134

with them.

The enemy, advancing in front of their own park, gave our cavalry some little hopes of displaying their bravery, as satisfaction for their brave comrades that were lying dead on their plains. Our brave General then rode up, saying, "now, Maxwell, you must make the best of your cavalry, or we shall all be done." Our gallant Commander of the cavalry then gave the word, " 19th, spare nobody," three cheers; on the third cheer we dashed forward, our brave General with us, exclaiming "Death or Victory;" and riding over our poor wounded men as they lay bleeding with their wounds, we cut our road up to their guns, and took 100 pieces, and killed the French General. The rest of their army marched off from us, when our small detachment proved victorious in the field; our cavalry pursued them, but they not being fatigued, rode always from us; we had marched twenty-five miles before the action took place. Our infantry lay all night upon their arms, to maintain their ground, the next morning arose, pitched their camp, and buried all their slain. The cavalry marched back five miles that night, to protect the baggage, and joined the line with the loss of their brave Commander, who fell in so noble a cause.

The slaughter made in the field that day of officers and soldiers who fell fighting for their king and country, was truly dreadful. After our camp was pitched, parties were sent from each regiment to pick up their killed and wounded. Some lay for the of two and three days before they were

taken up.

space

I am very sorry to say I had the misfortune to lose my right leg in the charge, had my horse killed under me, and left to the mercy of the field for

[Feb.

twenty-four hours, without any assistance from a surgeon. The sash which I wore proved of great assistance' in the stopping of the blood.

THOMAS SWARBROOK,

Serjeant 19th Dragoons.

I need not mention, in addition to the above, that the writer of this account receives a pension from GovernH. G.

ment.

Mr. URBAN,

Feb. 3.

IN the Supplement to the last Volume, ii. p. 632, of your very valuable work, I am not a little surprised to see what I must consider a very unfair attack upon the landed proprietors, and my surprise is the greater, because during the several years that I have been a constant reader of your excellent Numbers, I have never before witnessed any thing like partiality or party spirit.

The writer having indulged his wit in irony and ridicule at the severe sufferings and privations of the farmers and their Landlords, fancies he has made a new discovery, by asserting that the Farmers will experience relief from the reduction of their rents, and that their sufferings are occasioned by the "heartless oppression of their Landlords."

Can it be really believed that such reduction has not, I may say, almost universally taken place? Has he not heard of different landowners, whose tenants are under leases, ordering a new valuation of their estates, and allowing their tenants to continue their farms under fresh agreements? Has he not heard of others who have so far considered the situation of their tenants on leases, as to agree to modify their rents according to the price of corn for the current year? If he has not (and if he has, I am sure common justice would not allow him to put forth such assertions as he has written), I can take upon myself to inform him that such has been the conduct of several of those "patriotic" Landowners, as he ironically and contemptuously calls them. They do not "endeavour to keep their tenants to their leases, by transferring the cause of distress from the excess of their rents to the misconduct of Ministers." Other Landlords, perhaps, have reduced their rents in different or in less proportions. Nor are they wanting in justice.-It ought to be considered,

that

1823.]

that the times, and consequently the rate at which different farms were taken, were also different, and that to some lands let before the high times, an abatement of 15 or 20 per cent. is equivalent to 50 per cent. on others much more highly rented. This is so obvious to common sense, that I should hope some of your Readers will pause before they assent to the proposition, "that the general rental of the kingdom must be reduced by one half, instead of 10, 15, and 20 per cent."

A Correspondent of yours in the same Supplement, p. 593, writes, "that the Landowners wish for wheat at 18s. the bushel!!" Through all the best times, as they are called, I never knew any country gentleman whose lands were valued or let at a higher rate than that which Parliament pronounced to be the fair remunerating price to the grower, viz. 10s. the bushel; and this I believe to be the extreme rate at which myself or my neighbours wished to let their land; all above that, even in war, being considered fictitious and accidental. This is the price which the tradesmen in the neighbouring towns have considered as productive of a fair market to themselves, and a security of payment; "too happy," have they said, should we be to pay such price for our bread, could we but have the customers and paymasters we had in those days.'

66

Much has been said about Farmers drinking claret, their sons keeping hunters, and their daughters learning accomplishments! As far as my own observation has extended, and I reside constantly in the country, I can affirm with truth that I have had tenants on large farms in three different counties, each requiring a capital of at least ten thousand pounds, and I have never witnessed or heard of any of the extravagance alluded to. Plain in their habits and mode of living, whatever surplus of income their industry produced, they employed it in increasing their business. But supposing they were liable to the reproach of enjoying perhaps more than a comfortable style of living, I should be glad to know the reason why the occupier of land is to be the only description of person, who, possessed of a capital of ten thousand pounds, is to be denied a better sort of education for his children, or occasional indulgence in amusement? The

135

London tradesman, with such a capital, is without reproach allowed to ride his palfrey in the park, to have masters for his daughters, and all the comforts and luxuries of life; and why may not the equally worthy cultivator of the soil occasionally ride out with his neighbour's hounds, or give his children some advantage which he could not obtain himself?-In proceeding to facts, the writer states, that in 1790-4, the price of a bushel of corn was 44s. and the rent of land, on an acre of which three and a half or four quarters were grown, was 20s.; that the Tithe and Poor Rate were exactly what they are in the same county and district at the present time; and that, under this rent, this tithe, and rate, the Farmers were comfortable at that time; and why should they not, he asks, support the same circumstances at present? With regard to rent, he seems to suppose that the rents on land, such as he describes, have been much higher than 20s. per acre during the war, and that the wicked proprietors have not adequately reduced them. I do not believe that the rents of such lands have ever been more than as high or a trifle higher in the best of times; and we should be very far from complaining, if we could realize any thing like the rents at the present day, which the writer himself allows, would be reasonable, with corn at 44s. per quarter. Admitting this to be true, what then becomes of his severe attack on the rapacity and oppression of Landlords?

of

The next point I advert to is the Poor Rate, which he maintains is the same now as in 1790-4. In reply, I have only to state the case of a neighbouring parish, in a part of the country wholly agricultural. In 1792, the Poor Rates in that parish were 500l. a year, including the expense of the apothecary and attorney; the present Rates for the same parish, after allowing for the reduction in consequence the lowered price of provisions, are 25001. per annum, exclusive of the medical and legal expenses. I trust, therefore, this, which is not a solitary instance, will be received as a refutation of the assertion, that the Poor Rates are the same now as in 1790-4. If, therefore, the burdens to which the Farmer is liable, exceed by so much those that he had at the former period, it is very evident, even were his

rent

1923.]

17. Anecdotes, Biographical Sketches, and Memoirs; collected by Lætitia - Matilda Hawkins. Vol. I. 8vo. pp. 351. Riving

tons.

TH

HE fair Compiler of this entertaining Volume is distinguished as the Authoress of three very excellent Novels, in all of which she has experienced the gratification of having afforded amusement and instruction by

an extensive circulation of her writings. She now appears in a new character as a narrator of remarkable Anecdotes which she minuted down unknown to her father, at the time of their occurrence, and has now employed herself in publishing, as a relaxation from severer studies, and as the amusement of a leisure hour.

Filial piety, and an ardent zeal for the dignity of the family, are conspicuous in this volume; in which Ego. et Pater meus, "Lady Hawkins," and "my Brothers," are prominent figures:

From the earliest years of my recollection, my father was wont to inculcate the usefulness of committing to paper facts and circumstances; but he was generally too much employed, or too weary of employment, to do himself what he wished done. He was sometimes disposed to dictate to my elder brother; but my brother, who was himself engaged in a work of deep research, was not always at leisure; and when he was at leisure, my father was often taking his evening-nap. The thing wished was therefore never done; or, if attempted, it was not begun with energy enough to keep it going.

"I had heard all that could be said in favour of the scheme; and made sensible of its comparative importance by the progressive accumulation of facts, I, though myself with little leisure to subtract from time which I was never allowed to call my own, began in private to do what my father recommended; but the fear that this, which was to me relaxation when done in secret, would, if divulged, be added to my daily labour and exacted as a task, made me do it literally à l'insçu de mon père,—a singular instance, perhaps, of clandestine obedience." It is well known that Miss H. is the daughter of the celebrated Sir John GENT. MAG. February, 1823.

Hawkins, the Executor and Biogra pher of Dr. Johnson.

"We were well-disciplined children, and taught to be very respectful; but I little thought what I should have to boast when Goldsmith taught me to play Jack and Gill by two pits of paper on his fingers; and when Israel Mauduit, the author of the "Considerations on the German War,”

dissected a flower of the horse-chesnut to give me an idea of the science of botany, and taught my little brother how to understand the title of that excellent initiatory compilation, "Selecta è profanis," and patted him on the head by way of encouragement, when he saw him getting his lesson out of Horace. Of any notice bestowed on me by Sir Joshua Reynolds I cannot brag; but Dr. Johnson fondled me in his way; that is to say, he kept me. standing before a good fire, unconscious banities, while to my terror, from the displeasure of my nurse-maid, he leant his wig on my shoulder. When he recollected me, he would ask me if I would be his little housekeeper. It was happily not neces sary to reply.'

that he had not dismissed me from his ur

We admire the warm indignation with which an unpardonable calumny of Mr. Boswell is thus repelled:

"I cannot (says Miss H.) for the sake of brevity, pass by unimproved, the opportu nity of rescuing his character from Mr. Boswell's erroneous biography. I have not his "Life of Johnson" here; but I believe I can recollect with accuracy sufficient to prevent my doing him the injury I complain of as to my father, a part of what he has said of him. He has said, I think, that 'Sir John Hawkins was the son of a carpenter,' but that 'having married an old woman for her money'- -I forget what follows; but this is sufficient for my present purpose.

"Now I do, with all humility, confess, that since the time of Sir Walter Raleigh and Queen Elizabeth, the family of my father have had nought to boast; but, in those rude days, Knighthood for sailing round the world on a voyage of discovery, was a very elevating distinction. In the second acquirement of the same honour, indeed, there is a little seeming cause for boasting for those who pride themselves on being English, as it was bestowed on the defeat of the Spanish Armada, in which our

ancestor