ties; and, you will therein do an injury to your country as great as you have the power to do. Mr. Yorke has told you of his twenty years of parliamentary service. During that time he has always been a supporter of the ruling party, and has, for some years of the time, been a minister himself, or, at least, one of the ministry. Now, then, if you were to ask him what had been done for you, during that time, what could he answer? Your taxes have been increased four fold in the twenty years; the National Debt has been increased in the same proportion; the Income and Assessed Taxes have been imposed during that time; upwards of twenty thousand Foreign Troops have been introduced and established here; and, during the same time, France, whom Englishmen used to speak of with contempt, has conquered almost the whole of the continent, of every nation of which, during this series of conquests, England has been the Ally. During almost the whole of Mr. Yorke's parliamentary career; during the twenty years that you have returned him to parliament, our government has been engaged in the deliverance of Europe from the ambitious encroachments of France; and, at the close of his career (for I trust it is over) the French have subdued the whole of Europe, a little speck or two in the Southern Peninsula excepted. His length of service, therefore, will hardly be an argument in his favour. weight of taxes will be a fit subject for ridicule and scorn. Nor will this apply to those of you only who vote for him. It will apply, and with equal justice, to every man, who does not vote against him; nay, perhaps, the latter ought to be considered as the worst of the two. Gentlemen, Mr. Yorke belongs to a set of persons, who have arrogated to themselves, exclusively, the name of " the King's Friends," thereby necessarily insinuating, that the king has enemies amongst his subjects. Nothing can well be more audacious than this. It is the custom of these persons to consider it as a matter of course, that all those who oppose them, are enemies of the king. Gentlemen, you have lately, I mean within these few years, seen a great many peculators, or public robbers, detected and exposed; and, I beg you to observe, and bear it in your mind, that all of them, without a single exception, have been distinguished for their professions of loyalty, and have called themselves " king's friends," while, on the other hand, not one of those, who have, at any time, been denominated Jacobins, has ever been accused, or even suspected, of any act of public robbery. Here, therefore, is a complete answer to all Mr. Yorke's big talk about loyalty, which, it would seem, is possessed by no one, who does not, in one way or another, live upon the public. The gentleman, who is the declared opponent of Mr. Yorke, has a large fortune in your county, and has certainly every motive which a man can have for supporting the laws and constitution of England; yet, I venture to predict, that the partizans of this Sinecure Placeman will, by insinuation at least, accuse him of being a In cases of this sort, men are apt to be very forward with their tongues; but, unfortunately, there they stop. They complain of oppression: they complain of the burdens and the vexations they have to endure; each individual is, at all times, ready thus to complain; but, few, in general, are those, who are ready to exert them-Jacobin and a Leveller. selves in the way of obtaining redress. To obtain redress, or to endeavour to obtain it, is the business of the whole community; and, therefore, it is, that but too many individuals are inclined to leave the work to their neighbours, who, on their part, are full as willing to leave the work to those individuals. Thus it is, that no redress is obtained; and thus are we compelled to bear burthen upon burthen even to the weighing of us down to the earth. If, indeed, you are satisfied; if you think it right, that your money should be taken from you to support Sinecure Placemen; why, then, you will act consistently in reelecting Mr. Yorke; but, then, remember, that all your future complaints about the The real friends of the king, Gentlemen, are those who endeavour to cause truth to reach his ears, and who have set their faces against corruption and a consequent waste of the public money; and these are precisely the persons, whom men like Mr. Yorke represent as the enemies of the king. It has been thus in all the countries that Buonaparté has subdued; and, it was thus in the old government of France itself. When the people have complained of their burdens, when they have besought a redress of their griev ances, they have been answered by accusations of disloyalty, and, upon the ground. of that charge, their grievances have been augmented by the very means employed of to prevent the necessity of yielding to their just and reasonable requests. The final consequence has generally been, that, when attacked, those countries have fallen an easy prey to the enemy. We have stood astonished spectators of that series conquests. Here the conqueror was to be met; there he was to be beaten; now, and then again, his career was to be put an end to. Alas! we have always been disappointed each succeeding hope has been destroyed almost as soon as conceived; till, at last, the contest is reduced to the simple point, whether England shall be subdued or not. In this state of things, who is the really loyal subject: the man, who is, and always has been, the supporter of every species of waste and corruption; or the man, who endeavours to put an end to that waste, and to root up that corruption? Gentlemen, by those who are the most bold, or, rather, desperate, in supporting corruption, it has been broadly asserted, that all the nation is corrupt; that the people are more corrupt than those who have bought and sold seats in parliament; and that corruption begins at the bottom and is more inveterate there. Gentlemen, so false and foul a charge as this never was, in my opinion, before preferred. What! Because a man, by money, probably taken from the public purse, is able to corrupt some score or two of miserable wretches in a rotten borough, and thereby to procure his return to parliament; because, seats in parliament are obtained in this manner, are we to admit the truth of the accusation, that the whole of the people are corrupt; that corruption is as general as the air; and, that, therefore, there is no harm in corruption, or in any species of public robbery? The city of Westminster and the Borough of Southwark have proved that they, at least, merit not this accusation; and I do earnestly hope, that the county of Cambridge will follow their example, and, in so doing, set a noble example to other counties. There never was, perhaps, an occasion, when any body of electors had so fair an opportunity of distinguishing themselves as you have at this moment. The general principles of Mr. Yorke; his proved hostility to some of the dearest of our rights; his recent conduct, and his recent reward; his being compelled to appeal to the people, just enriched, as he is, with a sinecure, a thing, I believe, never before grasped at by a county member, even in the most shameless of times: all these circumstances combined have naturally excited an uncommon degree of interest as to the ensuing election, and have fixed upon, you the eyes of the whole nation: every one is waiting to know, whether the being a Cambridgeshire man shall, in future, be considered as a mark of honour or of shame. The case is so plain, that it admits not of dispute. It is not like ordinary cases, where men on both sides may claim credit for uprightness of intention. Here there can be no allowance for error of judgment. Your conduct must be right, or your in tention must be wrong. The great, and, indeed, as I should hope, the only danger, will arise from negligence. Great is the majority of those Freeholders in every county, who may, if they will, act an independent part; but, then, they are apt to be backward to act at all, which is, in a case like the present, full as dis graceful as it is to act wrong. What remorse must that man feel, who, having had it in his power to save the honour of his county, and to do so great a service to his country, shall neglect to do it, through indolence or from any insignificant motives? Each man of you should feel upon this occasson, as if the salvation of your country depended upon his single efforts. Instead of each man saying, what can I do; each one should say, the whole depends upon me; if I am not there, no one will be there; it is upon my voice that the honour of my county and the good of my country rest. And, how little, alas! is the trouble or the cost of the requisite exertions! Which of you does not spend, every month in the year, more time and more money in mere amusements: in pursuits, which when compared to the one now contemplated, are too trifling to merit a thought? In the hope that each man of you will put this question seriously to himself, and in reserving some further observations for another Letter, I remain, Gentlemen, Your friend, and obedient Servant, WM. COBBETT. London, 8th March, 1810. SUMMARY OF POLITICS. LORD CHATHAM.—In page 251 of the present Volume, the famous Narrative of " -SE Lord Chatham was inserted. On Friday It was so managed as to present us with and Monday last, a debate took place, in the view of a mere battle for power; and, the House of Commons, upon a motion of so much of the indirect object of it peeped MR. WHITBREAD, the purport of which out, that it lost much of the high character, was, a censure on Lord Chatham for hav- which of right belonged to it.The reing laid the said Narrative before the king, solutions, proposed in Mr. Whitbread's and, upon which motion the ministers original motion, were these:-"FIRST, That were left in Minority, there being for the "John Earl of Chatham, having requested motion 221 and against it 188.--Pre-permission of his Majesty to present to vious to this, there was another question "him a narrative of his proceedings, did carried against the ministers, the history on the 15th of January, privately subof which was as follows.--Lord Chat-"mit to the King a paper, bearing date ham, after his Narrative was before the "the 15th of October, purporting to be a House, was questioned upon the point," narrative of the proceedings of his Mawhether he had not laid some other paper 'jesty's land forces under his command, before the king, relative to the Expedi-" of which he withheld all knowledge from tion; but, upon this head his lordship po-" his Majesty's Ministers, and the Admiral sitively refused to give any answer. Where- commanding the naval part of the Exupon Mr. Whitbread moved an address "pedition, whose conduct he had impli to the king for the production of any such "cated in no fewer than twelve parts of paper, if any such had been laid before "his narrative, and that on the 10th of him. The ministry opposed this motion; " February it had been returned, in conbut, it was finally carried against them. sequence of a request from him to that -The answer from the king was, that "effect, and that the same was again tenhe had no other paper of the kind from "dered on the 14th of February to his Lord Chatham; but, that, on the 15th of "Majesty, having been altered, by the January, his lordship did lay before him "omission of a paragraph, containing an this same Narrative. Let us, however, as "opinion, the substance of which, from the best, and even the shortest way, in- "the examination of Lord Chatham, they sert the king's answer. "The Earl of "had not been able to ascertain."Chatham having requested his Majesty "CONDLY, That it is the opinion of this "to permit him to present his report to "House, that John, Earl of Chatham, havhis Majesty, and having also requested "ing thus acted, had been guilty of an "that his Majesty would not communicate it "unconstitutional abuse of the privilege he "for the present, his Majesty received it "enjoyed of having access to the throne, "on the 15th of January last, and kept it "which could not but tend to be highly "till the 10th of this month, when, in con- " injurions to the public service.". "sequence of a wish having been There was afterwards some modification of the words in Italics; but, that is not material.The first Resolution is merely a statement of acknowledged facts, and, of course, calls for no observation. The se cond Resolution contains the censure; and, though there can be little doubt, that the conduct of Lord Chatham was censurable, this really does not appear to me to have been the best way of proceeding. I see nothing unconstitutional in any com mander's presenting a Memorial, or a Narrative, any more than in any one's presenting a petition, to the king. Where is the law that forbids it? Where is the maxim, where is the principle, where is even the construction of law, that forbids such an act? The words constitutional and unconstitutional are extremely dangerous words; because they may be made to mean any thing that any man pleases to make them mean. They are, like JACK'S will," of Catholic utility." When our ex pressed by the Earl of Chatham, to cor"rect the same, his Majesty returned it to "him. The report, as altered, was again "tendered to his Majesty, by the Earl of "Chatham, on the 14th of this month, when his Majesty directed it to be delivered "to his Secretary of State, and his Majesty has not kept any copy or minute "of this Report, as delivered at either of "those times, nor has he had at any time "any other report, memorandum, narra"tive, or paper, submitted to him by the Earl of Chatham relating to the late ex"pedition to the Scheldt.". Upon this answer being given to the House the aforementioned debate took place; and, as was before stated, the motion of censure upon Lord Chatham was carried against the ministers, who made every effort to prevent the passing of such censure. -This debate, though it lasted two days, or, rather, nights, is by no means an interesting one. forefathers made the Revolution, and of Octover. Do you believe, reader, that it raised the present family to the throne of lay quietly until the 15th of January, withthis kingdom, they never thought it of out being shewn to any of the ministers? any great consequence whether a man Can you believe this? What was it drawn should or should not go to the king with a up for? The attacks upon Lord Chatham paper of any sort; nor can I any where were going on daily in the news-papers. find, that they made such a clamour about Is it likely, that he kept his defence in his secret advisers. This is a subject of com- pocket, 'till the 15th of January, without plaint, that I can never understand. I letting it see the light? Is it likely that do not see what mischief can arise from he, who has no parliamentary interest, what is called secret advice. And, how is would set his colleagues at defiance by it possible to prevent the king from re- going to the king with his narrative beceiving such advice? If the advice breaks fore he shewed it to them? Nay, that he out into acts, then there is a ministry, re- would request the king not to show it to them? sponsible for what is done; for, if the king Well; and supposing all this; supposing, follows other peoples', advice, all that is in that he really did thus keep the whole it, is, that the ministers ought to quit him. matter a secret from them till the moIt has always been a favourite doctrine with ment when the paper was brought before the Whigs to consider the king as a mere the House of Commons; supposing this, man of wax. According to their doctrine, do you believe, reader, that, in that case he is to have neither ears, nor eyes, nor the ministers would have defended him, tongue. Well, really, if this be so, why would have made such great exertions to perform the empty ceremony of presentsave him from censure, and would even ing Addresses and Petitions to him? have risked a division which threatened to Why complain, that the petitions of be so fatal to them? Is there in any sane the people lie unopened at the office mind credulity equal to a belief of this? of the Secretary of State!- -But, though I am convinced, that there is not a man in I do not blame Lord Chatham for pre- all England who believes it; and, indeed, senting a Narrative to the king, the man- it is almost an insult to the understanding ner of doing it I may and do blame. of the public to have said so much upon He wrote his narrative, he says, on the 15th the subject.- -Well; now let it be reof October; he presented it on the 14th of membered, that the ministry, the WaiFebruary; but, it now appears, that he did cheren ministry, the Jubilee ministry, adpresent it sooner, namely, on the 15th of vised the King, on the 20th of DecemJanuary, a week before the parliament met. ber, more than two months after the NarHe is to blame for having enjoined se- rative was written, to tell the city of Loncrecy on the king. Good God! what an don, in answer to their petition for Inidea! As if he had said, as, indeed, he quiry, that he did not intend to institute did say in effect: "Here is my narrative, any Inquiry relative to the Walcheren Sir; but don't you let any one see it for Expedition. But, more especially let "the present; that is to say, till I tell it be remembered; let it be borne in you."This really is like dropping everlasting remembrance, that this Narin to take a mutton chop with a man. rative of Lord Chatham was not amongst However, if the king liked it, the point of the papers laid before the House of ceremony was wholly between him and Commons, in pursuance of the prohis General. But, then, this narrative did mise made in the SPEECH at the opening certainly contain very broad insinuations of the session. In that Speech the paragainst SIR RICHARD STRACHAN; and that liament were told, IN THE KING'S being the case, it was an underhanded act to NAME, that he would cause to be laid present it without first apprising Sir Richard before them such papers, relative to the of its contents, or, at the very least, no Expedition, as, HE TRUSTED, would promise of secrecy should have been asked be satisfactory. Amongst the papers laid of the king-All this, however, is no- before the House of Commons, previous thing when compared with the question to the Inquiry, this Narrative of Lord Chatwhich here, arises between the ministers ham was not, though it is now confessed and the country.This narrative of that the king had it in his possession on Lord Chatham contains most important the 15th of January, that is to say, eight information respecting both the policy and days before the Speech was made to the Par the conducting of the Walcheren Expedi-liament, and that it remained in his posObserve; it was written on the 13th session until the first week in February; tion. "Bank might do for nothing the portion "of the business of the public at present 66 and, of course, it must have been in his possession, at the very moment, when a promise was made in his name, to lay before" conducted by them, on account of the parliament such papers as he trusted would be satisfactory. At the time, indeed, when the other papers were laid before the House of Commons, it is said that this paper had returned for a few days, into the possession of its author; but why was not the House told, then, of the existence of such a paper? Why were they not apprized that such a paper was coming? The case is too plain to need another word: and, yet the ministers defend this Lord Chatham at the risk of their places! Would they have done this, if they, as is now pretended, had been kept in ignorance as to the existence, or the purport of this paper?-Those who believe in Fairies would reject the belief of this.--I shall only add, upon this subject, that, from the Lists, printed in the news-papers, it appears, that SIR JOSEPH YORKE, the brother of MR. CHARLES YORKE, voted for Lord Chatham upon this occasion, or, at least, against Mr. Whitbread's motion of censure; and that LORD MAHON, the Surveyor of Green War and Keeper of the Records in Birmingham Tower, did the same. " REVERSION BILL.This bill has, from some deficiency in point of form, failed again in the Lords; and another, it seems, is to be brought into the House of Commons. MR. PETER MOORE said, upon this subject being, the other day, before the House, that this was a most unfor"tunate bill; it had had many nurses and "was yet stunted in its growth; and notwithstanding all its friends, he was "afraid it was not destined to come to ma"turity. He thought that the House ought not to abandon itself, and should "pass Address upon Address rather than give up their opinions upon this mea46 sure. -He maintained, that the best "service that could be done the Empire " was to take care of the Finances. He "adverted to the case of MR. STEELE, "who had not been made an example of "so that other defaulters were encouraged. He then mentioned the cases of "MR. VILLIERS and MR. HUNT, which had "occurred since; and stated, that of the "balance of 90,000l. due to the public, "30,000l. had been due from the year 1805, when MR. HUNT was Treasurer "of the Ordnance before. " 85 How many "families must be called upon for taxes to "make up these balances? He thought the "use of such an immense sum of public "money, by which they were enabled to "discount to the amount of from a million " and a half to two millions a week. He "then adverted to the little satisfaction "the public had received with respect to "the Loyalty Men, MR. JOHN BOWLES, "&c. &c.; and concluded by declaring his preference of the mode of Address, "as it kept the subject in their own "hands.". -This is the sort of Speech, to which MR. YORKE alluded, when he said, in answer to Sir Francis Burdett, that our greatest danger arose, not from Buonaparté (poor gentleman! as if he knew any thing about Buonaparte's views!): no, no; not from Buonaparté, "but from Speeches made in that House, "which gave a sanction to designing "persons to circulate sentiments that "made us hate one another." Yes, if Mr. Yorke had been present, you, Mr. Moore, would certainly have incurred his lofty displeasure. What would you, then, make us hate MR. STEELE, that old bosom companion of the minister who lent forty thousand pounds of the public money to Boyd and Benfield (then two members of parliament), without the sanction of parliament or the consent of his colleagues? Would you have us hate MR. VILLIERS, the Right Honourable, I believe, who, during a great part of this Jubilee reign, has been one of the most choice favourites at Court? "How many families,” indeed! What are families, when compared to Mr. Vuliers and Mr. Steele and Mr. Hunt and our old friend John Bowles? But, -These are the Speeches, which, according to Mr Yorke's notion, "make us hate me another;" make us hate such worthy people as those just mentioned. Very true, they do, in good earnest, tend to make us hate them; but, where is the harm of that, Mr. Yorke? Pray tell us, where the harm of that is. Pray tell us, why we should not hate them. above all things, thou sapient man, do tell us, how our hatred of such persons can tend to produce public danger. Do have the goodness to tell us, how it can possibly be, that our hating the Steeles and the Villiers's and the Hunts and the John Bowles's has a tendency to expose our country to danger. Or, if you are too busy to explain the mystery to the rest of us, do have the goodness to ex |