then inquired, if we had any English papers on board. It was anfwered in the affirmative. He then defired us, with a certain air, (affez leftement,) to fend them by our boat. He was answered, encore plus leftement, that if he wanted them, he might fend for them himself. He underflood this language; and fent his lieutenant on board us with a piece of nankin for the captain. I relate this circumftance, as it paints the English nation. They really think themfelves mafters of the fea, &c. &c.'

To the man who has the jaundice, as is commonly remarked, every thing has a yellow hue. A mental jaundice alone could conclude that the rough language of a Jack Tar was dictated by the remains of refentment, when conteft is no more. Whatever airs the captain of the Eaft Indiaman might difcover, our author allows that his friend, the American captain, gave himself greater; which, fo far from irritating this John Bull, did not prevent him from making a genteel prefent to the American; without expecting or receiving a return.

Another inftance of the effects of the author's mental jaundice, we will mention, which relates to ourselves.

The third volume of the work before us, is a republication of a treatise written by himself and M. CLAVIERE, conjointly. M. BRISSOT fays, in a note, this publication was tranflated into English and published in London and America. The authors of the Monthly Review for January 1788, although guided by English prejudices, have done honour to the principles contained in that work.'

We might produce many other paffages, in which a fimilar fpirit is difcovered: but the above inftances will fufficiently manifeft how much M. BRISSOT's prejudices have influenced and diftorted his judgment. We will now examine the prin ciple itfelf; and afk our benevolent philofopher,-(the excelJent fentiments and difpofitions displayed in feveral parts of this work induce us ftill to give him this appellation,) we would feriously afk him, on what his axiom is founded, that the Americans ought to deteft the English? Is every national conteft to terminate in implacable hatred? The great philanthropy which he expreffes, and the principles maintained as the bafis of the new constitution, of which he is fo ftrenuous a supporter, will not admit this folution. Indeed, if this argument were allowed, a state of implacable hatred muft have previously taken place against the French nation; who, with their allies, the favages, were formerly the terror and the fcourge of the Americans; and from whofe encroachments and cruelties, the English have most completely rescued them. Is it because the English endeavoured to retain the Americans under their domi

This is a wrong reference: the work was reviewed in our Ap pendix to vol. lxxvi. p. 593.

nion Previously to that unhappy war, the government of England was always deemed a mild government, and was envied by the colonifts of every other nation. During the war, no other methods were pursued than those which the laws of war, however horrid in them felves, could juftify. In the weak and infant state of America, the government of England was its guardian and fupport; and if England wifhed and attempted to retain this authority, fhe acted folely on the maxims which have uniformly prevailed in every age, and in every ftate; and therefore, whether they were juftifiable or not, this cannot, exclufively, be the juft caufe of hatred. If to retain a people under a mild government, under which they flourished, and were as happy as a diftant authority could make them, be a just cause of detestation, is it not lawful to argue, how deteftable must the French nation be at this inftant; for while they are boafting that all tyranny is fuppreffed, they are endeavouring to hold their revolting colonies in chains of the most abject flavery? Again, the author ought to have known that the American war was extremely unpopular in England, and that the bulk of the people were abfolutely averfe from it. He will not furely admit that the nation at large fhould be detefted for the fins of the miniftry; as this must make the deteftation of his countrymen univerfal. Or will he adopt the abfurd pofition that the English and French are natural enemies, and confequently muft hate each other most cordially, and argue that as it is the duty of the Americans to love the French for the fervices received from them, of course they should deteft the English? Before the French can be entitled to this enthusiastic love, the motives of their conduct ought to be examined, when fuch fervices were rendered. M. BRISSOT has himself fufficiently explained these motives, in the following anecdote of Monf. De Vergennes.

At the time, (fays he,) when the different powers were establishing the bafis of the peace of 1783, M. Vergennes, actuated by private views, wanted to perfuade the ambaffadors from the Congrefs, to confine themselves to their fisheries, and renounce the weffern territory; that is, an extenfive and fertile country beyond the Alleghenies. This minifter particularly infifted that the independence of America bould not be one of the fundamental principles of the treaty, but merely contingent. To fucceed in this project, it was neceflary to gain over Meff. Jay and Adams. Mr. Jay declared that he would facrifice his life fooner than fign fuch conditions; that the Americans fought for their independence, and that they would not lay down their arms until it was completely obtained; that the court of France had acknowleged it, and could not confiftently recall the avowal. Mr. Jay did not find it difficult to hold Mr. Adams in the fame opinion; nor could M. Vergennes ever fubdue his inflexibility.'

The

The most fhallow politician knows that the only principle, which induced our Gallic neighbours to affift the Americans, was to diftrefs Great Britain. It appears, from the above anecdote, that, notwithstanding the pretenfions of that virtuous court, they would have cajoled the Americans out of the very bleffing for which they drew the fword, when it was imagined that the independence was not neceflary for the humiliation of Great Britain. Such were the motives, and fuch was the conduct, for which the French nation claims the warmest gratitude, and exclusive affection!

Would M. BRISSOT infinuate that the national character of the English is the juft object of deteftation; and that his countrymen poffefs irrefiftible attractions? It would be indecent in either party to fupport its own pretenfions.-We shall leave it to other nations to decide the question. Refpecting the Americans, we shall only obferve, that if a great fimilarity in manners, in religious fentiments, as well as famenefs of language, and alfo confanguinity, have any influence, there is fome reafon to conclude that the prepoffeffion will be in our favour. The contraft which the author has occafionally drawn between the Americans and his countrymen, is itself fo ftriking, that he ought to excufe the Americans, fhould they exclaim with the failor in Shakspeare's Tempeft, when he laid himfelf down by the fide of Caliban: Diftress makes a man acquainted with ftrange bed fellows!

f

The reader will pardon our dwelling fo long on this fubject, when he recollects, that M. BRISSOT is not the only French politician who fpeaks of the English in fo indecent a manner. Some notice has already been taken of the violent terms used by M. De la Croix *, on which we have animadverted with more lenity than they deferve. It is with real concern that we behold two gentlemen, politicians, who obviously think themfelves, and who are probably deemed by their conftituents t, great philofophers, diffufing fuch fentiments under a conftitution that profelies to breathe nothing but peace and amity! It gives us too much reafon to queftion, whether the difpofitions of the prefent legiflators are worthy of more confidence than thofe of their predeceffors. We have, therefore, employed a few lines to convince them, if poffible, that fuch a conduct renders the politician' fufpected, and is unbecoming the philofopher. We muft farther remind them, that the period which they have chofen to calumniate us, places their illiberality and

* See the first article in the prefent Appendix.

+ M. De la Croix was member of the late National Affembly;. and M. Brift is of the prefent.

3

ingra

ingratitude in the strongest point of view. It is at the inftant when the generous conduct of Britain toward the French nation, is the admiration of the whole world: - when our miniftry, difdaining to follow the example of the French court, or to retaliate the evils which it defigned us, neither excites commotions, nor feeks any political advantages from them :when, as a member of the National Affembly has lately expreffed himself, affiftance to the diftreffed island of St. Domingo is offered with more promptitude, than thanks are returned :when the numerous focieties of very refpectable individuals are celebrating their liberation from defpotifm, with a warmth of enthusiasm, as if they were perfonally interested in the event:and when a multitude of performances are daily iffuing from the British preffes, in vindication of the principles of the French revolution and new form of government, that equal, if not exceed, both in number and in found argument, the various publications of their own political writers *.

If our animadverfions, as above, have occupied the space which might otherwife have been devoted to fuch extracts as would have given our English readers a more favourable opinion of the work in general, M. BRISSOT muft confider his own illiberality as the caufe. However, to do juftice to its merits, and to vindicate the expreffions of praife which we have uttered, we shall give a few specimens.-The following paffage is felected, to manifeft the author's defcriptive talents. Speaking of the roughnefs of the road between Bofton and New York, he obferves, that

The traveller is amply repaid for the fatigues of this route, by the variety of romantic fituations; by the beautiful views which prefent themselves at every step; and by the perpetual contraft between favage nature, and the attempts of art to fubdue it. Thofe immense lakes that are loft in the woods; thofe rivulets that refresh the meadows recently fnatched from uncultivated nature; thofe neat and pleafant houses interfperfed among the forests, containing numbers of happy, healthy, well-clad children; the fields covered with the trunks of trees configned to the deftruction of time, and which hide themfelves in the midst of Turkish wheat in bloom: those enormous heaps of timber that have been levelled by the winds half decayed, and with withered branches: thofe oaks that still preserve the marks of their pristine vigour, but which, iawn at the foot, only raife their dry and withered branches toward heaven, waiting for the first blait of wind to bring them to the earth; all thefe various objects, fo new to an European, ftrike his view, absorb his attention, and plunge him in a pleafing reverie. The extent of the fo

* On the other hand, a few party pamphlets, and the violent effufions of fome Tory newfpapers, are, furely, not to be confidered as echoes of the public voice.

refts,

Yon

refts, and the height and thickness of their trees, recal to mind the period in which thefe lands were only poffeffed by favages. antique tree has doubtlefs known them when they peopled thefe forefts. Not an individual is now to be traced. They have made room for another generation. The hufbandman no longer dreads their vengeance: his gun, with which he was formerly obliged to protect himself during his labour, remains fufpended at home. In the midst of thefe vaft forests, furrounded by his wife and children, he works, he fleeps, in peace, and is happy. If felicity has a dwelling, it is in thefe folitudes, where the pride of man, having no ftimulant, cannot form ambitious projects. His welfare depends alone on himself, and on the objects immediately before him.'

Among the many anecdotes of fome of the most distinguished Americans, the particulars of Dr. Franklin's life hold a confpicuous place: but as thefe have been communicated to the public through other channels, we fhall pafs them by, and felect a circumftance or two relative to General Putnam, which are not fo well known on this fide of the Atlantic. This gentleman was remarkable for his bold and intrepid spirit, which frequently prompted him to acts of fuccefsful rashness. When he was purfued by General Tryon, at the head of 1500 men, his only method of efcape was by precipitating his horfe down the fteep declivity of the rock called Horfeneck; and as none of the English dared to imitate his example, he escaped.

The Americans alfo relate, with aftonishment, the intrepid manner in which he killed a wolf of an enormous fize, which had long been the terror of Connecticut; and which had taken refuge in a deep and inacceffible cavern. He had the courage to have himfelf let down, by means of a cord fastened to his body, holding a torch in one hand and his gun in the other; and he had the good fortune to kill this ferocious animal, at the inftant when it sprang toward him but an act of intrepidity, which exceeded every other, was his venturing to clear, in a boat, the tremendous water-falls of Hudfon's river. This was in the year 1756, when Putnam fought against the French, and their allies, the favages. He was, accidentally, with a boat and five men, on the eastern fide of the river, contiguous to these falls. His men, who were on the oppofite fide, informed him, by fignal, that a confiderable body of favages were advancing to furround him, and that there was not a moment to lofe. Three modes of conduct were in his option, to remain, fight, and be facrificed; to attempt to pafs to the other fide, expofed to the full shot of the enemy; or to fail down the water-falls with almost a certainty of being overwhelmed. Thefe were the alternatives. He did not hesitate, but jumped into his boat at the fortunate inftant; for one of his companions, who was at a little diftance, was a victim to the barbarians. His enemies arrived foon enough to difcharge their balls at the boat, before he could get out of their reach. No fooner had he escaped this danger, through the rapidity of the current, but death prefented itself under a more ter