of his own country. What must a candid and fenfible reader think of fuch periods as thefe: By a change as rapid as it is frightful, England no more resembles itfelf: inftead of a contented and happy people, it exhibits only men languishing in poverty and dejection, and fuffering evils which they do not deferve.'

We know not whether all the mistakes of this prejudiced Writer are wilful; but we cannot help thinking some of them fo. Rouffeau had faid, in his Social Contract, that the people of England are never free, except during the election of a new parliament Our Author denies that they are free even then. They fell their liberty, fays he, though it be but a fhadow, a phantom; and this the Author of the Conftitution of England, one of the most violent panegyrifts of that nation, is obliged to acknowledge.'-This daring affertion made us fufpect that we had loft our memory; and when we opened again Mr. De Lolme's excellent book, we began to fufpect the rectitude of our eyefight:-but on fecond thoughts, finding no reason to prefume that our eyes are to view objects as they are exhibited by the magic lanthorn of M. D'ALBON, we are obliged to expose him to the Public as guilty of mifreprefentation and falfehood. The judicious Author of the Conftitution of England, instead of acknowledging what Rouffeau afferts, refutes it, with warmth, and even with afperity. He fhews, with the greatest perfpicuity and ftrength of reafoning, the fignal advantages which the people derive from acting by representatives in the great council of the nation; and drawing the proper line of diftinction between popular liberty and a part in the adminiftration of government, he accufes Rouffeau of ignorance and precipitation in the judgment he formed. If M. D'ALBON had read M. De Lolme's book with an ordinary degree of attention and candour (for we do not charge him with incapacity), he would have found all his imputations and objections answered before-hand: this might have prevented him from looking upon bribery and corruption as a part of the English conftitution; from confounding the vices of the administration with those of the government; and from attributing to the laws, and the political fyftem, effects which have their origin and caufes in the corrupt morals of individuals, and the increase of that luxury and opulence which fpring from the bofom of liberty. He might also have seen that the diforders, which he rails at with a malignant pleasure, may one day produce their own remedy,-and that no abufes have affected the fources of legiflation and liberty, of which the redrefs is not practicable, and which the nation has not ftill the power of redreffing: he might have seen that a great part of what the British nation fuffers at this day, proceeds from a concurrence of accidental circumftances, which it

was

was extremely difficult to forefee or prevent, and from the bad faith of his own country, which feems difpofed rather to perifh itself, than to see another profper. In a word, he might have feen many things, had he been at the pains of opening his eyes, and laying afide his national pocket-glass.

The Difcourfe concerning Holland is fomewhat lefs defective in point of inaccuracy; though the author's accounts of the Stadtholder (a name that founds painfully in a French ear!) and of the States General, are erroneous in various respects, and, at beft, are trivial and fuperficial. Among other marks of difingenuity, which caft a juft reproach upon the character of this Count D'Albon, we might mention his account of the elevation of William III. to the Stadtholdership. He difguifes the infamy of that lawless and unprovoked invafion, in the year 1672, which will be an eternal ftain on the annals of Lewis XIV. and Charles II. *; and tells us that a fedition was the caufe of the fudden elevation of William III. This is fpeaking the language of a flave, who hugs and careffes his chain. So then the generous voice of a whole people, who called upon the defcendant of the immortal founder of their flate to conduct the army of the Republic against a lawless invader, and to invigorate the public counfels by a restoration of the ancient conftitution-this, forfooth, was a fedition!-No! Monfieur D'Albon,- this was one of thofe events which, in times of trouble and faction, often produce unhappy acts of violence, that are painful to humanity, but which that humanity, which embraces the happiness of a whole community preferably to that of a few individuals, must applaud as an act of patriotism, and not of fedition. Our Author's account of the elevation of William IV. is ftill lefs ingenuous: he does not even mention the Aagrant iniquity of the French eruption into Dutch Flanders in the year 1746, without any other object or pretext than their mere good pleasure, and their defire that the Republic fhould facrifice its independence, and follow their nod. He only tells us, in a few words, that William IV. was raifed by a fedition, by a tumult in the city of Veere, which rendered the other provinces fo delirious, that they followed the first emotion, and confented to the restoration of the Stadtholdership.

Our Author condemns this ftep; and the whole ftrain of his reflexions on this fubject resembles that of the French pamphleteers, who seem to have given each other the word, to rail against

It must never be forgotten that this infamous conduct of Charles II. (inftead of being applauded by his people, as that of Lewis was) excited the indignation of all orders of men, and drew upon him the unanimous and bitter reproaches of his parliament and fubjects, who at length forced him to quit his base alliance with the French invader.

the

the Stadtholdership, and to unhinge (were it in their power) that happy union which conftitutes the ftrength of the Belgic provinces. Having spoken of the ftate of the Republic, after the death of William III. which he calls a period of felicity and glory which lafted thirty years (fays he in his chronology t) without a Stadtholder, he expreffes himself thus: After fuch a happy experience, why did the Republic, regretting the Stadtholderian government, reftore it again, and render it perpetual? Never was any refolution more fingular and more imprudent; and if the United Provinces had not been blinded, they would have foreseen the fatal consequences which could not but arife from this ftep' The interests of the Stadtholder' (continues this wonderful Politician) are in almost a perpetual oppofition to thofe of the Republic, and there is no reason to think that the latter will ever gain the ascendant.

I fee nothing in all the extent of the provinces, but the Stadtholder and his dependants: nowhere do I perceive the members of the ftate, the pillars of the country, the defenders of the Republic. To obtain an exact list of the creatures or flaves of the Prince of Orange, you have only to caft an eye on the deputies that form the affembly of the States General; then draw up a lift of all thofe that compofe the provincial affemblies; and then enumerate the magiftrates, fenators, burgomafters, &c. in the feveral cities: nay, to exprefs what I mean more fully and ftill more briefly, you have only to number the inhabitants of the Republic, and then you will have an exact lift of the inftruments which the Stadtholder can fet in motion, and manage according to his good pleasure.'-Pray, Sir, have you ever been in Holland?-Have you feen any one that has been there? or have you read any decent author who has written about the country and its government?

We have never met with fuch a blundering and difingenuous Difcourfer about governments as this Writer. He tells us, that the Roman Catholics in the United Provinces cannot fill any pofts, nor enter into commercial partnerships: focietés de commerce, is his term.-Now, if by pofts he means all employments, civil or military, he is mistaken; for Roman Catholics may fill military employments, and do fo in fact; and as to the latter article, it is one of the most glaring untruths imaginable, unless by focietés de commerce, he means the Eaft and West India companies. The bitter reproaches he cafts upon the Dutch government for its treatment of the Roman Catholics, are unjust in themselves, and peculiarly indecent in the mouth of a FrenchThe Roman Catholics (whofe religious principles are

man.

The Republic, after King William's death, was 46 years withOut a Stadtholder.

much

much more dangerous to a Proteftant government, than those of the Proteftants are to a Popish one *) are treated in the United Provinces with more lenity and indulgence than they are in any other Proteftant country: they enjoy all the rights of citizens, except an admiffion to civil employments; and in this exception they are not diftinguished from feveral other Protestant communities, whofe members are excellent fubjects, fuch as the Lutherans, Arminians, and Anabaptifts. And yet our declamatory Author reprefents the Papifts in Holland, as reftrained, tormented, and facrificed, in his high-fwollen phrafeology. What would he say, if they were tormented as the Proteftants are in France; i. e. if their paftors were sent to the gallows or the gallies-their marriages confidered as acts of fornication, and their children declared, by law, baftards? We fhall not continue this odious enumeration. Every one knows the tenderness and humanity of the French government, and the French tribunals, to the profeffors of the reformed religion in that country, fince the revocation of the edict of Nantes. Every one knows the infernal perfe cution of the Calas and the Sirvens, perpetrated openly, in the midft of the eighteenth century; and therefore our zealous Count would do well to apply the first efforts of his reforming Spirit at home, and then he would difplay, with a better grace, his zeal for the correction of his neighbours. Take the beam out of your own eye, &c.

His accounts of the Dutch commerce are the best part of this fpeckled difcourfe; and his obfervations on Belgic man ners, induftry, economy, and luxury are, for the most part, fenfible, judicious, and well expreffed: more especially, what he fays of the past state of literature and arts in the United Provinces, is much more elegant, ample, and impartial, than what we find in fome other modern travellers. It is not fuperficial, confidering the compafs of the work; and it must be confeffed that the lift he prefents of the literati and artists that have flourished in the United Provinces, is highly refpectable, and does fingular honour to a country, fo limited in its extent, and fo little favoured by the liberality of nature.-. At the end of this fplendid lift, he tells us, that the sciences have their flow and ebb, and that the most brilliant period of their profperity is the forerunner of their downfal, or at least, of their retrogradation to a state of mediocrity. Accordingly, he looks upon Dutch literature as, at prefent, under a total eclipfe; and here again he exaggerates more or lefs: for though

The religious principles of Proteftants are dangerous to no government; and the King of France has no better fubjects in his king. dom than those of that perfuafion.

we

we perceive no more above the literary horizon of the United Provinces, ftars of the firft magnitude, fuch as a Grotius, a Gronovius, a Schultens, a Boerhaave, an Albinus, a Nieuwentyt, a Huygens, a 'Gravefande, and a Maschenbroek; yet there are still many learned men; and the fpirit of literary improvement and philofophical inquiry is very far from being extinguished in the United Provinces, as appears from the numerous academies Jately erected in that country for the improvement of experimental philofophy, natural hiftory, ufeful arts, and Dutch poetry; and from various teftamentary foundations left for prize difcourfes on metaphyfical, moral, and theological fubjects. We know not whether this fpirit of improvement and inquiry be owing to the difinterested zeal of individuals, or to the foftering protection and encouragement of government; and therefore we fhall neither affirm nor refute what our Author fays of the ftate of obfcurity and nullity (as he calls it) in which the learned in Holland are at prefent funk.

Our Author's description of Switzerland, in the fourth Difcourfe, is picturefque and interefting; and his poetical ftyle is often happily employed in painting the romantic and ftupendous fcenes that nature exhibits in that country. It is more particularly in reading this laft Difcourfe, that we regret Count D'Albon's prostitution of his pen to national prejudices, and narrow views, in the other parts of his work.

ITALY.

II. Configlio ad un Giovane Poeta, &c. i. e. Counsel to a Young Poet. By MARTIN SHERLOCK. 8vo. Naples. 1779. This piece contains an ingenious inveftigation of Italian poetry, and comes from the pen of an Hibernian, who writes in the language of the country whofe bards he criticifes. Mr. SHERLOCK is a lively writer, and feems to poffefs a rich portion of tate and imagination. Farther, he discovers marks of judgment and folidity, when he fpeaks of objects which he has obferved with a deliberate affiduity and attention;-but he feems rather apt, fometimes, to take a part for the whole, and to be led a fairy dance after falfe or ambiguous lights: as the reader will fee in the following article. In the work before us, he appears to advantage; and though both the work and the language in which it is written, render it peculiarly interefting to Italian readers, yet it is worthy of a much more univerfal reception.

Mr. SHERLOCK obferves, that harmony and colouring (by which laft, no doubt, he means ftyle and expreffion) are the parts of the poetic art, in which the Italians more efpecially fhine; while nature, truth, the fimple, and the pathetic, which characterife the great poet, are more or lefs neglected. Their productions are generally addreffed to the imagination,

rarely