Mr. Rous, and various other witnesses who all agree, that, during the war, there was both greater production and greater consumption.' p. 67. A reasoner must be hard pressed, when he is driven to quote practical men in aid of his conclusions. There cannot be a worse authority, in any branch of political science, than that of merely practical men. They are always the most obstinate and presumptuous of all theorists. Their theories, which they call practice, and affirm to be the legitimate results of experience, are built upon a superficial view of the small number of facts which come within the narrow circle of their immediate observation; and are usually in direct contradiction to those principles which are deduced from a general and enlarged experience. Such men are the most unsafe of all guides, even in matters of fact. More bigotted to their own theories than the most visionary speculator, because they believe them to have the warrant of past experience; they have their eyes open to such facts alone as square with those theories. They are constantly confounding facts with inferences, and when they see a little, supply the remainder from their own imaginations. In this instance, the appeal to practical men, is peculiarly unfortunate for the only practical men whose authority is of any weight, those who join to their personal experience a knowledge of principle, certainly range themselves on any side rather than that of Mr. Blake. In this class Mr. Tooke stands pre-eminent: and we observe, that the pamphlet before us has elicited from this gentleman (in the second edition, just published, of his work on High and Low Prices) a most complete refutation of the facts upon which Mr. Blake's theory is founded. He has proved, to our minds most conclusively, that of scarcely any commodity whatever, except those which are the peculiar object of war demand, naval and military stores, was there either greater production, or greater consumption, during the war, than there has been since the peace. Production increased, it is true; for even the almost boundless expenditure of the war, could not altogether counteract the tendency to accumulation: but it was increasing equally fast before the commencement of the war, and has increased much faster since its close... Were the question to be decided by authority, Mr. Tooke might safely be set up against Alderman Rothwell, Mr. Rous, et hoc genus omne. But he has not suffered a single fact to rest upon his own authority. All his statements are given under the sanction of official documents. The following table contains a summary of Mr. Tooke's statements. It is extracted from the second edition of his work, p. 202 and shows the rate of the increase of production during the twenty years of war, as compared with the rate of increase before, and after that period :— Average Annual Amount of the Tonnage of British Shipping cleared out from the different Ports of Great Britain; of the official Value of Imports and Exports; of the imported Raw Materials of some important Branches of Manufacture (deducting Re-exports); of Tea sold at the East India Company's Sales; of various Commodities charged with Excise from 1783 to 1823, assuming 100 as the amount for the Ten Years ending in 1792, compared with the Amount of the Population at different Periods. Tea sold. Beer. Tallow. Sperm Hides. Malt. Hard. Soft. Bricks. Numbers. Years & Wax. After what has been done by Mr. Tooke, we should not have thought it necessary to say any thing farther, had our object been limited to the refutation of Mr. Blake. No general reasoning could have added to the conviction which every one must feel, who has perused Mr. Tooke's detail of facts, that Mr. Blake's theory is totally erroneous. What cannot, however, be proved by any detail of facts, but which it is of the highest importance to prove, is, that a state of war cannot, under any circumstances, generate an extra demand. This proposition can be proved only by general reasoning. If we have done any thing to render the evidence for it more clear to the mind of any of our readers, our end is attained. It is, indeed, a most important proposition. For, although Mr. Blake contrives, by we know not what process, to evade all the consequences to which his reasoning, if correct, must necessarily lead, and to arrive by a round-about course at the very same conclusions, as if he had started from directly contrary premises, we cannot expect that his disciples, if he has any, will be equally careful to avoid drawing mischievous. inferences, where those inferences legitimately follow from the principles which they acknowledge. Mr. Blake protests (p. 85.) against the supposition that he considers the Bank restriction to have been practically beneficial. Yet the only ground upon which that measure has ever been censured, is, that it caused the currency to vary in its value: and Mr. Blake is of opinion, that instead of causing a variation, it prevented that which would necessarily have taken place, if the currency had continued on a level with its nominal standard. We ourselves, if we could believe the Bank restriction to have had this effect, should be among the warmest of its defenders and supporters. And we cannot but feel surprise that Mr. Blake should rank among its mischievous consequences, that of preventing creditors from receiving a greater value than they lent.* There is another and a still more mischievous effect, to which the conclusions of Mr. Blake, should they ever obtain vogue, could not fail to be made subservient. We have heard before now the fallacy of the universal glut adduced in justification of enormous taxation, of extravagant government expenditure, and particularly of wars. How convenient to all who are interested in these abuses, is such a theory as that of Mr. Blake! Here, they may say, is a portion of capital, which, if it remains in the hands of the producers, must lie dormant in the shape of goods, yielding no advantage to the owners: let the government take it, to be expended in hiring soldiers and sailors, and in purchasing naval and military stores; and a new demand will suddenly be created for all sorts of produce ; prices will rise, the producers will be enriched, the labourers will obtain an increase of wages, industry will be vivified, and production itself will be stimulated by that very expenditure, which the people, in their "ignorant impatience of taxation," believe to be a calamity. These conclusions do not follow the less logically from Mr. Blake's theory, that he does not alarm us by stating them. ، It has interfered, too, with all contracts between debtor and creditor ; for, as the creditor is subject to the fluctuations that occur in the value of gold, and must submit to receive, in liquidation of his claim, the same nominal amount, whatever be the diminution in the value of the metal itself, he is justly entitled to receive the same nominal amount of gold, when any accidental circumstances occur to raise its value." pp. 85-6. If he really is not aware of the practical inference from his doctrine, we hope that now, when his attention has been directed to it, he will be induced to re-consider the grounds upon which that doctrine is founded. That such a man should, at this time of day, stand forward as the supporter of refuted, and now almost forgotten, errors, is greatly to be deplored; and we should feel pride, in contributing any thing towards recalling to sound principles, one who ought never to have been found on any other side. ART. III.—Private Correspondence of William Cowper, Esq., with several of his most intimate Friends. Now first published from the originals in the possession of his kinsman, John Johnson, LL.D. Rector of Yaxham, with Welborne, in Norfolk. Two volumes, 8vo. with Portraits. Colburn, London, 1824. SO many years have elapsed since the public attention was interested in the Memoirs of Cowper by Mr. Hayley, that the appearance of fresh matter on the same subject was hardly expected. So large a quantity of his letters, too, having been comprised in the former work, it might naturally enough be supposed that these were all that were entitled to publication, either on the score of merit, or as contributing to extend our acquaintance with the character of their author. His reverend kinsman has, nevertheless, collected a number of additional letters, which possess both these claims to notice; and we find in this correspondence a more undisguised picture of all that passed in the poet's mind, and of the occasional influences to which it was subject, than was to be gathered from the perusał of Mr. Hayley's biographical work. We agree with Dr. Johnson (the editor) in thinking that the general impression conveyed by Hayley of the disposition and mental habits of Cowper, was both obscure and inconsistent. We also think, in which perhaps he does not agree with us, that the whole of Cowper's merits have been incorrectly estimated. It was Mr. Hayley's industrious endeavour, throughout the work to which we have alluded, to prevent his being correctly estimated, either as a man or, as an author. Not content with the injudicious and inordinate praise which encumbers the narrative part, he strives to forestall the effect which the poet's own letters may produce on the reader. If they contain sense or wit, the reader is exhorted beforehand to admire this truly-gifted, this wonderful man. If, as is frequently the case, the letters indicate weakness and imperfection of character, frivolous tastes, or crude opinions, Mr. Hayley steps in and begs that the reader will not infer so and so, because he can assure him the fact is otherwise. The same of his poetry; in short, the man's writings are never to be taken as evidence of his character, except when they exhibit him in an advantageous light. The consequence of such an officious and indiscriminate zeal on the part of the biographer is, that the reader, with the evidence of the correspondence on the one hand, and the biographer's asseverations on the other, is reduced to the alternative, either of yielding up his judgment, and assenting blindly to the representations of the panegyrist, or of attempting to reconcile the two, and thus involve himself in a maze of obscurity and inconsistency. . We shall not now inquire into the merits of Cowper as a poetbut confine our attention to the tone of thought and sentiment which pervades his works; both because it is, in our estimation, of infinitely more importance that they should be rightly estimated, and because the admirers of Cowper usually dwell upon this as constituting their chief excellence. Indeed, the author himself repeatedly professes, in letters to his intimate friends, that the object and aim of his literary labours was, to edify and improve mankind, and that the lighter and ornamental parts were designed to allure and refresh the indolent reader, who would otherwise be weary of reproof. It is plain that Cowper, in his endeavours to inculcate upon mankind the importance of virtuous conduct, was altogether guided by his own conception of what was agreeable, and what disagreeable to the Deity. The motive which he suggests throughout is the expectation of posthumous rewards and punishments, the latter being the predominant stimulus. But the control exercised over human conduct by the expectation of posthumous dispensations, is valuable only; when it can be made to attach itself to a beneficial rule of conduct. If it attaches itself to an undesirable rule of conduct, it is so much unprofitable mischief. Now the rule of conduct which alone it can be good for human beings to follow, is that which can be shown to produce happiness: happiness on the largest possible scale. This was not Cowper's creed; we will not say rule, for there can be no rule of action destitute of a standard of reference. His criterion of good and bad was, his own conjecture of what would be pleasing and displeasing to the Deity; in which conjecture he was naturally guided by the supposed character of the Almighty. Of this he entertained the most terrific ideas, and accordingly his standard degenerated into a most pernicious asceticism, and hostility to human enjoyment. In judging of the merit of human actions, there can be, we conceive, but one standard according to which praise and blame should be dispensed--the test of utility, or conducive |