standard which Mr. Porter himself tells us (in his history) was the "invincible standard, brought home by Mr. Baldwin," is now left somewhere in the field," and the standard, now at Lord Hobart's," is merely a "French standard," and nothing more. But as if the spirit of contradiction itself had possessed Mr. Ker Porter, he says that the Invincible Standard had on it Le Passage de la Piavé, Le Passage du Tagliamento, &c., and it perversely happens that these very words are upon "the French standard, now at Lord Hobart's !"-The fact is, that the palpable disagreement between Mr. Ker Porter's pen and his pencil arises from the circumstance of their having been employed upon the same subject at different times. When the historical sketch was written, there was no fear at all of detection; but before the picture was finished, there was an ugly story got abroad about a German soldier having brought in a standard; and as it seems to be agreed, on all hands, that there was but one brought home to England, Mr. Porter resolved, that, since that one was not taken by the Highlanders, it should not be the invincible standard. Hence the invention of two standards. Unfortunately, however, for the veracity both of Mr. Porter's writings and his paintings, that modest and pious youth Sergeant Sinclair declares, that the standard which was brought in by the German soldier was the very same that was taken by Major Stirling, and which he [the sergeant] lost when he was cut down by the French cavalry! But, then, which to believe, Mr. Porter or the sergeant? The sergeant says, that after having been knocked down and stunned, and having got up again, and taken six Frenchmen prisoners, "he "perceived a soldier of General Stuart's foreign corps carrying into the rear the invincible standard, which he [the soldier] had picked up "while Sergeant Sinclair lay in a state of insensibility." Now, if the sergeant was in a state of insensibility, how could he see or hear what was doing the while? Did he, like Hudibras, send his senses out upon the scout and did they, upon their return, inform him that a foreigner had been there and had picked up the standard? Or did he swoon, as a negro sleeps, with one eye at a time? The truth is, that this part of the sergeant's narrative places him in a most cruel dilemma, and furnishes strong grounds to fear, that if he did really think of his Maker during the battle of Alexandria, he completely forgot Him at the Shakspeare Tavern the sergeant either saw the standard "picked up," or he did not see it picked up; if he did see it, how comes it that he, who was so vigorous as to fire fifteen rounds and take six prisoners afterwards, did not prevent another from carrying off his inestimable prize? And if he did not see it, he has told an absolute and shameful falsehood, which has been promulgated under the apparent authority of the Highland Society. One point more, and I have done. It has been stated as a possible case, as a last shift, that the standard might be first taken by the 42nd regiment, then retaken by the enemy, and afterwards taken by Lutz. On this case I shall only observe, that if the 42nd regiment should think proper to boast of having had the standard taken from them, Lutz can have no great objection to have it thought that he took the standard from those who took it from the 42nd regiment.*

* I here wish to declare in the most positive and explicit terms, that I have no intention to insinuate that Major Stirling, or any of the officers of the 42nd regiment, who were in Egypt, have lent their aid in favouring the imposition of Sergeant Sinclair and Mr. Ker Porter; on the contrary, I am well assured that they have not; but, at the same time, I must observe, that if they were informed

Turning, with disgust, from this tissue of misrepresentations, misstatements, contradictions, absurdities, and, I must add, falsehoods, with what pleasure does the mind contemplate the plain and honest narrative of Lutz, supported, in every point, by authenticated documents! We see the man with the badge of honour, the representation of the standard, on his breast we find that he has worn this badge ever since the date of the achievement, and by a public order of his commanding officer: to prove that this order was not given without cause, we have next the certificate of the Adjutant-General: to prove that the Adjutant-General was not deceived, we have the testimony of Lieut. Moncrieff, to whom Lutz brought the standard from the enemy; and to prove that he took it from the enemy, we have the testimony of two men, on their oaths, who saw it in their hands, who saw Lutz run into the smoke after them, and, in the space of two minutes, came out of that smoke in possession of the symbol of victory. In short, no case was ever more fairly made out: no fact was ever more fully and uncontrovertibly proved: no judge, though in the righteous, the scrupulous, the merciful courts of England, ever required clearer evidence whereon to ground a decision, even of death.

Having thus established the exclusive claim of Lutz to the honour of taking the invincible standard, I shall say but a very few words as to the reward of that gallant and, even in a national point of view, most meritorious and important achievement. Of the claims which the hero has on the Sovereign and the country that he serves, the first is, that his deeds be ascribed to himself and not to another. This, which is, in truth, no more than a mere demand of right, Lutz is, I trust, now in a fair way of obtaining. But the reward of valour does not stop here it demands rank and precedence, with a proportionate share of the comforts and pleasures of life: justice, because she watches over the weak and the timid, does not, for that reason, turn her back upon the stout and the brave. In considering, therefore, what ought to be done in the present instance, a narrative, such as I have here attempted, was determined on, not only as absolutely necessary to do away the mis-statements already abroad, and as a means of restoring the laurel to the brow of Lutz, but also as a foundation whereon to proceed in any other endeavours that might be made in his behalf. Leaving to the justice of his Royal Highness the Commander-in-Chief (when he came to be fully informed of all the circumstances of the case) to award such honours as he might think proper, it was thought that, in the meantime, some method ought to be adopted for giving the noblemen and gentlemen of the kingdom an opportunity of contributing towards a pecuniary reward.

of the sergeant's publicly claiming the honour in the name of the regiment or officers of the regiment, they should instantly have dis-claimed it in the same public manner; and which, indeed, they would, perhaps, have done before now, had they been acquainted with the mode of effecting such a purpose.-It is hardly necessary for me to say, that to the Highland Society in a body I cannot impute any intentional misrepresentation. Of the Sinclairs (the modest Sergeant and his patron Sir John) I shall leave the reader to form his own opinion, expressing, however, my sincere hope, and indeed my firm reliance, that in this project in behalf of his namesake, Sir John will finally meet with no better success than when, with modesty unparalleled, he called upon the people of England not only publicly to venerate Washington, but to contribute towards a fund for the raising of a monument to his memory, even in the dominions of their Sovereign, from whom Washington had snatched what was called “the most precious jewel of his crown."

A subscription, the last resource of misfortune, imprudence, and decayed patriotism, was thought an unsuitable expedient; the man who took the invincible standard ought never to appeal to the charity of England. After some deliberation as to the most proper means to be employed, an engraved portrait of Lutz, to be sold at a guinea, was resolved on, as at once calculated to commemorate his heroic deed and to procure him a handsome sum, without wounding those sentiments which he must, and which he does, entertain.-The portrait was executed accordingly. It is a full-length. Lutz is dressed in the regimentals of the Queen's German regiment, having the badge upon his breast, and the standard in his hand. A face of a bastion is to his left, while, behind him and to his right, the distant spires of Alexandria terminate the view. The likeness is exact; the print is in colours, and is in size nine inches by twelve. It is now ready for sale, at No. 18, Pall-Mall.-What importance has been attached to the taking of the invincible standard, how highly we have prized this trophy of victory, is well known to this nation and to the world indeed, it is the great pledge of our military fame: it is the pivot on which has turned every eulogium, of every sort, respecting the Egyptian campaign. "We fairly defeated them," says the historian," and the proof is, we took their invincible standard." This standard was sent to Sir Ralph Abercrombie to cheer him in his last awful moments: it is to be placed on his grand and costly tomb, voted by a grateful Parliament : and shall the gallant Lutz, shall the man who took this standard, be rewarded with a worsted shoulder-knot, and two-pence a day added to his pay? Shall he, because he is a foreigner, waste his life in penury and obscurity, and finally, perhaps, drop into the grave from the wards of an hospital or a poor-house? Forbid it justice! Forbid it British justice and British honour!

London, 22nd December, 1802.

WILLIAM COBBETT.

SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED,

(Register, December 25.)

THE Narrative which I last week published on this subject has excited an uncommon degree of public curiosity, and, I am proud to add, of generous public feeling. About forty of the portrait of the brave Lutz have been sold; the first purchasers were Lord and Lady Folkestone, the former five prints, and the latter two. I have received a great number of letters on the subject from different parts of the kingdom, all expressing the utmost admiration of Lutz, and entirely approving of my humble endeavours in his behalf. Amongst these letters there is one which, with the omission of the name of the writer, I shall take the liberty to insert here, as it appears to me to contain the general sentiments of all those who have done me the honour to write to me on this occasion; and as it contains, moreover, a hint which I hope will be turned to account.*

Yes! the man who jumped overboard, and saved the dispatches of Buonaparte, was rewarded with a pension for life by the City of London,

See Letter, Register, vol. ii. p. 603.—ED.

in Common Hall assembled. John Saunderson, the sailor, who, during the heat of the battle of Camperdown, went aloft and nailed to the mast the flag of his admiral, which had been shot away by the enemy, received a very handsome gratuity; enough to enable him to live at his ease, and to make a comfortable provision for his aged parents. "But the men thus rewarded were natives of this country!" This will be the observation of some few persons; but, as if it were decreed that nothing should be wanting in support of the claim of Lutz; as if no proof should be wanting of the injustice of those who would withhold a reward from him, the history of the war furnishes an instance of a foreigner. I allude to Mr. Goddard, an American. He was a prisoner of war on board the French privateer the Jean Bart, which privateer was going to France from the United States, and had the French minister Fauchet's dispatches on board. The Jean Bart was, in the channel, obliged to strike to a British frigate, and while the frigate's boat was making towards her, the French captain threw the dispatches overboard, when Goddard (whose family had been loyalists, and who had been one himself) most gallantly jumped over the side after them, and was lucky enough to keep them afloat till he was taken up by the boat of the frigate.*- -Goddard (whose rank in life was that of captain of a merchantman) was offered a good situation in the West Indies, which he refused; he was, I believe, also offered the Consulship of Rhode Island, worth about 500l. a year. He wished for a situation in England; but whether he finally got one, or took a sum of money, I know not, nor indeed is the fact at all necessary to the inference which I mean to draw from this statement, which is, that the quality of foreigner has not heretofore been regarded as a bar to claims on national gratitude and national justice. And shall it be so regarded now? Shall this selfish exception be made in only one case ; and that, too, in a case which calls aloud for an extraordinary exertion of liberality; in a case calculated to banish every sinister feeling from the breast?

As to the hint of my correspondent, relative to a subscription for the purpose of purchasing a commission for Lutz, it will, I think, be right to postpone that laudable undertaking a little while, for two reasons; first, to give the public time to be fully convinced that the claim of Lutz cannot be invalidated; and, secondly, to afford his Royal Highness the Commander-in-Chief an opportunity (now that he will know all the circumstances) of proving to the world that deeds of glory are, in the army which has the honour to be commanded by him, sure to meet with their reward. In the meantime, the fame of Lutz is spreading far and wide. The Political Register will carry it to every Court in Europe, without one single exception. In the United States of America it will be echoed through about three hundred different newspapers, and will be known to every man, woman, and child in the country. In the East and West Indies it will circulate sufficiently; and in his Majesty's European dominions, it has already made no inconsiderable progress. The Register itself is read by a vast number of persons. There has been a great extra demand for the narrative, which will take altogether upwards of five thousand stamps, and will bring into the Stamp-office about seventy pounds duty! (Poor Lutz might have this, one would think!) The London newspapers, too, have, from one motive or another, almost all of them,

See our Note p. 214 of this volume.-ED.

for once, at least, during their existence, contributed towards the circulation of truth. Some of them have made extracts from the narrative, others have mentioned it, and all of them have inserted a paragraph in the following words, which appears to me to have been published by the authority of some persons deeply concerned :-" We have good reason "to believe that the statement which appeared in a periodical publication "of recent date, respecting the capture, in the battle of Alexandria, of "what has been CALLED the Invincible Standard,' will not escape obser"vation from those whose business it is to notice it; and that it will be "clearly and incontestably proved that the 42nd regiment did take the "standard from that body of men termed the Invincible Legion, whom they engaged in the commencement of the action; which standard was, "in a subsequent attack by the enemy, lost by Sergeant Sinclair, who "received it in charge from the officer of the 42nd regiment, to whom "it had been surrendered; nor will this fact be found inconsistent "with the documents adduced in the publication above-mentioned, however contrary to the reasoning and insinuation of the author."So! what has been called the Invincible Standard!" Mark the hypothetical phraseology; "What has been called!" Yes, what was so called in all the public prints ten thousand times over; what was so called in the theatres, at Sadler's Wells and at Astley's; what was so culled in the Panorama; what was so called by the dukes, carls, barons, baronets, and gentlemen of the Highland Society; and what was so called by his Majesty's Minister, when in Parliament he signified the pleasure of his Royal Master that it should be placed on Abercrombie's tomb. Yes, not only what was called the Invincible Standard, but what is called the Invincible Standard, and which is not only called such, but is such, or else we have no Invincible Standard in our possession. And is it possible that the nation will relinquish this honour rather than do justice to Lutz? Will it be inveigled into this act of baseness and folly merely to gratify the spleen arising from disappointed assurance and intrigue? My “reasoning" and my "insinuation" are before my readers : let them judge. I do not know who this paragraph comes from; but its publication in so many papers cannot have cost less than twenty guineas, an expense to which an individual would, at least without some very powerful motive, scarcely have put himself to on such an account. As to the case stated in this paragraph, I shall say nothing, until it shows its front in a more authentic form; but while I sincerely desire to avoid a controversy, which, if persevered in, must finally bring shame on some portion, at least, of my fellow-subjects, it will not, I trust, be expected that the advocate of Lutz will suffer either his hero or himself to be unjustly attacked with impunity, however numerous or powerful the assailants. It is not my intention to trouble my readers with remarks on every unofficial misrepresentation that may appear relative to this subject: a passage, however, in the Morning Chronicle of the 27th inst. seems to demand immediate attention. After inserting the substance of my narrative, the writer concludes thus:-"The above narrative certainly will give great offence to the "42nd regiment, who are represented to have been in a very shameful "situation when rescued by the German regiment; and, if this account "be true, were so. If it is false, the officers will no doubt vindicate the "character of the regiment by a fair narrative of facts; and, if their "regiment has just claims to the honour of having taken the invincible "standard, will defend them by evidence. It certainly will afford us