him; and that Cochrane, at whose suggestion he deserted him, had in a manner ordered that unfortunate nobleman to leave their com- of that unfortunate nobleman. It is pany. The material words of the

narrative are these:

"On coming down to Kilpatrick, I met Sir John (Cochrane), with others accompanieing him; who takeing mee by the hand, turned mee, saying, My heart, goe you with mee? Whither goe you, said I? Over Clide by boate, said he.-I: Wher is Argyle? I must see him.-He: He is gone away to his owne countrey, you cannot see him.-I: How comes this change of resolution, and that wee went not together to Glasgow ? He: It is no time to answer questions, but I shall satisfy you afterward. To the boates wee came, filled 2, and rowed over." &c. "An honest gentleman who was present told mee afterward the manner of his parting with the Erle. Argyle being in the room with Sir John, the gentleman coming in, found confusion in the Erle's countenance and speach. In end he said, Sir John, I pray advise mee what shall I doe; shall I go over Clide with you, or shall I goe to my owne countrey? Sir John answered, My Lord, I have told you my opinion; you have some Highlanders here about you; it is best you goe to your owne countrey with them, for it is to no purpose for you to go over Clide. My Lord, faire you well. Then call'd the gentleman, Come away, Sir; who followed him when I met with him."-Sir P. Hume's Narrative, pp. 63, 64.

Such are all the censures which Mr. Fox passes upon this departed worthy; and such the contradiction which Mr. Rose now thinks it necessary to exhibit. It is very true that Mr. Fox, in the course of his narrative, is under the necessity of mentioning, on the credit of all the historians who have treated of the subject, that Argyle, after his capture, did express himself in terms of strong disapprobation both of Sir Patrick Hume and of Sir John

Mr. Fox neither adopts nor rejects this sentiment. He gives his own opinion, as we have already seen, in terms of the highest encomium on the character of Sir Patrick Hume, and merely repeats the expressions of Argyle as he found them in Woodrow and the other historians, and as he was under the necessity of repeating them, if he was to give any account of the last words

this censure of Argyle, then, perhaps, and not any censure of Mr. Fox's, that Mr. Rose intended to obviate by the publication before us. But, upon this supposition, how did the appearance of Mr. Fox's book constitute that necessity which compelled the tender conscience of Lord Marchmont's executor to give to the world this long-lost justification of his ancestor? The censure did not appear for the first time in Mr. Fox's book. It was repeated, during Sir Patrick's own life, in all the papers of the time, and in all the historians since. Sir Patrick lived nearly forty good years after this accusation of Argyle was made public; and thirtysix of those years in great credit, honour, and publicity. If he had thought that the existence of such an accusation constituted a kind of moral necessity for the publication of his narrative, it is evident that he would himself have published it; and if it was not necessary then, while he was alive to suffer by the censure of his leader, or to profit by its refutation, it is not easy to understand how it should be necessary now, when 130 years have elapsed from the date of it, and the bones of its author have reposed for nearly a century in their peaceful and honoured monument.

That the narrative never was published before, though the censure, to which it is supposed to be an antidote, had been published for more than a century, is a pretty satisfactory proof that those who were most interested and best qualified to judge, either did not consider the censure as very deadly, or the antidote as very effectual. We