LORD BROUGHAM'S POLITICAL CHARACTERS.
IT appears that Sir HERBERT TAYLOR published a pamphlet in reply to the celebrated article on the " Times of George the Third and George the Fourth," in the Spring Number of the Edin- burgh Review. Of the views, scope, or character of that pamphlet, we can offer no opinion; for either its publisher or its author, afraid of criticism, and eschewing publicity if accompanied with comment, have taken care to send no copy to the Spectator. But if Sir HERBERT has failed in bis client-like purpose of defend- ing the memory of his patrons from the unsparing onslaught of their assailant, his pamphlet has nevertheless dune good service, by becoming a text on which that assailant continues his discourse, and paints a fresh gallery of " Political Characters of the Reigns of George the Third and Fourth." The article falls naturally under two divisions,—the first em- bracing a defence of the former paper, which Sir HERBERT seems to attribute to " rancorous" personal and party feelings, and terms a " libel ;" the second containing a series of portraits of the great political leaders of the past and passing generation. Upon the sufficiency of the reply to Sir HERBERT, we, not having seen the original, are not in a situation to decide. We conjecture, however, that in attempting to defend, or it would almost seem to exalt the characters of GEORGE the Third, of his mean and sordid-minded consort, and of his heartlessly selfish son, the late King's Secretary has undertaken a labour beyond his strength. That Lord BROUGHAM habitually exaggerates whatever he does— seeming to think that the great excellence consists in saying the best or worst of any thing—is correct. But it is not in the power of a man with the soul of a gentleman usher to separate the par- tial from the wholly true—to submit the rhetorical combina- tions of BROUGHAM to a critical analysis—and to weigh the re- sults in the nicely-balanced scales of an impartial and enlightened judgment. Leaving this part of the article, with the remark that Lord BROUGHAM deems it politic or necessary to butter Sir HERBERT TAYLOR, in a manner which smacks a good deal more of a barris- ter's overstrained politeness than of the courtesy of a well-bred controvertist, we pass to the characters. These commence with an elaborate and panegyrical portrait of BURKK ; very striking, highly laboured, and equally balanced, but not exhibiting a re- fined apprehension or philosophical appreciation of that illus- trious man, either in his excellencies or his weakness. Fox comes next; and is much better—full, fair, and individualized, except in the oratorical qualities of his mind, which seem made up by fancy, rather than detected by discrimination. To PITT, an equal, perhaps a greater praise may be applied; and the lesser luminaries, DUNDAS, WINDHAM, and TIERNEY, have great merit,—DuNeas, however, looking the most like a man, which perhaps he was in reality. The exertions and forensic labours of ERSKINE are not exaggerated; but we suspect his qualities are, because he was a lawyer : for we may remark in passing, that Lord BROUGHAM loses no opportunity of exalting the effects of the law upon its followers, though we believe no profession is so inju- rious to an expansion of the intellect, a chivalrous sense of honour, or any morality above the vulgarest stamp. The sketch of SHERIDAN, though somewhat harsh, is the justest of the cha- racters. The effects of his education and training are noted with discrimination; his defects, and, with less gusto, his oratorical merits, are clearly brought out; a fair if not an ample allowance is made for his backsliding'; and his character as a politician is thus truly though sternly marked— a When the just tribute of extraordinary admiration has been bestowed upon this great orator, the whole of his praise has been exhausted. As a statesman, he is without a place in any class, or of any rank : it would be incorrect and flattering to call him a bad, or a hurtful, or a short-sighted, or a middling state- man—he was no statesman at all."
One striking and interesting feature in this article, is the fact peeping out here and there, that the author has in his portfolio materials of the most valuable kind, and characters of the present generation as striking and piquant as those of the past. Here is an important disclosure, from the reply to Sir HERBERT about the character of GEORGE the Third- " If it be said that hearsay might exaggerate all this, we assert that his own handwriting respecting Lord Chatham remains to convict him of feelings not other than inhuman, where his prejudices, and above all, his tyrannical pro- pensities, were thwarted. We allude to his conteniplatiug the death, and still more the 'decrepitude' of that illustrious person with manifest satisfaction; himself having once suffered in early life under the visitation of Divine Provi- dence, which laid his own faculties, such as they were, prostrate. Let us add, that some friends of the family, and of the monarchy, quite as firmly attached to both as Sir Herbert Taylor, have pronounced the opinion that a publication of the private correspondence of this revered Monarch with his Ministers during the American War, would put the very existence of the Constitution in jeopardy ; so full is it of proofs of a fierce tyrannical disposition. That oar- respondence now lies before us."
The notion of the " existence of the Constitution being put in jeopardy," now-a-days, by any thing written during the Ameri- can War, is, we take leave to say, sheer fudge. But to destroy the existence of documents so important in an historical point of view, would be a crime against posterity and letters; and we
trust that they may yet be given to the world, as evidence which it is entitled to possess.
The close of the reply contains a passage equally curious, but much more alarming to many living personages than any thing boding danger to the Constitution-
4, We hold them up once more in the face of the country, that no courtly para- site may presume to go about whispering that Sir Herbert Taylor has refuted the Edinburgh Review ; and to prove, that lie has only attempted to answer some of the things said by us of the two parents ; without even a formal denial, or mere plea of not guilty, to any one of the far heavier accusations explicitly brought against the son. We also hold up this deformed portrait as a warning to Princes and Princesses how they venture either to violate the public duty of their station, or those private duties which the preeminence of their rank, far from dispensing them from discharging, only imposes tenfold obligations to per. form ; and in order to remind them, that the day must come to them all when the tongue of the flatterer is still, and the ear of the world can no longer be abused by courtly defences, and the voice of the People in scorn of princely baseness can no more be stifled—the day of stern justice to all who betray the imperative duties of their exalted station."
There is a passage, of mysterious import, towards the cloae of the paper; against the doctrine of which, we at once enter our pro- test. Lord BROUGHAM, most auspiciously in his present position, echoes the twaddling notion that all men of abilities ought to be combined in a Government for the service of the State, instead of opposing each other as Oppositionists and Ministerialists. When the common sense of the mass of mankind passes judgment upon the morality of a particular line of conduct, it is proof enough of the impropriety of the act under the existing social circumstances. But there is this further answer to the sophism —that no men of talent are fit to be trusted under the supposed eonditions. Of all the statesmen whom our author has sketched amongst the past generation, or of all the politicians who are now living, where is there one who would not prefer his interest or his ease to the public good? If such a strong Government were a moral possibility, it would be strong only against the People, for the advantage of its own members.
Previous page
