-
Articles/Ads
Article REVIEW OF NEW PUBLICATIONS. ← Page 2 of 8 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Review Of New Publications.
His third Memorial , written in the close of 179-5 , attacks the mode in ¦ which the war had been carried on , and censures the allied powers for not explicitly declaring that their ' s was a war against J . icobinism , and for the ree _ tab ! ishment of order , religion and virtue . He intimates that the object of the ...-. veral allied powers , from their conduit , was manifestl y private aggrandizement , more than the support of legitimate government against Jacobinism . He is vehement in his censure of the several powers for not lead to
giving a greater what he here calls the Christian royalists : and here and elsewhere the Moral France , viz . the emigrant princes , & c . Of the internal state of France he gives a very glowing picture , from Which we should make quotations , if it were not similar in scope and tenour to many passages to be found in his writings on French affairs , especially in his Thoughts on a Regicide Peace . These Memorials , like every thino- that Mr . Burke wrotedisplay extraordinary geniusand the most extensive
, very , knowledge . As Memorials on French Affairs , at periods now passed , and in circumstances now changed , we do not think their publication was necessary But whatever Burke wrote , even should it have no great use as to its protested object , contains many observations of the most expanded general wisdom . ° _ -
~ ' F * X" Lcttm ° " t , le CondMt of our Domestic Parties , ivith regard to French Politics ; including ' Observations on tbe Conduct af the Minority , in the Session of 1793 . ' By tbe late Ri ght Honourable Edmund Burke . $ < vo . 3 s . Rivingtons . THE first of these Letters is published ns the genuine edition of tha :, of which a surreptitious copy was given to the public last spring and afterwards , by an injunction of Chancery , prohibited to be sold . In the preface written by the editors there is alerter from Mr . Burke , dated'from Bath , expressing his displeasure and regret that the Letter had been published , but avowing the sentiments it contained .
it is an attack upon the political conduct of Mr . Fox , principally ; next to him , Mr . Sheridan ; and also of the leading men of the party . " The charges against Mr .. Fox resolve themselves into three general heads ist Sending an ambassador to Russia . ,. dly , Not shewing , sufficient deference ' tor the opinions of the Duke of Portland , Lord FitzwiUiam , and other noblemen , whom Burke calls the heads of tlie party . 3 dly , Approviii" - of the French revolution , and of societies in England desirous of a reform ' ia parliamentand of the with
, disapproving war France . These charges have nothing new in them . The first was often repeated in the ministerial newspapers , but never supported by proof As to the second , neither the Duke of Portland nor Lord FitzwiUiam could be the heads of anyparty of which Mr . Fox was a member ; and if they had , such deference could not be requisite from ( to use Mr . Burke ' s own words ) < freemen mid gentlemen' to leadersas to impl complete sacrifice of inion
any , y a op . As to the 3 d , Mr . Fox ' s speeches , and the whole tenour of his conduct , avow ins opinion that the French revolution was in the first instance ri ° hr that war with France was wrong , and that a reform is necessary . Whether the sentiments of Fox on these heads be well or ill founded , is a matter of " political discussion , not of literary criticism . There is certainl y no novelty 111 the charges , as they have been made very often both in aud out of Parliament 5 . and no new arguments are here adduced Indeed respecting
. none of the other members of Opposition is any thing brought forward winch had not been advanced before . The professed object of the Letter is to give a view of the conduct of domestic parties . The reader will find nothing illustrative ot that conduct which he has not seen beforev Relatively , therefore , to the professed object , no new li ght is derived from the publication of
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Review Of New Publications.
His third Memorial , written in the close of 179-5 , attacks the mode in ¦ which the war had been carried on , and censures the allied powers for not explicitly declaring that their ' s was a war against J . icobinism , and for the ree _ tab ! ishment of order , religion and virtue . He intimates that the object of the ...-. veral allied powers , from their conduit , was manifestl y private aggrandizement , more than the support of legitimate government against Jacobinism . He is vehement in his censure of the several powers for not lead to
giving a greater what he here calls the Christian royalists : and here and elsewhere the Moral France , viz . the emigrant princes , & c . Of the internal state of France he gives a very glowing picture , from Which we should make quotations , if it were not similar in scope and tenour to many passages to be found in his writings on French affairs , especially in his Thoughts on a Regicide Peace . These Memorials , like every thino- that Mr . Burke wrotedisplay extraordinary geniusand the most extensive
, very , knowledge . As Memorials on French Affairs , at periods now passed , and in circumstances now changed , we do not think their publication was necessary But whatever Burke wrote , even should it have no great use as to its protested object , contains many observations of the most expanded general wisdom . ° _ -
~ ' F * X" Lcttm ° " t , le CondMt of our Domestic Parties , ivith regard to French Politics ; including ' Observations on tbe Conduct af the Minority , in the Session of 1793 . ' By tbe late Ri ght Honourable Edmund Burke . $ < vo . 3 s . Rivingtons . THE first of these Letters is published ns the genuine edition of tha :, of which a surreptitious copy was given to the public last spring and afterwards , by an injunction of Chancery , prohibited to be sold . In the preface written by the editors there is alerter from Mr . Burke , dated'from Bath , expressing his displeasure and regret that the Letter had been published , but avowing the sentiments it contained .
it is an attack upon the political conduct of Mr . Fox , principally ; next to him , Mr . Sheridan ; and also of the leading men of the party . " The charges against Mr .. Fox resolve themselves into three general heads ist Sending an ambassador to Russia . ,. dly , Not shewing , sufficient deference ' tor the opinions of the Duke of Portland , Lord FitzwiUiam , and other noblemen , whom Burke calls the heads of tlie party . 3 dly , Approviii" - of the French revolution , and of societies in England desirous of a reform ' ia parliamentand of the with
, disapproving war France . These charges have nothing new in them . The first was often repeated in the ministerial newspapers , but never supported by proof As to the second , neither the Duke of Portland nor Lord FitzwiUiam could be the heads of anyparty of which Mr . Fox was a member ; and if they had , such deference could not be requisite from ( to use Mr . Burke ' s own words ) < freemen mid gentlemen' to leadersas to impl complete sacrifice of inion
any , y a op . As to the 3 d , Mr . Fox ' s speeches , and the whole tenour of his conduct , avow ins opinion that the French revolution was in the first instance ri ° hr that war with France was wrong , and that a reform is necessary . Whether the sentiments of Fox on these heads be well or ill founded , is a matter of " political discussion , not of literary criticism . There is certainl y no novelty 111 the charges , as they have been made very often both in aud out of Parliament 5 . and no new arguments are here adduced Indeed respecting
. none of the other members of Opposition is any thing brought forward winch had not been advanced before . The professed object of the Letter is to give a view of the conduct of domestic parties . The reader will find nothing illustrative ot that conduct which he has not seen beforev Relatively , therefore , to the professed object , no new li ght is derived from the publication of