When und voce all allow,

He would do right—if he knew how.
But if, among this motley crew,
One man of real parts we view,
With mind for highest station fit,
The colleague, friend, yet foe of Pitt;
He to whose merits all men granted,
That Pitt's last list one great name wanted;
He who with every talent shone,
Except consistency alone;

"We smile if such a man there be,
But weep if G

V E SHOULD BE HE."

IT

THE SCHOOL OF PITT.

[From the British Press, April 6.]

T has been observed, that former Administrations have been distinguished by some particular name; such as the Rockingham Administration," " the Grenville Administration,' &c.; but that the New Ministry is a mere sine nomine vulgus, destitute of the differentia essentialis to discriminate it from any ordinary set of politicians. The ministerial prints have, however, glossed over this great defect, by denominating the New Ministry, " The School of Pitt." This new-fangled phrase has been bandied about among the time-servers with so much zeal and perseverance, that we should not be surprised if they have really persuaded themselves that it means something more than a vain empty title, for the purpose of imposing upon the ignorant, the thoughtless, and the superficial. We have read of the school of Plato, the school of Zeno, the school of Aristippus. These great masters taught and maintained particular tenets and principles, and might be considered the heads of so many sects; like Rowland Hill' and the late Mr. Wesley: the scholars imitated the

masters.

masters. In the same way, in the fine arts, the arts of painting and sculpture, we have heard of the schools of Phidias and Praxiteles, the schools of Titian and Vandyke; and, speaking more generally, the Flemish and the Italian schools. These epithets merely designate certain artists, who, forming themselves upon the principles of some great master in these respective arts, imitate his manner and style of colouring, and rest their fame on their approximation to those works which they have been taught to regard as models of perfection. The three great questions or leading principles of Mr. Pitt's political life, as laid down by Lord Grenville, in his explanation on Thursday se'nnight in the House of Lords, were, the Sinking Fund, the Abolition of the Slave Trade, and the Catholic Question: let us then try "The School of Pitt," as applied to the New Ministry, in relation to these principles. The New Ministry consists of the following persons: the Duke of Portland, Lord Hawkesbury, Viscount Castlereagh, Lord Eldon, Earl of Chatham, Earl of Westmoreland, Lord Mulgrave, Mr. Perceval, Earl of Camden, and Mr. Canning. Now of these, several, viz. the Earl of Westmoreland, Lord Hawkesbury, &c. were distinguished by their opposition to the Abolition of the Slave Trade, and the whole of them are pledged to oppose the Catholic Question. Seven of them also were Cabinet Members with Mr. Addington, now Viscount Sidmouth, when Mr. Pitt opposed that Ministry, and exerted all his strength to remove them, as persons utterly unfit, from incapacity, folly, and weakness, to fill that great and important station: they must then have been dunces, or very refractory scholars; but, in either event, how men who spent their political lives in opposition to Mr. Pitt's principles, can, with propriety, call themselves

tness and propriety of the title,

1

themselves the pupils of this great man, we are totally at a loss to discover: the veriest empiric in the country, who would impose his trash as some esteemed patent medicine, takes care to give it the colour and appearance of the genuine composition. So much, then, for those who would insinuate, that the Portland stone is Parian marble, fashioned into almost life, under the chisel of the ingenious sculptor Pitt; and the lamp-black and ruddle of Mr. Canning, the glowing colours of that political Titian. But, however ridiculous this jargon, "The School of Pitt," may be found when brought to the test, those who are acquainted with the source in which it originated, are well aware that it was intended to answer a particular object. Where was the studio, where was the school in which this famous master, the late, great, high-spirited, and eloquent Mr. Pitt taught?-The House of Commons. Who were his scholars?The Members of the House of Commons, and all the strangers which the Gallery contains. No thanks to the art of printingthanks to the liberty of the press-England, Europe, the world, are the pupils and scholars of those great masters, Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox, as much as Counsellor Perceval and Mr. Canning. In the House of Commons their great political principles, foreign and domestic, military and financial, were taught and enforced with all the powers of eloquence and argument; and the stranger who could obtain a back seat in the Gallery, had just as good an opportunity of learning as Mr. Canning, seated upon one of the benches of Rotten Row. But if this phrase," The School of Pitt," be so egregiously wrong, why has it been introduced? We answer, that it has been sechoed and resechoed as a puff oblique for Mr. Canning. Mr. Canning, it is well known, acted as a $sort of flapper to Mr. Pitt: he had access to the

masters. In the same way, in the fine arts, the arts of painting and sculpture, we have heard of the schools of Phidias and Praxiteles, the schools of Titian and Vandyke; and, speaking more generally, the Flemish and the Italian schools. These epithets merely designate certain artists, who, forming themselves upon the principles of some great master in these respective arts, imitate his manner and style of colouring, and rest their fame on their approximation to those works which they have been taught to regard as models of perfection. The three great questions or leading principles of Mr. Pitt's political life, as laid down by Lord Grenville, in his explanation on Thursday se'nnight in the House of Lords, were, the Sinking Fund, the Abolition of the Slave Trade, and the Catholic Question: let us then try the fitness and propriety of the title, "The School of Pitt," as applied to the New Ministry, in relation to these principles. The New Ministry consists of the following persons: the Duke of Portland, Lord Hawkesbury, Viscount Castlereagh, Lord Eldon, Earl of Chatham, Earl of Westmoreland, Lord Mulgrave, Mr. Perceval, Earl of Camden, and Mr. Canning. Now of these, several, viz. the Earl of Westmoreland, Lord Hawkesbury, &c. were distinguished by their opposition to the Abolition of the Slave Trade, and the whole of them are pledged to oppose the Catholic Question. Seven of them also were Cabinet Members with Mr. Addington, now Viscount Sidmouth, when Mr. Pitt opposed that Ministry, and exerted all his strength to remove them, as persons utterly unfit, from incapacity, folly, and weakness, to fill that great and important station: they must then have been dunces, or very refractory scholars; but, in either event, how men who spent their political lives in opposition to Mr. Pitt's principles, can, with propriety, call themselves

themselves the pupils of this great man, we are totally at a loss to discover: the veriest empiric in the country, who would impose his trash as some esteemed patent medicine, takes care to give it the colour and appearance of the genuine composition. So much, then, for those who would insinuate, that the Portland stone is Parian marble, fashioned into almost life, under the chisel of the ingenious sculptor Pitt; and the lamp-black and ruddle of Mr. Canning, the glowing colours of that political Titian. But, however ridiculous this jargon, "The School of Pitt," may be found when brought to the test, those who are acquainted with the source in which it originated, are well aware that it was intended to answer a particular object. Where was the studio, where was the school in which this famous master, the late, great, high-spirited, and eloquent Mr. Pitt taught?-The House of Commons. Who were his scholars?The Members of the House of Commons, and all the strangers which the Gallery contains. No thanks to the art of printingthanks to the liberty of the press-England, Europe, the world, are the pupils and scholars of those great masters, Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox, as much as Counsellor Perceval and Mr. Canning. In the House of Commons their great political principles, foreign and domestic, military and financial, were taught and enforced with all the powers of eloquence and argument; and the stranger who could obtain a back seat in the Gallery, had just as good an opportunity of learning as Mr. Canning, seated upon one of the benches of Rotten Row. But if this phrase, "The School of Pitt," be so egregiously wrong, why has it been introduced? We answer, that it has been sechoed and re-echoed as a puff oblique for Mr. Canning. Mr. Canning, it is well known, acted as a $sort of flapper to Mr. Pitt: he had access to the