mand. Mr. Burke contended for the general supremacy of Parliament and the imperial rights of the Crown as undoubted, though these should be exercised with great reserve over, not a colony but a nation, situated at a great distance and difficult if it were at all possible, to coerce. He contended that taxation should remain with their provincial assemblies; that a parliamentary revenue, such as these aimed at, was next to impossible; that the colonies be placed on the same footing toward the mother country as in 1766; that a feeling of friendly concession could alone govern a people free in spirit and in fact; that peace be sought in the spirit of peace, not in severe parliamentary enactments; that the rights of taxation being relinquished, all moderate men would be conciliated; but if more than these should be required, then it would be time for us to turn round with a decided negative.

The speech in which Mr. Burke recommended these propositions excited general admiration. Pitt considered it "very seasonable, very reasonable, and very eloquent." Mr. Fox, nearly twenty years afterwards, said that by reading this speech again and again, studying it, imprinting it on the mind, and impressing it on the heart, would be learnt that "representation was the sovereign remedy for every evil."

Lord Erskine observed: "It could only proceed from this cause, (the alleged corruption of Parliament,) that the immortal orations of Burke against the American War did not produce as general conviction as they did unmingled admiration." Mr. Burke, however, when removed from the heat of debate, more than once candidly confessed that the country gentlemen wanted a partner in bearing the burden of taxation; the King wished to see obedient subjects rather than independent allies; the body of the nation, which was as jealous of undisputed sovereignty as either, fully seconded their views; and the wisdom of the House of Commons alone, unsupported by the people, at length put an end to the contest.

One of Burke's observations at this time exhibits his characteristic foresight. Lord Rockingham had written to

him that the King and the people would soon see the error of their conduct to America. His reply was: "I do not think that weeks, or even months, or years, will bring the Monarch, the Ministers, or the People, to feeling—such a feeling, I mean, as tends to amendment or alteration of system."

William Burke, writing about this time, says: "Our friend E. B. has acted all along with so unwearied a worthiness, that the world does him the justice to believe that in his public conduct he has no one view but the public good." Lord Charlemont, shortly afterwards, writing to Mr. Flood of "our friend Burke's unparalleled success," says, "his character daily rises, and Barré is totally eclipsed by him; his praise is universal, and even the Opposition, who own his superior talents, can find nothing to say against him but that he is an imprudent fellow. Yesterday, a bill was brought into the Commons to exclude the importation of Irish wool from certain ports in England, when Burke supported the cause of Ireland in a most masterly manner, and the bill was rejected."

Dr. Franklin, whom Burke had known for several years, called upon him in April, 1775, the day before he finally quitted London. He opened his mind unreservedly; said that he looked to the approaching contest with the most painful feelings; that nothing could give him greater sorrow than the separation of the mother country and colonies, which now seemed inevitable from the obstinate and unaccommodating temper of England. Subsequently, Dr. Franklin wrote from Philadelphia that Burke's health formed a toast at their dinners.

Burke's feelings at various stages of the War were often deeply tinged with gloom. In August, 1776, he writes: "We are deep in blood. We expect to hear of some sharp affair every hour; God knows how it will be. I do not know how I can wish success to those whose victory is to separate from us a large and noble part of our empire; still less do I wish success to injustice, oppression, and absurdity."

THE DURATION OF MINISTRIES.

Burke delighted in exercising his irony upon the weak points of parties. Thus he wrote a serious defence of the Rockingham Administration, and soon after made an ironical reply in the form of a letter, signed Whittington; the author professing to be a tallow-chandler, and common-councilman in Cateaton-street, and like his namesake, to think himself destined to be Lord Mayor before he died. The letter was addressed to the Public Advertiser, and in it he says:

"In the multitude of counsellors there is safety. If Solomon means privy-counsellors, this nation ought to be safe beyond all others, since none can boast such a variety of ministers, and none can such a multitude of privy-counsellors.

"Ministers now-a-days, are pricked down for the year, like sheriffs; and if none were to make more of their offices than the last did, I fancy we should see them fine off. Now you can no more guess who is in office to-day, by the Court Kalendar of last year, than you can tell the present price of stocks by Lloyd's List of Christmas, 1745.

"But the main design of my taking pen in hand, was to refute the silly author of a late publication, called, A short Account of a late short Administration.

"This half-sheet accomptant shows his ill-humour in the very title: he calls one year and twenty days a short Administration; whereas I can prove by the Rule of Three Direct, that it is as much as any Ministry in these times has a right to expect.

"Since the happy accession of his present Majesty, to this day, we have worn out no less than five complete sets of honest, able, upright Ministers, not to speak of the present, whom G―d long preserve!

"First, we had Mr. Pitt's Administration; next, the Duke of Newcastle's; then, Lord Bute's; then, Mr. Grenville's; and lastly, my Lord Rockingham's.

"Now, Sir, if you take a bit of chalk, and reckon from

P

the 7th of October, 1760, to the 13th of July, 1766, you will find 5 years, 9 months, and 30 days! which, divided by 5, the total of Administrations, gives exactly 1 year and 60 days each, on an average, as we say in the City, and one day more, if they have the good fortune to serve in leap-year."

The letter proceeds to a very humorous and severe attack of Lord Chatham, and the Ministry which he had formed, as in the following passage:

"He has once more deigned to take the reins of government in his own hand, and will, no doubt, drive with his wonted speed, and raise a deal of dust around him. His horses are all matched to his mind; but as some of them are young and skittish, it is said he has adopted the new contrivance lately exhibited by Sir Francis Delaval on Westminster Bridge; whenever they begin to snort and toss up their heads, he touches the spring, throws them loose, and away they go, leaving his Lordship safe and snug, and as much at ease as if he sat on a wool-pack."

BURKE AND GOLDSMITH.

Among those of the Club whom Burke much esteemed, was Goldsmith. They had entered Trinity College within two months of each other; and though not then particularly acquainted, remembered each other afterwards. Occasional meetings at Dodsley's renewed the acquaintance about 1758; in the Annual Register for the following year, his Inquiry into the Present State of Polite Learning in Europe, is noticed with approbation; and Goldsmith's subsequent writings found favour in the Register.

Burke had a great turn for ridiculing Goldsmith's simplicity, which he practised, sometimes not very justifiably, for the amusement of his friends. He and an Irish acquaintance, (who lived to be Colonel O'Moore, to tell the anecdote to Mr. Croker, and perhaps to colour it a little,) were walking to dine one day with Reynolds, when, on arriving in Leicester-square, they saw Goldsmith, also on his way to the

same dinner-party, standing near a crowd of people, who were staring and shouting at some foreign women, in the windows of one of the hotels. "Observe Goldsmith," said Burke to O'Moore, "and mark what passes between him and me byand-by at Sir Joshua's." They passed on, and were soon joined at Reynolds's by Goldsmith, whom Burke affected to receive very coolly. "This seemed to vex poor Goldsmith," says the teller of the story, and he begged Mr. Burke would tell him how he had had the misfortune to offend him. Burke appeared very reluctant to speak; but after a good deal of pressing, said, "that he was really ashamed to keep up an intimacy with one who could be guilty of such monstrous indiscretions as Goldsmith had just exhibited in the Square." With great earnestness, Goldsmith protested himself unconscious of what was meant. "Why," said Burke, "did you not exclaim, as you were looking up at those women, what stupid beasts the crowd must be for staring with such admiration at those painted Jezebels, while a man of your talents passed by unnoticed ?" "Surely, surely, my dear friend," exclaimed Goldsmith, horror-struck, "I did not say so ?" Nay," returned Burke, “if you had not said so, how should I have known it ?" "That's true," answered Goldsmith, with great humility; "I am very sorry: it was very foolish. I do recollect that something of the kind passed through my mind, but I did not think I had uttered it."

The anecdote, (says Mr. Forster,) is more creditable to Goldsmith than to Burke, to whose disadvantage it was, probably, afterwards remembered. Burke got up a more good-humoured trick against Goldsmith at his own house, not long after this, in which a lively kinswoman was played off as a raw Irish authoress, arrived expressly to see "the Great Goldsmith," and get his subscription to her poems, with which liberal return of praise (for she had read several out aloud) the simple poet gave, abusing them heartily the instant she was gone. Garrick founded a farce upon the incident, which, with the title of the Irish Widow, was played in 1770.