it to be remembered, that the exports from France to Britain are luxuries, and next to luxuries; and that our exports to France are mostly utilities of the first or second necessity. What follows? That our exports stand less in need of treaty, and less in fear of prohibition than those of France; and, therefore, that treaty is advantageous to France."

We do not cite these extracts for the purpose of claiming entire approbation for Mr. Flood's opinions as a political economist. We know how widely the clearest sighted men have differed respecting the important positions discussed in his speech; and even if our inclination led us to stray beyond the strict limits of biography, and to engage in that discussion, our space would not permit us to do it justice. No. Our only object is to exhibit the matchless power of lucid and energetic logic which that great man possessed, and to prove that what is called his failure" in the English House of Commons, did not prevent him from subsequently exhibiting those powers, in a manner that must have extorted the admiration of his hearers. Well might Grattan say of him, "give him the thunderbolt, and he had the arm of a Jupiter."

"What," he asked, "is the object of a commercial nation? Not to be for ever busy in supplying other countries, and to leave itself to be supplied by them. That would be absurd. Its first object is, to supply itself; its second, to supply others. What follows? That two great neighbouring countries of manufacture can never be capital objects to each other; and that, for this plain reason, that they must have the greatest quantity of similar commodities; the greatest quantity of home supply; and, therefore, the smallest quantity of reciprocal wants. No axiom can be clearer than this; and, therefore, the right honourable member, (Mr. Pitt,) who always states what is strongest for his case, did argue that a profitable exchange might take place between these two countries. And why? Because France, he said, is a country of produce, and because Great Britain is a country of manufacture. Now, this is true in sound, but false in reality. To make it true in reality, it would have been requisite to add, that the produce of France is a produce necessary or useful to Great Britain-whereas it is luxurious as to

We

wines, and as to brandies it is mischievous. It ought, also, to be added, that France is not a country of manufacture; that is to say, that she is unable to supply herself with manufactures-because, in that case, it is likely she would consume ours. But this is so far from being the truth, that she manufactures enough not only to supply herself, but to acquire a yearly balance of bullion, much larger than any other country in Europe. also, it is true, manufacture enough not only to supply ourselves, but to obtain a balance in specie, though not to the amount of France; that is, France manufactures enough for twenty-four millions of people, and we manufacture enough for eight millions. I will not, however, infer from thence that she manufactures three times as much as we do. I mean to reason fairly; and, therefore, I admit that eight millions of our people consume more manufactures than eight, but not than twenty-four millions of Frenchmen. Now, if the quantity of her manufacture is at least equal to the quantity of ours, we can only surpass her in the quality; and though even in quality some of her manufactures excel ours, yet I am willing to suppose that, as to quality, we excel her in more. But what does this conclude as to the home consumption of France? Nothing at all. As long and as far as, from poverty, from economy, or from nationality and prejudices, she is content with her own manufactures, she will not consume ours. She could only import them for the use of other countries. Now, does any man seriously wish to make France the medium of our commerce with other countries? and to give up an active for a passive traffic? To give all the advantages of freight, commission, correspondence, and the preference as to the raw materials, or useful produce of those other countries in return, to France, instead of to England, and to make her the mercantile factor of Great Britain? Can any man entertain so insane an idea? Is any man so blind as not to see how much that would put this country into the power of her rival in peace, and of her enemy in war? What a wound it would enable France to give to this kingdom, upon the outset of hostilities? Or how difficult it might be, in such circumstances, to induce a mercantile people like the English to endure such a shock; and not rather to suffer the basest indignities that could be heaped upon a nation?

"The great objects of such a country

impute it. Heretofore they must acknowledge that, though you may, sometimes, have been unfortunate, you never were depressed. You have stood, (as your own Baillie* did in Asia,) presenting a front to every danger; so that nothing but an explosion from heaven could undo you. But if they read this treaty, they must think that day is over; and if they see you recede from the other countries of Europe to bury yourselves in the embraces of France, they may imagine that you have deserted that station which you have hitherto maintained in Europe. Now, I ask can you desert that station? And I answer, that you cannot; first, because it would be inglorious; and next, because it would be unsafe. The moment

that you were to let fall that standard, it would pass to some other power; and you would cease to be the hope, and cease to be the pride of Europe. The enemies of your former greatness would pursue your retreat, though they would stand aloof from your power. THE NATION THAT

HAS ONCE DARED TO BE GREAT, HAS NO SAFETY IN LITTLENESS-she must con

tinue her darings, or she will suffer the pains of pusillanimity."

This is worthy of Chatham; and will surely be allowed to contain profound political wisdom. We owe Mr. Flood this acknowledgment; as our readers may recollect that we gave Mr. Grattan great credit for a similar sentiment, when it now appears that he was merely repeating what had been much better said by his illustrious rival, nearly twenty years before. After a fine allusion to Elizabeth and Cromwell, both of whom, in most trying circumstances, placed England at the head of Europe, he thus concludes :

"With these glories before my eyes, and remembering how nobly they have been augmented within those hundred years, I stand in astonishment at the preamble of this treaty, which calls on us, in a tone of triumph, to reverse the system of that century. I cannot help asking myself, who those men are, who thus summon a mighty nation, to renounce its honours, and to abdicate its superiority. But, be they who they may, if they ask ME to depose Great Britain, and to put France into the throne of Europe-I answer, NO. If they ask me to repeal the revolution, I answer, NO;-or the liberty that came with it, or the glory that

followed it, or the maxims of commerce, and of government that have cherished and adorned both ;-I continue to answer by a reiterated negative. I confide that you will do the same; and I conclude."

Such was Mr. Flood in England. We have felt it our duty to be thus copious in our extracts from this most able speech, because of the idle notion that was so current, that he was unable to maintain his reputation before a British audience. His first appearance, unquestionably, did not serve him; but who can read the passages which we have quoted, and not be ready to admit, that his failure, as far as it could be called a failure, was owing, purely, to the accident of having been betrayed into a speech without having made any sufficient preparation? He now fully vindicated the estimate of his early admirers; and were he a younger man, or had he enjoyed better health, it is probable that many such efforts would have given him a station and an influence in the British House of Commons that would have satisfied his highest ambition.But he was now declining into the vale of years; and the motives which stimulate to parliamentary enterprise could operate but weakly on the veteran politician, whose youth and manhood had been passed amidst the stormy contentions of the Irish senate, and who felt himself now, in advanced life, a stranger in a strange land, politically invalided. Such was Mr. Flood's precise position at the period of which we write. His conduct upon the renunciation clause in his own country, and his opposition upon the India Bill in England, had alienated Fox. His breach him from the party of Pitt, from whom, with the Duke of Chandos separated indeed, he would in any event have been separated, by his impracticable self-will, and his sturdy independence. Even if Pitt were not too haughty to court him as a follower, he would have been too He was, proud to follow a leader. therefore," himself alone." There was no section of the house, of which he was acknowledged as the head. And, without a parliamentary gathering, such as it would have been perfectly hopeless for him to attempt to muster, he clearly saw that permanent senatorial pre-eminence was not to be at

tained. He, therefore, we think, judged wisely in not addressing the House often; and never except upon great occasions, when the weight of his character, as well as the importance of the subject were sure to command attention. In 1790, he introduced his plan of parliamentary reform, which certainly must be characterized as constitutional and wise, and which had the singular fate of being equally praised and disregarded. The speech in which it was introduced, was commended by Pitt, as "replete with eloquence, and deep political wisdom;" but he deemed the time unseasonable. Fox, also, con. curred in this eulogy, and pronounced Mr. Flood's proposal the clearest from objection of any that had been made upon that important subject. But, Laudatur, et alget ;"-his isolated position in the House rendered him incapable of rendering any service to his country.

;

A by-gone question of that kind can now only be interesting, as it affects the reputation of the distinguished mover; and it may be said of Mr. Flood's plan, that it was a bold and decisive one, and bore strong marks of that enlarged and enlightened meditative sagacity by which he was characterized. He would have increased the number of members in the House by one hundred, to be elected by responsible house-holders, not already possessed of a franchise thus avoiding the evils of Lord Chatham's plan, which made no provision for the great and responsible body of men, who were then non-electors; and of Mr. Pitt's plan, which contemplated the gradual extinction of a certain number of boroughs; a measure which, at best, must be slow,-which, if compulsory, might be deemed arbitrary; and if effected by purchase, would be a violation of principle, and build reform, not on the purity, but on the corruption of the franchise. It was possible that the purchase might never be effected, and that the worst boroughs, those of the government, never would resign, but would be comparatively increased in their importance, by the resignation of others that the Reform was to wait for the result of all these contingencies and, at all events, that it was not to begin till the expiration of the parliament, which had but just commenced, during all which time it would be open to be repealed, before it began to operate.

"My proposition," he proceeded, "is free from all these objections; for it is,

that one hundred members should be

added, and that they should be elected by a numerous and a new body of responsible electors; namely, the resident householders in every county-resident, I say, because the principle of the constitution is so strongly in favour of residence, could be an elector; and with reason:that it ordained that no non-resident first, because residents must be best acand next, because they can attend at every quainted with every local circumstance; place of election, with the least inconve nience and expense to themselves or to the candidate. Householders, I say, because being masters, or fathers of families, they must be sufficiently responsible

to be entitled to franchise. There is no country in the world in which the householders of it are considered as the rabble; no country can be said to be free, where they are not allowed to be efficient citizens; they are, exclusive of the rabble, the great mass of the people-they are the natural guards of popular liberty in the first stages of it. Without them it cannot be retained; as long as they have this constitutional influence, and till they become generally corrupt popular liberty cannot be taken away; whenever they do become generally corrupt it cannot be retained; neither will it be long possessed, if they have not this constitutional influence, for the liberty of a nation, like the honour of individuals, can never be safe but in their country have a better right to consideraown custody. The householders of this tion and franchise than those of any other country, because they pay more for it. It is admitted, that every individual of shillings a year to the revenue in tax.— this country, one with another, pays fifty The master or father of a family must contribute in proportion for himself, and for each individual of his family, even to the child that is hanging at the breast. Who shall say that this class of men ought to be confounded with the rabble? Who shall dare to say that they ought to be proscribed from franchise? They maintain the influence of the rich, the dignity of the noble, the majesty of the crown; they support your fleets and your armies; and who shall say, that they shall not have this right to protect their liberty."

The French Revolution furnished a plausible objection to any reform at that period. Who," says Mr. Burke, would commence unroofing his house

in a s orm?" This topic was strongly urged by Mr. Powis against Mr. Flood's motion on the present occasion; and his reply exhibits the keen sense of destitution, as a public man, which he experienced, whenever he had to claim the attention of the House as an independent member.

The ghost of French tumult has again been excited to conjure down, if possible, the dangerous spirit of reform; and a grave member of the British parliament, in the gravest of all possible harangues, has imagined to himself that a missionary from the national assembly of France has escaped to this House to make the present proposition. I am not a native of France. I am a citizen of the British empire. I am a member of this House. I appeal to you whether my conduct has been that of an alien or an adventurer-whether I have often trespassed upon your attention-whether I ever did so but upon an occasion of importance ;-and whether I then wearied you with ostentation or prolixity. I am as independent in fortune and nature as the honourable member himself, (Mr. Powis.) I have no fear but that of doing wrong; nor can I have an hope on the subject but that of doing some service before I die. The accident of my situation has not made me a partizan; and I never lamented that situation till now, that I feel myself as unprotected, as I fear the people of England will be on this occasion."

The general merits of his plan, (which was, undoubtedly, highly conservative, and might, had it been adopted, have prevented that perilous experiment, which, by a combination of folly and wickedness, was reserved to be put in practice in our times,) he thus sums up in the conclusion. His words were pregnant with instruction, and well deserving of being heedfully remembered.

"The higher classes of every state are subject to be debauched by ambition; the lower by necessity; the middle classes alone can be depended upon. The extremes of the state are apt to unite to overwhelm every thing between: it is the business, therefore, of wise statesmen to render the middle ranks so strong, as to be able to resist the union of the extremes. The constituent body is the political army of the state; an able general will make the centre of his army strong, if he be in danger from the wings. On this principle, I introduce four hundred thousand responsible citizens from the middle ranks of the people, to fortify the

constitution, and render it impregnable. Such men cannot gain by convulsion; such men are too numerous to combine ; and their position is a position of moderation, because it is a state of mediocrity."

Parliament was now dissolved; and the very little interest which the public, at that period, took in parliamentary reform of any kind, appears from the fact, that he was not re-elected. This must have sensibly mortified his proud spirit; but it was of the less importance, as his life was now drawing towards a close. From very early youth he never could be said to have enjoyed uninterrupted good health; but his final illness was caused by exposure to cold, during an attempt to extinguish a fire that broke out in his house at

Farmley. He was seized with a pleuritic attack, of which, after lingering a short time, he expired.

The details into which we have already entered, and the specimens of his intellectual powers which we have laid before the reader, render it unnecessary, we presume, to dwell at any great length upon the character of this great man. He was, indeed, one of whom his countrymen may feel justly proud, and whose powers of mind and personal qualities would, in any country, have enabled him to attain the loftiest station. Amongst these, the vigour and the sagacity of his reasoning faculties must be allowed to hold the chief place. Never, probably, did an orator exist whose extemporary logic was so perfect and so sustained. His imagination was just sufficient— and no more than sufficient-to throw a torch-light illumination around him as he proceeded, in his native strength, scaling the difficult and almost impracticable precipices, or winding his way through the dark and thorny labyrinths of argument, at one time so lofty as almost to surpass intellectual power, and at another so mazy as almost to baffle human penetration. Whatever the subject was, he never once sunk below the level of it, and was often able to raise his hearers up to the level of it, and to impose upon them the temporary delusion, that they were reasoning out, with their own minds, those conclusions to which they were conducted by the processes of his elaborate, and masterly argumentation. And yet, never man existed who so little condescended to