sycophantically laudatory. He said, in
'32, that as to vice, Wellington was not worse than his neighbours; but
he is not going to say, in '54, that Wellington was a noble-hearted
fellow; for he believes that a more cold-hearted individual never
existed. His conduct to Warner, the poor Vaudois, and Marshal Ney,
showed that. He said, in '32, that he was a good general and a brave
man; but he is not going, in '54, to say that he was the best general, or
the bravest man the world ever saw. England has produced a better
general--France two or three--both countries many braver men. The son of
the Norfolk clergyman was a braver man; Marshal Ney was a braver man. Oh,
that battle of Copenhagen! Oh, that covering the retreat of the Grand
Army! And though he said in '32 that he could write, he is not going to
say in '54 that he is the best of all military writers. On the contrary,
he does not hesitate to say that any Commentary of Julius Caesar, or any
chapter in Justinus, more especially the one about the Parthians, is
worth the ten volumes of Wellington's Despatches; though he has no doubt
that, by saying so, he shall especially rouse the indignation of a
certain newspaper, at present one of the most genteel journals
imaginable--with a slight tendency to liberalism, it is true, but
perfectly genteel--which is nevertheless the very one which, in '32,
swore bodily that Wellington could neither read nor write, and devised an
ingenious plan for teaching him how to read.

Now, after the above statement, no one will venture to say, if the writer
should be disposed to bear hard upon Radicals, that he would be
influenced by a desire to pay court to princes, or to curry favour with
Tories, or from being a blind admirer of the Duke of Wellington; but the
writer is not going to declaim against Radicals, that is, real
Republicans, or their principles; upon the whole, he is something of an
admirer of both. The writer has always had as much admiration for
everything that is real and honest as he has had contempt for the
opposite. Now real Republicanism is certainly a very fine thing, a much
finer thing than Toryism, a system of common robbery, which is
nevertheless far better than Whiggism {351}--a compound of petty larceny,
popular instruction, and receiving of stolen goods. Yes, real
Republicanism is certainly a very fine thing, and your real Radicals and
Republicans are certainly very fine fellows, or rather were fine fellows,