THOMAS.

REPLY to the FIVE Letters of CATO, on "The Constitutional Association," its Objects and Management.

AMONG the reasons, why this publication was originated, the nature and objects of the Constitutional Association were in the first Number fully commented upon, and objections raised to its expediency.

Those reasons had been publicly announced, before the letters of CATO on this particular subject had made their appearance; and from those reasons not only do we see no grounds for departing, but, on the contrary, we are more than ever confirmed in their propriety. We may be mistaken, but the error will be that of the head, not of the heart; for if there be one point which we wish to be more faithfully remembered, and more accurately understood than another; it is this: "that we admit, fully admit, the objects and motives of the Associa tion to be laudable, excellent, praiseworthy;" but, we deny its expediency, and are apprehensive of its complete failure, unless it materially alters its mode of procedure;" and "the failure of such an institution will be a day of triumph to its opponents, which we still hope never

to witness."

We will not too acutely probe the question-whether CATO be or be not an independent country gentleman, drinking the waters of Scarborough, and voluntarily engaging in the defence of this Association; or whether the incognito preserved between himself and the Society, but confided in the Editor of the New Times, be the ruse de guerre of a hired writer? We could have wished, on so noble an occasion for the display of Cato's talent, that he had thrown off all disguise, and have manfully avowed himself, fairly, openly, and boldly, as the conscientious literary champion of the Constitutional Association. And, rather than make "a semblance of disinterested support," we could have wished also, that the Association had candidly announced, that "the New Times" was the paper of its adoption. These little petitesses (if we may coin a word for the occasion) are unfitting, and unbecoming a cause, the cowardice of whose champions has been its rival's strength. We rather ask Cato, how happens it, that an Association, so patronized, and so supported, requires five long and argumentative letters, in order to shew it up? How is it, that an Association,

L

which has not been attacked by any one man of talent (not being a decided partizan) should put itself voluntarily in an attitude of defence? Why is it, that an opposition to its existence, and to its conduct, is supposed to exist, merely to give occasion to a visionary combat?

The Association, if in itself possessing all the good qualities attributed to it, would require no lay. man's chaunt-its fruit would prove the tree. But the fact is, that the Association, in a sanguine moment occasioned by an overflowing treasury, fancied that the strong arm of the law would do more for its purposes, than the slower progress of literary argument; but as it proceeded, it has found the ground sink from under it, and from some cause or other, all its efforts in courts of justice have been unsuccessful, thwarted, or incomplete. Instead of laying the axe manfully to the root of the tree, it has been pulling at a few rotten branches, and even those, it has not yet severed from the trunk.

We do not hesitate to say, that the failure of the Association will leave a chasm in the political world, which must not be left to be filled up by its opponents; into the trenches from which it may retire, other more judicious combatants must leap, or Cato's troops will be pursued and annihilated.

In the first letter, Cato complains, that to all the efforts and all the arguments of the Association, the reply is abuse, nothing but abuse; and yet at the opening of his argument, he condescends to apply to his antagonists such language as the following:

"The pointless invectives of Mr. Brougham-the hackneyed misrepresentations of The Chronicle and The Times-the legal idiotism of that wise man from the east,'

Mr. Ex Sheriff Parkins-and the savage yells und imprecations of the indicted libellers them

selves."

Cato should have come into court

with clean hands.

As we fully admit the excellent

motives of the Association, we need not enlarge upon the reasons which have been adduced for its institution; but there are points, on which we find it necessary to apply some few observations.

First, Had its Committee fully and maturely weighed the momentous duty it was about to undertake? Had they deeply considered not the mere letter of the Constitution, but its spirit? Had they placed in the balance, and accurately ascertained the different weight of public influence, which would be produced by an ephemeral Society, in opposition to an already established constitutional officer? Were they prepared to say, WE CAN, at all hazards, under all circumstances, and independently of any and every existing administration, perform the duties of the Attorney-General? Nothing short of this could or ought to be expected from a new institution, avowedly designed to supersede an old and efficient constitutional office, against which the only charge of accusation was-a leaning to conciliatory measures. There are some important questions also to be asked respecting the persons engaged in the trade of blasphemy and sedition. Cato names Hone, Wooler, H. Hunt, Carlile, Cobbett, Benbow, Dolby, Sherwin, and obliquely points at the old Times, the News, and Examiner.

Did the Committee enquire whether any men of talent and influence were engaged in this nefarious trade? Had they made themselves acquainted with the characters and personal circumstances of the above-named parties? Were they prepared with a correct statement of the extent to which their publications were car ried?

Because, by applying a more powerful remedy to the evil than it requires, such evil becomes to be appreciated, not by its true scale, but in proportion to the preparation made against it. And it is one among many others of the strata

gems of the seditious press, to cry up, by every art, and with great assiduity, its extent and importance. We are of opinion, that its evils have been greatly over-rated, and disproportionately exaggerated. Not that we would for one moment advise the least relaxation in the active revision of its productions, but, at the same time, we would wish to restore that courage which can look them in the face, count their numbers, attack, and defeat them, without expending useless powder on a visionary multitude.

Let us now spare a few moments in going over this terrible catalogue of seditious publishers. First and foremost stands HONE. He has been the object (as we understand) of several attempts in the shape of indictment, but the Association has failed. Yet the Quarterly Review, in a masterly article, (on a publication by this man, in conjunction with Sir Richard Philips, of the Apocryphal New Testament,) has laid him completely on his back. Besides, the man himself says, that prosecutions have put money into his pocket; and that feeling now the comfort of an approach to independence, he will keep what he has got, and live respectably, and retire to Pater

noster-row.

WOOLER publishes the Black Dwarf and a Sunday paper, and is himself in jail. The Black Dwarf is ugly enough, but not ugly enough to frighten a courageously loyal man out of his senses. It is written in humble imitation of a very old publication, called the Turkish Spy. It is metaphorically seditious, and by inuendo may be, by sharp and witty men, turned to political purposes; but its circulation is very limited indeed, and is confined to the very lowest class of pot-house politicians, against whom one may as well attempt an argument, as to wield the thunder of the skies. These pothouse politicians wrangle among themselves by way of amusement, as others go to the theatre.

H. HUNT is in prison. He is the most determined man of the whole bunch-a polished Jack Cade-but he is a man who, among all his errors, possesses the merit (if it can be called so) of undisguised boldness. Against his designs Govern. ment can always be on the alert; and it must be a wishy-washy sort of Executive, that could not manage a hundred such fellows. Whitefaced Wn is ten times more dangerous; he can plot. Hunt is too hasty and impetuous.

CARLILE, his wife and sister, are in Dorchester jail, and appear to give the Association more trouble than all the rest of its customers. But how comes it, that the Association for the Prosecution of Vice, and the Attorney-General also, have succeeded in their indictments against these people? The reason is this: because even loyal men, and the most loyal too, require; not merely that guilt shall be proved and punished, but that the mode of proof, and consequence of punishment, shall not be brought about by any other than the usual and regular application of the law: and the impression upon the public mind, as to the Constitutional Association, is, that it is extra officious." The Society may again press against the sister of Carlile a second trial, upon the principle that the first proceeding was not brought to an issue; but in criminal cases, no man is tried twice for the same offence; and though he be discharged, more in the manner of an escape from sentence, than of acquittal from guilt, yet the law leans always to the side of the delinquent. The sword CURTANA (or of mercy) with its blunt point, is as well borne before the King, as the two-edged one of Justice. It is, however, perfectly consistent with our principles, that we should decidedly declare our opinion of this woman's guilt; but we would not have even that guilt reached by an over exertion of legal eagerness, because the spirit