cuffed; and ftrong reafons are given for the author's opinion that throughout the tranfaction, Bonaparte had no object, but to amuse and delude our minifters. The Frenchman, it seems, who applied to Mr. Fox, offering to affaffinate Bonaparte, was a wretch of the name of Guillet, who (the author affures us) had been a fecret agent of Bonaparte for more than ten years, and was employed by him on this occafion to endeavour to impofe on the Englifh miniftry, by "pretending diffaffection to the tyrant, and propofing his affaffination." Such a man, inftead of being fent off, under the alien act, fhould,' we think, have been imprisoned as a spy, and, could the fact have been proved, his treacherous employer fhould have been expofed to the indignation of mankind. We cannot therefore believe, with this author, that Mr. Fox" difcovered the intended trap;" much less that he knew that Bonaparte had not only encouraged but inftigated the affaffination of his Majefty." He would in that case, have been far more blameable for fhowing, as the author exprelles it," any demonftration of a difpofition for peace with a mas whofe character is at hoftility with the repofe of the human race." The author's reflections upon that negociation, are, in our opinion (generally speaking) fenfible and juft. The fubfequent war of Bonaparte with Pruffia (which ended, in effect, with the downfal of that nonarchy) is the next interefting topic; and the author declares, with great probability, that the fate of Pruffia was decided before the battle of Jena was fought." He afferts (and all the circumflances concur to render the affertion, at least probable) that even the war department and the commiffariat were under the controul of Bonaparte, and that he received hourly advice, from the Pruffian head-quarters of the intentions of the Pruffian council of war."-Nothing indeed can be more manifeft, from the principal events of that war, than that the unfortunate Frederick was betrayed by his treacherous advifers into the hands of his inveterate enemy. Having detailed various other circumftances and given many curious anecdotes on the Pruffian war, (amongst which, are the particulars of the fecret treaty of Tilfit,) the author paffes to the tranfactions in Spain; refpecting which (as he admits) he has not added much to the interefting narrative of Don Cevallos. Some inftances, however, of the moft lawless rapacity (partaking of the nature both of robbery and swindling) * How otherwife can we account for the army, and all the neft important fortreffes being deftitute of provifions and stores? + He names two perfons employed for that purpofe by Lucchefini. are are given, on the authority of documents apparently authentic, and which, it appears, came to the author's knowledge in his profeffional character *. Thefe will not be found unworthy of the reader's attention: although our limits will not allow us to detail them here. We come now to what the author terms the conclufion of his work; in which he fums up his arguments on the queftion: "Whether Great Britain could, confiftently with a due confideration of her own rank and dignity, and even confiftently with her independence as a nation, make peace with Bonaparte?" To prove the negative of this queftion, he refers to the details already gone through, and adds feveral important confiderations; particularly that our enemy has now all the other maritime states of Europe under his controul, that their fleets are at prefent deftroyed or crippled by our victorious navy; but, fhould we allow him only five years of peace, he will be able to meet us on the ocean with a far fuperior force. "We are," the author declares, engaged in a war of a peculiar nature; not with a potentate who fights only for a particular object, for the attainment of a province, or for the ac knowledgment of a particular right; but we are at war with a man whofe object is the fubjugation of the human race; with a man who hates this country because we have a free constitution and the liberty of political difcuffion; because we have the freedom of the prefs, which he has banished from France, and from every country where he has obtained the predominance; with a man who, if he could fet his foot in this highly-favoured land, would wish to annihilate the finest conftitution that ever exifted on earth.' To confirm these arguments, he obferves that Bonaparte has enflaved two nations of Europe the moft free in their political conftitutions, Switzerland and Holland; and he infers (juftly in our opinion) from the preceeding detail, that we are at war with a man whofe ambition will not permit any government in Europe to be independent of his will." His treacherous conduct during the late peace is then brought again to view, and the confequences of any peace. we could make with him very forcibly (and we think truly) pointed out. As a notary public. The ftory, apparently authentic, of the tyrant; confifcating and felling a quantity of wool, as the property of " Spanish rebels," though really belonging to French merchants, with all the circumftances attending it, exhibits a precious inftance of profligate rapine. 942 The The author then addreffes, the admirers and partizans of our enemy, and also the two parties, the felf-named Whigs, and the Burdettites, or Democrats, endeavouring to convince both of their error, if they suppose any peace could be made without the most imminent danger to our free conftitution. Among other anecdotes, he afferts, and gives his reasons for the opinion, that "there are some perfons in this country who have direct communication with Bonaparte, through his bureau fpecial, eftablished at Paris for the purpose of maintaining a correfpondence with the diffaffected in this country." Such is the fubftance of a work; which, in fpite of that prejudice against the author with which fome of his former writings had infpired us, in fpite of the vehement personal animofity which pervades it, and which would lead us to fafpect him of credulity, at least, in fome of his anecdotes, and in others of exaggeration, we must admit to be highly important in its subject matter, replete with novel, and in many inftances authentic information, and (upon the whole) highly beneficial in its object and tendency. That the author has been ill-treated by the defpot of France, and that this ill-treatment rankles in his breaft, is fufficiently manifeft, not only from his flatement, but from the general tenor and language of this book. But from perfons of this defcription alone can "the fecrets of the prifon house" be learnt; and to expose those fecrets to open day, to lay bare the character and system of the hypocritical and artful ufurper, is furely one material ftep towards the defired mancipation of Europe. In the appendix are contained feveral important ftate papers, referred to in the body of the work, and characters (drawn with no very flattering pencil) of Bonaparte's family, his principal minifters, generals, &c. They form upon the whole an hideous group; and we fhould hope, for the honour of human nature, that in the vices and barbarities afcribed to most of them, there is much exaggeration. Upon the whole, however, the anecdotes are not devoid of entertainment and intereft. Next to Bonaparte and Murat (to neither of whom he will allow even perfonal courage) the Author confiders Savary as the most distinguished monfter of cruelty and perfidy. The author's quondam employer, Talleyrand, is by no means fpared: and the following truly French jeu d'efprit (afcribed to Chenier) precedes an elaborate hiftory and character of that minifter. It should be premised that La Roquet was a former Bishop of Autun, and it was fuppofed that Moliere had him in view when he wrote his comedy of Tartuffe. "La "La Roquet dans fon tems, Perigord dans la nôtre, Tartuffe eft le portrait de l'un— Ah!-fi Moliere eut connu l'autre !!!" And now-left we fhould be thought to have given too great confequence to a book, which from the circumstances of its author, might appear to deferve but little credit, we must be allowed to obferve that it is only by bringing forward fuch ftatements, that their truth or falfehood can be afcertained. In fuch a work, we pledge ourselves for nothing; but facts are facts, by whomfover reported; and this writer has certainly been fo fituated as to come to the knowledge of things, which no perfon here could know. Some of them are extraordinary enough, if they turn out to be true, even in part ;if not, we have only brought them to the teft, and the author alone must be responsible for what he has afferted. ART. VI. Inquiry into the Limits and peculiar Objects of Phyfical and Metaphyfical Science, tending principally to illuftrate the Nature of Caufation; and the Opinions of Philofophers, ancient and modern, concerning that Relation. By R. E. Scott, A. M. Profeffor of Moral Philofophy in the Univerfity and King's College of Aberdeen. Svo. 307 PP. 8s. Edinburgh, Brown and Crombie; London, Longman and Co. 1810. A MORE important enquiry than this cannot be con ceived. Whatever has a tendency to illuftrate the nature of caufation, tends not only to fmooth the path of human fcience, but also to fupport the foundation of all religion. Mr. Scott, however, fays with great modefty, that he would have declined it, had an author, whom he does not name, but who is evidently Dr. Gregory of Edinburgh, completed the purpose, which he incidentally mentions in his confutation of the Neceffarian hypothefis; " for then, continues he, any further inveftigation of that relation, would, I am perfuaded, have been fuperfluous." We really wish that Dr. Gregory had bent all the powers of that mind, which, by his enemies as well as his friends, is allowed to have. poffeffed uncommon vigour, to the completion of a purpose, so important in itself, and so long ago announced; but we are, on various accounts, glad that the enquiry has, in the mean time, been taken up by Mr. Scott. His Elements of Intellectual Philofophy furnish fufficient evidence that he pof ૨૧૩ felles feffes many of the qualifications neceffary to profecute fuch an enquiry with fuccefs; and though in our review of that work we found reafon to call in queftion fome pofitions intimately connected with the objects of the prefent*, we opened the volume before us with hopes, which, however, have not been altogether realized, that we should find those pofitions explained to our fatisfaction. In a fhort, but perfpicuous introduction, Mr. Scott traces all philofophy from that curiofity, which is difplayed as well by children as by men. Philofophy he therefore confiders as coeval with the human race; though the first fuggeftions, of a barbarous philofophy were, of course, difcarded by fucceeding and more enlightened enquirers. He shows, indeed, that nothing denominated philofophy was built on a foundation that could give permanence to the fuperftructure, until the publication of the works of Bacon, which banished hypothefis from the fchools, and eftablifhed the method of induction. He thinks, however, and thinks juftly, that the principles even of this method have not yet been fo completely unfolded as their importance feems to demand; and inftances the various opinions and even confufion of thought, which ftill prevail among philofophers respecting the relation of cause to effect. In the courfe of this detail, we twice meet with an expreffion, of which, though we will not pofitively cenfure it, we doubt the propriety: it is the fcience of Philofophy. We fay,-the fcience of Aftronomy, the fcience of Mechanics, the fcience of Mathematics, the fcience of Chemistry, the fcience of the Human mind, &c., by which we apprehend that nothing can be meant but the philofophy of Aftronomy, or the knowledge of Aftronomy, &c., but furely we could not fay the philofophy of philofophy, nor very properly the knowledge of philofophy; for what is philofophy, but knowledge or the love of knowledge ? After his introductory remarks, the author proceeds towards the object which he has in view; and, to clear the way before him, makes fome judicious obfervations on the ambiguity of language, and on the difficulties thrown by that ambiguity in the way of all philofophical enquiries, but more efpecially of metaphyfical enquiries. This he illuftrates by enumerating the various, or rather fome of the various fenfes, in which the word caufe is employed; and adds, we think juflly, that the radical meaning of that word is, perhaps in all languages, too indefinite to throw any See our 28th Vol. p. 225, &c. |