Fisheries of Newfoundland and Nova Scotia, to Great Britain, by the Treaty of Peace and Commerce, lately concluded at Utrecht. The first number appeared upon the 26th of May, 1713, and it continued to be published three times a week, upon Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. "This paper," says Boyer, "upon its first appearance abroad, was generally fathered upon the chief manager of the Treaty of Commerce, Arthur Moore, supposed to be assisted by the genius of Dr Davenant; but the latter solemnly disowned his having any share in it: and, indeed, it was soon after discovered to be the production of an ambidextrous, mercenary scribbler, Daniel De Foe, employed by the Earl of Oxford, who for this dirty work allowed him a considerable weekly salary, and who laid out all his skill in puzzling the argument by his verbose sophistry; "all of which is equally false and scurrilous. Boyer's account, however, has been copied by Oldmixon, with increased virulence.

This

writer observes, "Foe, as well as the Lord-Treasurer, had been a rank Presbyterian, and their genius was so near akin, that Harley could not but take him into his confidence as soon as he got acquainted with him.

He was

adored and caressed by that mighty statesman, who gave him, as that mercenary said himself, to the value of one thousand pounds in one year. Foe's business," continues Oldmixon, "was only to puzzle the cause by mercantile cant and bold sophistry, which several eminent merchants and others being apprised thereof, they desired Mr Henry Martin, bailiff of Southwark, an ingenious, judicious man, to publish a paper called 'The British Merchant,' which came out twice a week, wherein, with plain reason and incontested matters of fact, he exposed the fallacies, blunders, inconsistencies, and ignorance of the hireling 'Mercator, insomuch that at length the thoughts of true Englishmen about commerce, which at first was represented to be the effects of discontent and faction, as was hinted in the Queen's speech, appeared to be the universal sense of all traders."+

Tindal, following the writers above-mentioned, names De Foe at once as the author of 'Mercator.' He says, "The treaty was to be supported at any rate; the persons concerned in making it either could not or would not see their mistake; and the nation was to be convinced that, through their great skill in trade, they had made an excellent treaty of commerce. To these ends, Daniel De Foe was employed; though in a weekly paper, published some years before, called the Review,' he had very often condemned the French trade, as detrimental to this kingdom. He undertook, however, the cause now, and published a paper thrice a week, by the title of Mercator,' &c. In this paper he undertook to prove that the trade to France, though contrary to all experience, had always been beneficial to this kingdom, and would be so again, upon the foot of the treaty. And, as he had the art of writing very plausibly, and those who employed him and furnished him with materials had the command of all public papers in the Custom-house, he had it in his power to do a great deal of mischief, especially among such as were unskilled in trade, and at the same time very fond of French wines, which it was then a crime to be against.

Of the British Merchant,' set on foot in opposition to 'Mercator,' Tindal has given the following account: "Several ingenious merchants of long experience, and well skilled in trade, joined together to contradict the impositions of this writer. They knew he had many heads, besides the advantage of public papers to help him, and therefore thought the publication of a joint weekly paper the most feasible way to confute him, and set our trade in a clear light, because they were sensible that it was impossible for any man to be master of so much experience as was required to furnish materials from so many different branches of our trade as would be touched upon in this debate. The paper they published was, in opposition to Daniel De Foe's title, called "The British Merchant; or Commerce Preserved,' and was published twice a week. The person to whom the public was chiefly obliged for this paper, and who had the greatest hand in it, was Henry Martin, who was afterwards made Inspector-General of the Exports and Imports. He was assisted by Sir Charles Cooke, merchant, afterwards made Commissioner of Trade; Sir Theodore Jansen, Bart., James Milner, Theodore Torriano, Joshua Gee, Christopher Haynes, David Martin, merchants; and Charles King, who afterwards collected and reprinted those papers. Lord Halifax and General Stanhope had likewise a considerable share in the management

Boyer's Queen Anne, p. 633. + Oldmixon's England, iii, 519. Tindal's England, iv, 315.

of this paper, which had so great an effect, that the thoughts of the Whigs about commerce, which at first were represented as the result of discontent and spirit of party, appeared to be the universal sense of all traders."

Mr Chalmers, whose judgment will be most approved,
gives the true history and character of these papers. "The
firstMercator,' says he, "was published on the 26th of
May, 1713, the last on the 20th of July, 1714; and they
were written by William Brown and his assistants, with
great knowledge, great strength, and great sweetness,
considering how much party then embittered every com-
position. The British Merchant,' which opposed the
'Mercator,' and which was compiled by Henry Martin and
his associates, has fewer facts, less argument, and more
factiousness. It began on the 1st of August, 1713, and
ended the 27th of July, 1714. I have spoken of both from
my own convictions, without regarding the declamations
which have continued to pervert the public opinion from
that epoch to the present times. De Foe was struck at in
the third number of the British Merchant,' and plainly
mentioned in the fourth. "Mr Daniel De Foe may change
his name from 'Review' to Mercator,' from 'Mercator'
to any other title, yet still his singular genius shall be dis-
tinguished by his inimitable way of writing." This personal
sarcasm was introduced to supply deficiency of facts, or
weakness of reasoning. When Charles King re-published
the British Merchant' in volumes, among various changes
he expunged, with other personalities, the name of De
Foe." He, however, persisted in attributing 'Mercator'
"to a hireling writer of a weekly paper called the 'Review;'
and Anderson, copying from him, goes still further in his
Chronology of Commerce,' and makes De Foe the "hire-
ling writer" of Mercator,' and other papers, in favour of
the French treaty of trade. But, as Mr Chalmers observes,
"we can now judge with the impartiality of arbitrators.
On the one hand, there are the living challenge and the
death-bed declaration of De Foe; on the other, the mere
surmise and unauthorised assertion of King, Anderson, and
others, who detract from their own veracity by their own
factiousness or foolery. It is surely time to free ourselves
from prejudices of every kind, and to disregard the sound
of names as much as the falsehoods of party."¶

28 Les Soupirs de la Grande Bretagne; or, the
London. 1713.
Groans of Great Britain.
Price 1s.

29

Secret History of One Year. London. 1714. 30 An Account of the Conduct of Robert Earl of Oxford. 1715.

31 Impeachment, or, No Impeachment. London. 1715.

32 Folly and Vanity of Impeaching. London.
1715.

33 The Triennial Bill impartially stated.
don. 1716.

Lon

This work has been attributed to De Foe, but Mr Chalmers is decidedly of opinion that it is not his. Boyer insults our author for it in his Political State,' and says that all the arguments against the bill were fully confuted "by the ingenious and judicious Joseph Addison, Esq." Upon this important subject many persons, equally judicious, have thought differently.

34

Secret Memoirs of a Treasonable Conference
London. 1717.
at Somerset House.

35 A Letter from the Right Hon. Robert Wal-
pole. 1717.

36

Some National Grievances represented. 1717. 37 What if the Swedes should come? With some Thoughts about keeping the Army on Foot, whether they come or not.

1717.

London.

This work, perhaps more from the likeness of the title to that of one of his former pieces than from any weightier consideration, has been sometimes ascribed to De Foe. 38 An Argument proving that the Design of

Employing and Ennobling Foreigners, is a Treasonable Conspiracy against the Constitution, Dangerous to the Kingdom, an

Affront to the Nobility of Scotland in parti- || cular, and dishonourable to the Peerage of Great Britain in general. With an Appendix; wherein an Insolent Pamphlet, entitled The Anatomy of Great Britain,' is Anatomised; and its design and author detected and exposed. London. 1717. 8vo. pp. 102.

Boyer, in his Political State,' ascribes this work also to De Foe, and as such it was replied to by Toland, the author of The State Anatomy,' in a second part of that work, in which he frequently points to De Foe by name, and handles him with great severity as his supposed antagonist; but in this he was mistaken, as is fully apparent from the rejoinder of his former adversary, who published A Further Argument against Ennobling Foreigners,' in which the writer acquaints Toland, that in seeking for an author to fight with, he had dressed up a man of straw; and "finding it greatly to his purpose, that De Foe, author of The True-Born Englishman,' should pass for the author of the Argument against Ennobling Foreigners,' he has singled him out, and fallen upon him in a most merciless manner. He has recommended him to the revenge of his foreigners, and to the resentment of the government. He has exposed, ridiculed, bantered, and in a word, as far as in him lies, murthered the man; and yet all this while, this man, as I find, was no more author of this book than the man in the moon. Nay, as I hear, for I have no knowledge of the man, he has been sick in his bed all the while. In carrying on this tragi-comedy, he takes care to summon for evidence all that this De Foe has said upon the same subject, in his pamphlets and poems formerly written, and to confront this with what I have said now. Mr Toland hath taken a wrong aim, and charged a man falsely with writing a book who really has no concern in it, or about it." In another place the writer says, "If Mr Baker, the publisher, were not just at the point of death, while this is at the press, a particular account of that part would be given; but it is none of my business to vindicate De Foe, however injuriously he may be treated." Toland had charged De Foe with being a writer in Mercurius Politicus, but without any real foundation.

39 An Account of the Conduct of Lord Viscount Townsnend. 1717.

40 The History of the Press-yard; or a brief Account of the Customs and Ceremonies that are put in practice, and to be met with in that ancient Repository of living Bodies, called his Majesty's Gaol of Newgate, in London. London. 1717.

This account of the behaviour of the rebel prisoners during their confinement appears to have been written by one of their own class, who was chamber-fellow with young Bottair in Newgate; so that De Foe can have no pretensions to the authorship.

41 Minutes of the Negociations of Monsieur

Mesnager, at the Court of England, towards the Close of the last Reign, &c. Written by himself, and done out of French. London. 1717.

A second edition of this work, printed for J. Roberts, was published in 1736. There is nothing but traditional authority for ascribing this work to De Foe, and its internal character affords just reason for believing that it has no solid foundation. Although pretending to be a translation from the French, it was composed in England, but not by the French agent named in the title. It contains a curious narrative of the secret intrigues that brought about the peace of Utrecht, bearing upon the face of it every mark of authenticity; and as such it has been appealed to by most of our historians. Savage, in his satire On False Historians,' speaks of it as "a book calculated to vilify the administration in the four last years of Queen Anne's reign;" and pronounces it a forgery.

"Some usurp names-an English garreteer From minutes forged, is Monsieur Mesnager." Oldmixon, in his reply to Bishop Atterbury, p. 7, expressly says that Mesnager's negociation was written by De Foe, and that he composed it, "by direction or encouragement of the quondam treasurer, Harley, who could not

but be well acquainted with the subject described." This writer, however, is so often mistaken in his representations of things, that no great reliance is to be placed on his testimony. Boyer's Political State, Vol. XIII, June 1717, p. 631, contains the following passage:-"As for the forger of Monsieur Mesnager's minutes, whom I have promised to point out, I shall acquaint my readers, that in the general opinion, to which I easily subscribe, he is the same I had not long ago (see Political State for February, 1716, and 1717, p. 123) occasion to describe as a scribbler (Trium Literatum) famous for writing upon, for, and against all manner of persons, subjects, and parties, a description which perfectly answers his character. This man has formerly put his name to some of his low productions; but having been stigmatised by an ignominious punishment, he has since concealed it with all possible industry, and at the same time prostituted his pen to the vilest purposes. He was thought a fit tool for the designs in hand by those who had the administration of affairs during the four last years of the last reign; who, among other dirty work, put him upon writing a weekly paper, called Mercator,' calculated to procure an easy passage to a bill, by which a great branch of the trade of Great Britain was to have been given up. The beneficence of his masters, and in particular of the E of O, enabled him to repair and beautify his habitation at Newington, where he had set up his forge of politics and scandal, from which, for these six years past, he supplies monthly, often weekly, the publishers in and about Paternoster row. To this famous writer we are, among other learned lucubrations, indebted for-1. The Secret History of the White Staff, in three parts. 2. A Secret History of One Year. 3. Advice to the People of Great Britain, with respect to two important Questions-I. What they ought to expect from the King. II. How they ought to behave to him. 4. An Account of the Conduct of Robert Earl of Oxford. 5. Impeachment, or no Impeach

ment.

6. The Folly and Vanity of Impeaching. 7. An Account of the Two Nights' Court at Greenwich. 8. An Account of a Conference at St House. 9. A Letter from the Right Honourable Robert Walpole. 10. Some National Grievances represented. 11. An Argument against Employing and Ennobling Foreigners. 12. An Ac count of the Conduct of Lord Viscount Townsend. 13. Mercurius Politicus; or, Monthly Scandal upon the present Government. 14; and lastly, Minutes of the Negociations of Monsieur Mesnager. That this last doughty piece came from the same forge with the rest, will immediately appear to any one who shall take the pains to consider the loose style and long-winded spinning way of writing, which is the same in all the productions of this celebrated author," &c.

In the following month (July 1717) of Boyer's Political State,' at the end is the following passage:- I shall con clude with acquainting my readers, that whereas, in the last journal for the month of June, 1717, page 631, I had said, that in the general opinion, to which I easily subscribed, the forger of Monsieur Mesnager's minutes was a person I had not long before occasion to describe as a scribbler, Trium Literatum, &c. One De Foe thinking himself the person meant by me, has lately in print denied himself to be the author of the said forgery, which, therefore, must look out for a father. This is all the answer I shall return to the scurrilities plentifully bestowed on me, upon that idle pretence in a long advertisement lately published; for I shall never descend so low as to enter the Billingsgate lists either with branded De Foe, or any other scribbler of that stamp."

Great political warmth of feeling seems to have existed between Boyer and De Foe, which, to the credit of the former, subsided by the following printed account of the death of the latter in the 'Political State' for April, 1731: "About the end of this month died Mr Daniel De Foe, sen., a person well known for his numerous and various writings; by some of which it appears that he had a good natural genius, and he was generally looked on as a man who thoroughly understood the theory of trade, and the truc interest of this nation; but he never had the good fortune to be much taken notice of by any minister of state, so that he got but little by his knowledge."

42 Some Persons Vindicated against the Author
of the Defection. London. 1717.
The author was probably R. Walpole.

43 Remarks upon Febrifugium Magnum. 1722.
44 Flagellum; or, a Dry Answer to Dr Han-
cocke. 1723.

45 The Comical Pilgrim; or, Travels of a Cynick Philosopher through the most

LONDON:

REPRINTED BY CHARLES REYNELL, LITTLE PULTENEY STREET;

AND

PUBLISHED BY J. CLEMENTS, AT 21 AND 22, IN THE SAME STREET.

MDCCCXL.

TO

HONOUR AND JUSTICE,

THOUGH IT BE OF HIS WORST ENEMIES,

BY

DANIEL DE FOE;

BEING

A TRUE ACCOUNT OF HIS CONDUCT IN PUBLIC AFFAIRS.

"Come and let us smite him with the tongue, and let us not give heed to any of his words."