Delphi Complete Works of Richard Brinsley Sheridan

by Richard Brinsley Sheridan

  However dangerous it might be to exalt such an example into a precedent, it is questionable whether, in thus resolving to join the ascendant side, Mr. Canning has not conferred a greater benefit on the country than he ever would have been able to effect in the ranks of his original friends. That Party, which has now so long been the sole depository of the power of the State, had, in addition to the original narrowness of its principles, contracted all that proud obstinacy, in antiquated error, which is the invariable characteristic of such monopolies; and which, however consonant with its vocation, as the chosen instrument of the Crown, should have long since invalided it in the service of a free and enlightened people. Some infusion of the spirit of the times into this body had become necessary, even for its own preservation, — in the same manner as the inhalement of youthful breath has been recommended, by some physicians, to the infirm and superannuated. This renovating inspiration the genius of Mr. Canning has supplied. His first political lessons were derived from sources too sacred to his young admiration to be forgotten. He has carried the spirit of these lessons with him into the councils which he joined, and by the vigor of the graft, which already, indeed, shows itself in the fruits, bids fair to change altogether the nature of Toryism.

  Among the eminent persons summoned as witnesses on the Trial of Horne Tooke, which took place in November of this year, was Mr. Sheridan; and, as his evidence contains some curious particulars, both with regard to himself and the state of political feeling in the year 1790, I shall here transcribe a part of it: —

  “He, (Mr. Sheridan,) said he recollects a meeting to celebrate the establishment of liberty in France in the year 1790. Upon that occasion he moved a Resolution drawn up the day before by the Whig club. Mr. Horne Tooke, he says, made no objection to his motion, but proposed an amendment. Mr. Tooke stated that an unqualified approbation of the French Revolution, in the terms moved, might produce an ill effect out of doors, a disposition to a revolution in this country, or, at least, be misrepresented to have that object; he adverted to the circumstance of their having all of them national cockades in their hats; he proposed to add some qualifying expression to the approbation of the French Revolution, a declaration of attachment to the principles of our own Constitution; he said Mr. Tooke spoke in a figurative manner of the former Government of France; he described it as a vessel so foul and decayed, that no repair could save it from destruction, that in contrasting our state with that, he said, thank God, the main timbers of our Constitution are sound; he had before observed, however, that some reforms might be necessary; he said that sentiment was received with great disapprobation, and with very rude interruption, insomuch that Lord Stanhope, who was in the chair, interfered; he said it had happened to him, in many public meetings, to differ with and oppose the prisoner, and that he has frequently seen him received with very considerable marks of disapprobation, but he never saw them affect him much; he said that he himself objected to Mr. Tooke’s amendment; he thinks he withdrew his amendment, and moved it as a separate motion; he said it was then carried as unanimously as his own motion had been; that original motion and separate motion are in these words:— ‘That this meeting does most cordially rejoice in the establishment and confirmation of liberty in France; and it beholds with peculiar satisfaction the sentiments of amity and good will which appear to pervade the people of that country towards this kingdom, especially at a time when it is the manifest interest of both states that nothing should interrupt the harmony which at present subsists between them, and which is so essentially necessary to the freedom and happiness, not only of the French nation, but of all mankind.’

  “Mr. Tooke wished to add to his motion some qualifying clause, to guard against misunderstanding and misrepresentation: — that there was a wide difference between England and France; that in France the vessel was so foul and decayed, that no repair could save it from destruction, whereas, in England, we had a noble and stately vessel, sailing proudly on the bosom of the ocean; that her main timbers were sound, though it was true, after so long a course of years, she might want some repairs. Mr. Tooke’s motion was,— ‘That we feel equal satisfaction that the subjects of England, by the virtuous exertions of their ancestors, have not so arduous a task to perform as the French have had, but have only to maintain and improve the Constitution which their ancestors have transmitted to them.’ — This was carried unanimously.”

  The trial of Warren Hastings still “dragged its slow length along,” and in the May of this year Mr. Sheridan was called upon for his Reply on the Begum Charge. It was usual, on these occasions, for the Manager who spoke to be assisted by one of his brother Managers, whose task it was to carry the bag that contained his papers, and to read out whatever Minutes might be referred to in the course of the argument. Mr. Michael Angelo Taylor was the person who undertook this office for Sheridan; but, on the morning of the speech, upon his asking for the bag that he was to carry, he was told by Sheridan that there was none — neither bag nor papers. They must manage, he said, as well as they could without them; — and when the papers were called for, his friend must only put the best countenance he could upon it. As for himself “he would abuse Ned Law — ridicule Plumer’s long orations — make the Court laugh — please the women, and, in short, with Taylor’s aid would get triumphantly through his task.” His opening of the case was listened to with the profoundest attention; but when he came to contrast the evidence of the Commons with that adduced by Hastings, it was not long before the Chancellor interrupted him, with a request that the printed Minutes to which he referred should be read. Sheridan answered that his friend Mr. Taylor would read them; and Mr. Taylor affected to send for the bag, while the orator begged leave, in the meantime, to proceed. Again, however, his statements rendered a reference to the Minutes necessary, and again he was interrupted by the Chancellor, while an outcry after Mr. Sheridan’s bag was raised in all directions. At first the blame was laid on the solicitor’s clerk — then a messenger was dispatched to Mr. Sheridan’s house. In the meantime, the orator was proceeding brilliantly and successfully in his argument; and, on some further interruption and expostulation from the Chancellor, raised his voice and said, in a dignified tone, “On the part of the Commons, and as a Manager of this Impeachment, I shall conduct my case as I think proper. I mean to be correct, and Your Lordships, having the printed Minutes before you, will afterwards see whether I am right or wrong.”

  During the bustle produced by the inquiries after the bag, Mr. Fox, alarmed at the inconvenience which, he feared, the want of it might occasion Sheridan, ran up from the Managers’ room, and demanded eagerly the cause of this mistake from Mr. Taylor; who, hiding his mouth with his hand, whispered him, (in a tone of which they alone, who have heard this gentleman relate the anecdote, can feel the full humor,) “The man has no bag!”

  The whole of this characteristic contrivance was evidently intended by Sheridan to raise that sort of surprise at the readiness of his resources, which it was the favorite triumph of his vanity to create. I have it on the authority of Mr. William Smythe, that, previously to the delivery of this speech, he passed two or three days alone at Wanstead, so occupied from morning till night in writing and reading of papers, as to complain in the evenings that he “had motes before his eyes.” This mixture of real labor with apparent carelessness was, indeed, one of the most curious features of his life and character.

  Together with the political contests of this stormy year, he had also on his mind the cares of his new Theatre, which opened on the 21st of April, with a prologue, not by himself, as might have been expected, but by his friend General Fitzpatrick. He found time, however, to assist in the rapid manufacture of a little piece called “The Glorious First of June,” which was acted immediately after Lord Howe’s victory, and of which I have found some sketches [Footnote: One of these is as follows: —

  “SCENE I. — Miss Leake — Miss Decamp — Walsh.

  “Short dialogue — Nancy persuading Susan to go to the Fair,
where there is an entertainment to be given by the Lord of the Manor — Susan melancholy because Henry, her lover, is at sea with the British Admiral — Song — Her old mother scolds from the cottage — her little brother (Walsh) comes from the house, with a message — laughs at his sister’s fears and sings — Trio.

  “SCENE II. — The Fair

  “Puppet show — dancing bear — bells — hurdy-gurdy — recruiting party — song and chorus.

  “Ballet — D’Egville.

  “Susan says she has no pleasure, and will go and take a solitary walk.

  “SCENE III. — Dark Wood.

  “Susan — gipsy — tells her fortune — recitative and ditty.

  “SCENE IV.

  “SEA-FIGHT — hell and the devil!

  “Henry and Susan meet — Chorus introducing burden,

  “Rule Britannia.”

  Among other occasional trifles of this kind, to which Sheridan condescended for the advantage of the theatre, was the pantomime of Robinson Crusoe, brought out, I believe, in 1781, of which he is understood to have been the author. There was a practical joke in this pantomime, (where, in pulling off a man’s boot, the leg was pulled off with it,) which the famous Delpini laid claim to as his own, and publicly complained of Sheridan’s having stolen it from him. The punsters of the day said it was claimed as literary property — being “in usum Delpini.”

  Another of these inglorious tasks of the author of The School for

  Scandal, was the furnishing of the first outline or Programme of

  “The Forty Thieves.” His brother in law, Ward, supplied the dialogue, and

  Mr. Colman was employed to season it with an infusion of jokes. The

  following is Sheridan’s sketch of one of the scenes —

  “ALI BABA.

  “Bannister called out of the cavern boldly by his son — comes out and falls on the ground a long time, not knowing him — says he would only have taken a little gold to Keep off misery and save his son, &c.

  “Afterwards, when he loads his asses, his son reminds him to be moderate — but it was a promise made to thieves— ‘it gets nearer the owner, if taken from the stealer’ — the son disputes this morality— ‘they stole it, ergo, they have no right to it; and we steal it from the stealer, ergo, our title is twice as bad as theirs.’”] in Sheridan’s hand-writing, — though the dialogue was, no doubt, supplied (as Mr. Boaden says,) “by Cobb, or some other such pedissequus of the Dramatic Muse. This piece was written, rehearsed, and acted within three days. The first operation of Mr. Sheridan towards it was to order the mechanist of the theatre to get ready two fleets. It was in vain that objections were started to the possibility of equipping these pasteboard armaments in so short an interval — Lord Chatham’s famous order to Lord Anson was not more peremptory. [Footnote: For the expedition to the coast of France, after the Convention of Closter seven. When he ordered the fleet to be equipped, and appointed the time and place of its rendezvous, Lord Anson said it would be impossible to have it prepared so soon. “It may,” said Mr. Pitt, “be done, and if the ships are not ready at the time specified, I shall signify Your Lordship’s neglect to the King, and impeach you in the House of Commons.” This intimation produced the desired effect — the ships were ready. See Anecdotes of Lord Chatham, vol. i] The two fleets were accordingly ready at the time, and the Duke of Clarence attended the rehearsal of their evolutions. This mixture of the cares of the Statesman and the Manager is one of those whimsical peculiarities that made Sheridan’s own life so dramatic, and formed a compound altogether too singular ever to occur again.

  In the spring of the following year, (1795,) we find Mr. Sheridan paying that sort of tribute to the happiness of a first marriage which is implied by the step of entering into a second. The lady to whom he now united himself was Miss Esther Jane Ogle, daughter of the Dean of Winchester, and grand-daughter, by the mother’s side, of the former Bishop of Winchester. We have here another proof of the ready mine of wealth which the theatre opened, — as in gratitude it ought, — to him who had endowed, it with such imperishable treasures. The fortune of the lady being five thousand pounds, he added to it fifteen thousand more, which he contrived to raise by the sale of Drury-Lane shares; and the whole of the sum was subsequently laid out in the purchase from Sir W. Geary of the estate of Polesden, in Surrey, near Leatherhead. The Trustees of this settlement were Mr. Grey, (now Lord Grey,) and Mr. Whitbread.

  To a man at the time of life which Sheridan had now attained — four years beyond that period, at which Petrarch thought it decorous to leave off writing love-verses [Footnote: See his Epistle, “ad Posteritatem,” where, after lamenting the many years which he had devoted to love, he adds: “Mox vero ad quadragesimum annum appropinquans, dum adhuc et caloris satis esset,” &c.] — a union with a young and accomplished girl, ardently devoted to him, must have been like a renewal of his own youth; and it is, indeed, said by those who were in habits of intimacy with him at this period, that they had seldom seen his spirits in a state of more buoyant vivacity. He passed much of his time at the house of his father-in-law near Southampton; — and in sailing about with his lively bride on the Southampton river, (in a small cutter called the Phaedria, after the magic boat in the “Fairy Queen,”) forgot for a while his debts, his theatre, and his politics. It was on one of these occasions that my friend Mr. Bowles, who was a frequent companion of his parties, [Footnote: Among other distinguished persons present at these excursions were Mr. Joseph Richardson, Dr. Howley, now Bishop of London, and Mrs. Wilmot, now Lady Dacre, a lady, whose various talents, — not the less delightful for being so feminine, — like the group of the Graces, reflect beauty on each other.] wrote the following verses, which were much admired, as they well deserved to be, by Sheridan, for the sweetness of their thoughts, and the perfect music of their rhythm: —

  “Smooth went our boat upon the summer seas,

  Leaving, (for so it seem’d.) the world behind,

  Its cares, its sounds, its shadows: we reclin’d

  Upon the sunny deck, heard but the breeze

  That o’er us whispering pass’d or idly play’d

  With the lithe flag aloft. — A woodland scene

  On either side drew its slope line of green,

  And hung the water’s shining edge with shade.

  Above the woods, Netley! thy ruins pale

  Peer’d, as we pass’d; and Vecta’s azure hue

  Beyond the misty castle met the view;

  Where in mid channel hung the scarce-seen sail.

  So all was calm and sunshine as we went

  Cheerily o’er the briny element.

  Oh! were this little boat to us the world,

  As thus we wander’d far from sounds of care,

  Circled with friends and gentle maidens fair,

  Whilst morning airs the waving pendant curl’d,

  How sweet were life’s long voyage, till in peace

  We gain’d that haven still, where all things cease!”

  [Footnote 1: Isle of Wight]

  [Footnote 2: Kelshot Castle]

  The events of this year but added fresh impetus to that reaction upon each other of the Government and the People, which such a system of misrule is always sure to produce. Among the worst effects, as I have already remarked, of the rigorous policy adopted by the Minister, was the extremity to which it drove the principles and language of Opposition, and that sanction which the vehement rebound against oppression of such influencing spirits as Fox and Sheridan seemed to hold out to the obscurer and more practical assertors of freedom. This was at no time more remarkable than in the present Session, during the discussion of those arbitrary measures, the Treason and Sedition Bills, when sparks were struck out, in the collision of the two principles, which the combustible state of public feeling at the moment rendered not a little perilous. On the motion that the House should resolve itself into a Committee upon the Treason Bill, Mr. Fox said, that “if Ministers were determined, by means of the co
rrupt influence they already possessed in the two Houses of Parliament, to pass these Bills, in violent opposition to the declared sense of the great majority of the nation, and they should be put in force with all their rigorous provisions, — if his opinion were asked by the people as to their obedience, he should tell them, that it was no longer a question of moral obligation and duty, but of prudence.” Mr. Sheridan followed in the bold footsteps of his friend, and said, that “if a degraded and oppressed majority of the people applied to him, he would advise them to acquiesce in those bills only as long as resistance was imprudent.” This language was, of course, visited with the heavy reprobation of the Ministry; — but their own partisans had already gone as great lengths on the side of absolute power, and it is the nature of such extremes to generate each other. Bishop Horsley had preached the doctrine of passive obedience in the House of Lords, asserting that “man’s abuse of his delegated authority is to be borne with resignation, like any other of God’s judgments; and that the opposition of the individual to the sovereign power is an opposition to God’s providential arrangements.” The promotion of the Right Reverend Prelate that followed, was not likely to abate his zeal in the cause of power; and, accordingly, we find him in the present session declaring, in his place in the House of Lords, that “the people have nothing to do with the laws but to obey them.”