LONDON:-Printed by T. C. HANSARD, Peterborough - Court, Fleet - Street; Published by R. BAGSHAW, Brydges - Street, Covent Garden :-Sold also by J. BUDD, Pall Mall.

VOL. XV. No. 19.]

705]

LONDON, SATURDAY, MAY 13, 1809.

[Price 18.

"Do you think it possible to get me a vote on Monday, for Pitt's motion ?”
MRS. CLARKE'S Letter to Capt. SANDON.

[706

nor is it to be believed, that they had neglected to secure the means of covering their retreat. Yet, down they fall like so many men made of paste-board. No, no:

SUMMARY OF POLITICS. AUSTRIA.The reader will, perhaps, remember, that, when the present war between Austria and France was first talked of, I endeavoured to convince the minis-it is evident, that they had no stomach terial writers, that their joy at the prospect for the fight; and, when that is the case, of such a war would speedily be turned numbers, and what is called discipline, are into mourning; and that, by their exer- of no avail. Some persons expressed tions to urge Austria on to war, they were, great admiration of the Archdale's Prosupposing their exertions to have any ef- clamations upon entering Germany; his fect, urging her on to her destruction. complaints against the ambition of NapoThe editor of the Morning Chronicle made Icon, and his protestations about the Ensimilar observations, and for so doing he peror of Austria's desire to preserve peace. was most severely censured by his party Alas! these were known well enough beopponents, who, according to their old fore. But, in these what interest had the manner of turning every thing to a party people of Germany? Aye, or the people account, accused his friends of wishing to of Austria? The question with them was: see Buonaparté master of the continent, "shall we be worse off under the Emperor and who failed not to hold themselves forth" as the real friends of the "liberties,” as they termed it, of Europe.The recently received intelligence must, one would suppose, have convinced these AntiJacobins, that we were right, and that they were wrong. But, it is no matter whether they be so convinced, or not. Their readers, indeed, one would desire to see undeceived; yet, perhaps, it may, since deception has been carried on so long, be full as well to leave the work of removing that deception to time and events. -The fate of Austria will do little, perhaps, in the way of warning to despotic governments. They have already had so many warnings, that, it really seems, that they are doomed to destruction. Talk of armies, indeed! What has this famous army of Austria done? Suppose the French to have made only thirty thousand prisoners: I believe, that they have made all they say they have made; but, suppose it to be only thirty thousand; how are thirty thou-to the fate of these governments; or, rasand men to be made prisoners, in an open country, against their will? There is no such thing. It cannot be. Why, that must occupy a length of line of six or seven miles. What can surround six or seven miles? Only consider how many men it must take to surround a line of six or seven miles long. The Austrians were the first in the field; they had chosen their ground;

Napoleon than under the Emperor "Francis ?" This was the question, and the only rational question, with them. Intriguing courtiers, sinecure placemen and ineritless pensioners, all those who live in idleness upon the fruit of the public labour, may and will abuse the people for this indifference; but, if they would give themselves time to consider, they would see the unreasonableness of all such abuse. They themselves are anxious for the preservation of their several old governments; and this is very natural, because, to them, those governments operate to great advantage; they live easy and comfortable lives under those governments; they, without any labour or care or talent, are getting rich under those governments; but, upon the very same principle that they are so anxious for the preservation of such governments, the people, out of whose property and labour they enrich themselves, must be inditierent

ther, they must wish for a change, without troubling themselves with nice calculations as to the good or the evil, which that change is calculated to produce.Here is the real cause of all the triumphs of Napoleon. We hear stories about his carrying millions of pieces of gold with him, wherewith to corrupt the Austrian officers; a fact, if true, that seems to be a pretty

In short, viewing the matter in whatever way I will, I cannot, as an Englishman, discover any grounds for deciding, that the late triumph of France over Austria ought to be a subject of very deep regret. I do not like to see Napoleon triumph, because he is a despot; I wish the triumph had settled upon another head; upon the head of a different sort of man; but, I do not, and cannot, see that the triumph itself is calculated to produce any mischievous effect.There is one argument in favour of Austria's going to war, which, even after the hitherto fatal consequences are known, is still persisted in, and which is too curious to be passed over unnoticed. It is this: that Napoleon had resolved, and had the power, to destroy Austria, whether she went to war, or not; and that, therefore, she might as well make a trial to save herself; she might as well take her chance of the consequences of a war. Supposing the premises to be true, the conclusion is certainly correct; and, if those who make use of the argument, will but be so good as to apply it to the case of an oppressed people, I think they will soon cease to be surprized at the indifference of such a people, and at their readiness to take the chances of a change. But, is it not shocking to hear it coolly asserted, that Napoleon, or that any prince, has resolved upon conquering a nation, which contains from twelve to twenty millions of people; and that it is wise for the sovereign of such nation to rush into a war, in order to obtain a chance of escaping being conquered? Why, does not this assertion amount to a confession, that the people of such nation are of no weight at all; that they take no interest in the matter; or, that they, at bottom, wish for the success of Napoleon? What should have given him such confidence with respect to the conquest of Austria? The answer is ready: he knew, or, at least, he had very good reason for believing, that the twenty millions of people, iving in the Austrian dominions, were not disposed to resist him.

good answer to those, who talk about the | had not renewed the war with Austria. poverty of the French government, owing to the loss of commerce, and also to those, who would persuade us of the virtue of the Austrians; but, this is a mere invention; a falshood hatched for the purpose of misleading us; for, how is it possible for us to have any knowledge of such a fact. No; bribery, in this case, was, I am persuaded, unnecessary. He met, and he well knew that he should meet, with nothing like a spirit of resistance. The body of an army he knew he should have to meet; but, cf the body without a soul he was not at all afraid.- These truths have long been very clear to all men of tolerably accurate information as to such matters; and, it is surprizing to see with what industry and pertinacity they are disguised from the inass of the people of this country. It is surprizing, because one can see no adequate reason for it. Why should not the people be told the truth, relative to the cause of Napoleon's success in other countries? Why not tell them, what we know to be true, that he triumphs because the people of the countries, against which he makes war, are indifferent as to whether he becomes their ruler, or not?—As to the effect, upon the general interests of Europe, which the apparent approaching fall of Austria will have, it is difficult to offer a decided opinion. With respect to our own interests, the change, whatever it may be, does not appear to me to be an object of dread. I do not see how it is to affect us any more than a revolution in Kamschatka would. We are now, and long have been, cut off from all connection with Austria. The only interest that we can reasonably feel, with respect to her, is, for the happiness of her people. I am far from being certain, that the total conquest of Austria might not, by diverting, in part, the attention and the force of Napoleon; by extending his dominion, multiplying the objects of his care, and, of course, dividing his means, operate, for sometime, at least, in favour of England; white, in another point of view, which is too evident to dwell upon, the advantage to us is certain. Having finished his work on the side of Germany, he will, indeed, be enabled to turn his whole force upon Spain and Portugal; and hence, in time, there must arise danger to this country, and particularly to Ireland, unless something efficacious be speedily adopted to render heland more secure internally than it now is. But, this would have happened, and sooner too, if Napoleon

-Party, as usual, has laid hold of this defeat of the Austrians, to call for a change of

ministry in England. Good Lord! As if that would alter the case; as if that would make either the people or the army of Austria more disposed to a resistance of the French! The shape, in which this argument assails the common sense of the country, is this: that the defeat of the Austrians will add to the means, which Napoleon has of injuring us; that we shall

the cry of a Jacobin Conspiracy, when Mr.
Wardie preferred his charges against the
Duke of York; and, remembering this,
our surprize upon the present occasion will
naturally be the less. Bar, let us now

which the people have held for the pur-
pose of thanking the man, whom he mi-
aisters declared they would not sulier,
without opposition, to receive the thanks of
the House of Countoas. Let us hear what
was said about these Veetings.→→→→MIR.
BRAGGE, according to the report of the
debate, was the firs.. He is stated to have
said, that, he conceived there wa SON C-
thing realely irregular in the form of
"proces ding proposed by the Lion. Men
«ber. it was a form of proceeding better

stand in need of more wise and vigorous councils than we now have, in order to enable us to resist this increase of means in the hands of our enemy; that the late ministers are more wise and vigorous than the present; and that, therefore, the pre-hear what was said about those Meetings, sent ought to be turned out and the late restored to power. As I do not agree in any one of the premises, I, of course, reject the conclusion; and, I firmly believe, that a change of ministry, at this time, would be greatly injurious to the county. There would be new lords to make; and, which is much worse, there would be a new batch of pensioners to be fastened upon the public. The feelings and views of both parties, towards the people, is evidently the same. There is no difference whatever; and, in point of diligence and ability, the present men are, upon an average, I verily b-leve, quite equal to their predecessors. It was not, even in the affair of Spain, ability that was wanting. It was a want of night principles; the losses and disgrace, arising from our interference in the southern Peninsula of Europe, are to be ascribed, not to a want of ability in the ministers, but to that vicious systein, which affects our foreign as well as our domestic concerns, and to which system the late ministers have shewn clearly to the whole nation, that they are full as much attached as the present.

adapted to the genus and spiri, of one " of die Meetings that were so or quit, and “so industriously promoted, than betting "the temper and dignity of that liouse. "It would well become that Meeting, in

which the extraordinary proposition was "mad and approved, that a man holuing a I place under Gover, ment was not fit to sit "in that House. Such propositions were "not intended for the socer consideration " of Parliament. No; their object was

66

Was Let this
Was this a

to increase the popular ferment, to add "fuel to fire; and to encourage and pro"pagate that dangerous spirit that was circulated with a diligence the most sus MR. MADOCKS'S MOTION.On the picious. Spargere voces in vuigus m 5th instant Mr. Madocks made a motion, "bigu s-seemed to be the gran i princiin the House of Commons, for taking an Iple of action of the leaders of these examination at the bar of the House, upon Meetings. Their aim was to cry down the subject of a charge which he had to "all public men-to render them objects of make against MR. PERCEVAL and LORD "distrut and suspicion."Now, in the CASTLEREAGH, relating to the disposing of a first place, it will be observe, that MR. seat in that House. This motion was nega- MADOCKS distinctly stated, that he had tived upon the ground of its not being suf-proofs whereon to ground his change, and, ficiently specific; and, as it will be that as to ambiguity, he not only tated the brought forward in another shape, I shall pince, but noned the alleged lenders. not now offer any remarks upon the 1- What ambiguity was here ? ledged fact itself. Indeed, the charge will quite "ta #12" enough? have been made according to the taste of ere slanderous insinuation, calculated for the parties themselves, before this sheet the purpose of excuing d's.rust an ! suscan issue from the press.-There was, picion? On the contrary, did no M» Mahowever, something said, during the de- docks, like Mr. Wardle, expose himself to bate, respecting the proceedings at Public the consequences of a failure in making Meetings, which is well worthy of the a- good nis charger? What could be fairer ? tention of every reader.It seems old, B sides, Mr. Ma locks was ready to ta mė at first sight, that the conduct of the Meet the other particulars of the case, so that this ings of the People, in the several counties charge of ambigui y seems to have been aud towns of the kingdom, should have the last that could artech to him. As formed any part of the topics, on this occa to the contrast, which Mr. Bagge was sion, when so heavy a charge, as that of pleased to dr..w be ween the genius and having been guilty of corruption, was pre-spirit of the Foblic Meetings an the digferred against two of the King's ministers;nity of the House, has the reader seen, at but, we remember the cry of Jacobinism; any of the Meetings, any thing like popu

"

it met to decide upon the case, told by the accused, that, unless they acquitted him, they ought not to decide at all? That there was something new, very new indeed, in all this, and in a good deal more that passed upon this memorable occasion; and, therefore, I do think, Mr. Sturges, that you might pass over without surprize, a little novelty in the proceedings at the Meetings. But, Sir, you seem totally to have forgotten one thing, and that is, that, owing to the mode of examination which was chosen by the Duke of York's friends, his excellently good and wise friends, the whole of the Evidence was before the public, and that, of course, bating the difference in point of general understanding, the public was full as able to decide rightly as those persons were, who were present during the examinations. The public had before them all the Evidence, printed by order of the House itself. What could it have more? And, as to censuring an “ acquittal," why not censure that as well as a condemnation, if they thought it was wrong? In short, if the people have a right to meet, and to express their sentiments relative to the conduct of the House of Commons; if they have a right to do this in any case, the right will serve them in this case as well as in any other; unless, indeed, it should be contended, that the glorious constitution, for which they are called upon to spend their last

lar fury or folly? Does Mr. GEORGE ROSE discover any thing of this sort in the admirable Resolutions, passed in the town of Southampton, the electors of which have expressed their disapprobation of the parliamentary conduct of his son; or, in those of Christchurch, where he himself has met with something similar? He may; but, the nation will not. The truth is, that the Meetings, upon the present occasion, are without example for their temper, as well as their respectability; and, whatever may be said about them in the House of Commons, their utility can no more be doubted than their legality.- -As to the extraordinary proposition," that a man holding a place under government was not fit to sit in the House of Commons, we will first hear Mr. STURGES, upon the same point, and then we will see how the fact stands. He, in the report of the debate, is stated to have said, that he was proud that he "was no party to such resolutions as "those lately published, stating a clause "in the Act of Settlement as the existing "law of the land, which never was law. (Here it was observed that it was four "years before it was repealed.) Never till lately had it been seen in this country, "that bodies of people, not present during a judicial examination, had met to arraign "the conduct of those who found it their duty to acquit one who was accused. "He never till now heard of condemning "the Commons in this manner, for the shilling and to shed the last drop of "exercise of their duty in an acquittal. He "their blood," allows them to meet only "could not conceive how those who for the purpose of praising the conduct of "called themselves the friends of the the parliament.- Now, as to what Mr. country could reconcile it to their feel-Bragge called the "Extraordinary Propo"ings to degrade the character of the House " of Commons."- Here is new matter, and we will dismiss that first. We are told, that it is something new for persons not present at an examination, to arraign the conduct of those who have found it their duty to acquit the accused. But, Mr. Sturges, Mr. Sturges, do you not perceive, that there has been something new in this whole affair? That there was something new in crying out Jacobin Conspiracy, when a member simply preferred specific charges against a person in the public em-lution, containing such a proposition. Nay, ploy and in the public pay? That there was something new in not permitting the accuser to follow the mode of investigation that he proposed? That there was something new in denouncing, before hand, infamy upon the head of that accuser, in case he should fail to make good his charges? That there was something new in the House being, before

sition." There, surely, is something very reasonable in the proposition, that those who are appointed to be the guardians of the public money should not be allowed to take any of that money themselves; that they should not be allowed to take it from any quarter, or through any channel, and especially through the Crown, as a check upon which the constitution considers them. This appears to be very reasonable; and yet Mr. Sturges said that he, was proud that he was no party to a reso

he is reported to bave said that it never was law. He was, it appears, contradicted at the time; but I will make the contradiction in a manner a little more formal. The second act, passed in the twelfth year, of the reign of WILLIAM III. contains this clause: "That no person, who has

an office, or place of profit, under-the king, or receives a pension from the