that illustrious nobleman Earl Moira.' To us it appears rather a daub than a portrait. Of his lordship's talents and learning as a scholar, of his character and principles as a politician, and of his bravery and skill as a military man, we entertain a very respectful idea; and the public, we are convinced, think with us on that subject: but, if they did not, there is certainly nothing in this work which would make them converts to the opinion. If there be any feature in this Portrait' chastely and truly delineated, it is the sketch of his Lordship's history which is given towards the close of the work. Of the writer's manner, and of his skill in imagery, the following is a fair (perhaps a favourable) specimen:

Until the keen sword is sheathed; or, at any rate, until it is sweetly wreathed by the olive;—until the brow of rigor is unknit, and the government rests for a moment on its arms; until the loud voice of authority mingles the soft tenor notes of reconciliation with its harsh double bass of terror; no breath can attune the Eolian harp of Hibernia to any other sounds than those of sorrows and of sighs!'

Art. 42. Matter of Fact for the Multitude. By a True Patriot; though neither a Member of the Corresponding Society, the Whig Club, nor any Affiliated Society of Sedition in Europe. 8vo. 6d. Wright.

The reader of this pamphlet will probably think that it might be more properly called "Thoughts from the Treasury" than Matter of Fact. It is an address to the multitude, designed to convince them that Mr. Fox and the Opposition have been, for 20 years, in the pay of France;' that all the measures which Government have been compelled to take, have been only for the security of the Constitution; that the cry against ministers arises solely from a wish in hungry parasites to succeed them in places of power and profit ;' that the war was a measure of absolute necessity on the part of this country; that ministers, by entering into it, have honourably maintained the dignity and consulted the interests of Great Britain;' that they were sincere in their wish for peace with France,' and yet that every country who did make peace with her has thereby been ruined;' that those who advise reform have a latent design to subvert the Constitution;' and, finally, that Britain is now the richest and most prosperous nation under heaven!'-Of these curious and interesting positions, the proofs are principally drawn from Mr. Harper's observations; the Irish Chancellor's specch; the Irish "Press ;" and the "Union Star." However fallacious the public may think many of these assertions, or however inconclusive they may deem the proofs alleged to support them, it would be unjust to deny that they are urged with much plausibility, and in correct and nervous language.

Art. 43. Plain Truth, addressed to the Tars of Old England. Dedicated to Admiral Goodall. By one of themselves. 8vo. IS. Longman. 1798.

For Plain Truth, this loyal writer presents the tars of Old England with twenty-four pages of abuse against those matured villains of

hell,'

Wall

Do

1

6

hell, the French; their assassinating armies,' and regicide direc
tory; their crew of legislative robbers;' the which consist of
village attornies, theatrical banditti, buffoons, and taylors: Nor does he
forget those cowardly traitors, the sanguinary rebels' in Ireland
against whom he advises his fellow-seamento give full scope to their
revenge, and make no prisoners to cherish rebellion and the flames of
this most disastrous war.' The preface is a defiance of all CITIZEN
REVIEWERS. Without affecting that title, we profess ourselves de-
stitute of courage to grapple with such a combatant.

Art. 44. Letters of the Ghost of Alfred, addressed to the Hon. The
mas Erskine, and the Hon. Charles James Fox, on the Occasion
of the State Trials at the Close of the Year 1794 and the Begin
ning of the Year 1795. 8vo. 2s. 6d. Boards. Wright. 1798.
A lapse of nearly four years since these letters were originally pub-
lished, in "The True Briton," gives this collection somewhat the
air of an obsolete performance. The letters to Mr. Erskine consist
of tolerably well-wrought invective against that gentleman for what
the writer calls taking upon himself in those trials the function of
the judge, and attempting to lay down the law to the jury;' and for
urging in defence of his clients doctrines unconstitutional and false:"
for instance, that the people have a right to change their govern
ment, and that the monarch on the throne receives his title from the
exercise of such a right. It is Mr. Erskine's parliamentary conduct,
however, that principally falls under the censure of the Ghost of Al-
fred; and of that no part appears to have given so much offence as
the pertinacity with which Mr. E. has contended that the acquittal
of the persons tried for high treason, in 1794, went to disprove the
existence of the conspiracy in which they were charged with being
implicated.

The existence of a conspiracy (says this writer) was the basis of
the whole proceeding. It was the necessary foundation of the case
for the prosecution. If this ground-work had not been laid in the
most solid manner, and so as to preclude all doubt, can it be supposed
that the prisoners would have been put upon their defence? What
had they to defend themselves against, if no crime had been proved?"

It would be easy for an oppositionist to answer this argument by a reference to what every day passes in the criminal courts of this country; where innumerable cases occur in which the jury are to judge as well whether the offence was committed, as whether the person on trial committed it. It is not for us, however, to answer this writer's arguments; and it is the less necessary to attempt it, as we have no doubt that every reader, possessed of common understanding, and an ordinary knowlege of the law and constitution of England, will be able to detect the sophistry which is so thickly strewed in these letters. Those that are addressed to Mr. Fox constitute the principal part of the work. It is sufficient to say of them, that they only take a new occasion to reiterate those heavy charges which, for so many years, have been made on that gentleman. They deserve, however, the praise of being less coarse and scurrilous than publications of that stamp generally are. Indeed, were they to be REV. JUNE, 1798. considered

R

Wall..e.

considered merely as compositions, we should place them considerably above the level of newspaper productions.

Art. 45. Report of the Committee of the House of Commons, in conse quence of the several Motions relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War. Including the Whole of the Examinations taken before the Committee, the Correspondence relative to the Exchange of Prisoners, the Instructions of Colonel Tate, &c. 8vo. 2s. 6d. Wright. 1798.

This amended report (for the original one was re-committed) is very extensive: but the greater part of it is filled with the evidence of witnesses examined before the Committee, with correspondence, &c. the substance of which is compressed into what is properly the report of the Committee, and contained in the first 15 pages. The Committee have divided their report into three parts: the first relates to the treatment of the French prisoners of war confined in England; the second, to the treatment of British prisoners confined in France; and the third, to the steps taken by the British Government for the establishment of a cartel of exchange.

Every true Englishman will hear with pleasure that the rumors, which had gone abroad respecting the very harsh treatment said to have been experienced in this country by the French prisoners, are proved by this report to be in a great measure, if not totally, void of foundation. By the various documents given in the appendix, and cited in the report, it appears that, with respect to food, air, and the general accommodation of the prisoners, both in the hospitals and the prisons, Government have been properly attentive. Abuses, however, it seems, have in some instances arisen, either from the negli gence or the avarice of contractors: but, according to this report, wherever they have been detected either by the vigilance of M. Charettié, the French agent, or by other means, they were immediately redressed.

It was in consequence of these false statements, and of the mutual complaints made by each country respecting the treatment of their respective prisoners, that Mr. Swinburne (the English agent in France) was induced to propose to the French Government that plan which was afterward adopted, viz. "That, in future, each nation should take upon itself the care of clothing, victualling, and providing medical attendance for the prisoners of its own country." From a comparison of the rations afforded to the French prisoners when under the care of the British commissaries, and when under those of their own country, the Committee infer that under the former they had no good ground of complaint. They are as follow:

The daily rations of provisions for prisoners of the former description were, one quart of beer, one pound and half of bread, one third of an ounce of salt, three quarters of a pound of beef, except on Saturdays, when four ounces of butter or six of cheese were substi tuted; half a pint of pease four days a week. When greens were issued in lieu of pease, each man's allowance was one pound of cabbage, stripped of the stalk, and fit for boiling.

These rations varied occasionally, as circumstances required. In May 1795, on account of a temporary scarcity of fresh beef, it

was

Wall..

was withheld two days in the week, and salted provisions supplied in lieu; and in August 1795, on account of a scarcity of bread, the quantity of that article was diminished for a time, but the deficiency was made up by additional pulse or vegetables. Upon any complaint of consequence, a visitation was made by a commissioner of the board, to the spot where the complaint arose, for the sake of enquiring into it, and if well founded it was instantly redressed.'

The daily allowance of provisions at present' (that is, under the French commissaries) is one quart of beer, twenty-six ounces of bread, eight ounces of beef, two ounces of cheese, or one ounce and one third of good salt butter, one third of an ounce of salt, half a pint of pease, or half a pound of vegetables: each prisoner is allowed monthly half a pound of white soap, and three quarters of a pound of tobacco in the leaf.'

Under the second head of the inquiry, viz. respecting the treatment of British prisoners in France, the Committee, though professing themselves to have very imperfect means of information, bring against the French Government the heavy charge of being actuated, with respect to them, by an uniform spirit of rigour; contrary to the practices of the civilized nations of Europe, and unparalleled in any former war. In support of this charge, the Committee. produce documents, which undoubtedly prove that, in some particular instances, the British prisoners had met with very hard and cruel treat ment, from want of good food, of air, and of proper covering: but how far the charge of an uniform spirit of rigour and cruelty actuating the French Government, with regard to the British prisoners,' is supported by proof, the public will judge from the following letter of the English agent himself:

(No. 31.) Extract of a Letter from Henry Swinburne, Esq. to the commissioners for the transport service, &c.-Dated Paris, the 10th January 1797.

The prisoners at Dunkirk are already provided with the clothing that was absolutely necessary. Part of those at Amiens are relieved: some delay arises from the roguery of the contractor, which requires correcting, but I expect to-morrow to hear of the whole number being furnished with what, in this very rigorous season, is indis pensably necessary for their preservation. It is scarcely credible how the treatment of prisoners varies in different depots, much depending upon the will and also the means of the commanding officers. At Arras the prisoners are in barracks, with beds and blankets, plenty of rice, and two sous and a half per diem; at Dunkirk only a few blankets could be obtained; at Amiens nothing at all, and no pay for a long time back. I have been obliged to order for the two hundred men, a sufficient range of beds of rough planks, raised from the ground; the expence has been trifling, and I am happy to hear has been well employed, as it keeps them out of the reach of a destructive humidity and filth, of which they have hitherto been the victims.'

For the assertion that every effort was made to induce the British seamen, who were prisoners, to go on board the French fleet, the report seems to adduce much stronger authority in the evidence of

R 2

Mr.

Mr. McWhinnie, that of Captain Colnett, and the letter of Captain Cotes, given in the Appendix, No. 8, 10, and 72: but we cannot think, with the Committee, that the instructions to Colonel Tate, previously to his descent on Wales, go at all to prove that it is part of the system of France to force subjects to serve against their own country;' because we can easily conceive that a commander, in a particular and desperate expedition, might resort to that unjustifiable measure, without its being a general principle of the government of the country so to do.

The third head of the report states the steps which have been taken by Government for the establishment of a cartel, and the proceedings in both countries respecting Sir Sidney Smith, &c. The British Government, it appears, proposed an exchange on the terms which regulated the cartel between the two countries during the last war, viz. man for man, and rank for rank. The French Committee of Public Safety rejected this proposal, on the ground of the advantage which a restoration of prisoners would give Great Britain; which, as they said, wanted soldiers and seamen; while France, who carried on the war with the mass of the people, had a redundancy of forces. In 1796, however, (several partial exchanges having previously taken place,) M. Charretié proposed to Government that "all the prisoners of both nations should return home, and that the regulation of the exchange should be deferred till the return of peace." As a balance of more than 5000 men was due by France to Great Britain by former exchanges, this preposterous proposal (as the report calls it) was rejected. The capture of Sir Sidney Smith about this time, whom the French Government wished to detain " upon a distinction which they never thought fit to define," induced the British Government to propose the release of 1000 prisoners over and above the balance of exchange, if Sir Sidney were included in the cartel: adding a threat that, if he were not permitted to enjoy the privileges usually granted to persons of his rank, all the parole prisoners in England should be strictly confined. This proposal, how, ever, the French Government rejected, and refused to grant the de. sired indulgence to Sir Sidney, The negotiation for exchange, there fore, stands at this point, and the threat of closely confining the French parole prisoners was carried into execution.

On the whole, the Committee appear to have gone into a very la borious and minute investigation of a subject in which the honour of this country was deeply concerned. The result has vindicated the national character. In the report, however, the Committee draw some conclusions with a rapidity in which we cannot follow them, and deliver some opinions without stating the authorities on which they were founded.

Art. 46. A Letter to the Reformers. By Henry Redhead Yorke,
Esq. 8vo. pp. 87. Is. 6d. Symonds.

This letter is principally distinguished by the writer's zeal against the people and present government of France. His late sufferings on account of his former political tenets may, possibly, have contri buted somewhat towards a reform in his opinions. If we become

Wall....