Whether Diogenes the Cynic was a true philosoph not easily be determined. He has written nothin the sayings of his which are handed down by ot lively; and may be easily and aptly applied on ma sions by those whose wit is not so perfect as their This Diogenes (as every one will recollect) was citi little, bleak town situated on the coast of the Eux exposed to all the buffets of that inhospitable sea. at a great distance from those weather-beaten walls and indolence, and in the midst of literary leisure, was informed that his townsmen had condemned hi banished from Sinope; he answered coolly, " And I them to live in Sinope."

The gentlemen of a party in which Mr. Burke ha acted, in passing upon him the sentence of retireme done nothing more than to confirm the sentence had long before passed upon himself. When tha was choice, which the tribunal of his peers inflict as ment, it is plain he does not think their sentence in severe. Whether they, who are to continue in th which shortly he is to leave, will spend the long yea I hope, remain to them, in a manner more to their tion, than he shall slide down, in silence and obscu slope of his declining days, is best known to Him sures out years, and days, and fortunes.

The quality of the sentence does not however

1 Newspaper intelligence ought always to be received with s of caution. I do not know that the following paragraph is f any authority; but it comes with an air of authority. The pa fessedly in the interest of the modern Whigs, and under thei The paragraph is not disclaimed on their part. It professes to cision of those whom its author calls "the great and firm b Whigs of England." Who are the Whigs of a different c which the promulgator of the sentence considers as composed and unsettled particles, I know not, nor whether there be any scription. The definitive sentence of "the great and firm Whigs of England" (as this paper gives out) is as follows:

"The great and firm body of the Whigs of England, true to ciples, have decided on the dispute between Mr. Fox and M and the former is declared to have maintained the pure doctrin they are bound together, and upon which they have invariably consequence is, that Mr. Burke retires from parliament." Chronicle, May 12, 1791.

the justice of it. Angry friendship is sometimes as bad as calm enmity. For this reason the cold neutrality of abstract justice is, to a good and clear cause, a more desirable thing than an affection liable to be any way disturbed. When the trial is by friends, if the decision should happen to be favourable, the honour of the acquittal is lessened; if adverse, the condemnation is exceedingly embittered. It is aggravated by coming from lips professing friendship, and pronouncing judgment with sorrow and reluctance. Taking in the whole view of life, it is more safe to live under the jurisdiction of severe but steady reason, than under the empire of indulgent but capricious passion. It is certainly well for Mr. Burke that there are impartial men in the world. To them I address myself, pending the appeal which on his part is made from the living to the dead, from the modern Whigs to the ancient.

The gentlemen who, in the name of the party, have passed sentence on Mr. Burke's book, in the light of literary criticism, are judges above all challenge. He did not indeed flatter himself, that as a writer he could claim the approbation of men whose talents, in his judgment and in the publie judgment, approach to prodigies; if ever such persons should be disposed to estimate the merit of a composition upon the standard of their own ability.

In their critical censure, though Mr. Burke may find himself humbled by it as a writer, as a man, and as an Englishman, he finds matter not only of consolation, but of pride. He proposed to convey to a foreign people, not his own ideas, but the prevalent opinions and sentiments of a nation, renowned for wisdom, and celebrated in all ages for a wellunderstood and well-regulated love of freedom. This was the avowed purpose of the far greater part of his work. As that work has not been ill received, and as his critics will not only admit, but contend, that this reception could not be Owing to any excellence in the composition capable of perverting the public judgment, it is clear that he is not dis avowed by the nation whose sentiments he had undertaken to describe. His representation is authenticated by the verdict of his country. Had his piece, as a work of skill, been thought worthy of commendation, some doubt might have been entertained of the cause of his success. But the

matter stands exactly as he wishes it. He is more have his fidelity in representation recognised by t of the people, than if he were to be ranked in point (and higher he could not be ranked) with thos critical censure he has had the misfortune to incur.

It is not from this part of their decision which th wishes an appeal. There are things which touch h nearly. To abandon them would argue, not diffiden abilities, but treachery to his cause. Had his wo recognised as a pattern for dexterous argument and ful eloquence, yet if it tended to establish maxims, spire sentiments, adverse to the wise and free con of this kingdom, he would only have cause to lam it possessed qualities fitted to perpetuate the memo offence. Oblivion would be the only means of his the reproaches of posterity. But, after receiving mon allowance due to the common weakness of wishes to owe no part of the indulgence of the wo forgetfulness. He is at issue with the party before sent, and, if ever he can reach it, before the comin ation.

The author, several months previous to his pu well knew, that two gentlemen, both of them pos the most distinguished abilities, and of a most de thority in the party, had differed with him in or most material points relative to the French Revolut is, in their opinion of the behaviour of the French and its revolt from its officers. At the time of the declaration on this subject, he did not imagine th of these two gentlemen had extended a great wa themselves. He was however well aware of the pr that persons of their just credit and influence would dispose the greater number to an agreement with timents; and perhaps might induce the whole tacit acquiescence in their declarations, under a na not always an improper, dislike of showing a differ those who lead their party. I will not deny, that this conduct in parties is defensible; but within w the practice is to be circumscribed, and with what e the doctrine which supports it is to be received, it present purpose to define. The present question ha

to do with their motives; it only regards the public expression of their sentiments.

The author is compelled, however reluctantly, to receive the sentence pronounced upon him in the House of Commons as that of the party. It proceeded from the mouth of him who must be regarded as its authentic organ. In a discussion which continued for two days, no one gentleman of the opposition interposed a negative, or even a doubt, in favour of him or his opinions. If an idea consonant to the doctrine of his book, or favourable to his conduct, lurks in the minds of any persons in that description, it is to be considered only as a peculiarity which they indulge to their own private liberty of thinking. The author cannot reckon upon it. It has nothing to do with them as members of a party. In their public capacity, in everything that meets the public ear, or public eye, the body must be considered as unanimous. They must have been animated with a very warm zeal against those opinions, because they were under no necessity of acting as they did, from any just cause of apprehension that the errors of this writer should be taken for theirs. They might disapprove; it was not necessary they should disavow him, as they have done in the whole, and in all the parts of his book; because neither in the whole, nor in any of the parts, were they directly, or by any implication, involved. The author was known indeed to have been warmly strenuously, and affectionately, against all allurements of ambition, and all possibility of alienation from pride, or personal pique, or peevish jealousy, attached to the Whig party. With one of them he has had a long friendship, which he must ever remember with a melancholy pleasure. To the great, real, and amiable virtues, and to the unequalled abilities, of that gentleman, he shall always join with his country in paying a just tribute of applause. There are others in that party for whom, without any shade of sorrow, he bears as high a degree of love as can enter into the human heart; and as much veneration as ought to be paid to human creatures; because he firmly believes, that they are endowed with as many and as great virtues, as the nature of man is capable of producing, joined to great clearness of intellect, to a just judgment, to a wonderful temper, and to true wisdom. His sentiments with regard to them can never vary,

without subjecting him to the just indignation of m who are bound, and are generally disposed, to look reverence to the best patterns of their species, and give a dignity to the nature of which we all participa the whole of the party he has high respect. Upon indeed of the composition of all parties, he finds gre faction. It is, that in leaving the service of his cou leaves parliament without all comparison richer in than he found it. Very solid and very brilliant tale tinguish the ministerial benches. The opposite ro sort of seminary of genius, and have brought forth s so great talents as never before (amongst us at leas appeared together. If their owners are disposed their country, (he trusts they are,) they are in a c to render it services of the highest importance. If, mistake or passion, they are led to contribute to its shall at least have a consolation denied to the ruined that adjoins us-we shall not be destroyed by men or secondary capacities.

All these considerations of party attachment, of regard, and of personal admiration, rendered the A the Reflections extremely cautious, lest the slightes cion should arise of his having undertaken to exp sentiments even of a single man of that descriptio words at the outset of his Reflections are these:

"In the first letter I had the honour to write to which at length I send, I wrote neither for, nor f description of men; nor shall I in this. My errors are my own. My reputation alone is to answer for In another place he says, (p. 126,) "I have no man I speak only from myself, when I disclaim, as I do. possible earnestness, all communion with the actor triumph, or with the admirers of it. When I assert else, as concerning the people of England, I speak servation, not from authority."

To say then, that the book did not contain the se of their party, is not to contradict the author, or themselves. If the party had denied his doctrines current opinions of the majority in the nation, th have put the question on its true issue. There, I believe, his censurers will find on the trial, that t