friends-the object of whose life it is to preserve that good, and to increase it.

himself he thought it no very extraordinary stretch of penetration or charity, to admit that human nature is everywhere nearly as capable of emulation in good, as in evil. He boasted of no very exalted heroism, in opposing the calmness and firmness of conscious integrity to the shuffling and slippery movements, the feints in retreat, and feints in advance, the dread of being over-reached, or detected in attempts to over-reach, and all the other humiliating and mortifying anxieties of the most accomplished proficients in the art of diplo macy. 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 weak,

It was the lot of Mr. Fox to fight this battle for the greater part of his life; in the course of which time he never was seduced by the love of power, wealth, or popularity, to sacrifice the happiness of the many to the interest of the few. He rightly thought, that kings, and all public officers, were instituted only for the good of those over whom they preside; and he acted as if this conviction was always present to his mind; disdaining and withstanding that idolatrous tendency of mankind, by which they so often not only suffer, but invite ruin from that power which they themselves have wisely created for their own happiness. He loved, too, the happiness of his Countrymen more than their favour; and while others were exhausting the resources, by flattering the ignorant prejudices and foolishness in believing that politicians, who, after passions of the country, Mr. Fox was content to be odious to the people, so long as he could be useful also. It will be long before we witness again such pertinacious opposition to the alarming power of the crown, and to the follies of our public measures, the necessary consequence of that power. That such opposition should ever be united again with such extraordinary talents, it is, perhaps, in vain to hope.

One little exception to the eulogium of Sir James Mackintosh upon Mr. Fox, we cannot help making. We are no admirers of Mr. Fox's poetry. His Vers de Société appears to us flat and insipid. To write verses was the only thing which Mr. Fox ever attempted to do, without doing it well. In that single instance he seems to have mistaken his talent.

Immediately after the collection of panegyrics which these volumes contain, follows the eulogium of Mr. Fox by Philopatris himself; and then a volume of notes upon a variety of topics which this eulogium has suggested. Of the laudatory talents of this Warwickshire patriot, we shall present our readers with a specimen.

all, 'knew 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."(I. 209-211.)

It is impossible to read this singular book without being everywhere struck with the lofty and honourable feelings, the enlightened benevolence, and sterling honesty with which it abounds. Its author is everywhere the circumspect friend of those moral and religious principles upon which the happiness of so ciety rests. Though he is never timid, nor "Mr. Fox, though not an adept in the use prejudiced, nor bigoted, his piety, not prudish of political wiles, was very unlikely to be the and full of antiquated and affected tricks, predupe of them. He was conversant in the sents itself with an earnest aspect, and in a ways of man, as well as in the contents of manly form; obedient to reason, prone to inbooks. He was acquainted with the peculiar vestigation, and dedicated to honest purposes language of states, their peculiar forms, and The writer, a clergyman, speaks of himself as the grounds and effects of their peculiar a very independent man, who has always exusages. From his earliest youth, he had in-pressed his opinion without any fear of convestigated the science of politics in the greater and the smaller scale; he had studied it in the records of history, both popular and rare -in the conferences of ambassadors-in the archives of royal cabinets-in the minuter detail of memoirs-and in collected or straggling anecdotes of the wrangles, intrigues, and cabals, which, springing up in the secret recesses of courts, shed their baneful influence on the determinations of sovereigns, the fortune of favourites, and the tranquillity of kingdoms. But that statesmen of all ages, like priests of all religions, are in all respects alike, is a doctrine the propagation of which he left, as an inglorious privilege, to the misanthrope, to the recluse, to the factious incendiary, and to the unlettered multitude. For

sequences, or any hope of bettering his condition. We sincerely believe he speaks the truth; and revere him for the life he has led. Political independence-discouraged enough in these times among all classes of men-is sure, in the timid profession of the church, to doom a man to eternal poverty and obscurity.

There are occasionally, in Philopatris, a great vigour of style and felicity of expression. His display of classical learning is quite unrivalled-his reading various ana good; and we may observe, at intervals, a talent for wit, of which he might have availeq himself to excellent purpose, had it been com patible with the dignified style in which he generally conveys his sentiments. With a these excellent qualities of head and heart, we

Philopatris has employed a great deal of time upon the subject of capital punishments, and has evinced a great deal of very laudable tenderness and humanity in discussing it. We are scarcely, however, converts to that system Again, strange as it may appear to this au- which would totally abolish the punishment thor to say so, he must not fall into the fre- of death. That it is much too frequently inquent mistake of rural politicians, by sup-flicted in this country, we readily admit; but posing 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.

the newly devised punishments, and have been long thoroughly acquainted with the old ones. Of the nice applications of the law they are indeed ignorant; but they purchase the requisite skill of some man whose business it is to acquire it; and so they get into less mischief by trusting to others than they would do if they pretended to inform themselves. The people, it is true, are ignorant of the laws; but they are ignorant only of the laws that do not concern them. A poacher knows nothing of the penalties to which he exposes himself by stealing ten thousand pounds from the public. Commissioners of public boards are unacquainted with all the decretals of our ancestors respecting the wiring of hares; but the one pockets his extra per centage, and the other his leveret, with a perfect knowledge of the laws-the particular laws which it is his business to elude. Philopatris will excuse us for differing from him upon a subject where he seems to entertain such strong opinions. We have a real respect for all his opinions:no man could form them who had not a good heart and a sound understanding. If we have been severe upon his style of writing, it is because we know his weight in the commonwealth: and we wish that the many young persons who justly admire and imitate him should be turned to the difficult task of imitating his many excellences, rather than the useless and easy one of copying his few de

the punishment would be remitted, and its pre-
ventive efficacy, therefore, destroyed. We
agree with Philopatris, that the executions
should be more solemn; but still the English
are not of a very dramatic turn, and the thing
must not be got up too finely. Philopatrist
and Mr. Jeremy Bentham before him, lay a
vast stress upon the promulgation of laws,
and treat the inattention of the English govern-
ment to this point as a serious evil. It may
be so-but we do not happen to remember any
man punished for an offence which he did not
know to be an offence; though he might not
know exactly the degree in which it was
punishable. Who are to read the laws to the
people who would listen to them if they
were read? who would comprehend them if
they listened? In a science like law there
must be technical phrases known only to pro-
fessional men: business could not be carried
on without them: and of what avail would it
be to repeat such phrases to the people?
Again, what laws are to be repeated, and in
what places? Is a law respecting the number
of threads on the shuttle of a Spitalfields
weaver to be read to the corn-growers of the
Isle of Thanet? If not, who is to make the
selection? If the law cannot be comprehended
by listening to the viva voce repetition, is the
reader to explain it, and are there to be law
lectures all over the kingdom? The fact is,
that the evil does not exist. Those who are
most likely to commit the offence soon scent outfects.

OBSERVATIONS ON THE HISTORICAL WORK OF THE RIGHT HONOURABLE CHARLES JAMES FOX.*

[EDINBURGH REVIEW, 1809.]

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 cccupied, as he assures us," with official duties, which take equally," according to his elegant expression, "from the disembarrassment of the mind and the leisure 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 questionable 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 pri

*Observations on the Historical Work of the Right Honourable Charles James For. By the Right Honourable GEORGE ROSE. pp. 215. With a Narrative of the Events which occurred in the Enterprise of the Earl of Argyle in 1665. By Sir PATRICK HUME. London. 1809.

vate friendship." An ordinary reader may, perhaps, find some difficulty in comprehending how 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 part, we must confess, that after the most diligent perusal of his long explanation, we do not in the least comprehend 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 'he occurrences which befell him and his associ. ates 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 finds it "neCessary" to publish this volume.

All this sounds very chivalrous and affec

tionate; 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 distinguished himself in the cause of liberty;" 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 tenour of his life and conduct, to have been uniformly sincere and zealous in the cause of his country." Such is the deliberate and unequivocal testimony which Mr. Fox 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 ancestor of his deceased patron.

was present, told mee afterward the manner of his parting with the Erle. Argyle being in the roome 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 goe 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 go 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 Cochrane; and said, that their ignorance and misconduct were, though not designedly, the chief cause of his failure. 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 Wodrow 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 of that unfortunate nobleman. It is this censure of Argyle, then, perhaps, and not any censure of Mr. Fox's, that Mr. Rose intended to obviate by the publi cation 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

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. Now, 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 jealous and controlling spirit which was exercised towards their leader; and, with regard to the concluding scene, Sir Patrick's own account makes infinitely more strongly against himself and Sir John Cochrane, than the general state-papers of the time, and in all the historians ment 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 company. 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

since. Sir Patrick lived nearly forty good years after this accusation of Argyle was made public; and thirty-six 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 are very well contented to leave it doubtful which of these was the case; and we are convinced that all the readers of Mr. Rose's book will agree that it is still very doubtful. Sir Patrick, in his narrative, no doubt, says that Argyle was extremely arrogant, self-willed, and obstinate; but it is equally certain, that the earl said to him that he was jealous, disobedient, and untractable. Both were men of honour and veracity; and, we doubt not, believed what they said. It is even possible that both may have said truly; but, at this distance of time, and with no new evidence but the averment of one of the parties, it would be altogether ridiculous to pretend to decide which may have come nearest to an impartial statement. Before the publication of the present narrative, it is plain from Wodrow, Burnet, and other writers, that considerable blame was generally laid on Argyle for his peremptoriness and obstinacy; and, now that the narrative is published, it is still more apparent than ever that he had some ground for the charges he made against his officers. The whole tenour of it shows that they were constantly in the habit of checking and thwarting him; and we have already seen that it gives a very lame and unsatisfactory account of their strange desertion of him, when their fortunes appeared to be desperate.

candid, attack upon his party and his principles. Professing to be published from anxiety to vindicate and exalt the memory of an insurgent revolution whig, it consists almost entirely of an attempt to depreciate whig principles, and openly to decry and vilify such of Mr. Fox's opinions as Sir Patrick Hume constantly exemplified in his actions. There never was an effect, we believe, imputed to so improbable a

cause.

Finally, we may ask, if Mr. Rose's view, in this publication, was merely to vindicate the memory of Sir Patrick Hume, why he did not put into Mr. Fox's hands the information which would have rendered all vindication unnecessary? It was known to all the world, for several years, that Mr. Fox was engaged in the history of that period; and if Mr. Rose really thought that the papers in his custody gave a different view of Sir Patrick's conduct from that exhibited in the printed authorities, was it not his duty to put Mr. Fox upon his guard against being misled by them, and to communicate to him those invaluable documents to which he could have access in no other way? Did he doubt that Mr. Fox would have candour to state the truth, or that he would have stated with pleasure any thing that could exalt the character of a revolution whig? Did he imagine that any statement of his could ever obtain equal notoriety and effect with a statement in Mr. Fox's history? Or did he poorly It is perfectly plain, therefore, we conceive, withhold this information, that he might detract that the publication of Mr. Fox's book consti- from the value of that history, and have to tuted neither a necessity nor an intelligible in- boast to the public that there was one point ducement for the publication of this narrative; upon which he was better informed than that and that the narrative, now that it is published, illustrious statesman? As to the preposterous has no tendency to remove any slight shade apology which seems to be hinted at in the of censure that history may have thrown over book itself, viz., that it was Mr. Fox's business the temper or prudence of Sir Patrick Hume. to have asked for these papers, and not Mr. But, even if all this had been otherwise-if Rose's to have offered them, we shall only Mr. Fox had, for the first time, insinuated a observe, that it stands on a point of etiquette, censure on this defunct whig, and if the narra- which would scarcely be permitted to govern tive had contained the most complete refuta- the civilities of tradesmen's wives; and that it tion of such a censure, this might, indeed, seems not a little unreasonable to lay Mr. Fox have accounted for the publication of Sir under the necessity of asking for papers, the Patrick's narrative; but it could not have ac- very existence of which he could have no counted at all for the publication of Mr. Rose's reason to expect. This narrative of Sir Patbook-the only thing to be accounted for. The rick Hume has now lain in the archives of narrative is given as an appendix of 65 pages his family for 130 years, unknown and unsus to a volume of upwards of 300. In publishing pected to all but its immediate proprietor; and, the narrative, Mr. Rose did not assume the distinguished as Sir Patrick was in his day in character of "an author," and was not called Scotland, it certainly does not imply any extraupon, by the responsibility of that character, ordinary stupidity in Mr. Fox, not to know, by to explain to the world his reasons for "sub-intuition, that there were papers of his in existmitting himself to their judgment." It is only ence which might afford him some light on the for his book, then, exclusive of the narrative, subject of his history. that Mr. Rose can be understood to be offering We may appear to have dwelt too long on any apology; and the apology he offers is, that these preliminary considerations, since the it sprung from the impulse of private friend- intrinsic value of Mr. Rose's observations cership. When the matter is looked into, how-tainly will not be affected by the truth or the ever, it turns out, that though private friendship | fallacy of the motives he has assigned for pubmay, by a great stretch, be supposed to have lishing them. It is impossible, however, not dictated the publication of the appendix, it can by no possibility account, or help to account, for the composition of the book. Nay, the tendency and tenour of the book are such as this ardent and romantic friendship must necessarily condemn. It contains nothing whatever in praise or in defence of Sir Patrick Hume; but it contains a very keen, and not a very

to see that, when a writer assigns a false motive for his coming forward, he is commonly conscious that the real one is discreditable: and that to expose the hollowness of such a pretence, is to lay the foundation of a wholesome distrust of his general fairness and temper. Any body certainly had a right to publish remarks on Mr. Fox's work-and nobody a