The Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1822-1829, 1823-05-09
From the New York Evening Post.

.flsrcr 10 U.Hfara's Napoleon IN erie.
The Messrs. Swords have just repub-
lished from the Quarterly Review, for Fee
br,tary, 1893, an article with this title,
which some folks appear to think is all thai
II hoastingly purports To be, viz; reiuta-
ton Of O'Alcara's book, "not only proving
u faise, but mol epen 10 hare eoior or pre-
tence y & the reviewer further pledges him
selfnot 10 make use ct a single .fdct OF argn-
ment that he does mol obtain from the
mouth of o'hIeara himself Thisis taking
high ground to begin with. But il seems
MIR. STONE IN his paper on Saturday cse-
ming, finds himself 80 overpowered with
the force of this answer, that he can hard
ly find words 10 express The conviction II
has produced on him, already predisposed
to side with the reviewer. We little
thought, says he, that the author (O'Mea-
ra was so soon aud 30 completely to be
orer,rheimcd with shame the credit Of his
work 10 BE- entirely ruined his partizans
covered nth ridicaie, and his character
demolished at a single blow" Now we
must say that we coolly aud dispassion
atcly read his answer over, and feel our
selves compelled 10 add that we have seen
nothing calculated 10 produce any sucl,
conviction in our minds AS is here with
difficulty expressed. We have found mo-
thing 10 overwhelm or to ruin O'hIea-
ra, or 10 demolsh his character at n
single blow ! nor any thing that ought
to cover with ridicule those who credit his
statements. We acknowledge, however,
that nj present, we are not sufficiently pos
scssed of facts 10 enable MS to 80 into the
particular consideration Of this answer rs il
is called, and which certainly promises or
rather threatens FAR more than IL performs.
Probably we may revert TO the subject n
gain after we shall have seen O'Nleara's
reply, which he promises in a late note
ln the mean time, we are NJ no loss To pro
nounce thai the reviewer has wholly failed
10 redeem that part OF his pledge which
promises not 10 make usc of n slngle fact
or argument that be does not obtain from
O.Hearn himself Now, SO far does he
come short ofthis pledge, that the instan
ces in which he brings himself within II,
or even attempts to do so, hive either
wholly escaped our notice, or amount 10
nothing OF m0ment,--To give single in
stance: In completely reiiiting, as he does,
the atrocious libel un the late queen Of
France, to which O'Mea,a unjustilably
gave place in his book, though as a mere
bercsay Of Bonaparte, aud for the truth
Of which he does not venture 10 vonch, let
il be remembered, that he is compelled 10
adduce both fact and argument entirely
eXtrnsical TO O'Mcara's book.
The answer is loose in point of style,
and reflects no credit on the Quarterly Re-
view as literary performance. The wri
ter says, for instance, that Bonaparte
bad nothing 10 lose and every thing to
gain by an attempt 10 escape" But how
he could gain, or what he could gain, by
a mere attempt, il abortive, we know not.
We did not expect such bnpder from
pages which are constantly held up 10 MS
AS model Of perfect writing, and which
are never tired Of disparaging and ridicu
ling every American publication that falls
IN their way. We have thought aud said,
aud we still think aud say, notwithstanding
the imposing opinion of the Editor Of
the Commercial Advertiser, that IN our
judgment, O'Mcara's book carries with IL
internal evidence of the truths 1t narrates,
and is well calculated 10 produce impress.
sions favorable, in the worlds estimation,
to the character OF Napoleon, which no
sophstry can materially lessen, nor length
of time ellacc.
..sos..
From he Portland Statesman.
PATENT MEDICINES.
IA - n 4 >