The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-03-09
JOHN WILKES.

James E. Thorold Rogers, which mas Just
been published by Macmillan d Co., in
London, gives the following interesting
review of the career Of the celebrated John
Wilkes-
Wilkes expulsion from the House Of Com
mons was the great event of q life which
filed up seventy years of the last century,
1727-97. OF that long period, Wilkes was an
active politician during thirty years, that is,
from 1854, when he stood for Berwick-on-
Tweed, till 1884, when ne abandoned all
political activity. Mr.. Rogers goes lightly,
but not very good-naturedly, over the various
incidents in Wilkes career. IL is an old story
ut the best, and Mr.. Rogers has little or
nothing to add to it. We see the distillers
son bred like gentleman, marrying an
heiress, ten or eleven years older than HIM
self, and leading the life that men so settled
or unsettled in marriage might in those days
be expected to lead. We find him spending
money lavisblY to obtain a seat in Parliament;
but we may rrpeat here what has before been
stated in the AhheR@ltn3, that Wilkes did not
attempt to enter on a parliamentary career as
a means of repairing his supposed shattered
fortunes. If he had been place-hunter he
would not have shown the hostility to Lord
Butte and the Government, which eliminated
in the famous No. 40 of the North Brit0n.
Nor does Mr.. Rogers give any reason for
asserting that Wilkes hostility would have
given way if the Government would have
officially employed him. To the modern sense
the famous No. 45 seems not merely inoffen-
sive, but mild and iustifable. 1t treated the
Kings speech as the speech of his ministers,
and showed that King James was proved to
be considered nothing more than the first
magistrate in the realm, and that King
George might we'll be content with the same
position.
Mr. Rogers here speaks of one of the best
educated men of his day, a man who had
spent thousands to enable him to satisfy his
ambition by entering Parliament, and was
not more immoral than the distinguished
persons with whom he associated, but who
carried the fashion of immortality little
beyond the mode. Mr.. Rogers speaks of
Wilkes as man who was living by his wits,
and he describes him as an unprincipled
adventurer Even if Wilkes had been all
this, the mistakes and malice of the Gov
eminent converted the adventurer into a
popular hero-for the issue of the General
Warrant by which Wilkes, with printers, pub
Fishers, and others, were arrested, without
being designated by name, led to all the
triumph which ensued. The Judgment of
Chief Justice Pratt that such warrants were
illegal, the protection which the hG6eGS corpus
afforded to persons so accused and impri-
soned, and the heavy pecuniary damages
which they who had acted illegally were con-
demned to pay, were triumphs for which the
public were indebted, and continue to be in
debted, to the resolution of Wilkes. But for
him. we might still be liable to arrest and to
being kept in prison at the mere will of
couple of envious secretaries.
The next mistake of the Government only
increased the power and popularity of Wilkes.
He was prosecuted for printing and publish
ing an obscene lbel--a fragment of poem
called an essay on Woman" We have said
&bot no 70
have written this parody on Pope and War
burton, and that it was never published till a
copy stolen from Wilkes house was read in
the House of Lords by Lord Sandwich, who
had previously heard it read in private, and
expressed his delight at what now he affected
to read with disgust. We have, on former
occasions, protested against any idea of our
being apologists for Wilkes immortality, or
for this wretched fragment of dirty poem,
true copy of which probably does not exist,
but, as we have remarked before, Wilkes was
better man than most of his accusers. He
was infinitely superior, at all events, to Lord
Sandwich. This exemplary peer, the ''Jem-
my Twitcher" of his time, scandalized noun
tebanks by his blasphemy, and had volume
of sermons dedicated to him by Warburton,
who compared Wilkes to the Devil, and then
asked pardon of the Devil for damaging him
by such comparison. 1t must have been by
some such parson as Risdale, who was the
tool of Sandwich, that the profane parallel
was made in the pulpit between that peer and
our Saviour, with a shade of superiority
awarded to the peer Such were the man
ners of the times; and we must not Judge of
Wilkes by the manners of our own.
1t is hardly necessary to go over the we'll
known story-Wikes' journey abroad, his
outlawry, his return, his imprisonment his
repeated elections for Middlesex, the scandal
of which was at its height when the House
declared that Luttrell, who had the fewer
votes, was the duly elected member. eff
once" said Wilkes ''the ministry shall be
permitted to say whom the freeholders shall
not choose, the next step will be to tell them
whom they shall chose" The minis.
try certainly did a good deal in those
days to exasperate the people. There
was riot in st. Georges Fields when
Wilkes was released from prison, and in the
tumult, provoked by the interference of the
military, an eminent man was murdered.
Lord Darlington conveyed to the troops the
assurance of the pleasure with which the
King had heard of the readiness of the sol
diery to perform their duty, and the satisfac-
tion he had in the thought that they would
always perform such duty with aLacrtty. The
word was as ill-timed as another charge OF
horse and foot.
The last great service of Wilkes was
rendered when, as alderman and sheriff
he protected one Whebley, who had dared
to publish the debates of the House
Of Commons The protection was dis
tasteful to the King, but it prevailed
over privilege, and Mr.. Rogers acknow
ledged that "Wilkes indicated the right OF
the people to learn the expressed opinion oi
AkeaSr ,Ankfx II r.