On the other hand sulphuric acid is a no less ready test of the presence of acetite or sugar of lead in white wines, &c. in which it may have been used for the purpose of restoring them when pricked; upon adding to such a few drops of weak sulphuric acid, if the wine be pure it will remain transparent, other wise it will become turbid by the precipitation of the lead. As this is designed for general information, I shall not enlarge further there on, than to observe that by these prac tices health is imminently endangered; and were the first-mentioned no otherwise injurious than by the certain destruction of the teeth, and their afflicting pain, now so generally felt, and greatly attributable to the use of mineral acids and salts in our food and medicine, its practice, independant of the fraud, is an enormity which calls aloud for public censure and punishment, G. F. General View of the Confederation of the Rhine, exhibiting the Extent, Population, and Revenue, of each of the States of which it is composed, and also its Contingent of Troops. tains its ground long after its fallacy has been exposed. Innumerable proofs of this truth might be cited, but I shall content myself with one: that "Money is the sinews of war." It is a sentiment and a form of expression continually in the mouths of modern politicians, although the opinion was satisfactorily shewn to be erroneous three hundred years ago by Machiavelli, in his Reflec tions on the first Decade of Livy; a work in itself sufficient to form a statesman, and instruct him in the science of government. Such a treatise, at all times valuable, is at the present period capable of inspiring extraordinary interest; nay, more, it is capable of healing the political wounds which have wasted the lifestream of the British empire, and again entitling us to command the respect and admiration of surrounding nations. Machiavelli's refutation of the doctrine that money is the sinews of war, is contained in the tenth chapter of the second book of the Reflections on Livy, and runs as follows: "That Money is not the sinews of war, although it is the generally received opinion. "We can commence war at pleasure, but we cannot terminate it in the same manner. It is therefore the duty of a prince, before he engages in an enterprize, to ascertain his strength, and regulate his designs accordingly. He ought to be careful not to deceive himself on this examination, which he infallibly must do if he calculates on the basis of his pecuniary resources, his geographical position, or the friendship of his allies. These advantages considerably augment his real strength, but they do not constitute it. Considered alone, and by themselves, they are a mere nullity, nor can they be of any service to him unless he has a well-disciplined and brave army. Without such troops all the treasures in the world are nothing. The strength of a country cannot defend it alone; the fidelity and the friendship of allies wear out; if you are unable to defend them in your turn, they will no longer be faithful. Mountains, lakes, and places of the most difficult access, present few difficulties when deprived of valiant defenders. Treasures, instead of serving you, will only tend to excite the cupidity of the invading army: in of Antipater king of Macedon, against Lacedemon. He relates that, for want of money, the king of Sparta was com pelled to give battle, and was defeated. If he had been able to defer it a few days, intelligence of the death of Alexander would have arrived, and he would have remained conqueror without striking a blow; but being in want of money, and fearing that his army would muting and abandon him for want of pay, he was obliged to run the risk of a battle: and from thence Quintus Curtius takes an occasion of saying, that money is the sinews of war. a "This maxim is every day held forth as political maxim, and the princes who confide in it more than they ought to do, regulate their conduct according to this prejudice, which infatuates them, so as to make them believe that great trea sures are sufficient for their defence. They do not perceive that if it were really so, Darius would have conquered Alexander, the Greeks have triumphed over the Romans; in more modern times the Duke Charles would have beaten the Swiss, and the Florentines would not have had so many difficulties to surmount against Francis Maria, nephew of Julius the Second, in the war of Urbino. "All the above powers have been conquered by those who did not think that money was the sinews of war, but good troops. Among the objects of curiosity which Croesus king of Lydia showed Solon, was an immense treasure. What think you of my power, said the king, on showing it to him. It is not by this mass of gold that I can judge of it, re plied the philosopher; it is with the sword and not with gold that you make war, and he who can bring more arms into the field than yourself, may soon be come master of your treasures. "After the death of Alexander the Great, an immense horde of Gauls overran Greece and afterwards Asia. They sent ambassadors to the king of Macedon, to conclude with him a treaty of peace. That monarch, to give them a splendid idea of his power, and to dazzle their eyes with his magnificence, caused to be displayed all his gold and treasures. The ambassadors of the Gauls, who had nearly concluded the treaty, broke it off; so anxious were they to possess his riches; aud and these treasures, accumulated for his defence, were the sole cause of his ruin." A few years ago, the Austrians, with their coffers full, were despoiled of their states, without being in the least able to arrest the blow by their treasures. Hence I raise my voice against the general clamour; it is not gold, but good troops, which are the sinews of war: gold will not enable you to find good troops, but they will find gold. Had the Romans thought of making war with gold instead of the sword, all the treasures of the universe would not have sufficed, if we consider the magnitude of their enterprizes, and the difficulties they had to surmount; but the use they made of the sword prevented them from wanting money. The nations who dreaded them, brought their riches as an offering even to the Roman camp. If the king of Sparta was compelled to give battle for want of money, it only happened that he was reduced to such an extremity from that, in lieu of any other cause. We have seen, for example, armies in want of provisions, and between the hard alternative of dying of hunger and risking a battle, choose the latter as the most honourable, and that which merited most the favours of for tune. It has often occurred that a general, finding the enemy about to receive reinforcements, determined to hazard a battle the Athenians to make war against all What stronger proof can be brought in The Capuans, required by the Sidicins to aid them against the Samnites, probably calculated their power according to their riches, and not the goodness of their troops. Hence, after they had taken part with them, and been twice defeated, they were compelled to become tributary J.S. BYERLEY. to the Romans, in order to avoid their entire ruin," To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. SIR, rather than wait the arrival of the aid; ON whereby he would be compelled to fight under greater disadvantages. We have sometimes found a general obliged to fly or fight; which happened to Asdrubal, when he found himself attacked on the Metaurus by Claudius Nero and his colleague. That general preferred a battle, as, notwithstanding appearances, he might conquer, whereas certain ruin must have been the consequence of his flight. There are therefore a thousand reasons which may oblige a general to give battle contrary to his inclination, and the want of money may be one; but money is no more the sinews of war than any of the other causes which may reduce him to a fatal or dangerous alternative. I therefore again repeat that it is not gold, but soldiers, which command success in war. Money is a means, but only a secondary one, which good troops never fail to procure, because it is as impossible for good soldiers not to find gold as it is for gold to procure good soldiers. Ifistory affords numerous proofs of the fact. The example of Pericles advising 1 N the 7th instant I received from my brother the valuable present of your 26th volume. On examining its contents, I was surprised and concerned at an error which has unaccountably slipt into it, and which I flatter myself you will permit me to correct. In the 142d page of the above volume, is a very beautiful poem, of which I am asserted to be the author. To this honour I have no claim. It is the production of my valuable friend, John Joshua More,* of this city. It is very true, sir, that I did enclose several copies of "The Scale of Nature and the Three Recorders," to my English friends, and that I did not men John Joshua More, is a native of Cambridgeshire, in England: he early distinguished himself for his mathematical and astronomical knowledge. With many other virtuous men he left his native country soon after the commencement of the Quixotic war of 1793. He was one of those who supposed religious tolerance and parliamentary reform essential to the salvation of his country: these were refused, and he withdrew from the (now impending) evils he foresaw. tion tion the author's name, from a presump tion that they were uninterested in the name of a person with whom they had no acquaintance; but, sure I am that I never gave the most distant reason for supposing that I was the author of the production alluded to. The history of the poem is as follows: About twenty of us have formed a society for the purchase of books, for which purpose each of us subscribes half a dollar inonthly. In January we have an anniversary dinner, after which one of the members delivers an oration, and another an ode, composed for the occasion. The Three Recorders made a part of Mr. More's poem, for the anniversary celebration in January, 1808. And now, sir, that I am on the subject of book societies, permit me, as I have observed that you occasionally notice them, to introduce to your readers one that is probably unique. In this city there is a book society, consisting altogether of boys of from twelve to fourteen years of age, some few may be nearly fifteen. Each boy, on becoming a mem ber, stocks a certain number of volumes, which become a part of the common property of the society. Every Saturday evening they publicly debate some historic fact. The subject of the last night's discussion was, "What was the true cha racter of Mary Queen of Scots?" A subject which pre-supposes a degree of historic knowledge, rarely met with at that period of life, and leads us to hope that the next generation will outstrip their predecessors in useful knowledge, and with equal zeal maintain the rights of the people, and the independence of their country. From the laudable ambition of boys, let me call the attention of your subscribers to the follies (to use no harsher term) of men. Early in Mr. Pitt's war, the government of England contemplated sending Mr. Jackson as its representative to the United States. But there was even then something so objectionable in the character of Mr. Jackson, that Mr. Rufus King, our then ambassador, objected to the appointment; and in conversation with Mr. Pitt, adduced such reasons as led that minis ter to abandon the intention. As this fact was well known in the United States, and as Mr. Jackson had acted so very conspicuous a part at Copenhagen, his appointment to succeed Mr. Erskine gave very general dissatisfaction to our citizens. Many believed that he was only sent to insult our government, and at some places they went so far at the public meetings as to enter into reso lutions expressive of their hope, that the American government would not receive or acknowledge Mr. Jackson as the minis ter of England. In this temper of the nas tion, the president, however, wisely, I think, determined to hear what he bad to say, received him in due form; and the world will be surprized at (if any thing Mr. Jackson does can surprize), and I hope the thinking part of the British nation will not justify, the return he has made. But before I detail the circumstance I allude to, I shall relate one or two facts which I have on such authority as to command implicit belief. I will not pretend to say whether Mr. Erskine bad or had not written instructions from Mr. Canning, subsequent to those of the 23d of January, ult. but it is certain that Mr. Oakley, the confidential agent of the English ministry, left London some time after that date, and, consequently, if he did not bring written, he most probably did verbal, instructions. Nor is there the least doubt but Mr. Oakley was associ ated with Mr. Erskine by the English ministry, in the negociation with the United States, as when that gentleman met with any question peculiarly impor tant, he used to defer his assent, by words to this import, "I will take time to consider the subject, and consult Mr. Oakley about it," a degree of complaisance no minister would have avowed, had not the person to be consulted had a claim to the distinction. And it is universally believed here, that Mr. Oakley has uniformly justified Mr. Erskine's conduct, since the moment it was known that the British ministry refused to ratify his agreement with the United States. Having premised thus much, I shall state that on Sunday last it was generally understood among the best-informed citizens, that Mr. Jackson had conducted himself very extraordinarily towards our government, and that in consequence he was no longer considered as a public functionary; and yesterday's National Intelligencer laid the following summary before the public, which may be deemed official from the American government. "As soon as the preliminary ceremonies were adjusted, a correspondence took place between Mr. Smith, (the American Secretary of State) and Mr. Jackson, in which the latter stated, that the dispatch of the 23d of January, was the only dispatch by which the conditions were prescribed to Mr. Erskine, for the conclu sion of an arrangement with this country, on the matter to which it related. Mr. Smith, in reply, asserted, that no such declaration had ever before been made to the American government; and added, that if that dispatch had been communicated at the time of the arrange ment, or if it had been known that the propositions contained in it were the only ones on which Mr. Erskine was authorized to make an arrangement, the arrangement would not have been made. Notwithstanding this assurance, Mr. Jackson, in his next letter, indecorously used a language, implying that Mr. Fr. skine's instructions were at the time made known to this government. Mr. Smith, in his answer, distinctly intimated that such an insinuation was inadmissible, more especially after the explicit asseveration of this government; that they had no such knowledge; and that with such knowledge, such an arrangement would not have been made. Not satisfied with the sacred pledge thus given, more grossly, if possible, he reiterated his insinuation. A conduct so indecorous could receive but one answer. Mr. Jackson was accordingly informed, that it was become necessary, to preclude opportunities which he had abused, and that consequently no further communications would be received from him. That the necessity of this determination would, without delay, be made known to his government, who would at the same tinue be assured, that a ready attention would be given to any communication affecting the interests of the two countries through any other functionary that may be substituted." It must be admitted, that the sending hither a man known to be so obnoxious as Mr. Jackson, was not the most likely means of conciliating the feelings of this country towards your's; but, ill as I think of the British ministry, (including not only Mr. Canning's party, but his successors; nor do my Lord Grenville, or Mr. Windham, rank much higher), I would wish to believe that Mr. Jackson was not sent here as a political bully, to use language to the American government which no gentleman would dare use towards another. I am aware how totally mistaken is the American character in England; how its love of peace has been interpreted into a fear of war; but the dignified attitude it has now assumed, will, I trust, undeceive those who have hitherto implicitly believed a set of Tory libellers on the government and people of the United 66 States. These scribblers really seem indifferent to the matter, provided what they write will but flatter the passions and prejudices of their British employers. After the baneful effects produced by their predecessors, at the commencement of our revolutionary war, as well as those which resulted from the reports of royalists in France, and emigrants who escaped from thence, it were much to be wished that the English ministry would rather rely on the information of men of honour and veracity, than pin their faith to the assertions of miscreants, one of whom, when here, was held in universal contempt as a spy, and whose deserted wife and daughters have experienced every evil, which loss of character, associated with poverty, can infflict. It is not enough, sir, that such a man should call himself an esq." or even "a councellor, late of Rhode Island," the inhabitants of Alexandria only knew him as a petty-fogging grocer; nor, because he used to take notes in Congress occasionally for a Tory newspaper, is he to be presumed capable of the impartiality requisite for a stranger in America." But I shall on this subject say no more: if necessary, deteriora manent. On the contrary, I earnestly hope the English people will fully and impartially review their present situation; let them reflect on the consequences which have resulted from nearly fifty years of one undeviating policy. Let them ask themselves, whether that policy has increased the happiness of the great body of their people, diminished the number of the poor and miserable, or lessened the weight of their oppressions. Has it tended to mitigate religious intolerance, and unite in one compact band, the different sects of Christians, in defence of their common faith and common interests. Has it not on the contrary placed the nation on the verge; nay, has it not plunged her into the gulf of perdition? Has it not severed a mighty Continent from the empire; and if it has increased the number of splendid palaces and luxurious nobles, has it not nearly swept your hardy yeomanry from the land, and pressed so heavily on the poor, as to render the science of a Rum. ford necessary to ascertain how small a portion of what once were deemed the necessaries of life, is essential to ex istence. Has it not separated men of |