"In the Chronicle of March 25, is another attack upon the same lady, equally brutal and unprincipled.

"On the 23d of March, 1812, we have a striking proof of Whig abstinence from making inroads into the bosoms of private families'-let us read it.

“We seldom think it within the pale of newspaper license to notice what passes in the drawing-room of select society, BUT an incident occurred at the concert of the Countess of D. in Grosvenor-square, last week, so comical and diverting as to be worthy of record.'

"He then goes on to tell a tittle-tattle story about a lady, and her age, and personal qualifications, the point of which is

now lost, and the thing not worth repeating; but it is evident, that though the domestic privacy, yet when there is any Chronicle seldom thinks it right to invade cording, he pockets his scruples-particu thing sufficiently ludicrous to deserve relarly when a WOMAN is to be ridiculed.

In the Chronicle of Feb. 6, 1812, a story is told of Lord and Lady Castlereagh, by far too indelicate for us to copy-but as ing vulgarism, with a filthy allusion, is put the thing is imaginary, and the most disgust

into the mouth of one of the loveliest and most exemplary of women, it is necessary to mention it as another proof of the sweet consideration of Whig libellers for the most to possess. tender feelings a delicate female is supposed

But if females are thus treated by the Whig paper, let us see how carefully they abstain from the attacks upon disarmed enemies. Mr Perceval was murdered in the Lobby of the House of Commons BY AN ASSASSIN. We pass over an epitaph published in the Chronicle, (and re-published in the Twopenny Post Bag, full of political invectives against him,) and come to the following paragraph, which we read in that paper of June 2, 1812, a few days after his MURDER!

“The Post has published a volume of said rhymes are all of one character. verses upon the death of Mr Perceval; the Full of sighs, Social ties!!! Tears that flow, Children's woe, Drooping head,

And Statesman DEAD!!!
And streaming tear,

Lie buried here.'

"These verses put us in mind of some which we once saw written on spring, beginning as follows:

How beautiful the country does appear At this time of the year.'

We think, as illustrative of respect for the dead, and disarmed enemies, we need say but little on this article.

"That the death of an able Tory, even by the hand of an assassin, should delight the Whigs, we can easily fancy, and their joy at the prospect of place, opened to them by his fall, is natural to men who have never had one single thought of any thing except loaves and fishes;'-but that a London paper-A WHIG PAPER, a DELICATE paper, an honourable paper, a CHRISTIAN paper, should have made doggrel verses out of the sorrowing tears of

eleven orphan children, and ridicule the sudden dissolution by MURDER of the social ties of such a husband and such a father as Mr Perceval, does seem so incredibly horrid, that if the fact did not stand re

corded in the columns of the Morning Chronicle itself, we could not have believed it.

"How dare the Morning Chronicle, then, use the language it does, when speaking on

the subject of scurrility and personality— is it drivelling ?-is it doting ?-or is it downright mad ?"

JOHN BULL, No. XLII. Sept. 30.

“Mr Waithman appears to have borrow ed a little of the oblivious unction which the Chronicle has been using for some weeks past, when it talks big about personality and scurrility. The orderly and decent manner in which it takes the gentle set down we gave it last Sunday softens our hearts and feelings towards it prodigiously.

"Our defence (for they attacked) is and was unanswerable-it is conviction out of their own mouths; but lest they should imagine that we are silent for want of materials to go on with, we shall continue to mention articles which may be adduced in support of our vindication, to quote which we have no room.

"We beg, in the first place, to call the attention of our readers to a Character from the Persian,' in the Chronicle of July 16, 1812; and a poem in that paper of Sept. 8, of the same year. On the score of beastly indelicacy, we beg to refer to an article in the paper of Oct. 12, in the same year, with a Latin quotation; and for a striking mark of the durability and steadiness of its principles and attachments, as well as its great caution against personalities, we insert four lines, published upon

the late Richard Brinsley Sheridan-the wit the patron-the favourite, and the friend. Poor Sheridan had ventured to be moderate in the year 1812, and we have this :

'No, no, his fire he still retains,
Whate'er you may suppose !
Its lustre has but left his brains,

And settled in his nose.'

"Let us contrast these with some infamous lines which appeared in the Chronicle of June, 1816, on the death of the same person, and we shall find a striking proof of political consistency, and of loyalty to the King (whom the Chronicle now affects invidiously to praise) into the bargain.

"In short, let any impartial person compare the productions, in verse or prose, of the Whig-radicals for the last eight or ten years, with any thing ever published, and the palm must unhesitatingly be yielded to them, not only for their excellence in sedition, blasphemy, attacks on females, personal invective, and the violation of domestic privacy, but for the invention and first adoption of the mode of warfare which characterizes their works.

JOHN BULL, No. XLIII. Oct. 7.

"The Chronicle affects great indignation that the raillery which has occasionally appeared in his columns,' should be confounded with the infamous detraction and the merciless inroads into private life,' which are to be found in John Bull! So that imputing to men (and women too) the most gross and flagitious crimes is mere raillery, so long as it appears only in the Chronicle; but when charges not a tenth part so virulent are found in another paper, oh! then they become detractionthen they are infamous-merciless, &c. &c. Now, we have no other wish than to hold the scales perfectly equal between these two journalists; but the matter in dispute is a plain simple fact; and it is to be easily and conclusively settled, in the mode pointed out by the writer whom we quoted, on Thursday last, from Blackwood's Magazine. Take,' says he, any four or five files of the Chronicle, for the last thirty years, and with page, and day, and date, dare them to match from your pages the

base and merciless ribaldry, with which that virulent Journal has assailed every political opponent.' This is exactly what John Bull has done. He only yesterday se'nnight detailed (with page, and day, and date,) a long string of quotations from the Chronicle, and the Chronicle's correspondents. What does the Chronicle say in answer to this? Does it deny any one of the quotations to be accurate? Does it prove any one of them to be mere raillery? Does it prove that more infamous detraction, more merciless inroads on private life, nay, more vile and libellous attacks on female character, are to be found in John Bull or elsewhere? No. Not a syllable of all this. It only blusters about its consistent course during a long political life,' and is pleased to say that our public life' has been marked with inconsistencies à circumstance of which we certainly were not aware, and which we humbly conceive can have nothing at all to do with a comparison between the Chronicle and John Bull."

The subject is the greatest that could be chosen THE FIRST MURDER; and the dramatic characters are the sublimest that religion and poetry have hallowed to the piety and affections of mankind. They consist not only of Adam and his family, but also of the brightest members of the hierarchy of heaven, and the darkest demons in the abysses of perdition. The holiest enthusiasm is contrasted with the fiercest rage; and the kindliest feelings opposed to the cruellest workings of hatred and envy. But human nature is represented as having not yet lost all its original brightness, and as still retaining something of the odours and fragrance of paradise. The immediate communion with the angels is not entirely interrupted; but a tremendous intercourse seems to have commenced with outcast spirits, and glimpses are here and there opened into vistas of sin and horror, which the mysterious author unfolds for a moment; and then with a shuddering and hurried hand, as if appalled at his own daring, closes and quits as things too terrible for contemplation.

According to the view he has taken of the subject, some controversy, it would appear, had arisen between Cain and Abel, as to which of them should succeed their father in the service of the altar,and the daily sacrifice,—Cain insisting, as the first-born, to inherit the priestly spremacy as his birth-right, Abel contending that the appointment or ordination belonged to his father, and to which he and all his brethren were alike eligible. Eve, in this first polemical contest, had taken the part of Cain; Adam, that of Abel, but there is less of religious interest, than

of maternal anxiety in the partiality of our grand ancestress; for it would seem that from his birth Cain had been a wayward and untractable child, subject to violent passions, and a continual object of care and sorrow. Eve in consequence, actuated by a fond and affectionate solicitude, had endeavoured to appease and subdue his vindictive dispositions. Abel, on the contrary, was distinguished by his mild and modest demeanour, and his meekness and piety were the delight and solace of his father, whose reflections, embittered by the recollection of his own eternal forfeiture, were ever painfully awakened by the woeful evidences of the effects of his sin, in the malevolence of Cain, and the debates and quarrels which the fierce and turbulent character of " the first-born heir of misery" was constantly producing. To allay the controversy which agitated his family, Adam had proposed a solemn appeal to Heaven, and for this purpose instructed his sons to raise two altars; on the one Cain was directed to offer the firstling of his flock, and on the other Abel the first sheaf of his harvest: the acceptance of the offering was to determine which should inherit the sacerdotal office.

The drama opens with the guardian angels of Cain and Abel conversing together on the top of a mountain before the dawn of day. From their colloquy we learn the existence of the disputes in the family of Adam, who, with his children, are then represented as assembled on the plain below to abide the issue of the sacrifice. We also learn that to each of the human race a celestial guardian has been appointed since the fall; but that, for purposes which even the seraphim cannot comprehend, fiends and demons stronger than the guardians of men, are still permitted to be abroad, and that the angel of Cain, in the course of the night, while watching over his charge as he lay asleep, had been troubled with a strange sense of danger at the sight of one of these tremendous adversaries hovering in the mid-air, and seemingly intent to set him at defiance.