[36]Mr. Wilson observes of the Review, "That it did not outlive its day, may be attributed to the great proportion of temporary matter with which it abounded. There are to be found in its pages, however, many instructive pieces of a moral and political nature, besides others devoted to amusement, and also some useful historical documents. A complete copy of the work is not known to be in existence. It deserves to be remarked that De Foe was the sole writer of the nine quarto volumes that compose the work, a prodigious undertaking for one man, especially when we consider his other numerous engagements of a literary nature." Mr. Wilson then refers to an able eulogium by Dr. Drake. [Essays on the Tatler, vol. i. p. 23.] "Contemporary with Leslies' Remains, came forward, under a periodical dress, and of a kind far superior to anything which had hitherto appeared, the Review of Daniel De Foe, a man of undoubted genius, and who, deviating from the accustomed route, had chalked out a new path for himself. The chief topics were as usual, news foreign and domestic, and politics; to these, however, were added the various concerns of trade; and to render the undertaking more palatable and popular, he with much judgment instituted what he termed, perhaps with no great propriety, a 'Scandal Club,' and whose amusement it was to agitate questions in divinity, morals, war, language, poetry, love, marriage, &c. The introduction of this club, and the subjects of its discussion, it is obvious approximated the Review much nearer than any preceding work to our first classical model." The first number of the Review was published Feb. 19th, 1704, as A Weekly Review of the Affairs of France, purged from the Errors and Partiality of Newswriters and Petty Statesmen of all sides. It was at first a weekly publication, but afterwards came out twice a week, as it was changed to half a sheet from a whole one. The price was one penny. Mr. Wilson, in his valuable Life of De Foe, gives long extracts from the Review, a work, he observes, now very difficult to be met with. "A considerable portion of the first volume," observes that gentleman, "is devoted to foreign politics, more particularly the power and grandeur of the French monarchy, for the reduction of which within reasonable limits the principal nations of Europe were then embroiled in an expensive war. In estimating the powers and resources of France, which had attained their summit under Louis XIV., he was anxious to guard his countrymen against the folly of despising such an enemy." Mr. Wilson then gives copious and interesting extracts from the Review, to which we must refer the reader to his able biography, [vol. ii. ch. 10.] The volume closed in one hundred and two numbers, in February, 1705, and had the following title prefixed: A Review of the Affairs of France, and of all Europe, as influenced by that Nation: being Historical Observations on the Public Transactions of the World; purged from the Errors and Partiality of Newswriters and Petty Statesmen of all sides. With an Entertaining Part in every sheet; being Advice from the Scandal Club to the Curious Inquirers, in answer to Letters sent them for that purpose.[37]The following is the account of this storm by a contemporary historian:—"About the middle of the night, a violent wind arose, which blew down the steeples of churches, tore off the tiles, and rolled up the leads of houses, tossing them through the air to great distances, rooted up the largest trees, or broke them off short, carried hayricks and stacks of corn to great heights, scattered them abroad, and beat down the chimneys in divers places, to the destruction of many people in the towns. The ships which lay in the mouth of the Thames and other parts, were driven foul of one another. The sailors, not knowing what to avoid, or which way to steer, abandoned themselves to despair, expecting every moment to be their last. Some ships having broke their cables, and lost their anchors, drove before the wind, without helm or steerage, and either dashed one another to pieces, or were swallowed up in the raging deep. Some were driven out to sea, without any rigging; and others run upon the sands, rocks, and shores. The admiral was driven to sea without mast or anchor, from the Downs, and lost together with his ship; and other ships which had been in his squadron were driven to the coast of Holland in five hours' time, with their masts broken, without any art or direction, and others to other places. The watch-towers, with the watchmen, were overthrown together; and the destruction which this storm occasioned was long remembered with awe and horror. In the space of one tempestuous night, a gallant English fleet was reduced to nothing: and it is incredible what a dismal appearance there was at London and other towns. The mathematicians observed that the force of this tempest did not extend further south than the river Loire, in France, nor further north than the river Trent, in England." [Cunningham, vol. i. p. 356.][38]By his Appeal, in 1715.[39]Before the publication of this Hymn, he published a poem on himself, An Elegy on the Author of the True-born Englishman. In the preface to this poem he bitterly complains of the slanders to which he was constantly subject. He might have reflected, however, that such a fate was unavoidable to a political writer in those factious times; and that the more independent the author, the more likely he was to be exposed to the double shafts of partisan malice.—Ed.[40]It wasnoton this occasion, but for one of the Reviews published in 1707, in which, he criticises the apparent supineness of Charles XII.—Ed.[41]The title of a pamphlet published by a Dr. Browne.[42]The recent discussion of the Poor Law Amendment Act has thrown much additional light on this question. During this year, in addition to the works mentioned by Mr. Chalmers, De Foe advocated the rights of Dissenters in the colony of Carolina, in America, where they had been hardly treated; first deprived of a seat in the house of assembly, and then subjected to stringent laws. De Foe, while their affairs were being made matter of discussion in parliament, published Party Tyranny; or an Occasional Bill in Miniature, as now practised in Carolina. Humbly offered to the Consideration of both Houses of Parliament.—Ed.[43]The motion of lord Haversham in the house of lords, was to request the queen to invite over the presumptive heir to the crown, which would have produced the mischief of two rival courts. De Foe in this pamphlet gives us one of those passages so extremely interesting, being a sketch of his own life by himself. "If I were to run through the black list of the encouragements I have met with in the world, while I have embarked myself in the raging sea of the nation's troubles, this vindication would be ashamed to call them encouragements. How, in pursuit of peace, I have brought myself into innumerable broils; how many, exasperated by the sting of truth, have vowed my destruction; and how many ways attempted it; how I stand alone in the world, abandoned by those very people that own I have done them service; how I am sold and betrayed by friends, abused and cheated by barbarous and unnatural relations, sued for other men's debts, and stripped naked by public injustice, of what should have enabled me to pay my own; how, with a numerous family, and with no helps but my own industry, I have forced my way with undiscouraged diligence, through a sea of debt and misfortune, and reduced them, exclusive of composition, from seventeen to less than five thousand pounds; how, in gaols, in retreats, in all manner of extremities, I have supported myself without the assistance of friends or relations; how I still live without this Vindicator's suggested methods, and am so far from making my fortune by this way ofscribbling, that no man more desires a limitation and regulation of the press than myself; especially that speeches in parliament might not be printed without order of parliament, and poor authors betrayed to engage with men too powerful for them in more forcible arguments than those of reason. A man ought not to be afraid at any time to be mean to be honest. Pardon me, therefore, with some warmth, to say, that neither the Vindicator, nor all his informers, can, with their utmost inquiry, make it appear that I am, or ever was, mercenary. And as there is a justice due from all men, of what dignity or quality soever, the wrong done me in this can be vindicated by nothing but proving the fact, which I am a most humble petitioner that he would be pleased to do, or else give me leave to speak of it in such terms as so great an injury demands. No, my lord, pardon my freedom, I contemn and abhor everything and every man that can be taxed with that name, let his dignity be what it will. I was ever true to one principle; I never betrayed my master or my friend; I always espoused the cause of truth and liberty, was ever on one side, and that side was ever right. I have lived to be ruined for it; and I lived to see it triumph over tyranny, party-rage, and persecution principles, and am sorry to see any man abandon it. I thank God this world cannot bid a price sufficient to bribe me. It is the principle I ever lived by, and shall espouse while I live, that a man ought to die rather than betray his friend, his cause, or his master."—Ed.[44]9 Anne, c. 19.[45]The pieces in this volume are: 1. New Discovery of an Old Intrigue. 2. More Reformation. 3. Elegy on the Author of the True-born Englishman. 4. The Storm: an Essay. 5. A Hymn to the Pillory. 6. Hymn to Victory. 7. The Pacificator. 8. The Double Welcome to the Duke of Marlborough. 9. Dissenters' Answer to the High Church Challenge. 10. A Challenge of Peace to the whole Nation. 11. Peace without Union. 12. More Short Ways. 13. New Test of the Church of England's Honesty. 14. Serious Inquiry. 15. The Dissenters Misrepresented. 16. The Parallel. 17. Giving Alms no Charity. 18. Royal Religion.[46]In the year 1705, he also published a satirical poem, entituled, The Dyet of Poland: printed at Dantzick. He sketches the leading politicians of the day under Polish names; William III. being represented as Sobieski. He also published A True Relation, of the Apparition of one Mrs. Veal, the next day after her death, to one Mrs. Bargrave, at Canterbury, the 8th of Sept. 1705, which Apparition recommends the perusal of Drelincourt's Book of Consolation against the Fear of Death. This work it is said was written by De Foe to make Drelincourt's sell, which was before a heavy book in the market, and of course produced the desired effect. The future author of Robinson Crusoe may be distinctly seen in this work. Sir Walter Scott considered it one of his happiest efforts, and marked with the distinct impress of De Foe. He observes "that De Foe has put in force within those few pages, peculiar specimens of his art of recommending the most improbable narrative by his specious and serious mode of telling it. Whoever will read it as told by De Foe himself, will agree that could the thing have happened in reality, so it would have been told. In short, the whole is so distinctly circumstantial, that were it not for the impossibility, or extreme improbability at least, of such an occurrence, the evidence could not but support the story." In this year the second volume of the Review was completed. The early part of it refers to matters of trade, which he says he had intended to write more fully upon, but was diverted by domestic affairs; and that his labours in behalf of peace had given great satisfaction.—Ed.[47]Published the 10th of January, 1705-6. In May, 1706, he published a poem on the duke of Marlborough's great victory, entituled, On the Fight of Ramillies.[48]It was partly republished in 1821, by Mr. Hone; who says in the preface, "De Foe was the ablest politician of his day, an energetic writer, and, better than all, an honest man; but not much of a poet. The Jure Divino is defective in argument and versification. It is likewise disfigured by injudicious repetitions; a large portion is directed to the politics of the time, and it is otherwise unfit for republication entire; but it abounds with energetic thoughts, forcible touches, and happy illustrations."—Ed.[49]Appeal, p. 16.[50]See his History of the Union, p. 401.[51]Ibid. p. 379.[52]Daniel De Foe. He had two names through life; and even when letters of administration were granted on his personal estate, some time after his death,DeFoe is added with anotherwise. We might thence infer that his father's name wasFoe, if we had not now better evidence of the fact.[53]Ibid. p. 223.[54]History of the Union, p. 239.[55]Dr. Towers says, [Biograph. Brit.] "In this poem De Foe celebrates the courage of the Scots, and enumerates some of their military exploits. He endeavours to prove that the situation of Scotland rendered it well adapted for trade; he speaks honourably of the abilities of the inhabitants; he commends them for their learning, and their attention to religion; and he hints at the advantages which they might derive from a union with England. But though De Foe's poem was a panegyric upon Scotland and Scotsmen, it did not wholly consist of commendation. He takes notice of the evils that the common people suffered from their vassalage to their chiefs, and from their ignorance of the blessings of liberty. He also censures the Scots for not improving the natural advantages which their country possessed, and for neglecting their fishery; and he gives them some excellent advice." In 1707, he published a tract called, A Voice from the South; or an Address from some Protestant Dissenters in England to the Kirk of Scotland; the object being, as the title implies, to reconcile the presbyterians to the Union, then on the eve of completion.He also in that year published a third volume of the Review, in which he dwelt very much upon matters connected with trade. One passage relative to the poor and their management, shows that he was far beyond his age on that point, as on most others. "Perhaps he may give some needful hints as to the state of our poor, in which his judgment may differ from that of others, but he must be plain: and while he is no enemy to charity-hospitals and workhouses, he thinks that methods to keep our poor out of them, far exceed, both in prudence and charity, all the settlements and endeavours in the world to maintain them there. As to censure, he expects it. He writes to serve the world, not to please it. A few wise, calm, disinterested men, he always had the good hap to please and satisfy. By their judgment he desires still to be determined; and if he has any pride, it is that he may be approved by such. To the rest, he sedately says, their censure deserves no notice." In 1708 he published a fourth volume of the Review, in which he discusses the Union at great length. He also discusses the war, the policy of the Swedes, &c.; the insurrection in Hungary, the revolution in Naples. The great principles of liberty are here, as they always were by De Foe, maintained with energy and warmth; but De Foe's mind was essentially practical, and therefore moderate. In the following fine passage he displays his principle of action. "In all my writings, as well as in this paper, it has been my endeavour, and ever shall be, I hope, to steer the middle way between all our extremes, and while I am applauding the lustre of moderation, to practise it myself." He foresees, however, the fate of impartiality in the contests of faction. "If I might give a short hint to an impartial writer, it should be to tell him his fate. If he resolves to venture up the dangerous precipice of telling unbiassed truths, let him proclaim war with mankind,a la mode le pais de Pole, neither to give nor take quarter. If he tells the crimes of great men, they fall upon him with the iron hands of the law; if he tells their virtues, when they have any, then the mob attacks him with slander. But if he regards truth, let him expect martyrdom on both sides, and then he may go on fearless; and this is the course I take myself." [vol. iv. p. 593.]In 1708, prince George of Denmark, consort of queen Anne, died; and De Foe described his character in one of the Reviews. The recent circumstances in our own day, so analogous to that of prince George and the queen, make De Foe's sketch one of great interest. "Death has made a very deep incision in the public tranquillity, in the person of the prince of Denmark. His royal highness was a great and good man, a friend to England and her interest, and true and hearty in the cause of liberty.... If I had a design to run through the character of the prince, I would observe upon the excellency of his temper, the calmness of his passions, and the sedateness of his judgment, which commanded respect from the whole nation in a manner peculiar to himself; so that every party, however jarring and opposite, paid him their homage, although nothing was more averse to his temper than the divisions which unhappily agitate the nation. Nor can it be doubted that his highness derived peculiar satisfaction from his not interfering in public affairs more than his exalted station obliged him, since he saw it was impossible to do so without committing himself to a party, which he was always averse to. He sincerely lamented our divisions, but never encouraged or approved them. By his steady conduct, joined with a general courtesy to all sorts of people, he acquired the esteem and love of all parties, and that more than any person of his degree that ever went before him. I need not note how next to impossible it is in this divided nation, for the most consummate prudence to steer through the variety of interests and gain an universal good opinion, or indeed avoid universal censure. How the prince attained that great point I shall not attempt to examine; but this I think ought to be recorded to posterity, that one man in Britain was found, of whom no man spoke evil,—andthis was he!" [vol. iv. p. 409.]—Ed.[56]Lord Buchan was so obliging as to communicate the subjoined extract of a letter to his lordship's grandfather, the earl of Buchan, from De Foe, dated the 29th of May, 1711:—"The person, with whom I endeavoured to plant the interest of your lordship's friend, has been strangely taken up, since I had that occasion; viz., first, in suffering the operation of the surgeons to heal the wound of the assassin; and since, in accumulating honours from parliament, the queen, and the people. On Thursday evening her majesty created him earl Mortimer, earl of Oxford, and lord Harley of Wigmore: and we expect that to-morrow in council he will have the white staff given him by the queen, and be declared lord high treasurer. I wrote this yesterday; and this day, May the 29th, he is made lord high treasurer of Great Britain, and carried the white staff before the queen this morning to chapel."[57]Appeal, p. 16.[58]With the present Life of De Foe, by Mr. Chalmers, prefixed. In this year he closed the fifth volume of the Review. He goes at great length into the affairs of Scotland, especially religious. For the freedom of his remarks in protesting against innovations upon the Scotch establishment, the Review was prosecuted by the grand jury, but the prosecution was soon stopped. He also contended vigorously against licensing the press, and for the Copyright Bill, which subsequently passed. He attacked Dr. Sacheverell for his celebrated sermon on the 5th of November, at St. Paul's. And he published a sixth volume of the Review. He there exposed stock-jobbing;—he refers to his frequently repeated anticipations of the eventual defeat of Charles XII. in relation to the battle of Pultowa; and he pays great attention, as before, to Scotch affairs.—Ed.[59]Mr. Chalmers here seems to be mistaken. De Foe wrote neither of these works. The first Mr. Wilson tells us was written by Oldmixon. De Foe, indeed, in order to expose the folly of the high tory party, who had procured several addresses to the queen, and which were published by them as an indication, "that the sense of the nation is express for the doctrine of passive obedience and non-resistance, and for her majesty's hereditary title to the throne of her ancestors," published a counter manifesto, A New Test of the Sense of the Nation: being a modest Comparison between the Addresses to the late King James and those to her present Majesty. In order to show how far the sense of the nation may be judged of by either of them. 1710. His object is of course to expose the folly of supposing that the addresses represented the real feeling of the country. In a strain of great irony, he says; "The practice of addressing has cheated many already; a jest that was put upon Richard Cromwell, and yet they deprived him three weeks afterwards. It was a second time put upon king James II. and they all flew in his face a year after. And I could give some instances of the little value that has been put upon it since, even such as one would think the very people themselves expect,—that for time to come addressing should pass for nothing with their princes."—Ed.[60]Review, vol. vii. No. 95.[61]The following letter to Mr. J. Dyer, in Shoe-lane, who was then employed by the leaders of the tories, in circulating news and insinuations through the country, will show the literary manners of those times, and convey some anecdotes, which are nowhere else preserved. The original letter is in the Museum, Harl. MSS. No. 7001. fol. 269.Mr. Dyer,I have your letter. I am rather glad to find you put it upon the trial who was aggressor, than justify a thing which I am sure you cannot approve; and in this I assure you I am far from injuring you, and refer you to the time when long since you had wrote I was fled from justice: one Sammon being taken up for printing a libel, and I being then on a journey, nor the least charge against me for being concerned in it by anybody but your letter:—also many unkind personal reflections on me in your letter, when I was in Scotland, on the affair of the Union, and I assure you, when my paper had not in the least mentioned you, and those I refer to time and date for the proof of.I mention this only in defence of my last letter, in which I said no more of it than to let you see I did not merit such treatment, and could nevertheless be content to render any service to you, though I thought myself hardly used.But to state the matter fairly between you and I [me], a writing for different interests, and so possibly coming under an unavoidable necessity of jarring in several cases: I am ready to make a fair truce of honour with you, viz., that if what either party are doing, or saying, that may clash with the party we are for, and urge us to speak, it shall be done without naming either's name, and without personal reflections; and thus we may differ still, and yet preserve both the Christian and the gentleman.This I think is an offer may satisfy you. I have not been desirous of giving just offence to you, neither would I to any man, however I may differ from him; and I see no reason why I should affront a man's person, because I do not join with him in principle. I please myself with being the first proposer of so fair a treaty with you, because I believe, as you cannot deny its being very honourable, so it is not less so in coming first from me, who I believe could convince you of my having been the first and most ill-treated—for further proof of which I refer you to your letters, at the time I was threatened by the envoy of the king of Sweden.However, Mr. Dyer, this is a method which may end what is past, and prevent what is future; and if refused, the future part I am sure cannot lie at my door.As to your letter, your proposal is so agreeable to me, that truly without it I could not have taken the thing at all; for it would have been a trouble intolerable, both to you as well as me, to take your letter every post, first from you, and then send it to the post-house.Your method of sending to the black box, is just what I designed to propose, and Mr. Shaw will doubtless take it of you: if you think it needful for me to speak to him it shall be done—what I want to know is only the charge, and that you will order it constantly to be sent, upon hinting whereof I shall send you the names. Wishing you success in all things (your opinions of government excepted.)I am,Your humble servant,De Foe.Newington, June 17th,1710.[62]Arnott's Edinburgh. The second newspaper ever published in Scotland. During this period he published the seventh volume of the Review, which is chiefly occupied by home affairs.[63]De Foe had, many years before Harley proposed it in parliament, suggested an establishment of a South-sea trade, not only for commercial advantage, but as an effectual mode of crippling Spain and France. "I had the honour to lay a proposal before his late majesty king William, in the beginning of this war, for carrying the war, not into Old Spain, but into America: which proposal his majesty approved of, and fully proposed to put it in execution, had not death, to our unspeakable grief, prevented him. And yet I would have my readers distinguish with me, that there is always a manifest difference between carrying on a war with America and settling a trade there; and I shall not fail to speak distinctly to this difference in its turn." He then points out the circumstances of the trade, and distinctly warns his countrymen against those rash and extravagant speculations which they unfortunately persisted to indulge in, and which caused the ruin of so many persons. "I am far from designing to discourage this new undertaking, which I profess to believe a very happy one; but to correct these wild notions, it seems needful to ascertain what we are to understand by a trade to the South Seas, and what not; that in the first place our enemies may not make a wrong improvement of it, our friends in Spain may not take umbrage at it, and our people at home may not grow big with wild expectations, which might end in chagrin and disappointment. There is room enough on the western coast of America for us to establish a flourishing trade without encroaching upon the Spaniards. The industry and enterprise of the English in such a situation would open a wide door for the consumption of our manufactures, and bring a vast revenue of wealth to our own country." [Review, vol. viii. p. 165. 274.] They are the same views substantially as those he afterwards maintained in the pamphlet mentioned by Mr. Chalmers in the text.—Ed.[64]He also vindicated the memory of William III., who had been fiercely attacked for the Partition Treaty, by a pamphlet rather long and quaint—The Felonious Treaty: or, an Inquiry into the Reasons which moved his late Majesty King William, of Glorious Memory, to enter into a Treaty at ten several times, with the King of France, for the Partition of the Spanish Monarchy. With an Essay, proving that it was always the sense both of King William and of all the Confederates, and even of the Grand Alliance itself, that the Spanish Monarchy should never be united in the Person of the Emperor. 1711. In the year 1712, he vigorously attacked the persecuting bill introduced by lord Nottingham, by which dissenters were to be excluded from civil employments, and persons in office were forbidden to attend dissenting places of worship, under severe penalties. De Foe not only kept up a galling fire in his Reviews, but published a pamphlet on the subject, entituled, An Essay on the History of Parties and Persecution in Britain: beginning with a brief Account of the Test Act, and an Historical Inquiry into the Reasons, the Original, and the Consequences of the Occasional Conformity of the Dissenters: with some Remarks on the recent attempts already made and now making for an Occasional Bill: inquiring how far the same may be esteemed a Preservative of the Church, or an Injury to the Dissenters. He seems to have renewed the attack not only against that measure, but also against a similar bill introduced to authorise the use of the liturgy in Scotland, in a pamphlet which Mr. Wilson says bears undoubted evidence of being De Foe's, although never inserted in any list of his writings, entituled, The Present State of Parties in Great Britain: particularly an Inquiry into the State of the Dissenters in England, and the Presbyterians in Scotland: their religious and politic Interest considered, as it respects their Circumstances before and since the late Acts against Occasional Conformity in England, and for Toleration of Common Prayer in Scotland. In this work he goes into a lengthened history of the dissenters, and strongly recommends union amongst all bodies of them. He also in this year vigorously opposed the tax upon newspapers, which was enforced in 1712. The eighth volume of the Review closed in July, 1712. Trade and war are the main subjects discussed in it.—Ed.[65]The first Mercator was published on the 26th of May, 1713; the last on the 20th of July, 1714: and they were written by William Brown and his assistants, with great knowledge, great strength, and great sweetness, considering how much party then embittered every composition. The British Merchant, which opposed the Mercator, and which was compiled by Henry Martyn and his associates, has fewer facts, less argument, and more factiousness. It began on the 1st of August, 1713, and ended the 27th of July, 1714. I have spoken of both from my own convictions, without regarding the declamations which have continued to pervert the public opinion from that epoch to the present times. De Foe was struck at in the third number of the British Merchant, and plainly mentioned in the fourth. Mr. Daniel Foe may change his name from Review to Mercator, from Mercator to any other title, yet still his singular genius shall be distinguished by his inimitable way of writing. Thus personal sarcasm was introduced to supply deficience of facts, or weakness of reasoning. When Charles King republished The British Merchant in volumes, among various changes, he expunged, with other personalities, the name of De Foe.[66]It is now sufficiently known, that Lord Oxford had relinquished the Treaty of Commerce to its fate, before it was finally debated in parliament. See much curious matter on this subject in Macpherson's State Papers, vol. ii. p. 421-23. It is there said, that he gave up the commercial treaty, in compliment to sir Thomas Hanmer, as he would by no means be an occasion of a breach among friends. The treasurer had other reasons: the treaty had been made by Bolingbroke, whom he did not love; the lords Anglesea and Abingdon had made extravagant demands for their support; and, like a wise man, he thought it idle to drive a nail that would not go. Yet lord Halifax boasted to the Hanoverian minister, that he alone had been the occasion of the treaty being rejected. [Same papers, p. 509-47.][67]He attacked it first in 1713, in An Essay on the Treaty of Commerce with France, with necessary Expositions.[68]It closed May, 1713, with the ninth volume.[69]State of Wit, 1711, which is reprinted in the Supplement to Swift's Works.[70]Itwasordered to be destroyed.[71]The late History of Halifax relates, that Daniel De Foe, being forced to abscond, on account of his political writings, resided at Halifax, in the Back-lane, at the sign of the Rose and Crown, being known to Dr. Nettleton, the physician, and the Rev. Mr. Priestley, minister of a dissenting congregation there. Mr. Watson is mistaken when he supposes that De Foe wrote his Jure Divino here, which had been published previously in 1706; and he is equally mistaken, when he says, that De Foe had made an improper use of the papers of Selkirk, whose story had been often published.[72]The pamphlets mentioned in the text were filled with palpable banter. He recommends the Pretender by saying, That the prince would confer on every one the privilege of wearing wooden shoes, and at the same time ease the nobility and gentry of the hazard and expense of winter journeys to parliament.[73]The pardon is dated on the 13th of November, 1713, and is signed by Bolingbroke. See it set out verbatim. Appeal to Honour and Justice.[74]See Boyer's Political State, Oldmixon's History, &c.[75]It is universally said by the sellers and buyers of old books, that John, duke of Argyle, was the real author of The Secret History of the White Staff. His grace, indeed, is not in the Catalogue of Royal and Noble Authors. Whether the duke wrote this petty pamphlet may be doubted; but there can be no doubt that De Foe was not the author: for he solemnly asserts by his Appeal, in 1715, That he had written nothing since the queen's death. The internal evidence is stronger than this positive assertion.[76]In the year 1714, De Foe pleaded the cause of religious liberty in his most effective manner. He was roused to action by the bill then passing parliament, "to prevent the growth of schism," which was of course only another name for intolerance. By this bill, all schoolmasters were required to be licensed by the bishop, and have a certificate of conformity from the minister of his parish! De Foe of course could not be silent on such an occasion, and he published The Remedy worse than the Disease: or Reasons against passing the Bill for preventing the Growth of Schism; to which is added, a Brief Discourse of Toleration and Persecution, showing their unavoidable effects, good or bad, and proving that neither Diversity of Religion, nor Diversity in the same Religion, are dangerous, much less inconsistent with good Government. In a Letter to a noble Earl.Hæc sunt enim fundamenta firmissima nostræ libertatis, sui quemque juris et retinendi et dimittendi esse dominum.Cic. in Orat. pro Balbo. 1714.[77]The most solemn asseverations, and the most unanswerable arguments of our author, were not, after all, believed. When Charles King republished The British Merchant, in 1721, he without a scruple attributed The Mercator to a hireling writer of a weekly paper called the Review. And Anderson, at a still later period, goes further in his Chronology of Commerce, and names De Foe, as the hireling writer of the Mercator, and other papers in favour of the French treaty of trade. We can now judge with the impartiality of arbitrators: on the one hand, there are the living challenge, and the death-bed declaration of De Foe; on the other, the mere surmise and unauthorised assertion of King, Anderson, and others, who detract from their own veracity by their own factiousness, or foolery. It is surely time to free ourselves from prejudices of every kind, and to disregard the sound of names as much as the falsehoods of party.[78]It was entered at Stationers'-hall, for J. Roberts, the 18th of February, 1715-16.[79]2nd Mem. p. 27, &c.[80]The family of George I. had been instructed by the copy of this book, which is in the Museum. It would seem from the title-page and Mr. Wright's letter being printed on a different paper from the work itself, that both were added after the first publication. The Family Instructor and Mr. Wright's letter were entered at Stationers'-hall, for Emanuel Mathews, on the 31st of March, 1715.[81]When Mr. Chalmers wrote, it had been reprinted at least seventeen times. It is a work which has had great circulation.[82]Mr. Wilson considers that De Foe, in the year 1717, published the Memoirs of the Church of Scotland, in Four Periods: with an Appendix of some Transactions since the Union. [Life of De Foe, vol. iii. p. 418.] And also the Life of Dr. Daniel Williams, the eminent presbyterian divine, founder of the well-known dissenters' library, in Redcross-street. [Ib. p. 423.][83]The title was, The Life and strange surprising Adventures of Robinson Crusoe, of York, Mariner, who lived eight-and-twenty Years all alone in an uninhabited Island on the Coast of America, near the mouth of the great River Oroonoque, having been cast on shore by Shipwreck, wherein all the men perished but himself. With an Account how he was at last strangely delivered by Pirates. Written by Himself.[84]"No fiction in any language," said Dr. Blair in his elegant Lectures on Rhetoric, "was ever better supported than the Adventures of Robinson Crusoe. While it is carried on with that appearance of truth and simplicity, which takes a strong hold of the imagination of all readers, it suggests at the same time very useful instruction, by showing how much the native power of man may be exerted for surmounting the difficulties of any external situation." "Robinson Crusoe," said Marmontel, "is the first book I ever read with exquisite pleasure; and I believe every boy in Europe might say the same thing." In his Emile, Rousseau says, "Since we must have books, this is one, which, in my opinion, is a most excellent treatise on natural education. This is the first my Emilias shall read; his whole library shall long consist of this work only, which shall preserve an eminent rank to the very last. It shall be the text to which all our conversations on natural science are to serve only as a comment. It shall be a guide during our progress to maturity of judgment; and so long as our taste is not adulterated, the perusal of this book will afford us pleasure. And what surprising book is this? Is it Aristotle? Is it Pliny? Is it Buffon? No, it is Robinson Crusoe." In this judgment Dr. Beattie concurred.—Ed.[85]The title was, The further Adventures of Robinson Crusoe; being the second and last Part of his Life, and the strange surprising Accounts of his Travels round three Parts of the Globe. Written by Himself. To which is added, a Map of the World, in which is delineated the Voyages of Robinson Crusoe. 1719.[86]The whole story of Selkirk is told in Woodes Rogers' voyage, which he published in 1712, from p. 125 to 131, inclusive: whence it appears that Selkirk had preserved no pen, ink, or paper, and had lost his language; so that he had no journal or papers, which he could communicate, or by others could be stolen. There is an account of Selkirk in The Englishman, No. 26, written by Steele. The particular manner how Alexander Selkirk lived four years and four months, in the isle of Juan Fernandez, is related in captain Cooks's voyage into the South Sea, which was published in 1712. And Selkirk's tale was told in the Memoirs of Literature, vol. v. p. 118: so that the world was fully possessed of Selkirk's story, in 1712, seven years prior to the publication of Crusoe's Adventures. Nor were his adventures singular; for, Ringrose mentions in his account of captain Sharp's voyage, a person who had escaped singly from a ship that had been wrecked on Juan Fernandez, and who lived alone five years before he was relieved: and Dampier mentions a Mosquito indian, who having been accidentally left on this island, subsisted three years solitarily, till that voyager carried him off. From which of these De Foe borrowed his great incident, it is not easy to discover. In the preface to The Serious Reflections, he indeed says, "That there is a man alive and well known, the actions of whose life are the just subject of these volumes, and to whom the most part of the story directly alludes." This turns the scale in favour of Selkirk. Nor, was the name of Crusoe wholly fictitious; for, among De Foe's contemporaries, John Dunton speaks of Timothy Crusoe, who was called the Golden Preacher, and was so great a textuary, that he could pray two hours together in scripture language; but, he was not arrived at perfection, as appeared by his sloth in tying the conjugal knot; yet his repentance was sincere and public, and I fear not but he is now a glorified saint in heaven. [Life and Errors, p. 461.] The whole story of Selkirk, as told by Rogers, is reprinted in the present edition. Rob. Crusoe, vol. i. p. xxiii.
[36]Mr. Wilson observes of the Review, "That it did not outlive its day, may be attributed to the great proportion of temporary matter with which it abounded. There are to be found in its pages, however, many instructive pieces of a moral and political nature, besides others devoted to amusement, and also some useful historical documents. A complete copy of the work is not known to be in existence. It deserves to be remarked that De Foe was the sole writer of the nine quarto volumes that compose the work, a prodigious undertaking for one man, especially when we consider his other numerous engagements of a literary nature." Mr. Wilson then refers to an able eulogium by Dr. Drake. [Essays on the Tatler, vol. i. p. 23.] "Contemporary with Leslies' Remains, came forward, under a periodical dress, and of a kind far superior to anything which had hitherto appeared, the Review of Daniel De Foe, a man of undoubted genius, and who, deviating from the accustomed route, had chalked out a new path for himself. The chief topics were as usual, news foreign and domestic, and politics; to these, however, were added the various concerns of trade; and to render the undertaking more palatable and popular, he with much judgment instituted what he termed, perhaps with no great propriety, a 'Scandal Club,' and whose amusement it was to agitate questions in divinity, morals, war, language, poetry, love, marriage, &c. The introduction of this club, and the subjects of its discussion, it is obvious approximated the Review much nearer than any preceding work to our first classical model." The first number of the Review was published Feb. 19th, 1704, as A Weekly Review of the Affairs of France, purged from the Errors and Partiality of Newswriters and Petty Statesmen of all sides. It was at first a weekly publication, but afterwards came out twice a week, as it was changed to half a sheet from a whole one. The price was one penny. Mr. Wilson, in his valuable Life of De Foe, gives long extracts from the Review, a work, he observes, now very difficult to be met with. "A considerable portion of the first volume," observes that gentleman, "is devoted to foreign politics, more particularly the power and grandeur of the French monarchy, for the reduction of which within reasonable limits the principal nations of Europe were then embroiled in an expensive war. In estimating the powers and resources of France, which had attained their summit under Louis XIV., he was anxious to guard his countrymen against the folly of despising such an enemy." Mr. Wilson then gives copious and interesting extracts from the Review, to which we must refer the reader to his able biography, [vol. ii. ch. 10.] The volume closed in one hundred and two numbers, in February, 1705, and had the following title prefixed: A Review of the Affairs of France, and of all Europe, as influenced by that Nation: being Historical Observations on the Public Transactions of the World; purged from the Errors and Partiality of Newswriters and Petty Statesmen of all sides. With an Entertaining Part in every sheet; being Advice from the Scandal Club to the Curious Inquirers, in answer to Letters sent them for that purpose.
[36]Mr. Wilson observes of the Review, "That it did not outlive its day, may be attributed to the great proportion of temporary matter with which it abounded. There are to be found in its pages, however, many instructive pieces of a moral and political nature, besides others devoted to amusement, and also some useful historical documents. A complete copy of the work is not known to be in existence. It deserves to be remarked that De Foe was the sole writer of the nine quarto volumes that compose the work, a prodigious undertaking for one man, especially when we consider his other numerous engagements of a literary nature." Mr. Wilson then refers to an able eulogium by Dr. Drake. [Essays on the Tatler, vol. i. p. 23.] "Contemporary with Leslies' Remains, came forward, under a periodical dress, and of a kind far superior to anything which had hitherto appeared, the Review of Daniel De Foe, a man of undoubted genius, and who, deviating from the accustomed route, had chalked out a new path for himself. The chief topics were as usual, news foreign and domestic, and politics; to these, however, were added the various concerns of trade; and to render the undertaking more palatable and popular, he with much judgment instituted what he termed, perhaps with no great propriety, a 'Scandal Club,' and whose amusement it was to agitate questions in divinity, morals, war, language, poetry, love, marriage, &c. The introduction of this club, and the subjects of its discussion, it is obvious approximated the Review much nearer than any preceding work to our first classical model." The first number of the Review was published Feb. 19th, 1704, as A Weekly Review of the Affairs of France, purged from the Errors and Partiality of Newswriters and Petty Statesmen of all sides. It was at first a weekly publication, but afterwards came out twice a week, as it was changed to half a sheet from a whole one. The price was one penny. Mr. Wilson, in his valuable Life of De Foe, gives long extracts from the Review, a work, he observes, now very difficult to be met with. "A considerable portion of the first volume," observes that gentleman, "is devoted to foreign politics, more particularly the power and grandeur of the French monarchy, for the reduction of which within reasonable limits the principal nations of Europe were then embroiled in an expensive war. In estimating the powers and resources of France, which had attained their summit under Louis XIV., he was anxious to guard his countrymen against the folly of despising such an enemy." Mr. Wilson then gives copious and interesting extracts from the Review, to which we must refer the reader to his able biography, [vol. ii. ch. 10.] The volume closed in one hundred and two numbers, in February, 1705, and had the following title prefixed: A Review of the Affairs of France, and of all Europe, as influenced by that Nation: being Historical Observations on the Public Transactions of the World; purged from the Errors and Partiality of Newswriters and Petty Statesmen of all sides. With an Entertaining Part in every sheet; being Advice from the Scandal Club to the Curious Inquirers, in answer to Letters sent them for that purpose.
[37]The following is the account of this storm by a contemporary historian:—"About the middle of the night, a violent wind arose, which blew down the steeples of churches, tore off the tiles, and rolled up the leads of houses, tossing them through the air to great distances, rooted up the largest trees, or broke them off short, carried hayricks and stacks of corn to great heights, scattered them abroad, and beat down the chimneys in divers places, to the destruction of many people in the towns. The ships which lay in the mouth of the Thames and other parts, were driven foul of one another. The sailors, not knowing what to avoid, or which way to steer, abandoned themselves to despair, expecting every moment to be their last. Some ships having broke their cables, and lost their anchors, drove before the wind, without helm or steerage, and either dashed one another to pieces, or were swallowed up in the raging deep. Some were driven out to sea, without any rigging; and others run upon the sands, rocks, and shores. The admiral was driven to sea without mast or anchor, from the Downs, and lost together with his ship; and other ships which had been in his squadron were driven to the coast of Holland in five hours' time, with their masts broken, without any art or direction, and others to other places. The watch-towers, with the watchmen, were overthrown together; and the destruction which this storm occasioned was long remembered with awe and horror. In the space of one tempestuous night, a gallant English fleet was reduced to nothing: and it is incredible what a dismal appearance there was at London and other towns. The mathematicians observed that the force of this tempest did not extend further south than the river Loire, in France, nor further north than the river Trent, in England." [Cunningham, vol. i. p. 356.]
[37]The following is the account of this storm by a contemporary historian:—
"About the middle of the night, a violent wind arose, which blew down the steeples of churches, tore off the tiles, and rolled up the leads of houses, tossing them through the air to great distances, rooted up the largest trees, or broke them off short, carried hayricks and stacks of corn to great heights, scattered them abroad, and beat down the chimneys in divers places, to the destruction of many people in the towns. The ships which lay in the mouth of the Thames and other parts, were driven foul of one another. The sailors, not knowing what to avoid, or which way to steer, abandoned themselves to despair, expecting every moment to be their last. Some ships having broke their cables, and lost their anchors, drove before the wind, without helm or steerage, and either dashed one another to pieces, or were swallowed up in the raging deep. Some were driven out to sea, without any rigging; and others run upon the sands, rocks, and shores. The admiral was driven to sea without mast or anchor, from the Downs, and lost together with his ship; and other ships which had been in his squadron were driven to the coast of Holland in five hours' time, with their masts broken, without any art or direction, and others to other places. The watch-towers, with the watchmen, were overthrown together; and the destruction which this storm occasioned was long remembered with awe and horror. In the space of one tempestuous night, a gallant English fleet was reduced to nothing: and it is incredible what a dismal appearance there was at London and other towns. The mathematicians observed that the force of this tempest did not extend further south than the river Loire, in France, nor further north than the river Trent, in England." [Cunningham, vol. i. p. 356.]
[38]By his Appeal, in 1715.
[38]By his Appeal, in 1715.
[39]Before the publication of this Hymn, he published a poem on himself, An Elegy on the Author of the True-born Englishman. In the preface to this poem he bitterly complains of the slanders to which he was constantly subject. He might have reflected, however, that such a fate was unavoidable to a political writer in those factious times; and that the more independent the author, the more likely he was to be exposed to the double shafts of partisan malice.—Ed.
[39]Before the publication of this Hymn, he published a poem on himself, An Elegy on the Author of the True-born Englishman. In the preface to this poem he bitterly complains of the slanders to which he was constantly subject. He might have reflected, however, that such a fate was unavoidable to a political writer in those factious times; and that the more independent the author, the more likely he was to be exposed to the double shafts of partisan malice.—Ed.
[40]It wasnoton this occasion, but for one of the Reviews published in 1707, in which, he criticises the apparent supineness of Charles XII.—Ed.
[40]It wasnoton this occasion, but for one of the Reviews published in 1707, in which, he criticises the apparent supineness of Charles XII.—Ed.
[41]The title of a pamphlet published by a Dr. Browne.
[41]The title of a pamphlet published by a Dr. Browne.
[42]The recent discussion of the Poor Law Amendment Act has thrown much additional light on this question. During this year, in addition to the works mentioned by Mr. Chalmers, De Foe advocated the rights of Dissenters in the colony of Carolina, in America, where they had been hardly treated; first deprived of a seat in the house of assembly, and then subjected to stringent laws. De Foe, while their affairs were being made matter of discussion in parliament, published Party Tyranny; or an Occasional Bill in Miniature, as now practised in Carolina. Humbly offered to the Consideration of both Houses of Parliament.—Ed.
[42]The recent discussion of the Poor Law Amendment Act has thrown much additional light on this question. During this year, in addition to the works mentioned by Mr. Chalmers, De Foe advocated the rights of Dissenters in the colony of Carolina, in America, where they had been hardly treated; first deprived of a seat in the house of assembly, and then subjected to stringent laws. De Foe, while their affairs were being made matter of discussion in parliament, published Party Tyranny; or an Occasional Bill in Miniature, as now practised in Carolina. Humbly offered to the Consideration of both Houses of Parliament.—Ed.
[43]The motion of lord Haversham in the house of lords, was to request the queen to invite over the presumptive heir to the crown, which would have produced the mischief of two rival courts. De Foe in this pamphlet gives us one of those passages so extremely interesting, being a sketch of his own life by himself. "If I were to run through the black list of the encouragements I have met with in the world, while I have embarked myself in the raging sea of the nation's troubles, this vindication would be ashamed to call them encouragements. How, in pursuit of peace, I have brought myself into innumerable broils; how many, exasperated by the sting of truth, have vowed my destruction; and how many ways attempted it; how I stand alone in the world, abandoned by those very people that own I have done them service; how I am sold and betrayed by friends, abused and cheated by barbarous and unnatural relations, sued for other men's debts, and stripped naked by public injustice, of what should have enabled me to pay my own; how, with a numerous family, and with no helps but my own industry, I have forced my way with undiscouraged diligence, through a sea of debt and misfortune, and reduced them, exclusive of composition, from seventeen to less than five thousand pounds; how, in gaols, in retreats, in all manner of extremities, I have supported myself without the assistance of friends or relations; how I still live without this Vindicator's suggested methods, and am so far from making my fortune by this way ofscribbling, that no man more desires a limitation and regulation of the press than myself; especially that speeches in parliament might not be printed without order of parliament, and poor authors betrayed to engage with men too powerful for them in more forcible arguments than those of reason. A man ought not to be afraid at any time to be mean to be honest. Pardon me, therefore, with some warmth, to say, that neither the Vindicator, nor all his informers, can, with their utmost inquiry, make it appear that I am, or ever was, mercenary. And as there is a justice due from all men, of what dignity or quality soever, the wrong done me in this can be vindicated by nothing but proving the fact, which I am a most humble petitioner that he would be pleased to do, or else give me leave to speak of it in such terms as so great an injury demands. No, my lord, pardon my freedom, I contemn and abhor everything and every man that can be taxed with that name, let his dignity be what it will. I was ever true to one principle; I never betrayed my master or my friend; I always espoused the cause of truth and liberty, was ever on one side, and that side was ever right. I have lived to be ruined for it; and I lived to see it triumph over tyranny, party-rage, and persecution principles, and am sorry to see any man abandon it. I thank God this world cannot bid a price sufficient to bribe me. It is the principle I ever lived by, and shall espouse while I live, that a man ought to die rather than betray his friend, his cause, or his master."—Ed.
[43]The motion of lord Haversham in the house of lords, was to request the queen to invite over the presumptive heir to the crown, which would have produced the mischief of two rival courts. De Foe in this pamphlet gives us one of those passages so extremely interesting, being a sketch of his own life by himself. "If I were to run through the black list of the encouragements I have met with in the world, while I have embarked myself in the raging sea of the nation's troubles, this vindication would be ashamed to call them encouragements. How, in pursuit of peace, I have brought myself into innumerable broils; how many, exasperated by the sting of truth, have vowed my destruction; and how many ways attempted it; how I stand alone in the world, abandoned by those very people that own I have done them service; how I am sold and betrayed by friends, abused and cheated by barbarous and unnatural relations, sued for other men's debts, and stripped naked by public injustice, of what should have enabled me to pay my own; how, with a numerous family, and with no helps but my own industry, I have forced my way with undiscouraged diligence, through a sea of debt and misfortune, and reduced them, exclusive of composition, from seventeen to less than five thousand pounds; how, in gaols, in retreats, in all manner of extremities, I have supported myself without the assistance of friends or relations; how I still live without this Vindicator's suggested methods, and am so far from making my fortune by this way ofscribbling, that no man more desires a limitation and regulation of the press than myself; especially that speeches in parliament might not be printed without order of parliament, and poor authors betrayed to engage with men too powerful for them in more forcible arguments than those of reason. A man ought not to be afraid at any time to be mean to be honest. Pardon me, therefore, with some warmth, to say, that neither the Vindicator, nor all his informers, can, with their utmost inquiry, make it appear that I am, or ever was, mercenary. And as there is a justice due from all men, of what dignity or quality soever, the wrong done me in this can be vindicated by nothing but proving the fact, which I am a most humble petitioner that he would be pleased to do, or else give me leave to speak of it in such terms as so great an injury demands. No, my lord, pardon my freedom, I contemn and abhor everything and every man that can be taxed with that name, let his dignity be what it will. I was ever true to one principle; I never betrayed my master or my friend; I always espoused the cause of truth and liberty, was ever on one side, and that side was ever right. I have lived to be ruined for it; and I lived to see it triumph over tyranny, party-rage, and persecution principles, and am sorry to see any man abandon it. I thank God this world cannot bid a price sufficient to bribe me. It is the principle I ever lived by, and shall espouse while I live, that a man ought to die rather than betray his friend, his cause, or his master."—Ed.
[44]9 Anne, c. 19.
[44]9 Anne, c. 19.
[45]The pieces in this volume are: 1. New Discovery of an Old Intrigue. 2. More Reformation. 3. Elegy on the Author of the True-born Englishman. 4. The Storm: an Essay. 5. A Hymn to the Pillory. 6. Hymn to Victory. 7. The Pacificator. 8. The Double Welcome to the Duke of Marlborough. 9. Dissenters' Answer to the High Church Challenge. 10. A Challenge of Peace to the whole Nation. 11. Peace without Union. 12. More Short Ways. 13. New Test of the Church of England's Honesty. 14. Serious Inquiry. 15. The Dissenters Misrepresented. 16. The Parallel. 17. Giving Alms no Charity. 18. Royal Religion.
[45]The pieces in this volume are: 1. New Discovery of an Old Intrigue. 2. More Reformation. 3. Elegy on the Author of the True-born Englishman. 4. The Storm: an Essay. 5. A Hymn to the Pillory. 6. Hymn to Victory. 7. The Pacificator. 8. The Double Welcome to the Duke of Marlborough. 9. Dissenters' Answer to the High Church Challenge. 10. A Challenge of Peace to the whole Nation. 11. Peace without Union. 12. More Short Ways. 13. New Test of the Church of England's Honesty. 14. Serious Inquiry. 15. The Dissenters Misrepresented. 16. The Parallel. 17. Giving Alms no Charity. 18. Royal Religion.
[46]In the year 1705, he also published a satirical poem, entituled, The Dyet of Poland: printed at Dantzick. He sketches the leading politicians of the day under Polish names; William III. being represented as Sobieski. He also published A True Relation, of the Apparition of one Mrs. Veal, the next day after her death, to one Mrs. Bargrave, at Canterbury, the 8th of Sept. 1705, which Apparition recommends the perusal of Drelincourt's Book of Consolation against the Fear of Death. This work it is said was written by De Foe to make Drelincourt's sell, which was before a heavy book in the market, and of course produced the desired effect. The future author of Robinson Crusoe may be distinctly seen in this work. Sir Walter Scott considered it one of his happiest efforts, and marked with the distinct impress of De Foe. He observes "that De Foe has put in force within those few pages, peculiar specimens of his art of recommending the most improbable narrative by his specious and serious mode of telling it. Whoever will read it as told by De Foe himself, will agree that could the thing have happened in reality, so it would have been told. In short, the whole is so distinctly circumstantial, that were it not for the impossibility, or extreme improbability at least, of such an occurrence, the evidence could not but support the story." In this year the second volume of the Review was completed. The early part of it refers to matters of trade, which he says he had intended to write more fully upon, but was diverted by domestic affairs; and that his labours in behalf of peace had given great satisfaction.—Ed.
[46]In the year 1705, he also published a satirical poem, entituled, The Dyet of Poland: printed at Dantzick. He sketches the leading politicians of the day under Polish names; William III. being represented as Sobieski. He also published A True Relation, of the Apparition of one Mrs. Veal, the next day after her death, to one Mrs. Bargrave, at Canterbury, the 8th of Sept. 1705, which Apparition recommends the perusal of Drelincourt's Book of Consolation against the Fear of Death. This work it is said was written by De Foe to make Drelincourt's sell, which was before a heavy book in the market, and of course produced the desired effect. The future author of Robinson Crusoe may be distinctly seen in this work. Sir Walter Scott considered it one of his happiest efforts, and marked with the distinct impress of De Foe. He observes "that De Foe has put in force within those few pages, peculiar specimens of his art of recommending the most improbable narrative by his specious and serious mode of telling it. Whoever will read it as told by De Foe himself, will agree that could the thing have happened in reality, so it would have been told. In short, the whole is so distinctly circumstantial, that were it not for the impossibility, or extreme improbability at least, of such an occurrence, the evidence could not but support the story." In this year the second volume of the Review was completed. The early part of it refers to matters of trade, which he says he had intended to write more fully upon, but was diverted by domestic affairs; and that his labours in behalf of peace had given great satisfaction.—Ed.
[47]Published the 10th of January, 1705-6. In May, 1706, he published a poem on the duke of Marlborough's great victory, entituled, On the Fight of Ramillies.
[47]Published the 10th of January, 1705-6. In May, 1706, he published a poem on the duke of Marlborough's great victory, entituled, On the Fight of Ramillies.
[48]It was partly republished in 1821, by Mr. Hone; who says in the preface, "De Foe was the ablest politician of his day, an energetic writer, and, better than all, an honest man; but not much of a poet. The Jure Divino is defective in argument and versification. It is likewise disfigured by injudicious repetitions; a large portion is directed to the politics of the time, and it is otherwise unfit for republication entire; but it abounds with energetic thoughts, forcible touches, and happy illustrations."—Ed.
[48]It was partly republished in 1821, by Mr. Hone; who says in the preface, "De Foe was the ablest politician of his day, an energetic writer, and, better than all, an honest man; but not much of a poet. The Jure Divino is defective in argument and versification. It is likewise disfigured by injudicious repetitions; a large portion is directed to the politics of the time, and it is otherwise unfit for republication entire; but it abounds with energetic thoughts, forcible touches, and happy illustrations."—Ed.
[49]Appeal, p. 16.
[49]Appeal, p. 16.
[50]See his History of the Union, p. 401.
[50]See his History of the Union, p. 401.
[51]Ibid. p. 379.
[51]Ibid. p. 379.
[52]Daniel De Foe. He had two names through life; and even when letters of administration were granted on his personal estate, some time after his death,DeFoe is added with anotherwise. We might thence infer that his father's name wasFoe, if we had not now better evidence of the fact.
[52]Daniel De Foe. He had two names through life; and even when letters of administration were granted on his personal estate, some time after his death,DeFoe is added with anotherwise. We might thence infer that his father's name wasFoe, if we had not now better evidence of the fact.
[53]Ibid. p. 223.
[53]Ibid. p. 223.
[54]History of the Union, p. 239.
[54]History of the Union, p. 239.
[55]Dr. Towers says, [Biograph. Brit.] "In this poem De Foe celebrates the courage of the Scots, and enumerates some of their military exploits. He endeavours to prove that the situation of Scotland rendered it well adapted for trade; he speaks honourably of the abilities of the inhabitants; he commends them for their learning, and their attention to religion; and he hints at the advantages which they might derive from a union with England. But though De Foe's poem was a panegyric upon Scotland and Scotsmen, it did not wholly consist of commendation. He takes notice of the evils that the common people suffered from their vassalage to their chiefs, and from their ignorance of the blessings of liberty. He also censures the Scots for not improving the natural advantages which their country possessed, and for neglecting their fishery; and he gives them some excellent advice." In 1707, he published a tract called, A Voice from the South; or an Address from some Protestant Dissenters in England to the Kirk of Scotland; the object being, as the title implies, to reconcile the presbyterians to the Union, then on the eve of completion.He also in that year published a third volume of the Review, in which he dwelt very much upon matters connected with trade. One passage relative to the poor and their management, shows that he was far beyond his age on that point, as on most others. "Perhaps he may give some needful hints as to the state of our poor, in which his judgment may differ from that of others, but he must be plain: and while he is no enemy to charity-hospitals and workhouses, he thinks that methods to keep our poor out of them, far exceed, both in prudence and charity, all the settlements and endeavours in the world to maintain them there. As to censure, he expects it. He writes to serve the world, not to please it. A few wise, calm, disinterested men, he always had the good hap to please and satisfy. By their judgment he desires still to be determined; and if he has any pride, it is that he may be approved by such. To the rest, he sedately says, their censure deserves no notice." In 1708 he published a fourth volume of the Review, in which he discusses the Union at great length. He also discusses the war, the policy of the Swedes, &c.; the insurrection in Hungary, the revolution in Naples. The great principles of liberty are here, as they always were by De Foe, maintained with energy and warmth; but De Foe's mind was essentially practical, and therefore moderate. In the following fine passage he displays his principle of action. "In all my writings, as well as in this paper, it has been my endeavour, and ever shall be, I hope, to steer the middle way between all our extremes, and while I am applauding the lustre of moderation, to practise it myself." He foresees, however, the fate of impartiality in the contests of faction. "If I might give a short hint to an impartial writer, it should be to tell him his fate. If he resolves to venture up the dangerous precipice of telling unbiassed truths, let him proclaim war with mankind,a la mode le pais de Pole, neither to give nor take quarter. If he tells the crimes of great men, they fall upon him with the iron hands of the law; if he tells their virtues, when they have any, then the mob attacks him with slander. But if he regards truth, let him expect martyrdom on both sides, and then he may go on fearless; and this is the course I take myself." [vol. iv. p. 593.]In 1708, prince George of Denmark, consort of queen Anne, died; and De Foe described his character in one of the Reviews. The recent circumstances in our own day, so analogous to that of prince George and the queen, make De Foe's sketch one of great interest. "Death has made a very deep incision in the public tranquillity, in the person of the prince of Denmark. His royal highness was a great and good man, a friend to England and her interest, and true and hearty in the cause of liberty.... If I had a design to run through the character of the prince, I would observe upon the excellency of his temper, the calmness of his passions, and the sedateness of his judgment, which commanded respect from the whole nation in a manner peculiar to himself; so that every party, however jarring and opposite, paid him their homage, although nothing was more averse to his temper than the divisions which unhappily agitate the nation. Nor can it be doubted that his highness derived peculiar satisfaction from his not interfering in public affairs more than his exalted station obliged him, since he saw it was impossible to do so without committing himself to a party, which he was always averse to. He sincerely lamented our divisions, but never encouraged or approved them. By his steady conduct, joined with a general courtesy to all sorts of people, he acquired the esteem and love of all parties, and that more than any person of his degree that ever went before him. I need not note how next to impossible it is in this divided nation, for the most consummate prudence to steer through the variety of interests and gain an universal good opinion, or indeed avoid universal censure. How the prince attained that great point I shall not attempt to examine; but this I think ought to be recorded to posterity, that one man in Britain was found, of whom no man spoke evil,—andthis was he!" [vol. iv. p. 409.]—Ed.
[55]Dr. Towers says, [Biograph. Brit.] "In this poem De Foe celebrates the courage of the Scots, and enumerates some of their military exploits. He endeavours to prove that the situation of Scotland rendered it well adapted for trade; he speaks honourably of the abilities of the inhabitants; he commends them for their learning, and their attention to religion; and he hints at the advantages which they might derive from a union with England. But though De Foe's poem was a panegyric upon Scotland and Scotsmen, it did not wholly consist of commendation. He takes notice of the evils that the common people suffered from their vassalage to their chiefs, and from their ignorance of the blessings of liberty. He also censures the Scots for not improving the natural advantages which their country possessed, and for neglecting their fishery; and he gives them some excellent advice." In 1707, he published a tract called, A Voice from the South; or an Address from some Protestant Dissenters in England to the Kirk of Scotland; the object being, as the title implies, to reconcile the presbyterians to the Union, then on the eve of completion.
He also in that year published a third volume of the Review, in which he dwelt very much upon matters connected with trade. One passage relative to the poor and their management, shows that he was far beyond his age on that point, as on most others. "Perhaps he may give some needful hints as to the state of our poor, in which his judgment may differ from that of others, but he must be plain: and while he is no enemy to charity-hospitals and workhouses, he thinks that methods to keep our poor out of them, far exceed, both in prudence and charity, all the settlements and endeavours in the world to maintain them there. As to censure, he expects it. He writes to serve the world, not to please it. A few wise, calm, disinterested men, he always had the good hap to please and satisfy. By their judgment he desires still to be determined; and if he has any pride, it is that he may be approved by such. To the rest, he sedately says, their censure deserves no notice." In 1708 he published a fourth volume of the Review, in which he discusses the Union at great length. He also discusses the war, the policy of the Swedes, &c.; the insurrection in Hungary, the revolution in Naples. The great principles of liberty are here, as they always were by De Foe, maintained with energy and warmth; but De Foe's mind was essentially practical, and therefore moderate. In the following fine passage he displays his principle of action. "In all my writings, as well as in this paper, it has been my endeavour, and ever shall be, I hope, to steer the middle way between all our extremes, and while I am applauding the lustre of moderation, to practise it myself." He foresees, however, the fate of impartiality in the contests of faction. "If I might give a short hint to an impartial writer, it should be to tell him his fate. If he resolves to venture up the dangerous precipice of telling unbiassed truths, let him proclaim war with mankind,a la mode le pais de Pole, neither to give nor take quarter. If he tells the crimes of great men, they fall upon him with the iron hands of the law; if he tells their virtues, when they have any, then the mob attacks him with slander. But if he regards truth, let him expect martyrdom on both sides, and then he may go on fearless; and this is the course I take myself." [vol. iv. p. 593.]
In 1708, prince George of Denmark, consort of queen Anne, died; and De Foe described his character in one of the Reviews. The recent circumstances in our own day, so analogous to that of prince George and the queen, make De Foe's sketch one of great interest. "Death has made a very deep incision in the public tranquillity, in the person of the prince of Denmark. His royal highness was a great and good man, a friend to England and her interest, and true and hearty in the cause of liberty.... If I had a design to run through the character of the prince, I would observe upon the excellency of his temper, the calmness of his passions, and the sedateness of his judgment, which commanded respect from the whole nation in a manner peculiar to himself; so that every party, however jarring and opposite, paid him their homage, although nothing was more averse to his temper than the divisions which unhappily agitate the nation. Nor can it be doubted that his highness derived peculiar satisfaction from his not interfering in public affairs more than his exalted station obliged him, since he saw it was impossible to do so without committing himself to a party, which he was always averse to. He sincerely lamented our divisions, but never encouraged or approved them. By his steady conduct, joined with a general courtesy to all sorts of people, he acquired the esteem and love of all parties, and that more than any person of his degree that ever went before him. I need not note how next to impossible it is in this divided nation, for the most consummate prudence to steer through the variety of interests and gain an universal good opinion, or indeed avoid universal censure. How the prince attained that great point I shall not attempt to examine; but this I think ought to be recorded to posterity, that one man in Britain was found, of whom no man spoke evil,—andthis was he!" [vol. iv. p. 409.]—Ed.
[56]Lord Buchan was so obliging as to communicate the subjoined extract of a letter to his lordship's grandfather, the earl of Buchan, from De Foe, dated the 29th of May, 1711:—"The person, with whom I endeavoured to plant the interest of your lordship's friend, has been strangely taken up, since I had that occasion; viz., first, in suffering the operation of the surgeons to heal the wound of the assassin; and since, in accumulating honours from parliament, the queen, and the people. On Thursday evening her majesty created him earl Mortimer, earl of Oxford, and lord Harley of Wigmore: and we expect that to-morrow in council he will have the white staff given him by the queen, and be declared lord high treasurer. I wrote this yesterday; and this day, May the 29th, he is made lord high treasurer of Great Britain, and carried the white staff before the queen this morning to chapel."
[56]Lord Buchan was so obliging as to communicate the subjoined extract of a letter to his lordship's grandfather, the earl of Buchan, from De Foe, dated the 29th of May, 1711:—"The person, with whom I endeavoured to plant the interest of your lordship's friend, has been strangely taken up, since I had that occasion; viz., first, in suffering the operation of the surgeons to heal the wound of the assassin; and since, in accumulating honours from parliament, the queen, and the people. On Thursday evening her majesty created him earl Mortimer, earl of Oxford, and lord Harley of Wigmore: and we expect that to-morrow in council he will have the white staff given him by the queen, and be declared lord high treasurer. I wrote this yesterday; and this day, May the 29th, he is made lord high treasurer of Great Britain, and carried the white staff before the queen this morning to chapel."
[57]Appeal, p. 16.
[57]Appeal, p. 16.
[58]With the present Life of De Foe, by Mr. Chalmers, prefixed. In this year he closed the fifth volume of the Review. He goes at great length into the affairs of Scotland, especially religious. For the freedom of his remarks in protesting against innovations upon the Scotch establishment, the Review was prosecuted by the grand jury, but the prosecution was soon stopped. He also contended vigorously against licensing the press, and for the Copyright Bill, which subsequently passed. He attacked Dr. Sacheverell for his celebrated sermon on the 5th of November, at St. Paul's. And he published a sixth volume of the Review. He there exposed stock-jobbing;—he refers to his frequently repeated anticipations of the eventual defeat of Charles XII. in relation to the battle of Pultowa; and he pays great attention, as before, to Scotch affairs.—Ed.
[58]With the present Life of De Foe, by Mr. Chalmers, prefixed. In this year he closed the fifth volume of the Review. He goes at great length into the affairs of Scotland, especially religious. For the freedom of his remarks in protesting against innovations upon the Scotch establishment, the Review was prosecuted by the grand jury, but the prosecution was soon stopped. He also contended vigorously against licensing the press, and for the Copyright Bill, which subsequently passed. He attacked Dr. Sacheverell for his celebrated sermon on the 5th of November, at St. Paul's. And he published a sixth volume of the Review. He there exposed stock-jobbing;—he refers to his frequently repeated anticipations of the eventual defeat of Charles XII. in relation to the battle of Pultowa; and he pays great attention, as before, to Scotch affairs.—Ed.
[59]Mr. Chalmers here seems to be mistaken. De Foe wrote neither of these works. The first Mr. Wilson tells us was written by Oldmixon. De Foe, indeed, in order to expose the folly of the high tory party, who had procured several addresses to the queen, and which were published by them as an indication, "that the sense of the nation is express for the doctrine of passive obedience and non-resistance, and for her majesty's hereditary title to the throne of her ancestors," published a counter manifesto, A New Test of the Sense of the Nation: being a modest Comparison between the Addresses to the late King James and those to her present Majesty. In order to show how far the sense of the nation may be judged of by either of them. 1710. His object is of course to expose the folly of supposing that the addresses represented the real feeling of the country. In a strain of great irony, he says; "The practice of addressing has cheated many already; a jest that was put upon Richard Cromwell, and yet they deprived him three weeks afterwards. It was a second time put upon king James II. and they all flew in his face a year after. And I could give some instances of the little value that has been put upon it since, even such as one would think the very people themselves expect,—that for time to come addressing should pass for nothing with their princes."—Ed.
[59]Mr. Chalmers here seems to be mistaken. De Foe wrote neither of these works. The first Mr. Wilson tells us was written by Oldmixon. De Foe, indeed, in order to expose the folly of the high tory party, who had procured several addresses to the queen, and which were published by them as an indication, "that the sense of the nation is express for the doctrine of passive obedience and non-resistance, and for her majesty's hereditary title to the throne of her ancestors," published a counter manifesto, A New Test of the Sense of the Nation: being a modest Comparison between the Addresses to the late King James and those to her present Majesty. In order to show how far the sense of the nation may be judged of by either of them. 1710. His object is of course to expose the folly of supposing that the addresses represented the real feeling of the country. In a strain of great irony, he says; "The practice of addressing has cheated many already; a jest that was put upon Richard Cromwell, and yet they deprived him three weeks afterwards. It was a second time put upon king James II. and they all flew in his face a year after. And I could give some instances of the little value that has been put upon it since, even such as one would think the very people themselves expect,—that for time to come addressing should pass for nothing with their princes."—Ed.
[60]Review, vol. vii. No. 95.
[60]Review, vol. vii. No. 95.
[61]The following letter to Mr. J. Dyer, in Shoe-lane, who was then employed by the leaders of the tories, in circulating news and insinuations through the country, will show the literary manners of those times, and convey some anecdotes, which are nowhere else preserved. The original letter is in the Museum, Harl. MSS. No. 7001. fol. 269.Mr. Dyer,I have your letter. I am rather glad to find you put it upon the trial who was aggressor, than justify a thing which I am sure you cannot approve; and in this I assure you I am far from injuring you, and refer you to the time when long since you had wrote I was fled from justice: one Sammon being taken up for printing a libel, and I being then on a journey, nor the least charge against me for being concerned in it by anybody but your letter:—also many unkind personal reflections on me in your letter, when I was in Scotland, on the affair of the Union, and I assure you, when my paper had not in the least mentioned you, and those I refer to time and date for the proof of.I mention this only in defence of my last letter, in which I said no more of it than to let you see I did not merit such treatment, and could nevertheless be content to render any service to you, though I thought myself hardly used.But to state the matter fairly between you and I [me], a writing for different interests, and so possibly coming under an unavoidable necessity of jarring in several cases: I am ready to make a fair truce of honour with you, viz., that if what either party are doing, or saying, that may clash with the party we are for, and urge us to speak, it shall be done without naming either's name, and without personal reflections; and thus we may differ still, and yet preserve both the Christian and the gentleman.This I think is an offer may satisfy you. I have not been desirous of giving just offence to you, neither would I to any man, however I may differ from him; and I see no reason why I should affront a man's person, because I do not join with him in principle. I please myself with being the first proposer of so fair a treaty with you, because I believe, as you cannot deny its being very honourable, so it is not less so in coming first from me, who I believe could convince you of my having been the first and most ill-treated—for further proof of which I refer you to your letters, at the time I was threatened by the envoy of the king of Sweden.However, Mr. Dyer, this is a method which may end what is past, and prevent what is future; and if refused, the future part I am sure cannot lie at my door.As to your letter, your proposal is so agreeable to me, that truly without it I could not have taken the thing at all; for it would have been a trouble intolerable, both to you as well as me, to take your letter every post, first from you, and then send it to the post-house.Your method of sending to the black box, is just what I designed to propose, and Mr. Shaw will doubtless take it of you: if you think it needful for me to speak to him it shall be done—what I want to know is only the charge, and that you will order it constantly to be sent, upon hinting whereof I shall send you the names. Wishing you success in all things (your opinions of government excepted.)I am,Your humble servant,De Foe.Newington, June 17th,1710.
[61]The following letter to Mr. J. Dyer, in Shoe-lane, who was then employed by the leaders of the tories, in circulating news and insinuations through the country, will show the literary manners of those times, and convey some anecdotes, which are nowhere else preserved. The original letter is in the Museum, Harl. MSS. No. 7001. fol. 269.
Mr. Dyer,
I have your letter. I am rather glad to find you put it upon the trial who was aggressor, than justify a thing which I am sure you cannot approve; and in this I assure you I am far from injuring you, and refer you to the time when long since you had wrote I was fled from justice: one Sammon being taken up for printing a libel, and I being then on a journey, nor the least charge against me for being concerned in it by anybody but your letter:—also many unkind personal reflections on me in your letter, when I was in Scotland, on the affair of the Union, and I assure you, when my paper had not in the least mentioned you, and those I refer to time and date for the proof of.
I mention this only in defence of my last letter, in which I said no more of it than to let you see I did not merit such treatment, and could nevertheless be content to render any service to you, though I thought myself hardly used.
But to state the matter fairly between you and I [me], a writing for different interests, and so possibly coming under an unavoidable necessity of jarring in several cases: I am ready to make a fair truce of honour with you, viz., that if what either party are doing, or saying, that may clash with the party we are for, and urge us to speak, it shall be done without naming either's name, and without personal reflections; and thus we may differ still, and yet preserve both the Christian and the gentleman.
This I think is an offer may satisfy you. I have not been desirous of giving just offence to you, neither would I to any man, however I may differ from him; and I see no reason why I should affront a man's person, because I do not join with him in principle. I please myself with being the first proposer of so fair a treaty with you, because I believe, as you cannot deny its being very honourable, so it is not less so in coming first from me, who I believe could convince you of my having been the first and most ill-treated—for further proof of which I refer you to your letters, at the time I was threatened by the envoy of the king of Sweden.
However, Mr. Dyer, this is a method which may end what is past, and prevent what is future; and if refused, the future part I am sure cannot lie at my door.
As to your letter, your proposal is so agreeable to me, that truly without it I could not have taken the thing at all; for it would have been a trouble intolerable, both to you as well as me, to take your letter every post, first from you, and then send it to the post-house.
Your method of sending to the black box, is just what I designed to propose, and Mr. Shaw will doubtless take it of you: if you think it needful for me to speak to him it shall be done—what I want to know is only the charge, and that you will order it constantly to be sent, upon hinting whereof I shall send you the names. Wishing you success in all things (your opinions of government excepted.)
I am,Your humble servant,
De Foe.
Newington, June 17th,1710.
[62]Arnott's Edinburgh. The second newspaper ever published in Scotland. During this period he published the seventh volume of the Review, which is chiefly occupied by home affairs.
[62]Arnott's Edinburgh. The second newspaper ever published in Scotland. During this period he published the seventh volume of the Review, which is chiefly occupied by home affairs.
[63]De Foe had, many years before Harley proposed it in parliament, suggested an establishment of a South-sea trade, not only for commercial advantage, but as an effectual mode of crippling Spain and France. "I had the honour to lay a proposal before his late majesty king William, in the beginning of this war, for carrying the war, not into Old Spain, but into America: which proposal his majesty approved of, and fully proposed to put it in execution, had not death, to our unspeakable grief, prevented him. And yet I would have my readers distinguish with me, that there is always a manifest difference between carrying on a war with America and settling a trade there; and I shall not fail to speak distinctly to this difference in its turn." He then points out the circumstances of the trade, and distinctly warns his countrymen against those rash and extravagant speculations which they unfortunately persisted to indulge in, and which caused the ruin of so many persons. "I am far from designing to discourage this new undertaking, which I profess to believe a very happy one; but to correct these wild notions, it seems needful to ascertain what we are to understand by a trade to the South Seas, and what not; that in the first place our enemies may not make a wrong improvement of it, our friends in Spain may not take umbrage at it, and our people at home may not grow big with wild expectations, which might end in chagrin and disappointment. There is room enough on the western coast of America for us to establish a flourishing trade without encroaching upon the Spaniards. The industry and enterprise of the English in such a situation would open a wide door for the consumption of our manufactures, and bring a vast revenue of wealth to our own country." [Review, vol. viii. p. 165. 274.] They are the same views substantially as those he afterwards maintained in the pamphlet mentioned by Mr. Chalmers in the text.—Ed.
[63]De Foe had, many years before Harley proposed it in parliament, suggested an establishment of a South-sea trade, not only for commercial advantage, but as an effectual mode of crippling Spain and France. "I had the honour to lay a proposal before his late majesty king William, in the beginning of this war, for carrying the war, not into Old Spain, but into America: which proposal his majesty approved of, and fully proposed to put it in execution, had not death, to our unspeakable grief, prevented him. And yet I would have my readers distinguish with me, that there is always a manifest difference between carrying on a war with America and settling a trade there; and I shall not fail to speak distinctly to this difference in its turn." He then points out the circumstances of the trade, and distinctly warns his countrymen against those rash and extravagant speculations which they unfortunately persisted to indulge in, and which caused the ruin of so many persons. "I am far from designing to discourage this new undertaking, which I profess to believe a very happy one; but to correct these wild notions, it seems needful to ascertain what we are to understand by a trade to the South Seas, and what not; that in the first place our enemies may not make a wrong improvement of it, our friends in Spain may not take umbrage at it, and our people at home may not grow big with wild expectations, which might end in chagrin and disappointment. There is room enough on the western coast of America for us to establish a flourishing trade without encroaching upon the Spaniards. The industry and enterprise of the English in such a situation would open a wide door for the consumption of our manufactures, and bring a vast revenue of wealth to our own country." [Review, vol. viii. p. 165. 274.] They are the same views substantially as those he afterwards maintained in the pamphlet mentioned by Mr. Chalmers in the text.—Ed.
[64]He also vindicated the memory of William III., who had been fiercely attacked for the Partition Treaty, by a pamphlet rather long and quaint—The Felonious Treaty: or, an Inquiry into the Reasons which moved his late Majesty King William, of Glorious Memory, to enter into a Treaty at ten several times, with the King of France, for the Partition of the Spanish Monarchy. With an Essay, proving that it was always the sense both of King William and of all the Confederates, and even of the Grand Alliance itself, that the Spanish Monarchy should never be united in the Person of the Emperor. 1711. In the year 1712, he vigorously attacked the persecuting bill introduced by lord Nottingham, by which dissenters were to be excluded from civil employments, and persons in office were forbidden to attend dissenting places of worship, under severe penalties. De Foe not only kept up a galling fire in his Reviews, but published a pamphlet on the subject, entituled, An Essay on the History of Parties and Persecution in Britain: beginning with a brief Account of the Test Act, and an Historical Inquiry into the Reasons, the Original, and the Consequences of the Occasional Conformity of the Dissenters: with some Remarks on the recent attempts already made and now making for an Occasional Bill: inquiring how far the same may be esteemed a Preservative of the Church, or an Injury to the Dissenters. He seems to have renewed the attack not only against that measure, but also against a similar bill introduced to authorise the use of the liturgy in Scotland, in a pamphlet which Mr. Wilson says bears undoubted evidence of being De Foe's, although never inserted in any list of his writings, entituled, The Present State of Parties in Great Britain: particularly an Inquiry into the State of the Dissenters in England, and the Presbyterians in Scotland: their religious and politic Interest considered, as it respects their Circumstances before and since the late Acts against Occasional Conformity in England, and for Toleration of Common Prayer in Scotland. In this work he goes into a lengthened history of the dissenters, and strongly recommends union amongst all bodies of them. He also in this year vigorously opposed the tax upon newspapers, which was enforced in 1712. The eighth volume of the Review closed in July, 1712. Trade and war are the main subjects discussed in it.—Ed.
[64]He also vindicated the memory of William III., who had been fiercely attacked for the Partition Treaty, by a pamphlet rather long and quaint—The Felonious Treaty: or, an Inquiry into the Reasons which moved his late Majesty King William, of Glorious Memory, to enter into a Treaty at ten several times, with the King of France, for the Partition of the Spanish Monarchy. With an Essay, proving that it was always the sense both of King William and of all the Confederates, and even of the Grand Alliance itself, that the Spanish Monarchy should never be united in the Person of the Emperor. 1711. In the year 1712, he vigorously attacked the persecuting bill introduced by lord Nottingham, by which dissenters were to be excluded from civil employments, and persons in office were forbidden to attend dissenting places of worship, under severe penalties. De Foe not only kept up a galling fire in his Reviews, but published a pamphlet on the subject, entituled, An Essay on the History of Parties and Persecution in Britain: beginning with a brief Account of the Test Act, and an Historical Inquiry into the Reasons, the Original, and the Consequences of the Occasional Conformity of the Dissenters: with some Remarks on the recent attempts already made and now making for an Occasional Bill: inquiring how far the same may be esteemed a Preservative of the Church, or an Injury to the Dissenters. He seems to have renewed the attack not only against that measure, but also against a similar bill introduced to authorise the use of the liturgy in Scotland, in a pamphlet which Mr. Wilson says bears undoubted evidence of being De Foe's, although never inserted in any list of his writings, entituled, The Present State of Parties in Great Britain: particularly an Inquiry into the State of the Dissenters in England, and the Presbyterians in Scotland: their religious and politic Interest considered, as it respects their Circumstances before and since the late Acts against Occasional Conformity in England, and for Toleration of Common Prayer in Scotland. In this work he goes into a lengthened history of the dissenters, and strongly recommends union amongst all bodies of them. He also in this year vigorously opposed the tax upon newspapers, which was enforced in 1712. The eighth volume of the Review closed in July, 1712. Trade and war are the main subjects discussed in it.—Ed.
[65]The first Mercator was published on the 26th of May, 1713; the last on the 20th of July, 1714: and they were written by William Brown and his assistants, with great knowledge, great strength, and great sweetness, considering how much party then embittered every composition. The British Merchant, which opposed the Mercator, and which was compiled by Henry Martyn and his associates, has fewer facts, less argument, and more factiousness. It began on the 1st of August, 1713, and ended the 27th of July, 1714. I have spoken of both from my own convictions, without regarding the declamations which have continued to pervert the public opinion from that epoch to the present times. De Foe was struck at in the third number of the British Merchant, and plainly mentioned in the fourth. Mr. Daniel Foe may change his name from Review to Mercator, from Mercator to any other title, yet still his singular genius shall be distinguished by his inimitable way of writing. Thus personal sarcasm was introduced to supply deficience of facts, or weakness of reasoning. When Charles King republished The British Merchant in volumes, among various changes, he expunged, with other personalities, the name of De Foe.
[65]The first Mercator was published on the 26th of May, 1713; the last on the 20th of July, 1714: and they were written by William Brown and his assistants, with great knowledge, great strength, and great sweetness, considering how much party then embittered every composition. The British Merchant, which opposed the Mercator, and which was compiled by Henry Martyn and his associates, has fewer facts, less argument, and more factiousness. It began on the 1st of August, 1713, and ended the 27th of July, 1714. I have spoken of both from my own convictions, without regarding the declamations which have continued to pervert the public opinion from that epoch to the present times. De Foe was struck at in the third number of the British Merchant, and plainly mentioned in the fourth. Mr. Daniel Foe may change his name from Review to Mercator, from Mercator to any other title, yet still his singular genius shall be distinguished by his inimitable way of writing. Thus personal sarcasm was introduced to supply deficience of facts, or weakness of reasoning. When Charles King republished The British Merchant in volumes, among various changes, he expunged, with other personalities, the name of De Foe.
[66]It is now sufficiently known, that Lord Oxford had relinquished the Treaty of Commerce to its fate, before it was finally debated in parliament. See much curious matter on this subject in Macpherson's State Papers, vol. ii. p. 421-23. It is there said, that he gave up the commercial treaty, in compliment to sir Thomas Hanmer, as he would by no means be an occasion of a breach among friends. The treasurer had other reasons: the treaty had been made by Bolingbroke, whom he did not love; the lords Anglesea and Abingdon had made extravagant demands for their support; and, like a wise man, he thought it idle to drive a nail that would not go. Yet lord Halifax boasted to the Hanoverian minister, that he alone had been the occasion of the treaty being rejected. [Same papers, p. 509-47.]
[66]It is now sufficiently known, that Lord Oxford had relinquished the Treaty of Commerce to its fate, before it was finally debated in parliament. See much curious matter on this subject in Macpherson's State Papers, vol. ii. p. 421-23. It is there said, that he gave up the commercial treaty, in compliment to sir Thomas Hanmer, as he would by no means be an occasion of a breach among friends. The treasurer had other reasons: the treaty had been made by Bolingbroke, whom he did not love; the lords Anglesea and Abingdon had made extravagant demands for their support; and, like a wise man, he thought it idle to drive a nail that would not go. Yet lord Halifax boasted to the Hanoverian minister, that he alone had been the occasion of the treaty being rejected. [Same papers, p. 509-47.]
[67]He attacked it first in 1713, in An Essay on the Treaty of Commerce with France, with necessary Expositions.
[67]He attacked it first in 1713, in An Essay on the Treaty of Commerce with France, with necessary Expositions.
[68]It closed May, 1713, with the ninth volume.
[68]It closed May, 1713, with the ninth volume.
[69]State of Wit, 1711, which is reprinted in the Supplement to Swift's Works.
[69]State of Wit, 1711, which is reprinted in the Supplement to Swift's Works.
[70]Itwasordered to be destroyed.
[70]Itwasordered to be destroyed.
[71]The late History of Halifax relates, that Daniel De Foe, being forced to abscond, on account of his political writings, resided at Halifax, in the Back-lane, at the sign of the Rose and Crown, being known to Dr. Nettleton, the physician, and the Rev. Mr. Priestley, minister of a dissenting congregation there. Mr. Watson is mistaken when he supposes that De Foe wrote his Jure Divino here, which had been published previously in 1706; and he is equally mistaken, when he says, that De Foe had made an improper use of the papers of Selkirk, whose story had been often published.
[71]The late History of Halifax relates, that Daniel De Foe, being forced to abscond, on account of his political writings, resided at Halifax, in the Back-lane, at the sign of the Rose and Crown, being known to Dr. Nettleton, the physician, and the Rev. Mr. Priestley, minister of a dissenting congregation there. Mr. Watson is mistaken when he supposes that De Foe wrote his Jure Divino here, which had been published previously in 1706; and he is equally mistaken, when he says, that De Foe had made an improper use of the papers of Selkirk, whose story had been often published.
[72]The pamphlets mentioned in the text were filled with palpable banter. He recommends the Pretender by saying, That the prince would confer on every one the privilege of wearing wooden shoes, and at the same time ease the nobility and gentry of the hazard and expense of winter journeys to parliament.
[72]The pamphlets mentioned in the text were filled with palpable banter. He recommends the Pretender by saying, That the prince would confer on every one the privilege of wearing wooden shoes, and at the same time ease the nobility and gentry of the hazard and expense of winter journeys to parliament.
[73]The pardon is dated on the 13th of November, 1713, and is signed by Bolingbroke. See it set out verbatim. Appeal to Honour and Justice.
[73]The pardon is dated on the 13th of November, 1713, and is signed by Bolingbroke. See it set out verbatim. Appeal to Honour and Justice.
[74]See Boyer's Political State, Oldmixon's History, &c.
[74]See Boyer's Political State, Oldmixon's History, &c.
[75]It is universally said by the sellers and buyers of old books, that John, duke of Argyle, was the real author of The Secret History of the White Staff. His grace, indeed, is not in the Catalogue of Royal and Noble Authors. Whether the duke wrote this petty pamphlet may be doubted; but there can be no doubt that De Foe was not the author: for he solemnly asserts by his Appeal, in 1715, That he had written nothing since the queen's death. The internal evidence is stronger than this positive assertion.
[75]It is universally said by the sellers and buyers of old books, that John, duke of Argyle, was the real author of The Secret History of the White Staff. His grace, indeed, is not in the Catalogue of Royal and Noble Authors. Whether the duke wrote this petty pamphlet may be doubted; but there can be no doubt that De Foe was not the author: for he solemnly asserts by his Appeal, in 1715, That he had written nothing since the queen's death. The internal evidence is stronger than this positive assertion.
[76]In the year 1714, De Foe pleaded the cause of religious liberty in his most effective manner. He was roused to action by the bill then passing parliament, "to prevent the growth of schism," which was of course only another name for intolerance. By this bill, all schoolmasters were required to be licensed by the bishop, and have a certificate of conformity from the minister of his parish! De Foe of course could not be silent on such an occasion, and he published The Remedy worse than the Disease: or Reasons against passing the Bill for preventing the Growth of Schism; to which is added, a Brief Discourse of Toleration and Persecution, showing their unavoidable effects, good or bad, and proving that neither Diversity of Religion, nor Diversity in the same Religion, are dangerous, much less inconsistent with good Government. In a Letter to a noble Earl.Hæc sunt enim fundamenta firmissima nostræ libertatis, sui quemque juris et retinendi et dimittendi esse dominum.Cic. in Orat. pro Balbo. 1714.
[76]In the year 1714, De Foe pleaded the cause of religious liberty in his most effective manner. He was roused to action by the bill then passing parliament, "to prevent the growth of schism," which was of course only another name for intolerance. By this bill, all schoolmasters were required to be licensed by the bishop, and have a certificate of conformity from the minister of his parish! De Foe of course could not be silent on such an occasion, and he published The Remedy worse than the Disease: or Reasons against passing the Bill for preventing the Growth of Schism; to which is added, a Brief Discourse of Toleration and Persecution, showing their unavoidable effects, good or bad, and proving that neither Diversity of Religion, nor Diversity in the same Religion, are dangerous, much less inconsistent with good Government. In a Letter to a noble Earl.Hæc sunt enim fundamenta firmissima nostræ libertatis, sui quemque juris et retinendi et dimittendi esse dominum.Cic. in Orat. pro Balbo. 1714.
[77]The most solemn asseverations, and the most unanswerable arguments of our author, were not, after all, believed. When Charles King republished The British Merchant, in 1721, he without a scruple attributed The Mercator to a hireling writer of a weekly paper called the Review. And Anderson, at a still later period, goes further in his Chronology of Commerce, and names De Foe, as the hireling writer of the Mercator, and other papers in favour of the French treaty of trade. We can now judge with the impartiality of arbitrators: on the one hand, there are the living challenge, and the death-bed declaration of De Foe; on the other, the mere surmise and unauthorised assertion of King, Anderson, and others, who detract from their own veracity by their own factiousness, or foolery. It is surely time to free ourselves from prejudices of every kind, and to disregard the sound of names as much as the falsehoods of party.
[77]The most solemn asseverations, and the most unanswerable arguments of our author, were not, after all, believed. When Charles King republished The British Merchant, in 1721, he without a scruple attributed The Mercator to a hireling writer of a weekly paper called the Review. And Anderson, at a still later period, goes further in his Chronology of Commerce, and names De Foe, as the hireling writer of the Mercator, and other papers in favour of the French treaty of trade. We can now judge with the impartiality of arbitrators: on the one hand, there are the living challenge, and the death-bed declaration of De Foe; on the other, the mere surmise and unauthorised assertion of King, Anderson, and others, who detract from their own veracity by their own factiousness, or foolery. It is surely time to free ourselves from prejudices of every kind, and to disregard the sound of names as much as the falsehoods of party.
[78]It was entered at Stationers'-hall, for J. Roberts, the 18th of February, 1715-16.
[78]It was entered at Stationers'-hall, for J. Roberts, the 18th of February, 1715-16.
[79]2nd Mem. p. 27, &c.
[79]2nd Mem. p. 27, &c.
[80]The family of George I. had been instructed by the copy of this book, which is in the Museum. It would seem from the title-page and Mr. Wright's letter being printed on a different paper from the work itself, that both were added after the first publication. The Family Instructor and Mr. Wright's letter were entered at Stationers'-hall, for Emanuel Mathews, on the 31st of March, 1715.
[80]The family of George I. had been instructed by the copy of this book, which is in the Museum. It would seem from the title-page and Mr. Wright's letter being printed on a different paper from the work itself, that both were added after the first publication. The Family Instructor and Mr. Wright's letter were entered at Stationers'-hall, for Emanuel Mathews, on the 31st of March, 1715.
[81]When Mr. Chalmers wrote, it had been reprinted at least seventeen times. It is a work which has had great circulation.
[81]When Mr. Chalmers wrote, it had been reprinted at least seventeen times. It is a work which has had great circulation.
[82]Mr. Wilson considers that De Foe, in the year 1717, published the Memoirs of the Church of Scotland, in Four Periods: with an Appendix of some Transactions since the Union. [Life of De Foe, vol. iii. p. 418.] And also the Life of Dr. Daniel Williams, the eminent presbyterian divine, founder of the well-known dissenters' library, in Redcross-street. [Ib. p. 423.]
[82]Mr. Wilson considers that De Foe, in the year 1717, published the Memoirs of the Church of Scotland, in Four Periods: with an Appendix of some Transactions since the Union. [Life of De Foe, vol. iii. p. 418.] And also the Life of Dr. Daniel Williams, the eminent presbyterian divine, founder of the well-known dissenters' library, in Redcross-street. [Ib. p. 423.]
[83]The title was, The Life and strange surprising Adventures of Robinson Crusoe, of York, Mariner, who lived eight-and-twenty Years all alone in an uninhabited Island on the Coast of America, near the mouth of the great River Oroonoque, having been cast on shore by Shipwreck, wherein all the men perished but himself. With an Account how he was at last strangely delivered by Pirates. Written by Himself.
[83]The title was, The Life and strange surprising Adventures of Robinson Crusoe, of York, Mariner, who lived eight-and-twenty Years all alone in an uninhabited Island on the Coast of America, near the mouth of the great River Oroonoque, having been cast on shore by Shipwreck, wherein all the men perished but himself. With an Account how he was at last strangely delivered by Pirates. Written by Himself.
[84]"No fiction in any language," said Dr. Blair in his elegant Lectures on Rhetoric, "was ever better supported than the Adventures of Robinson Crusoe. While it is carried on with that appearance of truth and simplicity, which takes a strong hold of the imagination of all readers, it suggests at the same time very useful instruction, by showing how much the native power of man may be exerted for surmounting the difficulties of any external situation." "Robinson Crusoe," said Marmontel, "is the first book I ever read with exquisite pleasure; and I believe every boy in Europe might say the same thing." In his Emile, Rousseau says, "Since we must have books, this is one, which, in my opinion, is a most excellent treatise on natural education. This is the first my Emilias shall read; his whole library shall long consist of this work only, which shall preserve an eminent rank to the very last. It shall be the text to which all our conversations on natural science are to serve only as a comment. It shall be a guide during our progress to maturity of judgment; and so long as our taste is not adulterated, the perusal of this book will afford us pleasure. And what surprising book is this? Is it Aristotle? Is it Pliny? Is it Buffon? No, it is Robinson Crusoe." In this judgment Dr. Beattie concurred.—Ed.
[84]"No fiction in any language," said Dr. Blair in his elegant Lectures on Rhetoric, "was ever better supported than the Adventures of Robinson Crusoe. While it is carried on with that appearance of truth and simplicity, which takes a strong hold of the imagination of all readers, it suggests at the same time very useful instruction, by showing how much the native power of man may be exerted for surmounting the difficulties of any external situation." "Robinson Crusoe," said Marmontel, "is the first book I ever read with exquisite pleasure; and I believe every boy in Europe might say the same thing." In his Emile, Rousseau says, "Since we must have books, this is one, which, in my opinion, is a most excellent treatise on natural education. This is the first my Emilias shall read; his whole library shall long consist of this work only, which shall preserve an eminent rank to the very last. It shall be the text to which all our conversations on natural science are to serve only as a comment. It shall be a guide during our progress to maturity of judgment; and so long as our taste is not adulterated, the perusal of this book will afford us pleasure. And what surprising book is this? Is it Aristotle? Is it Pliny? Is it Buffon? No, it is Robinson Crusoe." In this judgment Dr. Beattie concurred.—Ed.
[85]The title was, The further Adventures of Robinson Crusoe; being the second and last Part of his Life, and the strange surprising Accounts of his Travels round three Parts of the Globe. Written by Himself. To which is added, a Map of the World, in which is delineated the Voyages of Robinson Crusoe. 1719.
[85]The title was, The further Adventures of Robinson Crusoe; being the second and last Part of his Life, and the strange surprising Accounts of his Travels round three Parts of the Globe. Written by Himself. To which is added, a Map of the World, in which is delineated the Voyages of Robinson Crusoe. 1719.
[86]The whole story of Selkirk is told in Woodes Rogers' voyage, which he published in 1712, from p. 125 to 131, inclusive: whence it appears that Selkirk had preserved no pen, ink, or paper, and had lost his language; so that he had no journal or papers, which he could communicate, or by others could be stolen. There is an account of Selkirk in The Englishman, No. 26, written by Steele. The particular manner how Alexander Selkirk lived four years and four months, in the isle of Juan Fernandez, is related in captain Cooks's voyage into the South Sea, which was published in 1712. And Selkirk's tale was told in the Memoirs of Literature, vol. v. p. 118: so that the world was fully possessed of Selkirk's story, in 1712, seven years prior to the publication of Crusoe's Adventures. Nor were his adventures singular; for, Ringrose mentions in his account of captain Sharp's voyage, a person who had escaped singly from a ship that had been wrecked on Juan Fernandez, and who lived alone five years before he was relieved: and Dampier mentions a Mosquito indian, who having been accidentally left on this island, subsisted three years solitarily, till that voyager carried him off. From which of these De Foe borrowed his great incident, it is not easy to discover. In the preface to The Serious Reflections, he indeed says, "That there is a man alive and well known, the actions of whose life are the just subject of these volumes, and to whom the most part of the story directly alludes." This turns the scale in favour of Selkirk. Nor, was the name of Crusoe wholly fictitious; for, among De Foe's contemporaries, John Dunton speaks of Timothy Crusoe, who was called the Golden Preacher, and was so great a textuary, that he could pray two hours together in scripture language; but, he was not arrived at perfection, as appeared by his sloth in tying the conjugal knot; yet his repentance was sincere and public, and I fear not but he is now a glorified saint in heaven. [Life and Errors, p. 461.] The whole story of Selkirk, as told by Rogers, is reprinted in the present edition. Rob. Crusoe, vol. i. p. xxiii.
[86]The whole story of Selkirk is told in Woodes Rogers' voyage, which he published in 1712, from p. 125 to 131, inclusive: whence it appears that Selkirk had preserved no pen, ink, or paper, and had lost his language; so that he had no journal or papers, which he could communicate, or by others could be stolen. There is an account of Selkirk in The Englishman, No. 26, written by Steele. The particular manner how Alexander Selkirk lived four years and four months, in the isle of Juan Fernandez, is related in captain Cooks's voyage into the South Sea, which was published in 1712. And Selkirk's tale was told in the Memoirs of Literature, vol. v. p. 118: so that the world was fully possessed of Selkirk's story, in 1712, seven years prior to the publication of Crusoe's Adventures. Nor were his adventures singular; for, Ringrose mentions in his account of captain Sharp's voyage, a person who had escaped singly from a ship that had been wrecked on Juan Fernandez, and who lived alone five years before he was relieved: and Dampier mentions a Mosquito indian, who having been accidentally left on this island, subsisted three years solitarily, till that voyager carried him off. From which of these De Foe borrowed his great incident, it is not easy to discover. In the preface to The Serious Reflections, he indeed says, "That there is a man alive and well known, the actions of whose life are the just subject of these volumes, and to whom the most part of the story directly alludes." This turns the scale in favour of Selkirk. Nor, was the name of Crusoe wholly fictitious; for, among De Foe's contemporaries, John Dunton speaks of Timothy Crusoe, who was called the Golden Preacher, and was so great a textuary, that he could pray two hours together in scripture language; but, he was not arrived at perfection, as appeared by his sloth in tying the conjugal knot; yet his repentance was sincere and public, and I fear not but he is now a glorified saint in heaven. [Life and Errors, p. 461.] The whole story of Selkirk, as told by Rogers, is reprinted in the present edition. Rob. Crusoe, vol. i. p. xxiii.