On the whole, while we much applaud Mr. Scott's diligence, learning, and taste, we cannot help repeating that he has unnecessarily extended his work; and that, while he treats us with some beautiful flowers, he mixes with them thorns and noisome weeds.

Muir.

ART. III. The History of the Reign of George III. to the Termination of the late War. To which is prefixed a View of the progressive Improvement of England, in Prosperity and Strength, to the Accession of his Majesty. By Robert Bisset, LL.D. Author of the "Life of Burke," &c. 6 Vols. 8vo. 21. 12s. 6d. Boards. Longman and Co.

ISTORIANS have sometimes been divided into two classes, the philosophical and the rhetorical: but perhaps we should not decidedly rank the author of these volumes under either. There is another class, however, not mentioned in the list of technical writers, but which certainly exists; and in this we should be more inclined to place him; viz. that of the prudent historians. It happens to be the business of the earliest of these annals to narrate councils which were not the most wise, and to state measures which were far indeed from beneficial; and though Dr. Bisset does not shrink from this painful task, though both the councils and the measures are fairly set forth, and their mischiefs are not dissembled, yet, when we behold a course pursued that is unfriendly to liberty and is fatal to the interests of the nation, when human life is sacrificed and incalculable treasures are squandered away, when the country sinks in consideration, when America is lost, and when France is aggrandized, the mind looks for the authors of these misfortunes, and it looks in vain in the records now before us. The cotemporary members of the cabinet are represented as able, faithful, and loyal; one is a patriot and a sage; another is a profound practical statesman; a third is only anxious to preserve the constitution inviolate; and in one or two only is some alloy gently intimated. On the other hand, if the ministers are all thus wise and virtuous, equal if not higher merit is liberally ascribed to their opponents. All this is good humoured; it has moreover the semblance of impartiality; and we should certainly be the last to complain of it, if we could forget that it belongs to the department of history to chastise injustice, to reprehend presumption, to expose folly, and to pour down a due though it be a tardy retribution on the heads of those who, assuming great and awful trusts, are either

See Rev. N. S. Vols. xxvi. p. 361. and xxvii. p. 23.

unequal

unequal to or betray them. It is peculiarly the duty and province of the historian to exclaim

"Cuncti adsint, meritaque expectent pramia palma."

Whether it be that this writer differs from the moral critics who thus delineate the office of the historian, or that from policy he disregards their authority, certain it is that he does not conform to it.

While, however, Dr. Bisset shews this favour to incompetent and unsuccessful ministers, he does not undervalue any of the great rights and important privileges of which Britons ought ever to be jealous, but is the avowed and firm, though tempe. rate, advocate of our liberties. His observations on constitutional questions are usually just, as well as ingenious; and if we meet with some of which we do not approve, they are few compared with those which call forth our commendation. As far as facts are concerned, we cannot impute it to him that he sacrifices the truth, or degrades the dignity of history; and if representations and apologies are occasionally made in a spirit which we cannot praise, the faithful narrative which accompanies them will prevent their having any ill effect, at least on persons of mature judgment. On the whole, then, the impression left on the mind is favourable to those principles to which we have been indebted for all that has hitherto distinguished us; and the work, though not free from many faults, and several great defects, is perhaps the least exceptionable of the histories of the same period. There may be too much justice in the Dr.'s severe observation on his predecessors, that they are rather repeaters of party notions and reports, than original composers of authentic history' but it cannot be denied that they have much assisted and shortened his labours; and we ought to add that, by paying more attention to one of them, he might have rendered his own publication considerably more complete than it now is.

With regard to style, we could have wished that Dr. B. had discovered more solicitude to attain correctness and simplicity; that his terms had been as appropriate as his meaning in general is just; that his page had presented fewer inexcusable negligences and unwarrantable licences, and less numerous marks of that undue haste and imperfect revision which characterize too many modern performances. In a work so important, which will fall chiefly into the hands of youth, both duty to the public and the suggestions of self-interest should have urged the author to have rendered his composition as faultless as it was within his utmost endeavours to effect.

K 4

The

The introduction shews that the Dr. has deeply studied the annals of his country; the events and characters of which, for the most part, he ably and justly appreciates. As preliminary to the history of the present reign, he very properly gives rather a minute account of the concluding part of that which preceded it. The administrative revolution, stated in the following passage, forms an æra so important in our records, that we are induced to submit to our readers the account of it here given:

• Ministerial influence in this reign, whether from the long continuance of parliament, or other causes, became much greater than at any former time. Corruption had been carried to a considerable length by the whigs, in the time of queen Anne, on particular occasions but it was reserved for Walpole to establish it as a methodical and regular engine of government; and to bribe in a dextrous and circuitous manner, which might not only escape detection, but in some degree even impose on the receiver, and which might make him suppose that to be the reward of merit from his country, which was really the wages of service to a minister. Closely connected with stock-jobbers, and other adventurers, in projects for the acquisition of money, Walpole found, through loans and similar government transactions, various opportunities of bestowing indirect donatives. Nor was he sparing in direct presents. He appears to have been the first minister who thoroughly understood the mode of managing parliaments, and making law givers willing tools in the hands of the court. He first completely succeeded in identifying, according to the apprehension of the majority, compliance with ministers, and patriotism; opposition to ministers, and dissaffection to the constitution. George's reign is an epoch in parliamentary history, as, since that time, whether ministers have been able or weak, wise or foolish, they have rarely failed to have the co-operation of parliament in their projects, whether useful or hurtful. The influence of the crown was established on the most solid basis by the whig party, and the whig leader, sir Robert Walpole.'

As we have before hinted, the author fairly states the acts and maxims of the early part of this reign: but he gives them a colour which all persons will not admit to be that which exactly belongs to them. Actions and measures which some have attributed to favouritism, and have considered as indicative of high notions of power, he describes as proceeding from a lau dable departure from old systems of political exclusion, and from the practice of confining administrations to a party. It is not a little curious that this salvo is first introduced in order to be applied to those arrangements, and the effects of them, which occasioned the resignation of William Pitt the elder, It is well known that this Minister himself never acted on the exclusive system, and that he was never cordially adopted by its partisans: but, admitting this to be otherwise, that was in

deed

deed a costly liberality which shewed itself at the expence of substituting weak and obscure individuals for a man of talents so pre-eminent, who had rendered services so signal, who was so fully invested, with public confidence, who bore a name so much respected abroad, and who had known so well how to command success. If, as the author represents, this and similar changes proceeded from a determination to act on enlarged views, it must be admitted that, however creditable the intention may be considered, the event proved highly unfortunate; and it furnished another instance of the evil of too rapid changes, and of the little dependence which can be placed on theories, be they ever so specious. The result, though melancholy, was a matter of triumph to the whigs. If the political bigotry of the two late reigns had not been shaken off, the country would have been saved many occasions of bitter regret; for it cannot be denied that, while the appointments were confined to the pale of whiggism, the empire flourished, and rose rapidly in the scale of power; and that from the moment at which another description of men came into place, the nation experienced nothing but agitations at home and humiliations abroad. If, however, the author palliates the blame of the dismissal of Pitt, he is not reluctant in displaying the merits of that illustrious statesman. The ground of difference on which he quitted office is fairly reported, and his various claims are exhibited in a strong light.

We cannot coincide in the censure here passed on Mr. Pitt, for not continuing a member of the cabinet after he had been out-voted in it in a matter immediately relating to his own department. We think that manliness and honesty called on him to act the part which he adopted; and if a near connection of that great man has lately practised this trimming, we cannot discover that the fruits of such temporizing recommend or sanction the practice. Besides, it requires no sagacity to perceive that he was considered as obstructing the progress of another who was ambitious to obtain absolute sway at home, and to raise to himself a name in Europe; and that on this account he was destined to be thwarted, till his spirit should determine him to abandon the field.

He who charges others with being repeaters of reports ought himself to set the example of deep research and diligent investigation but of these features we cannot say that we discover many traces in this history, while we certainly could point out numerous instances of the want of them ;-one occurs in the account here given of the peace of 1763. Among other reproaches cast on the authors of that treaty, was an accusation which charged them with a desertion of the king of Prussia,

and with a sort of treachery on the part of the Minister towards that monarch: but Dr. B. says that there is no authentic evidence to support that allegation. Archenholz, in his history of the seven years' war, having noticed the Minister's enmity to Frederic, asserts that he was so egregiously ignorant as not to be aware of the high veneration in which the Czar had ever held that great Prince, and not to be apprized of the clear proofs of it then recently furnished. He presumed that the new Emperor was desirous of retaining the provinces which had been taken from Prussia; and he offered to Prince Gallitzin, the Russian ambassador in London, to prevail on the Prussian monarch to give up such provinces as Russia might wish to keep: but Peter, we are told, wrote him a contemptuous answer, and sent the original proposal to Frederic. The same Minister, that historian farther says, busied himself in attempting to make peace between the Court of Vienna and the King of Prussia, completely without the privity of the latter; on which occasion he again made free with those provinces. Kaunitz, imagining this to be an intrigue to sow jealousy between the Courts of Vienna and Versailles, returned the British Envoy a very humiliating answer; saying that the Empress was powerful enough to make good her pretensions, and that it was below her dignity to conclude a peace by the intervention of England *. We are aware that the authority of this German writer is by no means of the first order: but he connects the charge with facts which ought to have been examined; and we see no temptations that could influence Archenholz to falsify in this instance. Supposing the accusation to be well-founded, a procedure of Frederic narrated in the same publication, and in other histories of the period, will serve to explain it t.

The most able part of this work is that which gives an account of the differences between Great Britain and her colonies. The result of the relation, and of the ranly and appro❤ priate observations which accompany it, appears to be in substance this; that the revolution was occasioned by the injustice, and by the weak and impolitic conduct, of the mothercountry. The Ministers, the author contends, did not alone deserve the blame; since the Parliament and the people merit a large portion of it. Some actuated by a love of domination, and others influenced by avarice, anxiously desired to see their fellow-subjects deprived of valuable rights, hitherto enjoyed in

* See Geschichte des Siebenjahrigen Krieges in Deutschland. Von J. W. von Archenholz. 2 Theil. p. 270, 7.

+ Vide the same work, 1 Theil. pp. 307—9.

+4

common