Great Britain -- Politics and government -- 1760-1789; Satire; United States -- History -- Revolution, 1775-1783
_Mr. W[ilke]s_[6] adverted with some degree of humour to the inference
of victory and triumph which might be deduced from the return of our
Generals and our Admirals, and one of our commissioners too. They found
(he said) that being on the spot interrupted their manœuvres, and he
supposed they were come three thousand miles off to act _cooly_. That,
the object they were sent to accomplish was confessedly a great one;
and it is well known, that objects of a certain magnitude are best
contemplated at a distance. Probably, their optics were too tender to
distinguish with accuracy amidst the smoak and confusion incident to
actual engagements; or perhaps, they reflected on the more imminent
dangers of domestic invasion, and hastened home from pure patriotism
to guard their native country.—At any rate, he must compliment their
discernment in pursuing a line of conduct, which could not fail of
conciliating the good opinion and sympathetic regard of the Noble Lord,
who presided in the American department. If therefore, Mr. Speaker,
by any miraculous change, I were, this day, to become the Advocate
of Administration, I should mark the inutility of recurring to the
written evidence, which the Amendment calls for, at a moment when we
are so copiously provided with _vivâ voce_ testimony. Yet, Sir, I do
not think, upon reflexion, that Ministers will adopt this ground for
rejecting the noble Lord’s Amendment. They, Sir, will more boldly tell
you—you shall have neither,—for, in these times, it is the fashion for
all modern Statesmen, first to tell their own story, and then protest
solemnly against being cross-examined—_or directly, or indirectly,
answering question, query, or otherwise_. I believe I am accurate in my
quotation.—I am not indeed surprized at these declarations of obstinate
silence—this is Scottish policy—the example was set by my good old
friend, the E[a]rl of B[u]te—for therein I am orthodox in my faith, that
the Son is equal to the Father; and I am sure I may add with Athanasian
zeal, the father is incomprehensible, and the Son is incomprehensible,
yet there are not two incomprehensibles, but one incomprehensible.
(Here a confused cry of order, and the Chaplain reprimanded for
laughing.)
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account