A LETTER FROM A Right Honourable PERSON. And the Answer to it, Translated into Verse, as nearly as the different Idioms of PROSE and POETRY will allow. With Notes Historical, Critical, Political, &c.
LONDON: Printed for W. NICOLL in St. Paul's Church Yard. MDCCLXI.
The PREFACE.
WHEN first, of a thousand times, I read these curious epistles, which here I consecrate to rhime and immortality, when I found them equally fraught with historical truth, as with political wisdom; equally distinguished for elegance of manners, and accuracy of style, I lamented, that they were composed of perishable, prosaick materials. With what sincere concern did I reflect, that they must soon, too soon! be lost to remembrance, or be sent, in their news-papers, perhaps, to Jamaica, to exercise the criticism of sugar-planters, Negroes, and Creolians? I deplored the fate of the great man, to whom the second letter is addressed, whose good fame, o tempera, o mores! is hardly likely to survive his virtue, even in a monument, erected to the VIRO IMMORTALI.
I CONSIDERED from whence this calamity could arise, and I was immediately convinced, that if Homer had written the wrath of Achilles, or Virgil the loves of Dido in prose, the hero and the heroine must have long since experienced the common fate of mortality. The Muses, the Muses alone have the privelege of giving immortality. Musa vetat mori. Yet even the Muses cannot give it in prose. Shall it then hereafter be said, that two such personages, as these writers [Page ii] appear to be in each other's Letters; so eminently distinguished for their integrity, patriotism, abilities, and how tender is the expression! for their kind friendship, (a) shall they die, like mere mortals, quia carent vate sacro; because, No bard had they to make all time their own?
ANIMATED by these, and other reflections, equally powerful, I determined to snatch these charming letters from oblivion; to give them to immortality, by doing them into verse, as nearly as the different idioms of prose and poetry can allow; and then to place them in friendly opposition to each other, like pictures hung in contrast to illustrate each other's beauties.
THAT they are equally susceptible of all the most luxurious ornaments of poetry, every critick must allow; nor, if he be a critick of any tolerable sagacity, can he hesitate, even a moment, in pronouncing, that they are the works of the same master. Is there not the same everlasting length of period, the same manly disregard to grammar; the same loose, unconnected texture of expression; the same inconclusive, unconsequential reasoning, so peculiarly fitted to the freedom and ease of epistolary writing? Beauties, like these, it is confessed, have a kind of originality, which it is almost impossible to preserve in a translation. Yet the reader will find, it hath been boldly attempted, and his candour will determine, I hope, not unfavourably, of the success.
IN an humble consciousness of having merited that success by the fidelity of this translation, I shall venture to assert, what few modern translators can presume to assert, that it sometimes rises superior, in sublimity and beauty, even to the original. This superiority, no doubt, proceeds [Page iii] from a secret charm, that in general, animates the language of poetry, and particularly from the harmony of the numbers, which I have, not injudiciously, chosen. Be it known, therefore to all our minor poets, that doggrel is the proper measure for the sublime ideas of modern patriotism, panegyrick and addresses, of which I shall convince the world, as soon as a certain address to his M----y, I beg pardon, I mean to his minister, shall make its appearance.
BUT not panegyrick alone, nor patriotism have their proper and peculiar measures in poetry. When the ladies write love letters, all the numbers are elegiack. When our patriot-commoner raises his voice to assert the rights of the people; to deplore the errour of administration, or to vindicate his own injured reputation from the misrepresentations of credulity and calumny, his diction instantly assumes the pomp of blank verse. Lastly, when Mr. P--t and Mr. B--d oblige the world with a private publick correspondence, the mutual acknowledgments of each other's merit; their kind professions of friendship and esteem naturally sink together into doggrel.
HOWEVER, I am in christian charity; I bear no malice to prose or prosemen. I think it falls down very naturally in notes, remarks and annotations to the bottom of the page. Witness doctor W--n's two huge coloumns of criticism to support and explain two lines of Mr. Pope's poetry. In humble imitation of this right-reverend canonist in criticism, I have bottomed my pages with notes variorum. I do not mean the variorum of persons only, but of learning, morality, criticism, politicks, and panegyrick. I confess, I have almost exhausted my common place-book; no matter; I shall easily fill it again with quotations of learning from our illustrious moderns, and maxims of politicks from the common council at Guildhall.
[Page iv]THE publick, no doubt, ingratitude, as well as curiosity, will expect to be informed, WHO and WHAT are the writers, to whom they are obliged for these letters: who have published them for their own spontaneous bounty, unsolicited, and unmerited, as the pension of Kings: who is this right honourable person, and his friend Mr. -----: this pius Aeneas and his fidus Achiates; this second Sir James H----s, who vouches for the sentiments of the city.
THE last Hague Gazette has translated one of these letters into French, and assures us, that it is writen by the right honourable Mr. Pitt to the Lord Mayor of London, whom it frequently styles, MON CHER MOXSIEUR. It likewise informs us, that Mr. Pitt, although dismissed from his Office, yet regularly attends the frequent Councils held at Court. But as we have some reason to believe, that this intelligence is a little premature; that it is, at present, and probably will be for ever a mistake, we may therefore believe, there may possibly be some mistake in the other instance. If indeed it were only a trivial anachronism, in calling Mr. B----d, MY LORD; or might we think it prophetick of the next Year's Mayorality, then would I cry out with Coreggio, I too am a Painter.
Then should he stand in Oratorial Attitude, haranguing, loud, His and his Friend's fifteen Aldermen; their hundred common-council.
BUT to my task adventurous. Casta, O, Lucina, fave. Diva, producas sobolem, and give the springing birth to light.
A LETTER from a Right Honourable Person to ------ in the City, faithfully done into Verse, &c.
The following Letter was generously communicated to us by the Writer himself.
General REFLECTIONS upon these Letters.
NEITHER in the Petulance of attempting to be a Wit, nor for the poor Renown of being smart, nor yet to vindicate, as may possibly be suspected, my Reason by my Risibility, did I assume the Tone and Air of Pleasantry. The right honourable Person has made his Appeal to the Publick, and every Individual of that Publick is authorised to deliver his Sentiments upon it, in his own Manner, according to the Measure of his Knowledge, his Abilities and Understanding. For my Part, I was determined to try the Gentleman's Conduct by every Kind of Proof, even by that of Ridicule. If he sinks under this Proof, which is generally allowed to be no mean Test of Truth, his Resignation is blameable; and then it is of little Importance, by what Forms of Trial he stands condemned. If he can stand this Process, he will come forth from it, like Gold from the Furnace, brighter and purer, and certainly not injured in his Weight.
SOME Expressions in these Papers may possibly be taxed with too much Levity, and others charged with too much Severity; yet when, in the first of these Letters, whoever withdraws his good Opinion from the right honourable Person is represented as capricious and ungenerous, and rated for a Credulity, weak as injurious (I presume the Gentleman means unjust) when, in the second Letter, all, who differ from the Writer's Sentiments, are frankly called Fools and Knaves, surely such Coarseness of Expression will justify all Kinds of Language in return.
I DO not make any over-earnest Professions of my own Impartiality. I do not think myself exempted from that common Lot of all human [Page 18] Understandings, the being placed between Reason and Passion; between Prejudice and Impartiality. I greatly fear, that our Friends are not always impartial; I truly believe, that our Enemies are not always malignant.
I CONFESS, I did not imagine this extraordinary Resignation was an Object of such present Importance, or probably productive of such future Consequences, either good or evil, as to require any mighty Solemnity in the Manner of treating it; and perhaps the following Reflexions may convince my Readers, it was not for want of many a serious Argument, that I have chosen those of Raillery and Ridicule. But here let me be permitted to lay before the Publick some Circumstances concerning it, of which they have not yet been informed, and upon which they may with absolute Certainty rely.
WHEN the right honourable Gentleman entered into Ministry, he found every thing yielding to his Ambition. The late King, whose Love for his native Country may justly be numbered among his Virtues, must have certainly been highly satisfied with a Minister, who so largely gratified his favourite Passion: who poured forth the Blood and Treasures of Great Britain into Hanover, with a Profusion, which no other Minister durst have ventured, or must have ventured at the Hazard of his Head. Such were the effects of that Influence, which he had gained over the People, by repeated Professions of his Zeal for their Service; as if their Interests were not united with those of the other great Members of the State, or as if they could, even in Idea, be separated from those of the Sovereign. His Majesty's Servants in council silently acquiesced (nor would I willingly impute it to [Page 19] them as a Crime) in this continental Prodigality. Every part of Administration concurred in a Compliance with his Directions; I am ashamed to say, in an implicite Obedience to his Commands. Fleets were equipped; Regiments were raised, Expeditions appointed, and the Treasury gave forth its Millions to his Order.
THUS did he exercise a Kind of Despotism, unknown to the Constitution, and destructive of every Idea of Liberty, until he was opposed, for the first Time even by his own Account opposed, in a Measure too precipitate, too important and too unjust, to be complied with either by his Majesty, or his Servants. He proposed an immediate Declaration of War against Spain, at a Time, when she was giving us every Assurance of her Inclination to preserve the Peace and Amity, subsisting between the two Nations, and which it is their mutual Interest to preserve.
IT is hardly conceivable, that he could either desire, or expect to succeed in such an extravagant Proposal. What! to declare War, and commence Hostilities against a friendly Nation, without asking a Satisfaction for any supposed Insults, a Redress of Injuries, or even an Explanation of Grievances! The Laws of Nature and Nations; the Obligations of Treaties; the common Sense of Equity and Reason equally disclaim a Proceeding, as unjust, as precipitate.
BUT what have the Spaniards already done to provoke the Gentleman's Indignation, and justify his Resentment? He neither urged any particular Instance of their Partiality to the French; nor any new Violations of our long-contested Rights to cutting Logwood, nor even their Injustice with regard to the Antigallican and her Prize, which, besides some other Indignities, he temperately endured through the [Page 20] whole Course of his administration. But, so it seems, the Fulness of Time for his resigning was not yet arrived; he was not yet tired of guiding and governing. But when he had taken a nearer View of the Port, to which the Vessel was driving with all the Sails he had crowded upon her; when he saw the Rocks and Shallows and Breakers, that threatened his Entrance into the Harbour; when he saw the Coast covered with the ship-wrecked Reputations of former Ministers, he prudently quitted the Helm, and retired, a simple Passenger, to his Cabin.
BUT really what had Spain already done? She had written to France to desire her good Offices with Great Britain; that when her Minister was forming the general Articles of Peace, he might likewise pay some Attention to certain Matters of mutual Complaint between us and the Spaniards, which might possibly occasion some future Rupture between the two Kingdoms, and disturb the Tranquility of Europe. What is there either so injurious, or offensive in this Proceeding, that could have justified the Nation in declaring War, or could particularly justify the Minister, who had borne, with rather a too passive Spirit, some real Indignities from the Spaniards; some real Injustice.
MR. BUSSY probably exceeded his Commission, or executed it with Insolence; or if this Letter could reasonably give Umbrage to us, why not call for an Explanation of it? Why not demand a Copy of it, and if denied—‘"No: the Spaniards will certainly declare War against us. Let us prevent them."’ When it was urged that they would think twice before they declared War against this Kingdom: ‘"I will not give them Leave to think,"’ was the spirited Answer of our Minister. ‘"This is the Time; let us crush the [Page 21] whole House of Bourbon. But, if the Members of this Board are of another Opinion, this is the last Time I shall ever mix in its Councils. I was called into Ministry by the Voice of the People, and to them I hold myself answerable for my Conduct. I am to thank the Ministers of the late King for their Support. I have served my Country with Success, but I will not be responsible for the Conduct of the War any longer, than while I have the Direction of it."’ This last Declaration was by no means equivocal. It was a frank and open Demand of an unlimited Authority, and unconditional Obedience.
THE noble Lord, who presided in this Council; to whom Years have added the Wisdom of Experience without abating the Vigour and Fire of Youth; whose natural and acquired Abilities are unquestionable as great, as ever this Gentleman could boast; who was himself as bold a Minister, as ever directed the Affairs of this Nation, made him this temperate Reply. ‘"I find the Gentleman is determined to leave us, nor can I say, I am sorry for it; since he would otherwise have certainly compelled us to leave Him. But, if he be resolved to assume the Right of advising his Majesty, and directing the Operations of the War, to what purpose are we called to this Council? When he talks of being responsible to the People, he talks the Language of the House of Commons, and forgets, that at this Board, he is only responsible to the King. However, though he may possibly have convinced himself of his Infallibility, still it remains, that we should be equally convinced before we can resign our Understandings to his Direction, or join with him in the Measure he proposes."’
[Page 22]HE bore the Rebukings of this Answer without making any Reply, but he had gone too far, though perhaps not without repenting, to retreat. He therefore resigned the Seals, which were received with an Ease and Firmness, that he probably very little expected. The King, with his usual Goodness, expressed his Concern for the Loss of so able a Servant, and to shew the favourable Sense he entertained of his Services, was graciously pleased to make him an Offer of any Rewards in the Power of the Crown to bestow. His Majesty then added, with regard to the Measure proposed, that he would certainly have found Himself under the greatest Difficulty, how to have acted, even though the whole Council had concurred in supporting it. A Sentiment of infinite Honour to him, who uttered it, not only as it asserts a royal Prerogative, which for the Good of his People He should ever preserve, but as it vindicates those nobler Prerogatives of his Reason, his Understanding and his Conscience. But these Prerogatives, in all Probability, the right honourable Gentlemàn never thought of. However, this Condescension, with which he was treated, affected him strongly. ‘"I confess, Sir, I had but too much Reason to expect your Majesty Displeasure. I did not come prepared for this exceeding Goodness. Pardon me Sir,—it over-powers; it oppresses me."’ He burst into Tears.
HIS Lady's Title, and his own Pension, were settled next Day between Lord Bute and Him; when certainly the Title, and probably the Sum of the Pension, was of his own free Choice. His Friends at first, warmly disclaimed the Insinuation of his taking a Pension. They called it a base and momentary Artifice to blast his Reputation. They disdained his receiving any Honours from a Master, whom he no longer thought proper to serve. "What Title," thus [Page 23] they exclaimed, ‘"can be half so honourable, as being styled the Patriot Minister; the Minister of the People? What Honour can descend to his Posterity, equal to the historical Truth, that he has saved his Country from Ruin and Reproach; that he has raised her to Glory and Happiness?"’ But since it is no longer an Insinuation, that he has received his Pension; since his accepting a Title for his Lady can be no longer an Artifice of his Enemies, his Friends endeavour to defend his blasted Reputation.
THE best attempt for this Purpose, yet offered to the publick, is in a Pamphlet, entitled, The Conduct of a right honourable Gentleman, justified by Facts, and upon the Principles of the British Constitution. It is written with Temper, and has a Degree of Knowledge, though certainly not that of the British Constitution, rarely found among us Pamphleteers. His first Proposition is, that Mr. Pitt could not, consistently with his own Safety, continue in the high Post he held, after being forced to deviate from the great Lines of conduct he had chalked out when he first entered upon it. In page 44, he tells us, thus, I think, I have fully demonstrated my first Proposition. As he has not thought proper to inform us what these great Lines of Conduct are (perhaps not much straighter than Hogarth's Line of Beauty) from whence the right honourable Person was forced to deviate; nor told us, why, or by whom he was thus forced, we cannot be quite convinced, that he has demonstrated his first Proposition. But how demonstrated? By a tedious Detail of Injuries, committed against us by Spain: a Detail of uncertain, unauthenticated Facts. Let me not seem to suspect the Writer's own Belief of these Facts, but granting them true; granting, that Mr. Pitt was convinced of their Truth, yet it never can be demonstrated either from their Truth, or [Page 24] his Conviction, that his Resignation was necessary to his Safety. The Rectitude or Error of his conduct in this Instance arises from the Reason, which he himself hath given for it, that he was no longer allowed to guide.
THE great Chillingworth repeatedly cries out, the Bible, the Bible is the Religion of Protestants. Thus would I repeat, the Law, the Law is the British Constitution. Where therefore is the Law, by which Mr. Pitt's Safety could have been affected, if he had continued in Office, after the Measure he proposed of declaring War against Spain was rejected? ‘"But evil Councellors are liable by the Law to punishment."’ True; and may they ever be liable. Yet the Minister, who does not give any Counsel; who enters his Protest against the Counsel, given by others, shall be liable to Punishment, as an evil Counsellor? If for the sake of preserving that unanimity, so necessary at this dangerous Crisis of our Affairs; if in a modest Diffidence of his own Judgment, or a less outrageous Contempt for that of others, Mr. Pitt had silently complied with the united Opinions of His Majesty, and all the Members of the Cabinet, could such Compliance ever be imputed to him as a Crime; could it endanger his Safety? If there be any Law, that declares the Guilt of such Compliance, or threatens his Safety for it, let it be produced; or let it never be urged hereafter, even by his Fears, whether they be real or affected.
OUR Writer, so learned in the Principles and Maxims of the British Constitution, is candid enough to acknowledge, Pag. 51. that neither the Constitution, nor Laws of this Country define the post or power of a Minister of State, or even suppose, that any such can exist. True [Page 25] indeed. The Constitution disclaims, abhors and dreads even the Idea of such a Minister. Yet, strange proof how a bad cause can pervert a good Understanding! The very Gentleman, who makes this candid Concession, founds Mr. Pitt's Defence upon his being not only a Minister, but a first, a directing Minister: Terms, as new as unknown to the Constitution as that of guiding, and as heartily to be detested.
IT is the peculiar Excellence of this Constitution, that the Powers of Government are divided among the three Estates of which it is composed. Should any one of these Estates become possessed of more than its proper share of Power, the Constitution, with all its Blessings of Religion, Liberty, and Property, is instantly dissolved. The King becomes a Tyrant, the House of Lords an Aristocracy, and the People a Democracy. Shall one Man therefore, a simple Citizen, dare to assume to himself all the different Powers of Government? Shall he presume to make War and Peace? Shall he raise Armies, fit out Fleets, plan Expeditions, and lavish away the publick Treasure, under this new-invented Title, a guiding Minister? The very Claim of such a Power is an insolent Outrage to the Laws, the Constitution, the Liberty of our Country, and this Right Honourable Person is the first, that ever made this outrageous Claim. If any one Man were capable of executing such a Power, yet never should it be intrusted, (I speak with all possible Reverence and Respect,) no, not for a Moment to any one Man, even to THE BEST OF SOVEREIGNS.
IF among the great Lines of this Gentleman's Conduct, he determined never to join in any Measure, which he was not allowed to guide; or in somewhat modester Language, if he resolved to resign, [Page 26] whenever he was unable to convince the other Members of the Council, of the Wisdom, the Justice, or Utility of the Measures he proposed, permit me to ask, what must be the Consequence, if every other Member, (and his equal Right, I presume, will not be denied) should take the same Resolution? In vain will his Majesty call together a Number of his Servants for their Advice in Matters of Doubt and Importance, if each of them in his Turn, may withdraw himself from his Duty to his Country, for I presume such a Duty will be acknowledged, whenever his Opinion is contradicted.
BUT it seems the right honourable Person is not disabled by his Resignation, from offering his opinion to his Majesty, his Parliament and his Council with as much Freedom, and with more weight, than he could have had, had he retained the Seals of his Office. In what manner he will exert his Abilities, or shew forth his Zeal for his Country, and his inviolable Attachment to the Interests of the People, he probably has not yet determined. Perhaps, he will endeavour to convince the House of Commons, that he is endowed with some peculiar Spirit, some certain superior Instinct, fitted for planning and executing all the great Measures of Government. But I truly hold it of little Importance to the State of the Nation, whether he sits in the silence of his Pension, or rises, in the Spleen of disappointed Ambition, a futile Declaimer against the Measures of Government.