The Statesman.
London, England, 1819-05-31 00:00:00

Ti ra EMMA OF TOE STAITILYN4N.

'Wonky, May 19. 1819.
crit,--The r narg• end nilieoehre limg••••
your Paper of Wednesday, tn.. 26th, reported to have
been that of Mr. Monona, was of a Wore nhieb.
whether I did, or Mil not, believe to hats been his,
called for immediate omit*.

The reported speech, with a •ingoler tolgority of
phrase, imputed to me "absolute lakehrods." An
" absolute falsehood" is s a premeditated, wilful,
fraudulent deeeptiGn.' flow n y words, when
merely spoke of blr. Boaitousc having received \
letter, which I betiered he had receivtql, could be
tortured into such a baseness of intention, in a case,
and at a Hee, when none but an idiot could hav►
bees so stupid es to incur the infamy, the logicians
are left to d►cide. And all other passages of an ad-
dress submitted to public scrutiny, must, in themes,
manner abide V. ordeal of criticism ; and the more
acute it shall be in the detection of error, the greater
will be the benefit of the Potlic. Be it ow, here
added, that a mere statement of a ci►eomasence fully
believed to have happened, although it did not hap-
pen, is not a falsehood, but a mere 'mot:scions
error.

Mr. Bosnausg In his Jotter to yaw, inserted in
year paperer yesterday, edasi,r that your report of his
Monday's speech Wei "not collo cot tPct ;" hat that
is Fame respects that speech us. even " more strong."
Be that as it may, I am isdiffe•eot. Angry de-
clamation will nit refute fart and inpatient. Bat
•hen he, or any on. else, shall, by fart and argu-
ment, prows me Is error, that person •ill receive m)
thanks.

Mr. Magnum has, indeed, in one eery onim.
portant particular, apprivd me of an inedrertence
into which I had fellers, namely, that of not having
applied to him, to ask whether he hod revolved my
letter of the 28th of February, before I took his haw.
lag received it for granted.
I hereby admit, and very readily speloelae fnr
that inadvertence, each as it was ; sltheegh for the
reasons that will appear, it was, as I conceive, of no
Impedance whatever. And Mr. Ilosnouts himself
newts to be of the lame opinion ; intuits*, when be
ante to she knowledge of the three queries which my
letter contained, be apparently ihnoght so little of
them, as to consider them not worthy an replan.-
doh of hi. sentiments nn thee, to th.• assembled Mt-
tore be addressed on Monday the 41. b.
• •

If this, indeed, were the rase, then possibly he
may not think it a trout 171111611111.. e that my letter of
the 48th of February hod been lost io its way to him.
Mr. liontiousr, its a letter 1.1 NIP on the 22J,
asserts that " he neser slid receive the letter iis 'locu-
tion ;" and he proceeds to siy, "you °writ to me to
slate, as publicly 94 tnu have made the ennirnry as.
scrams, that I did NOT receive your
Serb. indeed, bad 1 been curable of it, would
hate been an "sstertion" with a witness; but not
being se hardy an assent►. nos a dealer ita Impossi-
bilities, I wrote to him as rnNnwr •_
James•street, Sunda) eirewing. Way 43,1919.
66 sll,—On this mnrui.•R rceritiou your letter
of yesterdsy, I sis grestly surprised by its Worm-

" Allemstripeniod by a Mend, who is well known
to the master of that host.. and taking with me the
Rue servant, I afterwards went thither.
" The circeiersiences having been stated by my
servant, sad Mr. WARR' having ascertained by
hia hoot that you at the time lodged is his house, he
declared himself decidedly of opinion, that the deli-
very of the letter Is yes must have taken place.
" e•rreiving I Islel shown es earnestness for es-
cerulean( the fret of delivery. Mr. WAIIIM appeared
not at all inerpriatad that a letter to yea should get
mislaid or lost, evopened: as he stated it le be your
habit not regularly to peruse letters as they arrived,
hot to allow of their considerably accumsisting be-
fore they were attended te.
" I, therefore. treat, Sr, is this first place, that
yes will see I had no grounds for doubting that the
letter in question had duly reached your hands; and,
is the second place, that your not being acquainted
with it. contents, was attributable to some cause
which did not depend on me.
" I farther trait yens must see. that my publish.
lag the copy could not possibly have been with any
intradoss of nth-stating a fart, or that I would have
had the slightest apprehension, that I was even its.
advertently so doing.
" I bare only. Sir, to lament that you did not
open my letter before ii got mislaid or lest; and to
assure you, that nothing h.t my being satisfied that
it bad bees wee bt vow, would have caused my ear-
ring yos hail received it, which I may fairly presume
was the ease, althoegb yno are sot now ceaseless of
it, eveer having been in your p ion.

" It is, however. fnrtonat►, that so oa►iy is to-
morrow yov hi,. in opportunity of communi-
cating to a lore cnmpsny of throve to whom my re-
cently printed Lotter is witened. and of costs to
live Palk, any ►aply alion of llso matter.
" I have the boomer to be, Sir,
" Your obedient Servant.
" Jobs Hob Away, E.q. JOHN CARTWRIGHT."
In a Wier OD the 28th, in reply, Mr. HOSDOUIR
says— _ -

Mr. WARIIII avoid not possibly know any thing
of my habits se to my answering or weglecting my
co►resp.•ndents."
• 14 Dooloos tho Fteetien I was not absent
from London a moment, sod can positively meet
that I did not neglect to open a single letter that was
laid upon my table— I must, therefore, persist
in thinking, that the letter was not inisisid at my
lodgings, bat by some mistake was not left there."
Now, it mast be ovine, that whatever might have
been. Mr. lloaiiou•c's own punctuality, this conclu-
sion of his agstosi lb. punctuality of my servant is
by no unions logical; beeves@ the letter might have
been delivered. although it bad not reached big bands.
My servant, to whoa, from five years' experience,
is dor from me the praise of ►emsrkable steadin►ss
and eortectness, y of recollection, as well as
dioinctness and clearness in reporting messages or
other business, PO my questioning him last Sioday
.nu Ling the (let, said exactly what he had said on
the Di.h of February, namely, that a nt took
in the letter. mint, " Mr. ilostioUtt is not within,
bet will be here this evening."
The same young man, on being farth►r interns.
gated, now se's, the letter we, so d►livered by him
ii.iereeo eight and nine •clock in the evening, and
fprOIIPCIS that be was back at my house soon after
nine.

Lilac cireorortsoce• sometimes throw mac► light
on di.yatnl gartiaaa. lf, t►erefore, It should taro
art th.t Mr. lloonouse can recollect t►e time at
which he letersed to ►is !vigils(' oft ibis *venial; of
'he 28iii of February, being this Sunday before the
class of t►s Elestioo, it is possible that this may be
of use.

Should it prove to Incisor that be did nof return
sidebar till a later ►oar lima above-mentioned, lins,
an coniegerece of the declaration that he wee " not
a-Ain" at the time aforesaid, oho feet of tiro deli-
very, according to my servagt's secoont, will have
e remarkable coolirometine ; for if hi did not go at
tiro time to No. 43, I. Claiges-stroot, bow case be
ti the information that Mr. Minnows was not
Welsh, ?"

Not being able to conceive any pima& Woes.'
myna to my serrant's waking as an incorrect report,
I em perseed.d—frons the words " not again," if
ilia. were lhifad. that this fact will go very far to
exonerate boards* Demuth frau en lerstatien of
ne•lert nr miorepresentatsoo, so far as revecti a de-
livering by one, sad • receiving by the other, the
letter in gyration ; slier which, if theta woo any
omission in laying is on Mr. lioncnoss'e table, it
will t,r, seen whole the blame most lie.

With regard to. myself I had at all event, a
conviction ibi. Arse had been a regular delivery,
tending I. present the slightest sulkies that it
might n0v.4111,14..1 bate failed to meet It. eye of the
Gentlemen to whew it was diseeted; as well as Pito-
bowl of townie to shot out from my mind soy thought
0 making I. rogviry.
But all this pother and all theta arguments, pro
and con, do, 1 confess, appear to ma of a million
tunes less i nportaetco, than any OOP of tbs. (bre,
goestions put to Mr. liostioust in any letter, of
%Melt he has not yet taken lb. 'wallas. titmice. -
If, 'fiirtnenlit 0 basing originally won the lafloil
Mr limusousa had oft se nppertoolly duel tie
Pectins. of asessmisig 1b govirios it contained/If he
aright hove dons so, hod be bees so loclioeter at the

coal

fr rid

If that tarn'!man he, in reality, a Radical Re.
former, he will do well, in my opinion, to take his
political reputation into his own keeping, Instead of
leasing it in that of his apologist and eulogist, who,
in an 'sr-anent " Defence of de People," against
Lord Ekssaxs and the Whigs, has nevertheless
talked meek frontline on the question of Reform ;
and who has else most enaccoantably confounded
his favourite, Mr. liosuntist, with those Whigs, in
each a way as, if his ewnpaiison were correct, would
prove that Mr. Iloanoust was any thing on earth
bet a Radical Reformer.
This aothor (p. 63) draws a marked distinction
between Mr. KINSAIRD and Mr. Ifounouse, as
Reformers ; and he bad remarked (p. 62) that " the
declaration made by Mr. lloanorse, Is neither more
nor less then the declaration made by the Friends of
the People in 1795, those very Friends of the Paople,
whose Petition was presented to Parlisinent in 1793,
by Lord Cart and Lord Frisians."
If this he proving Mr. llonnover • Rodicql Re-
former, then any conclusion may be draw n (lemony
premises, lu defiance of the meaning of words. the
evidence er facts, or the ohiversel sew.e of mankind.
The °editions' langalge of this man nr of that mart
for serving the turn of the moment, never yet did
make a Radical Reformer of a factions orator. If
an) thing whatever is to be taken as • stamp of party
character, it is a inviter manifesto, drawn op with
care after mature consideration, And subscribed by
the parties.
Such was the famous Petition of 1793; bat ft
that the delineation of a Radical Reform is to out-
rage the public reason, and the better knowledge ice
coked by the nation in general since that period.

fled we found in the Petition of 1793 all that cone
stitut.e a Radical Reform, to what end had a
BUITHAM since written ? And where had been the
saeceesity or utility of a constant discussion no OHO
••hjects by a Comm, and various other able writers
In the sin-end-twenty years which have since eloped ?
The author I have quoted (if he have been rightly
pointed oat to me) has the credit of mach intimacy
"Pith Mr. 1311111TRAW. and Minch itchwitalion of Ms
writioget wherefore he ought not to hold ep for ap.
probation, for lbs aka of favouring the electioneer.
ing views of ant owe, a very impeffect plan, pat
togethet by very Imperfect party politicians, which,
after a Rictissown's reasonings and ■ Brverms's de.
■onstrations, ought not to be to mutt as mentioned
by men of sense and public view.. What is such
praise of the Petition of nineij.threc, but holding op
• blanket to Imola& the light of the son ?
If, Sir, I virally err not, in order to di.tingoish
a ►adical Reformer from a mock Reformer, or a
gabble► an Reform, we melt pursue the sort of pro.
caws by which we distinguish a man from a bead.—
Both are animals. Bath seismic life by eating, di-
rating, sod evacuating. Both have their wasted
strength renewed by sleep. Both have intellect,aad
free will, for seeking their good and shunning their
evil ; that is, both, according to their nature, b. reap•
propriate capacity thereunto adapted.
Bet the man is distinguished from the bead, by
that grand feature iii his nature—MOßAL! I Y, and
his tree estimation depends on his being ciiiaous or
vicious. And in like manner the genuine radical
Reformer is distinguished from the mock Reformer,
or the learned gobbler on Reform. After ill that
can be said of latent, which is Not synonymous with
I:drive, what is the grand distinction of a BENTH 414
from others of the learned who can gabble on Re-
form, but his lofty sense of MORAL( fear.
leas, inflexible pursuit of, ■nd adherence to, TRU CU!
I sacred TRUTH.

And what so effectually betrays the spurious pre.
tensions to the character of Radkal Reformers, as
when the troth Is sacrificed to some *elfish is serest or
mese passion ; or the party is found capable of such
a moral degradation, as to Imitate that profligate
wretch, the bellows of the Borourhosongers, who
could ridicule the 'earrings of an Ocieas ender sae.
totes ialtored by brutal despots; nodose at soy time
make sport of whatever is sacred among men.
Did net Mr. liosmousa attempt to ridiade the Is.
flexible adherents to a grand truth of political mo.
rality, by a broad lualsoatioe that they were '`cor.
combs 1?" And does sot his eulogist and echo, the
author of the " Defame of llse People," against
Lord Esrerspg and the Whigs (p. 65), dewily,
them

former

"9,"

PO as "bigots P' IVO; not the feeling. which are .. ,:"•••
er sipper's...6st in the bosons of a real Radical Re. -
riser, render his utterly incapable of thes sporting
ith whet he knows to be m %ost sacred ?
Has the author of the " Defence of /he People"
i so learn, limit sophistry, being at variance with
inciple, and a reproach i . - . touvii age, -1-
01,1 it succeed it . . Iles
• yet to leare,..thet 'I, a ,alsrt ' . - t •
on shown, that Him* ir4 ...
hich is loptiy efg ;tt \ t -
vire ouisc f sz
Ara, so ler., r ' ' `-ts
r
prerrso weeves-itilml4 400.11,...,.. A
rermr,iiipig ytqamarry• /vs'e . ii,‘ ,
kki•knOlso hit • 0t.,..* z .
. "
t its Wm. is imirJ•44..ltt 4?
gy realm C.; tlte:hrwe ~ ..„, . . 1 1.
~
rd„,. deptfels.--w. .1311 sir V, ,, N
..
reseal . , le .A . . 4
, . 4
-
4
#P=:. • .). .
. • -
, • ' °9)64 • •
~. -..- .. .
-, 0 ,I. • ..., ...., 4.- IF.

• A. 4,
r
• .1

...

. 04_

.~: t
.: ~~y~

~._~`.