we quite prefer things to names in all our talk about slavery and freedom; not only on this, but other occafions?

This country is a happy one to its fubjects, and from the above adduced reafons: But there are degrees in happiness as well as mifery. May we look after ours? To be happy and comfortable in the focial civilized world we are destined to, every individual from the loweft of the people up to the first of the nobility, must wish for a competency of pecuniary income adequate to his allotted state. If it were as feasible in practice as it seems in theory and in nature, this might perhaps be effected, and to the injury of no one; I mean by collecting all the fpecie of the country into one mafs, and then parcelling out, all through the nation, that portion to its individuals that should be found proper and proportionate, as far as the nature of things could admit of it: But this is talking of chimeras, however defirable. But if even the taxes or quotas paid individually to government, were in a greater or leffer degree in this manner effected, this only seems a great thing; and how far this is effected in proportion to real practicability, others may and to be fure do know, though I do not; but I fear it is not unreasonable in me to fuppofe it not done up to poffibility; this then at least (if fo) might be both wifhed for, nay, humbly offered to confideration, free from offence or arrogance by any, however infignificant, of his Majefty's fubjects. Now, in reality, if I were in the receipt of 30,000l. a year, and you of 1000l. and both of us of the nobility or best gentry, I could furely pay, at lefs inconvenience, 10,000l. a year than you 100l., nay 50l.; rather the paying of 10,000l. a year out of 30, would to me be as nothing. Nor do I at all know but if I

were a young man, in the high ranks of life,

though with finall poffeffions,

nay even at prefent, when I fhould feel no objection to it, and I were offered an income of either 30,000l. a year or 20, but I fhould prefer the latter, fince equal to every even luxury, and lefs trouble attending it than the former.

But

But come we to realities, and to the happiness of the present British subject, to whom money must be a defideratum indeed towards the procuring that happiness? who can be happy with continual calls for it; no, not in wantonnefs and extravagance, but as the means of poffeffing what your station feems reasonably to require? And how does the Englishman stand in that respect? Surely, in general, most wretchedly; nor need we go about particularizing how and why? As to the great perfonal comfort of the numberlefs millions in the nation, while I am miferable, it seems to me fomething of Mr. Pope's mouse and partridge, who were most satisfactorily to be crucified in confideration of the grand totality of the universe.* But there is one national concern, among my patriotic recommendations, that I had almost overlooked; I mean, certain annual remittances to certain diplomatique gentry, great or fmall, together with other of his Majesty's great or small fubjects, which it were extremely defirable to attend to as much as poffible; and I will flatter myfelf that this patriotic effufion will be deemed a very fincere one, even should the minister, or even his gracious Majefty himself, God bless him, happen to fee the article. Yet, however, the grand why of our wants may be mentioned, viz. The national debt, and thence the taxes, as intereft for it. If half, or poffibly a third only, were taken off, perhaps we should have what I talk of, general competency;-as to the means for effecting this, by our annual drops of water (our million) into the fea, alas, alas! how flow, even if fure; for if any war intervened, how would it be then? But as matters now ftand, must there not be fad drawbacks to the golden age we fo pompously set out with as our own? But are there none remediable towards that thing which is our being's end and aim;" That without which life must be not a fatisfaction but a burthen, that fine qua non of defirable human existence,-Happiness ?

This nation is flourishing;—it has a million more than it wants, Suppofe for a moment France was flourishing? or even as we now are. Can France

become fo in a few years? From the general appearance of things, which every one fees in every newspaper, this does not feem likely; but from what I fee in mine this feems our wish. This may be right in politics, but to my fmall information not apparent. If fhe was flourishing, could we call ourfelves fo? To me it appears that no nation is flourishing, I mean fecure, without a command of money ready at call; and what command should we then have? Even ten years hence, with I will suppose even nineteen millions, or I mean up to twenty millions, faved towards paying off the debt (whether it would be more or lefs I know not) fhould we be flourishing, I mean fecure? I fhould think not; and even then, that gentlemen or ladies who had from five to fifty thoufand pounds, in the funds, would (not extremely long first) find, if realizing their thousands, fome diminution of their poffeffed and profeffed fums or fortunes. Oh happy to British politics, the... wretched condition of all the states around us! We are flourishing? No, they are ruined.

Mr. Pitt feems to have done every thing, done wonders in regard to the improvement of the revenue. Some of his taxes have been, I have understood from thofe that know thefe things, uncommonly and even unexpectedly productive; the mere change of mode of collection has, it feems, been exceedingly fo: he has dared,-how I honour him for it,-let him dare ftill more, go to things not names; go to, diftinguish between ufuality and reality, habitual and practical, and fo on; yes, he has dared to have resource to that downfall of Sir Robert Walpole, excife; and fpurned the nonsense of your nominalists, with Sir, you encroach on the facred liberty of the sub*ject; every man's own dwelling fhould be his fanctuary, and no one facrilegiously enter it, but from his confent and approbation.' Mr. Pitt's understanding goes to the weighing even inconveniences, and then choofing between them; this, and much more, added to I believe new and unexpected springs of trade, (some luck in truth there, nay, and fome necessity,

when

when fo bad you must look about you; hear this, ye patriots! and give me fome little credit for it, while you fee me thus applauding my great man;) yes, the combination of all these things has on the whole produced what we fee; even a revenue exceeding our wants, inftead of from Lord Stair's and others, nay, feemingly not falfified calculations, the revenue would have been inferior to the expences of the state, by whether one or two millions, or more or less, I know not; though every one knows that any inferiority would have given ruin for our, whether near or diftant, perspective, Need any one afk how agreeably war would have been then renewed, or how far invited from that very fituation?. Nor was France unflourishing then as now, nor the Emperor, nor perhaps Ruffia neither.

Yes, all this, and much more, adorns Mr. Pitt's ftill rather early reign, if that term, even metaphorically, will be allowed me; (nor let us forget his firmness and celerity too with Holland, nay Portugal, nay France) and many a fubject will, I am fure, happily join in with my applaufe of it. Let me not forget neither, in confirmation of my encomium higher up, by uniting in my praises for the minister, those for the man, who could, and even when by no means fo affluent as to make the facrifice (however otherwife in the undistinguishing eye of man) even nothing at all, but very much the contrary; yes, who could, fo circumftanced, give up, if I have it rightly, an annual receipt of 3000l. a year at the call of nobleness and generofity; and this, hardly even by poor craftiness and calumny, whispered into an interior meanness from confequential advantage, &c. This furely illuftrates the man, whatever elfe may, or may not, the minifter. To me too, as man, I fee traits that strike unifon with my own, however fecret and infignificant theory, firmness; it is faid, obftinacy; and if to my small difcernment it can be seen fuch, indeed, and upon my word, I will fay it. But, however inconfiftent man may be, and is, in action, he is, methinks, not fo in character; and do I not fee Mr. Pitt as a liftner, I mean as adopting the right from inGg 2 formation

formation and opinion elsewhere? Do I not fee that great (and oh how wanted!) characteristic of human nature, even change of opinion? And can that go with, live with, hand in hand go with obftinacy? But no, it was, where I particularly allude to it, incapacity; (will you fay weakness too? Sure not along with obftinacy;) you see I allude to the formation of the India Bill; and, God Almighty knows, though most affuredly I do not, perhaps it was incapacity, in that refpect. I fay that local refpect, for I imagine you would not have me give it as univerfal characteristic of Mr. Pitt. But yes, in the Shop-tax, he was obftinate, and, as a statefman, ignorant too. I am no judge of these taxes, and only know, with all the world, the difficulty of then finding them. However, that oppofers tried others in vain is known by us all too. That he was obftinate afterwards I allow, but that I, even therefore, blame him, will not decide. And when you so often see, and perhaps deride, the fentimental fine giving up, &c. pray do not imagine me fo delicate as not to diftinguifh a little between the real and practical in this world, and that you must know (confeffing fincerely too that myself have, not unoften, not known it) to what and whom you are to give up; and that my white lie is never at hand with me against perhaps your black one. Mr. Pitt would only have been hauxed and laughed at, not reverenced, for giving it up fooner. I like his fpunk there, and (do, for once, give me my term des balles) I am not fure now but the odds were, at the time, that Alexander the Great would (from the event) have been delivered down to us as a dupe and fool, instead of the demi-god he really however was, in fwallowing off the draught.

I run on too long on my honoured Mr. Pitt, all unknown to him, and free from poffible use to me. I say unknown, though I have just eaten with him two or three times, and let me join thereto, that so far from seeing a trace of bauteur, I have heard or read of, as being a feature of his character, it feemed even the reverse, more approaching to a fchool-boy playfulness. His father I knew more, and there may be seen a trifling sketch of him in Praxitiles. I end all this by (if you will but change the fexes for me) " Ob “ matre pulchra, filia pulchrior!" let me juft add however, that in my

fmall

way,