The Statesman.
London, England, 1815-08-17 00:00:00

To Ma. ASMIURST.

great deal has been said concerning your
intkpeneleal political principles. What those prin-
ciples are, we have not yet heard. We call upon
you, thereforet for an open avowal of them. Your
opponent, L'rd Strwritar..tNo, has made a public de-
claration of his political principles ; and, give us
leave to ety, Sir, they may be as independent as
yours. lie has openly, and indeed manfully, avow-
ed his entire approbation of the present, that is the
l'err system of Govertitient or politics—and he has
unequivocally expressed his determination to main-
tain them, as far at least as his iufluence can have ef•
fact. Now, Sir, as we are clearly of opinion, and
we are convinced that you and every other man of
common sense must see it in the same light, that there
can he no middle coarse which you can pursue with
any effect, good or bad, between that system of po-
litics, which Lord S. has openly declared it is his
determination to pursue, and that of a Reform in the
Representation of the People; that is, Sir, we being
clearly of opinion that either the people must once
ogain be represented in conformity =ills the Constar:.
lion of England, or the Pitt system, under which the
people groan, must continue to rule the country.—
We say, Sir, as this point admits not of a doubt,
and as we conceive it folly and only humbugging the
country to talk of independent principles of politics
without explaining what these principles are, we re-
quest, therefore, from you, Sir, a plain answer to
the foll Owing questions :—Are you, or are you not,
a determined advocate fors Reform in the Represen-
tation of the People? Will you, or will you not,
seemly co-operate with those real patriots, those
true lovers of their country, who are anxious end
determined, ifpassible, to effect a salutary Reform?
—that is, Sir, who are determined to bring back the.
Representation of the People to its original purity,
and to make it what it ought to be, fast, free, and
gcneral.—By the way of illustration, we beg leave
to put the following questions, not only to you,
Sir, but to every man of common reason in the na-
tion :

Do you think that the nation would now be so
overloaded with taxes? Do you think that one-third
of its population would now be reduced to paupers,
that is to beggars ? IVool4 the Corn Bill, think
you, he now the law of the land contrary to the
voice of the people, lordly, imploringly, and consti-
tutionally expressed ? Would the Government of
England, think you, have presumed to have set the
people, and the constitutional law of England, at
defiance, by transporting from her shores. to gratify
the rancour of a Russian or a Prussian despot, any
man, much less such a man as NArur.EON lionx-
?MTh, chosen Emperor of the French by the people,
by the unanimous voice of the people, who had thrown
himself on the generosity and hospitality of the
British nation, and on the security and inviolability
of the law of England ? Do you think that a Bri-
trill army, under a glorious WetrancTow, or any
such glorious man, would nom be ordered or pe►mit-
ted to stand ignobly by, keeping guard as it were,
whilst the lawless hordes of the North ravaged and
desolated a country, the pride of Europe—the seat
of the arts and scieneet—the pattern of civilitalion—
and for what ? Why, because they presumed to
throw off the galling chains of slavery, because they
dared to be men, and presumed to wish to enjoy
that just and natural freedom, which was once the
glory and the boast of Englishmen. nosily, do you
think that England or the English people, who once
boalted of their freedom with just reason,—who
once were antigun that all other nations should en-

joy that blessing—a ho once eagerly called upon the
French people to assume their just rights and liber.
ties—do you think that she or they would have tent
cren a hand, much less have dissipated so much of
their treasure—nearly eight hundred millions of
lounds sterling—would they have overwhelmed them.
selves with an eternal load of laxes—forty millions
if pounds sterling to be extracted from them yearly
few crer? Would they have sacrificed hundreds of
housands of their countrymen ? Would they have
ed:iced one-third of the popuration et their country
beggary ? Would they have given up the best part
f their commerce 4 Woultl they hare annihilated
he best part of their manufactures? Would they
are forced their manufacturers to seek shelter and
übsistence in a foreign and a rival country? Would]
hey. I say, have done all these thingq to enable
lie Sovereigns of the Continent to trample on the
'us/ rights and liberties of man—on the freedom—the
ust, reasonable, and natural freedom—of French.
en ; that freedom, those rights and liberties which
t na3 the glory and the boast of Englishmen, that
Ley confirmed and enjoyed by the glorious Consti-
ution and Revolution of 16S8? We say, do you
hiok that all these things would have happened had
he people of England been properly, that is, eon-
iititionally represented in the House of Commons?
We request; Sir, an immediate answer to the pies-
oils we hate put to you in conclusion of the first
ragraph.

We are, Sir,
A BODY OF FREF.IIOI DENS
IN OXFORDSHIRE.

•
Wednesday a, shocking catastrophe happened at
Ohs Ferry, sow Southampton, to a poor mast
smed Gosling, in the employ of Mr. Bell, brewer.
le au in the melt-house belonging to the brewery,
id got entangled its the wheel of the mill, by
hick means h 1 brains were beaten out. lie has
rt a wife sad tea children to lament his 1031.