liberty-this would have been labouring to make the continent free and happy. But the conduct of these sagacious persons could not have any other effect, and it had no other effect, than to render the chains of despotism more powerful. To the revolutionists -to the Liberals-to the would-be tyrants of the continent-the conduct of the Statesmen of Cockaigne was "liberal," superlatively "liberal;" but to the PEOPLE at large, it only produced delusion, phrenzy, error, convulsion, bloodshed and devastation in the first moment, and more grinding slavery in the second. That which yielded these, ought, we humbly presume, to bear another name than "Liberality."

At the same time, when the " Liberal System" was born, the continental monarchs were occupied in endeavours to give to their subjects rational liberty; the monster came into the world, and it immediately employed them in endeavours to strengthen despotism, to save themselves from destruction. This was, perhaps, in effect, great Liberality towards the monarchs, but still it was anything but Liberality towards the people.

A few weeks since, some of the runaway" constitutionalists" of Spain returned to that unhappy country, to render it the theatre of civil war. Every one knew that the vast mass of the people detested them; that it was impossible for them to overturn the government, supported as it was by the French army; that at the best they wished to set up the old, impracticable, tyrannical constitution; that their proclamations warranted the conclusion, that they meant to establish a republic; and that they could accomplish nothing beyond leading a portion of the people to slaughter and ruin, and removing rational freedom still farther from Spain. Yet this actually threw the Statesmen of Cockaigne into paroxysms of transport, and they laboured to persuade us that the helpless vermin who were swept out of the country without a battle when they were its rulers, and had its whole resources in their hands, could now, in the character of destitute rebels, triumph over the government and the French army. The friends of the "Liberal System" were enraptured with prospect of the Spanish provinces being uselessly overspread with blood

and horrors. What prodigious Liberality!

It is notorious that the overwhelming majority of the people-the wealth, intelligence, and virtue of the continental nations, abhorred the revolutionists; yet our friends of the "Liberal System" wished to cram down the throats of this majority, by the aid of the cannon and the bayonet, the opinions and schemes of the revolutionists. What stupendous Liberality!

Upon the whole, the "Liberal System" has been prodigiously liberal to the heads of the continental revolutionists, although these persons, we suspect, have now no great cause to revere its Liberality. It has been in the upshot largely liberal to the continental sovereigns, although it has been this, no doubt, quite unintentionally; but the " Liberal System" has given cause to the PEOPLE of the continent to curse it to the last hour of their existence.

We have glanced at the consequences of the "Liberal System," as they have affected other nations; we will now glance at them as they have affected, and are affecting, our own country.

The Statesmen of Cockaigne-the friends of the"Liberal System," brought in due form a Greek loan into the market. Now, who were the real borrowers? A people barbarous, profligate, divided, practically without a government, without laws, without resources, without revenue; warring almost without hope against the whole power of Turkey, and not possessing a single item of what constitutes a security for borrowed money. And who were to be the real lenders? The credulous people of this country, who had to depend altogether on the statements of the Statesmen of Cockaigne for knowledge touching the character and condition of the borrowers. Of course, these Statesmen circulated full and honest information respecting the Greeks! They circulated a fiddlestick !-They circulated nothing but the most delusive and mischievous statements; everything that told against the Greeks was scandalously distorted, or suppressed; and everything favourable to them was as scandalously exaggerated. At any rate, these Statesmen ventured their own money, when they called upon the ignorant and credu

lous to venture theirs? Blunder upon blunder! They risk their money in Greek stock!-No, no, give them their due, they are not, after all, quite so simple. The profuse Lord Byron, it seems, only lent his money to the Greeks, and he lent it on far different security from stock bonds. The object of these worthies was to feed, to fatten, to enrich themselves by the sale of Greek stock, and not to ruin themselves by purchasing it. That this has been stupendously liberal to themselves and the Greeks, is beyond all question; but that it has been direct swindling, abominable robbery, towards the people at large, is alike unquestionable.

The Statesmen of Cockaigne have of course profusely supplied the innumerable republics of South America with loans, on the same system on which they have acted with regard to the Greeks. These republics never yet possessed anything that could constitute a fair security for borrowed money. Some of them, according to their own account, have been eight, twelve, and fourteen years independent, free from war, and in a flourishing condition; and still they keep wanting new loans. Notwithstanding all this, the friends of the " Liberal System" have continually drawn for them millions after millions, from the pockets of their dupes. These most upright men have had possession of almost all the channels of public information; and of course we have nothing but the most ravishing statements, touching the condition of the thousand and one South American republics. Countries superlatively poor have been called immensely rich-uninhabited deserts have been represented to be thickly peopled-republics, containing half a million, or a million, of inhabitants, have been sworn to be surprisingly po pulous-and people, ignorant and licentious in the last degree, disunited, having in reality scarcely any operative laws, and subject to the will of a knot of despots, have been called in telligent, virtuous, unanimous, order ly, and free. All this has been done, but naked facts and plain reasoning have been scrupulously withheld; and the country has known nearly as much of the real state of the North Pole, as of the real state of South America. In consequence, numbers of fan have been already ruined by VOL. XVI.

their money in these outlandish loans ; numbers more have been greatly im poverished, and the ruin of additional numbers is rapidly approaching. Beau tiful liberality this, truly, in one set of Englishmen towards another.

We are not in the words of the Anti-jacobin,—

"A steady patriot of the world alone, The friend of every country-but his own." We love our own country better than all others-we love the honest spirit that rivets its affections to its native soil and its legitimate kinsmen-we love the feeling of nationality, for it is alike honourable to the individual, and beneficial to the state; and we regard those with scorn whose axe is continually laid at the root of this feeling. What then are we to think of those Englishmen who mingle contempt of their own country with their adoration of foreign ones, and who delude, cozen, rob, and ruin their countrymen, for the benefit of the people of Greece, South America, and Spain ?-Shame upon them! Shame upon them!

The friends of the "Liberal System" have been long slandering Mr Canning and his colleagues for not acknowledging the independence of the South American republics. Now what are the real facts of the matter? Would such acknowledgment increase our trade? Scarcely to the extent of a single cargo. Its advocates admit that the direct benefits would be almost wholly engrossed by the republics. Would it then, on the other hand, involve us in difficulties and dangers? Most assuredly. Spain has still military possession of a part of South America; she rejects the fanciful divisions that have been made, and claims the whole; the other continental powers wish her to regain the whole, and they are hostile to our interference. Were we to concede the recognition, we must, to render it effective to discharge the honest duty which it would impose upon us towards the republics-treat Spain as an enemy, if she attempted to subjugate them; and this could scarcely fail of involving us in war with the whole continent. We have protested against the interference of others, and others will not suffer us to be the sole interferers, and to monopolize all the good things, without a contest. Of course, by withholding the recognition, we risk by granting it, we should "erything. This is not

3 M

all. We are rich, beyond all other nations, in colonial possessions; and there are several nations in the world that would rejoice to see these independent. Let us only get up a game of colony-robbery, and others will speedily play it as expertly as ourselves, to our own cost. Let us be the nation to divide the last ligament between Spain and her colonies, and it will not be long before the sword shall be applied to the bonds that unite us to our own. If any country in the world have an interest in discountenancing colonial revolt in every possible way, it is Great Britain.

All this, to our friends of the "Liberal System," is nothing. These sages have been for years preaching up colonial revolt as one of the best and the most necessary things in nature. They have regularly applied every possible stimulant, and furnished every possible assistance, to the colonies of Spain; and they have justified the insurrection of these in every variety of language. What was it to them if they threw away half the empire, provided they huddled together a few gimcrack republics, and obtained a little additional trade in South America!-How all this has sounded in Canada, India, &c. and how it will operate on other states in the way of precedent, instruction, and example, it is not for us to say; but if it do not largely contribute in the end to render us as destitute of colonies as Spain, we shall be the most fortunate people that ever existed.'

That this is splendid liberality towards others, will be admitted by every one; but that it is liberality towards ourselves, will be denied by all. Let us not be mistaken. If we can honestly and honourably, in a manner becoming a great and high-minded nation, recognize the South American republics, and increase our trade with them, let us; we will be among the first to advocate it. But if not-if to do this we must resort to chicanery, quarrel with the whole continent, and furnish other states with a pretext for fomenting rebellion in our own colonies, then let these republics be sunk in the ocean, rather than take from us another cargo. We are rich and glorious above all other nations, and we should be so still if South America were not in existence. What we protest against is, the introduction of the Liberal's romance, and the petty trades

man's cunning and rascality, into our councils. It is not for us to go sneaking round the world to preach up Liberalism and foment colonial insurrection, that we may deprive other states of their dependencies, and obtain their trade-every conceivable principle forbids it. The revolt that begins in the colonies of one nation, can scarcely fail, sooner or later, of finding its way to those of another; and therefore it is our interest to regard such revolt, wherever it may take place, as a dangerous enemy. The independence of the colonies of other states must, to a certain point, pave the way to the independence of our own; and for these we may tremble when other countries shall lose the last of such possessions. Our transmarine territories are of immense extent-they are scattered about in almost all parts of the globe-many of them are not very capable of effeetive defence-they are accessible to the emissaries of other states-several of these states would make gigantic sacrifices to give them independence; and therefore we ought not, by word, deed, or look, to feed colonial revolt, and give the pretext to rival nations, so ardently desired for enabling them to make India, &c. what South America now is. It is astonishing that the cant which we have been so long vociferating respecting the liberty of the continental nations, Greece, South America, &c. has not been echoed by our own dependencies; and that, instead of having leisure for stirring up universal rebellion, and cursing the allies for warring against Liberalism, we have not been fully employed in cutting the throats of the Indians, Canadians, &c. for labouring to give themselves liberty and independ

ence.

In the midst of all this bluster respecting trade, let it not be forgotten that trade, like gold, may be bought too dear; and that it is an easy matter to lose two old customers in endea vours to obtain one new one. We have reached those glorious circumstances in which what we have to do is, not to obtain, but to PRESERVE. There is but one path open for us for the pursuit of trade, and this is the path of integrity and honour. If we cannot preserve our commercial prosperity by acting towards others as we wish them to act towards us, it must depart from us; nothing else can save it. If we

get up a race of plot, intrigue, overreaching, and roguery, we may depend upon it that whoever may win, we shall be the losers.

On the score of national interest, in more ways than one, it has, we believe, always hitherto been thought wise in this country to make a friend of Turkey, and to keep her as powerful as possible. The reasons for our doing this are now more weighty than they ever were. Yet we are now taught to hate Turkey, and to assist in her dismemberment. Turkey is to fall-is to be cut up into an infinity of savage, impotent republics; and this is to fill England with transport! Our governinent in chief is neutral between the Turks and the Greeks ;-the Statesmen of Cockaigne, our sub-governmert, send men, arms, and money, to the latter, and make war upon Turkey! National interest!--What is national interest when weighed against liberalism, resuscitated jacobinism,-revolutionism? What is national interest when it clashes with the views of such persons as Hobhouse, Hume, Byron, and their great, though nameless, colleagues? What is national interest when a rebellion can be got up, a revolution can be accomplished, a republic can be created, and a knot of unprincipled idiotic profligates can be made rulers? Let Turkey be trod in the dust-let us lose every European friend-let our allies be annihilatedlet our checks upon foreign powers, and the bulwarks of our most valuable possessions be destroyed-let our national interests be cast to the windsonly let jacobinism flourish, republics abound, and liberals become the despots of mankind. Beautiful romance! -Lovely Liberality !-What a pity that it should be fraught with national ruin !

We have been taught to detest the continental monarchs, and we have profited so well by the instruction, that scarcely any party can speak of them except in terms of execration. For a ministerial paper to speak respectfully of these monarchs, would be little better than treason. Well, what have these poor monarchs done? Per haps they sent money, arms, and men, to our Radicals in the days of radical inadness; or they supported the Queen when she brought the constitution to the brink of ruin-or they have robbed us of our colonies or they have

injured our trade-or they have made war upon us, or they have picked a quarrel with us without cause-or they have interfered in some other mischievous way in our affairs? Oh, no, they have done none of these things. Then, in the name of common sense, what have they done? Done! Read the Edinburgh Reviews, and Morning Chronicles, for a list of their enormities! They have done as they pleased in their own affairs-they have done what we always do in similar circumstances-they have refused to be discrowned-they have rejected constitutions which the whole world knew to be absurd and ruinous-they have made war upon jacobinism, upon infidelity, and democracy-they have refused to establish liberty at a time when it was impossible to establish it -they have scorned our dictation, and refused to rush into destruction at our bidding. And, oh, horrible! they have crushed their Benthamites and Byronites, knocked up Liberalism, and restored tranquillity to the whole continent! Is this all?--All! What more can be necessary to sanction us in detesting them?

But perhaps these monarchs have laboured to put down rational and genuine liberty?—they established a constitution in France greatly resembling our own. Have they endeavoured to destroy it? No; they have fought for its preservation. When they dethroned the tyrannical Cortes of Spain, did they wish to re-establish the old despotism? No; their influence was exerted to procure for Spain a constitution like that of France. An attempt was recently made in Portugal to restore the old despotism in all its force. Did they second it? No; they opposed it, and supported the king in his wishes to give to Portugal a rational constitution. Well, after all, it seems that these monarchs are friendly to such constitutions as our own, and to constitutional liberty like that of England? Yes; but they hate jacobin constitutions, and jacobin liberty. And do we not hate these too, in regard to their establishment in our own country? It cannot be denied.

But perhaps these monarchs abuse their power; perhaps their subjects are in the most deplorable situation? The Edinburgh Review asserts that, putting out of sight political liberty, they are exerting themselves to the

utinost for the benefit of their sub jects; and the Morning Chronicle, that "burning and shining light" of the Statesmen of Cockaigne, declares that our lower orders, that is, the vast mass of our population, are, with regard to law and actual well-being, in a much worse condition than those of the continental nations. In truth, the ravishing descriptions which this astonishing paper puts forth touching the state of the people who are governed by the monarchs, are almost sufficient to make us scorn our constitution, and sigh for a despotism.

Notwithstanding all this, perhaps we have suffered grievously by what these monarchs have done-perhaps the triumph of the revolutionists would have been of prodigious benefit to us as a nation? Alas! even here our animosity towards the monarchs can find no resting-place. We have gained very nearly as much from what they have done, as they themselves have gained. We owe to them a very large portion of our present tranquil lity; they fought for us even when we were against them; and when they smote Liberalism in their own territories, they gave the death-wound to languishing faction and rebellion here.

If the revolutionists had been successful in some countries, and had continued their struggles in others, we should unquestionably have been still convulsed, by the endeavours of powerful factions, to plunge us into revolution. Almost the first things that the revolutionists of Spain and Portugal thought of after they obtain ed power, were to abuse us and our constitution, to administer pity and encouragement to our Radicals, and to make severe enactments against our trade. The revolutionists of France hated us. If any of the more power ful nations of Europe had been revolutionized, we could scarcely have avoided a war with them; and their moral influence alone would have been nearly sufficient to give a triumph to our own revolutionists. In addition to this, the din which, conjointly with our friends of the "Liberal System," they would have kept up in favour of revolutionary doctrines, could hardly have failed to kindle rebellion in some one or other of our transmarine possessions. The enemies who were annihilated by the Holy Alliance, were the enemies of the constitution of Eng

land, of the trade of England, of the general interests of England, and of the people of England.

Nevertheless these monarchs possess absolute power-they are despots -and therefore we must abuse them. No doubt we can do this justifiablyno doubt we can bring clean hands to the matter-no doubt, as we execrate despotism so furiously, we are not despots ourselves-no doubt the British sceptre is not waved over a single bondsman. Alas!-alas! WE-we who are eternally blackening the allied monarchs, because they will not surrender absolute power at the cost of almost certain destruction, are ourselves the despots over millions upon millions, to whom we might give freedom at the price of only a part of what we possess! We, the blustering, swaggering devotees of liberty, rule over nations by a despotism more searching and comprehensive than any of the continental ones! Do we then say that we ought to give constitutions to the nations of the East? No! we would advise no such absurdity-we would prepare no such scourges for them, or injuries for our own country; but we will say that, with regard to the abstract question, they have as much right to liberty as the nations of the continent; and that we have a much worse title to be the despots of Asia, than the continental monarchs have to be the despots of Europe. Shame would strike us dumb, were we, like our Broughams, Hutchinsons, and Littletons, our liberal Whigs and trimming Tories-with our Eastern possessions before us, to attempt to say to the Emperor of Russia, or the Emperor of Austria,―Thou art a despot.

Here the " Liberal System" blazes out in all its prodigious varieties of shape and colour-here, with one hand, it darts its thunders upon our devoted land, and, with the other, it holds it up to the world's mockery; and yet it is at last, with regard to despotism, here miserly to others, and liberal to England. Its liberality, however, is but that of the pickpocket who tucks up his colleague to the gallows for theft, and yet continues his vocation.

Perhaps this matter with regard to despotism may be explained by the magic of geography-perhaps that which is slavery in Europe, is freedom in Asia? Alas, no!-Perhaps we have