Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

not seem enough: and we must proceed | same mistake again in p. 147. of his in the task, till we have settled Mr. own book; and after this, he makes Rose's pretensions to accuracy on a Mr. Fox the person who selected the still firmer foundation. And if we be Appendix to Barillon's papers; whereas thought minutely severe, let it be re-it is particularly stated in the Preface membered that Mr. Rose is himself an to the History, that this Appendix was accuser; and if there be justice upon selected by Mr. Laing. earth, every man has a right to pull stolen goods out of the pocket of him who cries," Stop thief!"

66 α

Mr. Rose affirms, that compassing to levy war against the King was made high treason by the statute of 25 Edward III.; and, in support of this affirmation, he cites Coke and Blackstone. His stern antagonist, a professional man, is convinced he has read neither. The former says, compassing to levy war is no treason." (Inst. 3. p. 9.); and Blackstone," bare conspiracy to levy war does not amount to this species of treason.” (Com. iv. p. 82.) This really does look as if the Serjeant had made out his assertion.

a

In the story which Mr. Rose states of the seat in Parliament sold for five pounds (Journal of the Commons, vol. v.), he is wrong, both in the sum and the volume. The sum is four pounds; and it is told, not in the fifth volume, but the first. Mr. Rose states. that a perpetual excise was granted to the Crown, in lieu of the profits of the Court of Wards; and adds, that the question in favour of the Crown was carried by a majority of two. The real fact is, that the half only of an excise Of the bill introduced in 1685 for upon certain articles was granted to the preservation of the person of James Government in lieu of these profits; II., Mr. Rose observes-"Mr. Fox has and this grant was carried without a not told us for which of our modern division. An attempt was made to statutes this bill was used as a model; grant the other half, and this was nega- and it will be difficult for any one to ticed by a majority of two. The Jour- show such an instance." It might have nals are open;- Mr. Rose reads them; been thought, that no prudent man -he is officially accurate. What can would have made such a challenge, the meaning be of these most extra-without a tolerable certainty of the ordinary mistakes? ground upon which it was made. Serjeant Heywood answers the challenge by citing the 36 Geo. III. c. 7., which is a mere copy of the act of James.

Mr. Rose says that in 1679, the writ de hæretico comburendo had been a dead letter for more than a century. It would have been extremely agreeable to Mr. Bartholomew Legate, if this had been the case; for, in 1612, he was burnt at Smithfield for being an Arian. Mr. Wightman would probably have participated in the satisfaction of Mr. Legate; as he was burnt also, the same year, at Lichfield, for the same offence. With the same correctness, this scourge of historians makes the Duke of Lauderdale, who died in 1682, a confidential adviser of James II. after his accession in 1689. In page 13. he quotes, as written by Mr. Fox, that which was written by Lord Holland. This, however, is a familiar practice with him. Ten pages afterwards, in Mr. Fox's history, he makes the same mistake. Mr. For added,"-whereas was Lord Holland that added. The

[ocr errors]

In the fifth section of Mr. Rose's work is contained his grand attack upon Mr. Fox for his abuse of Sir Patrick Hume; and his observations upon this point admit of a fourfold answer. 1st, Mr. Fox does not use the words quoted by Mr. Rose; 2dly, He makes no mention whatever of Sir Patrick Hume in the passage cited by Mr. Rose; 3dly, Sir Patrick Hume is attacked by nobody in that history; 4thly, If he had been so attacked he would have deserved it. The passage from Mr. Fox is this: —

|
dition, it is impossible for him not to touch
upon what he deemed the misconduct of
his friends; and this is the subject upon
which, of all others, his temper must have

"In recounting the failure of his expe

and

been most irritable. A certain description | quotation from a private letter, made of friends (the words describing them are by the editor, to be the same as if inomitted) were all of them, without excep- cluded in a work intended for publition, his greatest enemies, both to betray cation by the author;-then he reand destroy him ;and (the names again omitted) were the greatest members that he is the sole executor cause of his rout, and his being taken, of Sir Patrick's grandson, whose blank though not designedly, he acknowledges, is so filled up ;- and goes on blunderbut by ignorance, cowardice, and faction. ing and blubbering - grateful and inThis sentence had scarce escaped him, when, accurate — teeming with false quotanotwithstanding the qualifying words with tions and friendly recollections to the which his candour had acquitted the last- conclusion of his book. — Multa gemens mentioned persons of intentional treachery, ignominiam. it appeared too harsh to his gentle nature; and, declaring himself displeased with the hard epithets he had used, he desires that they may be put out of any account that is to be given of these transactions." - Heywood, pp. 365, 366.

Mr. Rose came into possession of the Earl of Marchmont's papers, containing, among other things, the narrative of Sir Patrick Hume. He is very severe upon Mr. Fox, for not having been Argyle names neither the description more diligent in searching for original of friends who were his greatest enemies, papers; and observes that if any applinor the two individuals who were the cation had been made to him (Mr. principal cause of the failure of his Rose), this narrative should have been scheme. Mr. Fox leaves the blanks at Mr. Fox's service. We should be as he finds them. But two notes are glad to know, if Mr. Rose saw a person added by the editor, which Mr. Rose tumbled into a ditch, whether he would might have observed are marked with wait for a regular application till he an E. In the latter of them we are pulled him out? Or, if he happened told, that Mr. Fox observes, in a private to espy the lost piece of silver for letter, "Cochrane and Hume certainly which the good woman was diligently filled up the two principal blanks." sweeping the house, would he wait for But is this communication of a private formal interrogation before he imletter any part of Mr. Fox's history? And would it not have been equally fair in Mr. Rose to have commented upon any private conversation of Mr. Fox, and then to have called it his history? Or, if Mr. Fox had filled up the blanks in the body of his history, does it follow that he adopts Argyle's censure, because he shows against whom it is levelled? Mr. Rose has described the charge against Sir Patrick Hume to be, of faction, cowardice, and treachery, Mr. Rose has more than once altered the terms of a proposition before he has proceeded to answer it; and, in this instance, the charge of treachery against Sir Patrick Hume is not made either in Argyle's letter, Mr. Fox's text, or the editor's note, or anywhere but in the imagination of Mr. Rose. "Ön the whole, and upon the most The sum of it all is, that Mr. Rose attentive consideration of every thing first supposes the relation of Argyle's which has been written upon the subject, opinion to be the expression of the there does not appear to have been any relator's opinion, that Mr. Fox adopts intention of applying torture in the Argyle's insinuations because he ex-case of the Earl of Argyle." (Rose, p. plains them; then he looks upon a 182) If this every thing had included

parted his discovery, and suffer the lady to sweep on till the question had been put to him in the most solemn forms of politeness? The established practice, we admit, is to apply, and to apply vigorously and incessantly, for sinecure places and pensions-or they cannot be had. This is true enough. But did any human being ever think of carrying this practice into literature, and compelling another to make interest for papers essential to the good conduct of his undertaking? We are perfectly astonished at Mr. Rose's conduct in this particular; and should have thought that the ordinary exercise of his good-nature would have led him to a very different way of acting.

"Mr. Rose, in his concluding paragraph, boasts of his speaking 'impersonally,' and he hopes it will be allowed justly, when he makes a general observation respecting the proper province of history. But the last might be speaking justly, he was not speaksentence evidently shows that, though he ing impersonally, if by that word is meant, without reference to any person. words are 'But history cannot connect itself with party, without forfeiting its name; without departing from the truth, the dignity, and the usefulness of its func

His

the following extract from Barillon, the above cited, and very disgraceful, inaccuracy of Mr. Rose would have been spared. "The Earl of Argyle has been executed at Edinburgh, and has left a full confession in writing, in which he discovers all those who have assisted him with money, and have aided his designs. This has saved him from the torture." And Argyle, in his letter to Mrs. Smith, confesses he has made discoveries. In his very inaccurate history of torture in the southern tions. After the remarks he has made in some of his preceding pages, and the part of this island, Mr. Rose says, that apology he has offered for Mr. Fox, in his except in the case of Felton, in the last preceding paragraph, for having been attempt to introduce the civil law in mistaken in his view of some leading points, Henry VI.'s reign,-and in some cases there can be no difficulty in concluding, of treason in Mary's reign, torture was that this general observation is meant to be never attempted in this country. The applied to the historical work. The charge fact, however, is, that in the reign of intended to be insinuated must be, that, Henry VIII. Anne Askew was tortured the name by being connected with party; in Mr. Fox's hands, history has forfeited by the Chancellor himself. Simson and has departed from the truth, the was tortured in 1558; Francis Throg. dignity, and the usefulness of its functions. morton in 1571; Charles Baillie, and It were to be wished that Mr. Rose had Banastie, the Duke of Norfolk's servant, explained himself more fully; for, after were tortured in 1581; Campier, the assuming that the application of this obJesuit, was put upon the rack; and servation is too obvious to be mistaken, Dr. Astlow is supposed to have been there still remains some difficulty with racked in 1558. So much for Mr. respect to its meaning. If it be confined to such publications as are written under Rose as the historian of punishments. the title of histories, but are intended to We have seen him, a few pages before, serve the purposes of a party; and truth is a the stake,-where he makes quite as sacrificed, and facts perverted, to defend bad a figure as he does now upon the and give currency to their tenets, we do rack. Precipitation and error are his not dispute its propriety; but, if that be foibles. If he were to write the history the character which Mr. Rose would give of sieges, he would forget the siege of him with candour, or even common justice. Troy; if he were making a list of poets, Mr. Rose has never, in any one instance, he would leave out Virgil:-Cæsar intimated that Mr. Fox has wilfully dewould not appear in his catalogue of parted from truth, or strayed from the generals;-and Newton would be over-proper province of history, for the purpose looked in his collection of eminent mathematicians.

In some cases Mr. Rose is to be met only with flat denial. Mr. Fox does not call the soldiers who were defending James against Argyle authorised assins; but he uses that expression against the soldiers who were murdering the peasants, and committing every Sort of licentious cruelty in the twelve counties given up to military execution; and this Mr. Rose must have known, by using the most ordinary diligence in the perusal of the text and would have known it in any other history than that of Mr. Fox.

-

to Mr. Fox's labours, he has not treated

of indulging his private or party feelings. But, if Mr. Rose intends that the observation should be applied to all histories, the influence of political connections and prinauthors of which have felt strongly the ciples, what must become of most of the histories of England? Is the title of historian to be denied to Mr. Hume? and in what class are to be placed Echard, Kennet, Rapin, Dalrymple, or Macpherson? In this point of view the principle laid nected with party, may write an impartial down is too broad. A person, though conhistory of events which occurred a century before; and, till this last sentence, Mr. Rose has not ventured to intimate that Mr. Fox has not done so. On the contrary, he has declared his approbation of a great portion

book no faults, besides those which the

of the work; and his attempts to discover | He rests his credit with the world as a material errors in the remainder have man of labour-and he turns out to be uniformly failed in every particular. If it a careless inspector of proofs, and an might be assumed that there existed in the historical sloven. The species of talent scrutinising eye of Mr. Rose has discovered, which he pretends to is humble—and he possesses it not. He has not done it might be justly deemed the most perfect work that ever came from the press; for not that which all men may do, and which a single deviation from the strictest duty of every man ought to do, who rebukes an historian has been pointed out; while his superiors for not doing it. His instances of candour and impartiality pre- claims, too, it should be remembered, sent themselves in almost every page; and to these every-day qualities are by no Mr. Rose himself has acknowledged and means enforced with gentleness and applauded many of them."- (pp. 422-424.) humility. He is a braggadocio of miThese extracts from both books are nuteness-a swaggering chronologer; sufficient to show the nature of Serjeant a man bristling up with small factsHeywood's examination of Mr. Rose-prurient with dates-wantoning in the boldness of this latter gentleman's obsolete evidence- loftily dull, and assertions and the extreme inaccuracy haughty in his drudgery;- and yet of the researches upon which these assertions are founded. If any credit could be gained from such a book as Mr. Rose has published, it could be gained from accuracy alone. Whatever the execution of his book had been, the world would have remembered the infinite disparity of the two authors, and the long political opposition in which they lived - if that, indeed, can be called opposition, where the thunderbolt strikes, and the clay yields. They would have remembered also that Hector was dead; and that every cowardly Grecian could now thrust his spear into the hero's body. But still, if Mr. Rose had really succeeded in exposing the inaccuracy of Mr. Fox-if he could have fairly shown that authorities were overlooked, or slightly examined, or wilfully perverted-the incipient feel ings to which such a controversy had given birth must have yielded to the evidence of facts; and Mr. Fox, however qualified in other particulars, must have appeared totally defective in that laborious industry and scrupulous good faith so indispensable to every historian. But he absolutely comes out of the contest not worse even in a single tooth or nail-unvilified even by a wrong datewithout one misnomer proved upon him -immaculate in his years and days of the month-blameless to the most musty and limited pedant that ever yellowed himself amidst rolls and records.

But how fares it with his critic?

all this is pretence. Drawing is no
very unusual power in animals; but he
cannot draw:- he is not even the ox
which he is so fond of being. In at-
tempting to vilify Mr. Fox, he has only
shown us that there was no labour
from which that great man shrunk, and
that no object connected with his his-
tory was too minute for his investiga-
tion. He has thoroughly convinced us
that Mr. Fox was as industrious, and
as accurate, as if these were the only
qualities upon which he had ever rested
his hope of fortune or of fame. Such,
indeed, are the customary results when
little people sit down to debase the
characters of great men, and to exalt
themselves upon the ruins of what they
have pulled down. They only provoke
a spirit of inquiry, which places every
thing in its true light and magnitude-
shows those who appear little to be still
less, and displays new and unexpected
excellence in others who were before
known to excel. These are the usual
consequences of such attacks. The fame
of Mr. Fox has stood this, and will
stand much ruder shocks.

Non hiemes illam, non flabra neque imbres
Convellunt; immota manet, multosque per

annos

Multa virum volvens durando sæcula vincit.

LISHOP OF LINCOLN'S

CHARGE.*

(E. REVIEW, 1813.)

▲ Charge delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Lincoln, at the Triennial Visitation of that Diocese in May, June, and July, 1812. By George Tomline, D.D. F.B.S. Lord Bishop of Lincoln. London. Cadell and Co. 4to.

It is a melancholy thing to see a man, clothed in soft raiment, lodged in a public palace, endowed with a rich portion of the product of other men's industry, neing all the influence of his splendid

tical stations.

of less importance who fills them; but when the bitter period arrives, in which the people must give up some of their darling absurdities;-when the senseless clamour, which has been carefully handed dora from father fool to son fool, can be no longer indulged;—when it is of incaleulable importance to turn the people to a better way of thinking; the greatest mpediments to all amelioration are too often found among those to whose councas, at such periods, the country ought to look for wisdom and peace. We will suppress, however, the feelings of indignation which such productions, from such men, naturally occasion. We will give the Bishop of Lincoln credit for being perfectly sincere ;- we will sup. pose, that every argument he uses has not been used and refuted ten thousand times before; and we will sit down as patiently to defend the relirious liberties of mankind, as the Reverend Prelate has done to abridge

England. No man can be fairly said to be permitted to enjoy his own worship who is punished for exercising that worship. His Lordship seems to have no other idea of punishment than lodging a man in the Poultry Compter, or flogging him at the cart's tail, or fining him a sum of money; - just as if incapacitating a man from enjoying the dignities and emoluments to which men of similar condition, and other

faith, may fairly aspire, was not freall punishments. This limited idea of quently the most severe and galling of the nature of punishment is the more extraordinary, as incapacitation is actually one of the most common punish

ments in some branches of our law. The sentence of a court-martial fre

situation, however conscientiously, to deepen the ignorance, and inflame the fary of his fellow creatures. These are the miserable results of that policy which has been so frequently pursued for thesequently purports that a man is rendered for ever incapable of serving his fifty years past, of placing men of mean or middling abilities in high ecclesias-Majesty, &c. &c.; and a person not in In ordinary times, it is holy orders, who performs the functions of a clergyman, is rendered for ever incapable of holding any preferment in the Church. There are indeed many species of offence for which no punishment more apposite and judicious could be devised. It would be Court, in passing such a sentence, rather extraordinary, however, if the incapacitation was not by them consiwere to assure the culprit, "that such dered as a punishment; that it was all governments, of determining who only exercising a right inherent in should be eligible for office and who toleration complete, because he sees a ineligible." His Lordship thinks the permission in the statutes for the exercise of the Roman Catholic. worship. He sees the permission - but he does not choose to see the consequences to which they are exposed who avail themselves of this permission. It is the liberality of a father who says to a follow your own inclination. Judge son, "Do as you please, my dear boy; remember, if you marry that lady, I for yourself, you are free as air. But will cut you off with a shilling." We and frivolous statement, than the Bihave scarcely ever read a more solemn shop of Lincoln's antithetical distinction between persecution and the denial of political power.

them.

We must begin with denying the main position upon which the Bishop of Lincoln has built his reasoning The Catholic religion is not tolerated in

It is impossible to conceive the mischief hich this mean and cunning prelate did at this period.

« AnteriorContinua »