The National Register.
London, England, 1812-05-03 00:00:00

THE NATIONAL REGISTER.

MAY 3

did Mr. Fox, the great Champion of the People, and the
model which those imitate who pretend to have adopted
his principles, show that he was worthy the confidence of.
his SOVEREIGN ? Was it by a steady adherence to his
friends ? Did he never desert those for the sake' of power?
Let those who recollect his indecent coalition with Lord
Nowi'ii say whether, in that transaction, he displayed
much regard for rectitude, for public opinion, or for the
honour of Parliament. Did not Mr. Fox, la this single
act, demonstrate that the Opposition were unworthy of
credit, by showing the terms on which they were ready
to support any Minister and any measures, or to connect
themselves with any man or set of men capable of bring-
ing them into office ? When called to fill the situation of
one of his Majesty's Secretaries of State, do we find this
would-be patriot employing his eloquence in the Senate,
or his talents in the Cabinet to better the condition of the
Country ? On the contrary, do we not find " All the
Talents," who were then in possession of the helm of the
State, engaged in increasing the burdens of the People by
doubling the Income Tax ? What stronger proof do we
require than this, to show that these men could not be
placed in that situation again, consistently with the safety
and honour of the Country ? As to Lord GRENVILL,
we have already said enough on his public conduct, when
he was in office, to mark him out as a Statesman whose
measures were every way calculated to involve the nation
in difficulties. With regard to Lord GREY, we may re-
mark, that if a supercilious and haughty demeanour
towards his inferiors, arc qualifications essential to the
office of First Lord of the Admiralty, then is his Lord-
ship's claim to that situation indisputable. As a Member
of the Privy Council, this Nobleman approved of all tile
measures adopted by the then !Ministers ; he, therefore,
comes in for a share of the odium of his colleagues. Who
then can blame the PRINCE. REGENT for discovering, in the
first instance, the want of principle and the want of talent
which these men evinced when they were put to the trial
by his Rol-A r. FATHER ; and, in the second place, for re-
fusing to repose in them a trust which they had so very
xecently abused ? Had his ROYAL [CNN Ess acted in any
other way than he did, then indeed might he have trem-
bled for the consequences ; but, weighu ;g candidly the
undeniable facts to which we have generally alluded, and
which stand-on record, we cannot discover on what princi-
ple of justice those inconsiderate vilifiers of the PRINCE test
their accusations against him. We can easily suppose that
they feel disappointment at his retaining his FATIIVICi
Ministers, to their exclusion ; but we have yet to learn
how he is to receive more ht their hands than he would
have received from Lords GREY or GREN V I LLE. The
power of the one party would not have been less than that
of the other ; and its stability would have rested as much
in the one case on the will of the PRINCE as in the other.
Where then are we to find any other motive for his ROYAL
HiouNliss acting as he did, than that of a sincere desire to
promote the welfare of the People ? Much has been said
about the stability of the Throne being end,ingered by
the continuance of the present Ministers. Those, how
ever, who urge this plea in support of a change .ice
bound to show, before it can be listened to, that the
PRINCE is insensible to the value of :t Crown, and thiit
those whom they wish to set up as its guardians are much
better fitted for the task than the individuals who haye
already given proofs that they are at least capable of nnua.

taining it.