« НазадПродовжити »
I whom I requested in take charge
rendered it impossible for you to
accept the second of the alternatives Sir—In a letter bearing your sig
proposed to you (a circumstance which, pature, and purporting to have been I must be permitted to observe, conaddressed by you to the Chairman of siderably aggravat
irman of siderably aggravated the offence ofa dinner of Parliamentary Reformers fered to me); that the utmost which I on the 4th of April, which was pub could obtain from you was an engagelished in several of the Newspapers ment to afford me satisfaction, so soon of the following day; a liberty is as the term of your confinement should taken with my name, as little justi- have expired; that the interval must fiable (in my judgment) by differences be full of hazard as to secrecy; that of public opinion, as it is recon- without in any degree impeaching eileable with the ordinary courtesies either your honour, or that of any of private life. The obvious meaning | Gentleman whom you might select, of that passage in your letter of which the mere fact (which could hardly be I complain, is, to impute to me, that concealed) of a communication bein upholding the present system of tween me or any friend of mine, and Representation in the House of Com- the King's Bench, could not fail to mons, I am actuated by the corrupt excite suspicion ; and that such suspiand dishonourable motive of a per- cion would necessarily be strengthened sonal pecuniary interest.- It cannot by my prolonging my stay in England be matter of surprise to you, that I till the middle of May, after having should feel myself under the necessity repeatedly and publicly announced of requiring at your hands a dis
my intention of waiting only for Mr. avowal of the imputation which that Lambton's motion of the 17th of April. passage appears to convey. Should Yielding for the time (and I know not you be unable, or unwilling, to afford how I could have done otherwise), to me a satisfactory explanation upon the force of these representations, it rethis point, I have then to demand of mained for me only to keep my own you tie only other reparation which counsel, and to quicken, as much as an injury of such a nature admits.
of such a nature admits. I possible, my return from the Continent. It can hardly be necessary to state to I arrived here yesterday evening. My you, Sir, the reason why this demand first business on my arrival has been to. has not been sooner made: but I owe cominunicate with Lord William Bentinck, it to inyself to preclude the possibility who has the goodness to undertake to of any doubt or misrepresentation, as deliver this letter to you, and to settle to the causes of that delay. The first on my behalf all necessary arrange- , and natural impulse of my own feel- ments on the matter to which it reings, was to address myself to you | lates. I assure you, upon my honour, the instant that I had read your letter that Lord William Bentinck is the only in the newspapers. But it was
person who ha represented to me by the friend letter, or of my purpose to write it. I.
have the lionour to be, Sir, your most to make to your letter, than to express obedient servant, ,
ny acknowledgment for the frankness GEO. CANNING. and promptitude, with which you have !
disclaimed any intention of personal
offence. I have the honour to be, Sir, TO THE RIGHT hox. GEORGE CANNING.
Your most obedient Servant, St. James's-place, June 8, 1821.
(Signed) GEORGE CANNING. · Şir-I am not aware of having made any unjustifiable allusion to you, or of kaving said of you in my letter to the TO THE EDITOR OF THE MORNING Chairinan of the Reform Meeting, more than all political men, who benefit
St. James's-square, June 12, 1821., from the system which they advocate,
Sir-Some one has forged my name are fairly and necessarily subject to.
to a letter to the Editor of the Courier, The letter in question is now before me ;
authorizing the publication of a corand I am at a loss for a form of words in
respondence between · Mr. Canning which I could have more guardedly
and Sir Francis Burdett. Lord Wile: marked the disqualification under which
liam Bentịnck has assured me he I conceive yourself and others to be
knows nothing about the matter. I from giving authority to your opinions
| did authenticate copies of the letters on Parliamentary Reform, and at the
that had passed between the two Gen-, same time have avoided making any
tlemen in question. But in so doing, allusion whatever to personal cha
at the special request of Lord Wilracter. Not having intended, and not
lliam Bentinck, I stated that, although having made (as I read the letter), any
Sir Francis Burdett could have no pose. such allusion at the time, I cannot now
sible objection to their publication, I. hesitate in a more particular manner, to
should think it unbecoming on his disclaim having ever had such an
part to be a party to it. As far as intention. I have the honour to be, Sir,
my own opinion went, of course, I Your most obedient, humble Servant, .
could have opposed no obstacle to: (Signed) FRANCIS BURDETT,
that which I thought would do so.'
much credit to Sir Francis Burdett. TO SIR FRANCIS BURDETT.
But his lordship will recollect I stated Gloucester Lodge, June 9, 1821.
my surprise if Mr. Canning should
wish to give notoriety to such a traniSir-Lord William Bentir:ck has just action. delivered to me the answer, which you I am, Sir, your obedient servant, have transmitted to his Lordship, through | ; : DOUGLAS KINNAIRD. Mr. Kinnaird, to the letter which I addressed to you on Thursday. Lord William Bentinck's opinion (with which We have been requested by Lord : my own feelings entirely coincide) sa- William Bentinck to give insertion to tisfies me that I can have no other reply the following Letter :
TO THE EDITOR OF THE MORNING
- [ parties principally concerned, with
which I can truly say Mr. Kinnaird CHRONICLE.
and I mutually flattered ourselves, that Park-lane, June 13, 1821. this transaction had happily terminated. Sir-A letter from Mr. D. Kinnaird, I am, Sir, your obedient servant, which appeared in your Paper of this
W. BENTINCK. day, in reference to the publication of the Correspondence between Mr. Can- The same letter mutatis mutandis ning and Sir Francis Burdett, requires appeared in The Courier of last night, from me the following explanation :- with the following note addressed by Certainly, the paragraph to which the Editor of The Courier to Lord both our names are signed, though W. Bentinck, which, says the Editer, written by us, was not written as a bis Lordship wishes to be annexed to letter to the Editor of the Courier, or his own letter: to any other person. It was intended | The Editor of The Courier presents simply to authenticate the corres- his compliments to Lord William Benpondence which it accompanied. The tinck an
tinck, and has the honour to inform mistake, by which the Editor of the him. with reference
t of Courier considered it as addressed Mr. Douglas Kinnaird's letter which to himself, is explained by him in his
relates to the alleged “ forgery” of Paper of this evening. With respec'his name, that the mistake originated to the question of publishing, it is lin a practice ordinarily adopted in perfectly true that Mr. D. Kinnaird, I giving publication to the communicathorgh publication had his perfect
tions of Correspondents, viz. that of assent, and though his authentication
causing them to be addressed to the of the correspondence was given with
Editor of the Journal in which they that view, declined to be a party to
appear. It is surely superfluous to it. But it is equally true, that publica
add, that there could have existed no tion, in some form or other, was al
motive of any other kind fór thus inways required by Mr. Canning, and
|troducing the Correspondence. was uniformly so stated by me to Mr. Kinnaird, from the moment that there. The following is the forgery appeared a prospect of the affair being complained of by Mr. DOUGLAS brought to an amicable termination. | KINNAIRD. I regret the mistake into which the Editor of The Courier has fallen,
TO THE EDITOR. more especially as it has given rise to l Sir-The following Correspondence Mr. Kinnaird's letter, which, although (Nos. 1, 2, 3,) having passed between (as I am convinced, from all that has Mr. Canning and Sir Francis Burdett, passed between us upon this occasion) we declare it to be authentic. without the intention of the wriler,
W. BENTINCK, seems to detract something from that
DOUGLAS KINNAIRD. complete satisfaction to the feelings as well as to the honour of both the
June 11, 1821.
Thus we have all these curious thing is; many as are the pole .. documents before us; and, let troons which it palms on the ụs now see, whether you, Gen-world for men of valour and of tlemen, are ready to acknow-honour; monstrous as it is to ledge, that they too are “ West- suppose, that the fighting of a minster's Pride."
duel can make a rogue an honest: As to the practise of duelling, man, and still more monstrous as though I by no means pretend it is to appeal to a pistol for the that it includes any moral offence, decision of an argument: still, it is any thing rather than a trial if a man acknowledges the legiof courage ; for, nine times out timacy of this mode of settling of ten, the parties are urged on differences; if he will have the to it by fear ; and we accord- advantange attending the repuingly see the most perfect cowards tation of duel-fighting; if he will fighting duels. Shakspeare has pretend to merit on account of a admirably illustrated the real supposed readiness in him to fight character of the duellist in the duels ; then, he subjects himself play, called “ What you will." | to the laws of duelling, and his Sir Andrew, a stupid drunken conduct must be judged of by Knight, has fallen into disgrace those laws. with his Mistress, he is told; and Now, it is clear, that, when the he is also told, that he must re- complaining party comes, at once, gain his lost ground by “ some to the point, and makes disavowal “ notable expedient of wit or of the condition, and the express and “ valour.” Whereupon, after only condition, of not fighting, to pretty nearly ascertaining that disavow is to acknowledge fear', his rival will not fight, he sends to fight. This is so plain a thing him a challenge, written in a that it cannot be questioned by “ curst and brief” style and any one. If, indeed, the injured, manner. But, despicable as the or pretended injured, party, call : for an explanation, and in civil his power to get this níoney and terms, without accompanying the to eat and drink, in like manner -call with a statement of the fighting as the ox knoweth his owner, and alternative; then, even a high the ass his master's crib. On dueller, or, as they call it, “man: This is the clear, the fair, the “ of honour,” may explain, and only meaning of the words ; and, may, if truth will bear him out, now, what says “ Glory” of disavow. But, to say to a fighter, those words in his disavowal, or * you shall disuvow or fight,” is disclaimer? Why, that he had to cat off the possibility of ho- no intention to make any allusion nourable parley. Upon this prin- whaterer to PERSONAL cha-' ciple all men act. If the honest racter! The deuce he did not ! Jabourer be told to retract on pain Well! Let him then keep a glossoof a slap in the face, nothing but ry-monger to be the bearer of his fear of the slap will make him re- dispatches ; for, it will hencetract. .. . - forward be extremely dangerous
Here I leave this matter, it to place the smallest degree of rebeing, in my eyes, of far less liance on his words as they apimportance than the political con- pear on the paper. Nothing persequences of this, as Mr. Canning sonal! No allusion even to percalls it, “ prompt disavowal.” sunal character! Good God! Let us see what “ Glory’s ” as- Then this may not be paper, on sertion was. It was this: that which I am writing, nor is this a Mr. Canning defended to the ut- pen that I hold in my hand. My most a system, by the hocus-po- name may not be William ; and cus tricks of which he and his fa- even “ Glory" himself, as he mily got niuch public money ; that once curiously enough observed, he espoused a cause by which he in one of his Crown-and-Anchor and his family eat and drank; that harangues, “ may be an oyster”. he was true to those who put it in Plain as “ Glory,” in his Bar