et considerations; and they attempt to justify a similar policy of their own, which, when they had effected, rendered them the scorn of Europe, and the disgrace of their country.

There was another very serious objection raised against the late dissolution, in the course of the debate, and of which the opposition candidates made a very improper use during the elections.I mean the assertion, that parliament was dissolved for the purpose of suppressing most serious, deliberate, and important inquiries. This insinuation, artfully and wickedly thrown out, to answer clection purposes, and to court popularity, has been since falsified by the revival of that committee of inquiry. That this committee may render essential service to their country, I shall be the last man to deny; but it is to be hoped, that in all their inquiries they will keep in view, that the detection of frauds and public peculators will produce no good to the state, unless vigorous restrictive measures be adopted to keep the hands of evil-disposed persons, in future, from picking and stealing.It is to be hoped that they will not tread in the steps of the late ministers, who threw out a tub to the whale; who had economy perpetually on their lips, and wasteful expenditure in their hearts; who, while they pretended to encourage the exposure of public malversations, for the self-evident purpose of deluding the people with a shew of public virtue, actually screened a delinquent, Mr. Alexander Davison, and retained him in an high official situation, until they were driven from power themselves. I-entertain so favourable an opinion of the present ministers as to feel assured that their practice will be agreeable to their preaching; and that though a revision of past abuses and corruptions be expedient, yet that they will look before them also, meet our public distempers with a manly firmness, and strive to correct them with judgment and integrity. By so doing, popularity need not be sued; it will follow them in their career. Dr. Davenant, who wrote above an hundred years ago, has laid down the mode of conduct which I have recommended above, with so much truth, justice, and patriotism, that I cannot forbear from making an extract out of his chapter, entitled" That mismanagement is as well redressed by looking into things, as by accusing persons,”

"Private men," says he, "in the attacks made upon them, would scarce be able to raise factions, and to interest a nation in their quarrel, if they who set themselves to correct abuses in the state, would show a disposition to mend things rather than to meddle with persons; and the attempt is stronger, and surer to take effect the one than the other way. For though persons have been sometimes brought in aid in things, by the greatness of their names, power, and interest, to obstruct inquiries, and though they have been held up as shields for inferior criminals to fight under, yet the assembly must be very corrupt where this succeeds; it is an artifice that can hardly be made use of more than once; and they who let their party thus set them in the fore-front of the battle, instead of protecting others, find it difficult to save themselves. Besides, this craft is easily defeated by over-looking the person, and steadily pursuing to correct the fault, which is always the safest course: for men grow ashamed of defending what is in itself a real crime, nor can it have perpetual advocates; but friendship, acquaintance, kindred, holding the same opinion, with several other reasons and excuses, are pretended for >making a vigorous stand to bring offenders off, when persons are aimed at and in danger; and often such a stand is made, that misgovernment, instead of being checked, comes to receive a sanction. However, when you strike not so much at things as persons, though you happen to prevail, the contest begets such rancour as keeps the state for a long time after divided and in dissention. This way of re forming a state disturbs the public peace, and the events of it are uncertain; for many great men thus questioned, have, by the strength of their friends and adherents, escaped popular anger, which instead of shaking has confirmed their power; but the instances are very rare of ministers that have been able to support themselves for any time, whose actions (without naming them) have received a thorough condemnation. Perhaps nothing can more contribute to restore peace and order in a gover...nent, than to overlook the persons of men, either in contempt or in compassion, and to fall to work in earnest upon mending things. A man may without imputation of blame profess a friendship, and adhere to this or that great

man, pretending to believe him innocent when accused, and consequently join with those who sort together in his defence. But can any party be formed, and can any be so insolent to go along with them who shall openly declare for such crimes, and for such and such corruption and mismanagement? Nor, indeed, can any thing more disappoint the ambitious and wicked designs of corrupt men, than to take away their pretences and false colours, and to leave them without excuse; which you do, when, without expressing anger or prejudice to the persons of men, you make it manifest, that your only aim is to put it out of their power, or out of the power of such as will tread in their steps hereafter, to bring any further mischiefs' upon the commonwealth. And, when these measures are taken, it is difficult, if not impossible, to form or keep up parties that shall combine to protect and countenance the vices of the age: for it being the interest of much the major part to be well governed, where the people plainly see all affairs carried on calmly, and without piques, and personal enmities, they let faction drop, and the good join to suppress the bad, which union produces what may be called right and perfect government."

But to return. We have now seen the injustice of the insinuations cast upon the present ministry by their opponents, for a purpose too evident to be mistaken; and the cruel and ungenerous attack upon lord Melville is a branch of that factious spirit which has broken out with such unwarrantable virulence in our times. It is. reported in the newspapers that lord Milton commenced his parliamentary apprenticeship for the county of York, with declaring, that "he could not help adverting to that part of his majesty's speech which recommended the renewal of the economical inquiries of the late parliament. With what confidence could the nation look for the execution of this pledge to a ministry whose first act was to recal to the councils of his majesty, the man who was declared by a resolution of that house to be a violator of the law, and a betrayer of the public trust reposed in him. It was true that individual was afterwards acquitted; but this was not an acquittal from the resolution, but from the impeachment that followed; and it was an acquittal not very glorious in its nature or circumstances."—It is with unfeigned regret that I observe a spirit of persecution (if this report be true) displayed at so early a period of life; and though his lordship may glory in serving an apprenticeship in parliament to the commercial interests of the county of York, this declaration proves that he has not served an apprenticeship to the laws of his country.Will his lordship pretend, that when a grand jury finds a true bill against an individual upon ex parte evidence, and that individual is in consequence consigned to a trial before a jury of his country, and is afterwards fully acquitted, that the previous finding of the bill is to be considered as a lasting evidence of his guilt? If 50, there can be no distinction between impeachment and trial, and a bare impeachment of any individual by the house of commons should supersede the necessity of any trial; the house would thus become accusers and judges. No trial was ever conducted with greater impartiality and deliberation than that of lord Melville; and the acquittal ought to have led immediately to the rescinding of the resolutions of the house, if a due respect had been paid to the principles of our jurisprudence, and to the universal rules of equity.

The law of England declares that a man who has been tried for any offence from the guilt of which he has been subsequently acquitted, is deemed innocent in. the contemplation of justice; and the doctrine is so well established, that a person is liable to an action for accusing any one so acquitted of the crime of which he was acquitted. It would be a perversion of all the maxims of equity, it would level to the ground our justly boasted system of jurisprudence, if it were to be entertained or a moment, that imputation of guilt, and guilt itself are synonimous terms. We should thus open the door for the establishment of a Turkish jurisprudence in a land of liberty and equal laws. I repeat again, that the resolutions of the house of commons ought, in justice to lord Melville, from respect to the high tribunal by which he was acquitted, and out of regard to their own honour, to have been rescinded on the very day of his acquittal. In fact, they were abrogated by the verdict of the peers of the realm, though, as a matter of form in an assemble which is extremely tenacious, and justly so, of forms, it would have been more ce

sistent with the dignity of the house to have expunged those resolutions from its journals. If it were not below the dignity of the subject, I might here retort lord Milton's declaration upon his party, and ask, with what confidence could the nation look for the execution of the pledge of economical inquiries to a ministry, who, after one of their agents had acknowledged himself guilty of cheating the public, actually retained him in his official situation in defiance of a resolution of the house of commons? Let this question be answered, before his lordship or any other person pretends to arraign the conduct of ministers, for recalling to his majesty's councils an injured, persecuted, and innocent, nobleman.

To conclude this part of my subject. The result of the appeal to the sense of the people was strikingly demonstrated in the proud majority which the ministers obtained upon the trial of strength with their opponents; for in the house of lords, the numbers in their favour were, 160 to 67, leaving them a majority of 93; and in the house of commons they had 350 to 155, or a majority of 195. By referring to the two divisions, on the motions of Mr. Brand and Mr. Lyttleton, it will be found, that on the first, the late ministers obtained 226 votes in their favour, and on the second 198. This disproportion of votes in their favour at the close of the late, and at the commencement of the present parliament, shews, that the voice of the people is against them. Nevertheless, before the meeting of parliament, they felt confident in their strength, and the Morning Chronicle of June 22 was so certain of their victory, that it inserted a list of the members returned to parliament who had voted against the present administration, and triumphantly predicted, with its worted accuracy, that the defeat of ministers was certain. We leave our readers," says that paper," to form their own opinion, when they have perused the following lists, as to what is the strength of the opposition, and what has been the result of the appeal to the people. We do not presume to anticipate the manner in which any of the gentlemen whose names we have mentioned will vote; but we may be allowed to express our confident hope and belief, that Mr. Secretary Canning's daring experiment has failed, and that, in the present, as in the former house of commons, there are to be found talents, character, and numbers, incompatible with the existence of a juggling and weak administration." On the 29th of June, however, the Chronicle altered its tone, and in a style of coarse and surly invective, abused the ministers for the triumph of which they boasted. There is no necessity to insert the article here, because the one I have recorded above, compared with the votes in both houses of parliament, will suffice to expose the impositions to which all the talents resort in support of their declining cause. The conduct of lord Sidmouth, and of those who are more immediately connected with him in both houses of parliament, proves, that neither his lordship, nor his friends, have given any countenance to the association of the "great proprietory interest,"who have confederated to throw every obstacle in the way of government. His lordship vindicated the exertion of the royal prerogative in dissolving the late parliament, and honourably declared, that the ministers should be judged by their acts only, and that if they acted, for the best interests of their country, they ought to be supported. What a contrast does such conduct exhibit between his lordship and his former colleagues! He has promulgated an admonition which every independent man in the empire should adopt.

THE OUPE QUESTION.-At length there is a prospect that this long pending. inquiry will be brought to a final determination. Lord Folkstone, on Monday last, moved that the papers relative to the affairs of Oude should be re-printed; but in consequence of a suggestion from sir J. Anstruther, that these papers had been already three times printed, and that there were sufficient numbers of them in the vote office to supply the new members, his lordship withdrew his motion, and promised, that after he had consulted the opinions of other persons, he would fix a day. for the discussion. That day I do not hesitate to predict will be a day of triumph to lord Wellesley, and of confusion to his persecutors. I am thoroughly prepared to meet any one upon the subject, hand to hand and foot to foot; and I should have resumed the discussion in this number, if the necessity I find myself under of keeping pace with the proceedings in parliament, and of avoiding the inconvenience which resulted in my last volume from deferring my remarks upon them, had not, compelled me to postpone it.

REVIVAL OF PRIVATE BILLS.-It is indisputable that the dissolution of the late parliament occasioned great inconvenience to individuals, which required a legislative provision. As I have shewn in a former part of this article, that this inconvenience, however great, was the duty of every loyal subject to bear with, in consideration of the more momentous national questions which were obtruded upon parliament and the country, I need not enlarge upon this topic. But if it were the duty of individuals to submit to a case of such indispensable necessity, it was also, the duty of parliament to afford an adequate remedy to the inconvenience arising from it. With this view, the chancellor of the exchequer proposed on the 29th ult. that private bills and petitions should be referred to a committee; and if they should be reported to be precisely similar to those presented in the last session, that the house should proceed upon them without further attendance of witnesses. Its motive was to obviate delay and expense. With respect of the delay, it was of little consequence whether bills were passed in May or July; and, in point of expense, the officers of the house would relinquish their fees for any fresh proceedings, as they had before done in 1784. The principle and obvious necessity of the measure seemed to be generally approved; and after a few kicks of course, for form sake, from lord Howick and the opposition, the motion was adopted. Thus all the des plorable consequences to private individuals, which the fertile imaginations of the opposition had conjured into existence, have been effectually prevented. In the house of lords, lord Eldon's motion to the same effect met with no opposition, and even lord Grenville acquiesced in the mode proposed.

It was com

COMMITTEE OF FINANCE. The peculators, as the present ministers are insolently called, have not been backward in giving every encouragement to inquiries into public abuses and dilapidations; and though they were faisely represented, during the elections, as a body of men resolved to stifle every species of investigation, it now appears that the first public act which they have proposed in parliament, is, the revival of that committee of finance, the advantages of which are universally acknowledged. The pursuits and objects of the committee will now be prosecuted with as much vigour as if there had been no dissolution of parliament, although it will not be composed altogether of the same inembers as the former committee, and for very substantial reasons. In the first place, the chancellor of the exchequer when proposing the list of names, omitted those of sir H. Mildmay and Mr. Sturges Bourne, the former because he had been implicated in the 4th military report, and had requested from a sense of delicacy that he might not be proposed; and the latter, (who has been most grossly and vilely traduced in the Morning Chronicle and other opposition papers,) because he is now in office. The former committee had been appointed in a manner so contrary to parliamentary usage, that it would have been the height of folly to have re-appointed the same persons. posed of the adherents of the late ministers, with the exception of two persons only who were friendly to the present administration, and of three others who were not biassed by either party. A committee so appointed, could not be expected to be impartial and to fulfil the expectations of the public, besides that, five of its members are no longer in the house. The mode pursued by the chancellor of the exchequer was therefore the best suited to the purpose, and the best calculated to give satisfaction to the public. Independently of these considerations, there are many acts of the late administration which will become subjects of inquiry, and will lead, as I mentioned in my last number, to their immediate impeachment for HIGH CRIMES, AND MISDEMEANORS. It would not therefore be proper that a knot of their partizans should influence, by a majority, the decisions of the committee. Some of the misdemeanours of the ex-ministers were adverted to by the chancellor of the exchequer with great candour and liberality; nor did he forget to enumerate amongst their other abuses of office, their appointments to places in reversion, not withstanding their expressed aversion from such grants; particularly of the appointment of a collector and surveyor of customs in the port of Buenos Ayres, when that place was not in our possession, and the nomination of three hundred surveyors of taxes just before the dissolution of parliament in October last, for purposes which may be easily conceived. In addition to these, the chancellor of the exchequer mentioned a variety of other instances in which patent places, sinecures,

and pensions, had been granted by the immaculate and virtuous Talents; and passing all, the grant of 4001. a year during pleasure to a Scotch judge. For these substantial reasons, it was not judged fit or decent, when the delinquencies of the Late administration were about to be brought to light, that their adherents should form a majority of the committee appointed to inquire into what checks may be ne cessary for reducing the public expenditure, and for diminishing the amount of salaries, &c. The committee is fixed at 25 persons, and consists of Messrs. Bankes, Biddulph, Shaw, Grattan, Addington, Cavendish, H. Thornton, Ryder, Calvert, H. Combe, Baring, lord H. Petty, and lord Archibald Hamilton, all of whom were members of the former committee. Those who have been appointed, and were not of the former committee are, Messrs. Hawkins Browne, Jodderel, Wharton, Sumner, Wigram, L. Foster, Poole Carew, Mills, Rutherford, Ellison, Brogden, and T. Baring names of known respectability, and offering a sure guaranty for the bonest and faithful discharge of the confidence reposed in them. The name of sir Francis Burdett was proposed, but it was negatived without a dívision, most probably from his well known ignorance and imbecility.

THE CARNATIC AND POLYGAR QUESTIONS.-Since the above article was sent to the press, I find that sir T. Turton has given notice, that he shall move for the production of certain papers relative to the Polygars, and that he is quite prepared to enter upon the discussion of the Carnatic question. So am I. But, if he Be su duly prepared, why does he defer the discussion? What has an act of complaisance towards lord Folkstone to do with an act of public justice? Is no allow ance to be made for the feelings of the illustrious nobleman who has been for so long a period the victim of persecution? Or can there be any reasonable motive to pal liate deferred justice? Every paper which lord Wellesley's enemics have required has been granted to them without hesitation; his friends and admirers have incessantly defied his accusers, and even supplicated a definitive judgment. Yet these facts have made no impression, and session after session is suffered to pass over without a prospect of the termination of these inquiries. I begin to suspect that the accusers of lord Wellesley repent of their benevolent designs; that they find that they have been the dupes of bad men, actuated by nefarious motives; and that they have discovered that the conduct of the noble lord has been, in every instance, in Auenced by an ardent zeal for the prosperity and glory of his country. It is impose sible otherwise to account for these periodical shufflings, equivocations, and procrastinations,

4

THE EXPEDITION OF SIR FRANCIS BURDETT FROM PICCADILLY, TO THE CROWN AND ANCHOR TAVERN, IN THE STRAND. The celebration of the return of the baronet for Westminster, which had long been announced to the public, and which the peaceable inhabitants dreaded as a great nuisance, took place on Monday last. Many rumours had been circulated that the children of liberty meditated a general attack, at the same time, upon three different offices in the Strand, to wit, the Morning Post office, the Courier office, and the office for the publication of my review. I had received several letters, threatening me with the exercise of their savage vengeance 46 on the day of glory," which, of course, brought me up to London from the sea-coast, whither! had repaired for the restoration of my health. I came to town, thoroughly re solved to convince the assailants that I knew how to defend a position full as well as they knew how to attack it. But I am happy to state, both for their sakes and my own sake, that, with the exception of a few hearty hisses which I received in the evening, no demonstration of actual hostility was manifested by them. The Morning Post and the Courier offices also, which had been equally menaced, were suffered to remain untouched. Although I could not participate in the triumph of the citizens of Westminster upon this occasion, I will not refuse to do justice to the good conduct which they displayed both during the march of the expedition,