PAGES MISSING FROM SCAN - SEE TALK PAGE
No. 8.
A NOTE ON JUNIUS AND WOLCOT.
What would Junius,[1] who, whatever might be his rank or destination, was one of the proudest of men, have said, on finding himself assimilating so closely with such refuse as he would have deemed Wolcot? Yet these people who disgraced more than they did honour to the species, were from the same stock: the same ill blood runs in their veins. Junius suffered a malevolent spirit to suppress all regard for truth in too numerous instances; and Wolcot, in the vulgar phrase, would have lied with the devil for a bean-stack, and won it. He wrote for a dinner, and made no secret of it, nor yet of his selfish and discreditable inducements "to cry havoc, and let slip his" doggerel—
Were I to write of common folks
No soul would buy my rhymes so queer and jokes;
Then what becomes of mutton, beef and pork?
How would my masticating muscles work?—
At Princes let but satire lift his gun,
The more the feathers fly, the more's the fun.
E'en the whole world, blockheads and men of letters,
Enjoy a cannonade upon their betters.
That blockheads enjoyed his fun, as he calls it, without the least regard to its veracity, we allow, though we were not prepared for such a thick-skulled compliment to this readers; but he might safely have been desired to name any respectable man of letters that felt gratified by his fabrications.—Like Junius, he was reckless of whatever ill consequences might result from his writings, for he chaunts—
Panegyric moves with snail-like creep,
And defamation on the light'ning's wings.
That is, defamation was more profitable to the empty pockets of the one and the revenge of the other; and—we add, that no intelligent person can peruse the works of Wolcot in connexion, without soon observing that he had no standard for his opinions but the state of his funds. Hence he is by turns a royalist and a republican, having written with equal virulence on both sides of the question. If he writes con amores, it is on the side of anarchy; for the production win which he excelled himself, both in pathetic and satirical touches,[2] was addressed to certain journeymen Shoemakers, who, about forty years ago, combined against their masters to raise their wages; but with so little reason, that the Judge who tried the ringleaders said the profits must be exorbitant which would enable them to live six weeks in idleness. The drift of this poetical tirade, was to excited the lower class to pull down all above them: but the allusions in it manifest the grossest ignorance of the particulars connected with the marriage of Henry, Duke of Cumberland; whose brother, George 3rd, censured that step in the most unqualified terms; the Duchess however held her jointure by the same right as any other dowager in the kingdom; which this ignorant instructor (for he elsewhere says he will instruct us in the knowledge we want) does not appear to have known;[3] nor yet that the disproportionate union with the widow of Colonel Luttrel, which was incompatible with obvious reasons of state, gave occasion for that Act of Parliament by which, in future, all marriages of the Royal Family, without the consent of the King in council, were declared null and void.
The misrepresentations of this fellow, brought to mind the exaggerated charges of Junius against the Duke of Grafton; not as regards the rangership of Whittlebury forest (for those have been fully exposed) but the virulence indulged against the private character of that Nobleman, who had a commixture of virtues and failings common among man of all ranks. The Author happened luckily to be acquainted with a person who, after having been many years in the service of his Grace, retired with a decent competence to his native village (Hatfield, in Yorkshire.) When questioned on the subject of the Duke's domestic conduct, it was evident it had been such as conciliated the regard of his dependants. And when this was observed in one who had had those ample opportunities which Junius had not, of observing his presumed enemy at home, under his every day garb, usages and description, it is as conclusive against the fabrications of the mortified politician as the case of John Harrison is against those of Peter Pindar,—Another piece by whom, is enough to make the blood curdle
- ↑ Refers to page 77.
- ↑
You must not heed your childrens hunger'd cry,
Nor once over their little sorrows sigh,
In tears their blubber'd faces let them steep
and howl their griefs to sleep.
We must support too her fine gold-lac'd crew
Behind her gilt coach, dancing[subnote 1] jolly fellows,
With canes and ruffles goodly to the view,
And (suiting their complexions) pink umbrellas. - ↑ It may be doing a service to the young men who admire this man's works, to show them the ignorance of their professed instructor, who points out to their admiration "our Edwards and our Henries," intending thereby to degrade their modern successors; but without explaining that nothing could be more futile than the purpose in which those heroes were engaged: for Edward III. who took the lead in these "deeds of arms," supposing his construction of the salique law to have been correct, was not the rightful heir to the crown of France by his own rule. If he had succeeded in his enterprise, the certain result would have been that England would have become a province of France.—Voltaire has the credit of illustrating this consequence, by showing that the Tartars who invaded China, and subverted the reigning dynasty, afterwards submitted with sword in hand to the Chinese emperors of their own race.
- ↑ The footmen standing on a large leather cushion, stuffed with elastic materials, suggested the epithet.
