« PreviousContinue »
employed; as all "mankind, of whatever colour, were entitled to justice, and would meet with it indiscriminately."
P. 139. The conduct of the negroes even to each other was merciless, for they put to death, without hesitation, all men ❝ and women who refused to join them.'
Now, this unmixed vituperation of the brigands and negroes is the author's own. Those people were indeed very ferocious, but there were palliatives for their conduct, and they possessed also very fine, and even noble qualities: and how slightly does Mr Moore mark Sir John Moore's justice and impartiality,—one penny-worth of bread to all this sack-no notice of the crimes of the opposite faction! Were we to take our notion of Sir John' Moore's proceedings in St Lucia from the present narrative, overloaded, as it is, by such observations as the above, we should inevitably conclude, that the General saw in the negroes and brigands but a horde of dreadful villains, who had wantonly attacked those most inoffensive and gentle of people, the slave masters, and who, for their crimes, and the absence of all human feelings within them, ought to be swept from the face of the earth; finally, that their horrible disposition was not more the effect of a degenerate nature, than of republicanism. We should imagine, we say, that such false and foolish notions had entered Sir John Moore's head; and that, with a soldier's recklessness, he shot and hanged these wretches, indifferent to aught but the military question of whether they were enemies or friends,-soothing his conscience with commonplace proclamations about a justice which was all on one side. But a notion more injurious to his penetration, impartiality, and humanity, could not be entertained. With a heart resolute to do his duty, he possessed a head to distinguish causes, as well as effects. He abhorred the cruelty of punishment, and deplored the necessity of it; and, while he inflicted it reluctantly, he did justice to the heroic qualities of those very brigands whom Mr Moore paints in such unmitigated blackness. He warred against them, and punished their crimes, but he admired their courage; and he despised, and reproached, and restrained the whites, whose tyranny had first sown in the poor negroes' hearts the seeds of that ferocity, which it was his painful duty to repress.
We will now give our proofs: but, first, we would ask this author why, when he spoke of Marin Pedre, the brigand chief, he did not also give us the history of the oppression, which drove him to take arms?—why he did not even notice the conduct of that British General, we will not call him English, who having seized above three hundred innocent persons, and put them on board of vessels, did afterwards send agents, secretly to
treat with them for purchasing their release? Is it because the mercenary oppressor was not an Irishman, that the virtuous indignation of the biographer is hushed and quiet upon this subject? Or is the frank and clear exposition of the villanous act, made by Sir John Moore, an inconvenient appendage to the observation, that true republicanism seems, at least in this country, to be an excuse for every species of treachery, want of 'faith, and common honesty?' Was that passage directed against the vices or the cause of the republicans? are there no ruffians within the pale of legitimacy? Never did the upright, the virtuous, just, and humane Sir John Moore stoop to be the pitiful slave of prejudices, where men's rights were before him; never did he learn to light his moral path by the torch of party spirit. That which was cruel and unjust he hated and repressed, without heeding if it were found beneath the white flag or the tri-color.
We write partly from memory, partly from notes, and can only give the substance of Sir John Moore's recorded opinions, not his words; but we admired his noble sentiments too much, not to treasure them fondly and deeply in our memory; and we pledge ourselves to the general truth of all that we are going to state. We say, then, that Sir John Moore, in his Journal, speaks with contempt and indignation of the emigrés in St Lucia, and of the proprietors of slaves; that he deplored the condition of their black slaves-that he threatened those emigrés with punishment for casting reflections on the submissive republicans that he checked them for their ill treatment of the negroes-that he repeatedly assured the people, not only, as his biographer in his slight way says, that royalist or republican would be neither a merit or demerit with him, but that he suspected them of wishing for detachments of troops to enable them to tyrannize over the negroes, a system which he abhorred, and would never permit. Why,' he exclaimed, is a man to be treated harshly because he ' is not white? All men are entitled to justice; and from me they ⚫ shall meet it, whether they be white, black, royalist, or republican.' This language,' he says in another part, was not agreeable to his auditors, especially the emigrés; but he had no preference for them, and wished to curb their insolence; because, instead of profiting by their misfortunes, they had only whetted their prejudices, and thirsted to gratify their revenge and to oppress their fellow-creatures: coquins, canaille, bêtes, were expressions they habitually used towards every person of the lower ' classes.' Now, here is nothing to indicate that he judged all the villany of the day to attach to the republicans and blacks. The fact is, that whilst he in no manner mitigates his censure of the
emigrés, he speaks highly of the spirit of the brigands, and the fine qualities of the negroes. Writing of our army, which at that period, at least that part of it which was in the West Indies, was perhaps the very worst in Europe, he says, that such was the disorder ' and want of zeal and system, he judged peace could not be made lest even the negroes should beat us in the field; that ' against the spirit and the enterprise of the republicans, there was • little chance, and that the fidelity of the brigands to the republic 6 was so firm, that they went to death without faltering, some even "crying out" Vive la Republique" the instant before they were shot; ' that the actions they committed were indeed atrocious, but he ' attributed it to certain villanous chiefs, whites and mulattoes, of Robespierre's gang, who, coming from France, had misled them; for that the blacks were by nature gifted with good qualities, and their cause was praiseworthy, if they had not disgraced it
by savage acts.' Ay! that their cause was not only not reprehensible,' but praiseworthy! The cause of republicanism, the cause of freedom, was praiseworthy! That the bloody acts of the brigands made him feel less remorse when his duty obliged ' him to put them to death, but he did it with pain, as he thought them misled; and this conclusion he came to, because he • observed that the blacks, who were of the royalist party, were as brave and true to their side as the others,-refusing rewards, ' and even liberty, when made prisoners by Victor Hugues; and ' with equal courage and fortitude submitting patiently to death, or the most terrible sufferings, rather than betray the cause they had espoused.' Nor was he at all surprised that so many of the blacks hailed the opportunity of gaining freedom; for, with the observant spirit of a statesman, he also remarks, that the West Indies was the only country in the world, where industry and ' cultivation added nothing to the happiness of the people; because all was for the benefit of the few who were white, and nothing went to comfort the many who were black.' We appeal to our readers, then, to say, whether these, his real opinions, are fairly given by his biographer; and whether it is just and right to Sir John Moore, to suppress such proofs of his manly, and just, and humane character, in a work purporting to be his life?
After the campaign in St Lucia, we next find Sir John Moore engaged, as a General on the staff, during the rebellion of 1798, in Ireland; and, remembering his biographer's politics, we could only expect the most offensively obtrusive Toryism in this part of the work. It was impossible for him to avoid running riot upon such food; and accordingly, a pampered boar, rushing into a garden, churning and foaming, and chopping with his tusks, is but a type of his fury. Irishmen, Catholics, rebels, republicans !
every thing most obnoxious to his prejudices was in array before him; and he has fallen upon them with so much haste, as entirely to forget that it is Sir John Moore's acts and opinions, and not his own morbid political violence, that was to be recorded. We have abundance of such sentences as, the depraved directory,' 'the infatuation of traitors,'' disaffected Catholics,' 'loyal Pro'testant inhabitants,' men of lawless habits,' 'wild men,'' fero'cious chiefs,'' merciless rebels,'' frenzy of the people,' and the like; accompanied with the following profound political philosophy :
'Certainly the brute creation, who are merely guided by instinct, never act so preposterously as the rational frequently do. For it appears from history, that nations, at certain periods, . became frantic, and brought misery upon themselves. The 'poets explain this by inventing the allegory of the Furies, ' armed with snakes and torches, bursting out of hell, and instilling madness into the people. But in plain truth, these Furies are wicked and ambitious men, skilled in the art of deceiving ⚫ the populace, and of inflaming their passions, in order to obtain ' for themselves wealth, power, or fame. This was now strikingly exemplified in Ireland, in which island agriculture, commerce, and manufactures, were more prosperous than in any former ages; and the arts, sciences, and civilisation were also progres'sively advancing. But instead of allowing this amelioration to proceed, the nation was instigated to open rebellion, by which all improvement retrograded, and the people were involved in 'misery.'-P. 184.
In this advanced age of the world, during the French Revo'lution and the Irish Rebellion, hostilities were not confined to those bearing arms. Even peaceful persons were often dragged 'from their domestic homes, and cruelly massacred, while the ' ruthless murderers derided the wailing and agonies of their dying 'victims. These horrible consequences ought to induce statesmen vigilantly to prevent or extinguish the first sparks of civil 'commotion; for unhappily, there are sullen, malignant spirits, ' ever at work to kindle discontent among the people, and, when 'the fire has caught, to fan the flame.'-P. 189-90.
Could the bulk of mankind profit by history, surely the 'preachers of the benign doctrines of Christ, and lay political 'agitators, would curb their zeal and ambition, and cease to stir and inflame the ignorant multitude with the pretexts of religion and liberty. For experience has often evinced the horrible events which thence ensue, together with an augmentation of 'impiety, immorality, and the loss of rational freedom.'P. 200.
"Were all mankind disinclined to injure or do injustice to each 'other, they certainly ought to be left to the enjoyment of per'fect liberty, and every man should have the power of acting as ' he pleased; but the dispositions and habits of human beings to 'do unto others, what they would not that others do unto them, render the establishment of laws and government essential for their welfare. As the prevalence of vice is the only good cause for imposing any restraints on freedom, these never should be greater than is requisite for the happiness of the people, and always proportioned to their disposition to do evil. The degrees of virtue, and the tendency to various vices, are different in different countries; consequently, one code of laws, and one constitution of government, are unsuitable to all. Projects of one universal legislative system would neither be agreeable to the tempers, nor adapted to the correction of the various corruptions, of the human race. Experience proves this. The • English laws and constitution have been found admirably suited to the character of Englishmen, which imposed upon them no greater prohibitions than were requisite for establishing good order, and which granted a greater degree of freedom than was 'possessed by any other nation. In the year 1706, this consti'tution was extended to Scotland, and suddenly the Scots were transformed from an ill-governed, turbulent, and impoverished people, into an orderly, composed, improving nation; which 'concordant effects proved, that there was an agreement in cha'racter, and an equality in morals, with the English. But when 'the same constitution was transferred to Ireland, no such bene'ficial consequences ensued; for lawless riots, wanton pillagings, "and atrocious murders, have continued to prevail in that hapless 'country. And it is found absolutely necessary to maintain there a numerous standing army, to restrain carnage, and the destrućtion of property, from increasing throughout the island. 'continuance of these flagrant acts is a decisive proof, that the ' restrictions of the laws and constitution are not proportioned to the propensity to do wrong. If the freedom of the Irish laws and government were wisely graduated by the scale of virtue and morals which have been attained by the natives, it is rea ́sonable to believe, that they would soon became peaceful, pros'perous, and happy.' P. 226.
And has Mr Moore then yet to learn, that agriculture, commerce, and manufactures, might be prosperous, and the people wretched? His brother's observations on the state of the West Indies might have taught him better. If these things were indeed more prosperous in Ireland, at the period of the rebellion, than in any former age, it was only a proof how dreadfully they