132-068.xml

Title: [[copyist’s hand] nd [wm 1818]]

Description: [copyist’s hand]

nd [wm 1818]

To Erskine

5.

But your Lordship, or your Lordship’s Morning Chronicle friend may say – though in the middle of our paragraph the junto was “a miserable little one”, yet, at the commencement, it was “a junto who administer Westminster” to wit – “in the name of Sir Francis Burdett” and again moreover towards the close it is “the rump that govern Westminster in his name” and then his rump administration is an object towards which “the pliancy and subserviency of the Baronet finds it necessary to manifest itself”. How then says M r Perry – and here – through the mouth of this your Lordship’s | | honest, enlightened, independent intimate (p. 18. l. 17) whose “spirit and eloquence would have added lustre to the bar at any period” (p. 19. l. 5.) Your Lordship may perhaps remember not to forget, that whether the Rump govern the Baronet, or the Baronet the rump, here is a thing called power: and this said thing a good thing, which the said Rump have not only possessed but exercised, and by exercising it enjoyed: and forasmuch as in that “miserable little junto”, the appetite and relish for power is as sharp as in your Lordship’s Clients, it is regulated and subdued, thus it is that the number of that same Junto have had their reward | | all idea of self sacrifice: and therefore even according to your own notion theoretical as it is and therefore false, all merit is out of the question. Now of this argument the full advantage shall be left to your Lordship, and your Lordship’s said disinterested friends, who being so disinterested, might but for some inadvertence /the shortness of his memory/ have remembered to sell the Morning Chronicle gratis, while your Lordship was fascinating Juries with eloquence at the same price.

Unfortunately even of this argument, such as it is, the application goes no further than the Rump: for it is only that “junto” that can be not only a “ miserable” but a “ little” one.

Remains the great body of the 3883: and here again the learned and editorial eyes may look till they are dim before they can see any thing that can be called power: all they can there see is consumption of time danger of loss of custom, loss of the fruits bestowed by patronage – in a word, in an incalculable variety of shapes self-sacrifice: all this without a motive, unless sympathy for the public interest – in two words public spirit, or in one word patriotism have been their motive. Here may be some illegitimate and corruptive influence – influence of will on will may be seen the monster Terrorism by these self-devoted heroes in humble life, faced | | with and vanquished. But of this more in my next, when my humble labours

come

132-049.xml

Title: [1819 Apr. 13 + + To Erskine]

Description: 1819 Apr. 13 + +

To Erskine

Lett. II Whig Merits

1

16

Well, my Lord I have told Your Lordship where merits are not: I will now tell you where they are. Direct instruction commences the work of instruction: contrast perfects it.

Merits are not in Your Lordship’s “great body” of the Parliamentary Whigs: they are in the 3883, against whom these Whigs, with their Tory helpmates prevailed on the Westminster Hustings in March 1819.

In the “great body” of Your Lordship’s Clients, pretensions abundant: good deeds: unavoidable and uncostly not a few: merits, none. In the 3883 – “in the miserable little junto” – “in the Rump who administer Westminster in the in the name of Sir Francis Burdett” [*] ... there it is that merits may be seen – seen in an abundance by which I am the more astonished the more I think of it:- seen by those whose eyes allow them, not only to see merits, but to see them where they are. In that miserable little junto, would you see labour without profit – labour with expence instead of profit – would you even uncalculable loss – would you see in a word see self-sacrifice? there you may see self-sacrifice: there you may see what a may look for, till his eyes water, and not find it, in Your Lordship’s calumniated Whigs of England (p. 9 l. 1.) in your Lordship’s band of patriots (p. 7. l. 9) in your Lordship’s “men of honour, manliness and wisdom” (p. 13. l. 29) in Your Lordship’s “men of true wisdom” (p. 23 l. 11) – in your Lordship’s men who follow the dictates “of a pure and honest sense of duty, conscious of their talents and their honest disposition” (p 24. l. 15) in your Lordship’s “acknowledged possessors of the highest sense of honour” (p. 24 l. 24) in your Lordship’s “enlightened and independent men” (p. 30. l. 12.) and so forth.

“Shade of Hampden! look down, and in a host of Tradesmen and Shop-keepers, behold thy yet living and altogether worthy successor”. [+] Such was the exclamation called forth by the contemplation of the merits of these my fellow citizens of Westminster – of such their merits as in the year 1817 had already manifested themselves. Now in 1819, do I see any reason for lowering this voice? No: I see encreased reason for raising it.

[*] Morn. Chron. 11 March 1819

[+] Parl. Cat. Introd p cxxix

132-066.xml

Title: [[copyist’s hand] nd To Erskine]

Description: [copyist’s hand]

nd

To Erskine

3.

George Rose loved himself. For unless it be in Armata where is the man that does not? But George Rose loved his Country: George Rose, with the exception of those whose skins were black, loved mankind. I say my Lord he loved mankind or at least his Country. Ese, my Lord, what use could he think he had for me? I could give him no sinecures. George Rose could serve himself, and he did so: he could give himself sinecures, and so he did. George Rose could not serve mankind, George Rose could not serve his country: and therefore he did not.

Thus it is – thus it ever will be – under the system of corruption: that system, to which, on this occasion, your Lordship’s eloquence, and even without being lifted up by fees has, with so much eagerness given its protection. | | as he touched it, turned every thing into gold. Under the system of corruption, the corrupter General turns into corruption the whole crop of the tree of good and evil; and without so much as touching it. – Touching it did I say? Looking at him it of itself becomes corruption: he need not so much as look at it.

But I have been wandering and prating of past times. It is among the weaknesses of old men.

Well, my Lord, I have told your Lordship where merits are not: I will now tell you where they are. Direct indication commences the work of Instruction: contrast perfects it. Merits are not in your Lordship’s ‘great body’ of the Parliamentary Whigs: they are in the 3883 against whom these Whigs with their Tory Helpmates prevailed on at the Westminster Hustings in March 1819.

In the ‘great body’ of your Lordship’s clients, pretensions abundant: good deeds unavoidable and | | not a few: merits none. In the 3883, “in the Miserable little junto” – “in the Rump who administer Westminster in the name of Sir Francis Burdett” – there it is that merits may be seen – seen in an abundance by which I am the more astonished the more I think of it: seen by those whose eyes allow them not only to see Merits, but to see them where they are. In that miserable little Junto, would you see labour without profit – labour with expence instead of profit – would you see in a word self-sacrifice? there you may see self sacrifice: that you may see what a may look for till his eyes water and not find it in your Lordships calumniated Whigs of England (p.9 l.1.)

in