Part 10

[13] Mr. Wilson has some valuable observations on this subject, which justice to the memory of De Foe requires us to transcribe. "The failure of this speculation seems to have been owing rather to the want of encouragement upon the part of the public, than to any imprudence in the projector. Pantiles had been hitherto a Dutch manufacture, and were brought in large quantities to England. To supersede the necessity of their importation, and to provide a new channel for the employment of labour, the works at Tilbury were laudably erected; and De Foe tells us that he employed a hundred poor labourers in the undertaking. The capital embarked in the concern must also have been considerable; for he informs us that his own loss by its failure was no less a sum than three thousand pounds. But besides so serious a misfortune to himself, it was no less so to the public; not only by the failure of an ingenious manufacture, but for the sake of the numerous families supported by it, who were now turned adrift in the world, or thrown upon some other branch of trade. De Foe continued the pantile works it is believed until the year 1703, when he was prosecuted by the government for a libel, and being deprived of his liberty the undertaking soon came to an end." Mr. Wilson adds an extract from one of the Reviews, (March, 1705,) in which De Foe indignantly refers to this undertaking and its calamitous issue. "Nor should the author of this paper boast in vain, if he tells the world that he himself, before violence, injury, and barbarous treatment destroyed him and his undertaking, employed a hundred poor people in making pantiles in England, a manufacture always bought in Holland; and thus he pursued this principle with his utmost zeal for the good of England; and those gentlemen who so easily persecuted him for saying what all the world since owns to be true, and which he has since a hundred times offered to prove, were particularly serviceable to the nation, in turning that hundred of poor people and their families a begging for work, and forcing them to turn other poor families out of work to make room for them, besides three thousand pounds damage to the author of this, which he has paid for this little experience."--ED.

[14] The sentence in italics is part of the passage in De Foe's Appeal to Honour and Justice, (in which he gives a summary of his life, and vindicates his conduct throughout it,) which particularly refers to this period. We give the whole. "Misfortunes in business having unhinged me from matters of trade; it was about the year 1694, when I was invited by some merchants with whom I had corresponded abroad, and some also at home, to settle at Cadiz, in Spain; and that with the offer of very good commissions. But Providence, which had other work for me to do, placed a secret aversion in my mind to quitting England upon any account, and made me refuse the best offers of that kind, to be concerned with some eminent persons at home, in proposing ways and means to the government for raising money to supply the occasions of the war, then newly begun." [Vide Appeal to Honour and Justice.]

[15] Besides the topics mentioned by Mr. Chalmers, De Foe suggests various improvements in road-making, and an asylum for idiots. He also warmly advocates a great improvement in the system of education, and especially of females. Before the publication of the next work mentioned by Mr. Chalmers, De Foe took part in a controversy then very warmly agitated, viz., of Occasional Conformity. The Dissenters differed on this subject; one party being willing to comply outwardly with the ceremonies of the church, when in certain offices, and the other party objecting to that compliance as a sinful and dastardly desertion from their principles of dissent. De Foe adopted the latter view, and, in 1697, maintained it with his accustomed warmth, in An Inquiry into the Occasional Conformity of Dissenters in Parliament. He also vigorously took the field against the vices and social abuses of the times; and, in 1698, published The Poor Man's Plea in relation to all the Proclamations, Declarations, Acts of Parliament, &c., which have been or shall be made or published, for a Reformation of Manners, and suppressing Immorality in the Nation.--ED.

[16] 10 and 11 Wm. III. ch. 18.

[17] De Foe says himself, that he had published nine editions fairly printed upon good paper, and sold at the price of one shilling, and that it had been printed twelve times by other persons without his concurrence. We must presume it to have produced a great effect. De Foe himself says, many years afterwards, "National mistakes, vulgar errors, and even a general practice, have been reformed by a just satire. None of our countrymen have been known to boast of being true-born Englishmen, or so much as to use the word as a title or appellation, ever since a late satire upon that national folly was published, though almost thirty years ago. Nothing was more frequent in our mouths before that, nothing so universally blushed and laughed at since. The time I believe is yet to come for any author to print it, or any man of sense to speak of it in earnest; whereas before you had it in the best writers, and in the most florid speeches before the most august assemblies, upon the most solemn occasions." [Use and Abuse of the Marriage Bed, p. 400.] The object of the poem is thus stated by the author in the preface: "The intent of the satire is pointed at the vanity of those who talk of their antiquity, and value themselves upon their pedigree, and being true-born; whereas it is impossible we should be true-born; and if we could, should have lost by the bargain. These sort of people who call themselves true-born, and tell long stories of their families, and like a nobleman of Venice, think a foreigner ought not to walk on the same side of the street with them, are owned to be meant in this satire. What they would infer from their long original, I know not, nor is it easy to make out, whether they are the better or the worse for their ancestors. Our English nation may value themselves for their wit, wealth, and courage, and I believe few nations will dispute it with them; but for long originals and ancient true-born families, I would advise them to waive the discourse. A true Englishman is one who deserves a character, and I have nowhere lessened him that I know of."--ED.

[18] p. 13. We add the remaining part of this passage, which is extracted by Mr. Chalmers from the Appeal to Honour and Justice; "And is only mentioned here as I take all occasions to do, for the expressing the honour I ever preserved for the immortal and glorious memory of that greatest and best of princes, and whom it was my honour and advantage to call master as well as sovereign, whose goodness to me I never forget, and whose memory I never patiently heard abused, and never can do so; and who, had he lived, would never have suffered me to be treated as I have been in this world."--ED.

[19] This pamphlet was published before the poem of the True-born Englishman, viz., in 1698, and was an answer to one by Mr. Trenchard, "showing that a standing army is inconsistent with a free government, and absolutely destructive to the constitution of the English monarchy." It is supposed that De Foe wrote another pamphlet on this subject, entituled, Some Reflections on a pamphlet lately published, entituled, &c. (Mr. Trenchard's pamphlet.) 1697. But there is great doubt as to this work being De Foe's.--ED.

[20] Subsequently to the publication of the pamphlet referred to in the text, in the year 1700, the indefatigable De Foe was again in the political arena. The Spanish king had just died, bequeathing the crown to the duke of Anjou, grandson of Lewis XIV. and Europe was anxiously awaiting the French monarch's decision. He subsequently broke through the partition treaty, and placed his grandson on the throne of Spain. In the meanwhile, however De Foe published, a pamphlet, entituled, The Two Great Questions Considered: 1. What the French king will do with respect to the Spanish monarchy? 2. What measures the English ought to take. In the same year, he published The Danger of the Protestant Religion, from the present Prospect of a Religious War in Europe. His object is to point out the powerful front presented by the popish party, and to warn and arouse England to the danger and defence of protestantism.--ED.

[21] Mr. Polhill, of Cheapstead-place, in Kent, whose father, Mr. David Polhill, was committed to the Gatehouse, and thereby gained great popularity, was so good as to communicate to me the curious anecdote of De Foe's dressing himself in women's clothes, and presenting the Legion paper to the speaker. De Foe says himself in his Original Power of the People, p. 24: "this is evident from the tenor and yet undiscovered original of the Legion paper; the contents of which had so much plain truth of fact; and which I could give a better history of, if it were needful." When De Foe republished his works, in 1703, he thought it prudent to expunge this passage, that too plainly pointed out the real history of the Legion paper, which is not mentioned by the Commons Journals. Mr. Wilson thinks Mr. Chalmers mistaken in supposing that De Foe delivered the petition disguised as a woman. He says, "such a report was certainly current at the time, but the true history of it seems to be that which is related in the history of the Kentish petition; it was said it was delivered to the speaker by a woman, but I have been informed since, that it was a mistake, and it was delivered by the very person who wrote it, guarded by about sixteen gentlemen of quality, who if any notice had been taken of him, were ready to have carried him off by force." The Remonstration is too long a paper to be here reprinted, but the general tone and object of it will be gathered by the conclusion. "We do hereby claim and declare:--

"1. That it is the undoubted right of the people of England, in case their representatives in parliament do not proceed according to their duty, and the people's interest, to inform them of their dislike, disown their actions, and direct them to such things as they think fit, either by petition, address, proposal, memorial, or any other peaceable way.

"2. That the house of commons, separately, and otherwise than by bill legally passed into an act, have no legal power to suspend or dispense with the laws of the land, any more than the king has by his prerogative.

"3. That the house of commons has no legal power to imprison any person, or commit them to custody of sergeants, or otherwise, (their own members excepted,) but ought to address the king, to cause any person, on good grounds, to be apprehended, which person so apprehended, ought to have the benefit of the Habeas Corpus act, and be fairly brought to trial by due course of law.

"4. That, if the house of commons, in breach of the laws and liberties of the people, do betray the trust reposed in them, and act negligently, or arbitrarily and illegally, it is the undoubted right of the people of England, to call them to an account for the same, and by convention, assembly, or force, may proceed against them as traitors and betrayers of their country.

"These things we think proper to declare, as the unquestionable right of the people of England, whom you serve, and in pursuance of that right, (avoiding the ceremony of petitioning our inferiors, for such you are by your present circumstances, as the person sent is less than the sender,) we do publicly protest against all your aforesaid illegal actions, and in the name of ourselves, and of all the good people of England, do require and demand:--

"1. That all the public just debts of the nation be forthwith paid and discharged.

"2. That all persons illegally imprisoned, as aforesaid, be either immediately discharged, or admitted to bail, as by law they ought to be; and the liberty of the subject recognised and restored.

"3. That John Home, aforesaid, be obliged to ask his majesty's pardon for his vile reflections, or be immediately expelled the house.

"4. That the growing power of France be taken into consideration; the succession of the emperor to the crown of Spain supported; our protestant neighbours protected, as the interest of England and the protestant religion requires.

"5. That the French king be obliged to quit Flanders, or his majesty be addressed to declare war against him.

"6. That suitable supplies be granted to his majesty for the putting all these necessary things in execution, and that care be taken that such taxes as are raised, may be more equally assessed and collected, and scandalous deficiences prevented.

"7. That the thanks of this house may be given to those gentlemen who so gallantly appeared in the behalf of their country with the Kentish petition, and have been so scandalously used for it.

"Thus, gentlemen, you have your duty laid before you, which it is hoped you will think of; but if you continue to neglect it, you may expect to be treated according to the resentment of an injured nation; for Englishmen are no more to be slaves to parliaments, than to kings.

"Our name is Legion, and we are Many."

De Foe seems to have written a History of the Kentish Petition. And in the following year, 1702, he is supposed to have written Legion's Newspaper; being a Second Memorial to the Gentlemen of the late House of Commons.--ED.

[22] This pamphlet was in reply to sir Humphrey Mackworth's Vindication of the Rights of the Commons of England; and recent events, arising out of Stockdale's proceedings against Mr. Hansard for publishing a report of the house of commons, have made both sir Humphrey's and De Foe's pamphlets extremely interesting to the political world. De Foe maintains four general propositions as the foundation of his argument.

"1. That all government is instituted for the protection of the governed.

"2. That its constituent members, whether king, lords, or commons, if they invert the great end of their institution, the public good, cease to be; and power retreats to its original.

"3. That no collective or representative body of men whatever, in matters of politics or religion, have been infallible.

"4. That reason is the test and touchstone of laws, which cease to be binding, and become void, when contradictory to reason." He also maintains that no power has a right to dispense with the laws, and deduces that when such a right is assumed by either of the three powers, the constitution suffers a convulsion, and is dissolved of course. This tract has had considerable reputation. Mr. Wilson tells us, "that during the contest between the house of commons and the celebrated Mr. Wilkes, who was refused his seat, although repeatedly returned by his constituents, it was judged seasonable to reprint this work. It was accordingly published in 8vo. in 1769, by R. Baldwin, accompanied by some distinguished characters of a parliament man, by the same author, and is stated in the title-page to be the third edition. Prefixed to the work is a spirited dedication to the right honourable the lord mayor, the aldermen, and commons, of the city of London." [The dedication, amongst other things, states, "the reprinting of this excellent piece of the celebrated Daniel De Foe, who seems to have understood as well as any man the civil constitution of the kingdom, wherein the nature of our own constitution is set in the clearest light, upon self-evident principles, and the original power of the collective body of the people asserted, seemed to be altogether seasonable and fitting. It is with propriety addressed to the body of men which has always stood, like Mars in the gap, against all encroachments on the liberties of the people, and to which the nation hitherto owes its freedom and prosperity," &c.] The chief magistrate at that time was the patriotic alderman Beckford, who has a noble statue erected by his fellow-citizens in their Guildhall, to commemorate his worth. De Foe's work was reprinted, for the fourth time, at the logographic press, and included in the "Selection" from his writings published by the late Mr. John Walker, in 1790. [Life of De Foe, vol. i. p. 436.]

[23] This pamphlet was published before the events mentioned in the preceding paragraph of the text. It was preceded by another pamphlet of our indefatigable author, entituled, Six Distinguishing Characters of a Parliament man. As the pamphlets of De Foe illustrate not only the character of the author, but the spirit of the times, we give a summary of the 'Distinguishing characteristics' of the member of the house, desired by De Foe. 1. He must be a thorough partisan of the revolution, neither papist nor Jacobite. 2. A man of religion, of orthodox principles, and moral practice. 3. "A parliament man," says the sensible and experienced author, "ought to be a man of general knowledge, acquainted with the true interest of his country as to trade, liberties, laws, and common circumstances, especially of that part of it for which he serves. He ought to know how to deliver his mind with freedom and boldness, and pertinently to the case; to understand when our liberties are encroached upon, and be able to defend them: and to distinguish between a prince, who is faithful to liberty, and the interest of his country, and one whose business it is to invade both liberty and property." 4. He should be a man in years. 5. And of thorough honesty. 6. And of morals. This pamphlet was followed by the one mentioned in the text, and that again almost immediately by The Villany of Stock-jobbers detected; and the Cause of the late Run upon the Banks and Bankers discovered and considered.--ED.

[24] The author of De Foe's life in the Biographia Britannica, Dr. Towers, says, "in this piece De Foe wrote against the views and conduct of the court, and against what then seemed to be the prevailing sentiment of the nation. He appears however to have been perfectly right, to have exhibited on this occasion great political discernment, and to have been influenced by no motives but those of public spirit." Many opponents entered the field against De Foe upon this subject.--ED.

[25] De Foe frequently vindicates the memory of William III., but more especially in his Reviews. In 1702, he published The Mock Mourners, a satire by way of elegy on king William. By the author of the True-born Englishman. De Foe's summary of William III.'s character in the reviews is as follows:--

"It may, perhaps, be thought by some people a digression too remote from my present pursuit, when I launch out into the crimes of a party; but, if I am carried into extremes when the memory of king William is touched, I am altogether careless of making an excuse; and I acknowledge myself less master of my temper in that case, than in anything I can be touched in besides. The memory of that glorious monarch is so dear, and so valuable in the hearts of all true protestants, that have a sense both of what they escaped and what they enjoy by his hand, that it is difficult to retain any charity for their principles that can forget the obligation. His name is a word of congratulation; and 'The immortal memory of king William,' will be a health, as long as drinking healths is suffered in this part of the world.

"Let the ungrateful wretch that forgets what God wrought by his hand, look back upon popery coming in like a flood; property trampled underfoot; all sorts of cruelties and butcheries in practice in Scotland, and approaching in England! Let him review the insolence of the soldiery, the inveteracy of the court party, the tyranny, perjury, and avarice of governors; and at the foot of the account let him write, Delivered by king William. Then let him look back on the prince: How great, how splendid, how happy, how rich, how easy, and how justly valued by friends and enemies! He lived before in the field glorious, feared by enemies of his country, loved by the soldiery, having a vast inheritance of his own, governor of a rich state, blessed with the best of consorts, and as far as this life could give, completely happy. Compare this with the gaudy crown we gave him. Had a visible scheme been laid with it, of all the uneasinesses, dangers, crosses, disappointments, and dark prospects which that prince found with it, no wise man would have taken it off the dunghill, or come out of gaol to be master of it.

"Unhappy Englishmen! Is this the man you reproach? Had he any failing but that he bare too much with the most barbarous usage in the world? Had he not the most merit and the worst treatment that ever king in England met with?

"Who can hear men tell us, they helped to make him king, and were not considered for it? You helped to make him king! Pray what merit do you plead, and from whom was the debt? You helped to make him king? That is, you helped to save your country, and ruin him; you helped to recover your own liberties and those of your posterity, as you ought to have been blasted from heaven if you had not, and now you claim rewards from him! I will tell you how he rewarded you fully: he rewarded you by sacrificing his peace, his comfort, his fortune, and his country, to support you. He died a thousand times in the chagrin, vexation, and perplexity he had from the unkindness and treachery of his friends, and the numberless hazards of the field against the enemy. And yet all would not satisfy a craving generation, an insatiable party, who thought all the taxes raised for the war, given, not to the nation, but to the king, and endeavoured to blot the best character in the world with the crimes of those whom they themselves recommended him to trust." [Review, 1707, vol. iv. p. 77.]

[26] See note [15], p. 11-12.

[27] Life of Mr. John How, p. 210.

[28] A Letter to Mr. How, by way of Reply to his Considerations, &c. 1701.