connect the paragraph called in question, did not by any means shew that it was the wish of the writer of it to disparage his Majesty. It acknowledged, what we all knew, the virtues of his Majesty, and breathed throughout sentiments of loyalty. It was to be observed, however, that the paragraph forming the subject of the

nature, concerning the King and the administration of the affairs of the country, applying personally to his Majesty. The paragraph was short, and the Jury would thereby be the better able to attend to the words of it. They were these: "What a "crowd of blessings rush upon one's mind, "that might be bestowed upon the coun"try in the event of a total change of sys-present prosecution, and which it was "tem! Of all Monarchs, indeed, since the "Revolution, the successor of George the "Third will have the finest opportunity of "being nobly popular." The Jury would apply their minds to the consideration of these words, and see whether they supported the charge. The Defendant had given his interpretation to the paragraph, and to shew that he was innocent made reference to the context in the paper of the same day, from which it would appear that he meant not to disparage the Sovereign, or to arraign the wisdom of his conduct. This paragraph, he contended, was to be viewed as part of the same article to which the attention of the Jury was now called, and to be taken as if it had been incorporated in it. The part of this article first pointed out by the Defendant referred to a political event which they all knew, namely, the communication between Lord Grenville and Mr. Perceval, relative to the formation of a new Government, and another part of it referred to the line of conduct observed by the Prince of Wales on that occasion. His Lordship proceeded to read the particular passages alluded to, and observed, that if the paragraph charged on as being a libel had stood immediately under, or if it had been a continuation of the article in question, it must have had a considerable effect on the opinion of the Jury, and even as it did stand, it was for them to determine if the paragraph charged as a libel could be supposed to have any reference to the sentiments of the writer or publisher, as expressed in the longer article. The Jury would, therefore, have to consider, first, if they could take the paragraph in question as having reference to the more detailed article; and, if there was any thing improvident in the paragraph said to be a libel, what qualification it was entitled to receive from connecting it with the other article. The other, and the most important for their consideration, was, What was the fair, candid and honest interpretation which they found themselves called on to give to the paragraph itself. The article with which it was sought to

sought to connect with this article as a corollary, was removed to the distance of two columns from it. If the two had stood together, the one immediately following the other, the one must have been taken, in fairness, to throw light upon the other. But standing so far removed as they did, he was not so much convinced that they could be regarded as having any reference to, or connection with, each other. The other question, therefore, was, What was the fair meaning of the paragraph, standing unconnected with any other article; and was it per se libellous? It stated that blessings might result from a change of system; but that might fairly mean from a change of political system. By the word "total," it was obvious that the paragraph did not mean a subversion -a demolition of the Government, because in the very next line it talks of our Monarchs, and contemplates a succession of them. Now, that to say, that there would be blessings likely to result from a change of system, was a sentiment that might not be safely expressed, was a length that he did not feel himself prepared to go. A change of system might become necessary in consequence of error: error might be fairly imputed to any one. There was only one Being to whom error was not imputable. His Majesty, who we all knew cordially wished the welfare of his subjects, might even from his excess of love for them, be led to take an erroneous view of the interests of his country. He was not prepared, therefore, to go the length of saying, that to state so, amounted to a disparagement of his Majesty. If such charge could be shewn to have been made with a malicious view, it would be highly libellous; or if corruption, wilful fault, or any perverse evil motive were assigned, it would be clearly criminal; but there was no proof of any malice in the present case. The paragraph went on to state, not positively that the Successor to his present Majesty would be nobly popular, but that he would have an opportunity of becoming so. What was the fair import of the paragraph, taken all together, ac

offenders) could not, he imagined, be doubted; and he therefore presumed that the Government of the United States would not, after it had itself declared a commerce with France, &c. illegal, and its citizens who should engage in it, delinquents, and after having given to Great Britain by compact an interest in the strict observation of prohibition, complain if the naval force of this country should assist in preventing such a cominerce.— 20, lie asked whether there would be any objection to making the repeal of the British Orders and the American Embargo cotemporaneous? He seemed to consider this as indispensible. Nothing could be less admissible, he said, than that Great Britain, after rescinding her Orders, should for any time, however short, be left subject to the Embargo in common with France, whose Decrees were subsisting, with a view to an experiment upon France, or with any other view. The United States could not, upon their own principles, apply the Embargo to this country one moment after its Orders were revoked, or decline after the event to apply it exclusively to France, and the Powers connected with her system.

heretofore, Great Britain alone.-I pro- | American laws might denounce against posed to Mr. Canning, that I should call on him in the course of a day or two, for the purpose of a free communication, upon what he had suggested. To this he readily assented; and it was settled that I should see him on the Sunday following (the 224) at twelve o'clock, at his own house.--In the interview of the 22d, Mr. Canning's impressions appeared to be in all respects the same with those which he had mentioned on the 18th; and I said every thing which Ithonght consistent with candour and discretion, to confirm him in his disposition to seek the re-establishment of good understanding with us, and especially to see in the expected Act of Congress, if it should pass, an opening for reconciliation. -It was of some importance to turn their attention here, without loss of time, to the manner of any proceeding that might be in their contemplation. It seemed that the Resolutions of the House of Representatives, if enacted into a law, might render it proper, if not indispensable, that the affair of the Chesapeake should be settled at the same time with the business of the Orders and Embargo, and this I understood to be Mr. Canning's opinion and wish. It followed that the whole matter ought to be settled at Washington, and, as this was moreover desirable on various other grounds, I suggested that it would be well, in case a special mission did not meet their approbation, that the necessary powers should be sent to Mr. Erskine. In the course of the conversation, Mr. Canning proposed several questions relative to our late proposal; the principal were the two following:

I took occasion, towards the close of our conversation, to mention the recent appointment of Admiral Berkeley to the Lisbon station. Mr. Canning said that whatever might be their inclination to consult the feelings of the American Government on that subject, it was impossible for the Admiralty to resist the claim of that officer to be employed (no other objection existing against him), after such a lapse 1. In case they should wish either of time since his return from Halifax, through me or through Mr. Erskine, to without bringing him to a Court Martial. meet us upon the basis of our late over- The usage of the navy was in this respect ture, in what way was the effectual ope- different from that of the army. But I ration of our embargo as to France, &c. understood Mr. Canning to say that he after it should be taken off as to Great might still be brought to a Court Martial, Britain, to be secured. It was evident, although I did not understand him to say he said, that we should do no more than that this would be the case. He said that refuse clearances for the ports of France, Admiral Berkeley, in what he had done, &c. or prohibit under penalties, voyages had acted wholly without authority. Í to such ports, the effect which my letter did not propose to enter into any discussion of the 23rd of August, and my published upon the subject, and therefore contented instructions, proposed to have in view, myself with speaking of the appointment would not be produced; for that vessels, as unfortunate.-In both of these converalthough cleared for British ports, might,sations Mr. Canning's language and manwhen once out, go to France instead of ners were in the highest degree conciliacoming here; that this would in fact be tory. so, (whatever the penalties which the

LONDON :--Printed by T. C. HANSARD, Peterborough - Court, Fieet - Street:

Published by R. BAGSHAW, Brydges-Street, Covent Garden :-Sold also by J. BUDD, Pall-Mall.

VOL. XVII. No. 13.]

LONDON, SATURDAY, MARCH 31, 1810.

[Price 18. "There is a certain number of persons in the State Prisons, whom it is not convenient, either to bring "to trial, or to set at liberty. There are several men, certainly culpable, but who cannot be condemned "by our Couris.”- -NAPOLEON'S Decree.

481]

SUMMARY OF POLITICS,

-[452

Despotism, as he has lately and as he even now appears to us in real life. We need WHAT IS DESPOTISM?—In the pre-not go far to come at a sight of him. He sent state of the world, when governments is at no great distance from us. To get a stand, as it were, at the bar of the peo-view of his jealous scowling visage, so ple; or, if the people are, in certain cases, strongly descriptive of that cowardly tykept down by violent means, when go-ranny, which is bold only because it feels vernments stand, at least, at the bar of rea- that the arms of the mercenaries by whom son; at such a time, it is worth while to it is surrounded will insure it impunity; inquire a little into the nature of the dif- to get a full view of this detestable object, ferent sorts of government; and, as being we have nothing to do but to go down to that sort, of which very few amongst us, Dover, and cast our eyes across the Chanhere in England, have, as yet, the hardi- nel.But, to proceed to the practical hood openly to avow themselves the advo- illustration, which I have now more immecates; that sort, which, as yet, we hold diately in my eye, or, which, at any rate, in abhorrence, let us first inquire what I shall select for this occasion, the reader Despotism is, and endeavour to come to a will, probably, remember something of a clear and settled notion respecting it.- certain DECREE, recently passed, or said Mr. Adams, in his Essays on Political to have been passed, by the EMPEROR Constitutions, has defined this species of NAPOLEON. This Decree I have not seen government, and, in my opinion, very at full length. I shall, therefore, take the completely defined it. But, let us hear account of it, given in the Morning ChroniDR. JOHNSON. He says, that Despotism cle of the 22nd of this month, and which means "Absolute Power." Then, again, account was in the following words: he says, that Absolute, as applied to power, "A decree passed the beginning of this means "Not limited." Hence it is clear," month. It relates to State Prisoners, that, wherever there exists a power, not " and the preamble says, that there is a limited by any fixed rule, or law, and not" certain number of persons in the State. controulable by any other power; where- Prisons, whom it is NOT CONVEever such a power exists, there must exist" NIENT, either TO BRING TO TRIAL, a despotism. Indeed, what is despotism" OR TO SET AT LIBERTY- that but arbitrary power? Like Peculator and " though they would be condemned by Public-Robber, they are different words;" the Tribunals to capital punishments, but, they mean the same abominable" SUPERIOR CONSIDERATIONS OPthing. -DR. JOHNSON says, that Arbi-" POSE THEIR BEING BROUGHT TO trary, means, despotic; absolute;-de- « TRIAL-that several are men accus"pending on no rule;-capricious;-depend-" tomed to crimes, but who CANNOT BE "ing on the will.". Wherever, then, the" CONDEMNED BY OUR COURTS, people, or any part of the people; here- though they have the certainty of their ever any person whatever, is liable to be" culpability-that some belong to diffepunished, in any way whatever, at the" rent countries, which have been united pleasure of the party punishing; where-" to France, but that they cannot be tried, ever the life, liberty, or property, of any "because their offences are either politiman in the community is " dependent on the" cal, or anterior to the union of these will" of any body whatever, the govern-" States!!!"-So, then! H-e, hem! ment under which he has the misery to live Mr. Perry puts three marks of admiration is a despotism; or else all the definitions of at the close of this account; and, he adds, DR. JOHNSON are false. Let us now seek by way of remark, these words: "Such for a practical illustration of this theory:" is the horrible nature of BUONAPARTE'S let us take a look at the hateful monster," tyranny, and the debased state of the people, Q

"to whom he dares so fearlessly to avow it!" This is very good. These are sentiments which do honour to the person expressing them; and, in which sentiments I cordially join. What! put men into prison, without any trial, and keep them there during his pleasure? What! imprison, keep in prison, punish men, without any trial? What! put men in prison, shut them up in a jail, without any forms of law, without any trial, and then say that superior considerations oppose their being brought to trial? What! send men to prison, and keep them there, because .

without any complaint. They suffered him to bring his Polanders and his Italians into France, while he sent the French troops out of France. They suffered him, thus, by degrees, to draw the hand-cuffs and leg-bolts over their limbs; and, when they had so done, was it any wonder that he fearlessly told them, that he would keep men in prison, as long as he pleased, without bringing them to trial, merely because, if brought to trial, they could not be condemned in his Courts? Impudent as this declaration is; revolting as it is to every principle of justice; insulting as it is to human nature; degrading as it is to the character of any thing in human shape; still, it is no more than what ought to have been expected by a people, who had quietly, and, indeed, many of them, from very bad motives, suffered themselves to be surrounded in their very houses by Mamelukes, Polanders, and other Foreign Troops, without having whom at his back their ruler would never have dared so to insult them.One of the greatest faults of the French, however, is their havings for so long a time, not only suffered to exist, but given their countenance to the existence of, that thing called the Corps Legislatif; that sham of a representation of the people, formed by sham elections; that set of sham Legislators, whose proceedings consist of sham motions, sham debates, and sham votings, and whose sham laws are in reality, already made by Napo

because what? because, if brought to trial, they CANNOT BE CONDEMNED BY THE COURTS? Well might the Morning Chronicle call Buonaparte's government a "horrible tyranny:" well might it speak of "the debased state of the people, to whom he "dares fearlessly to avow it." It is very true, that the people, supposing them not to be completely over-awed and kept down by mercenary troops, who can have no feeling in common with them, and who, in all likelihood, are hired and paid for the sole purpose of keeping the people in a state of submission to despotic acts, and are, thus, the means of increasing those taxes, to enforce the levying of which is one of their principal uses; it is very true, that the people, unless thus kept down; unless thus assessed with the bayonet at the breast; unless thus commanded to contribute with a "stand and deliver;" unless thus compelled, by force of arms, to sub-leon's Ministers and Orators before they mit to down-right, notorious, bare-faced robbery it is very true, that the people, unless thus beaten down and kept down; unless thus held in continual fear of their lives, must be a very base race, and must richly deserve all that they suffer. But, if they be trammelled in the manner here described; if they be compelled to support armed mercenaries in the midst of them; if they be reduced to a state, in which they are obliged to work like galley-slaves in order to earn the means of supporting troops, whose business it is to shoot at them, if they dare attempt to resist their Robbers; if such be their state, what are they to do? What is it possible for them to do?-It must be allowed, however, that things cannot have arrived at this pitch, without some fault, or some shocking folly, on the part of the people of Napoleon's dominions; nay, without some fault. They suffered him to introduce his Mamelukes and other foreign troops, without any resistance, and even

are introduced into that sham assembly, which, for the far greater part, manifestly consists of a set of venal knaves, or of fools, who, to make them knaves, want nothing but the requisite wit. Despicable as this Assembly is, in its doings as well as in its origin, it has nevertheless, served, for a good while, to impose upon the people. The mass of mankind are worked upon by the power of words. They are very apt to take a thing to be, and to let it pass for, what it is called. From this cause it is, that we seldom see any body of men backward in bestowing fine appellations upon each other and ascribing to each other very fine qualities; and, from this cause it is, that the impostors in question speak of themselves, upon all occasions, as if they were, in reality, freely chosen by the people, when they, and not only they, but all the world, know, that they were no more chosen by the people, than they were chosen by the birds of the air. Yet, from a want of

ALFRE