notice from Mr. Burke of the light in which he considered every attempt to introduce the example of France into the politics of this country, and of his resolution to break with his host friends and to join with his worst enemies to prevent it.  He hoped that no such necessity would ever exist; but in case it should, his determination was made.  The party knew perfectly that he would at least defend himself.  He never intended to attack Mr. Fox, nor did he attack him directly or indirectly.  His speech kept to its matter.  No personality was employed, even in the remotest allusion.  He never did impute to that gentleman any republican principles, or any other bad principles or bad conduct whatsoever.  It was far from his words; it was far from his heart.  It must be remembered, that, notwithstanding the attempt of Mr. Fox to fix on Mr. Burke an unjustifiable change of opinion, and the foul crime of teaching a set of maxims to a boy, and afterwards, when these maxims became adult in his mature age, of abandoning both the disciple and the doctrine, Mr. Burke never attempted, in any one particular, either to criminate or to recriminate.  It may be said that he had nothing of the kind in his power.  This he does not controvert.  He certainly had it not in his inclination.  That gentleman had as little ground for the charges which he was so easily provoked to make upon him.

The gentlemen of the party (I include Mr. Fox) have been kind enough to consider the dispute brought on by this business, and the consequent separation of Mr. Burke from their corps, as a matter of regret and uneasiness.  I cannot be of opinion that by his exclusion they have had any loss at all.  A man whose opinions are so very adverse to theirs, adverse, as it was expressed, “as pole to pole,” so mischievously as well as so directly adverse that they found themselves under the necessity of solemnly disclaiming them in full Parliament,—­such a man must ever be to them a most unseemly and unprofitable incumbrance.  A cooeperation with him could only serve to embarrass them in all their councils.  They have besides publicly represented him as a man capable of abusing the docility and confidence of ingenuous youth,—­and, for a bad reason or for no reason, of disgracing his whole public life by a scandalous contradiction of every one of his own acts, writings, and declarations.  If these charges be true, their exclusion of such a person from their body is a circumstance which does equal honor to their justice and their prudence.  If they express a degree of sensibility in being obliged to execute this wise and just sentence, from a consideration of some amiable or some pleasant qualities which in his private life their former friend may happen to possess, they add to the praise of their wisdom and firmness the merit of great tenderness of heart and humanity of disposition.