& Let not thofe nymphs thy anguish move, Whose guilt can force a pang from thine.” There is much good poetry in the ferio-comical Hymn ta Modefty: HYMN to MODESTY. O! Modefty, thou fhy and blufhful maid, Don't of a fimple fhepherd be afraid; Wert thou my lamb with fweeteft grafs I'd treat thee And give a goddefs to my cell. Thy fragrant breat, like Alpine fnows fo white, Of Night's pale wand'rer o'er her cloudlefs fkie, Thy flaxen ringlets that luxuriant spread, Thou knoweft not that bofom's fair defign; And as for those two pouting lips divine Thou think'it them form'd alone for fimple chat To bill fo happy with thy fav'rite dove, And playful force, with fweetly fondling love, Then hafle with me, meek maid, to dwell, Such thoughts thy fweet fimplicity produces! Oh! Oh! fly from Impudence, the brazen rogue, The world, O fimple maid, is full of art, From morn to eve my kifs of fpeechless love, • From morn to eve my kiss of speechless love, The fpeechlefs kifs of love improving the blufhes, and heightening the luftre of the eye of Modefty, is a beautiful idea, expreffed in the language of true paffion, and proves that Peter has not millftone for a heart." a The Tales in this publication are "The Royal Sheep-The K*** and Parfon Young-and The Parfon, the Squire, and the Spaniel." The last of these is an old story new verfified. We have already teftified our difapprobation at the author's fporting with the prefent fubject; our readers, we dare fay, will join us, after having read the following conclufion of the poem. Peter had expreffed his abhorrence at a penfion for many ludicrous reafons, and thus concludes: Yes, fhould I imitate the fickle wind, Or Mr. patriot Eden-change my mind; And fay, "Well well, well well, my tuneful friend, "You make fine verfes nothing can be fweeter "What will you have? what? what? fpeak out, speak out"Yes, yes, you fomething want, no doubt, no doubt." Or fhould you, like fome men who gravely preach, Forfake your ufual fhort-hand mode of fpeech, And thus begin-in bible-phrafe fublime: "What fhall be done for our rare fon of rhime? "The man in whom the KING delighteth ?” D 4 Then would the poet thankfully reply, With fault'ring voice, low bow, and marv'ling eye, "Thrice bleft, who findeth favour with the king! Upon the whole, though the pipe of the facetious Peter has played fo often, and fo long, it does not feem in the least out of tune. The print which accompanies the poem has confiderable merit in its way; but why, in the figure of the poet, give us fomething fo unlike the perfon meant to be exhibited? ART. XIV. An Effay on the Impolicy of the African SlaveTrade. In Two Parts. By the Rev. T. Clarkfon, M. A. 8vo. 3s. boards. Phillips, London, 1788. IN N our Review for laft month we gave an account of Mr. Clarkfon's former Effay on Slavery; our attention is now called for by the fame animated writer to the production before us, in which he endeavours to prove, by a variety of arguments, that the African flave-trade is impolitic. In the first place, he argues that the flave-trade, confidered abftractedly by itself, is of no emolument to the nation; that it is unprofitable, on the whole, to individuals; and that it is the grave of our feamen, deftroying more of them in one year than all the other trades in Great-Britain, when put together, deftroy in two. However extraordinary thefe feveral propofitions may appear, they are maintained by our author, not upon flight evidence or fuperficial observation, but upon fuch arguments as, both from their own force, and by the facts upon which they are established, merit the moft attentive confideration. The author next endeavours to fhew that the trade which might be fubftituted for that of flaves, in the natural productions of Africa, if confidered in the fame light, would, by affording an inexhauftible mine of wealth to our dyers and artificers in wood, by enabling us to break the monopoly of the Dutch in fpices, by repaying us for the lofs of America, and by becoming the cheapest market for all forts of raw materials for our manufacturers, be of great national advantage, as well as highly profitable profitable to individuals, and be likewise a nursery for our fea men. That the flave-trade is a nursery for our feamen, an argument upon which ftrefs has been laid in the debates on this fubgreat ject, Mr. Clarkfon denies in the moft explicit and unequivocal manner, and affirms, as has been already obferved, that it is extremely deftructive. To evince the truth of this affertion he produces fuch evidence as places, in the ftrongeft light, the unwearied industry with which he has examined the fubject. It clearly appears, from his invefligation, that if we refer the eftimate to the number of hips, every veffel that fails from the port of Liverpool in this trade lefes more than feven of her crew; and that if we refer it to the number of feamen employed, more than a fifth perif. This, we are aflured, has been the invariable proportion for the port of Liverpool for many years; but it is only a part of the lofs diftinctly specified by our author; a fecond lofs of feamen enfues from thofe who are dipated in the Weft-Indies after their discharge from their refpective fhips; and a third from the miferable ftate of many of the feamen, who, having left the colonies either in their own or other fhips, have returned home. Our author's obfervations being put together, and the whole lofs, including thofe that were upon the dead lift, those that were loft in the colonies, and thofe that died or were rendered unferviceable at home, being estimated, it cannot, as he obferves, be ftated that lefs than fifteen feamen in every vefiel, or nineteen hundred and fifty out of the whole number employed, were loft to the service of this country by the profecution of the flave-trade in the year 1786; the lofs ftated in which year, our author adds, will be nearly applicable to that of the year 1787, or any other year of what may be called the peace establishment in this trade. Our author next inquires whether the trade in the natural productions of the country would be equally detrimental to the ftate; as it will be alleged that the veffels in which it is conducted must go to the fame coaft. This objection he aníwers in the most explicit manner, by endeavouring to prove that if the fame ships and men were to go into the trade proposed, they would not experience an equal lofs. That this would really be the cafe he attempts to demonftrate by recurring to the causes of the lofs defcribed, and by fhewing these causes to be chiefly peculiar to the trade in flaves, or fuch as would ceafe to exift were that trade abolished. Mr. Clarkfon contends that the flave-trade not only diminishes our own naval strength, but increases that of our enemies. "It is clear," fays he, • That That every lot of flaves which we additionally import, or cause to be imported, into their colonies, enables them to clear an additional piece of ground; every piece fo gained fupplies additional produce. This produce employs additional feamen; and the great number of naval fubjects, which we thus additionally raise for an enemy, has a tendency (which is not to be put in competition with the profits of the flave-trade) to diminish our national importance.' Our author having examined the pofitive advantages fuppofed to refult from the profecution of the flave-trade, examines, in the fecond part of the Effay, the fuppofed fatal confequences of its abolition. He firft fhews that it is in the power of the planters, if they pleafe, to do without fresh fupplies from the African coaft; fecondly, that if the importation of flaves is prohibited no want of cultivators will be found, but, on the contrary, that the number of cultivators will increafe; and laftly, that not only the planters, but the flaves and the islands will be benefited by the change. To evince the truth of the firft of the pofitions here mentioned, the author has recourfe to a number of facts collected from different islands in the Weft-Indies; and to establish the other two he purfues a train of argument ftrongly marked with probability. Our author farther contends that the abolition of the flavetrade would not, as has been affirmed by the opponents of this meafure, annihilate a confiderable branch of the revenue, but that it would, in fact, increafe the revenue; and, in courfe of time, confiderably augment both the opulence and power of the nation. But, for a fatisfactory detail of the arguments and obfervations by which he endeavours to confirm this opinion, we muft refer our readers to the Effay, where they will find the political confequences, both of the flave-trade and its abolition, developed with a minutenefs of inquiry, and an extent of information, beyond what has hitherto been difplayed on this interesting fubject. We have thus ftated the fentiments of our author, with fome of his reafoning; and in conclufion we have to observe that if the favourers of the flave-trade have arguments to offer in fupport of it, they have fhewn a want of policy in the extreme to be fo dilatory in bringing them forward to public difcuffion. ART. XV. Variety: a Collection of Effays. Written in the Year 1787. 12mo. 3s. fewed. Cadell. London, 1788. A Prefatory advertisement informs us that thefe effays were intended to have appeared periodically; but the authors, on confulting their publifher, were informed that the times were fo much altered fince the World and the Connoiffeur made their appearance, that any attempt to revive fuch mode of pub lication |