Comus, ll. 790–1.
ADVERTISEMENT, ETC., FROM ‘THE ELOQUENCE OF THE BRITISH SENATE’
All the biographical and critical notes, introductory to the selected Speeches, are here reproduced, except (1) a few which consist merely of dates, and (2) the ‘characters’ of Chatham, Burke, Fox and Pitt. These were republished by Hazlitt in Political Essays, and will be found in the present reprint of that work (see ante, pp. 321–350). Where there are two notes on the same speaker, they have been printed together under the same heading. In cases where Hazlitt specially mentions a particular speech, a reference to that speech is given below. Hazlitt himself, in the Table of Contents, described the following as the ‘principal biographical notices,’ viz., in vol. I., Cromwell, Whitlocke, Lord Belhaven, Mr. Pulteney, Lord Chesterfield, Sir John St. Aubin, and Sir Robert Walpole; and, in vol. II., Lord Chatham, Lord Mansfield, Lord Camden, Mr. Burke, Mr. Fox, and Mr. Pitt.
[389]. ‘Who strut and fret,’ etc. Macbeth, Act V. Scene 5. [390]. ‘Wherein I saw them,’ etc. Hamlet, Act I. Scene 4. ‘Set the imprisoned wranglers free again.’ Cowper, The Task, Book IV. 34. [391]. ‘The things themselves,’ etc.,
‘The things we know are neither rich nor rare.’
Pope, Prologue to the Satires, 171.
[1]. As to the real grounds and views on which the former coalitions were begun and carried on, see Burke’s Regicide Peace, Second Part.
[2]. One instance may serve as an example for all the rest:—When Mr. Fox last summer predicted the failure of the new confederacy against France, from a consideration of the circumstances and relative situation of both parties, that is, from an exact knowledge of the actual state of the case, Mr. Pitt contented himself with answering—and, as in the blindness of his infatuation he seemed to think quite satisfactorily,—‘That he could not assent to the honourable gentleman’s reasoning, for that it went to this, that we were never to attempt to mend the situation of our affairs, because in so doing we might possibly make them worse.’ No; it was not on account of this abstract possibility in human affairs, or because we were not absolutely sure of succeeding (for that any child might know), but because it was in the highest degree probable, or morally certain that the scheme would fail, and leave us in a worse situation than we were before, that Mr. Fox disapproved of the attempt. There is in this a degree of weakness and imbecility, a defect of understanding bordering on idiotism, a fundamental ignorance of the first principles of human reason and prudence, that in a great minister is utterly astonishing, and almost incredible. Nothing could ever drive him out of his dull forms, and naked generalities; which as they are susceptible neither of degree nor variation, are therefore equally applicable to every emergency that can happen: and in the most critical aspect of affairs he saw nothing but the same flimsy web of remote possibilities and metaphysical uncertainty. In his mind the wholesome pulp of practical wisdom and salutary advice was immediately converted into the dry chaff and husks of a miserable logic.
[3]. I would recommend to the reader a masterly and unanswerable essay on this subject in the Morning Post, by Mr. Coleridge, in February 1800, from which, and the conversation of the author, most of the above remarks are taken. I will only add, that it is the property of true genius to force the admiration even of enemies. No one was ever hated or envied for his powers of mind, if others were convinced of their real excellence. The jealousy and uneasiness produced in the mind by the display of superior talents almost always arises from a suspicion that there is some trick or deception in the case, and that we are imposed on by an appearance of what is not really there. True warmth and vigour communicate warmth and vigour; and we are no longer inclined to dispute the inspiration of the oracle, when we feel the ‘presens Divus’ in our own bosoms. But when, without gaining any new light or heat, we only find our ideas thrown into perplexity and confusion by an art that we cannot comprehend, this is a kind of superiority which must always be painful, and can never be cordially admitted. For this reason the extraordinary talents of Mr. Pitt were always viewed, except by those of his own party, with a sort of jealousy, and grudgingly acknowledged; while those of his rivals were admitted by all parties in the most unreserved manner, and carried by acclamation.