to give to this proceeding, on the part of Sir Francis Burdett, the character of faction. Of faction! What, is it factious to maintain, or to endeavour to maintain, the undeniable principles of that constitution, for the preservation of which we are called upon to spend our last shilling, and to "shed our last drop of blood?" Not a day passes over our heads but we are reminded of the excellence of this constitution, and of the shame and infamy and misery which would speedily follow its destruction. Agreed! Perfectly agreed! And what does Sir Francis Burdett ask, but the practice of this very constitution; being, doubtless, of fixed opinion, that, if laws are not observed, they are, in fact, destroyed, as to all their good purposes, and that they insensibly become instruments of deception and oppression; that they cast forth darkness and misery, instead of light and happiness?It being evident, that, generally speaking, men pursue first their private interests, it follows, that, if men expend money for the purpose of obtaining seats in parliament, they have it in view to get a large profit by such expenditure, and will, of course, use the means of securing such profit.

The

kind of profit may differ. Some may prefer baubles to hard solid cash ; but, the effect, as to the nation, will be pretty nearly the same, in the end. And, this being the case, it is quite clear, that whoever wishes to see a corrupt House of Commons, will surely be an advocate for expensive elections.

One thing surprized me not a little, and that was, that the Whigs, the famous advocates for PARLIAMENTARY REFORM, did not say one word, when Sir Francis called upon the who's House for advice. They had, formerly, prepared very elabo rate schemes for the causing of elections to be free; and, one would have expected it was not, certainly, too much to expect; that, when they saw, that there had been one free election in England, one really free. election, they would bave found some means or other of edging in a word in approbation of it, even if they had abstain from saying any thing upon the subject of that advice which the Baronet was so anxious to obtain. But, alas! they had, in the fatal interim, been in power themselves. They themselves had tasted of the honey; and, which was of more weight in the influencing of their conduct, they hoped, though in vain I believe, to taste of it again.- The newspapers, some of them, speak of Sir Francis Burdett's conduct as malicious, and take care, by hook or by crook, to bring in the name of Despard. Just as if the sense

and reason of the nation were to be silenced by the use of this name; just as if it had any thing to do with the High Bailiff of Westminster suing Sir Francis Burdett for the expenses of taking the election. And, as to malice, was there any malice in his asking the advice of the Honourable House? He did no more. If the House advised him to pay the demand; if they advised him to submit to be punished for having obeyed the king's command, in taking his seat, why there it was; he would have paid the money; for he made no complaint, and said that the payment was a matter of perfect indifference to him. I should suppose, that the Honourable House would have considered it as a compliment to its wisdom, to have its advice asked upon such a matter, particularly as Sir Francis stated, that it was purely from tenderness for the honour of the Honourable House, and from a fear of incurring their displeasure, that he had asked their advice. But, there are some men, whom nothing will please. Censure them, and they call you abusive; pay a compliment to their feelings, and they say you are malicious.

POPULATION; ——— In another part of this sheet will be found a Post Script from Mr. Arthur Young, from which I perceive, and with unfeigned sorrow, that that gentleman is very angry with me, who certainly never intended to give him any offence.

I said, in the passage, to which he alludes (see page 709 of this volume), that I knew of no return to the population act, which could enable Mr. Young to state what was the population of England and Wales in the year 1720. It appears, from what he now says, that there was a calculation made upon the subject, by a Mu. RICKMAN, who was appointed to collect and make an abstract of the parochial returns; and it is, it seems, upon this calculation that Mr. Young makes his statement. The act required, that the several rectors, vicars, curates, &c. &c. should make out returns, 1st, of the number of inhabited houses and families, and uninhabited houses; 2d, of the total number of persons, exclusive of soldiers and sailors; 3rd, of the number of persons emploved in trade, manufactures, or handicraft; 4th, of the number of baptisms and burials, at stated periods, from 1700 to 1800; and 5th, of the number of marriages in each year, from 1754 downwards to 1800. From these returns Mr. Rickman made up what is called the Population abstract; but, the abstract contained the answers to the first, second, and third questions only. There has since, it appears, been something ele made out by Mr. Rickman,

be made to give way to the general good. There can be no doubt, that the particular interests of the distillers would suffer from the stoppage of their trade, in times of scarcity, but, such a measure would certainly be proper, and could not, reasonably, be complained of as an ex post facto law. There are, I hear, petitions coming forward in favour of the intended measure; so that the House will find the subject ready discussed to their hands. This premature discus

able to have a great market dinner, I answer, that though they, doubtless, are, quite able to bear the expense, yet, they are not always able to find out an excuse for it that will satisfy them. selves, and, which is of infinitely greater importance, that will satisfy their wives, who are very much addicted to reckon such expenses as so much subtracted from those enjoyments, of which they are justly entitled to a share.As a farmer's frolic, therefore; as a little truantship from the

growers. They began it, and they have, I think, deprived themselves of that chance of success, which want of time for thought would have given them. Nothing, surely, was ever more indecent than the opposition which they commenced. The report was not printed until ten days after they began to call meetings and to condemn the measure. It was, therefore, impossible for them to be acquainted with the evidence, upon which the committee had made its report to the House, and yet they, in terms the most unqualified, set up a clamorous condemnation. There has been, I perceive, a meeting of Yeomen farmers, at Winchester, copsisting, certainly, of very respectable men, as far as the list of names at the bottom of the advertisement, enables me to judge; but, it is with no small satisfaction that I understand, that Sir Henry Mildmay was act present. It is no derogation from his character to say, that I believe him to have spoken against the measure, without full consideration; and, I shall be very glad to see, that time has altered his opinion, and has induced him to retract an error, into which any man might have fallen. As to his colleague, what he may happen to do is, with me at least, a matter of very little importance. The meeting at Winchester was so meagrely attended as to excite very little interest. It was, in all probability, sug. gested by some businessless attorney, on the preceding market-day, as the means of insuring to himself, for once in his life-time, a good hearty dinner of roast-beef and plumb-pudding, at which, in compensation for his vigils, he might haif burst himself with the juice of the grape, in drinking success to the consumption of barley. Great care was taken (by othicious and faithful brother Scut, I suppose) to mention the dianer in calling the meeting, and, as the most moving piece of eloquence, this mention

-

was reserved for the close. The truth is, that this meeting, like most others of the kind, appears to have been a mere apology for a dinner; and, if I am reminded, that the gentlemen, attending it, are at all times

perhaps, excuseable, and brother Scut might have merit in the invention; but, if be carried the jest so far as to patch up, from ten times borrowed resolutions, a manifesto against an intended act of parliament, then he exposed his clients to the contempt of their more sober and sensible neighbours.

-Of this description are, I dare say," almost the whole of the meetings we have read of, in the several counties. It is the large farmers only who assemble; large farmers do not work themselves; they love a jovial dinner; they keep brave horses to ride; and a day of frolic beyond the ani madversion of the petticoat, is a day snatched from fate. This is the light, in which I, were I a member of parliament, should view these manifestoes. I should trace them to their first causes; I should see the attorney, or his clerk, copying them from old newspapers; and, of course, should be very careful how I regarded them as containing the real sentiments of even the persons by whom they were subscribed.

MR. PALMER, After much talking about, this gentleman's case is again before parliament; and it must give satisfaction to every lover of fair dealing to see that justice, or something like justice, is, at last, to be done him. The short view of his case is this He was the author of that excellent plan of conducting the post-office of the kingdom, which is admired by all those who have considered it, and the advantages of which to the nation have been immense, in all the ways, in which an establishment of this sort can be advantageous to a nation. --If his plan succeeded, he was to be remunerated accordingly, than which nothing could be more fair. The clear revenue of the post-office was, before, comparatively, a trifle. If it rose, in consequence of the adoption of his plan, to a certain amount, he was to receive a certain per centage upon that overplus, But, at the same time, was agreed, that Mr. Palmer should be an officer in the post-office, under the postmaster general, and that he should assist in carrying his plan into effect; for, the filling

it

of which office he was to receive a salary.

He

Thus he began with the public. entered upon his office, and the post-office revenue speedily attained the amount which gave him a per centage. But, sometime previous to the year 1799, he was dismissed from his office, on account of alledged misbehaviour; and, upon demanding his percentage, was told, that he had failed in that part of his bargain, which obliged him to assist in carrying his plan into execution; that, therefore, the bargain became void; that he had no claim to the percentage; and that, of course, he had only to accept of what the minister (who had dismissed him) chose to give him. Such was the decision of Pitt; and I need hardly say, that it was also the decision of one of his Houses of Commons.The claim has now been revived. Mr. George Rose is opposed to this intended waste of the public money! And he and his right trusty and well-beloved Mr. Charles Long (Mr. Thomas Steele is not in the House now, I believe,) reprobate the claim; insist, that the salary and percentage were to be inseparable; and, of course, that Mr. Palmer could claim no percentage, useless he kept his office.———I

say

that such was not the bargain; and the proof is this, that Mr. Palmer was certainly in his senses, and that no man in his senses would voluntarily have made a bargain, which could be binding only upon himself. He was to have a great reward for a great public service; but, as it was in the absolute power of the other contracting party to dismiss him at any moment, it is evident, that, if the claim to the percentage was to cease along with the possession of the office, he could not have a moment's security for his reward. It is an abuse of words to call such a thing a bargain; and though a sharp lawyer might get a man to set his hand to it, that must be a villainous court of equity, in which it would not be overset. Mr. Palmer might misbehave himself in his office, though I do not believe he did, and I think his dismission is no bad presumptive proof of it. But, we all know how many ways there are, in which a man may offend a minister or a minister's jackall; and we all know, that if such be the case, he is pretty sure to be dismissed fromany office that he may hold, during that minister's pleisure, Isit, therefore, probable, that, Mr. Palmer, or any other man with an understanding above that of an oyster or periwinkle, would have made the bargain here spoken of? If Pitt had said to him in plain terms: You shall have so much money for your invention, while you continue in such an office; but, mark

"

This was Pitt's way. When once be had got the House to do any thing, be used to tell them that they were eternally blasted if they did not stick to it, and even follow it up. I well remember how he used to call for votes upon the sole ground of their having already voted in the same spirit; and to tell them, almost in so many words, that they were a parcel of inconsistent fellows if they. boggled at it for a single moment.-But, Mr. Rose, this is another parliament. The walls are the same; the literal house is the same; but the figurative house is another, and I wish I could say a very different one. True, a House of Commons did reject the claim of Mr. Palmer; and a House of Commons did pass a bill of attainder against Bussel and Sidney, but another House of Commons repealed that bill of attainder, and were not afraid of their honour and character being shaken by the act.It is clear; it wants no proof, no evidence to support the fact, that Mr. Palmer never could mean to make his hoped-for and expected reward de pend upon his continuance in office, or, in other words, upon the mere whim of the minister of the day, let him be who he might. Eesides, what was be to be in office for? Why, to assist in carrying his plan into execution; to assist in making the plan suc ceed. Well, then, the plan, did succeed; the public are, aud long have been, in pos session of its immense benefits; so that there appears to be not the shadow of an objection to the claim of the percentage, and this, as far as I understand, is all that is intended to be granted.+1: wish the Pitts and the Longs, and the Roses had been as

stout in their resistance of other claims. There are £20,000 gone to Dr. Jenner, and for what, let the people of Ringwood say, There have been, I believe, a bundred thousand pounds granted to the negro civiJizers of Sierra Leone; and, away goes the scheme in smoke. But here is a scheme which was sensible and practicable. It has been tried; it has succeeded its benefits have been enjoyed for a series of years; they are still enjoyed, and will be enjoyed for ages to come. Here would be a fit object for national liberality; but, Mr. Palmer asks for none; he only asks for his own; he merely demands that which is unjustly detained from him; and, if he is to receive no redress from the parliament, from whom is he to receive it, and who will ever trust the nation again? It is odd enough, that, when sinecure places are the topic, the persons who oppose this claim are amongst the foremost to talk of the sacredness of national bargains. Never mind the amount, say they, the place has been granted, and the nation must abide by the grant. Tell them of the enormous amount of the Marquis of Buckingham's place: no matter, say they, he has the place, and he must receive the revenue of it, be it what it may. Two years of that place is worth all Mr. Palmer's claim for ten years. The fact is, I dare say, that they found Mr. Palmer what they call, i in their Whitehall slang, an intractable man. The man had merit; he could not help knowing that; and he was incapable of truckling to pompous ignorance. This, I'll engage, was his only sin; but, it was a thumper; it was a sin never to be forgiven. It is from such causes that the public affairs are so frequently mismanaged. To be capable of managing them argues the possession of talents and spirit; and who, that possesses talents and spirit, will quietly submit to the control of that stupidity and arrogance, which will frequently bear sway where the qualifications for office are

such as I need not describe.

Mr. Bankes, who, it appears, opposes this claim, did not, any more than Mr. Rose or Mr. Long or Mr. Sturges, oppose the vote of 40,000l. to pay the debts of Pitt. Nay, no one opposed it, though, if Sir Francis Burdett had beca in the House, I trust, he would have opposed it. Was that forty thousand pounds as well merited as the 60,000l. now to be paid to Mr. Palmer? There is not a just man in the kingdom but will answer, NO. This, Mr. Bankes calls an extravagant demand; but, it is not the mere amount of any demand that makes it extravagant. The demand of a guinea for a pound of beef is

more extravagant than the demand of twenty guineas for the half of an ox. Mr.Palmer

asks for no more than his due, agreetly to the undenied terms of what he says is contract. Disprove the contract, and he entitled to nothing; but, if the contrac be recognised, the demand cannot be extrvagant. There is, too, in the present cae, this peculiar circumstance, that you c knowledge to have gained by the contrac; and, that it is only his share of the gains that Mr. Palmer demands. Had the nation lost by the contract; or, had the gain been matter of doubt, there might have been some room for shuffle. It would have been disgraceful, indeed; it would have been abhorrent from the character of Englishtnen, amongst whom the sacredness of pecuniary engagements is inculcated in the common and emphatical phrase: a bargain is a bargain." Still, however, there would have been room for some men to shuffle; but, in the present case, I am almost ready to say, that I would defy an American to find out a pretext for shuffling..

or, at least, I never saw or heard of "such return. I am of opinion, that he "has now spoken from no better authority

66

than that of Gregory King, who, indeed "was so minute and accurate a gentleman "that he included in his estimate the "number of rabbits in England and "Wales."-Now, Mr. Cobbett, what right could you have to accuse me of so' offensive a want of respect to the committee as to state a matter of information as derived from specific authority, which, so far from having foundation, was built only on the vague guesses of a political speculator? Sir, I did not merit this injurious supposition. You have no occasion to go back to Gregory King, because, if you will put on your spectacles when you next examine the popu lation report on the return to the 41st of the King, you will find a table of progressive state of population from 1700 to 1801. But if you knew of this document and rejected it, I leave you to settle that matter with Mr. Rickman; I certainly accept his authority in decided preference to your cases to prove our depopulation; ruined towns-your large churches-your marks of the plough your down sides

your