Few topics have been more vaguely and unsatisfactorily discussed than diet; the reason of which evidently is, that persons have written on it under the influence of their own particular habits and likings, without any solid foundation of general principles deduced from experiment. We are sorry that we cannot except the little work before us from the number of those which have been composed in this manner: but the truth seems to have been, that the author, desirous of saying something on a subject which temporary causes had made popular, put pen to paper with no other previous stock than a few loose ideas gathered from cursory reading and common observation. We do not mean to deny that his leading notions are right: but we find nothing masterly nor precise-nothing to distinguish his remarks from the ordinary unpremeditated conversation of a medical man on the subject. Who could not presently fill a few pages with declamation' about animal food, bread, tea, and butter-about the preference of stewing to roasting, and the economy of broth and hasty-pudding? After the elaborate experiments of Count Rumford, and other real inquirers into these matters, the public can be little benefited by a set of hasty observations, some of them hazarded on very dubious grounds, and nearly all of them taken on trust. We find nothing so clearly deducible from the present performance, as that Dr. B. was broughtup on oatmeal porridge and barley-broth, and that he is no great lover of either tea or cheese! POLITICAL, &c. Art. 46. Memoirs of the Administration of the Right Hon. William Pitt, or an Inquiry into the Causes and Consequences of his Conduct in respect to different Departments, Bodies, and public Individuals of the State. In a Letter to the Right Hon. the Earl of Suffolk, in consequence of his Lordship's Motion in Parliament and Conferences with his Majesty for the Removal of Ministers. David Gam, Esq. 8vo. pp. 92. 28. Reed. 1797. By The well known anecdote of David Gam and Lord Suffolk in the Field of Agincourt has supplied the author of this pamphlet with a name. As we were led to expect from the very ample title-page, he pursues the Minister over a wide field, in which he exposes to public view the alleged incapacity and bold corruption of the Premier, exemplified in every act of the Legislature. Professing the soundest loyalty to his Majesty and personal attachment to his august family, he charges Mr. Pitt with being the sole cause that certain of them have in any degree hazarded, by their misconduct, a diminution of the popular esteem. This is a broad assertion; and, as notorious facts weigh more with the public than prejudiced opinions, we consider it as the weakest part of a very heavy crimination, which is divided into several articles. In all Mr. Pitt's lust of power and his prodigality are traced through their effects in the army, navy, church, laws, letters, the arts, commerce, diplomatic department, and, lastly, in the conduct of the war. and each of these, crimes of omission and commission originating in peculation or inefficiency are denounced, sometimes in the deep tones of despair, but more frequently in those of objurgatory declamation. As As our province is chiefly confined to the author's literary merit, without deciding on the justice of all his allegations; we cannot overlook such words as "unshakable" and "poisonously," nor a metaphor straining on the tiptoe of nonsense like the following; nor would I check the tear though it extinguish not the volcano;' p. 8. We remember a ludicrous line in the Entertainment of the Padlock, "Quench Etna with a cup of tea." Art. 47. A Letter to George Augustus Pollen, Esq. M. P. on the late Parliamentary Association. By a Moderate man. Svo. pp. 35IS. Cadell jun. and Davies. This writer inveighs warmly and with some force against the negligence, the apostacy, and the corruption of certain members of our legislature. After some general statement and observations, he says, Have not the people reason to be suspicious of every public chaFacter, and careful how far they trust him? Public virtue, they find by experience, is become a plant of so rare a growth, that they can with difficulty be brought to acquiesce in the real existence of it; and corruption has extended its baneful influence so wide, that the jaundiced eye views every thing through the falsified medium. It is not less wonderful than painful, to see how far the poisonous contagion has now spread. The question is not now, Whom to corrupt but, What bribe will be sufficient? nor do we require, Who has been bribed; but, Who is proof against corruption? Venality, in short, is become so common, that public virtue is regarded as a phænomenon, or as an alien in the land.' With the following extracts we shall take leave of this sensible writer : A neglect of duty, which many Members are guilty of, is that of treating the House of Commons in the same manner as men who have nothing to do behave at the theatre, when they go to the play before the last act is over, merely for a lounge, or (in their own language) to kill time. Thus you will see Members come into the senate-house at the end of a debate, and, without having heard any of the arguments advanced on either side, or without even understanding the nature of the question before them, hastily give a vote, which is to affect in its consequences the whole kingdom.' argu • Indeed, a Member who gives his vote without hearing the ments adduced, and understanding the subject before him, is not less reprehensible than a juryman who sleeps during a trial, and then, without having attended to the evidence or the merits of the case upon which he is to decide, returns a partial verdict to the parties. If the situation of the latter, on whose verdict perhaps the fate of a fellow-creature depends, is awful and important, how much more awful and important is that of a Member of the Senate, in whose decree the lives, fortunes, and happiness of millions, as well as the fate of an whole country, are involved! If compassion, if humanity, if a love of justice, and a conscientious desire of doing what is right, be the guide to direct a man's conduct in the one instance, how much more forcibly ought it to operate in the other! A juryman, by by an improper verdict, may destroy an individual; but a Member, by an unjust vote, may ruin a whole nation.' Art. 48. This little work was privately printed, without a date, under the title of Royal Mornings, during the administration of Lord North; one of whose agents obtained at Berlin a copy of the French original, which is ascribed to the late Frederic the Third, who also composed an exoteric book intitled Anti Machiavel. This is an esoteric work, which reveals the most hidden mysteries of king-craft, and unveils without a shudder the very Holy of Holies to the scornful gaze of the profane. The Second Morning thus opens: Religion is absolutely necessary in a state; this is a maxim which it would be madness to dispute; and a king must know very little of politics, indeed, that should suffer his subjects to make a bad use of it but then it would not be very wise in a king to have any religion himself. Mark well, my dear nephew, what I here say to you; there is nothing that tyrannizes more over the head and heart than religion, because it neither agrees with our passions, nor with those great political views which a monarch ought to have. The true religion of a prince is his interest and his glory: he ought, by his royal station, to be dispensed with having any other: he may, indeed, preserve outwardly a fair occasional appearance, for the sake of amusing those that are about him, or who watch his motions and character: if he fears God, or (to speak as the priests and women do) if he fears Hell, like Lewis the XIVth. in his old age, he is apt to become timorous and childish, and fit for nothing but to be a Capuchin: if the point is to avail himself of a favorable moment for seizing a province, an army of devils, to defend it, present themselves to his imagination: we are, on that supposition, weak enough to think it injustice; and we proportion, in our conscience, the punishment to the crime. Should it be necessary to make a treaty with other powers, if we remember that we are Christians, we are undone, all would be over with us, we should be constantly bubbles. As to war, it is a trade, in which any the least scruple would spoil every thing; and, indeed, what man of honour would ever make war, if he had not the right to make rules that should authorise plunder, fire, and carnage? I do not, however, mean that we should make a proclamation of impiety and atheism, but it is right to adopt ones thoughts to the rank one occupies. All the Popes, who had common sense, have held no principles of religion but what favoured their aggrandisements. It would be the silliest thing imaginable if a prince was to confine himself to such paltry trifles as were contrived only for the common people: besides, the best way for a prince to keep fanaticism out of his country, is, for him to have the most cool indifference for religion. Believe me, dear nephew, that holy mother of ours has her little caprices, like any woman, and is commonly as inconstant: attach yourself, then, my dear nephew, to trae philosophy, which is ever consolatory, luminous, courageous, dispas siopate, and inexhaustible as nature: you will then soon see that II you will will not have in your kingdom any material dispute about religion; for parties are never formed but on the weakness of princes, or on that of their ministers. There is one important reflection I would wish you to make; it is this: your ancestors have, in this matter, conducted their operations with the greatest political dexterity; they have introduced a reformation which gave them the air of apostles, at the same time it was filling their purse. Such a revolution was, without doubt, the most reasonable that could ever happen, on such a point as this; but since there is now hardly any thing left to be got in that way; and that, in the present position of things, it would be dangerous to tread in their footsteps, it is therefore even best to stick to toleration. Retain well, dear nephew, the principle I am now to incul- · cate into you: let it be your rule of government, that men are to worship the divinity in their own way; for should you appear in the least neglectful of this indulgence, all would be lost and undone in your dominions. Have you a mind to know why my kingdom is composed of so many sects? I will tell you: In certain provinces the Calvinists are in possession of all the offices and posts; in others, the Lutherans have the same advantage: there are some where the Catholics are as predominant, that the king can only send there one or two Protestant deputies; and of all the ignorant and blind fanatics, I dare aver to you, that the Papists are the most fiery and the most atrocious. The priests, in this senseless religion, are untameable wild beasts, that preach up a blind submission to their wills, and exercise a complete despotism: they are assassins, robbers, violaters of faith, and inexpressibly ambitious. Mark but Rome; observe with what a stupid effrontery she dares arrogate to herself dominion over the princes of the earth. As to the Jews, they are little vagrants, poor devils, that at bottom are not so black as they are painted; almost every where rebuffed, hated, and persecuted, they pay with tolerable exactness those who enslave them, and take their revenge by bubbling all the simpletons they can meet with.' This edition is very incorrectly printed: p. 10. 1. 5. the comma after Burgrave makes it seem a proper name; p. 14. 1. 19. poizing for seizing; p. 18. Sales, Loyola, good expedient, are grossly ill spelled. The preface does not atone for these and other defects. Art. 49. A Letter to the Seceders. 8vo. 6d. Rivingtons. 1797. It could not be known from the title of this pamphlet, whether the subject of it were religion or politics;-whether the author addressed himself to those sectaries called Seceders, or to those of our Legislators who have lately thought it proper to discontinue their attendance in Parliament. The latter however are the persons to whom he writes; and he urges some arguments, which are by no means contemptible, to chew that they have abandoned their duty. What,' he asks, will foreigners think of those men, who, being called to a high and important station in the Government of their Country, in a time of imminent danger like the present, through disgust, disappointment, cowardice, or something worse, desert their post, and give up all pretensions to honour and conscience? Those sacred ties should, on the contrary, more closely oblige you to a con stant stant discharge of your Parliamentary Duties. It is only by being on the spot, by regular attendance in your places, and by mixing in the discussion, that you can hope to be serviceable to your Country. Then you will be able to detect the wilful error of a wicked Minister, if Mr. Pitt be such; you may expose the folly of his proceedings, and awaken to a sense of political duty those Members, who have, perhaps, too implicitly trusted, and too zealously supported him.' The following acknowlegements, from a Ministerialist, shew either great candour or very little art. 'Tis true, we have been led into misfortune by the best Kings who ever sat on the English Throne; we have been plunged into the most destructive wars by the most upright Ministers whom Monarchs ever chose; we have been gradually involved in civil wars and scenes of infamy and disgrace by the wisest Parliaments.' The succeeding observations are ingenious Now it is not denied, that the present is a moment of peculiar danger and difficulty. Indeed the notoriety of the fact would mock a studied concealment. We are now so circumstanced, that on the one hand, if a weak Prince were on the Throne, a few artful Demagogues might introduce French Liberty and French Misery into this once envied Country; and on the other, if our King aspired to an arbitrary Power, an able Minister might so take advantage of political incidents, as to arm the Monarch with the iron Sceptre of Despo tism, and lead his People into Slavery. At such a crisis then, how unbecoming the sacred dignity of Legislators, to abandon their Seats, and deprive their Country of their Counsel and Direction! It is more honourable, Geutlemen, with British Virtue, to stem the torrent of Court Interest, if there be an Interest at Court incompatible with that of the Country, and set up a patriotic standard in the House against the Hirelings of Corruption. Nor need you, even if the House were as corrupt as you represent it, fear the want of support. If you shewed in your own conduct a sincere desire of serving your Country, the virtuous few would immediately crowd round you, and the dupes of ministerial influence would, by degrees, waken from the lethargy of Venality. It is impossible, but that the feelings of Englishmen would revive, and that the Representatives of the People, though they may have been seduced for a time by the eloquence of Mr. Pitt, or by other means, still cherish the love of their Country. They may have been mistaken, but still they would promote the welfare of those whom they represent. 'Patriotism, like every other virtue, may, through the infirmity of humanity, follow a wrong line, and deviate from the path of public interest. But that is no argument in favour of unnecessary and disproportionate violence in the method of bringing it back. And, granting that the majority of the House of Commons have failed in their duty, I cannot but think your secession a much too violent means to be used for their recovery. For what, in all probability, will be the conse quence, if you persist in dividing the affections of the people, and setting up yourselves against the majority of their Representatives, as the only Friends of their Rights? The unprincipled and discontented, they who have smarted under the severity of laws, necessarily REV. AUG. 1797. Kk made |