In a similar strain, the writer continues at a far greater length than our patience will allow us to quote. What man of understanding but must have felt disgusted at such a fulsome panegyric, which has not so much as a word of truth to recommend it! We despise the historian who sacrifices his integrity by an attempt to mislead posterity in this manner. It will, however, prove but an attempt; for will posterity overlook the general iniquitous and abandoned conduct of the royal libertine, both abroad and at home?--his cowardice and want of skill in the field?--his tergiversation to his creditors?--his infamous conduct with regard to certain foreign bondholders?--his notorious practices as a seducer?--his gross and unpardonable dereliction of duty at the Horse Guards?--his refusal to inquire into the conduct of the soldiers at the Manchester massacre?--his shameful acceptance of ten thousand pounds a year of the public money, for only calling upon his dying father twice a week, which Earl Grey pronounced to be "an insult to the people to ask it?"--his receiving this sum, and his going down to Windsor with a bible in his carriage, on _pretence_ of visiting his royal father after he had ceased to exist?--or his bigotted, ridiculous, and futile opposition to the claims of the Catholics? Will posterity, we repeat, forget to canvass all this, and much more, of which the Duke of York was notoriously guilty?