UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
 AT LOS ANGELES
 
 A N 
 
 APPEAL 
 
 THE N E W 
 
 THE OLD WHIGS, 
 
 [ PRICB 3 s. f 
 
 8 2
 
 A N 
 
 APPEAL 
 
 FROM 
 
 THE NEW 
 
 T O 
 
 THE OLD WHIGS, 
 
 IN GONSEQJJENCE OF SOME LATE 
 
 DISCUSSIONS IN PARLIAMENT, 
 
 RELATIVE TO THE 
 
 Reflexions on the French Revolution. 
 
 THE THIRD EDITION. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 PRINTED FOR J. DODSLEY, PALL-MALL, 
 
 M.DCC.XCI.
 
 fHERE are Jome corrections in this Edition, 
 which tend to render the Jenje lejs objcurs in one or 
 two places. The order cf the two laft members is alfo 
 changed, and I believe for the better. This change 
 was made on the Juggeftion of a very learned perfon> 
 to the partiality of whoje friendship I owe much j to 
 the feverity of whoje judgment I owe more.
 
 2FH 
 
 T Mr. Burke's time of life, and in his difpo- 
 fitions, pet ere honeflam dimiffionem was all he 
 had to do with his political aflbciates. This boon 
 - they have not choien to grant him. With many ex- 
 prefllons of good-will, in effeft they tell him he has 
 |j loaded the ftage too long. They conceive it, tho' 
 g an harfh yet a neceffary office, in full parliament to 
 ~ declare to the prefent age, and to as late a pofteri- 
 ty, as fhall take any concern in the proceedings 
 of our day, that by one book he has diigraced the 
 whole tenour of his life. Thus they difmifs their 
 oo old partner of the war. He is advifed to retire, 
 ^ whilft they continue to ferve the public upon wifer 
 <= principles, and under better aufpices, 
 ^ . Whether Diogenes the Cynic was a true phi- 
 => lofopher, cannot eafily be determined. He has 
 written nothing. But the fayings of his which 
 are handed down by others, are lively; and may 
 be eafily and aptly applied on many occafions 
 by thofe whofe wit is not fo perfect as their me- 
 & mory. This Diogenes (as every one will recollefl) 
 5 was citizen of a little bleak town fituated on the 
 ^ coaft of the Euxine, and expofed to all the buffets of 
 that unhofpitable fea. He lived at a great diftance 
 
 from
 
 from thofe weather-beaten walls, in eafe and indo- 
 lence, and in the midft of literary leifure, when he 
 was informed that his townfmen had condemned 
 him to be banifhed from Sinope ; he anfwered 
 coolly, "And I condemn them to live in Sinope." 
 
 /The gentlemen of the party in which Mr. Burke 
 has always acted, in palling upon him the fentence 
 I of retirement *, have done nothing more than to 
 \ confirm the fentence which he had long before 
 palTed upon himfelf. When that retreat was choice, 
 which the tribunal of his peers inflict as puniih- 
 ment, it is plain he does not think their fentence 
 intolerably fevere. Whether they who are to con- 
 tinue in the Sinope which fliortly he is to leave, 
 will fpend the long years which, I hope, remain 
 to them, in a manner more to their fatisfaction, 
 than he Ihall flide down, in filence and obfcurity, 
 the flope of his declining days, is belt known to 
 him who meafures out years, and days, and for- 
 tunes. 
 
 * News-paper intelligence ought always to be received with 
 Come degree of caution. I do not know that the following pa- 
 ragraph is founded on any authority; but it comes with an 
 air of authority. The paper is profefledly in the intereft of 
 the modern Whigs, and under their direction. The para- 
 graph is not difclaimed on their part. It profefles to be the 
 decifion of thofe whom its author calls " The great and firm 
 body of the Whigs of England." Who are the Whigs of a 
 different competition, which the promulgator of the fentence 
 confiders as compj>fed of fleeting ard unfettled particles, I 
 know not, nor whether there be any of that defcription. The 
 definitive fentence of" the great and firm body of the Whigs 
 of England" (as this paper gives it out) is as follows : 
 
 " The great and firm body of the Whigs of England, true to their 
 c principles, have decided on the difpnte between Mr. Fox and Mr. 
 " Burke; and the former is declared to have maintained the pure doc- 
 " trines by which they are bound together, and upon which they have 
 " invariably acted. Ths confequence is, that Mr. Burke retires from 
 parliament." A/cmng- Chronicle, May it, tygr. 
 
 ~~* *"""** The
 
 ( 3 ) 
 
 The quality of the fentencc does not however 
 decide on the juftice of it. Angry friendfhip is 
 fometimes as bad as calm enmity. For this rea- 
 fon the cold neutrality of abftraft juftice, is, to a 
 good and clear caufe, a more defirable thing than 
 an affection liable to be any way difturbed. When 
 the trial is by friends, if the decifion fhould happen 
 to be favorable, the honor of the acquittal is leflen- 
 edj if adverfe, the condemnation is exceedingly 
 embittered. It is aggravated by coming from lips 
 profeffmg friendfhip, and pronouncing judgment 
 with forrow and reluctance. Taking in the whole 
 view of life, it is more fafe to live under the jurif- 
 diction of fevere but Heady reafon, than under 
 the empire of indulgent, but capricious paffion. 
 It is certainly well for Mr. Burke that there are 
 impartial men in the world. To them I addrefs 
 myfelf, pending the appeal which on his part is 
 made from the living to the dead, from the mo- 
 dern Whigs to the antient. 
 
 The gentlemen, who, in the name of the party, 
 have palled fentence on Mr. Burke's book, in the 
 light of literary criticifm are judges above all 
 challenge. He did not indeed flatter himfelf, that 
 as a writer, he could claim the approbation of 
 men whole talents, in his judgment and in the 
 public judgment, approach to prodigies ; if ever 
 fuch perfons fliould be difpofed to eftimate the 
 merit of a compofition upon the ftandard of their 
 own ability. 
 
 In their critical cenfure, though Mr. Burke may 
 find himfelf humbled by it as a writer, as a man and 
 as an Englifhman, he finds matter not only of con- 
 folation, but of pride. He propofed to convey to a j 
 foreign people, not his own ideas, but the prevalent 
 opinions and fentiments of a nation, renowned for 
 wifdom, and celebrated in all ages for a well under- 
 B 2 ftood
 
 ( 4 ) 
 
 ftood and well regulated love of freedom. This was 
 the avowed purpofe of the far greater part of his 
 work. As that work has not been ill received, and 
 as his critics will not only admit but contend, that 
 this reception coulH not be owing to any excellence 
 fn the compofition capable of perverting the public 
 judgment, it is clear that he is not disavowed by 
 the nation whofe fentiments he had undertaken to 
 defcnbe. His reprefcntation is authenticated by 
 the verdict of his country. Had his piece, as a 
 work of fkill, been thought worthy of commenda- 
 tion, fome doubt might have been entertained of 
 the caufe of his fuccefs. But the matter (lands 
 exaftly as he wiflies it. He is more happy to 
 have his fidelity in reprefentation recognized by 
 the body of the people, than if he were to be 
 ranked in point of ability (and higher he could not 
 be ranked) with thofe whofe critical cenlure he has 
 had the misfortune to incur. 
 
 It is not from this part of their decifion which the 
 author wiflies an appeal. There are things which 
 touch him more nearly. To abandon them would 
 argue, not diffidence in his abilities, but treachery 
 to his caufe. Had his work been recognized as 
 a pattern for dextrous argument, and powerful 
 eloquence, yet if it tended to eftablifli maxims, or 
 to infpire fentiments, adverfe to the wife and free 
 conftitution of this kingdom, he would only have 
 caufe to lament, that it pofTerTed qualities fitted to 
 perpetuate the memory of his offence. Oblivioa 
 would be the only means of his efcaping the re- 
 proaches of pofterity. But, after receiving the com- 
 mon allowance due to the common weaknefs of 
 man, he wiflies to owe no part of the indulgence of 
 the world to its forgetfulnefs. He is at uTue with 
 the party, before the prefent, and if ever he can reach 
 it, before the coming, generation. 
 
 The
 
 ( 5 ) 
 
 The author, feveral months previous to his pub- 
 lication, well knew, that two gentlemen, both of them 
 pofieffed of the moft diftinguiihed abilities, and of 
 a moft decifive authority in the party, had differed 
 with him in one of the moft material points relative 
 to the French revolution ; that is in their opinion 
 of the behaviour of the French foldiery, and its re- 
 volt from its officers. At the time of their public 
 declaration on this fubject, he did not imagine the 
 opinion of thefe two gentlemen had extended a 
 great way beyond themfelves. He was however 
 well aware of the probability, that perlbns of" 
 their juft credit and influence would at length 
 difpofe the greater number to an agreement with 
 their fentiments; and perhaps might induce the, 
 whole body to a tacit acquieicence in their declara- 
 tions, under a natural, and not always an improper 
 diflike of {hewing a difference with thofe who lead 
 their party. I- will 'not deny, that in general this- 
 conduct in parties is defenfible ; but within what li- 
 mits the practice is to be circumlcribed, and with 
 what exceptions the doctrine which fupports it is to 
 be received, it is not my prefent purpofe to define. 
 The prefent queftion has nothing to do with their 
 motives j it only regards the public expreffion of 
 their fentiments. 
 
 The author is compelled, however reluctantly, to 
 receive the fentence pronounced upon him in the 
 Houfe of Commons as that of the party. It pro- 
 ceeded from the mouth of him who muft be regard- 
 ed as its authentic organ. In a difcuffion which con- 
 tinued for two days, no one gentleman of the oppofi- 
 tion interpofed a negative, or even a doubt, in favour 
 of him or of his opinions. If an idea confonant to the 
 doctrine of his book, or favourable to his conduct, 
 lui ks in the minds of any perfons in that defcription, 
 it is to be confidered only as a peculiarity whjcn they 
 B 3 indulge
 
 indulge to their own private liberty of thinking. The 
 author cannot reckon upon it. It has nothing to do 
 with them as members of a party. In their public 
 capacity, in every thing that meets the public ear, 
 or public eye, the body muft be confidered as una- 
 nimous. 
 
 They muft have been animated with a very warm 
 zeal againft thofe opinions, becaufe they were under 
 no necejfity of acting as they did, from any juft 
 caufe of apprehenfion that the errors of this writer 
 fhould be taken for theirs. They might difap- 
 prove i it was not neceffary they fhould difaiiow 
 him, as they have done in the whole, and in all the 
 parts of his book ; becaufe neither in the whole nor 
 in any of the parts, were they, directly, or by any 
 implication, involved. The author was known in- 
 deed to have been warmly, ftrenucufly, and affec^ 
 tionately, againft all allurements of ambition, and 
 all pofiibility of alienation from pride, or perfonal 
 picque, or peevilh jealoufy, attached to the Whig 
 party. With one of them he has had a long friend- 
 fliip, which he muft ever remember with a me- 
 lancholy pleafure. To the great, real, and ami- 
 able virtues, and to the unequalled abilities of 
 that gentleman, he lhall always join with his 
 country in paying a juft tribute of applaufe. 
 There are others in that party for whom, without 
 any fhade of forrow, he bears as high a degree of 
 love as can enter into the human heart; and as 
 much veneration as ought to be paid to human 
 creatures ; becaufe he firmly believes, that they are 
 endowed with as many and as great virtues, as the 
 nature of man is capable of producing, joined to 
 great clearnefs of intellect, to a juft judgment, to a 
 wonderful temper, and to true wifdom. His fenti- 
 ments with regard to them can never vary, with- 
 out fubjecting him to the juft indignation of man- 
 
 kind,,
 
 
 ( 7 ) 
 
 kind, who are bound, and are generally difpofed, 
 to look up with reverence to the beft patterns of 
 their fpecies, and fuch as give a dignity to the na- 
 ture of which we all participate. For the whole 
 of the party he has high refpect. Upon a view 
 indeed of the compofition of all parties, he finds 
 great fatisfaction. It is, that in leaving the fer- 
 vice of his country, he leaves parliament without 
 all comparifon richer in abilities than he found it. 
 Very folid and very brilliant talents diftinguifh 
 the minifterial benches. The oppofite rows are 
 a fort of feminary of genius, and have brought 
 forth fuch and fo great talents as never before 
 (amongft us at leaft) have appeared together. If 
 their owners are difpofed to ferve their country, 
 (he trufts they are) they are in a condition to ren- 
 der it fervices of the higheft importance. If, through 
 miftake or paffion, they are led to contribute to its 
 ruin, we fhail at leaft have a confolation denied to 
 the ruined country that adjoins us we fhall not be 
 deftroyed by men of mean or fecondary capacities. 
 
 All thefe confiderations of party attachment, 
 of perfonal regard, and of perfonal admiration, 
 rendered the author of the Reflections extremely 
 cautious, left the flighteft fufpicion fhould arife of 
 his having undertaken to exprefs the fentiments 
 even of a {ingle man of that description. His words 
 at the outfet of his Reflections are thefe : 
 
 " In the firft letter I had the honour to write to 
 <c you, and which at length I fend, I wrote neither 
 "for, nor from any defcription of men ; nor fhall 
 " I in this. My errors, if any, are my own. My 
 
 reputation alone is to anfwer for them." In 
 
 another place, he fays (p. 126.) <c I have no man's 
 " proxy. I fpeak only from myjelf\ when I difclaim, 
 " as I do, with all poffible earneftnefs, all commu- 
 K nion with the actors in that triumph, or with the 
 B 4 " admirer*
 
 * c admirers of it. When I afiert any thing elfe, as 
 " concerning the people of England, I fpeak from 
 " obfervation, not from authority" 
 
 To fay then, that the book did not contain the fenti- 
 ments of their party, is not to contradict the author, 
 or to clear themfelves. If the party had denied his 
 doctrines to be the current opinions of the majo- 
 rity in the nation, they would have put the quef- 
 tion on its true iffue. There, I hope and believe, his 
 cenfurers will find on the trial, that the author is 
 as faithful a reprefentative of the general fentiment of; 
 the people of England, as any perfon amongft them 
 can be of the ideas of his own party. 
 
 The French Revolution can have no connexion 
 with the objeds of any parties in England formed 
 before the period of that event, unlefs they choofe 
 to imitate any of its a6b, or to confolidate any princi- 
 ples of that revolution with their own opinions. The 
 French revolution is no part of their original con- 
 fra<?l. The matter, (landing by itfelf, is an open 
 fubjecl: of political difcufiion, like all the other re- 
 volutions (and there are many) which have been 
 attempted or accomplished in our age. But if 
 any confiderable number of Britifh fubje&s, taking 
 a factious intereft in the proceedings of France, 
 begin publicly to incorporate themfelves for the 
 fubverfion of nothing Ihort of the whole conftitution 
 of this kingdom j to incorporate themfelves for the 
 ytter overthrow of the body of its laws, civil and 
 ecclefiaftical, and with them of the whole fyftem 
 of its manners, in favour of the new conftitution, 
 and of the modern ufages of the French nation, I 
 think no party principle could bind the author not to 
 exprefs his fentiments ftrongly againft fuch a faction, 
 On the contrary, he was perhaps bound to mark his 
 dffient, when the leaders of the party were daily go- 
 jpg out of their way to make public declarations in 
 
 parliament^
 
 ( 9 ) 
 
 parliament, which, notwithftanding the purity of 
 their intentions, had a tendency to encourage ill- 
 defigning men in their practices againft our con- 
 flitution. 
 
 The members of this faction leave no doubt of 
 the nature and the extent of the miichief they mean 
 to produce. They declare it openly and deci- 
 fively. Their intentions are not left equivocal. 
 They are put out of all difpute by the thanks 
 which, formally and as it were officially, they ifiue, 
 in order to recommend, and to promote the cir- 
 culation of the moft atrocious and treafonable li- 
 bels, againft all the hitherto cheriflied objects of 
 the love and veneration of this people. Is it con- 
 trary to the duty of a good fubject, to reprobate 
 fuch proceedings ? Is it alien to the office of a good 
 member of parliament, when fuch practices en- 
 creafe, and when the audacity of the confpirators 
 grows with their impunity, to point out in his place 
 their evil tendency to the happy conftitution which 
 he is chofen to guard ? Is it wrong in any fenfe, 
 to render the people of England fenfible how much 
 they muft fuffer if unfortunately fuch a wicked fac- 
 tion fhould become porTeffed in this countiy of 
 the fame power which their allies in the very next 
 to us have fo perfidioufly ufurped, and fo outra- 
 geoufly abufed ? Is it inhuman to prevent, if pofli- 
 ble, the fpilling of their blood, or imprudent to 
 guard againft the effufion of our own ? Is it con- 
 trary to any of the honeft principles of party, or re- 
 pugnant to any of the known duties of friend (hip 
 for any fenator, refpectfully, and amicably, to cau- 
 tion his brother members againft countenancing by 
 inconfiderate expreflions a fort of proceeding which 
 it is impofiible they fhould deliberately approve ? 
 
 He had undertaken to demonftrate, by arguments 
 which he thought could not be refuted, and by do- 
 cuments, which he was fure could not be denied, 
 
 thac
 
 ( '0 ) 
 
 that no comparifort was to be made between the Bri- 
 tifli government, and the French ufurpation. That 
 they who endeavoured madly to compare them, 
 were by no means making the companion of one 
 good fyftem with another good fyftem, which va- 
 ried only in local and circumftantial differences ; 
 much lefs, that they were holding out to us a fupe- 
 rior pattern of legal liberty, which we might fub- 
 ftitute in the place of our old, and, as they defcribe 
 it, fuperannuated conftitution. He meant to de- 
 monftpate, that the French fcheme was not a com- 
 parative good, but a pofitive evil. That the quef- 
 tion did . not at all turn, as it had been ftated, 
 on a parallel between a monarchy and a republic. 
 He denied that the prefent fcheme of things in 
 France, did at all deferve the refpectable name of a 
 republic : he had therefore no comparifon be- 
 tween monarchies and republics to make. That 
 what was done in France was a wild attempt to 
 methodize anarchy j to perpetuate and fix diforder. 
 That it was a foul, impious, monftrous thing, whol- 
 ly out of the courfe of moral nature. He un- 
 dertook to prove, that it was generated in trea- 
 chery, fraud, falfehood, hypocrify, and unprovoked 
 murder. He offered to make out, that thofe who 
 have led in that bufinefs, had conducted themfelves 
 with the utmoft perfidy to their colleagues in func- 
 tion, and with the moft flagrant perjury both to- 
 wards their king and their conflituents j to the one 
 of whom the affembly had fworn fealty, and to the 
 other, when under no fort of violence or conftraint, 
 they had fworn a full obedience to inftructions. 
 That by the terror of affaffination they had driven 
 away a very great number of the members, fo as to 
 produce a faife appearance x of a majority. That 
 this fictitious majority had fabricated a conftitution, 
 which as now it ftands, is a tyranny far beyond 
 any example that can be found in the civilized 
 4 European
 
 ( It ) 
 
 European world of our age; that therefore the 
 lovers of it muft be lovers, not of liberty, but, iff 
 they really underftand its nature, of the lowed and 
 bafeft of all fervitude. 
 
 He propofed to prove, that the prefent ftate of 
 things in France is not a tranfient evil, productive, 
 as fome have too favourably reprefented it, of a 
 lafting good ; but that the prefent evil is only the j 
 means of producing future, and (if that were poffible) I 
 worfe evils. That it is not, an undigefted, imper- 
 feel, and crude fcheme of liberty, which may gradu- 
 ally be mellowed and ripened into an orderly and 
 focial freedom ; but that it is ib fundamentally wrong, 
 as to be utterly incapable of correcting itfelf by- 
 any length of time, or of being formed into any 
 mode of polity, of which a member of the houfc 
 of commons could publicly declare his approba- 
 tion, 
 
 If it had been permitted to Mr. Burke, he would 
 have fliewn diftinctly, and in detail, that what the 
 afiembly calling itfelf national, had held out as a Jarge 
 and liberal toleration, is in reality a cruel and in- 
 fidious religious perfecution ; infinitely more bitter 
 than any which had been heard of within this cen- 
 tury. That it had a feature in it worfe than the 
 old perfections. That the old perfecutors afted, 
 or pretended to aft, from zeal towards fome fyflem 
 of piety and virtue : they gave ftrong preferences 
 to their own ; and if they drove people from one 
 religion, they provided for them ancther, in which 
 men might take refuge, and expect confolation. 
 That their new perft cution is not againft a variety 
 in confcience, but againft all confcience. That it} 
 profefles contempt towards its objeft j and whilf]:/ 
 it treats all religion with fcorn, is riot fo much aaf 
 neutral about the modes: It unites the oppofite 
 pyils of intolerance an4 pf indifference,
 
 ( I* ) 
 
 He could have proved, that it is fo far from re- 
 jeftingtefts (as unaccountably had been aflerted) that 
 the afiembly had impofed tefts of a peculiar hardfhip, 
 arifing from a cruel and premeditated pecuniary fraud : 
 tefts againft old principles, fanftioned by the laws, and 
 binding upon the confcience. That thefe tefts were 
 not impofed as titles to fome new honour or fome 
 new benefit, but to enable men to hold a poor com- 
 penfation for their legal eftates, of which they had 
 been unjuftly deprived; and, as they had before 
 been reduced from affluence to indigence, fo on 
 refufal to fwear againft their confcience, they are 
 now driven from indigence to famine, and treated 
 -with every pofllble degree of outrage, infult, and 
 inhumanity. That thefe tefts, which their impofers 
 well knew would not be taken, were intended for 
 the very purpofe of cheating their miferable victims 
 out of the compenfation which the tyrannic im- 
 poftors of the aflembly had previoufly and pur- 
 pofely rendered the public unable to pay. That 
 thus their ultimate violence arofe from their origi- 
 nal fraud. 
 
 He would have jfhewn that the univerfal peace 
 and concord amongft nations, which thefe common 
 enemies to mankind had held out with the fame frau- 
 dulent ends and pretences with which they had uni- 
 formly conducted every part of their proceeding, 
 was a coarfe and clumfy deception, unworthy to be 
 propofed as an example, by an informed and fa-. 
 gacious Britifh fenator, to any other country.- . 
 That far from peace and good-will to men, they 
 meditated war againft all other governments; and 
 propofed fyftematically to excite in them all the very 
 worft kind of feditions, in order to lead to their com- 
 mon deftruction. That they had diicovered, in the 
 few inftances in which they have hitherto had the 
 power of difcovering it, (as at Avignon, and in 
 
 the
 
 ( 1.3 ) 
 
 the Comtat, at Cavailhon and at Carpentras) 
 in what a favage manner they mean to conduct 
 the feditions and wars they have planned againft 
 their neighbours for the fake of putting themlelves 
 at the head of a confederation of republics as wild 
 and as mifchievous as their own. He would hav* 
 fhewn in what manner that wicked fcheme was 
 carried on in thofe places, without being dire<5tly 
 either owned or difclaimed, in hopes that the un- 
 done people fhould at length be obliged to fly to 
 their tyrannic protection, as fome fort of refuge 
 from their barbarous and treacherous hoftility. He 
 would have fhewn from thofe examples, that neither 
 this nor any other fociety could be in fafety as ; 
 long as fuch a public enerny was in a condition to j 
 continue directly or indirectly fuch practices againft 
 its peace, That Great Britain was a principal ob-// 
 ject of their machinations ; and that they had be- 
 gun by eftablifhing correfpondences, communica-/ 
 tions, and a fort of federal union with the factious^ 
 here. That no practical enjoyment of a thing fo 
 imperfect and precarious, as human happinefs muft 
 be, even under the very beft of governments, could 
 be a feoirity for the exiftence of thefe govern- 
 ments, during the prevalence of the principles of 
 France, propagated from that grand fchool of every 
 difoixler, and every vice. 
 
 He was prepared to (hew the madnefs of their 
 declaration of the pretended rights of man > the 
 childifh futility of fome of their maxims ; the grofs 
 andftupidabfurdity,andthe palpable falfity of others ; 
 and the mifchievous tendency of all fuch declara- 
 tions to the wellbeing of men and of citizens, and to 
 the fafety and profperity of every juft commonwealth. 
 He was prepared to fhew that, in their conduct, 
 the aflembly had directly violated not only every 
 found principle of government, but every one, without 
 exception, of their own falfe or futile maxims ; and 
 
 indeed
 
 ( 14 ) 
 
 indeed every rule they had pretended to lay down 
 for their own direction. 
 
 In a word, he was ready to fhew, that thofe 
 who could, after fuch a full and fair expofure, con- 
 tinue to countenance the French infanity, were not 
 miflaken politicians, but bad men -, but he thought 
 that in this cafe, as in many others, ignorance had 
 been the caufe of admiration. 
 
 Thefe are ftrong affertions. They required ftrong 
 proofs. The member who laid down thefe pofitions 
 was and is ready to give, in his place, to each po- 
 fition decifive evidence, correfpondent to the na- 
 ture and quality of the feveral allegations. 
 
 In order to judge on the propriety of the interrup- 
 tion given to Mr. Burke, in his fpeech on the com- 
 mittee of the Quebec bill, it is necefiary to enquire, 
 firft, whether, on general principles, he ought 
 to have been fuffered to prove his allegations ? 
 Secondly, whether the time he had chofen was fo 
 very unieafonable as to make his exercife of a par- 
 liamentary right productive of ill effects on his 
 friends or his country ? Thirdly, whether the opi- 
 nions delivered in his book, and which he had 
 begun to expatiate upon that day, were in contra- 
 diction to his former principles, and inconfiftent 
 with the general tenor of his publick conduct ? 
 
 They who have made eloquent panegyrics on the 
 French Revolution, and who think a free difcuflion fo 
 very advantageous in every cafe, and under every 
 circumftance, ought not, in my opinion, to have pre- 
 vented their eulogies from being tried ' on the teft 
 of facts. If their panegyric had been anfwered 
 with an invective (bating the difference in point of 
 eloquence) the one would have been as good as the 
 other : that is, they would both of them have 
 been good for nothing. The panegyric and the 
 fatire ought to be fuffered to go to trial j and that 
 
 which
 
 which fhrinks from it, muft be contented to (land 
 at bell as a mere declamation. 
 
 I do not think Mr. Burke was wrong in the 
 courfe he took. That which feemed to be recom- 
 mended to him by Mr. Pitt, was rather to extol 
 the Englifh conftitution, than to attack the French. 
 I do not determine what would be beft for Mr. 
 Pitt to do in his fituadon. I do not deny that be 
 may have good reafons for his referve. Perhaps 
 they might have been as good for a fimilar referve 
 on the part of Mr. Fox, if his zeal had fuffered 
 him to liften to them. But there were no motives 
 of minifterial prudence, or of that prudence which 
 ought to guide a man perhaps on the eve of being 
 minifter, to reftrain the author of the Reflections. 
 He is in no office under the crown j he is not the 
 organ of any party. 
 
 The excellencies of the Britifh conftitution had 
 already exercifed and exhaufted the talents of the 
 beft thinkers, and the moft eloquent writers and 
 fpeakers, that the world ever faw. But in the pr- 
 fent cafe, a fyftem declared to be far better, and 
 which certainly is much newer (to reftlefs and un- 
 ftable minds no fmall recommendation) was held 
 out to the admiration of the good people of Eng- 
 land. In that cafe, it was furely proper for thofe, 
 who had far other thoughts of the French conftitu- 
 tion, to fcrutinize that plan which has been recom- 
 mended to our imitation by active and zealous fac* 
 tions, at home and abroad. Our complexion is 
 fuch, that we are palled with enjoyment, and ftimu- 
 lated with hope; that we become lefs fenfible to 
 a long-pofferTed benefit, from the very circum- 
 fiance that it is become habitual. Specious, un- 
 tried, ambiguous profpects of new advantage re- 
 commend themfelves to the fpirit of adventure, 
 which more or lefs prevails in every mind. From 
 this temper, men, and factions, and nations too, 
 
 have
 
 have facrifked the good, of which they had been 
 in allured poilefilon, in favour of wild and irrational 
 expectations. What fliould hinder Mr. Burke, if 
 he thought this temper likely, at one time or other, 
 to prevail in our country, from expofing to a mul- 
 titude, eager to game, the falfe calculations of this 
 lottery of fraud ? 
 
 I allow, as I ought to do, for the effufions which 
 come from a general zeal for liberty. This is to 
 be indulged, and even to be encouraged, as long 
 as the queftion is general. An orator, above all men, 
 ought to be allowed a full and free ufe of the 
 praife of liberty. A common place in favour of 
 ilavery and tyranny delivered to a popular afiembly, 
 would indeed be a bold defiance to all the princi- 
 ples of rhetoric. But in a queftion whether any 
 particular conftitution is or is not a plan of ra- 
 tional liberty, this kind of rhetorical flourifh in 
 favour of freedom in general, is furely a little out of 
 its place. It is virtually a begging of the queftion. 
 It is a fong of triumph, before the battle. 
 
 " But Mr. Fox does not make the panegyric of 
 " the new conftitution ; it is the deftruction only of 
 " the ablblute monarchy he commends." When 
 that namelefs thing which has been lately fet up in 
 France was defcribed as " the moft ftupendous and 
 * glorious edifice of liberty, which had been erecl- 
 " ed on the foundation of human integrity in 
 " any time or country," it might at firft, have 
 led the hearer into an opinion, that the con- 
 ftruction of the new fabric was an object of ad- 
 miration, as well as the demolition of the old. 
 Mr. Fox, however, has explained himfelf; and it 
 would be too like that captious and cavilling fpirit, 
 which I fo perfectly deteft, if I were to pin down 
 the language of an eloquent and ardent mind, to 
 the punctilious exactnefs of a pleader. Then Mr. 
 Fox did not mean to applaud that monftrous thing, 
 
 which,
 
 Which, by the courtefy of France, they call a con- 
 ftkution. I eafily believe it. Far from meriting 
 the praifes of a great genius like Mr. Fox, it can- 
 not be approved by any man of common fenfe, or 
 common information. He cannot admire the change 
 of one piece of barbarifm for another, and a worfe. / 
 He cannot rejoice at the deftruction of a monar- 
 chy, mitigated by manners, refpectful to laws and 
 ufages, and attentive, perhaps but too attentive to 
 public opinion, in favour of the tyranny of a licen- 
 tious, ferocious, and favage multitude, without laws, 
 manners, or morals, and which fo far from refpect- 
 ing the general fenfe of mankind, infolently endea- 
 vours to alter all the principles and opinions, which 
 have hitherto guided and contained the world, and 
 to force them into a conformity to their views and 
 actions. His mind is made to better things. 
 
 That a man fhould rejoice and triumph in the 
 deftruction of an abfolute monarchy -, that in fuch 
 an event he fhould overlook the captivity, dif- 
 grace, and degradation of an unfortunate prince, 
 and the continual danger to a life which exifts only 
 to be endangered ; that he fhould overlook the utter 
 ruin of whole orders and clafTes of men, extending it- 
 felf directly, or in its neareft confequences, to at leaft 
 a million of our kind, and to at leaft the temporary 
 wretchednefs of an whole community, I do not de- 
 ny to be in fome fort natural : Becaufe, when people 
 fee a political object, which they ardently defire, but 
 in one point of view, they are apt extremely to pal- 
 liate, or underrate the evils which may arife in ob- 
 taining it. This is no reflection on the humanity 
 of thofe perfons. Their good-nature I am the laft 
 man in the world to difpute. It only fhews that 
 they are not fufficiently informed, or fufficiently 
 confiderate. When they come to reflect ferioufly 
 on the tranfaction, they will think themfelves bound 
 to examine what the object is that has been ac- 
 quired by all this havock. They will hardly afifert , 
 C that
 
 ( 18 ) 
 
 that the deltr notion of an abfolute monarchy, is a 
 thing good in itfelf, without any fort of reference to 
 the antecedent ftate of things, or to confequences 
 which refult from the change ; without any confider- 
 ation whether under its ancient rule a country was, to. 
 a confiderable degree, flourifhing and populous,; 
 highly cultivated, and highly commercial ; and whe- 
 ther, under that domination, though perfonal liberty, 
 had been precarious and infecure, property at leaft ' 
 was ever violated. They cannot take the moral fym- 
 pathies of the human mind along with them, in ab- 
 ftractions feparated from the good or evil condition 
 of the {late, from the quality of actions, and the cha- 
 racter of the actors. None of us love abfolute and 
 uncontrolled monarchy ; but we could not rejoice at 
 the fufferings of a Marcus Aurelius, or a Trajan, 
 who were abfolute monarchs, as we do when Nero 
 is condemned by the fenate to be punifhed more 
 major urn : Nor when that monfter was obliged to 
 fly with his wife Sporus, and to drink puddle, were 
 men affected in the fame manner, as when the ve- 
 nerable Galba, with all his faults and errors, v/as 
 'murdered by a revolted mercenary foldiery. With 
 fuch things before our eyes our feelings contradict 
 our theories ; and when this is the cafe, the feel- 
 ings are true, and the theory is falfe. What I con- 
 tend for is, that in commending the deilruction of, 
 an abfolute monarchy, all the circumftances ought j 
 not to be wholly overlooked, as confiderations fitj 
 only for fhallow and fuperficial minds. 
 
 The fubverfion of a government, to deferve any 
 praife, muft be confidered but as a ftep preparatory 
 to the formation of fomething better, either in the 
 fcheme of the government itfelf, or in the peribns 
 who adminifter in it, or in both. Thefe events can- 
 not in reaion be feparated. For inftance, when we 
 praife our revolution of 1688, though the nation, 
 in that act, was on the defenfive, and was juftified 
 
 in
 
 ( '9 ) 
 
 in incurring all the evils of a defenfive war, we do 
 not reft there. We always combine with the fub- 
 verfion of the old government the happy fettlement 
 which followed. When we eftimate that revolt , 
 tion, we mean to comprehend in our calculation f 
 both the value of the thing parted withy and the / 
 value of the thing received in exchange. 
 
 The burthen of proof lies heavily on thofe who 
 tear to pieces the whole frame and contexture of 
 their country, that they could find no other way 
 of fettling a government fit to obtain its rational 
 ends, except that which they have purfued by means 
 unfavourable to all the prefent happinefs of millions 
 of people, and to the utter ruin of feveral hundreds 
 of thoufands. In their political arrangements, men 
 have no right to put the well-being of the prefent 
 generation wholly out of the queftion. Perhaps 
 the only moral truft with any certainty in our 
 hands, is the care of our own time. With regard 
 to futurity, we are to treat it like a ward. We art 
 not fo to attempt an improvement of his fortune, as 
 to put the capital of his eftate to any hazard. 
 
 It is not worth our while to difcufs, like fophifters, 
 whether, in no cafe, fome evil, for the fake of fome 
 benefit is to be tolerated. Nothing univerfal can 
 be rationally affirmed on any moral, or any politi- 
 cal fubjecl. Pure metaphyfical abftraction doe* not 
 belong to thefe matters. The lines of morality are 
 not like the ideal lines of mathematics. They arc 
 broad and deep as well as long. They admit of ex- , 
 ceptions ; they demand modifications. Thefe ex- 
 ceptions and modifications are not made by th / 
 procefs of logic, but by the rules of prudence. Pru- 
 dence is not only the firft in rank of the virtues poli- 
 tical and moral, but fhe is the director, the regu- 
 lator, the ftandard of them all. Metaphyfics can- 
 not live without definition; but prudence is cau- 
 tious how foe defines. Our courts cannot be more 
 C a fearful
 
 fearful in fuffering fictitious cafes to be brought be- 
 fore them for eliciting their determination on a point 
 of law, than prudent moralifts are in putting ex- 
 treme and hazardous cafes of confcience upon emer- 
 gencies not exifting. Without attempting there- 
 fore to define, what never can be defined, the cafe 
 of a revolution in government, this, I think, may \ 
 be fafely affirmed, that a fore and prefilng evil is to 
 be removed, and that a good, great in its amount, 
 and unequivocal in its nature, mud be probable 
 almoft to certainty, before the ineflimable price of 
 our own morals, and the well-being of a number 
 of our fellow-citizens, is paid for a revolution. If 
 ever we ought to be ceconomifls even to parfimony, 
 it is in the voluntary production of evil. Every \ 
 revolution contains in it fomething of evil. 
 ' It muft always be, to thofe who are the greateft 
 
 /amateurs, or even profeffors of revolutions, a 
 matter very hard to prove, that the late French 
 government was fo bad, that nothing worfe, in the 
 infinite devices of men, could come in its place. 
 'They who have brought France to its prefent con- 
 dition ought to prove allb, by fomething better 
 than prattling about the Baftile, that their fubverted 
 government was as incapable, as the prefent cer- 
 tainly is, of all improvement and correction. How 
 dare they to fay fo who have never made that expe- 
 riment? They are experimenters by their trade. 
 They hare made an hundred others, infinitely more 
 hazardous. 
 
 ,~- The Englifh admirers of the forty-eight thoufand 
 republics which form the French federation, praife 
 them not for what they are, but for what they are to 
 become. They do not talk as politicians but as 
 prophets. But in whatever character they choofe 
 to found panegyric on prediction, it will be thought 
 a little fmgular to praife any work, not for its own 
 merits, but for the merits of fomething elfe which 
 
 may
 
 may fucceed to it. When any political inftitution is 
 praifed, in fpite of great and prominent faults of every 
 kind, and in all its parts, it muft be fuppofed to 
 have fomething excellent in its fundamental prin- 
 ciples. It muft be fhewn that it is right though 
 imperfect; that it is not only by poflibility fufcep- 
 tible of improvement, but that it contains in it a 
 principle tending to its melioration. 
 
 Before they attempt to fhew this progreflion of 
 their favourite work, from abfolute pravity to finifhed 
 perfection, they will find themfelves engaged in a 
 civil war with thofe whofe caufe they maintain. 
 What! alter our fublime conftitution, the glory of 
 France, the envy of the world, the pattern for man- 
 kind, the mafter- piece of legiflation, the collected 
 and concentrated glory of this enlightened age ! Have 
 we not produced it ready made and ready armed, ma- 
 ture in its birth, a perfect goddefs of wifdom and of 
 war, hammered by our blackfmith midwives out of 
 the brain of Jupiter himfelf? Have we not fworn 
 our devout, profane, believing, infidel people, to an 
 allegiance to this goddefs, even before Ihe had burft 
 the dura mater, and as yet exifted only in embryo ? 
 Have we not folemnly declared this conftitution 
 unalterable by any future legiflature ? Have we 
 not bound it on pofterity for ever, though our 
 abettors have declared that no one generation is 
 competent to bind another ? Have we not obliged 
 the members of every future aflembly to qualify 
 themfelves for their feats by fwearing to its con- 
 fcrvation ? 
 
 Indeed the French conftitution always muft be 
 (if a change is not made in all their principles and 
 fundamental arrangements) a government wholly by 
 popular reprefentation. It muft be this or nothing. 
 The French faction confiders as an ufurpation, as an 
 atrocious violation of the indefeafible rights of man, 
 every other defcription. of government. Take it 
 C 3 or
 
 or leave it ; there is no medium. Let the irrefra- 
 gable doctors fight out their own controverfy in 
 heir own way, and with their own weapons j and 
 when they are tirecj let them commence a treaty 
 of peace. Let the plenipotentiary Ibphifters of Eng- 
 land fettle with the diplomatic fophifters of France 
 in what manner right is to be corrected by an infu- 
 jfion of wrong, and how truth .may be rendered more 
 true by a due intermixture of falfhood. 
 
 Having iuffitiently proved, that nothing could 
 make it generally improper for Mr. Burke to prove 
 what he had alledged concerning the object of this 
 difpute, I pafs to the fecond queihien, that is, whe- 
 ther he was juftified in clioofijig the committee 
 on the Quebec bih as the field for this difcuf- 
 fion ? If it were neceflary, it might be fhewn, 
 that he was not the firft to bring thefe difcufllons 
 into parliament, nor the firft to renew them in 
 this feffion. The fact is notorious. As to the 
 Quebec bill, they were introduced into the debate 
 upon that fubject for two plain reafons ; firft, that 
 as he thought it then not advifeable to make the 
 proceedings of the factious focieties the fubject 
 of a direct motion, he had no other way open 
 to him. Nobody has attempted to fhew, that it 
 was at all admifiible into any other bufmefs before 
 the houfe. Here every thing was favourable. Here \ 
 was a bill to form a new constitution for a French ; 
 province under Englifh dominion. The queftion, 1 
 naturally arofe, whether we fhould fettle that con-^ 
 ftitution upon Engliih ideas, or upon French.! 
 This furnifhed an opportunity for examining into 
 the value of the French cqnftitudon, either confider- 
 ed as applicable to colonial government, or in its own 
 nature. The bill too was in a committee. By the 
 privilege of fpeaking as often as he pleafed, he hoped 
 in fome meafure to fupply the want of fupport, 
 which he had but too much reafon to apprehend. 
 JTI a committee it was always in his power to bring 
 
 the
 
 the queftions from generalities to fafts ; from de- i 
 clamation to difcuffion. Some benefit he actually 
 received from this privilege. Theie are plain, ob- 
 vious, natural reafons for his conduct. I believe 
 they are the true, and the only true ones. 
 
 They who juftify the frequent interruptions, which 
 at length wholly difabled him from proceeding, attri- 
 bute their conduct to a very different interpretation 
 of his motives. They fay, that through corruption, or 
 malice, or foliy, he was acting his part in a plot to 
 make his friend Mr. Fox pafs for a republican ; and 
 thereby to prevent the gracious intentions of his fo- 
 vereign from taking effe6t, which at that time. had 
 began to difclofe themielves in his favour *. This 
 
 is- 
 f.ariv/ -ji r 
 
 * To explain this, it will be neceflary to advert to a para-, 
 graph which appeared in a paper in the minority interefl Tome 
 time before this debate. " A very dark intrigue has lately been 
 " difcovered, the authors of which are well known to us.; brtt 
 " until the glorious day fhall come, when it will not be a 
 " LIBEL to tell the TRUTH, we muft not be fo regardlefs of 
 " our own fafety, as to publifh their names. We will, how- 
 " ever, ftate the fad, leaving it to the ingenuity of our readers' 
 " to diicover what we dare not publifh. 
 
 " Since the bufmefs of the armament againft Rufiia has been 
 " under difcufiion, a great perfonage has been heard to fay, " that 
 " he was not fo wedded to Mr. PITT, as not to be very willing 
 " to give his confidence to Mr. Fox, if the latter mould be 
 " able, in a crifis like the prefent, to conduct: the government 
 " of the country with greater advantage to the public." 
 
 " This patriotic declaration immediately alarmed the fwarm 
 " of courtly infects that live only in the funfhine of minifterial 
 " favour. It was thought to be the forerunner of the difmif- 
 " fion of Mr. PITT, and every engine was fet at work for the. 
 " purpofe of preventing fuch an event. The principal engine 
 " employed on this occafion was CALUMNY. It was whif- 
 " pered in the ear of a great perfonage, that Mr. Fox was the 
 " laft man in England to be truiled by a KING, becaufe he 
 " was by PRINCIPLE a REPUBLICAN, and consequently an 
 " enerny to riONARCHY. 
 
 " In the difcuflion of the Quebec bill which flood for yefter- 
 
 " day, it was the intention of fome perfons to conneft with this 
 
 " fubjedl the French Revolution, in hopes that Mr. Fox would 
 
 " be warmed by a coliifion with Mr. Burke, and induced tode- 
 
 C 4. fen4
 
 is a pretty ferious charge. This, on Mr. Burke's 
 part, would be fomething more than miftakej 
 fomething worfe than formal irregularity. Any 
 contumely, any outrage is readily paflfed over, by 
 the indulgence which we all owe to fudden paffion. 
 Thefe things are foon forgot upon occafions in 
 which all men are fo apt to forget themfelves. De- 
 liberate injuries, to a degree muft be remembered, 
 becaufe they require deliberate precautions to be 
 fecured againft their return. 
 
 I am authorized to fay for Mr. Burke, that he 
 confiders that caufe affigned for the outrage offered 
 to him, as ten times worfe than the outrage itfelf. 
 There is fuch a ftrange confufion of ideas on this 
 fubjecl, that it is far more difficult to underftand 
 the nature of the charge, than to refute it when 
 underftood. Mr. Fox's friends were, it feems, 
 feized with a fudden panic terror left he Ihould 
 
 ' fend that revolution in which fo much power was taken 
 " from, and fo little left in, the crown. 
 
 " Had Mr. Fox fallen into the fnare, his fpeech on the occa- 
 fion would have been laid before a great perfonage, as a 
 " proof that a man who could defend fuch a revolution, might 
 " be a very good republican, but could not poffibly be a friend 
 ' to monarchy. 
 
 " But thofe who laid the fnare were difappointed ; for Mr. 
 f ' Fox, in the fhort converfation which took place yefterday in 
 " the houfe of commons faid, that he confeffedly had thought 
 te favorably of the French revolution ; but that moft certainly 
 ' he never had, either in parliament or out of parliament, pro r 
 " feffed or defended republican principles." 
 
 ^Argus, April azd, 1791. 
 
 Mr. Burke canr.ot anfwer for the truth, nor prove the falfe- 
 hood of the ftory given by the friends of the party in this paper. 
 He only knows that an opinion of its being well or ill authen- 
 ticated had no influence on his conduft. He meant only, to the 
 beft of his power, to guard the public againft the ill defigns of 
 factions out of doors. What Mr. Burke did in parliament could 
 hardly have been intended to draw Mr. Fox into any declara- 
 tions unfavourable to his principles, fmce (by the account of thofe 
 who are his friends) he had long before effectually prevented 
 the fuccefs of any fuch fcandalous defigns. Mr. Fox's friends 
 have themfelves dene away that imputation on Mr, Burke. 
 
 pafs
 
 C *5 ) 
 
 pafs for a republican, I do not think they had any 
 ground for this apprehenfion. But let us admit 
 they had. What was there in the Quebec bill, ra- 
 ther than in any other, which could fubject him or 
 them to that imputation ? Nothing in a difcuffion 
 of the French conftitution, which might arife on 
 the Quebec bill, could tend to make Mr. Fox 
 pafs for a republican ; except he ihould take oc- 
 cafion to extol that ftate of things in France, which 
 affects to be a republic or a confederacy of re- 
 publics. If fuch an encomium could make any 
 unfavourable impreftlon on the king's mind, furely 
 his voluntary panegyrics on that event, not fo much 
 introduced as intruded into other debates, with 
 which they had little relation, muft have produced 
 that effect: with much more certainty, and much 
 greater force. The Quebec bill, at worft, was only 
 one of thofe opportunities, carefully fought, and in- 
 duftrioufly improved by himfelf. Mr. Sheridan had 
 already brought forth a panegyric on the French 
 fyftem in a ftill higher ftrain, with full as little de- 
 mand from the nature pf the bufmefs before the 
 houfe, in a fpeech too good to be fpeedily forgot- 
 ten. Mr. Fox followed him without any direct call 
 from the fubject matter, and upon the fame ground. 
 To canvafs the merits of the French conftitution 
 on the Quebec bill could not draw forth any opi- 
 nions which were not brought forward before, with 
 no fmall oftentation, and with very little of ne- 
 ceflity, or perhaps of propriety. What mode, or 
 what time of difcuffmg the conduct of the French 
 faction in England would not equally tend to kindle 
 this enthufiafm, and afford thofe occafions for pane- 
 gyric, which, far from fhunning, Mr. Fox has always 
 induftrioufly fought ? He himfelf faid very truly, in 
 the debate, that no artifices were neceffary to draw 
 from him his opinions upon that fubject. But to 
 fall upon Mr, Burke for making an ufe, at worft 
 
 not
 
 ( 26 ) 
 
 not more irregular, of the fame liberty, is tan-- 
 tamount to a plain declaration, that the topic of 
 France is tabooed or forbidden ground to Mr. Burke, 
 and to Mr. Burke alone. But furely Mr. Fox is 
 not a republican; and what fhould hinder him, 
 when fuch a difcuflion came on, from clearing him- 
 felf unequivocally (as his friends fay he had done 
 near a fortnight before) of all fuch imputations ? 
 Inftead of being a difadvantage to him, he would 
 have defeated ail his enemies, and Mr. Burke, fmce 
 he has thought proper to reckon him amongft 
 them. 
 
 But it feems, fome news-paper or other had im- 
 puted to him republican principles, on occafion of 
 his conduct upon the Quebec bill. Suppofing Mr. 
 Burke to have feen thefe news-papers (which is to 
 fuppofe more than- 1 believe to be true) I would afk, 
 when did the news-papers forbear to charge Mr. Fox, 
 or Mr. Burke himfelf, with republican principles, or 
 any other principles which they thought could render 
 both of them odious, fometimes to one defcription 
 of people, fometimes to another ? Mr. Burke, fmce 
 the publication of his pamphlet, has been a thoufand 
 times charged in the news-papers with holding de- 
 fpotic principles. He could not enjoy one moment 
 of domeftic quiet, he could not perform the leaft 
 particle of public duty, if he did not altogether 
 difregard the language of thofe libels. But how- 
 ever his fenfibility might be affected by fuch abufe, 
 it would in him have been thought a moil ridicu- 
 lous reafon for {hutting up the mouths of Mr. Fox, 
 or Mr. Sheridan, fo as to prevent their delivering 
 their fentiments of the French revolution, that 
 forfooth, " the news-papers had lately charged Mr. 
 " Burke with being an enemy to liberty." 
 
 I allow that thole gentlemen have privileges to 
 
 which Mr. Burke has no claim. But their friends 
 
 ought to plead thofe privileges -, and not to affign bad 
 
 i reafons,
 
 reafons, on the principle of what is fair between 
 man and man, and thereby to put themfelves on a 
 level with thofe who can Ib eafily refute them. Let 
 them fay at once that his reputation is of no value, 
 and that he has no call to aflert it -, but that theirs 
 Js of infinite concern to the party and the public ; 
 and to that ccnfkleration he ought to facrifice all 
 his opinions, and all his feelings. 
 
 In that language I fhould hear a ftyle corre- 
 fpondent to the proceeding ; lofty, indeed, but plain 
 and confident. Admit, however, for a moment, and 
 merely for argument, that this gentleman had as 
 good a right to continue as they had to begin thefe 
 difcufiions, in ctndour and equity they muft allow 
 that their voluntary defcant in praife of the French 
 constitution was as much an oblique attack on Mr. 
 Burke, as Mr. Burke's enquiry into the foundation 
 of this encomium could poffibly be conftrued into 
 an imputation upon them. They well knew, that 
 he felt like other men ; and of courfe he would 
 think it mean and unworthy, to decline afferting in 
 his place, and in the front of able adverfaries, the 
 principles of what he had penned in his clofet, and 
 without an opponent before him. They could not 
 but be convinced, thac declamations of this kind 
 would rouze him ; that he muft think, coming 
 from men of their calibre, they were highly mif- 
 chievous ; that they gave countenance to bad men, 
 and bad defigns; and, though he was aware that the 
 handling fuch matters in parliament was delicate, 
 yet he was a man very likely, whenever, much againft 
 his will, they were brought there, to refolve, that 
 there they Ihouid be thoroughly lifted. Mr. Fox, 
 early in the preceding fefTion, had public notice 
 fiom Mr. Burke of the light in which he con- 
 jQdered every attempt to introduce the example j 
 of France into the politics of this country ; and I 
 of his refolution to break with his belt friends^ 
 
 and
 
 / and to join with his word enemies to prevent it. He 
 hoped, that no fuch neccffity would ever exiil. But 
 in cafe it fhould, his determination was made. The 
 party knew perfectly that he would at leaft defend 
 himfelf. He never intended to attack Mr. Fox, 
 nor did he attack him directly or indirectly. His 
 fpeech kept to its matter. No perfonality was 
 employed even in the remoteft allufion. He never 
 did impute to that gentleman any republican prin- 
 ciples, or any other bad principles or bad conduct 
 whatfoever. It was far from his words; it was far 
 from his heart. It mufl be remembered, that not- 
 wkhftanding Mr. Fox, in order to fix on Mr. Burke, 
 an unjuftifiable change of opinion, and the foul 
 crime of teaching a fet of maxims to a boy, anq 
 afterwards, when thefe maxims became adult in his! 
 mature age, of abandoning both the difciple anc$ 
 the doctrine, Mr. Burke never attempted, in any 
 one particular, either to criminate or to recrimi- 
 nate. It may be faid, that he had nothing of the 
 kind in his power. This he does not controvert. 
 He certainly had it not in his inclination. That 
 
 fentleman had as little ground for the charges which 
 e was fo eafily provoked to make upon him. 
 
 The gentlemen of the party (I include Mr. Fox) 
 have been kind enough to confider the difpute 
 brought on by this bufmefs, and the confequent 
 reparation of Mr. Burke from their corps, as a 
 matter of regret and uneafinefs. I cannot be of 
 opinion, that by his exdufion they have had any 
 lofs at all. A man whofe opinions are fo very ad- 
 verfe to theirs, adverfe, as it was expreffed, " as 
 * ( pole to pole," fo mifchievoufly as well as fo di- 
 rectly adverfe, that they found themfelves under the / 
 neceffity of folemnly difclaiming them in full parlia-. J 
 ment, fuch a man muft ever be to them a moil im4f 
 feemly and unprofitable incumbrance. A co-opera- 
 tion with him could only ferve to embarrafs them in 
 
 ati
 
 all their councils. They have befides publickly re- 
 prefented him as a man capable of abufing the doci- 
 lity and confidence of ingenuous youth ; and, for a / 
 bad reafon, or for no reafon, of difgracing his whole/ 
 public life by a icandalous contradiction of every onef 
 of his own acts, writings, and declarations. If thefc 
 charges be true, their excluiion of fuch a perfon 
 from their body is a circumflance which does equal 
 honour to their juftice and their prudence. If they 
 cxpn is a degree of fenfibility in being obliged to 
 execute this wife and juft fentence, from a conli- 
 deration of fome amiable or fome pleafant quali- 
 ties which in his private life their former friend may 
 happen to poflefs, they add, to the praife of their 
 wifdom and firmnefs, the merit of great tendernefe 
 of heart, and humanity of difpofition. 
 /"On their ideas, the new Whig party have, in my 
 /opinion, acted as became them. The author of 
 | the Reflections, however, on his part, cannot, with- 
 out great fhame to himfelf, and without entailing 
 \ cverlafting difgrace on his pofterity, admit the truth 
 or juftice of the charges which have been made 
 upon him ; or allow that he has in thofe Reflections 
 difcovered any principles to which honeft men are 
 bound to declare, not a fhade or two of difient, but 
 a total fundamental oppofition. He muit believe, 
 if he does not mean wilfully to abandon his caufe 
 and his reputation, that principles fundamentally at 
 variance with thofe of his book, are fundamentally 
 falfe. What thofe principles, the antipodes to his, 
 really are, he can only difcover from that contrariety. 
 ,He is very unwilling to fuppofe, that the doctrines 
 / of fome books lately circulated are the principles 
 I of the party ; though, from the vehement declara- 
 ' tions againtl his opinions, he is at fome lofs how to 
 judge otherwife. 
 
 For the prefent, my plan does not render it ne- 
 ctary to fay any thing further concerning the me- 
 rits
 
 ( 30 ) 
 
 rits cither of the one fet of opinions or the other. 
 The author would have difcuffed the merits of 
 both in his place, but he was not permitted to 
 do fo. 
 
 I pafs to the next head of charge, Mr. Burke's 
 inconfiftency. It is certainly a great aggravation 
 of his fault in embracing falfe opinions, that in 
 doing fo he is not fuppofed to fill up a void, 
 but that he is guilty of a dereliction of opinions 
 ;' that are true and laudable. This is the great 
 gift of the charge againft him. It is not fo much 
 that he is wrong in his book (that however is 
 alledged alfo) as that he has therein belyed his 
 whole life. I believe, if he could venture to va- 
 lue himfelf upon any thing, it is on the virtue o 
 confiftency that he would value himfelf the moft. 
 Strip him of this, and you leave him naked indeed. 
 
 In the cafe of any man who had written fome- 
 thing, and fpoken a great deal, upon very multifa- 
 
 i 
 
 rious matter, during upwards of twenty-five years \ 
 public fervice, and in as great a variety of import- 
 ant events as perhaps have ever happened in the 
 fame number of years, it would appear a little hard, 
 in order to charge fuch a man with inconfiftency, 
 to fee collected by his friend, a fort of digeft of 
 his fayings, even to fuch as were merely fportive 
 and jocular. This digeft, however, has been 
 made, with equal pains and partiality, and without \ 
 bringing out thofe paflages of his writings which j 
 might tend to fhew with what reftrictions any ex-/ 
 prefllons, quoted from him, ought to have beeri 
 underftood. From a great ftatefman he did not 
 quite expect this mode of inquifition. If it only 
 appeared in the w >rks of common pamphleteers, 
 Mr. Burke might fafely truft to his reputation. 
 When thus urged, he ought, perhaps, to do a little 
 more. It fhall be as little as poffible, for I hope 
 not much is wanting. To be totally filent on his 
 
 charges
 
 charges would not be refpectful to Mr. Fox. Ac- 
 culations fometimes derive a weight from the per- 
 fons who make them, to which they are not en- 
 tided from their matter. 
 
 He who thinks, that the Britifh conftitntion ought 
 to confift of the three members, of three very dif- 
 ferent natures, of which it does actually confift, and , 
 thinks it his duty to preferve each of thofe mem- ' 
 bers in its proper place, and with it's proper pro- 
 portion of power, mufl (as each lhall happen to be 
 attacked) vindicate the three feveral parts on the 
 feveral principles peculiarly belonging to them. He 
 cannot uflert the democratic part on the princi- 
 ples on which monarchy is fupported ; nor can he 
 fupport monarchy on the principles of democracy; 
 nor can he maintain ariftocracy on the grounds 
 of the one or of the other, or of both. All thefej 
 he muft fupport on grounds that are totally differ- 
 ent, though practically they may be, and happily! 
 with us they are, brought into one harmonious body./ 
 A man could not be confiftent in defending fuch// 
 various, and, at firft view, difcordant parts of ai/ 
 mixed conftitution, without that fort of inconfift-/] 
 ency with which Mr. Burke (lands charged. 
 
 As any one of the great members of this conftitu- 
 tion happens to be endangered, he that is a friend to 
 all of them choofes and prefles the topics necefiary 
 for the fupport of the part attacked, with all the 
 ftrength, the earneftnefs, the vehemence, with all the 
 power of ftating, of argument, and of colouring, which 
 he happens to poflefs, and which the cafe demands. 
 He is not to embarrafs the minds of his hearers, or 
 to encumber, or overlay his fpeech, by bringing 
 into view at once (as if he were reading an aca- 
 demic lecture) all that may and ought, when a juft 
 occafion prefents itfelf, to be faid in favour of the 
 other members. At that time they are out of the 
 ourt ; there Js no queftion concerning them. 
 
 Whilft
 
 Whilft he oppofes his defence on the part where 
 the attack is made, he prefumes, that for his regard 
 to the juft rights of all the reft, he has credit in every 
 candid mind. He ought not to apprehend, that his 
 raifmg fences about popular privileges this day, will 
 infer that he ought, on the next, to concur with thofe 
 who would pull down the throne : becaufe on the 
 next he defends the throne, it ought not to be fup- 
 pofed that he has abandoned the rights of the 
 people. 
 
 A man who, among various objects of his equal 
 regard, is fecure of fome, and full of anxiety for 
 the fate of others, is apt to go to much greater 
 lengths in his preference of the objects of his imme- 
 diate folicitude than Mr. Burke has ever done. A 
 man fo circumftanced often feems to undervalue, to 
 vilify, almoft to reprobate and difown, thofe that are 
 out of danger. This is the voice of nature and 
 truth, and not of inconfiftency and falfe pretence. 
 The danger of any thing very dear to us, removes, 
 for the moment, every other affection from the 
 mind. When Priam had his whole thoughts em- 
 ployed on the body of his Hector, he repels with 
 indignation, and drives from him with a thoufand 
 reproaches, his furviving fons, who with an officious 
 piety crouded about him to offer their affiftance. 
 A good critic (there is no better than Mr. Fox) 
 would fay, that this is a mafter-ftroke, and marks a 
 deep understanding of nature in the father of poetry. 
 He would defpife a Zoilus, who would conclude 
 from this paffage that Homer meant to reprefent 
 this man of affliction as hating or being indifferent 
 and cold in his affections to the poor reliques of 
 his houfe, or that he preferred a dead carcafe to his 
 living children. 
 
 Mr. Burke does not ftand in need of an allowance 
 of this kind, which, if he did, by candid critics ought 
 to be granted to him. If the principles of a mixed 
 
 conftitution
 
 ( 33 ) 
 
 conftitution be admitted, he wants no more to juftify 
 to confiftency every thing he has faid and done during 
 the courfe of a political life juft touchiag to its 
 clofe. I believe that gentleman has kept him- 
 felf more clear of running into the fafliion of wild 
 vifionary theories, or of feeking popularity through 
 every means, than any man perhaps ever did in the 
 lame fituation, 
 
 He was the firft man who, on the huftings, at a\ 
 popular election, rejected the authority 'of inftruc- ) 
 tions . from conftituents j or who, in any place,/ 
 has argued fo fully againft it. Perhaps the dif- 
 credit into which that doctrine of compulfive in- 
 ftructions under our conftitution is fince fallen, may 
 be due, in a great degree, to his oppofing himfelf 
 to it in that manner, and on that occafion. 
 
 The reforms in reprefentation, and the bills for} 
 fhortening the duration of parliaments, he uniformly / 
 and fteadily oppofed for many years together, inf 
 contradiction to many of his belt friends. Thefe 
 friendsj however, in his better days, when they had 
 more to hope from his fervice and more to fear 
 from his lofs than now they have, never chofe 
 to find any inconfiftency between his acts and ex- 
 preflions in favour of liberty, and his votes on thofc 
 queftions. But there is a time for all things. 
 
 Againft the opinion of many friends, even againft 
 the folicitacion of fome of them, he oppofed thofe 
 of the church clergy, who had petitioned the Houfe 
 of Commons to be difchnrged from the fubfcrip- 
 tion. Although he fupported the diffenters in their 
 petition for the indulgence which he had refufed to 
 the clergy of the eftablifhed church, in this, as he 
 was not guilty of it, fo he was not reproached with 
 inconfiftency. At the fame time he promoted, and 
 againft the wifh of feveral, the claufe that gave 
 the diflenting teachers another fubfcription in the 
 D place
 
 ( 54 ) 
 
 place of that which was then taken away. Neither 
 at that time was the reproach of inconfiftency 
 brought againft him. People could then diftinguifh 
 between a difference in conduct, under a variation 
 of circumftancesj and an inconfiftency in principle. 
 It was not then thought neceffary to be freed of him 
 as of an incumbrance. 
 
 Thefe inftances, a few among many, are pro- 
 duced as an anfwer to the infmuation of his 
 having purfued high popular courfes, which in 
 his late book he has abandoned. Perhaps in his 
 whole life he has never omitted a fair occafion, with 
 whatever rifqne to him of obloquy as an indivi- 
 dual, with whatever detriment to his intereft as a 
 member of oppofition, to affert the very fame doc-^ 
 trines which appear in that book. He told the 
 Houfe, upon an important occafion, and pretty early 
 in his fervice, that " being warned by the ill effect 
 " of a contrary procedure in great examples, he 
 " had taken his ideas of liberty very low ; in order 
 " that they fhould ftick to him, and that he might 
 " ftick to them to the end of his life." 
 
 At popular elections the moft rigorous cafuifts 
 will remit a little of their feverity. They will 
 allow to a candidate fome unqualified effufions 
 in favour of freedom, without binding him to 
 adhere to them in their utmoft extent. Bvt Mr. 
 Burke put a more ftrict rule upon himfelf than 
 moft moralifts would put upon others. At 
 his firft offering himfelf to Briftol, where he was 
 almoft fure he Ihould not obtain, on that or any oc- 
 cafion, a fmgle Tory vote, (in fact he did obtain but 
 one) and refted wholly on the Whig intereft, he 
 thought himfelf bound to tell to the electors, both 
 before and after his election, exactly what a repre- 
 fentative they had to expect in him. 
 
 " The diftinguijhing part of our conftitution (h/* 
 
 " faid)
 
 ( 35 ) 
 
 e{ faid) is its liberty. To preferve that liberty in- 
 " violate, is the peculiar duty and proper truft of 
 f. member of the houfe of commons. But the li- 
 " berty, the only liberty I mean, is a liberty con- \ 
 <( nedbed with order, and that not only exifts with 
 " order and virtue, but cannot exift at all without 
 " them. It inheres in good and fteady govern- 
 " ment, as in itsfubftance and vital principle." 
 
 The liberty to which Mr. Burke declared him- 
 felf attached, is not French liberty. That liberty 
 is nothing but the rein given to vice and confuiion. 
 Mr. Burke was then, as he was at the writing of his 
 Reflections, awfully imprefied with the difficulties 
 arifmg from the complex ftate of our conftitution 
 and our empire, and that it might require, in dif- 
 ferent emergencies different forts of exertions, and 
 the fucceffive call upon all the various principles 
 which uphold andjuftify it. This will appear from 
 what he faid at the clofe of the poll. 
 
 " To be a good member of parliament is, let me 
 <c tell you, no eafy tafkj efpecially at this time, 
 ' when there is fo ftrong a difpofition to run into 
 s< the perilous extremes offer-vile compliance, or 
 f< wild popularity. To unite circumipectbn with 
 *' vigour, is abfolutely neceffary ; but it is extreme- 
 " ly difficult. We are now members for a rich 
 " commercial city ; this city, however, is but a part 
 <f of a rich commercial nation, the interefts of which 
 " are various, multiform) and intricate. We are 
 " members for that great nation which, however, is 
 " itfelf but part of a great empire, extended by our 
 " virtue and our fortune to the fartheft limits of 
 " the eaft and of the weft. All thefe wide-fpread j 
 " interefts muft be confidered; muft be compared jl 
 * c muft be reconciled, if pofllble. We are members 
 " for a free country ; and furely we all know that 
 " the machine of a free conftitution is no fimple 
 D 2 a thing i
 
 ( 36 ) 
 
 " thing; but as intricate and as ddicate y as it is 
 " valuable. We are members in a great and an- 
 " tient MONARCHY ; and iv e muft prefen-e religioujly 
 " the true legal rights of the fovereign, which form the 
 tc key-jlcne that binds together the noble and well- 
 f( conftrufted arch of our empire and our conftitittion. 
 " A conftitution made up of balanced powers, muft 
 <c ever be a critical thing. As fuch I mean to touch 
 " that part of it which comes within my reach." 
 
 In this manner Mr. Burke fpoke to his condi- 
 ments feventeen years ago. He fpoke, not like a 
 partizan of one particular member of our confti- 
 1 tution, but as a perfon ftrongly, and on principle, 
 attached to them all. He thought thefe great and 
 \efTential members ought to be preserved, and pre- 
 ferved each in its place ; and that the monarchy 
 ought not only to be fecured in its peculiar ex- 
 iftence, but in its pre-eminence too, as the prefid- 
 ing and connecting principle of the whole. Let it 
 be confidered, whether the language of his book, 
 printed in 1790, differs from his fpeech at Briftol 
 in 1774. 
 
 i "With equal juftice his opinions on the American 
 fwar are introduced, as if in his late work he had 
 (belied his conduct and opinions in the debates 
 which arofe upon that great event. On the Ameri- 
 can war he never had any opinions which he has feen 
 occafion to retract, or which he has ever retracted. 
 He indeed differs effentially from Mr. Fox as to the 
 caufe of that war. Mr. Fox has been pleafed to fay, 
 that the Americans rebelled, * becaufe they thought 
 c they had not enjoyed liberty enough.' This caufc 
 of the -war from him I have heard of for the firft time. 
 It is true that thofe who ftimulated the nation to 
 that meafure, did frequently urge this topic. They 
 contended, that the Americans had from the begin- 
 ning aimed at independence j that from the begin-
 
 ( 37 ) 
 
 ning they meant wholly 'to throw off the authority \ 
 of the crown, and to break their connexion with ' 
 the parent country. This Mr. Burke never believed. / 
 When he moved his fecond conciliatory propofition 
 in the year 1776, he entered into the difcufiion of 
 this point at very great length ; and from nine fe- 
 veral heads of preemption, endeavored to prove the 
 charge upon that people not to be true. 
 
 If the principles of all he has faid and wrote 
 on the occafion, be viewed with common tem- 
 per, the gentlemen of the party will perceive, that 
 on a fuppofition that the Americans had re 
 belled merely in order to enlarge their liberty, 
 Mr. Burke would have thought very differently o 
 the American caufe. What might have been in the 
 ffecret thoughts of fome of their leaders it is im- 
 Vpoflible to fay. As far as a man, fo locked up as 
 Dr. Franklin, could be expected to communicate his 
 ideas, I believe he opened them to Mr. Burke. It 
 was, I think, the very day before he fet out for Ame- 
 rica, that a very long converfation pa (Ted between 
 them, and with a greater air of opennefs on the Doc- 
 tor's fide, than Mr. Burke had obferved in him be- 
 fore. In this difcourfe Dr. Franklin lamented 
 with apparent fincerity, the feparation 
 feared was inevitable between Great Britain 
 colonies. He certainly {poke of it as an event which 
 gave him the greateft concern. America, he faid, 
 would never again fee fuch happy days as ihe had 
 pafled under the protection of England. He cbferved, 
 that ours was the only inftance of a great empire, in 
 which the moil diftant parts and members had been 
 as well governed as the metropolis and its vicinage : 
 But that the Americans were going to lole the means 
 which fecured to them this rare and precious advan- 
 tage. The queftion wjth them was not whether they 
 were to remain as they had been before the troubles, 
 for better, he allowed they could not hope to be; 
 
 ' 
 
 i in mm De- 
 mented, and\ 
 >n which he/ 
 itain and hen
 
 /'but whether they were to give up fo hap^y a fitua- 
 \tion without a ftruggle ? Mr. Burke had feveral 
 other converfations with him about that time, in none 
 of which, foured and exafperated as his mind certainly 
 was, did he difcover any other wilh in favour of 
 America than for a fecurity to its ancient condi-/ 
 tion. Mr. Burke's converfation with other Ameri- 
 cans was large indeed, and his enquiries extenfive and 
 diligent. Trufting to the refult of all thefe means 
 of information, but trufling much more in the pub- 
 lic preemptive indications I have juft referred to, 
 and to the reiterated folemn declarations of their 
 affemblies, he always firmly believed that they were 
 ji purely on the defenfive in that rebellion. He con- 
 fidered the Americans as Handing at that time, and 
 in that controverfy, in the fame relation to Eng- 
 land, as England did to king James the Second, in 
 1688. He believed, that they had taken up arms 
 from one motive only ; that is our attempting 
 to tax them without their confent; to tax them 
 for the purpofes of maintaining civil and military 
 eftablifhments. If this attempt of ours could have 
 been practically eftablifhed, he thought with them, 
 that their aflemblies would become totally ufelefs ; 
 that under the iyftem of policy which was then 
 
 frfued, the Americans could have no fort of fe- 
 rity for their laws or liberties, or for any part of 
 ^m ; and, that the very cireumftance of our free- 
 m would have augmented the weight of their 
 flavery. 
 
 Confidering the Americans on that defenfive foot- 
 ing, he thought Great Britain ought inftantly to 
 have clofed wkh them by the repeal of the taxing 
 act. He was of opinion that our general rights 
 over that country would have been preferved by 
 this timely conceflion*. When, inflead of this, 
 
 * See his fpeech on American taxation., the i pth of April, 1 774. 
 
 a Bfofton
 
 X 39 ) 
 
 a Bofton port bill, a MafTachufet's charter bill, 
 a Filhciy bill, an Intercourfe bill, I know not 
 how many hcftile bills rufhed out like Ib many 
 tempefts from all points of the compafs, and 
 were accompanied firft with great fleets and ar- 
 mies of Englifh, and followed afterwards with great 
 bodies of foreign troops, he thought that their 
 caufe grew daily better, becaufe daily more defen- 
 five ; and that ours, becaufe daily more offenfive, 
 grew daily worfe. He therefore in two motions, 
 in two fucceflive years, propofed in parliament; 
 many concefiions beyond what he had reafon toj 
 think in the beginning of the troubles would everj 
 be ferioufly demanded. 
 
 So circumftanced, he certainly never could and 
 never did wifh the colonifts to be fubdued by 
 arms. He was fully perfuaded, that if fuch fhould 
 be the event, they muft be held in that fubdued 
 ftate by a great body of {landing forces, and per- 
 haps of foreign forces. He was ftrongly of opinion, 
 that fuch armies, firft victorious over Englifhmen, 
 in a conflict for Englifh coriftitutional rights and 
 privileges, and afterwards habituated (though in 
 America) to keep an Englifh people in a ftate i 
 of abject fubjection, would prove fatal in the end j 
 to the liberties of England itfelf ; that in the mean ' 
 time this military fyftem would lie as an oppreffive 1 
 burthen upon the national finances j that it would \ 
 conftantly breed and feed new difcuflions, full of , 
 heat and acrimony, leading poffibly to a new feries 
 of wars ; and that foreign powers, whilft we con- 
 tinued in a ftate at once burthened and diffracted, 
 muft at length obtain a decided fuperiority over us. 
 On what part of his late publication, or on what 
 exprefllon that might have efcaped him in that 
 work, is any man authorized to charge Mr. Burke 
 with a contradiction to the line of his conduct, , 
 and to the current of his doctrines on the American j 
 D 4 war ?
 
 ( 40 ) 
 
 war ? The pamphlet is in the hands of his accufers, 
 let them point out the paflage if they can. 
 
 Indeed, the author has been well fifted and fcru- 
 tinized by his friends. He is even called to an 
 account for every jocular and light expreffion. A 
 ludicrous picture which he made with regard to 
 a pafiage in the fpeech of a * late minifter, has 
 been brought up againft him. That paflage con- 
 tained a lamentation for the lofs of monarchy to the 
 Americans, after they had feparated from Great 
 Britain. He thought it to be unfeafonable, ill 
 judged, and ill forted with the circumftances of all 
 the parties. Mr. Burke, it feems, confidered it 
 ridiculous to lament the lofs of fome monarch or 
 other, to a rebel people, at the moment they had 
 for ever quitted their allegiance to theirs and our 
 fovereign; at the time when they had broken off 
 all connexion with this nation, and had allied them- 
 felves with its enemies. He certainly muft have 
 thought it opeli to ridicule : and, now that it is 
 recalled to his memory, (he had, J believe, whol- 
 ly forgotten the circumftance) he recollects that he 
 did treat it with fome levity. But is it a fair infe- 
 rence from a jeft on this unfeafonable lamentation, 
 that he was then an enemy to monarchy either in 
 this or in any other country ? The contrary per- 
 haps ought to be inferred, if any thing at all can 
 be- argued from pleafantries good or bad. Is it for 
 this reafon, or for any thing he has laid or done re- 
 lative to the American war, that he is to enter 
 into an alliance offenfive and defenfive with every 
 rebellion, in every country, under every circum- 
 ftance, and raifed upon whatever pretence? Is it 
 "becaufe he did not wifli the Americans to be fub- 
 dued by arms, that he muft be inconfiftent v;ith 
 Jiimfelf, if he reprobates the conduft of thofe fo- 
 
 * Lord Lanfclown. 
 
 tieties
 
 ( 4! ) 
 
 cietics in England, who alledging no one act of ty T \ 
 ranny or oppreffion, and complaining of no hoftile ] 
 attempt againft our antient laws, rights, and ulages, \ 
 are now endeavouring to work the ckltruction of the j 
 crown of this kingdom, and the whole of its con- 
 ftitution? Is he obliged, from the concefiions he 
 wilhed to be made to the colonies, to keep any terms 
 with thofe clubs and federations, who hold out to us * 
 as a pattern for imitation, the proceedings inJFrance, 
 in which a king, who had voluntarily and formally di- \ 
 vetted himieif of the right of taxation, and of all |J 
 other fpecies of arbitrary power, has been dethroned ? / 
 Is it becaufe Mr. Burke wilhed to have America 
 rather conciliated than vanquifhed, that he muft wifh 
 well to the army of republics which are fet up in 
 France; a country wherein not the people, but the 
 monarch was wholly on the defend ve (a poor, indeed, 
 and feeble defenfive) to preferve Jome fragments of 
 the royal authority againft a determined and defpe- 
 rate body of confpirators, whofe object it was, with 
 whatever certainty of crimes, with whatever hazard 
 of war and every other fpecies of calamity, to anni--, 
 hilate the whole of that authority; to level all ranks, > 
 orders, and diftinctions in the flate ; and utterly to ; 
 deftroy property, not more by their acts than in/ 
 their principles ? 
 
 Mr. Burke has been alfo reproached with an in- 
 confiflency between his late writings and his former 
 conduct, becaufe he had propofed in parliament 
 feveral ceconomical, leading to feveral conftitutional 
 reforms. Mr. Burke thought, with a majority of 
 the Houfe of Commons, that the influence of the 
 crown at one time was too great ; but after his Ma- 
 jeity had by a gracious mefTage, and feveral fubfe- 
 quent acts of parliament, reduced it to a ftandard 
 which fatisfied Mr. Fox himfelf, and, apparently at 
 leaft, contented whoever wifhed to go fartheft in that 
 reduction, is Mr. Burke to allow that it would be right 
 
 for
 
 C 41 ) 
 
 for us to proceed to indefinite lengths upon that fub- 
 ject? that it would therefore bejuftifiable in a people 
 owing allegiance to a monarchy, and profefiing to\ 
 maintain it, not to reduce, but wholly to take away all \ 
 prerogative, and // influence whatfoever ? Muft his 
 having made, in virtue of a plan of oeconomical re- 
 gulation, a reduction of the influence of the crown, 
 compel him to allow, that it would be right in the 
 French or in us to bring a king to fo abject a ftate, 
 as in function not to be fo relpectable as an under 
 fhcrifF, but in pe-rfon not to differ from the condi- 
 tion of a mere prifoner ? One would think that fuch) 
 a thing as a medium had never been heard of in tlW 
 moral world. 
 
 This mode of arguing from your having done 
 any thing in a certain line, to the neceffity of do- 
 ing every thing, has political ccnfequences of other 
 moment than thofe of a logical fallacy. If no man 
 can propofe any diminution or modification of an 
 invidious or dangerous power or influence in go- 
 vernment, without entitling friends turned into 
 adverfaries, to argue him into the deftruction of 
 all prerogative, and to a fpoliation of the whole 
 patronage of royalty, I do not know what can 
 more effectually deter perfons of fober minds from 
 engaging in any reform ; nor how the worft enemies 
 to the liberty of the fubject could contrive any me- 
 thod more fit to bring all correctives on the power 
 of the crown into fuipicion and difrepute. 
 
 If, fay his accufers, the dread of too great influence 
 in the crown of Great Britain could juftify the degree 
 of reform which he adopted, the dread of a return 
 under the defpotifm of a monarchy might juftify the 
 people of France in going much further, and reduc- 
 ing monarchy to its prefent nothing. Mr. Burke does 
 pot allow, that a furrlcient argument ad hominem is 
 inferable from thefe premifes. If the horror of the 
 exceffes of an abfolute monarchy furnifhes a reafon for 
 
 abolifhing
 
 ( 43 ) 
 
 abolifKing it, no monarchy once abfolute (all have been 
 fo at one period or other) could ever be limited. It 
 mult be deftroyed ; otherwife no way could be found 
 to quiet the fears of thofe who were formerly fub- 
 jected to that fway. But the principle of Mr. Burked 
 proceeding ought to lead him to a very different 
 conclufion ;- to this conclufion, that a monar-X 
 chy is a thing perfectly fufceptible of reform ; per- V 
 fectly fufceptible of a balance of power ; and that, i; 
 when reformed and balanced, for a great country, it / 
 is the belt of all governments. The example of our" 
 country might have led France, as it has led him, 
 to perceive that monarchy is not only reconcila- 
 ble to liberty, but that it may be rendered a great 
 and ftable fecurity to its perpetual enjoyment. No 
 correctives which he propofed to the power of the 
 crown could lead him to approve of a plan of 
 a republic (if fo it may be reputed) which has 
 no correctives, and which he believes to be inca- 
 pable of admitting any. No principle of Mr. 
 Burke's conduct or writings obliged him, from 
 confiftency, to become an advocate for an ex- 
 change of mifchiefs ; no principle of his could . 
 compel him to juftify the fetting up in the place j 
 of a mitigated monarchy, a new and far more/ 
 defpotic power, under which there is no trace of? 
 liberty, except what appears in confufion a*id iri 
 crime. 
 
 Mr. Burke does not admit that the faction pre- 
 dominant in France have aboiilhed their monarchy 
 and the orders of their flate, from any dread of arbi- 
 trary power that lay heavy on the minds of the peo- 
 ple. It is not very long lince he has been in that 
 country. Whilft there he converfed with many de- 
 fcriptions of its inhabitants. A few perfons of rank 
 did, he allows, difcover ftrong and manifeft tokens of 
 fuch a fpirit of liberty, as might be expected one 
 day to break all bounds. Such gentlemen have 
 
 fincc
 
 ( 44 ) 
 
 /mce had more reafon to repent of their want of 
 forefight than I hope any of the fame clafs will ever 
 have in this country. But this fpirit was far from 
 general even amongft the gentlemen. As to the 
 lower orders and thofe a little above them, in 
 whofe name the prefent powers domineer, they 
 were far from difcovering any fort of diflatisfaflion 
 with the power and prerogatives of the crown. 
 
 SThat vain people were rather proud of them : they 
 rather defpifed the Englifh for not having a mo- 
 narch pofieffed of fuch high and perfect authority. 
 : <?bey had felt nothing from Lettres de Cachet. The 
 \ Baftile could infpire no horrors into them. This 
 was a treat for their betters. It was by art and 
 impulfe i it was by the finifter ufe made of a fea- 
 fon of fcarcity ; it was under an infinitely diverfified 
 fucceffion of wicked pretences, wholly foreign to 
 the queftion of monarchy or ariftocracy, that this 
 light people were infpired with their prefent fpirit of 
 levelling. Their old vanity was led by art to take 
 another turn : It was dazzled and feduced by mi- 
 litary liveries, cockades, and epaulets, until the 
 French populace was led to become the willing, 
 but flill the proud and fhoughtlefs inflrument and 
 victim of another domination. Neither did that 
 people defpife, or hate, or fear their nobility. On 
 the contrary, they valued themfelves on the gene- 
 rous qualities which diftinguifhed the chiefs of then- 1 
 nation. 
 
 So far as to the attack on Mr. Burke, in ccnfe- 
 quence of his reforms. 
 
 To fhew that he has in his laft publication 
 abandoned thofe principles of liberty which have 
 given energy to his youth, and in fpite of his 
 cenlbrs will afford repofe and confolation to 
 his declining age, thofe who have thought proper 
 in parliament to declare againft his book, ought 
 to have produced fomething in it, which di- 
 rectly
 
 ( 45 ) 
 
 or indirectly militates with any rational plan 
 of free government. It is fomething extraordinary, 
 that they whofe memories have fo well ferved them 
 with regard to light and ludicrous expreflions which 
 years had configned to oblivion, fhould not have 
 been able to quote a fingle paflage in a piece ib 
 lately publifhed, which contradicts any thing he has 
 formerly ever laid in a flyle either ludicrous or 
 ferious. They quote his former fpeeches, and his ; 
 former votes, but not one fyllable from the book./ 
 It is only by a collation of the one with the other 
 that the alledged inconfiftency can be eftablifhed. 
 But as they are unable to cite any fuch contradictory 
 paflage, fo neither can they fhew any thing in the 
 general tendency and fpirit of the whole work un- 
 favourable to a rational and generous fpirit of li- 
 berty j unlefs a warm oppofition to the fpirit of \ 
 levelling, to the fpirit of impiety, to the fpirit of 
 profcription, plunder, murder, and cannibalifm, be | 
 adverle to the true principles of freedom. 
 
 The author of that book is fuppofed to have 
 pafied from extreme to extreme ; but he has always j 
 kept himfelf in a medium. This charge is not fo 
 wonderful. It is in the nature of things, that they 
 who are in the centre of a circle fhould appear 
 directly oppofed to thofe who view them from any 
 part of the circumference. In that middle point, 
 however, he will flill remain, though he may hear 
 people who themfelves run beyond Aurora and the 
 Ganges, cry out, that he is at the extremity of the 
 weft. 
 
 In the fame debate Mr. Burke was reprefented 
 as arguing in a manner which implied that the Bri- 
 tifh conftitution could not be defended, but by abu- 
 fmg all republics antient and modern. He faid no- 
 thing to give the leaft ground for fuch a cenfure. 
 He never abufed all republics. He has never pro- 
 felfed himfelf a friend or an enemy to republics or 
 
 to
 
 to monarchies in the abftract. He thought that the 
 circumftances and habits of every country, which it 
 is always perilous and productive of thegreaieft cala- 
 mities to force, are to decide upon the form of its 
 government. There is nothing in his nature, his 
 temper, or his faculties, which fhould make him an 
 enemy to any republic modern or antient. Far from 
 it. He has ftudied the form and fpirit of republic 
 very early in life ; he has ftudied them with great 
 attention ; and with a mind undifturbed by affection 
 or prejudice. He is indeed convinced that the fci- 
 ence of government would be poorly cultivated 
 without that ftudy. But the refult in his mind 
 from that inveftigation has been, and is, that neither 
 England nor France, without infinite detriment to 
 them, as well in the event as in the experiment, 
 could be brought into a republican form ; but that \ 
 every thing republican which can be introduced j 
 with fafety into either of them, mufl be built upon 1 
 a monarchy; built upon a real, not a nominal mo- / 
 narchy, as its ejjential bafis ; that all fuch inftitu- 
 rions, whether ariftocratic or democratic, muft ori- 
 ginate from their crown, and in all their proceed- 
 ings muft refer to it ; that by the energy of that main 
 Ipring alone thofe republican parts muft be fet in ac- 
 tion, and from thence muft derive their whole le- 
 gal .effect, (as amongft us they actually do) or the 
 whole will fall into confufion. Thefe republican 
 members have no other point but the crown in 
 which they can poffibly unite. 
 
 This is the opinion expreffed in Mr. Burke'* 
 book. He has never varied in that opinion fince \ 
 he came to years of difcretion. But furely, if at - y 
 any time of his life he had entertained other no- 
 tions, (which however he has never held or profefied 
 to hold) the horrible calamities brought upon a great 
 people, by the wild attempt to force their country 
 into a republick, might be more than fufficient to 
 
 undecejve
 
 ( 47 ) 
 
 undeceive his understanding, and to free it for ever 
 from fuch deftructive fancies. He is certain, that 
 many, even in France, have been made fick of their 
 theories by their very fuccefs in realizing them. 
 
 To fortify the imputation of a defertion from his 
 principles, his conftant attempts to reform abufes, 
 have been brought forward. It is true, it has been 
 the bufmefs of his ftrength to reform abufes in 
 government ; and his laft feeble efforts are em- 
 ployed in a ftruggle againft them. Politically he 
 has lived in that element j politically he will die 
 in it. Before he departs, T will admit for him that 
 he deferves to have all his titles of merit brought 
 forth, as they have been, for grounds of con- 
 demnation, if one word, juftifying or fupporting 
 abufes of any fort, is to be found in that book 
 which has kindled fo much indignation in the 
 mind of a great man. On the contrary, it fpares 
 no exifling abufe. Its very purpofe is to make 
 war with abufes; not, indeed, to make war with 
 the dead, but with thofe which live, and flourish, 
 and reign. 
 
 The purpofe for which the abufes of govern- 
 ment are brought into view, forms a very ma- 
 terial confederation in the mode of treating them. 
 The complaints of a friend are things very differ- 
 ent from the invectives of an enemy. The charge 
 of abufes on the late monarchy of France, was 
 not intended to lead to its reformation, but to 
 juftify its deftruction. They who have raked into 
 all hiftory for the faults of kings, and who have ag- 
 gravated every fault they have found, have acted 
 confidently ; becaufe they acted as enemies. No 
 man can be a friend to a tempered monarchy who 
 bears a decided hatred to monarchy itfelf. He 
 who, at the prefent time, is favourable, or even 
 fair to that fyftem, muft act towards it as towards 
 a friend with frailties, who is under the profecution 
 of
 
 ( 48 ) 
 
 of implacable foes. I think it a duty in that cafe, 
 not to inflame the public mind againft the obnoxi- 
 ous perfon, by any exaggeration of his faults. It is 
 our duty rather to palliate his errors and defects, 
 or to cad them into the lhade, and induftrioufly to 
 bring forward any good qualities that he may hap- 
 pen to poffefs. But when the man is to be amend- 
 ed, and by amendment to be preferred, then the 
 line of duty takes another direction. When his 
 fafety is effectually provided for, it then becomes the 
 office of a friend to urge his faults and vices with all 
 the energy of enlightened affection, to paint them 
 in their moft vivid colours, and to bring the moral 
 patient to a better habit. Thus I think with regard 
 to individuals j thus I think with regard to antient 
 and refpected governments and orders of men. A 
 fpirit of reformation is never more confident with 
 itfelf, than when it refufes to be rendered the means 
 of deftruction. 
 
 I fuppofe that enough is faid upon thefe heads 
 of accufation. One more I had nearly forgotten, 
 but I (hall foon difpatch it. The author of the Re- 
 flections, in the opening of the laft parliament, en- 
 tered on the Journals of the Houfe of Commons a 
 motion for a remonftrance to the crown, which is 
 fubftantially a defence of the preceding parlia- | 
 ment, that had been difiblved under difpleafure. It * 
 is a defence of Mr. Fox. It is a defence of the 
 Whigs. By what connection of argument, by 
 what affociation of ideas, this apology for Mr. Fox 
 and his party is, by him and them, brought to cri- 
 minate his and their apologift, I cannot eafily di- 
 vine. It is true, that Mr. Burke received no previous 
 encouragement from Mr. Fox, nor any the leaft 
 countenance or fupport at the time when the motion 
 was made, from him or from any gentleman of the 
 party, one only excepted, from whcfe friendfhip, on 
 that and on other occafions, he derives an honour 
 
 to
 
 ( 49 ) 
 
 to which he muft be dull indeed to he infenfible *, 
 If than remonftrance therefore was a falfe or feeble 
 defence of the meafures of the party, they were in 
 no wife affected by it. It Hands on the Journals. 
 This fccures to it a permanence which the author 
 cannot expect to any other work of his. Let it 
 fpeak for itfelf to the prefent age, and to all pofte- 
 ritjr. The party had no concern in it; and it can 
 never be quoted againft them. But in the late debate 
 it was produced, not to clear the party from an im- 
 proper defence in which they had no fhare, but for 
 the kind purpofe of infmuating an inconfiftency be- 
 tween the principles of Mr. Burke's defence of the 
 diflblved parliament, and thofe on which he pro- 
 ceeded in his late Reflections on France. 
 
 It requires great ingenuity to make out fuch a 
 parallel between the two cafes, as to found a charge 
 of inconfiftency in the principles ailumed in arguing 
 the one and the other. What relation had Mr. 
 Fox's India bill to the conftitution of France ? 
 What relation had that conftitution to the queftion 
 of right, in an houfe of commons, to give or to 
 withhold its confidence from minifters, and to flate 
 that opinion to the crown ? What had this difcuf- 
 fion to do with Mr. Burke's idea in 1784, of the 
 ill confequences which muft in the end arife to the 
 crown from fetting up the commons at large as an 
 oppofite intereft to the commons in parliament? 
 What has this difcufllon to do with a recorded 
 warning to the people, of their rafhly forming a 
 precipitate judgment againft their repreientatives ? 
 "What had Mr. Burke's opinion of the danger of in- 
 troducing new theoretic language unknown to the 
 records of the kingdom, and calculated to excite 
 vexatious queftions, into a parliamentary proceed- 
 
 * Mr. Windham. 
 
 E ing,
 
 ( 5 ) 
 
 Ing, to do with the French afiembly, which defies all 
 precedent, and places its whole glory in realizing 
 what had been thought the moft vifionary theories ? 
 What had this in common with the abolition of the 
 French monarchy, or with the principles upon which 
 the Englifh revolution was juftified ; a revolution in 
 which parliament, in all its acts and all its decla- 
 rations, religioufly adheres to f the form of found 
 words,' without excluding from private difcuffions, 
 fuch terms of art as mayferve to conduct an inquiry 
 for which none but private perfons are relponfible ? 
 Thefe were the topics of Mr. Burke's propofed re- 
 monftrance; all of which topics fuppofe the exift- 
 ence and mutual relation of our three eftates ; as 
 well as the relation of the Eaft India Company to 
 the crown, to parliament, and to the peculiar laws, 
 rights, and ufages of the people of Hindoftan ? What 
 reference, I fay, had thefe topics to the conftitution 
 of France, in which there is no king, no lords, 
 no commons, no India company to injure or fup- 
 port, no Indian empire to govern or opprefs ? What 
 relation had all or any of thefe, or any queftion 
 which could arife between the prerogatives of the 
 crown and the privileges of parliament, with the 
 cenfure of thofe factious perfons in Great Britain, 
 whom Mr. Burke ftates to be engaged, not in 
 favour of privilege againft prerogative, or of pre- 
 rogative againft privilege, but in an open attempt 
 againft our crown and our parliament; againft 
 our conftitution in church and ftate ; againft all the 
 parts and orders which compofe the one and the 
 other? 
 
 No perfons were more fiercely active againft 
 Mr. Fox, and againft the meafures of the houfe of 
 Commons diffolved in 1784, which Mr. Burke de- 
 fends in that remonftrance, than feveral of thofe re- 
 volution-makers, whom Mr. Burke condemns alike 
 
 in
 
 itt His remonftrance, and in his book. Thefe revo- 
 lutionifts indeed may be well thought to vary in their 
 condud. He is, however; far from accufmg them, 
 in this variation, of the fmalleft degree of inconfifl- 
 ency. He is perfuaded, that they are totally indif- 
 ferent at which end they begin the demolition of the 
 conftitution. Some are for commencing their ope- 
 rations with the deftruction of the civil powers, in 
 order the better to pull down the ectiefiaftical j 
 fome wifh to begin with the ecclefiaftical, in order 
 to facilitate the ruin of the civil ; fome would de- 
 llroy the houfe of commons through the crown j 
 fome the crown through the houfe of commons; 
 and fome would overturn both the one and the other 
 through what they call the people. But I believe 
 that this injured writer will think it not at all in- j 
 confident with his prefent duty, or with his former' 
 life, ftrenuoufly to oppoie all the various partizans 
 of deftruclion, let them begin where, or when, or 
 how they will. No man would fet his face more / 
 determinedly againft thofe who fhculd attempt to 
 deprive them, or any defcription of men, of the 
 rights they poflefs. No man would be more 
 fteady in preventing them from abufmg thofe rights 
 to the deftruction of that happy order under which 
 they enjoy them. As to their title to any thing 
 further, it ought to be grounded on the proof they 
 give of the fafcty with which power may be trufled 
 in their hands. When they attempt without difguife, 
 not to win it from our affections, but to force it from 
 our fears, they fhew, in the character of their means 
 of obtaining it, the ufe they would make of their do- 
 minion. That writer is too well read in men, not to 
 know how often the defire and defign of a tyrannic 
 domination lurks in the claim of an extravagant 
 liberty. Perhaps in the beginning it always difplays 
 itfelf in that manner. No man has ever affected 
 E 2 power
 
 ( 5' ) 
 
 power which he did not hope from the favour of die 
 exifting government, in any other mode. 
 
 The attacks on the author's confiftency relative 
 to France, are (however grievous they may be to his 
 feelings) in a great degree external to him and to us, 
 and comparatively of little moment to die people 
 of England. The fubilantial charge upon him is 
 concerning his doctrines relative to the Revolution 
 of i6&8. Here it is, that they who fpeak in the 
 name of the party have thought proper to cen- 
 fure him the moft loudly, and with the greateil 
 afpcrity. Here they faftcn ; and, if they are right in 
 their fact, with fufficient judgment in their (elec- 
 tion. If he be guilty in this point he is equally 
 blameable, whether he is confiitent or not. If he 
 endeavours to delude his countrymen by a falfe re- 
 prefentation of the fpirit of that leading event, and 
 of the true nature and tenure of the government 
 formed in confequence of it, he is deeply refpon- 
 fiblej he is an enemy to the free conllitution of 
 the kingdom. But he is not guilty in any fenfe. 
 I maintain that in his Reflections he has ftated the 
 Revolution and the fcttiement upon dieir true prin- 
 ciples of legal reafon and conftitutional policy. 
 
 His authorities are the acts and declarations of 
 parliament given in their proper words. So far 
 as thefe go, nothing can be added to what he has 
 quoted. The queftion is, whether he has under- 
 ftood them rightly. I think they fpeak plain enough. 
 But we muft now fee whether he proceeds v/ith other 
 authority than his own conftructions ; and if he does, 
 on what fort of authority he proceeds. In this 
 part, his defence will not be made by argument, 
 but by wager of law. He takes his compurgators, 
 his vouchees, his guarantees, along with him. I 
 know, that he will not be fatisfied with a juftification 
 proceeding on general reafons of policy. He muft 
 
 be
 
 ( 53 ) 
 
 be defended on party grounds too ; or his caufe is not 
 fo tenable as I wifh it to appear. It muft be made 
 out for him, not only, that in his conftrucYion of 
 thefe public a6ts and monuments he conforms him- 
 felf to the rules of fair, legal, and logical interpre- 
 tation; but it muft be proved that his conftruc- 
 tion is in perfect harmony with that of the ancient 
 Whigs, to whom, againft the Sentence of the mo- 
 dern, on his part, I here appeal. 
 
 This July, it will be twenty-fix years* fmce he 
 became connected with a man whofe memory will 
 ever be precious to Englishmen of all parties, as 
 long as the ideas of honour and virtue, public 
 and private, are underftood and cherifhed in this 
 nation. That memory will be kept alive with par- 
 ticular veneration by all rational and honourable 
 Whigs. Mr. Burke entered into a connexion with 
 that party, through that man, at an age, far from 
 raw and immature ; at thole years when men are 
 all they are ever likely to become ; when he was in 
 the prime and vigour of his life \ when the powers 
 of his underftanding, according to their ftandard, 
 were at the beft j his memory exercifed ; his judg- 
 ment formed; and his reading, much frefher in the 
 recollection, and much readier in the application, 
 than now it is. He was at that time as likely as 
 moft men to know what were Whig and what 
 were Tory principles. He was in a fituation to 
 difcern what fort of Whig principles they enter- 
 tained, with whom it was his wifh to form an eter- 
 nal connexion. Foolilh he would have been at 
 that time of life (more fbolifh than any man who 
 undertakes a public truft would be thought) to ad- 
 here to a caufe, which he, amongft all thofe who were 
 engaged in it, had the leaft fanguine hopes of, as 
 a road to power. 
 
 * July i/th 1765. 
 E 3
 
 ( 54 ) 
 
 There are who remember, that on the removal 
 of the Whigs in the year 1766, he was as free to 
 choofe another connexion as any man in the king- 
 dom. To put himfelf out of the way of the nego- 
 tiations which were then carrying on very eagerly, 
 and through many channels, with the Earl of Chat- 
 ham, he went toll eland very foon after the change 
 of miniftry, and did not return until the meeting of 
 parliament. He was at that time free from any 
 thing which looked like an engagement. He was 
 further free at the defire of his friends ; for the very 
 day of his return, the Marquis of Rockingham 
 wifhed him to accept an employment under the 
 new fyftem. He believes he might have had fuch 
 a fituation ; but again he cheerfully took his fate 
 with the party. 
 
 It would be a ferious imputation upon the pru- 
 dence of my friend, to have made even fuch trivial 
 facrifices as it was in his power to make, for prin- 
 ciples wiiich he did not truly embrace, or did" not 
 perfectly underftand. In either cafe the foily would 
 have been great. The queftion now is, whether, 
 when he firft practically profefled Whig principles, 
 he underftood what principles he profefled j and 
 whether, in his book, he has faithfully expreffed 
 them. 
 
 When he entered into the Whig party, he did not 
 conceive that they pretended to any difcoveries. 
 They did not affect to be better Whigs, than thofe 
 were who lived in the days in which principle was 
 put to the teft. Some of the Whigs of thofe days 
 were then living. They were what the Whigs had 
 been at 'the Revolution j what they had been during 
 the reign of queen Anne ; what they had been at 
 the accefllon of the prefent royal family. 
 
 What they were at thofe periods is to be feen. It 
 rarely happens to a party to have the opportunity of a 
 
 clear,
 
 ( 55 ) 
 
 clear, authentic, recorded, declaration of their poli- 
 tical tenets upon the fubject of a great conftitutional 
 event like that of the Revolution. The Whigs had 
 that opportunity, or, to fpeak more properly, they 
 made it. The impeachment of Dr. Sacheverel 
 was undertaken by a Whig Miniflry and a Whig 
 Houfe of Commons, and carried on before a preva- 
 lent and fteady majority of Whig Peers. It was 
 carried on for the exprefs purpole of ftating the true 
 grounds and principles of the Revolution -, what the 
 Commons emphatically called their foundation. It 
 was carried on for the purpole of condemning the 
 principles on which the Revolution was firil op- 
 pofed, and afterwards calumniated, in order by a 
 juridical fentence of the higheft authority to con- 
 firm and fix Whig principles, as they had operated 
 both in the refiftance to King James, and in the 
 . Jubfequent fettlement ; and to fix them in the ex- 
 tent and with the limitations with which it was 
 meant they fliould be underftood by pofterity. The 
 minifters and managers for the Commons were per- 
 fons who had, many of them, an active fhare in 
 the Revolution. Mod of them had feen it at an 
 age capable of reflection. The grand event, and 
 all the diicuflions which led to it, and followed it, 
 were then alive in the memory and converfation of 
 all men. The managers for the Commons muft 
 be fuppofed to have fpoken on that fubject the pre- 
 valent ideas of the leading party in the Commons, 
 and of the Whig miniflry. Undoubtedly they fpoke 
 alfo their own private opinions ; and the private 
 opinions of luch men are not without weight. They 
 were not umbratiles dottores> men who had ftudied 
 a free conftitution only in its anatomy, and upon 
 dead fyftems. They knew it alive and in action. 
 
 In this proceeding, the Whig principles, as ap- 
 plied to the Revolution and fettlement, are to be 
 E 4 found,
 
 found, or they are -to be found no where. I wifli 
 the Whig readers of this appeal firft to turn to Mr. 
 Burke's Reflections from p. 20 to p. 50 ; and then 
 to attend to the following extracts from the trial 
 of Dr. Sacheverel. After this, they will confider 
 two things; firft, whether the doctrine in Mr. 
 Burke's Reflections be confonant to that of the 
 Whigs of that period j and fecondly, whether they 
 choofe to abandon the principles which belong- 
 ed to the progenitors of fome of them, and to the 
 . predecefTors of them all, and to learn new principles 
 \ of Whiggifm, imported from France, and diiTemi- 
 nated in this country from diflenting pulpits, from 
 federation focieties, and from the pamphlets, which (as 
 containing the political creed of thofe fynods) are in- 
 duftrioufly circulated in all parts of the two king- 
 doms. This is their affair, and they will make their 
 option. 
 
 Thefe new Whigs hold, that the fovereignty, 
 whether exercifed by one or many, did not only ori- 
 ginate/re^ the people (a pofition not denied, nor 
 worth denying or afienting to) but that, in the 
 people the fame fovereignty constantly and unalien- 
 ably refides ; that the people may lawfully depofe 
 kings, not only for mifconduct, but without any mif- 
 conduct at all ; that they may fet up any new fafhion 
 of government for themfelves, or continue without 
 any government at their pleafure ; that the people 
 are eflentially their own rule, and their will the 
 meafure of their conduct ; that the tenure of ma- 
 giftracy is not a proper fubject of contract; becaufe 
 magiftrates have duties, but no rights : and that if 
 a contract de faffo is made with them in one age, 
 allowing that it binds at all, it only binds thofe who 
 were immediately concerned in it, but does not pafs 
 to pofterity. Thefe doctrines concerning the people 
 (a term which they are far from accurately defining, 
 but by which, from many circumftances, it is plain 
 
 enough
 
 ( 57 ) 
 
 I enough they mean their own faction, if they fhould 
 \grow by early arming, by treachery, or violence, 
 into the prevailing force) tend, in my opinion, to 
 the utter fubverfion, not only of all government, 
 in all modes, and to all ftable fecurities to rational 
 freedom, but to all the rules and principles of 
 morality itfelf. 
 
 k I arTert, that the ancient Whigs held doctrines, 
 totally different from thole I have laft mentioned. I 
 aflert, that the foundations laid down by the Com- 
 mons, on the trial of Doctor Sacheverel, for jufti- 
 fying the revolution of 1688, are the very fame 
 laid down in Mr. Burke's Reflections ; that is to 
 fay, a breach of the original contraft, implied and 
 exprefled in the conftitution of this country, as 
 a fcherne of government fundamentally and invio- 
 lably fixed in King, Lords, and Commons. That 
 the fundamental fubverfion of this antient conftitu- 
 tion, by one of its parts, having been attempted, 
 and in effect accomplifhed, juftified the Revolu- 
 tion. That it was juftified only upon the neceffity 
 of the cafe; as the only means left for the reco- 
 very of that antient conftitution, formed by the ori- 
 ginal contract of the Britifh ftate ; as well as for the 
 future prefervation of the fame government. Thefe 
 are the points to be proved. 
 
 A general opening to the charge againft Dr. Sache- 
 verel was made by the Attorney General, Sir John 
 Montagu; but as there is nothing in that opening 
 fpeech which tends very accurately to fettle the prin- 
 ciple upon which the Whigs proceeded in the pro- 
 fecution (the plan of the ipeech not requiring it) 
 I proceed to that of Mr. Lechmere, the manager 
 who fpoke next after him. The following are ex- 
 tracts, given, not in the exact order in which they 
 ftand in the printed trial, but in that which is 
 thought moft fit to bring the ideas of the Whig 
 Commons diftinctly under our view. 
 
 i MR.
 
 ( 58 ) 
 
 * MR. LECHMERE. 
 
 c It becomes an indifpenfable duty upon us, who 
 appear in the name and on the behalf of all the 
 Commons of Great Britain, not onlj to demand 
 your lordfhips juftice on fuch a criminal [Dr. Sa-r 
 cheverel] but dearly and openly to ajfert our foun- 
 dat ions' 
 
 < The nature of our conflitution is that of a //- 
 m * te l monarchy ; wherein the fupreme power is 
 communicated and divided between Queen, Lords, 
 anc * Commons ; though the executive power and 
 adminiftration be wholly in the crown. The terms 
 O f f uc fa a conftitution do not only ftippofe, but ex- 
 
 r . . 01, 
 
 prefs, an original contract between the crown and 
 fa c people : by which that fupreme power was 
 
 r r / r r . 
 
 (by mutual conient, and not by accident) limited, 
 an ^ lodged in more hands than one. And the 
 uniform frefervation of fuch a conftitution for Jo. 
 man y a?es* without any fundamental cLatt?e, demon- 
 
 /, 71/7-7 r 7 / 
 
 jtratcs to your Icrajhips the continuance of the Jame 
 contraft.' 
 
 ' The conlequences of fuch a frame of govern- 
 ment are obvious. That the laws are the rule to 
 
 ..... r 
 
 both ; the common meaiure of the power or the 
 crown, and of the obedience of the fubjecl ; and 
 if the executive part endeavours fac.Jubvcrjion and 
 tota ^ deftruttion of the government l , the original con- 
 tract is thereby broke, and the right of allegiance 
 ceafes ; that part of the government, thus funda- 
 mentally injured, hath a right to fave or recover 
 that conftitution, in which it had an original in- 
 
 s The necejfary means (which is the phrafe ufed 
 f by the Commons in their firft article) are words 
 
 State Trials, vol. v. p. 651. 
 
 made
 
 ( 59 ) 
 
 ' made choice of by them with the greatefl caution. 
 c Thofe means are defcribed (in the preamble to 
 
 4 their charge) to be, that glorious enterprize, which 
 ? his late majefly undertook, with an armed force, 
 f to deliver this kingdom from popery and arbitrary 
 ' power ; the concurrence of many fubjeclis of the 
 ( realm, who came over with him in that enterprize, 
 c and of many others of all ranks and orders, who 
 ' appeared in arms in many parts of the kingdom 
 
 5 in aid of that enterprize. 
 
 c Thefe were the means that brought about the 
 c Revolution ; and which the act that pafTed foon 
 s after, declaring the rights and liberties of the fubjeff, 
 c and fettling the JucceJJion of the crown, intends, 
 f when his late majefty is therein called the glorious 
 f inftrument of delivering the kingdom ; and which the 
 f Commons, in the laft part of their firft article, 
 
 * exprefs by the word rejiftance. 
 
 f But the Commons, who will never be unmind- Regard of 
 c ful of the allegiance of the fubiects to the crown of the Com " 
 
 ... . j j i i i i mons to 
 
 f this realm, judged it highly incumbent upon their aiie- 
 
 * them, out of regard to thefafety of her majefty' s f^"^ ,, 
 c perfon and government, and the antient and legal a d to the* 
 
 < conftitution of this kingdom, to call that refiftance *"[.,,_ 
 ' the necejfary means; thereby plainly founding that tion. 
 
 * power, right, and refiftance, which was exercifed 
 ' by the people at the time of the happy Revolu- 
 f tion, and which the duties of felf-prefervation and 
 ( religion called them to, upon the NECESSITY 
 ' of the cafe, and at the fame time effectually fe curing 
 
 < her majefty' s government, and the due allegiance of 
 aUberfabjeSs.' 
 
 * The nature of fuch an original contratt of go- AH ages 
 vernment proves, that there is not only a power I^e'inte. 
 in the people, who have inherited this freedom, to reft in p- 
 aflert their own title to it ; but they are bound in 7S?^ 
 duty to tranfmit the fame conftitution to their pof- tiadl > and 
 terity alfo.' 
 
 Mr.
 
 Mr. Lechmere made a fecond fpeech. Notwith- 
 ftanding the clear and fatisfactory manner in which 
 he delivered himfelf in his firfl upon this arduous 
 queftion, he thinks himfelf bound again difti nelly to 
 affert the fame foundation j and to juftify the Re- 
 volution on the cafe of ' necejjity only, upon principles 
 perfectly coinciding with thofe laid down in Mr. 
 Burke's Letter on the French affairs. 
 
 MR. LECHMERE. 
 
 c Your lordfhips were acquainted, in opening the 
 charge, with how great caution, and with what un- 
 feigned regard to her majefly and her govern- 
 ment, and the duty and allegiance of her fub- 
 jects, the commons made ufe of the words ne- 
 ceflary means., to exprefs the refiftance that was 
 made ufe of to bring about the Revolution, and 
 with the condemning of which the Doctor is 
 charged by this article; not doubting but that the 
 honour and juftice of that refiftance, from the ne- 
 cejjity of that cafe, and to which alom we have fir iff ly 
 confined eur/ehes, when duly confidered, would 
 confirm and ftrengthen j-, and be underitocd to be 
 an effectual fecurity for an allegiance of the 
 fubject to the crown of this realm, in every other 
 cafe where there is not the fame necejjity ; and that 
 the right of the people to Jelf-defence, and pre- 
 fer-vation of their liberties, by ref flame, as their 
 loft remedy, is the rejult of a cafe of Juch neceflity 
 only, and by which the original contract between 
 king and people, is broke. I'bis was the principle 
 laid down and carried through all that was J aid with 
 rejpeft to allegiance ; and on which foundation, in 
 the name and on the behalf of all the commons of 
 
 1 Great
 
 ( 61 ) 
 
 Great Britain, we ajfert and juftify that refiftance by 
 which the late happy revolution was brought 
 about' 
 
 f It appears to your lordfhips and the world, that 
 breaking the original contrail between king and people y 
 were the words made choice of by that Houfe of 
 Commons, [the Houfe of Commons which had 
 originated the declaration of right,] with the 
 greateft deliberation and judgment, and approved of 
 by your lordfhips, in that firft and fundamental 
 ftep towards the re-eftablifoment of the government, 
 which had received ib great a fhock from the evil 
 counfels which had been given to that unfortunate 
 prince.' 
 
 Sir John Hawles, another of the managers, fol- 
 lows the fteps of his brethren, pofitively affirming 
 the doctrine of non-reliftance to government to be 
 the general, moral, religious, and political rule for 
 the fubject; and juflifying the Revolution on the 
 fame principle with Mr. Burke, that is, as an ex- 
 ception from neceffity. Indeed he carries the doctrine 
 on the general idea of non-refiftance much further 
 than Mr. Burke has done; and full as far as it can 
 perhaps be fupported by any duty ofperfeft obliga- 
 tion j however noble and heroic it may be, in many 
 cafes, to fuffer death rather than difturb the tran- 
 quillity of our country. 
 
 * SIR JOHN HAWLES. 
 
 c Certainly it muft be granted, that the doctrine 
 f that commands obedience to the fupreme power, 
 c though in things contrary to nature, even to fuffer 
 * death, which is the higheft injuftice that can be 
 
 * P. 676. 
 
 * done
 
 ' done a man, rather than make an oppofition to the 5 
 ' fupreme power * [is reafonablej] becaufe the 
 c death of one, or fome few private perfons, is a 
 ( lefs evil than difturbing the whole government ; that 
 c law muft needs be underftood to forbid the doing 
 ' or faying any thing to difturb the government ; 
 c the rather becaufe the obeying that law cannot 
 c be pretended to be againft nature : and the Doc- 
 ' tor's refufing to obey that implicit law, is the 
 c reafon for which he is now profecuted; though he 
 c would have it believed, that the reafon he is now 
 c profecuted, was for the doctrine he aflerted of 
 f obedience to the fupreme power > which he 
 ' might have preached as long as he had pleafed, 
 ' and the Commons would have taken no offence 
 c at it, if he had flopped there, and not have taken 
 * upon him, on that pretence or occafion, to have 
 c caft odious colours upon the Revolution.' 
 
 General Stanhope was among the managers: 
 He begins his fpeech by a reference to the opinion 
 of his fellow managers, which he hoped had put 
 beyond all doubt the limits and qualifications that 
 the Commons had placed to their doctrines con- 
 cerning the Revolution; yet not fatisfied with this 
 general reference, after condemning the principle 
 of non-refiftance, which is aflerted in the fennon 
 without any exception, and ftating, that under the fpe- 
 cious pretence of preaching a peaceable doctrine, 
 Sacheverel and the Jacobites meant in reality to 
 excite a rebellion in favour of the Pretender, he 
 explicitly limits his ideas of refiftance with the 
 
 * The words neceflary to the completion of the fentence 
 are wanted in the printed trial but the conftru&ion of the 
 Sentence, as well as tl.e foregoing part of the fpeech, juiHfy the 
 infertion of fome fuch fupplemental words as the above. 
 
 boundaries
 
 boundaries laid down by his colleagues and by 
 Mr. Burke. 
 
 GENERAL STANHOPE. 
 
 f The conftitution of England is founded upon 
 c compatt ; and the fubjeils of this kingdom have, R; hts of 
 c in their feveral public and private capacities, as the fubje 
 ' legal a title to what are their rights by law, as a JrownV 
 f prince to the poffefiion of his crown. q*iiy le- 
 
 f Your lordfhips, and mod that hear me, are wit- gal " 
 f nefies, and muft remember the neceffities of thofe 
 f times which brought about the Revolution : that jufticeof 
 f no other remedy was left to preferve our religion JoniS 
 c and liberties ; that refiftance was neceffary and con- neceffity. 
 { Jeqttently juft. 
 
 * Had the Doctor, in the remaining part of his 
 f fermon, preached up peace, quietnefs, and the 
 f like, and fhewn how happy we are under her 
 f maj city's adminiftration, and exhorted obedience 
 c to it, he had never been called to anfwer a 
 f charge at your lordfhips bar. But the tenor of all 
 4 his fubfequent difcourfe is one continued invective 
 c againft the government.' 
 
 Mr. Walpole (afterwards Sir Robert) was one 
 of the managers on this occafion. He was an 
 honourable man and a found Whig. He was not, 
 as the Jacobites and difcontented Whigs of his time 
 have reprefented him, and as ill-informed people flill 
 reprelent him, a prodigal and corrupt miniiter. They 
 charged him in their libels and feditious converfa- 
 tions as having firft reduced corruption to a fyftem. 
 Such was their cant. But he was far from governing 
 by corruption. He governed by party attachments. 
 The charge of fyftematic corruption is lefs appli- 
 cable to him, perhaps, than to any minifler who 
 ever ferved -the crown for fo great a length of 
 
 time.
 
 ( 64 ) 
 
 time. He gained over very few from the Oppo- 
 fition. Without being a genius of the firft clafs, 
 he was an intelligent, prudent, and fafe minifteK. 
 He loved peace -, and he helped to commu- 
 nicate the fame difpofition to nations at leaft 
 as warlike and reftlefs as that in which he had 
 the chief direction of affairs. Though he ferved 
 a matter who was fond of martial fame, he kept 
 all the eftablifhments very low. The land tax 
 continued at two fhillings in the pound for the 
 greater part of his adminiftration. The other 
 impofitions were moderate. The profound re- 
 pofe, the equal liberty, the firm protection of 
 juft laws during the long period of his power, 
 were the principal caufes of that profperity which 
 afterwards took fuch rapid ftrides towards per- 
 fection; and which furniihed to this nation abi- 
 lity to acquire the military glory which it has fince 
 obtained, as well as to bear the burthens, the caufe 
 and confequence of that warlike reputation. With 
 many virtues, public and private, he had his faults ; 
 but his faults were fuperficial. A carelefs, coarfe, 
 and over familiar ftyle of difcourfe, without fufficient 
 regard to perfons or occafions, and an almoft total 
 want of political decorum, were the errours by 
 which he was moil hurt in the public opinion: 
 and thofe through which his enemies obtained the 
 greateft advantage over him. But juflice muft 
 be done. The prudence, fteadinefs, and vigilance 
 of that man, joined to the greateft poflible lenity in 
 his character and his politics, preferved the crown 
 to this royai family ; and with it, their laws and li- 
 berties to this country. Walpoie had no other 
 plan of defence for the Revolution, than that of 
 the othtr managers, and of Mr. Burke j and he 
 gives full a* little countenance to any arbitrary at- 
 tempts, , n the pait of reftlefs and factious men, 
 for framing new governments according to their 
 fancies. 
 
 MR.
 
 t 65 ) 
 
 MR. WALPOLE. 
 
 ? Refiftance is no where enafted to be legal, but Cafe of 
 fubjefted, by all the laws now in being, to the " u f j of"the 
 greateft penalties. It is what is not, cannot, nor iaw;*d 
 
 1 t J /- M j i the higlieft 
 
 ought ever to be defcnbed, or affirmed, in any oOneL 
 pofitive law, to be excu fable : when> and upon 
 what nevtr-to-bt-expffftd occafions, it may be 
 exercifed, no man can forefeej and it ought never to 
 he thought of, but when an utter fubverfion of the 
 laws of the realm threatens the whole frame of our 
 conftitution, and no redrefs can other-wife be hoped for. 
 It therefore does, and ought for ever, to ftand, 
 in the eye and letter of the law, as the highejl 
 offence. But becaufe any man. or party of men, 
 may not^ out of folly or wantonnefs, commit 
 treafon, or make their own difcontents, ill prin- 
 ciples, or difguifed affections to another intereft, 
 a pretence to refift the fupreme power, will it fol- utmoft 
 low from thence that the utmoft neceffity ought JSSte 
 not to engage a nation, in its own defence, for 
 the prefervation of fly e whole T 
 
 Sir Jofeph Jekyl was, as I have always heard and 
 believed, as nearly as any individual could be, the 
 very ftandard of Whig principles in his age. He 
 was a learned, and an able man ; full of honour, 
 integrity, and public fpirit; no lover of innovation; 
 nor difpofed to change his Iblid principles for 
 the giddy fafhion of the hour. Let us hear this 
 Whig. 
 
 SIR JOSEPH JEKYL. 
 
 * In clearing up and vindicating the juftice of the 
 
 * Revolution, which was the fecond thing propofel, it 
 
 F < is
 
 ( 66 ) 
 
 Commons < is far from the intent of the Commons to ftate the 
 ?heTm te c I* m **s an d bounds of the fnbject's fubmiflion to the 
 of fubmif- fovereign. That which the law hath been wifely 
 c filent in, the Commons defire to be filent in too ; 
 c nor will they put any cafe of a juftifiable refiftance, 
 ' but that of the Revolution only; and they perfuade 
 f themjehcs that the doing right to that refiftance will 
 ( be Jo far from promoting popular licence or confufion-, 
 ' that it ivill have a contrary effeft> and be a means of 
 'fettling men's winds in the love of, and veneration for 
 ' the laws - t to refcue and fecure which, was the 
 c ONLY aim and intention of thofe concerned in re- 
 'Jijlance.' 
 
 lion. 
 
 To feciirfe 
 the laws, 
 the only 
 aim of the 
 Revolu- 
 tion. 
 
 Dr. Sacheverel's counfel defended him on this 
 principle, namely that whilft he enforced from the 
 pulpit the general doctrine of non-refiftance, he was 
 not obliged to take notice of the theoretic limits 
 which ought to modify that doctrine. Sir 
 Jofeph Jekyl, in his reply, whilft he controverts its 
 application to the Doctor's defence, fully admits 
 and even enforces the principle itfelf, and fupports 
 the Revolution of 1 68 8, as he and all the managers 
 had done before, exactly upon the fame grounds 
 on which Mr. Burke has built, in his Reflections 
 on the French Revolution. 
 
 SIR JOSEPH JEKYL. 
 
 c If the Doctor had pretended to have ftated the 
 particular bounds and limits of non-refiftance, 
 and told the people in what cafes they might, or 
 might not refift, be would have been much to blame ; 
 nor was one word faid in the articles, or by the 
 managers, as if that was expected from him: 
 but, on the contrary > we have infifted, that in NO
 
 * tare 
 
 i 
 
 afe can refinance b? lawful, but in cafe of extreme 
 neceffity, and where the conftitution cannot ether- neceflity. 
 f wife be preferred; and fuch neceffity ought to be 
 c plain and obvious to the fenfe and judgment of 
 ( the whole nation > and this was the cafe at the Re- 
 ' volution.' 
 
 The counfel for Doctor Sacheverel, in defend- 
 ing their client, were driven in reality to abandon 
 the fundamental principles of his doctrine, and to 
 confefs, that an exception to the general doctrine 
 of paffive obedience and non-refiftance did exift 
 in the cafe of the Revolution. This the ma- 
 nagers for the Commons confidered as having 
 gained their caufe ; as their having obtained the 
 whole of what they contended for. They con- 
 gratulated themfelves and the nation on a civil 
 victory, as glorious and as honourable as any that 
 had obtained in arms during that reign of tri- 
 umphs. 
 
 Sir Jofeph Jekyl, in his reply to Harcourt, and 
 the other great men who conducted the cauie for 
 the Tory fide, fpoke in the following memorable 
 terms, diftinctly Hating the whole of what the Whig 
 Houfe of Commons contended for, in the name 
 of all their constituents : * 
 
 SIR JOSEPH JEKYJ. 
 
 c My lords, the concefiions [the conceffions of Ne 
 Sacheverel's counfel] are thde: That, neceffity ^""^JJ 
 creates an exception to the general rule of /ubmif- and the/ 
 fion to the prince j that fuch exception is under- f JJ'JJI ^ on 
 ftood or implied in the laws that require fudi necrjr, 
 iubmiffionj and that the cafe of the Revolution ^e?' 
 wa: a cafe of ncceflity. th demand 
 
 ^^ , TM r 
 
 F 2 * Thefe
 
 ( 68 ) 
 
 1 Thefe arc conccfllons Jo ample, and do fo fully 
 anfwer the drift of the Commons in this article, 
 and are to the utmoft extent of their meaning in it, 
 that I can't forbear congratulating them upon 
 this fuccefs of their impeachment ; that in full 
 parliament, this erroneous doctrine of unlimited 
 non-refiftance is given up, and difclaimed. And 
 may it not, in after ages, be an addition to the 
 glories of this bright reign, that fo many of thofe 
 who are honoured with being in her majefty's 
 fervice have been at your lordlhips bar, thus fuc- 
 cefsfully contending for the national rights of her 
 people, and proving they are not precarious or 
 remedilefs ? 
 
 * But to return to thefe conceflions j I muft ap- 
 peal to your lordlhips, whether they are not a 
 total departure from the Doctor's anfwer.' 
 
 I now proceed to fhew that the Whig managers 
 for the Commons meant to preferve the government 
 on a firm foundation, by aflerting the perpetual vali- 
 dity of the fettlement then made, and its coercive 
 power upon pofterity. I mean to fhew that they 
 gave no fort of countenance to any doctrine tending 
 , to imprefs the people, taken feparately from the legif- 
 lature which includes the crown, with an idea that 
 they had acquired a moral or civil competence to alter 
 (without breach of the original compact on the part 
 of the king) the fuccefiion to the crown, at their 
 pleafure; much lefs that they had acquired any 
 right, in the cafe of fuch an event as caufed the 
 Revolution, to fet up any new form of govern- 
 ment. The author of the Reflections, I believe, 
 thought that no man of common understanding 
 could oppofe to this doctrine, the ordinary fove- 
 reign power* a"s declared in the act of queen Anne. 
 That is j that the kings or queens of the realm, 
 
 with
 
 with the confent of parliament, are competent to 
 regulate and to fettle the fuccefiion of the crown. 
 This power is and ever was inherent in the fupreme 
 fovereignty ; and was not, as the political divines 
 vainly talk, acquired by the revolution. It is de- 
 clared in the old ftatute of Queen Elizabeth. Such 
 a power muft refide in the complete fovereignty of 
 every kingdom $ and it is in fact exercifed in all of 
 them. But this right of competence in the legiflature, 
 not in the people, is by the legiflature itfelf to be exer- 
 cifed \v\t\\found difcretion ; that is Ito fay, it is to be 
 exercifed or not, in conformity to the fundamental 
 principles of this government ; to the rules of moral 
 obligation ; and to the faith of pacts, either con- 
 tained in the nature of the tranfaction, or entered 
 into by the body corporate of the kingdom j which 
 body, in juridical construction, never dies; and in fact 
 never loies its members at once by death. 
 
 Whether this cfoctnne is reconcileable to the 
 modern philofophy of government, J believe the 
 author neither knows nor cares ; as he has little 
 refpect for any of that fort of philofophy. This 
 may be becaufe his capacity and knowledge do 
 not reach to it. If fuch be the cafe, he cannot be 
 blamed, if he acts on the fenfe of that incapacity ; 
 he cannot be blamed, if in the moil arduous and 
 critical queftions which can poflibly arife, and which 
 affect to the quick the vital parts of our conftitu- 
 tion, he takes the fide which leans moft to fafety and 
 fettlement $ that he is refolved not " to be wife 
 " beyond what is v-ritten" in the legiflative recor4 
 and practice j that when doubts arife on them, he 
 endeavours to interpret one ftatute by another j and 
 to reconcile them all to eftablifhed recognized 
 morals, and to the general antient known policy 
 of the laws of England. Two things are equally 
 Evident, the firft j$, that the legiflature polMes the 
 F 3 power
 
 ( 70 ) 
 
 power of regulating the fucceflion of the crown; 
 the fecond, that in the exercife of that right it has 
 uniformly acted as if under the reftraints which the 
 author has ftated. That author makes what the 
 antients call mos majorum, not indeed his fole, but 
 certainly his principal rule cf policy, to guide his 
 judgment in whatever regards our laws. Unifor- 
 mity and ?.:;:ilogy can b>" pjcfeived in them by 
 this procefs only. That point bang fixed, and 
 laying fafl. Iv-'.l of a flrong bottom, our fpecula- 
 tions may fwir.gin all directions, without public de- 
 triment; becaufe they will ride with fure anchorage. 
 
 In this manner thefe things have been always 
 confidered by our anceftors. There are fome in- 
 deed who have the art cf turning the very acts of 
 parliament which were made for fecuring the here- 
 ditary fucceffbn in the prefent royal family by ren- 
 dering it penal to doubt of the validity of thofe 
 acts of parliament, into an inftrument for defeating 
 all their ends and purpofes : but upon grounds 
 fo very foolifH, that it is not worth while to take 
 further notice of fuch fophiftry. 
 
 To prevent any unneceflaiy fubdivifion, I ihall 
 here put together what may be neceflary to fhew the 
 perfect agreement of the Whigs with Mr. Burke, 
 in his affertions, that the Revolution made no 
 " eflential change in the conftitution of the mo- 
 " narchy, or in any of its ancient, found, and 
 " legal principles; that the fucceflion was fettled 
 <f in the Hanover family, upon the idea, and in the 
 " mode of an hereditary fucceflion qualified with 
 " Proteftantifm ; that it was not fettled upon ekftive 
 " principles, in any fenfe of the word efeftive, or 
 " under any modification or defcription of election 
 " whatfoever i but, on the contrary, that the nation, 
 " after the Revolution, renewed by a frefh compact 
 " the fpiiit of 'the original compact of the ftate, 
 
 " binding
 
 ( 71 ) 
 
 Cf binding itfelf, both in its exifting members and all Its 
 " pofterity, to adhere to the fettlement of an here- 
 " ditary fucceffion in the Proteftant line, drawn 
 " from James the Firft, as the ftock of inheritance." 
 
 SIR JOHN HAWLES. 
 
 c If he [Dr. Sacheverel] is of the opinion he pre- Necefiity of 
 f tends, I cannot imagine how it comes to pafs, that Jj ^'ght 
 f he that pays that deference to the fupreme power of the 
 c has preached fo directly contrary to the determina- Jubmuf J 
 ' tions of the fupreme power in this governments he to the r- 
 ' very well knowing that the lawfulnels of the Revo- tlemcnt 
 ' lution, and of the means whereby it was brought 
 c about, has already been determined by the aforefaid 
 
 * acts of parliament : and do it in the worft manner he 
 ' could invent. For queftioning the right to the crown 
 c here in England, has procured the Jhedding of more 
 c blood, and caufed more Jlaughter, than all the other 
 ' matters tending to difturbances in the government, put 
 ' together. If, therefore, the doctrine which the 
 e apoftles had laid down, was only to continue the 
 
 * peace of the world, as thinking the death of foine 
 
 * few particular perfons better to be borne with 
 f than a civil war ; fure it is the higheft breach of 
 1 that law to queftion the firft principles of this 
 ' government.' 
 
 ' If the Doctor had been contented with the liberty 
 
 * he took of preaching up the duty of paffive obedi- 
 ' ence, in the moft extenfive manner he had thought 
 
 * fit, and would have flopped there, your lordfhips 
 ' would not have ha.d the trouble, in relation to 
 ' him, that you now have; but it is plain, that he 
 ' preached up his abfolute and unconditional obe- 
 f djence, not to continue the -peace and tranquillity of 
 ' this nation, but to Jet thejubjefts atjtrife y and to ratfe 
 
 * a war in the bowels of this nation \ and it is for this 
 f that he is now profecuted ; though he would fain 
 ' have it believed that the profecution was for 
 
 F 4 < preaching
 
 ( 7* ) 
 
 f preaching the peaceable doctrine of abfolute obe- 
 * dience.' 
 
 Whole 
 frame of 
 goi-ernmer,t 
 reftoredui - 
 hurt on the 
 Revolution. 
 
 SIR JOSEPH JEKYL. 
 
 * The whole tenor of the adminiftration, then in 
 being, was agreed by all to be a total departure 
 from tbe conftitution. The nation was at that time 
 united in that opinion, all but the criminal part 
 of it. And as the nation joined in the judgment 
 of their difeafe, fo they did in the remedy, they 
 Jaw there was no remedy left, but the laft ; and when 
 that remedy took place, the whole frame of. the go- 
 vernment ivas reftored entire and unhurt * This 
 fhewed the excellent temper the nation was in at 
 that time, that, after fuch provocations from an 
 abufe of the regal power, and fuch a convulfion, 
 no one fart of the conftitution was altered, orjuffer- 
 ed the leaft damage \ but, on the contrary ', the whole 
 received new life and 'vigour.' 
 
 The Tory council for Dr. Sacheverel having 
 infmuated, that a great and effential alteration in 
 the conftitution had been wrought by the Revolu- 
 tion, Sir Joieph Jekyl is fo ftrong on this point, 
 
 * * What we did was, in truth and fubftance and in a conflitu- 
 
 * tional light, a revolution, hot made, 'but prevented. We took 
 ' folid fecurities; we fettled doubtful queftions; we correfled ano- 
 malies in our Jaw. In the liable fundamental parts of our con- 
 
 * ftitution we made no revolution ; rio, nor any alteration at all. 
 ' We did not impair the monarchy. Perhaps it might be Ihewn 
 ' that we ftrengthened it very confiderably. The nation kept the 
 ' fame ranks, the fame orders, the fame privileges, the fame fran- 
 
 * chifes, the fame rules for property, the fame fubordinations,the 
 fame order iri the law, in the revenue, and in the magiftracy ; 
 ' the fame lords, the fame commons, the fame corporations, the 
 ' fame electors.' Mr. Burke's fpeech in the Hcttfe of Commons f 
 $tb February 1 790. Jt appears how exa&ly he coincides in every 
 thing with Sir jofeph Jekyl, 
 
 that
 
 ( 73 ) 
 
 hat he takes fire even at the infinuation of his 
 being of fuch an opinion. 
 
 SIR JOSEPH JEKYU 
 
 * If the Doctor inftructed his counfel to infinu- K 
 ate that there was any innovation in the conftitution J 
 wrought by the Revolution, it is an addition to his 
 crime. The Revolution did not introduce any inno- 
 vation ; it was a reftoration of the antient funda- 
 mental conftitution of the kingdom, and giving it its 
 proper force and energy.' 
 
 ***##*##** 
 
 The Solicitor General, Sir Robert Eyre, dif- 
 tinguilhes exprefsly the cafe of the Revolution, and 
 ics principles, from a proceeding at pleafure, on the 
 part of the people, to change their antient confti- 
 tution, and to frame a new government for them- 
 felves. He diftinguifiies it with the fame care from 
 the principles of regicide, and republicanifm, and 
 the forts of refiftance condemned by the doctrines 
 of the church of England, and, which ought to be 
 condemned, by the doctrines of all churches pro- 
 fefling Chriftianity. 
 
 MR. SOLICITOR GENERAL^ SIR ROBERT EYRE. 
 
 ' The refiftance at the Revolution, which was Revolution 
 5 founded in unavoidable ne-ce/ity, could be no de- J'Xfo'T 
 
 * fence to a man that was attacked for ajjerting voluntary 
 5 that the people might cancel their allegiance at plea- Segiaw* 
 f Jure, or dethrone- and murder their Jovereign by a 
 
 f - judiciary Jentence. For it can never be inferred 
 
 * from the lawfulness of refiftance, at a time when 
 ' a total fubverficn of the government both in church 
 '. and ft ate was intended, that a people may take 
 ' up arms, and call their Jovereign to account at 
 ' pleafure ; and, therefore, fmce the Revolution could 
 
 * le ofnofervice in giving the leaft colour for averting 
 
 ( any
 
 ( 74 ) 
 
 c any fuch wicked principle, the Doctor could never 
 ' intend to put it into the mouths of thofe new 
 ' preachers, and new politicians, for a defence ; 
 ' unlefs it be his opinion, that the refiftance at the 
 
 * R volution can bear any parallel with the execra- 
 c bis m:>.rddr cf the royal martyr, jo iujJly detefledby the 
 
 ' It is plain that the Doctor is not impeached 
 c for preaching a. general doctrine, and enforcing 
 
 * L,e general duty of obedience, but for preaching 
 
 * againft an excepted cafe, after he has flat ed the ex- 
 f cepfion. He is not impeached for preaching the 
 
 * genera] doctrine of obedience, and the utter ille- 
 f gality of refiftance upon any pretence whatfoever ; 
 c but becaufe, having firft laid down the general 
 ' doctrine as true, without any exception, he flatss 
 ' the excepted cafe, the Revolution, in exprefs terms, 
 ' as an objection ; and then afTuming the confide- 
 ' ration of that excepted cafe, denies there was any 
 c refiftance in the Revolud: n ; and afferts, that to 
 ' impute refiftance to the Revolution, would caft 
 ' black and odious colours upon it. This is not 
 
 * preaching the doctrine of non-re fiftance, in the 
 ' general terms ufed by the homilies, and the fa- 
 
 * thers of the church where cafes of neceflity may 
 ' be underftcod to be excepted by a tacit implication, as 
 ' the counjel have allowed-, but is preaching directly 
 ' againft the refiftance at the Revolution, which, in 
 
 * the courfe of this debate, has been all along ad- 
 c mitted to be neceffary and juft, and can have 
 ' no other meaning than to bring a dishonour 
 
 * upon the Revolution, and an odium upon thofe. 
 ( great and illuftrious perfons, thofe friends to the 
 f monarchy and the church, that ajjifled in bringing it 
 ( about. For had the Doclor intended any thing elfe, 
 
 * he would have treated the cafe of the Revolution 
 ' in a different manner, and have given it the true 
 ( and fair anfii-er j he would have faid, that the re- 
 
 < fiftance
 
 ( 7J ) 
 
 fiftance at the Revolution was cf abjolute neceffity, Revolution 
 
 , , , , r i a on abfolutc 
 
 ' and the only means left to revive the conjtitution j nec eiruy. 
 
 ' and muft therefore be taken as an executed cafe, 
 
 * and could never come within the reach and inten- 
 
 * tion of the general doctrine of the church. 
 
 ' Your lord (hips take notice on what grounds the 
 c Doftor continues to affert the fame pofition in his 
 4 anfwer. But is it not moft evident, that the ge-. 
 
 * neral exhortations to be met with in the homilies 
 ' of the church of England, and fuch like decla- 
 c rations in the ftatutes of the kingdom, are meant 
 
 * only as rules for the civil obedience of the fubjeft 
 4 to the legal adminiftration of the fupreme power in 
 4 ordinary cafes ? And it is equally abfurd, to con- 
 
 * ftrue any words in a pofitive law to authorize the 
 
 * deftruftion of the whole, as to expect that king, 
 4 lords, and commons fhould, in exprefs terms of 
 4 law, declare fuch an ultimate refort as the right of 
 4 refinance t at a time when the cafe fuppofes that the 
 f force of all law is ceajed *. 
 
 ( The Commons muft always refent, with the ut- Commons 
 4 moil deteftation and abhorrence, every pofition aveMhlSj 
 
 * that may fhake the authority of that aft of par- thefubmif- 
 4 liament, whereby the crown is fettled upon her SritjftotM 
 4 majefty, and whereby the lords fpiritual and temporal fettiement 
 4 and commons do, in the name of. all the people of Eng- crolin. 
 
 4 land, moft humbly and faithfully Jubmit them/elves, 
 f their heirs and pofteritiss, to her majejiy, which this 
 4 general principle of abfolute non-refiftance muft 
 f certainly fhake. 
 
 c For, if the refiftance at the Revolution was ille- 
 e gal, the Revolution fettled in ufurpation, and this 
 4 aft can have no greater force and authority than 
 f an aft pafied under an ufurper. 
 
 4 And the Commons take leave to obierve, that 
 4 the authority of the parliamentary fettiement is a 
 
 * See Reflexions, p. 42, 43. 
 
 ' matter
 
 ( 76 ) 
 
 matter of the greateft confequence to maintain,, in 
 a cafe where the hereditary right to the crown is 
 contefted. 
 
 ' It appears by the feveral inftances mentioned in 
 the act declaring the rights and liberties of the 
 fubject, and fettling the fuccefilon of the crown, 
 that at the time of the Revolution there was A 
 total ' fubverfion of the conftitution of government both 
 in church and ft ale, which is a cafe that the laws 
 cf England could ne^jerfuppoje^ provide for, or have 
 in view.* 
 
 Sir Jofeph Jekyl, fo often quoted, confidered the 
 prefervation of the monarchy, and of the rights and 
 prerogatives of the crown, as eiTential objects with 
 all found Whigs ; and that they were bound, not on- 
 ly to maintain them when injured or invaded, but to 
 exert themfelves as much for their re-eftabliftiment, 
 ifthey fhould happen to be overthrown by popular fu- 
 ry, as any of their own more immediate and popu- 
 lar rights and privileges, if the latter fhould be at 
 any time fubverted by the crown. For this reafon 
 he puts the cafes of the Revolution and the Reftora- 
 Kion y exactly upon the fame footing. He plainly 
 marks, that it was the object cf all honeft men, 
 not to facrifice one part of the conftitution to an- 
 other; and much more, not to facrifice any of them 
 to vifionary theories of the rights of man ; but to 
 preferve our whole inheritance in the conftitution, 
 in all its members and all its relations, entire, and 
 unimpaired, from generation to generation. In this 
 Mr. Burke exactly agrees with him. 
 
 SIR JOSEPH JEKYL. 
 
 iat 3 re * Nothing is plainer than that the people have 
 ri S ht<jof ( a light to the laws and the conftitution. This 
 
 ' right
 
 ( 77 ) 
 
 right the nation hath afferted, and recovered out 
 of the hands of thofe who had difpoffefTed them 
 of it at feveral times. There are of this two 
 fainous inflames in the knowledge of the prefent 
 age ; I mean that of the Reftauration, and that ^f JJ 
 of the Revolution j in both of thefe great events union. 
 were the regal -power, and the rights of the people ^^ 
 recovered. And it is bard to Jay in 'which the u-refti-i 
 people have the greatefl intereft:, for the commons ^f^ 
 are Jenfible that there is not one legal power be- crown 
 longing to the crown, but they have an intereft in it ; own!' 1 * 
 and I doubt not but they will always be as careful 
 to fupport the rights of the crown, as their own 
 privileges .' 
 
 The other Whig managers regarded (as he did) 
 the overturning, of the monarchy by a republican 
 faclion with the very fame horror and deteftation 
 with which they regarded the deftruftion of the 
 privileges of the people by an arbitrary mo- 
 narch. 
 
 MR. LECHMERE, 
 
 Speaking of our conftitution, ftates it as c a 
 f conflitution which happily recovered itfelf,.at 
 
 * the Reftoration, from the confufions and dif- 
 
 * orders which the horrid and del eft able proceed- 
 
 * ings of faction and uj'urpation had thrown it into, 
 f and which, after many convulfions and ftruggles, 
 
 was providentially faved at the late happy Revo- 
 1 lution ; and, by the many good laws parted fince 
 
 * that time, ftands now upon a firmer foundation : 
 
 * together with the moft comfortable profpect of 
 ' fecurity to all pofterity, by the fettlement of the 
 crown in the Proteftant line.' 
 
 I mean
 
 ( 78 ) 
 
 I mean now to Ihew that the Whigs, (if Sir 
 Jofeph Jekyl was one) and if he fpoke in conformity 
 to the fenfe of the Whig houfe of commons and 
 the Whig miniftry who employed him, did care- 
 fully guard againft any prefumption that might 
 arife from the repeal of the non-refitlance oath of 
 Charles the fecond, as if, at the Revolution, the an- 
 tient principles of our government were at all chang- 
 ed or that republican doctrines were countenanced, 
 or any fanftion given to feditious proceedings 
 upon general undefined ideas of mifconducl: or for 
 changing the form of government or for refiftance 
 upon any other ground than the mceffity fo often 
 mentioned for the purpofe of felf-prefervation. It 
 will {hew dill more clearly the equal care of the 
 then Whigs, to prevent either the regal power 
 from being fwallowed up on pretence of popular 
 rights, or the popular rights from being deftroyed 
 on pretence of regal prerogatives. 
 
 SIR JOSEPH JEKYL. 
 
 c Further, I defire it may be confidered, that 
 thefe legislators [the legiflators who framed the 
 non- refiftance oath of Charles the Second] were 
 guarding againft the confequences of thofe per- 
 nicious and antimonarcbical principles, which had 
 been broached a little before in this nation ; and thofe 
 large declarations in favour of non-rejiftame were 
 made to encounter or obviate the mifchief of 
 thofe principles ; as appears by the preamble to 
 the fulleft of thofe acts, which is the militia aft, in 
 the i jth and i4th of King Charles the Second. 
 The words of that act are thefe : And, during the 
 late ufurped governments, many evil find rebellious 
 principles have been wftilled into the minds of the 
 people of this kingdom, which may break forth, unlejs 
 prevented, to the difturb<yjcc of the peace and quiet 
 
 ( thereof:
 
 ( 79 ) 
 
 c thereof: Be it therefore enafted, &V. Plere your 
 f lordfhips may fee the reafon that inclined thofc 
 c legiflators to exprefs themfelves in fuch a manner 
 4 againft refiftance. They had Jem the regal rights 
 c fwallowed z'.p, under the pretence cf popular ones ; and 
 
 * it is no imputation on them that they did not then 
 c forefee a quite different cafe, as was that of the Re- 
 ' volution j where, under the pretence of regal au- 
 c thority,a total fubveriion of the rights of the fubjeft 
 ' was advanced, and in a manner effected. And this 
 
 * may ferve to fhew, that it was not the defign of 
 c thofe legiflators to condemn refiftance, in a cafe of 
 
 * abfohte necej/ity, for preferring the conftitution, when 
 c they were guarding againft principles which had fo 
 c lately deftroyed it. 
 
 c As to the truth of the do6lrine in this declara- 
 tion which was repealed, / will admit it to be as 
 true as the Doffor' s counjel ajftrt it; that is, with 
 an exception of cafes of neceffity ; and it was not re- 
 pealed becaufe it was falfe, underftanding it with 
 that reftrittion ; but it was repealed becaufe it 
 might be interpreted in an unconfinedjenje, and ex- 
 clufive of that reftriftion; and being fo underftood, 
 would refle6t on the juftice of the Revolution : 
 and this the legiflature had at heart, and were 
 very jealous of j and by this repeal of that decla- 
 ration, gave a parliamentary or legiflative admo- 
 nition, againft averting this doctrine of non-re- 
 fiftance in an unlimited fenfe.' 
 
 c Though the general doftrine of non- refiftance, General 
 the doftrine of the church of England, as ftated 
 in her homilies, or elfewhere delivered, by which 
 
 the general duty of fubje&s to die higher powers JjJ 
 is taught, be owned to be, as unqueftionably it bound to* 
 is, a godly and wholefome doclrine-, though this *J 
 general doctrine has been conftantly inculcated by 
 the reverend fathers of the church, dead and 
 living, and preached by them as a prefervative 
 S < againft
 
 againft the popifh doctrine of depofing prince"*; 
 and as the ordinary rule of obedience ; arid 
 though the fame doctrine has been preached, 
 maintained, and avowed by our moft orthoddx 
 and able divines from the time of the Reforma"- 
 tion j and how innocent a man Dr. Sacheverel 
 had been, if, with an bone/} and well-meant zeal, 
 he had preached the fame doctrine in the fame 
 general terms in which he found it delivered try 
 the apoftles of Chrift, as taught by the homilies, 
 and the reverend fathers of our church, and, 
 in imitation of thofe great examples, had only 
 prefied the general duty of obedience, and the il- 
 legality of refiftance, without taking notice 6f 
 any exception.' 
 
 SubmilTion 
 :o the fove- 
 ; reign a con- 
 ' Vieniious 
 
 uty, except 
 L.n cafes of 
 f^eceflity. 
 
 I 
 < 
 
 I' 
 
 Another of the managers for the houfe of com* 
 mons, Sir John Holland, was not lefs careful in 
 guarding againft a confufion of the principles of the 
 revolution, with any loofe general doctrines of a right 
 in the individual, or even in the people, to under- 
 take for themfelves, on any prevalent tempo- 
 rary opinions of convenience or improvement, any 
 fundamental change in the conftitution, or to 
 fabricate a new government for themfelves, and 
 thereby to difturb the public peace, and to unfettie 
 the antient conftitution of this kingdom. 
 
 SIR JOHN HOLLAND. 
 
 c The commons would not be underftood, as if 
 they were pleading for a licentious refiftance ; as if 
 JubjeRs were left to their good-will and pleafure, 
 when they are to obey, and when to rejift. No, 
 my lords, they know jhey are obliged by all the ties 
 of Jo rial creatures and Chriftians y for wrath and
 
 * confcience fake, to fulmit to their fovereign. The 
 ( commons do not abet humourjome factious arms : 
 ' they aver them to be rebellious. But yet they 
 
 * maintain, that that refiftance at the Revolution, 
 
 * which was fo neceffary, was lawful and juft from 
 < that neceffity. 
 
 c Thele general rujes of obedience may, upon a 
 c real neceffity -, admit a lawful exception ; and fuch a 
 
 * necejjary exception we aflert the revolution to be, 
 
 * 'Tis with th'i3 view of neceffity only, abfolute Right of 
 
 * neceffity of preferving our laws, liberties, and 
 
 * religion] 'tis with this limitation that we defire to u 
 ' be underftood, when any of us fpeak of refiftance 
 
 in general. The neceffity of the refiftance at the 
 ( Revolution, was at that time obvious to every 
 ' man/ 
 
 I fhall conclude thefe extra6b with a reference to 
 the prince of Orange's declaration, in which he gives 
 the nation the fulleft affurance that in his enterprize 
 he was far from the intention of introducing any 
 change whatever in the fundamental law and con- 
 ftitution of the ftate. He confidered the objecl: of 
 his enterprize, not to be a precedent for further 
 revolutions, but that it was the great end of his ex- 
 pedition to make fuch revolutions fo far as hu- 
 man power and wifdom could provide, unnecefla- 
 
 Extracts from the Prince of Orange's Declaration. 
 
 c All magiftrates, who have been unjuftly turn- 
 ed out, fhall forthwith refume their former em- 
 ployments, as well as all the boroughs of Eng- 
 land fhall return again to their antient frefcrip- 
 tions and charters : and more particularly, that 
 
 G *&f
 
 the antlent charter of the great and famous ci- 
 ty of London fhall be again in force. And that 
 the writs for the members of parliament fhall 
 be addrefled to the proper officers, according to 
 law and cuftom. * 
 ' And for the doing of all other things, which the 
 two houfes of parliament fhall find necefTary for 
 the peace, honour, and fafety of the nation, fo that 
 there may be no danger of the nation's falling, at 
 any time hereafter, under arbitrary government' 
 
 Extra^ from the Prince of Orange's additional De- 
 claration. 
 
 e We are confident that no perfbns can \\xvtfuch 
 hard thoughts of us, as to imagine that we have 
 any other defign in this undertaking, than to pro- 
 cure a fettlementof the religion, and of the liberties 
 and properties oftheJubjecJs, upon Jo fur e a founda- 
 tion, that there may be no danger of the nation's re- 
 lapfmg into the like miferies at any time hereafter. 
 And, as the forces that we have brought along with 
 us are utterly diiproportioned to that wicked de- 
 fign of conquering the nation, if we were capable 
 of intending it ;Jo the great numbers of the principal 
 nobility and gentry, that are men of eminent quality 
 and eft at es, and perfons of known integrity and zeal, 
 both for the religion and government of England, 
 many of them aljo being diftingui/hed by their conflant 
 fidelity to the crown, who do both accompany us in 
 this expedition, and have earneftly folicited us 
 to it, will cover us from all fuch malicious infi- 
 nuations.' 
 
 In the fpirit, and upon one occafion in the 
 words *, of this declaration, the ftatutes paffed in 
 that reign made fuch provifions for preventing thefe 
 dangers, that fcarcely any thing fhort of combination 
 
 Declaration of Right. 
 
 of
 
 of king, lords, and commons for the definition of 
 the liberties of the nation, can in any probability 
 make us liable to fimilar perils. In that dreadful, 
 and, I hope, not to be looked for cafe, any opinion 
 of a right to make revolutions, grounded on this pre- 
 cedent, would be but a poor refource. Dreadful 
 indeed would be our fituation. 
 
 Thefe are the doctrines held by the Wings of 
 the Revolution, delivered with as much folemnity, 
 and as authentically at leaft, as any political dog- 
 jnas were ever promulgated from die beginning of 
 the world. If there be any difference between 
 their tenets and thofe of Mr. Burke it is, that the 
 old Whigs oppofe themfelves ftill more ftrongly 
 than he does againft the doctrines which are now 
 propagated with fo much induftry by thofe who 
 would be thought their fucceffors. 
 
 It will be faid perhaps, that the old Whigs, in 
 order to guard themfelves againft popular odium, 
 pretended to affert tenets contrary to thofe which 
 they fecretly held. This, if true, would prove, what 
 Mr. Burke has uniformly afferted, that the extrava- 
 gant doctrines which he meant to expofe, were dif~ 
 agreeable to the body of the people ; who, though 
 they perfectly abhor a defpotic government, cer- 
 tainly approach more nearly to the love of mitigated 
 monarchy, than to any thing which bears the ap- 
 pearance even of the beft republic. But if thefe 
 old Whigs deceived the people, their conduct was 
 unaccountable indeed. They expofed their power, 
 as every one converfant in hiftory knows, to the 
 greateft peril, for the propagation of opinions which, 
 on this hypothecs, they did not hold. It is a 
 new kind of martyrdom. This fuppofition does 
 as little credit to their integrity as their wifdom: 
 It makes them at once hypocrites and fools. I 
 think of thofe great men very differently. I hold 
 them to have been, what the world thought them, 
 G 2 men
 
 of deep imderftanding, open fmcerity, and 
 clear honour. However, be that matter as it may ; 
 what thefe old Whigs pretended to be, Mr. Burke 
 is. This is enough for him. 
 
 I do indeed admit, that though Mr. Burke has 
 proved that his opinions were thofe of the old 
 Whig party, folemnly declared by one houfe, in 
 effect and fubftance by both houfes of parliament, 
 this teftimony (landing by itfelf will form no proper 
 defence for his opinions, if he and the old Whigs 
 were both of them in the wrong. But it is his 
 prefent concern, not to vindicate thefe old Whigs, 
 but to fhew his agreement with them. He appeals 
 to them as judges : he does not vindicate them as 
 culprits. It is current that thefe old politicians 
 knew little of the rights of men ; that they loft 
 their way by groping about in the dark, and fum- 
 bling among rotten parchments and mufty records. 
 Great lights they fay are lately obtained in the world ; 
 and Mr. Burke, inftead of ihrowding himfelf in ex- 
 ploded ignorance, ought to have taken advantage of 
 the blaze of illumination which has been fpread 
 about him. It may be fo. The enthufiafts of this 
 time, it feems, like their predeceffors in another 
 faction of fanaticifm, deal in lights. Hudibras plea- 
 fantly fays of them, they 
 
 " Have lights, where better eyes are blind, 
 u As pigs are faid to fee the wind." 
 
 The author of the Reflections has heard a .great 
 deal concerning the modern lights j but he has 
 not yet had the good fortune to fee much of them. 
 He has read more than he can juftify to any 
 thing but the fpirit of curiofity, of the works of 
 thefe illuminators of the world. He has learn- 
 ed nothing from the far greater number of them, 
 than a full certainty of their fhallownefs, levity, 
 pride, petulance, prefumption and ignorance. 
 
 Where
 
 Where the old authors whom he has read, and 
 the old men whom he has converfed with, have 
 left him in the dark, he is in the dark ftill. If 
 others, however, have obtained any of this extraor- 
 dinary light, they will ufe it to guide them in their 
 reft- arches and their conduct. I have only to with, 
 that the nation may be as happy and as profperous 
 under the influence of the new light, as it has been 
 in the fober fhade of the old obfcurity. As to 
 the reft, it will be difficult for the author of the Re- 
 flections to conform to the principles of the avowed 
 leaders of the party, until they appear otherwife than 
 negatively. All we can gather from them is this, 
 that their principles are diametrically oppofite to 
 his. This is all that we know from authority. 
 Their negative declaration obliges me to have re- 
 courfe to the books which contain pofitive doc- 
 trines. They are indeed, to thofe Mr. Burke holds, 
 diametrically oppofite ; and if it be true, (as the 
 oracles of the party have faid, I hope haftily) that 
 their opinions differ fo widely, it fhould feem they 
 are the moft likely to form the creed of the modern 
 Whigs. 
 
 I have ftated what were the avowed fentiments 
 of the old Whigs, not in the way of argu- 
 ment, but narratively. It is but fair to fet before 
 the reader, in the fame fimple manner, the fenti- 
 ments of the modern, to which they fpare neither 
 pains nor expence to make profelytes. I choofe 
 them from the books upon which moft of that in- 
 duftry and expenditure in circulation have been em- 
 ployed ; I choofe them not from thofe who fpeak 
 with a politic obfcurity ; not from thofe who only 
 controvert the opinions of the old Whigs, without 
 advancing any of their own, but from thofe who 
 fpeak plainly and affirmatively. The Whig reader 
 may make his choice between the two doctrines. 
 
 The doctrine then propagated by thefe focieties, 
 
 which gentlemen think they ought to be very 
 
 G 3 tender
 
 ( 86 ) 
 
 tender in difcouraging, as nearly as poflible iit 
 their own words, is as follows: that in Greac 
 Britain we are not only without a good conftitu- 
 tion, but that we have " no conftitution." That, 
 " tho' it is much talked about, no fuch thing as a 
 " conftitution exifts, or ever did exift ; and confe- 
 " quently that the people have a conftitution yet: to 
 " form-, that fince William the Conqueror, the 
 " country has never yet regenerated irfelf, and is 
 " therefore without a conftitution. That where 
 " it cannot be produced in a vifible form, there is 
 <f none. That a conftitution is a thing antecedent 
 " to government ; and that the conftitution of a 
 <c country is not the aft of its government, but of 
 " a people conftituting a government. That every 
 " thing in the Englifh government is the reverie 
 " of what it ought to be, and what it is faid to be 
 " in England. That the right of war and peace 
 < refides in a metaphor {hewn at the Tower, for 
 * fix pence or a fhilling a-piece. That it fig- 
 " nifies not where the right refides, whether in the 
 " crown or in parliament. War is the common 
 <c harveft of thofe who participate in the divifion 
 " and expenditure of public money. That the 
 <c portion of liberty enjoyed in England is juft 
 " enough to enflave a country more productively 
 " than by defpotifm." 
 
 So far as to the general ftate of the Britifh confti- 
 tution. As to our houfe of lords, the chief virtual 
 reprefentative of our ariftocracy, the great ground 
 and pillar of fecurity to the landed intereft, and that 
 main link by which it is connected with the law and 
 the crown, thefe worthy focieties are pleaied to tell 
 us, that, " whether we view ariftocracy before, or 
 :f behind, or fide- ways, or any way elfe, domeftically 
 " or publicly, it is (till a monfter. That ariftocracy 
 " in France had one feature lefs in its countenance 
 " than what it has in fome other countries > it did 
 
 " not
 
 " not compofe a body of hereditary legiflators. It: 
 <c was not a corporation of ariftocracy " for fuch 
 it feems that profound legiflator Mr. De la Fay- 
 ctte defcribes the houfe of peers. <c That it is 
 " kept up by family tyranny and injuftice that 
 <c there is an unnatural unfitnefs in ariftocracy to be 
 " legiflators for a nation that their ideas of dif- 
 " tributive juftice are corrupted at the very fource j 
 " they begin life by trampling on all their younger 
 Cf brothers, and fifters, and relations of every kind, 
 " and are taught and educated fo to do. That the 
 " idea of an hereditary legiflator is as abfurd as an 
 (t hereditary mathematician. That a body holding 
 " themfelves unaccountable to any body, ought to 
 <c be trufted by no body that it is continuing the 
 fc uncivilized principles of governments founded in 
 tf conqueft, and the bafe idea of man having apro- 
 <f perty in man, and governing him by a perfonal 
 <f right that ariftocracy has a tendency to dege- 
 " nerate the human fpecies," &c. &c. 
 
 As to our law of primogeniture, which with few 
 and inconfiderable exceptions is the (landing law of 
 all our landed inheritance, and which without quef- 
 tion has a tendency, and I think a moft happy 
 tendency, to preferve a character of confequence, 
 weight, and prevalent influence over others in the 
 whole body of the landed intereft, they call loudly 
 for its deftrutljon. They do this for political rea- 
 fons that are very manifeft. They have the con- 
 fidence to fay, " that it is a law againft every law 
 " of nature, and nature herfelf calls for its deftruc- 
 " tion. Eftablifh family juftice, and ariftocracy 
 " falls. By the ariftocratical law of primogeni- 
 " turelhip, in a family of fix children, five are 
 " expofed. Ariftocracy has never but cm child. 
 " The reft are begotten to be devoured. They 
 " are thrown to the cannibal for prey, and the na- 
 " tural parent prepares the unnatural repaft." 
 
 64 As
 
 As to the houfe of commons, they treat it far 
 worfe than the houfe of lords or the crown have 
 been ever treated. Perhaps they thought they had a 
 greater right to take this amicable freedom with 
 thofe of their own family. For many years it has 
 been the perpetual theme of their invectives. 
 " Mockery, infult, ufurpation," are amongft the 
 beft names they beftow upon it. They damn it 
 in the mafs, by declaring " that it does not arife 
 * f out of the inherent rights of the people, as the 
 " national aflembly does in France, and whofe 
 " name defignates its original." 
 
 Of the charters and corporations, to whofe rights, 
 a few years ago, thefe gentlemen were fo trem- 
 blingly alive, they fay, " that when the people of 
 " England come to reflect upon them, they will, 
 c< like France, annihilate thofe badges of oppref- 
 " fion, thofe traces of a conquered nation." 
 
 As to our monarchy, they had formerly been 
 more tender of that branch of the conftitution, and 
 for a good realbn. The laws had guarded againfl 
 all feditious attacks upon it, with a greater degree 
 of ftriftnefs and feverity. The tone of thefe gen- 
 tlemen is totally altered fince the French Revolu- 
 tion. They now declaim as vehemently againft 
 the monarchy, as in former occafions they treacher- 
 oufly flattered and foothed it. 
 
 " When we furvey the wretched condition of 
 cc man under the monarchical and hereditary fyftems 
 Cf of government, dragged from his home by one 
 " power, or driven by another, and impoverifhed 
 " by taxes more than by enemies, it becomes evi- 
 " dent that thofe fyftems are bad, and that a ge- 
 " neral revolution in the principle and conftruction 
 " of governments is necefTary. 
 
 " What is government more than the manage - 
 5 f ment of the affairs of a nation ? It is not, and 
 " from its nature cannot be, the property of any 
 
 " particular
 
 " particular man or family, but of the whole com- 
 * e munity, at whole expence it is fupported ; and 
 " though by force or contrivance it has been ufurp- 
 " ed into an inheritance, the ufurpation cannot 
 " alter the right of things. Sovereignly, as a 
 " matter of right, appertains to the nation only, 
 fc and not to any individual j and a nation has at 
 <c all times an inherent indefeafible right to abolifh 
 " any form of government it finds inconvenient, 
 " and eftablifh fuch as accords with its interefl, 
 cc difpofition, and happinefs. The romantic and 
 " barbarous diftinttion of men into kings and fub- 
 ' c jects, though it may fuit the condition of cour- 
 " tiers, cannot that of citizens ; and is exploded 
 fc by the principle upon which governments are 
 -" now founded. Every citizen is a member of 
 " the fovereignty, and, as fuch, can acknowledge 
 " no perfonal fubjection; and his obedience can be 
 f only to the laws." 
 
 Warmly recommending to us the example of 
 France, where they have deftroyed monarchy, they 
 fay 
 
 " Monarchical fovereignty, the enemy of man- 
 " kind, and the fource of mifery, is abolifned ; and 
 <c fovereignty itfelf is reftored to its natural and 
 " original place, the nation. Were this the cafe 
 ?' throughout Europe, the caufe of wars would be 
 ?' taken away." 
 
 u But, after all, what is this metaphor called a 
 ** crown, or rather what is monarchy ? Is it a thing, 
 " or is it a name, or is it a fraud ? Is it * a con- 
 " trivance of human wifdom,' or of human craft 
 " to obtain money from a nation under fpecious 
 " pretences ? Is it a thing nece0ary to a nation ? 
 ? f If it is, in what does that neceffity confift, what 
 ff fervices does it perform, what is its bufmefs, and 
 
 " v/hat
 
 ( 9 ) 
 
 * f what are its merits ? Doth the virtue confift m 
 " the metaphor, or in the man ? Doth the gold- 
 " fmith that makes the crown make the virtue al- 
 '* fo ? Doth it operate like Fortunatus's wifriing- 
 " cap, or Harlequin's wooden fword ? Doth it make 
 " a man a conjuror ? In fine, what is it ? It ap- 
 " pears to be a fomething going much out of 
 " fafhion, falling into ridicule, and rejected in fome 
 " countries both as unneceffary and expenfive. In 
 " America it is confidered as an abfurdity ; and in 
 " France it has fo far declined, that the goodnefs 
 " of the man, and the refpect for his perfonal cha- 
 " rafter, are the only things that preferve the ap- 
 " pearance of its exiftence." 
 
 " Mr. Burke talks about what he calls an here- 
 " ditary crown, as if it were fome production of 
 " Nature i or as if, like Time, it had a power to 
 tf operate, not only independently, but in fpite of 
 " man; or as if it were a thing or a fubjecT: uni- 
 " verfally confented to. Alas ! it has none of thole 
 " properties, but is the reverfe of them all. It is a 
 " thing in imagination, the propriety of which is 
 " more than doubted, and the legality of which 
 " in a few years will be denied." 
 
 " If I afk the farmer, the manufacturer, the 
 * merchant, the tradefman, and down through all 
 " the occupations of life to the common labourer, 
 " what fervice monarchy is to him ? he can give 
 " me no anfwer. If I alk him what monarchy is, 
 " he believes it is fomething like a fmecure. 
 
 " The French conftitution fays, That the right 
 " of war and peace is in the nation. Where elfe 
 " fhould it refide, but in thofe who are to pay the 
 " expence? 
 
 a In England, this right is faid to refide in a me- 
 3 " tapher.
 
 ( 9' ) 
 
 * taphory fhewn at the Tower for fixpence or a 
 
 Cc fhilling a-piece : So are the lions ; and it would 
 
 tf be a ftep nearer to reafon to fay it refided in 
 
 K them, for any inanimate metaphor is no more 
 
 " than a hat or a cap. We can all fee the abfurdi- 
 
 <c ty of worfhipping Aaron's molten cal or Nebu- 
 
 " chadnezzar's golden image; but why do men 
 
 continue to praftife themfelves the abfurdities they 
 
 ff defpife in others ?" 
 
 The Revolution and Hanover fucceffion had 
 been objects of the higheft veneration to the old 
 Whigs. They thought them not only proofs of 
 the ibber and fteady fpirit of liberty which guided 
 their anceftors ; but of their wifdom and provident 
 care of pofterity. The modern Whigs have quite 
 other notions of thefe events and actions. They do 
 not deny that Mr. Burke has given truly the words 
 of the acts of parliament which fecured the fuc- 
 ceffion, and the juft fenfe of them. They attack not 
 him but the law. 
 
 " Mr. Burke (fay they) has done fome fervice, 
 " not to his caufe, but to his country, by bringing 
 <c thofe claufes into public view. They ferve to 
 " demonftrate how neceffary it is at all times to watch 
 " againft the attempted encroachment of power, 
 " and to prevent its running to excefs. Itisfome- 
 " what extraordinary, that the offence for which 
 " James II. was expelled, that of fctting up power 
 " by ajjumption, fhould be re-acted, under another 
 " lhape and form, by the parliament that expelled 
 ec him. It fhews that the rights of man were but 
 <e imperfectly underftood at the Revolution; for, 
 l( certain it is, that the right which that parliament 
 K fet up by cffumption (for by delegation it had it not, 
 " and could not have it, becaufe none could give it) 
 " over the perfons and freedom of pofterity for ever, 
 " was of the fame tyrannical unfounded kind which 
 
 " James
 
 *' James attempted to fet up over the parliament 
 
 " and the nation, and for which he was expelled. 
 
 : The only difference is, (for in principle they dif- 
 
 " fer not), that the one was an ufurper over the 
 
 : living, and the other over the unborn -, and as 
 
 " the one has no better authority to ftand upon 
 
 " than the other, both of them muft be equally 
 
 " null and void, and of no effect." 
 
 " As the eftimation of all things is by comparifon, 
 " the Revolution of 1688, however from circum- 
 cc ftances it may have been exalted beyond its va- 
 " lue, will find its level. It is already on the wane ; 
 " eclipfed by the enlarging orb of reafon, and the 
 " luminous revolutions of America and France. In 
 <c lefs than another century, it will go, as well as 
 " Mr. Burke's labours, * to the family vault of all 
 fc the Capulets.' Mankind will then fcarcely beKevf 
 " that a country calling itfelf free, would fend to 
 <f Holland for a man, and clothe him with power, on 
 " purpoje to put tbemfehes in fear of him, and give 
 " him almoft a million fterlixg a -year for leave to 
 ff Jubmit tbewjehes and their fofterity, like bend-men 
 11 and bend-women, fcr ever " 
 
 " Mr. Burke having faid that the king holds his 
 " crown in contempt of the choice of the Revolu- 
 <c tion fociety, who individually or colleftively have 
 " not," (as moft certainly they have not) u a vote 
 " for a king amongft them, they take occafion from 
 c< thence to infer, that a king who does not hold 
 " his crown by election, defpifes the people." 
 
 < f The King of England," fays be, " holds bis 
 <f crown (for it does not belong to the nation, 
 " according to Mr. Burke) in contempt of the choice 
 " of the Revolution Society." &c. 
 
 " As to who is King in England or elfe where, 
 
 or
 
 ( 93 ) 
 
 '* or whether there is any King at all, or whether 
 * r the people chufe a Cherokee Chief, or a Heflian 
 " Huffar for a King, it is not a matter that I 
 " trouble myfelf about be that to themfelves; 
 *< but with refpect to the doctrine, fo far as it re- 
 * f lates to the Rights of Men and Nations, it is 
 " as abominable as any thing ever uttered in the 
 " moft enflaved country under heaven. Whether 
 " it founds worfe to my ear, by not being accuf- 
 " tomed to hear fuch defpotifm, than what it does 
 ls to the ear of another perfon, I am not fo well 
 " a judge of; but of its abominable principle I 
 " am at no lofs to judge." 
 
 Thefe focieties of modern Whigs pufh their in- 
 folence as far as it can go. In order to prepare the 
 minds of the people for treafon and rebellion, they 
 reprefent the king as tainted with principles ofdef- 
 potifm, from the circumflance of his having domi 
 nions in Germany. In direct defiance of the moil 
 notorious truth, they defcribe his government there 
 to be a defpotifm i whereas it is a free conftitution, 
 in which the dates of the electorate have their 
 part in the government -, and this privilege has 
 never been infringed by the king, or, that I have 
 heard of, by any of his predeceffors. The confti- 
 tution of the electoral dominions has indeed a dou- 
 ble control, both from the laws of the empire, and 
 from the privileges of the country. Whatever rights 
 the king enjoys a.s elector, have been always pa- 
 rentally exercifed, and the calumnies of theft fcan- 
 dalous focieties have not been authorized by a fingle 
 .complaint of oppreffion. 
 
 " When Mr. Burke fays that f his majefty's 
 heirs and fuccefTors, each in their time and order, 
 v/ill come to the crown with the Jame contempt 
 of their choice with which his majefty has fuc- 
 ceeded to that he wears,' it is faying too much 
 even to the humbleft individual in the country ; 
 " part of Avhole daily labour goes towards making 
 
 "up
 
 ( 94 ) 
 
 " up the million fterling a year, which the country 
 <f gives the perfon it ftiles a king. Government 
 " with infolence, is defpotifm j but when contempt 
 " is added, it becomes worfe j and to pay for con- 
 " tempt, is the excefs of flavery. This fpecies of 
 " government comes from Germany ; and re- 
 " minds me of what one of the Brunfwick foldiers 
 " told me, who was taken prilbner by the Ameri- 
 " cans in the late war: c Ah !' faid he, * America 
 ' is a fine free countiy, it is worth the people's 
 
 * righting for ; I know the difference by knowing 
 
 * my own : in my country, if the prince fays> Eat 
 t ftraWy we eat ft raw.' " God help that country, 
 " thought I, be it England or elfe where, whole li- 
 " berties are to be protected by German principles 
 " of government, and princes of Brunfivick ! " 
 
 " It is fomewhat curious to obferve, that although 
 <c the people of England have been in the habit of 
 " talking about kings, it is always a Foreign Houfe 
 <f of kings ; hating Foreigners, yet governed by them. 
 " It is now the Houfe of Brunfwick, one of the 
 " petty tribes of Germany." ----- 
 
 " If Government be what Mr. Burke defcribes 
 " it, * a contrivance of human wifdom,' I might 
 " afk him, if wifdom was at fuch a low ebb in Eng- 
 " land, that it was become necefTary to import it 
 " from Holland and from Hanover ? But I will do 
 < the country the juftice to fay, that was not the 
 " cafe ; and even if it was, it miftook the cargo. 
 " The wifdom of every country, when properly ex- 
 * e erted, is fufficient for all its purpofes j and there 
 <( could exift no more real occafion in England to 
 ** ba-ve Jent for a Dutch Stadtholder, or a Ger- 
 " man Eleftor, than there was in America to have 
 " done a fimilar thing. If a country does not un- 
 " derftand its own affairs, how is a foreigner to un- 
 " derftand them, who knows neither its laws, its 
 
 " manners,
 
 ( 95 ) 
 
 " manners, nor its language? If there exifted a man 
 
 " fo tranfcendantly wife above all others, that his 
 
 " wifdom was neceffary to inftruft a nation, fome 
 
 * c reafon might be offered for monarchy ; but when 
 
 <c we caft our eyes about a country, and obferve 
 
 " how every part underftands its own affairs j and 
 
 " when we look around the world, and fee that of all 
 
 " men in it, the race of kings are the mofl infigni- 
 
 " ficant in capacity, our reafon cannot fail to afk us 
 
 What are thofe men kept for ?" * 
 
 Thefe are the notions which, under the idea of 
 Whig principles, feveral perfons, and among them 
 perfons of no mean mark, have afibciated them- 
 felves to propagate. I will not attempt in the 
 fmalleft degree to refute them. This will probably 
 be done (if fuch writings {hall be thought to deferve 
 any other than the refutation of criminal juftice) by 
 others, who may think with Mr. Burke. He has 
 performed his parr. 
 
 I do not wifh to enter very much at large into the 
 difcuflions which diverge and ramify in all ways from 
 this productive fubject. But there is one topic upon 
 which I hope I fhall be excufed in going a little be- 
 yond my defign. The factions, now io bufy amongft 
 us, in order to diveft men of all love for their country, 
 and to remove from their minds all duty with re- 
 gard to the ftate, endeavour to propagate an opini- 
 on, that the people, in forming their commonwealth, 
 have by no means parted with their power over it. 
 This is an impregnable citadel, to which thefe gen- 
 tlemen retreat whenever they are pufhed by the 
 battery of laws, and ufages, and pofitive conven- 
 tions. Indeed it is fuch and of fo great force, 
 that all they have done in defending their out- 
 works is fo much time and labour thrown away. 
 Difcufs any of their fchemes their anfwer is It 
 
 * Vindication of the Rights of Man, recommended by the 
 feveral focieties.
 
 ( 96 ) 
 
 Is the act of the people, and that is fufficient. Are w 
 to deny to a majority of the people the right of 
 altering even the whole frame of their fociety, if 
 fuch fhould be their pleafure ? They may change 
 it, fay they, from a monarchy to a republic to-day, 
 and to-morrow back again from a republic to a 
 monarchy ; and fo backward and forward as often 
 as they like. They are matters of the common- 
 wealth ; becaufe in fubftance they are themfelves 
 the commonwealth. The French revolution, fay 
 they, was the act of the majority of the people ; 
 and if the majority of any other people, the people of 
 England for inftance, wifh to make the fame change, 
 they have the fame right. 
 
 J uft the fame undoubtedly. That is, none at all. 
 Neither the few nor the many have a right to act 
 merely by their will, in any matter connected 
 with duty, truft, engagement, or obligation. The 
 conflitution of a country being once fettled upon 
 fome compact, tacit or exprefled, there is no 
 power exifting of force to alter it, without the 
 breach of the covenant, or the confent of all the 
 parties. Such is the nature of a contract. And 
 the votes of a majority of the people, whatever 
 their infamous flatterers may teach in order to 
 corrupt their minds, cannot alter the moral any 
 more than they can alter the phyfical eflence 
 of things. The people are not to be taught to 
 think lightly of their engagements to their go- 
 vernors; elfe they teach governors to think lightly 
 of their engagements towards them. In that kind 
 of game in the end the people are fure to be lofers. 
 To flatter them into a contempt of faith, truth, and 
 juftice, is to ruin them ; for in thefe virtues confifts 
 their whole fafety. To flatter any man, or any part 
 of mankind, in any defcription, by afferting, that in 
 engagements he or they are free whilft any other hu- 
 man creature is bound, is ultimately to veft the rule 
 of morality in, the pleafure of thofe who ought to be 
 
 rigidly
 
 ( 97 ) 
 
 rigidly fubmitted to it ; to fubje<5t the fovereign rea- 
 fon of the world to the caprices of weak and giddy 
 men. 
 
 But, as no one of us men can difpenfe with public 
 or private faith, or with any other tie of moral ob- 
 ligation, fo neither can any number of us. The 
 number engaged in crimes, inftead of turning them 
 into laudable acts, only augments the quantity and 
 the intenfity of the guilt. I am well aware, that 
 men love to hear of their power, but have an ex- 
 treme difrelifh to be told of their duty. This is 
 of courfe ; becaufe every duty is a limitation of feme 
 power. Indeed arbitrary power is fo mi'ch to the 
 depraved tafteof the vulgar, of the vulgar of every 
 deicription, that almoft all the difTenfions which 
 lacerate the commonwealth, are not concerning the 
 manner in which it is to be exercifed, but concerning 
 the hands in which it is to be placed. Somewhere 
 they are refolved to have it. Whether they de- 
 fire it to be veiled in the many or the few, de- 
 pends with moft men upon the chance which they 
 imagine they themfelves may have of partaking in 
 the exercife of that arbitrary fway, in the one mode 
 or in the other. 
 
 It is not neceflary to teach men to third after 
 power. But it is very expedient that, by moral 
 inftructioR, they fhould be taught, and by their civil 
 conftitutions they fhould be compelled^ to put many 
 reftrictions upon the immoderate exercife of it, and 
 the inordinate defire. The beft method of obtaining 
 thefe two great points forms the important, but at 
 the fame time the difficult problem to the true 
 itatefman. He thinks of the place in which politi- 
 cal power is to be lodged, with no other attention, 
 than as it may render the more or the lefs practi- 
 cable, its falutary reftraint, and its prudent direc- 
 tion. For this reafon no legiflator, at any period of 
 the world, has willingly placed the feat of active 
 H power
 
 ( 98 ) 
 
 power in the hands of the multitude : Becaufe there 
 it admits of no control, no regulation, no fteady 
 direction whatfoever. The people are trie natural 
 control on authority ; but to exercife and to control 
 together is contradictory and impoffible. 
 
 As the exorbitant exercife of power cannot, un- 
 der popular fway, be effectually reftrained, the other 
 great object of political arrangement, the means 
 of abating an excefiive defire of it, is in fuch a ftate 
 Hill worfe provided for. The democratick com- 
 monwealth is the foodful nurfe of ambition. Un- 
 der the other forms it meets with many reftraints. 
 Whenever, in Hates which have had a democratick 
 bafiSjthelegiflators have endeavoured to put reftraints 
 upon ambition, their methods were as violent, as in 
 the end they were ineffectual; as violent indeed as 
 any the moft jealous defpotifm could invent. The 
 oftracifm could not very long fave itfelfi and much 
 lefs the ftate which it was meant to guard, from the 
 attempts of ambition, one of the natural inbred in- 
 curable diftempers of a powerful democracy. 
 
 But to return from this fliort digreflion, which 
 however is not wholly foreign to the queftion of the 
 effect of the will of the majority upon the form or 
 the exiftence of their fociety. I cannot too often 
 recommend it to the ferious confideration of all 
 men, who think civil fociety to be within the pro- 
 vince of moral jurifdiction, that if we owe to it any 
 duty, it is not fubject to our will. Duties are not 
 voluntary. Duty and will are even contradictory 
 terms. Now though fociety might be at firft a 
 voluntary act (which in many cafes it undoubtedly 
 was) it continues under a permanent {landing cove- 
 nant, coexifting with the fociety ; and it attaches 
 upon every individual of that fociety, without any 
 formal act of his own. This is warranted by the 
 general practice, arifing out of the general fenfe of 
 mankind. Men without their choice derive be- 
 nefits
 
 ( 99 ) 
 
 nefhs from that aflbciation; without their choice 
 they are fubjected to duties in confequence of thefe 
 benefits j and without their choice they enter into a 
 virtual obligation as binding as any that is actual. 
 Look through the whole of life and the whole fyf- 
 tem of duties. Much the ftrongeft moral obliga- 
 tions are fuch as were never the refults of our option. 
 I allow, that if no fupreme ruler exifts, wife to 
 form, and potent to enforce, the moral law, there is 
 no fanction to any contract, virtual or even actual, 
 againft the will of prevalent power. On that hypo- 
 thefis, let any fet of men be ftrong enough to fet 
 their duties at defiance, and they ceafe to be duties 
 any longer. We have but this one appeal againft 
 irrefiftible power 
 
 Si genus humanum et mortalia temmtls arma, 
 At fperate Deos memores fandi atque nefandi. 
 
 Taking it for granted that I do not write to the 
 difciples of the Parifian philofophy, I may afliime, 
 that the awful author of our being is the author of our 
 place in the order of exiftence ; and that having dif- 
 pofed and marfhalled us by a divine tactick, not ac- 
 cording to our will, but according to his, he has, in 
 and by that difpofition, virtually Subjected us to act 
 the part which belongs to the place affigned us. We 
 have obligations to mankind at large, which are not 
 in confequence of any fpecial voluntary pact. They 
 arife from the relation of man to man, and the rela- 
 tion of man to God, which relations are not matters 
 of choice. On the contrary, the force of all the pacts 
 which we enter into with any particular perfon amongft 
 them, depends upon thofe prior obligations. In fome 
 cafes the fubordinate relations are voluntary, in others 
 they are neceffary but the duties are all compulfive- 
 When we marry, the choice is voluntary, but the duties 
 are not matter of choice. They are dictated by the 
 nature of the fituation. Dark and infcrutable are 
 H 2 the
 
 ( 1=0 ) 
 
 the ways by which we come into the world. Ther 
 inftincts which give rile to this myfterious pro- 
 ce> of nature are not of our making. But out: 
 of phyfical caufes, unknown to us, perhaps un- 
 knowable, arife moral duties, which, as we are 
 ab>e perfectly to comprehend, we are bound indif- 
 penfably to perform. ChikLen are not confenting 
 to their relation, but their relation, without their 
 actual confent, binds them to its duties; or rather it 
 implies their confent, becaufe the prefumed confent 
 of every rational creature is in unifon with the predif- 
 po fed order of things. Men come in that manner 
 into a community with the focial ftate of their pa- 
 rents, endowed with all the benefits, loaded with 
 all the duties of their fituation. If the focial ties and 
 ligaments, ipun out of tliofe phyfical relations which 
 are the elements of the commonwealth, in moft cafes 
 begin, and .always continue, independently of our 
 will, fo does that relation called our country, 
 which comprehends (as it has been well faid) " * all 
 the charities of all," bind us to it without any fti- 
 pulation on our part. Nor are we left without 
 powerful inftincts to make this duty as dear and 
 grateful to us, as it is awful and coercive. Our 
 country is not a thing of mere phyfical locality. 
 It confifts, in a great meature, in the antient order 
 into which we are born. We may have the fame 
 geographical fituation, but another country ; as we 
 may have the fame country in another foil. The 
 place that determines our duty to our country is 
 a focial, civil relation. 
 
 Thefe are the opinions of the author whofe caufe 
 I defend. I lay them down not to enforce them 
 upon others by difputation, but as an account of 
 his proceedings. On them he acts ; and from 
 them he is convinced that neither he, nor any man, 
 
 * Omnes omnium charitates patria una comple&itur. Cic. 
 
 or
 
 or number of men, have a right (except what ne~ 
 cefiity, which is out of and above all rule, rather 
 impofes than beftows) to free themfelves from, 
 that primary engagement into which every man 
 born into a community as much contracts by his 
 being born into it, as he contracts an obligation 
 to certain parents by his having been derived from 
 their bodies. The place of every man determines 
 his duty. If you afk, Quern te Deus effejiiffit? You 
 will be anfwered when you refolve this other quef- 
 tion, Humana qua parte locatus es in re* ? 
 
 I admit, indeed, that in morals, as in all things 
 elfe, difficulties will fometimes occur. Duties will 
 fometimes crofs one another. Then queftions will 
 arife, which of them is to be placed in fubordina- 
 tion ; which of them may be entirely luperfeded ? 
 Thefe doubts give rife to that part of moral fci- 
 ence called cafuiftry, which, though necefTary to be 
 well ftudied by thofe who would become expert in 
 that learning, who aim at becoming what, I think 
 Cicero fomewhere calls, artifices officiorum -, it re- 
 quires a very folid and difcriminating judgment, 
 great modefty and caution, and much fobriety of 
 mind in the handling ; elfe there is a danger that 
 it may totally fubvert thofe offices which it is its 
 object only to methodize and reconcile. Duties, at 
 their extreme bounds, are drawn very fine, fo as 
 to become almoft evanefcent. In that ftate, fome 
 fhade of doubt will always reft on thefe queftions, 
 when they are purfued with great fubtilty. But the 
 
 * A few lines in Perfius contain a good fummary of all the 
 objeds of moral inveftigation, and hint the refult of our en- 
 quiry : There human will has no place. 
 
 QuidfuMus ? et quidnam iiiduri gignimur ? ordo 
 Quis datus? et metre qui moilis rlexu e et uncle ? 
 Quis modus argento ? Quidy/n of tare ? Quid afpcr 
 Utile nummus habet ? Patn<s charifque propinquts 
 Quantum elargiri debeat ? Quern te Deus effe 
 JuJ/tt ? et humana qua parte iocatus es in re ? 
 
 Hj very
 
 very habit of ftating thefe extreme cafes is not 
 very laudable or fafe : becaufe, in general, it is 
 not right to turn our duties into doubts. They are 
 impofed to govern our conduct, not to exercife our 
 ingenuity ; and therefore, our opinions about them 
 ought not to be in a ftate of fluctuation, but fteady, 
 furc, and refolved. 
 
 Amongft thefe nice, and therefore dangerous, 
 points of cafuiftry may be reckoned the queftion fo 
 much agitated in the prefent hour Whether, after 
 the people have difcharged themfelves of their 
 original power by an habitual delegation, n:> occa- 
 fion can pofllbly occur which may juftify their re- 
 fumption of it ? This queftion, in this latitude, 
 is very hard to affirm or deny : but I am fatisfied 
 that no occafion can juftify fuch a refumption, 
 which wculd not equally authorize a difpenfation 
 with any other moral duty, perhaps with all of 
 them together. However, if in general it be 
 not eafy to determine concerning the lawfulnefs 
 of fuch devious proceedings, which muft be ever 
 on the edge of crimes, it is far from difficult to 
 forefee the perilous confequences of the refufcita- 
 tion of fuch a power in the people. The practical 
 confequences of any political tenet go a great way 
 in deciding upon its value. Political problems do 
 not primarily concern truth or falfehood. They 
 relate to good or evil. What in the refult is likely 
 to produce evil, is politically falfe : that which is 
 productive of good, politically is true. 
 
 Believing it therefore a queftion at leaft ar- 
 duous in the theory, and in the practice very critical, 
 it would well become us to afcertain, as well as 
 we can, what form it is that our incantations are 
 about to call up from darknefs and the fleep of ages. 
 When the fupreme authority of the people is in 
 queftion, before we attempt to extend or to confine 
 it, we ought to fix in our minds, with fome degree 
 
 of
 
 of diftinftnefs, an idea of what it is we mean 
 when we fay the PEOPLE. 
 
 In a (late of rude nature there is no fuch thing 
 as a people. A number of men in themfelves have 
 no colle6tive capacity. The idea of a people is the 
 idea of a corporation. It is wholly artificial ; and 
 made like all other legal fictions by common 
 agreement. What the particular nature of that 
 agreement was, is collected from the form into 
 which the particular fociety has been caft. Any 
 other is not their covenant. When men, there- 
 fore, break up the original compact or agreement 
 which gives its corporate form and capacity to a 
 ftate, they are no longer a people; they have no 
 longer a corporate exiftence ; they have no longer 
 a legal coactive force to bind within, nor a claim 
 to be recognized abroad. They are a number of 
 vague loofe individuals, and nothing more. With 
 them all is to begin again. Alas ! they little know 
 how many a weary flep is to be taken before they 
 can form themfelves into a mafs, which has a true 
 politic perfonality. 
 
 We hear much from men, who have not ac- 
 quired their hardinefs of aflertion from the profun- 
 dity of their thinking, about the omnipotence of a 
 majority, in fuch a diflblution of an ancient fociety 
 as hath taken place in France. But amongft men fo 
 difbanded, there can be no fuch thing as majority or 
 minority; or power in anyone perfon to bind another. 
 The power of acting by a majority, which the gentle- 
 men theorifts feem to afTume fo readily, after they 
 have violated the contract out of which it has arifen, 
 (if at all it exifted) muft be grounded on two aflump- 
 tions; firft, that of an incorporation produced by 
 unanimity; and fecondly, an unanimous agreement, 
 that the a<5t of a mere majority (fay of one) ihall 
 pafs with them and with others as the acl: of the 
 whole. 
 
 H 4 We
 
 We are fo little affected by things which are habi- 
 tual, that we confider this idea of the decifion of a ma- 
 jority as if it were a law of our original nature : But 
 fuch conftruclive whole, refiding in a part only, is one 
 of th.e mofl violent fictions of pofitive law, that ever 
 has been or can be made on the principles of artifi- 
 cial incorporation. Out of civil fociety nature knows 
 nothing of it ; nor are men, even when arranged ac- 
 cording to civil order, otherwife than by very long 
 training, brought at all to fubmit to it. The rrind 
 is brought far more eafily to acquiefce in the pro- 
 ceedings of one man, or a few, who act under a 
 general procuration for the ftate, than in the vote 
 of a victorious majority in councils in which 
 every man has "his fhare in the deliberation. For 
 there the beaten party are exafperated and four- 
 ed by the previous contention, and mortified by 
 the conclufive defeat. This mode of decifion, 
 where wills may be fo nearly equal, where, ac- 
 cording to cjrcumftances, the fmaller number may 
 be the {banger force, and where apparent reafon 
 may be ail upon one fide, and on the other little elfe 
 than impetuous appetite ; all this muft be the refult 
 of a very particular and ipecial convention, confirmed 
 afterwards by long habits of obedience, by a fort 
 of difcipline in fociety, and by a ftrong hand, vefted 
 with ftationary permanent power, to enforce this fort 
 of conftruclive general will. What oigan it is that 
 fliall declare the corporate mind is fo much a matter 
 of pofitive arrangen ent, that feveral dates, for the 
 validity of feveral of their acts, have required a pro- 
 portion of voices much greater than that of a mere 
 majority. 1 hefe proportions are fo entirely governed 
 by convention, that in ibme cafts the minority decides. 
 The laws in many countries to condemn require more 
 than a mere majority ; lefs than an equal number 
 to acquit. In our judicial trials we require unani- 
 mity either to condemn or to abfolve. In fome in- 
 corporations
 
 ( 105 ) 
 
 corporations one man fpeaks for the whole ; in 
 others, a few. Until the other day, in the confti- 
 tution of Poland, unanimity was required to give 
 validity to any a6t of their great national council 
 or diet. This approaches much more nearly to rude 
 nature than the inftitutions of any other country. 
 Such, indeed, every commonwealth muft be, with- 
 out a pofitive law to recognize in a certain number 
 the will of the entire body. 
 
 If men diflblve their antient incorporation, in or- 
 der to regenerate their community, in that ftate of 
 things each man has a right, if he pleafes, to re- 
 main an individual. Any number of individuals, 
 who can agree upon it, have an undoubted right to 
 form themfclves into a ftate apart and wholly inde- 
 pendent. If any of thefe is forced into the fellow- 
 fhip of another, this is conqueft and not compacl:. 
 On every principle, which fuppofes fociety to be in 
 virtue of a free covenant, this compulfiye incorpo- 
 ration muft be null and void. 
 
 As a people can have no right to a corporate ca- 
 pacity without univerfal confent, fo neither have they 
 a right to hold exclufivelv any lands in the name and 
 title of a corporation On the fcheme of the pre- 
 fent rulers in our neighbouring country, regenerated 
 as they are, they have no more right to the ter- 
 ritory called France than T have. I have a right to 
 pitch my tent in any unoccupied place I can find for 
 it ; and I may apply to my own maintenance any 
 part of their unoccupied foil. I may purchafe 
 the houfe or vineyard of any individual proprietor 
 who refufes his confent (and moft proprietors have, 
 as far as they dared, refulcd ir) to the new incorpo- 
 ration. I ftand in his independent place. Who are 
 thefe infolent men calling themfelves the French 
 nation, that would monopolize this fair domain of 
 nature ? Is it becaufe they fpeak a certain jargon ? 
 Is it their mode of chattering, to me unintelli- 
 gible,
 
 gible, that forms their title to my land? Who 
 are they who claim by prefcription and defcent 
 from certain gangs of banditti called Franks, and 
 Burgundians, and Vifigoths, of whom I may have 
 never heard, and ninety-nine out of an hundred 
 of themfelves certainly never have heard; whilft 
 at the very time they tell me, that prefcription and 
 long poffeffion form no title to property ? Who 
 are they that prefume to aflert that the land which 
 I purchafed of tke individual, a natural perfon, and 
 not a fiction of flate, belongs to them, who in the 
 very capacity in which they make their claim can 
 exift only as an imaginary being, and in virtue of 
 the very prefcription which they reject and difown r 
 This mode of arguing might be pufhed into all the 
 detail, fo as to leave no fort of doubt, that on 
 their principles, and on the fort of footing on which 
 they have thought proper to place themfelves, the 
 crowd of men on the other fide of the channel, 
 who have the impudence to call themfelves a 
 people, can never be the lawful exclufive pof- 
 fefTors of the foil. By what they call reafoning 
 without prejudice, they leave not one ftone upon 
 another in the fabric of human fociety. They fub- 
 vert all the authority which they hold, as well as 
 all that which they have deftroyed. 
 
 As in the abftract, it is perfectly clear, that, out of 
 a ftate of civil fociety, majority and minority are re- 
 lations which can have no exiftence ; and that in civil 
 fociety, its own fpecific conventions in each incor- 
 poration, determine what it is that conftitutes the 
 people, fo as to make their act the fignification of the 
 general will , to come to particulars, it is equally clear, 
 that neither in France nor in England has the ori- 
 ginal, or any fubfequent compact of the ftate, ex- 
 prefTed or implied, conftituted a majority of men, told 
 by the bead, to be the acting people of their feveral 
 communities. And I fee as little of policy or uti- * 
 5 %>
 
 Jity, as there is of right, in laying down a principle 
 that a majority of men told by the head are to be 
 confidered as the people, and that as fuch their will 
 is to be law. What policy can there be found in 
 arrangements made in defiance of every political 
 principle ? To enable men to act with the weight 
 and character of a people, and to anfwer the ends for 
 which they are incorporated into that capacity, we 
 mult fuppofe them (by means immediate or confe- 
 quential) to be in that Hate of habitual focial difci- 
 pline, in which the wifer, the more expert, and the 
 more opulent, conduct, and by conducting enlighten 
 and protect the weaker, the lefs knowing, and the lefs 
 provided with the goods of fortune. When the mul- 
 titude are not under this difcipline, they can fcarcely 
 be faid to be in civil fociety. Give once a certain 
 conftitution of things, which produces a variety of 
 conditions and circumftances in a ftate, and there is 
 in nature and reafon a principle which, for their own 
 (benefit, poftpones, not the intereft but the judgment, 
 of thofe who are niimeroplures,to thofe who are wr- 
 Jufe et honore majores. Numbers in a ftate (fuppofing, 
 which is not the cafe in France, that a ftate does 
 exift) are always of confideration but they are 
 not the whole confideration. It is in things more 
 ferious than a play, that it may be truly faid,/^//V 
 eft equitem mibi plaitdere. 
 
 A true natural ariftocracy is not a feparate intereft 
 in the ftate, or feparable from it. It is an effential 
 integrant part of any large people rightly confti- 
 tuted. It is formed out of a clafs of legitimate 
 preemptions, which, taken as generalities, muft 
 be admitted for actual truths. To be bred in 
 a place of eftimation ; To fee nothing low and 
 fordid from one's infancy ; To be taught to refpect 
 one's felf; To be habituated to the cenforial 
 infpection of the public eye ; To look early to 
 public opinion ; To ftand upon fuch elevated 
 
 ground
 
 ground as to be enabled to take a large view of the 
 wide-fpread and infinitely diverfified combinations 
 of men and affairs in a large fociety ; To have lei- 
 fure to read, to reflect, to convert ; To be enabled 
 to draw the court and attention of the wife and 
 learned wherever they are to be found ; To be ha- 
 bituated in armies to command and to obey ; 
 To be taught to defpife danger in the purfuit 
 of honour and duty ; To be formed to the 
 greateft degree of vigilance, forefight, and circum- 
 fpection, in a ftate of thing, in which no fault 
 is committed with impunity, -md the flighted mif- 
 takes draw on the moft ruinous confequences 
 To be led to a guarded and regulated conduct, 
 from a fenfe that you are confidered as an inftri^ctor 
 of your fellow-citizens in their higheft concerns, and 
 that you aft as a reconciler between God and man 
 To be employed as an administrator f law and 
 juftice, and to be thereby amongft the firft benefac- 
 tors to mankind To be a profeffor of high fcience, 
 or of liberal and ingenuous art To be amongft 
 rich traders, who from their fuccefs are prefumed to 
 have iharp and vigorous understandings, and to p f- 
 iefs the virtues of diligence, order, conftancy, and 
 regularity, and to have cultivated an habitual regard 
 to commutative juftice Thefe are the circum- 
 ftances of men, that form what I fhould call a na- 
 tural ariftocracy, without which there is no rution. 
 
 The ftate of civil fociety, which neceflarily ge- 
 nerates this ariftocracy, is a ftate of nature j and 
 much more truly fo than a favage and incoherent 
 mode of life. For man is by nature reafonable; and 
 he is never perfectly in his natural ftate, but when he 
 is placed where reafon may be beft cultivated, and 
 moft predominates. Art is man's nature. We are 
 as much, at leaft, in a ftate of nature in formed 
 manhood, as in immature and helplefs infancy. Men 
 qualified in the manner I have juft defcribed, form in 
 
 nature,
 
 nat',:re as fhe operates in the common modification of 
 fock'ty,the leading, guiding, and governing part. It is 
 the foul to the body, without which the man does not 
 exift. To give therefore no more impoi tance, in the 
 focial order, to fuch defer iptions of men, than that of 
 fo many units, is an horrible ufurpation. 
 
 When great multitudes aft together, under that 
 difcipline of nature, I recognize the PEOPLE. I 
 acknowledge fomething that perhaps equals, and 
 ought always to guide, the fovercignty of conven- 
 tion. In all things the voice of this grand chorus 
 of national harmony ought to have a mighty and 
 decifive influence. But when you diiturb this har- 
 mony j when you break up this beautiful order, 
 this array of truth and nature, as well as of habit 
 and prejudice ; when you feparate the common fort 
 of men from their proper chieftains fo as to form 
 them into an adverfe army, I no longer know that 
 venerable objeft called the people in fuch a dif- 
 banded race of deferters and vagabonds. For a 
 while they may be terrible indeed ; but in fuch a 
 manner as wild beads are terrible. The mind owes 
 to them no fort of fubmiffion. They are, as they 
 have always been reputed, rebels. They may law- 
 fully be fought with, and brought under, whenever 
 an advantage offers. Thofe who attempt by outrage 
 and violence to deprive men of any advantage which 
 they hold under the laws, and to deilroy the natural 
 order of life, proclaim war againft them. 
 
 We have read in hiftory of that furious infurrec- 
 tion of the common people in France called the 
 Jacquerie ; for this is not the firft time that the 
 people have been enlightened into treafon, murder, 
 and rapine. Its objeft was to extirpate the gentry. 
 The Capial de Buche, a famous foldier of thofe days, 
 dishonoured the name of a gentleman and of a man 
 by taking, for their cruelties, a cruel vengeance on 
 thefe deluded wretches : It was, however, his right 
 j and
 
 and his duty to make war upon them, and after- 
 wards, in moderation, to bring them to punifhment 
 for their rebellion ; though in the fenfe of the French 
 revolution, and of fome of our clubs, they were the 
 people $ and were truly fo, if you will call by that 
 appellation arty majority of men told by the head. 
 
 At a time not very remote from the fame pe- 
 riod (for thefe humours never have affected one of 
 the nations without fome influence on the other) 
 happened feveral rifings of the lower commons in 
 England. Thefe infurgents were certainly the ma- 
 jority of the inhabitants of the counties in which 
 they refided; and Gade, Ket, and Straw, at the head 
 of their national guards, and fomented by certain 
 traitors of high rank, did no more than exert, accord- 
 ing to the doctrines of ours and the Parifian focieties, 
 the fovereign power inherent in the majority. 
 
 We call the time of thofe events a dark age. 
 Indeed we are too indulgent to our own profici- 
 ency. The Abbe John Ball underftood the rights 
 of man as well as the Abbe Gregoire. That reverend 
 patriarch of fedition, and prototype of our modern 
 preachers, was of opinion with the national affem- 
 bly, that all the evils which have fallen upon men 
 had been caufed by an ignorance of their " having 
 been born and continued equal as to their rights." 
 Had the populace been able to repeat that profound 
 maxim all would have gone perfectly well with 
 them. No tyranny, no vexation, no oppreffion, no 
 {are, no forrow, could have exifted in the world. 
 This would have cured them like a charm for the 
 tooth-ach. But the loweft wretches, in their moft 
 ignorant ftate, were able at all times to talk fuch 
 fluff; and yet at all times have they fuffered many 
 evils and many oppreflions, both before and fmce 
 the republication by the national affembly of this 
 Ipell of healing potency and virtue. The enlighten- 
 ed Dr. Ball, when he wilhed to rekindle the lights 
 
 and
 
 ( III ) 
 
 and fires of his audience on this point, chofe for 1 
 the text the following couplet : 
 
 When Adam delved and Eve fpan, 
 Who was then the gentleman ? 
 
 Of this fapient maxim, however, I do not give him 
 for the inventor. It feems to have been handed 
 down by tradition, and had certainly become pro- 
 verbial; but whether then compofed, or only ap- 
 plied, thus much muft be admitted, that in learning,, 
 fenfe, energy, and comprehenfivenefs, it is fully equal 
 to all the modern diflertations on the equality of 
 mankind -, and it has one advantage over them, 
 that it is in rhyme *. 
 
 There is no doubt, but that this great teacher 
 of the rights of man decorated his difcourfe on 
 this valuable text, with lemmas, theorems, fcholia, 
 
 corollaries, 
 
 * It is no fmall lofs to the world, that the whole of this en- 
 lightened and philofophic fermon, preached to t^.vo hundred 
 thoufand national guards affembled at Blackheath (a number 
 probably equal to the fublime and majeftic Federation of the I4th 
 of July 1790, in the Champs de Mars J -is not preferved. A fhort 
 abftrad is, however, to be found in Walfingham. I have added 
 it here for the edification of the modern Whigs, who may pof- 
 libly except this precious little fragment from their general 
 contempt of antient learning. 
 
 Ut fua doftrina plures inficeret ad le Blackheth (ubi ducenta 
 millia hominum communium fuere iimul congregata) hujufce- 
 modi fermonem eft exorfus. 
 
 Whan Adam dalfe, and Eve fpan, who was than a gentleman ? 
 
 Continuanfque fermonem inceptum nitebatur per verba pro- 
 verbii quod pro themate fumpferat, introducere & probare, 
 ab initio omnes pares creates a natura, fervitutem per injuftam 
 oppreffionem nequam hominum imroduclam contra Dei volun- 
 tatem, quia fi Deo placuiflet lervos creafle, utique in principio 
 mundi conftituiflet, quis fervus, quifve dominus futurus fuiffeu 
 Confiderarent igitur jam tempus a Deo datum eis, in quo 
 (depofito fervitutis jugo diutius) poflent fi vellent, libertate 
 diu concupita gaudere. Quapropter monuit ut eflent viri 
 cordati, & amore boni patrisfamilias excolentis agrum fuum & 
 extirpantis ac refecantis uoxia gramina qu<e fruges lolent 
 
 opprimere,
 
 corollaries, and all the apparatus of fcience, which 
 was furnifhed in as great plenty and perfection out 
 of the dogmatic and polemic magazines, . the old 
 horfe-armory, of the fchoolmen, among whom the 
 
 Rev, 
 
 opprimere, & ipfi in praefenti facere feftinarent ; primo majores 
 regni domino s occidendo ; deind^ juridical, jujUciarics & jura- 
 tores patritt perimendo ; poftremo quofcunque fcirent in pojte- 
 rum communitati noci-vos : tollerent de terra fua : fie de- 
 mum & pacem fibimet parerent & fecuritatcm in futurum ; Ji 
 fublatis majoribus effet inter eos aqua, libertas, eadem nobilitas, par 
 dignitas,jimilifyue poteftas. 
 
 Here is difplayed at once the whole of the grand arcanum 
 pretended to be found out by the national aflembly, for fecuring 
 future happinefs, peace, and tranquillity. There feems however 
 to be fome doubt whether this venerable protomartyr of philo- 
 fophy was inclined to carry his own declaration of the rights of 
 men more rigidly into pradlice than the national aflembly them- 
 felves. He was, like them, only preaching licentioufnefs to the 
 populace to obtain power for himfelf, if we may believe what is 
 fubjoined by the hiilorian. 
 
 Cumque hasc & plura alia deliramenta [think of this old fool's 
 calling all the wife maxims of the French academy deliramenta} 
 prasdicaflfet, commune vulgus cum tanto favore profequitur, ut 
 acclamarent eunt archiepifcopum futurum, & regni cancellarium. 
 Whether he would have taken thefe fituations under thefe names, 
 or would have changed the whole nomenclature of the ftate and 
 church, to be underftood in the fenfe of the Revolution, is not fo 
 certain. It is probable that he would have changed the names 
 and kept the fubftance of power. 
 
 We find too, that they had in thofe days their Society 
 for conftitttticnal information, of which the reverend John Ball 
 was a confpicuous member, fometimes under his own name, 
 fometimes under the feigned name of John Schep. Beftdes 
 him it confifted (as Knyghton tells us) of perfons who went by 
 the real or fictitious names of Jack Mylner, Tom Baker, Jack 
 Straw, Jack Trewman, Jack Carter, and probably of many 
 more. Some of the choiceft flowers of the publications, charitably 
 written and circulated by them gratis, are upon record in Wal- 
 fingham and Knyghton : and I am inclined to prefer the pithy 
 and fententious brevity of thefe bulletins of ancient rebellion, 
 before the looje and confufed prolixity of the modern advertife- 
 ments of conltitutional information. They contain more good 
 morality, and lefs bad politics ; they had much more foundation 
 in real oppreffion ; and they have the recommendation of being 
 much better adapted to the capacities of thofe for whofe ia- 
 
 ftru&ion
 
 &ev. Dr. Ball was bred, as they can be fupplied 
 from the new arfenal at Hackney. It was, no 
 doubt, diipofed with all the adjutancy of definition 
 
 and 
 
 ftru&ion they were intended. Whatever laudable pains the 
 teachers of the prefent day appear to take, I cannot compliment 
 them, fo far as to allow, that they have fucceeded in writing down 
 to the level of their pupils, the members of tbefovereign, with half 
 the ability of Jack Carter and the reverend John Ball, That 
 my readers may judge for themfelves, I (hall give them one or 
 two fpecimens. 
 
 The firft is an addrefs from the reverend John Ball under his 
 ttom de guerre of John Schep. I know not againft what parti- 
 cular " guyle in borough" the writer means to caution the 
 people; it may have been only a general cry againft " rotten 
 boroughs," which it was thought convenient then as now to make 
 the firft pretext, and place at the head of the lift of grievances. 
 
 JOHN SCHEP. 
 
 John Schep fometime Seint Mary Pried of Yorke, and now of 
 Colchefter, greeteth well John NamelefTe, & John the Miller & 
 John Carter, and biddeth them that they beware of guyle in borcugh t 
 and ftand together in God's name ; and biddeth Piers Ploweman 
 goe to his werke, and chaftife well Hob the robber, [probably 
 the king] and take with you John Trewman, and all his fellows 
 and no moe. 
 
 John thfr.Miller hath yground fmal, fmall, fmall . 
 
 The King's Sonne of Heaven fhal pay for all. 
 
 Beware or ye be woe, 
 
 Know your frende fro your foe. 
 
 Have enough and fay hoe : 
 
 And do wel and better, and flee finne, 
 
 And feeke peace and holde you therein; 
 
 & fo biddeth John Trewman, & all his fellowes. 
 
 The reader has perceived, from the laft lines of this curious 
 ftate paper, how well the national afTembly has copied its union 
 of the projeffion of univerfal peace, with the practice of murder 
 and confufion, and the blaft of the trumpet of fedition in all na- 
 tions. He will, in the following conftitutional paper, obferve 
 how well, in their enigmatical ftyle, like the afTembly and their 
 abettors, the old philosophers profcribe all hereditary diftindion, 
 andbeftow it only on virtue andwifdom, according to their efti- 
 tnation of both. Yet thefa people are fuppofed never to have 
 heard of " the rights of man!" 
 
 JACK MVLNER. 
 
 Jakke Mylner afketh help to turne his mylne aright. 
 He hath s;rounden fmal, fmal, 
 Tbe King's Sone of Heven he fhall pay fur alle. 
 
 I Lok*
 
 ( "4 ) 
 
 and divifion, in which (I fpeak it with fubmif- 
 lion) the old marfhals were as able as the modern 
 martinets. Neither can we deny, that the philofo- 
 phic auditory, when they had once obtained this 
 knowledge, could never return to their former ig- 
 norance j or after fo inftru&ive a lefture be in the 
 fame ftate of mind as if they had never heard it*. 
 But thefe poor people, who were not to be envied 
 for their knowledge, but pitied for their delufion, 
 were not reafoned (that was impofiible) but beaten 
 out of their lights. With their teacher they were 
 delivered over to the lawyers ; who wrote in their 
 blood the ftatutes of the land, as harfhly, and in the 
 fame fort of ink, as they and their teachers had 
 written the rights of man. 
 
 Our doctors of the day are not fo fond of quoting 
 the opinions of this antient fage as they are of 
 
 Loke thy mylne go a ryyt with the four fayles, and the pofi 
 ftande in fteadfaftnefle. 
 
 With ryyt & with myyt, 
 
 With flcill & with wy lie, 
 
 Lat myyt help ryyt, 
 
 And fkyl go before wille, 
 
 And ryyht before myght, 
 
 Than goth our mylne aryght. 
 
 And if myght go before ryght, 
 
 And wylle before fkylle; 
 
 Than is our mylne mys-a-dyght. 
 
 JACK CARTER underftood perfectly the do&rine oflooking 
 to the end, with an indifference to the means t and the probability 
 of much good ariflng from great evil. 
 
 Jakke Carter prayes yowe alle that ye make a gode enJe of 
 that ye have begunnen, & doth wele and ay bettur & bettur, 
 for at the even men heryth the day. For if the ende be web 
 than is alle ivele. Lat Peres the plowman my brother dwelle 
 at home and dyght us corne, & I will go with yowe & helpe, 
 that I may, to dyghte youre mete and youre drynke, that ye none 
 fayle. Lokke 'that Hobbe robbyoure be wele chaftyfed for 
 lefyng of your grace ; for ye have gret nede to take God with 
 yowe in all your dedes. For now is tyme to be war. 
 
 * See the wife remark on this fubjeft, in the Defence of 
 Rights of Man, circulated by the focieties. 
 
 imitating
 
 ( "S ) 
 
 imitating his conduct ; Firft, becaule* it might ap- 
 pear, that they are not as great inventors as they 
 would be thought , and next, becaufe, unfortunately 
 for his fame, he was not fuccefsful. It is a remark, 
 liable to as few exceptions as any generality can be> 
 that they who applaud profperous folly, and adore 
 triumphant guilt, have never been known to fuc- 
 cour or even to pity human weaknefs or offence 
 when they become fubject to human viciffitude, 
 and meet with puniihment inftead of obtaining 
 power. Abating for their want of fenfibility to the 
 fufferings of their affbciates, they are not fo much 
 in the wrong: for madnefs and wickednefs are 
 things foul and deformed in themfelves ; and (land 
 in need of all the coverings and trappings of fortune 
 to recommend them to the multitude. Nothing 
 can be more loathfome in their naked nature. 
 
 Aberrations like thefe, whether antient or mo- 
 dern, unluccefsful or proiperous, are things of pa- 
 fage. They furnifh no argument for fuppofmg a 
 multitude told by the head to be the -people. Such 
 a multitude can have no fort of title to alter the 
 feat of power in the fociety, in which it ever ought 
 to be the obedient, and not the ruling or pre rid- 
 ing part. What power may belong to the whole 
 mafs, in which mafs, the natural ariftccracy y or 
 what by convention is appointed to reprefent and 
 ftrengthen it, acts in its proper place, with its proper 
 weight, and without being fubjected to violence, is 
 a deeper queftion. But in that cafe, and with that 
 concurrence, I Ihould have much doubt whether 
 any rafh or defperate changes in the ftate, fuch as we 
 have feen in France, could ever be effected. 
 
 I have faid, that in all political queftions the 
 confequences of any afTumed rights are of great 
 moment in deciding upon their validity. In this 
 point of view let us a little fcrutinize the effects of a 
 right in the mere majority of the inhabitants of any 
 I 2 country
 
 country of fuperfeding and altering their government 
 at pleq/ure. 
 
 The fum total of every people is compofed of its 
 units. Every individual muft have a right to ori- 
 ginate what afterwards is to become the aft of the 
 majority. Whatever he may lawfully originate, he 
 may lawfully endeavour to accomplifh. He has a 
 right therefore in his own particular to break the ties 
 and engagement which bind him to the country in 
 which he lives ; and he has a right to make as 
 many converts to his opinions, and to obtain as 
 many affociates in his defigns, as he can pro- 
 cure : For how can you know the difpofitions 
 of the majority to deftroy their government, but 
 by tampering with fome part of the body ? You 
 muft begin by a fecret conipiracy, that you may 
 end with a national confederation. The mere 
 pleafure of the beginner muft be the fole guide ; 
 fmce the mere pleafure of others muft be the fole 
 ultimate fan&ion, as well as the fole actuating prin- 
 ciple In every part of the progrefs. Thus arbi- 
 trary will (the laft corruption of ruling power) 
 ftep by ftep, poifons the heart of every citizen. 
 If the undertaker fails, he has the misfortune of a 
 rebel, but not the guilt. By fuch doctrines, all 
 love to our country, all pious veneration and at- 
 tachment to its laws and cuftoms, are obliterated 
 'from our minds ; and nothing can refult from 
 this opinion, when grown into a principle, and 
 animated by difcontent, ambition, or enthufiafm, 
 but a feries of confpiracies and feditions, fome- 
 times ruinous to their authors, always noxious to 
 the ftate. No fenfe of duty can prevent any 
 man from being a leader or a follower in fuch en- 
 terprizes. Nothing reftrains the tempter ; nothing 
 guards the tempted. Nor is the new ftate, fabri- 
 cated by fuch arts, fafer than the old. What can 
 prevent the mere will of any perfon, who hopes to 
 % unite
 
 ( "7 ) 
 
 unite the wills of others to his own, from an attempt 
 wholly to overturn it ? It wants nothing but a dif- 
 pofition to trouble the eftablifhed order, to give a 
 tide to the enterprise. 
 
 When you combine this principle of the right to 
 change a fixed and tolerable conflitution of things 
 at pleafure, with the theory and practice of the 
 French affembly, the political, civil, and moral ir- 
 regularity are if pofiible aggravated. The aflembly 
 have found another road, and a far more commo- 
 dious, to the deftruction of an old government, and 
 the legitimate formation of a new one, than through 
 the previous will of the majority of what they call 
 the people. Get, fay they, the poflefiion of power by 
 any means you can into your hands 3 and then a 
 fubfequent confent (what they call an addrefs of ad- 
 hefion) makes your authority as much the act of the 
 people as if they had conferred upon you origi- 
 nally that kind and degree of power, which, 
 without their permiffion, you had feized upon. 
 This is to give a direct fanction to fraud, hypo- 
 crify, perjury, and the breach of the moft facred 
 trufts that can exift between man and man. What 
 can found with fuch horrid difcordance in the mo- 
 ral ear, as this pofition, That a delegate with limited 
 powers may break his fworn engagements to his 
 conftituent, affume an authority, never committed to 
 him, to alter all things at his pleafure; and then, if 
 he can perfuade a large number of men to flatter him 
 i the power he has ufurped, that he is abfolved in 
 his own confcience, and ought to ftand acquitted in 
 the eyes of mankind ? On this fcheme the maker of 
 the experiment miift begin with a determined per- 
 jury. That point is certain. He muft take his 
 chance for the expiatory addrerTes. This is to make 
 the fuccefs of villainy the itandard of innocence. 
 
 Without drawing on, therefore, very fhocking 
 
 CQnfequences a neither by previous confent, nor by 
 
 I 3 fubfequent
 
 ( "8 ) 
 
 iubfequent ratification of a mere reckoned majority y 
 can any fet of men attempt to diffolve the ftate at 
 their pleafure. To apply this to our prefent fub- 
 ject. When the feveral orders, in their feveral 
 bailliages, had met in the year 1789, fuch of them, 
 I mean, as had met peaceably and conftitutionally, 
 to choofe and to inftruct their reprefentatives, fo 
 organized, and fo acting, (becaufe they were or- 
 ganized and were acting according to the conventions 
 which made them a people) they were the people of 
 France. They had a legal and a natural capacity to 
 be confidered as that people. But obferve, whilft 
 they were in this ftate, that is, whilft they were a 
 people, in no one of their inftructions did they charge 
 or even hint at any of thofe things, which have 
 drawn upon the ufurping affembly, and their ad- 
 herents, the deteftation of the rational and thinking 
 part of mankind. I will venture to affirm, without 
 the leaft apprehenfion of being contradicted by any 
 perfon who knows the then ftate of France, that if 
 any one of the changes were propofed, which form 
 the fundamental parts of their revolution, and com- 
 pofe its moft diftinguifhing acts, it would not have 
 had one vote in twenty thoufand in any order. 
 Their inftructions purported the direct contrary to 
 all thofe famous proceedings, which are defended a$ 
 the acts of the people. Had fuch proceedings been 
 expected, the great probability is, that the peo- 
 ple would then have rifen, as to a man, to prevent 
 them. The whole organization of the aflembly 
 was altered, the whole frame of the kingdom was 
 changed, before thefe things could be done. It is 
 long to tell, by what evil arts of the confpirators, 
 and by what extreme weaknefs and want of fteadinefs 
 in the lawful government, this equal ufurpation on the 
 rights of the prince and people, having firft cheated, 
 and then offered violence to both, has been able to 
 triumph, and to employ with fuccefs the forged 
 
 fignature
 
 ( "9 ) 
 
 fignature of an imprifoncd fovereign, and the fpu- 
 rious voice of dictated addrefles, to a fubfequcnt 
 ratification of things that had never received any 
 previous fanction, general or particular, exprefled 
 or implied, from the nation (in whatever fenfe that 
 word is taken) or from any part of it. 
 
 After the weighty and refpectable part of the peo* 
 pie had been murdered, or driven by the menaces 
 of murder from their houfes, or were difperfed in 
 exile into every country in Europe; after the foldiery 
 had been debauched from their officers ; after pro- 
 perty had loft its weight and consideration, along 
 with its fecurity ; after voluntary clubs and aflbcia- 
 tions of factious and unprincipled men were fubftitu- 
 ted in the place of all the legal corporations of the 
 kingdom arbitrarily diflblved; after freedom had 
 been banifhed from * thofe popular meetings, whofc 
 fole recommendation is freedom After it had 
 come to that pafs, that no diflent dared to appear 
 in any of them, but at the certain price of life ; 
 after even diflent had been anticipated, and afTarfina- 
 tion became as quick as fufpicion ; fuch pretended 
 ratification by addrefies could be no aft of what any 
 lover of the people would choofe to call by their 
 name. It is that voice which every fuccefsful ufur- 
 pation, as well as this before us, may eafily pro- 
 cure, even without making (as thefe tyrants have 
 made) donatives from the fpoil of one part of the 
 citizens to corrupt the other. 
 
 The pretended rights of man, which have made 
 this havock, cannot be the rights of the people. 
 For to be a people, and to have thefe rights, are 
 things incompatible. The one fuppofes the pre- 
 lence, the other the abfence of a ftate of civil fo- 
 ciety. The very foundation of the French com- 
 monwealth is falfe and felf-deftruftive ; nor can its 
 
 * The primary aflemblics. 
 
 I 4 principles
 
 principles be adopted in any country, without the 
 certainty of bringing it to the very fame condition 
 in which France is found. Attempts are made to 
 introduce them into every nation in Europe. This 
 nation, as pofieffing the greateft influence, they wifh 
 moft to corrupt, as by that means they are allured 
 the contagion muft become general. I hope, there- 
 fore, I fhall be excufed, if I endeavour to ihew, as 
 fhortly as the matter will admit, the danger of 
 giving to them, either avowedly or tacitly, the 
 fmalleft countenance. 
 
 There are times and circumftances, in which 
 not to fpeak out is at leaft to connive. Many 
 think it enough for them, that the principles 
 propagated by thefe clubs and focieties enemies 
 to their country and its conftitution, are not owned 
 by the modern Whigs in parliament, who are fo 
 warm in condemnation of Mr. Burke and his book, 
 and of courfe of all the principles of the ancient 
 constitutional Whigs of this kingdom. Certainly 
 they are not owned. But are they condemned with 
 the fame zeal as Mr. Burke and his book are con- 
 demned ? Are they condemned at all? Are they 
 rejected or difcountenanced in any way whatfbever ? 
 Is any man who would fairly examine into the de- 
 meanour and principles of thole focieties, and that 
 too very moderately, and in the way rather of ad- 
 monition than of punifhment, is fuch a man even 
 decently treated ? Is he not reproached, as if, in 
 condemning fuch principles, he had belied the con- 
 duel of his whole life, fuggefting that his life had 
 been governed by principles fimilar to thole which 
 he now reprobates ? The French fyftem is in the 
 mean time, by many active agents out of doors, rap- 
 tu rou fly praiied -, The Britifh conftitution is coldly 
 tolerated. But thefe conftitutions are different, both 
 in the foundation and in the whole fuperftructure; and 
 jt is plain, that you cannot build up the one but on the 
 
 ruins
 
 ruins of the other. After all, if the French be a fupe- 
 rior fyftem of liberty, why fhould we not adopt it ? 
 To what end are ourpraifes ? Is excellence held out 
 to us only that we fhould not copy after it ? And 
 what is there in the manners of the people, or in the 
 climate of France, which renders that fpecies of re- 
 public fitted for them, and unfuitable to us ? A ftrong 
 and marked difference between the two nations 
 ought to be fhewn, before we can admit a conftant 
 affected panegyrick, a Handing annual commemo- 
 ration, to be without any tendency to an example. 
 
 But the leaders of party will not go the length 
 of the doctrines taught by the feditious clubs. I am 
 fure they do not mean to do fo. God forbid! 
 Perhaps even thofe who are directly carrying on 
 the work of this pernicious foreign faction, do not 
 all of them intend to produce all the mifchiefs which 
 muft inevitably follow from their having any 
 fuccefs in their proceedings. As to leaders in par- 
 ties, nothing is more common than to fee them 
 blindly led. The world is governed by go-be- 
 tweens. Thefe go-betweens influence the perfcns 
 with whom they carry on the intercourfe, by 
 (rating their own fenfe to each of them as the 
 fenfe of the other ; and thus they reciprocally 
 mafter both fides. It is firft buzzed about the 
 cars of leaders, " that their friends without doors 
 (f are very eager for fome meafure, or very warm 
 " about fome opinion that you muft not be 
 " too rigid with them. They are ufeful perfbns, and 
 f zealous in the caufe. They may be a little wrong ; 
 " but the fpirit of liberty muft not be damped ; and 
 " by the influence you obtain from fome degree of 
 Cf concurrence with them at prefent, you may be 
 " enabled to fet them right hereafter." 
 
 Thus the leaders are at firft drawn to a conni- 
 vance with fentiments and proceeding?, often to- 
 fally different from their ferious and deliberate 
 
 notions.
 
 notions. But their acquiefcence anfwers every 
 purpofe. 
 
 With no better than luch powers, the go-be- 
 tweens aflume a new reprefentative character. What 
 at beft was but an acquiefcence, is magnified into 
 an authority, and thence into a defire on the part 
 of the leaders ; and it is carried down as fuch to the 
 fubordinate members of parties. By this artifice 
 they in their turn are led into meafures which at 
 firft, perhaps, few of them wifhed at all, or at leaft 
 did not defire vehemently or fyftematically. 
 
 There is in all parties, between the principal lead- 
 ers in parliament, and the loweft followers out of 
 doors, a middle fort of men ; a fort of equeftrian 
 order, who, by the fpirit of that middle fituation, 
 are the fitteft for preventing things from running 
 to excefs. But indecifion, though a vice of a totally 
 different character, is the natural accomplice of vi- 
 olence. The irrefolution and timidity of thofe who 
 compofe this middle order, often prevents the effect 
 of their controlling iituaticn. The fear of differing 
 with the authority of leaders on the one hand, and of 
 contradicting the defires of the multitude on the 
 other, induces them to give a careleis and pafiive af- 
 fent to meafures in which they never were confultcd : 
 and thus things proceed, by a fort of activity of 
 inertnefs, until whole bodies, leaders, middle men, 
 and followers, are all hurried, with every appear- 
 ance, and with many of the effefts, of unanimity, 
 into fchemes of politics, in the fubftance of which 
 no two of them were ever fully agreed, and the 
 origin and authors of which, in this circular mode 
 of communication, none of them find it poffible 
 to trace. In my experience I have feen much of 
 this in affairs, which, though trifling in compa- 
 rifon to the prefent, were yet of fome importance 
 to parties j and I have known them fuffer by it. 
 The fober part give their fandion, at firft through 
 3 inattention
 
 ( "3 ) 
 
 inattention and levity ; at laft they give it through 
 neceflity. A violent fpirit is raifed, which the pre- 
 Tiding minds, after a time, find it impracticable to 
 flop at their pleafure, to control, to regulate, or even 
 to direct. 
 
 This Ihews, in my opinion, how very quick and 
 awakened all men ought to be, who are looked 
 up to by the public, and who deferve that confi- 
 dence, to prevent a furprife on their opinions, when 
 dogmas are fpread, and projects purfued, by which 
 the foundations of fociety may be affected. Before 
 they liften even to moderate alterations in the govern- 
 ment of their country, they ought to take care that 
 principles are not propagated for that purpofe, 
 which are too big for their object. Doctrines limit- 
 ed in their prelent application, and wide in their 
 general principles, are never meant to be confined 
 to what they at firft pretend. If I were to form a 
 prognoftic of the effect of the prefent machinations 
 on the people, from their fenfe of any grievance they 
 fuffer under this conftitution, my mind would be at 
 cafe. But there is a wide difference between the 
 multitude, when they act againft their government 
 from a fenfe of grievance, or from zeal for fbme 
 opinions. When men are thoroughly poflefled with 
 that zeal, it is difficult to calculate its force. It is 
 certain, that its power is by no means in exact 
 proportion to its reafonablenefs. It muft always have 
 been difcoverable by perfons of reflection, but it 
 is now obvious to the world, that a theory con- 
 cerning government may become as much a caufe 
 of fanaticifm as a dogma in religion. There is a 
 boundary to men's pafiions when they act from 
 feeling i none when they are under the influence 
 of imagination. Remove a grievance, and, when 
 men act from feeling, you go a great way towards 
 uieting a commotion. But the good or bad con- 
 of a government, the protection men have en- 
 joyed,
 
 joyed, or the oppreffion they have fuffered under it, 
 are of no fort of moment, when a faction proceeding 
 upon Ipeculative grounds, is thoroughly heated 
 againft its form. When a man is, from fyftem, furious 
 againft monarchy or epifcopacy, the good conduct of 
 the monarch or the bifhop has no other effect than 
 further to irritate the adverlary. He is provoked 
 at it as furnifhing a plea for preferving the thing 
 which he wiflies to deftroy. His mind will be 
 healed as much by the fight of a fceptre, a mace, 
 or a verge, as if he had been daily bruifed and 
 wounded by thefe fymbols of authority. Mere 
 fpectacles, mere names, will become fufficient caufes 
 to ftimulate the people to war and tumult. 
 
 Some gentlemen are not terrified by the facility 
 with which government has been overturned in 
 France. The people of France, they fay, had no- 
 thing to lofe in the deftruction of a bad confthu- 
 tion; but though not the bed poflible, we have 
 ftill a good flake in ours, which will hinder us from 
 defperate rifques. Is this any fecurity at all againft 
 thofe who feem to perfuade themfelves, and who 
 labour to perfuade others, that our conftitution is 
 an ufurpation in its origin, unwife in its contrivance, 
 mifchievous in its effects, contrary to the rights of 
 man, and in all its parts a perfect nuifance? What 
 motive has any rational man, who thinks in that 
 manner, to Ipill his blood, or even to riique a fhilling 
 of his fortune, or to wafte a moment of his leifure, 
 to preferve it ? If he has any duty relative to it, his 
 duty is to deftroy it. A conftitution on fufferance is a 
 ccnftitution condemned. Sentence is already pafled 
 upon it. The execution is only delayed. On the 
 principles of thefe gentlemen it neither has, nor 
 ought to have, any fecurity. So far as regards them, 
 it is left naked, without friends, partizans, afler- 
 tors, or protectors. 
 
 Let
 
 ( IlJ ) 
 
 Let us examine into the value of this fecurity 
 upon the principles of thofe who are more fober ; 
 of thofe who think, indeed, the French conftitution 
 better, or at lead as good, as the Britiih, without 
 going to all the lengths of the warmer politicians 
 in reprobating their own. Their fecurity amounts 
 in reality to nothing more than this 5 that the dif- 
 ference between their republican fyftem and the 
 Britiih limited monarchy is not worth a civil war. 
 This opinion, I admit, will prevent people not 
 very enterprifing in their nature, from an active un- 
 dertaking againft the Britiih conftitution. But it 
 is the pooreft defenfive principle that ever was in- 
 fufed into the mind of man againft the attempts of 
 thofe who will enterprife. It will tend totally to 
 remove from their minds that very terror of a 
 civil war which is held out as our fole fecurity. They 
 who think fo well of the French conftitution, cer- 
 tainly will not be the perfons to carry on a war to 
 prevent their obtaining a great benefit, or at worft 
 a fair exchange. They will not go to battle in 
 favour of a caufe in which their defeat might be 
 more advantageous to the public than their viclory. 
 They muft at leaft tacitly abet thofe who endeavour 
 to make converts to a found opinion; they muft dif- 
 countenance thofe who would oppofe its propaga- 
 tion. In proportion as by thefe means the enter- 
 prifing party is ftrengthened, the dread of a ftruggle 
 is leffened. See what an encouragement this is to 
 the enemies of the conftitution ! A few aflaffina- 
 tions, and a very great deftrudtion of property, we 
 know they confider as no real obftacles in the way 
 of a grand political change. And they will hope, 
 that here, if antimonarchical opinions gain ground, 
 as they have done in France, they may, as in France, 
 accomplifh a revolution without a war. 
 
 They who think fo well of the French conftitu- 
 tion cannot be ferioufly alarmed by any progrefs 
 
 made
 
 made by its partizans. Provifions for fecurity arc 
 not to be received from thofe who think that there is 
 no danger. No ! there is no plan of fecurity to be 
 liftened to but from thofe who entertain the fame 
 fears with ourfelves ; from thofe who think that the 
 thing to be fecured is a great blefiing; and the 
 thing againft which we would fecure it a great 
 mifchief. Every perfon of a different opinion muft 
 be carelefs about fecurity. 
 
 I believe the author of the Reflections, whe- 
 ther he fears the defigns of that fet of people 
 with reafon or not, cannot prevail on himfelf to 
 defpife them. He cannot defpife them for their 
 numbers, which, though fmall, compared with the 
 found part of the community, are not inconfidera- 
 ble : he cannot look with contempt on their influ- 
 ence, their activity, or the kind of talents and tem- 
 pers which they poflefs, exactly calculated for the 
 work they have in hand, and the minds they chiefly 
 apply to. Do we not fee their moft considerable 
 and accredited minifters, and feveral of their party 
 of weight and importance, active in fpreading mif- 
 chievous opinions, in giving fanction to feditious 
 writings, in promoting feditious anniverfaries ? and 
 what part of their defcription has difowned them or 
 their proceedings ? When men, circumftanced as 
 thefe are, publickly declare fuch admiration of a 
 foreign conftitution, and fuch contempt of our own, 
 it would be, in the author of the Reflections, think- 
 ing as he does of the French conftitution, infamou fly 
 to cheat the reft of the nation to their ruin, to fay 
 there is no danger. 
 
 In eftimating danger, we are obliged to take into 
 our calculation the character and difpofition of the 
 enemy into whofe hands we may chance to fall. The 
 genius of this faction is eafily difcerned by obferving 
 with what a very different eye they have viewed 
 the late foreign revolutions. Two have paffed be- 
 fore.
 
 ( 1*7 ) 
 
 fore them. That of France and that of Poland. The 
 Hate of Poland was fuch, that there could fcarcely 
 exift two opinions, but that a reformation of its 
 conftitution, even at fome expence of blood, might 
 be feen without much difapprobation. No confu- 
 fion could be feared in fuch an enterprize ; becaufe 
 the eftablilhment to be reformed was itfelf a ftate of 
 confufion. A king without authority; nobles without 
 union or fubordination ; a people without arts, induf- 
 try, commerce, or liberty ; no order within ; no defence 
 without ; no effective publick force, but a foreign 
 force, which entered a naked country at will, and 
 difpofed of every thing at pleafure. Here was a 
 ftate of things which feemed to invite and might 
 perhaps juftify bold enterprize and defperate experi- 
 ment. But in what manner was this chaos brought 
 into order ? The means were as finking to the 
 imagination, as fatisfactcry to the reafon, and footh- 
 ing to the moral fentiments. In contemplating that 
 change, humanity has every thing to rejoice and to 
 glory in ; nothing to be alhamed of, nothing to 
 liiffer. So far as it has gone, it probably is the 
 moil pure and defecated public good which ever 
 has been conferred on mankind. We have feen 
 anarchy and fervitude at once removed ; a throne 
 ftrengthened for the protection of the people, with- 
 out trenching on their liberties; all foreign cabal 
 baniihed, by changing the crown from elective to 
 hereditary; and what was a matter of pleafing wonder, 
 we have leen a reigning king, from an heroic love 
 to his country, exerting himfelf with all the toil, the 
 dexterity, the management, the intrigue, in favour 
 of a family of ftrangers, with which ambitious men 
 labour for the aggrandifement of their own. Ten 
 millions of men in a way of being freed gradually, 
 and therefore fafely to themfelves and the ftate, not 
 from civil or political chains, which, bad as they 
 are, only fetter the mind, but from fubftantial per- 
 
 fonal
 
 fonal bondage. Inhabitants of cities, before without 
 privileges, placed in the confideration which belongs 
 to that improved and connecting fituation of fo- 
 cial life. One of the moft proud, numerous, and 
 fierce bodies of nobility and gentry ever known in 
 the world, arranged only in the foremoft rank of 
 free and generous citizens. Not one man incurred 
 lofs, or fuffered degradation. All, from the king 
 to the day-labourer, were improved in their condi- 
 tion. Every thing was kept in its place and order ; 
 but in that place and order every thing was bet- 
 tered. To add to this happy wonder (this unheard- 
 of conjunction of wifdom and fortune) not one 
 drop of blood was fpilled j no treachery ; no out- 
 rage j no fyftem of (lander more cruel than the 
 fword; no ftudied infults on religion, morals, or 
 manners} nofpoil; no confifcation j no citizen beg- 
 gared j noneimprifoned; none exiled: the whole was 
 effected with a policy, a difcretion, an unanimity 
 and fecrecy, fuch as have never been before known 
 on any occafion; but fuch wonderful conduct was re- 
 ferved for this glorious confpiracy in favour of the 
 true and genuine rights and interefts of men. 
 Happy people, if they know to proceed as they 
 have begun ! Happy prince, worthy to begin with 
 fplendor, or to ciofe with glory, a race of patriots 
 and of kings: and to leave 
 
 A name, which every wind to heav'n would bear, 
 Which men to fpeak, and angels joy to hear. 
 
 To finifti all this great good, as in the inftant it is, 
 contains in it the feeds of all further improvement -, 
 and may be confidered as in a regular progrefs, be- 
 caufe founded on fimilar principles, towards the 
 ftable excellence of a Britifh conftitution. 
 
 Here was a matter for congratulation and for 
 feftive remembrance through ages. Here moralifts 
 and divines might indeed relax in their temperance 
 to exhilarate their humanity. But mark the cha- 
 
 rafter
 
 ( 1*9 ) 
 
 rafter of our faftion. All their enthufiafm is kept for 
 the French revolution. They cannot pretend that 
 France had flood fb much in need of a change as Po- 
 land. They cannot pretend that Poland has not ob- 
 tained a better fyflem of liberty or of government 
 than it enjoyed before. They cannot aflert, that 
 the Polilh revolution coft more dearly than that of 
 France to the interefts and feelings of multitudes of 
 men. But the cold and fubordinate light in which 
 they look upon the one, and the pains they tal^e to 
 preach up the other of thefe revolutions, leave us no 
 choice in fixing on their motives. Both revolutions 
 profefs liberty as their objeft j but in obtaining this 
 bjeft the one proceeds from anarchy to order: the 
 other from order to anarchy. The firft fecures its li- 
 berty by eftablifhing its throne -, the other builds its 
 freedom on the fubverfion of its monarchy. In the 
 one their means are unftained by crimes, and their 
 fettlement favours morality. In the other, vice and 
 confufion are in the very eflence of their purfuit 
 and of their enjoyment. The circumftances in 
 which thefe two events differ, muft caufe the dif- 
 ference we make in their comparative eftimation, 
 Thefe turn the fcale with the focieties in favour of 
 France. Ferrum eft quod amant. The frauds, the 
 violences, the facrileges, the havock and ruin of fa- 
 milies, the difperfion and exile of the pride and 
 flower of a great country, the diforder, the confu- 
 fion, the anarchy, the violation of property, the 
 cruel murders, the inhuman confifcations, and in the 
 end the infolent domination of bloody, ferocious, and 
 fenfelefs clubs. Thefe are the things which they 
 love and admire. What men admire and love, they \ 
 would furely aft. Let us fee what is done in France; 
 and then let us undervalue any the flighteft danger 
 of falling into the hands of fuch a mercilefs and 
 favage faftion ! 
 
 K But
 
 ' But the leaders of the factious focieties are too 
 ' wild to fucceed in this their undertaking.' I hope 
 fo. But fuppofing them wild and abfurd, is there 
 no danger but from wife and reflecting men ? Per- 
 haps the greateft mifchiefs that have happened in 
 the world, have happened from perfons as wild as 
 thofe we think the wildeft. In truth, they are the 
 fitteft beginners of all great changes. Why en- 
 courage men in a mifchievous proceeding, becaufe 
 their abfurdity may difappoint their malice ? ( But 
 ' noticing them may give them confequence.' Cer- 
 tainly. But they are noticed ; and they are noticed, 
 not with reproof, but with that kind of countenance 
 which is given by an apparent concurrence (not a real 
 one, I am convinced) of a great party, in the praifes 
 of the object which they hold out to imitation. 
 
 But I hear a language ftill more extraordinary, 
 and indeed of fuch a nature as muft fuppofe, or 
 leave, us at their mercy. It is this ( You know 
 ' their promptitude in writing, and their diligence in 
 ' caballing ; to write, Ipeak, or act againtt them, 
 * will onlyftimulate them to new efforts/ This way 
 of confidering the principle of their conduct pays 
 but a poor compliment to thefe gentlemen. They 
 pretend that their doctrines are infinitely beneficial 
 to mankind j but it feems they would keep them 
 to themfelves, if they were not greatly provoked. 
 They are benevolent from fpite. Their oracles arc 
 like thofe of Proteus (whom fome people think 
 they refemble in many particulars) who never would 
 give his refponfes unlefs you ufed him as ill as 
 poflible. Thefe cats, it feems, would not give out 
 their electrical light without having their backs 
 well rubbed. But this is not to do them perfect: 
 juftice. They are fufficiently communicative. Had 
 they been quiet, the propriety of any agitation of to- 
 pics on the origin and primary rights of government, 
 
 in
 
 in oppofition to their private fentiments, might pof- 
 fibly be doubted. But, as it is notorious, that they were 
 proceeding as faft, and as far, as time and circumftan- 
 tes would admit, both in their difcufiions and cabals 
 -as it is not to be denied, that they had opened a cor- 
 refpondence with a foreign faction, the moft wicked 
 the world ever faw, and eftabliihed anniverfaries to 
 commemorate the moft monftrous, cruel, and per- 
 fidious of all the proceedings of that faction the 
 queftion is, whether their conduct was to be re- 
 garded in filence, left our interference fhould render 
 them outrageous ? Then let them deal as they 1 
 pleafe with the conftitution. Let the lady be paf- 
 five, leit the ravifher fhould be driven to force. 
 Refiftance will only increafe his delires. Yes, 
 truly, if the refiftance be feigned and feeble. But 
 they who are wedded to the conftitution will not 
 aft the part of wittols. They will drive fuch fe- 
 ducers from the houfe on the firft appearance of 
 their love-letters, and offered affignations. But if 
 the author of the Reflections, though a vigilant, was 
 not a difcreet guardian of the conftitution, let them 
 who have the fame regard to it, fhew themfelves as 
 vigilant and more fkilful in repelling the attacks of 
 feduction or violence. Their freedom from jealoufy 
 is equivocal, and may arife as well from indifference 
 to the object, as from confidence in her virtue. 
 
 On their principle, it is the refiftance, and not the 
 afiault, which produces the danger. I admit, indeed, 
 that if we eftimated the danger by the value of the 
 writings, it would be little worthy of our attention : 
 contemptible thefe writings are in every fenfe. But 
 they are not the caufe; they are thedifgufting fymp- 
 toms, of a frightful diftemper. They are not other- 
 wife of confequence than as they fhew the evil habit 
 of the bodies from whence they come. In that light 
 the meaneft of them is a ferious thing. If however 
 I fhould under-rate them ; and if the truth is, that 
 K 2 they
 
 they are not the refult, but the caufe of the diforders 
 I fpeak of, furely thofe who circulate operative poi- 
 fons, and give, to whatever force they have by their 
 nature, the further operation of their authority and 
 ad -ption, are to be cenfured, watched, and, if pof- 
 fible, reprefied. 
 
 At what diftance the direct danger from fuch 
 factions may be, it is not eafy to fix. An adapta- 
 tion of circumftances to defigns and principles is ne- 
 cefTary. But thefe cannot be wanting for any long 
 time in the ordinary courfe of fublunary affairs. 
 Great difcontents frequently arife in the beft-confti- 
 tuted governments, from caufes which no human 
 wifdom can forefee, and no human power ran pre- 
 vent. They occur at uncertain periods, but at pe- 
 riods which are not commonly far afuncler. Go- 
 vernments of all kinds are adminiRered only by 
 men ; and great miitakes, tending to inflame thefe 
 difcontents, may concur. The indecifion of thofe 
 who happen to rule at the critical time, their fupine 
 neglect, or their precipitate and ill-judged attention, 
 may aggravate the public misfortunes. In fuch a 
 flate of things, the principles, now only fown, will 
 fhoot out and vegetate in full luxuriance. In fuch 
 circumftances the minds of the people become fore 
 and ulcerated. They are put out of humour with all 
 public men, and all public parties ; they are fatigued 
 with their diffenfions ; they are irritated at their coali- 
 tions j they are made eafily to believe, (what much 
 pains are taken to make them believe) that all oppo- 
 fitions are factious, and all courtiers bafe and fervile. 
 From their difguft at men, they are foon led to quar- 
 rel with their frame of government, which they 
 prefume gives nourilhment to the vices, real or 
 fuppofed, of thofe who adminifter in it. Mif- 
 taking malignity for fagacity, they are foon led to 
 caft off all hope from a good adrniniilration cf affairs, 
 and come to think that all reformation depends, not 
 
 on
 
 ( '33 ) 
 
 on a change of actors, but upon an alteration in the 
 machinery. Then will be feit the full effect of en- 
 couraging doctiine;; which tend to make the citi- 
 zens delpife caei, conltitution. Then will be felt 
 the plenkuJe c,f the imlchicf of teaching the people 
 to believe, that ail antient inftitutions are the relults 
 of ignorance ; and that all prefcriptive government 
 is in its nature ufurpation. Then will be felt, in 
 all its energy, the danger of encouraging a fpirit 
 of litigation in perfons >,f that immature and imper- 
 fect ttate of kn wledgc which ferves to render them 
 fufceptible of doubt out incapable of their folution. 
 Then will be feit, in all its aggravation, the per- 
 nicious confequence of deftroying all docility in the 
 minds wf thofe who are not formed for rinding their 
 own way in the labyrinths of political theory, and 
 are made to reject the clue, and to difdain the guide, 
 Then will be felt, and too late will be acknow- 
 ledged, the ruin which follows the disjoining of re- 
 ligion from the ftate ; the feparation of morality 
 from policy ; and the giving confidence no concern 
 and no coactive or coercive force in the moft mate- 
 rial of all the focial ties, the principle of our obliga- 
 tions to government. 
 
 I know too, that befides this vain, contradic- 
 tory, and feif-deftructive leclirity, which fome men 
 derive from the habitual attachment of the peo- 
 ple to this conftitution, whilft they fuffer it with a 
 fort of fportive acquiefcence to be brought into 
 contempt before their faces, they have other grounds 
 for removing all apprehenfion from their minds. 
 They are ofopinion, that there are too many men 
 of great hereditary eftates and influence in the king- 
 dom, to fuffer the eftablifhment of the levelling 
 fyftem which has taken place in France. This is 
 very true, if in order to guide the power, which now 
 attends their property, thefe men poffefs the wifdom 
 K 3 which
 
 ( 134 ) 
 
 which is involved in early fear. But if through a 
 fupine fecurity, to which fuch fortunes are peculiarly 
 liable, they neglect the ufe of their influence in the 
 feafon of their power, on the firft derangement of 
 fociety, the nerves of their ftrength will be cut. 
 Their eftates, inftead of being the means of their fe- 
 curity, will become the very caufes of their danger. 
 Inftead of beftowing influence they will excite ra- 
 pacity. They will be looked to as a prey. 
 
 Such will be the impotent condition of thofe men 
 of great hereditary eftates, who indeed diflike the de- 
 figns that are carried on, but whofe diflike is rather 
 that of fpectators, than of parties that may be con- 
 cerned in the cataftrophe of the piece. But riches 
 do not in all cafes fecure even an inert and paffive re- 
 fiftance. There are always, in that defer iption, men 
 whofe fortunes, when their minds are once vitia- 
 ted by paflion or by evil principle, are by no 
 means a fecurity from their actually taking their 
 part againft the public tranquillity. We fee to 
 what low and defpicable pafiions of all kinds many- 
 men in that clafs are ready to facrifice the patri- 
 monial eftates, which might be perpetuated in, 
 their families with fplendor, and with the fame of 
 hereditary benefactors to mankind from generation 
 to generation. Do we not fee how lightly people 
 treat their fortunes when under the influence of 
 the paflion of gaming ? The game of ambition or 
 refentment will be played by many of the rich and 
 great, as defperately, and with as much blindriefs 
 to the confequences, as any other game. Was he 
 a man of no rank or fortune, who firft fet on foot 
 the diftuioances which have ruined France ? Paf- 
 fion blinded him to the confequences, fo far as they 
 concerned himfelf j and as to the confequences with 
 regard to others, they were no part of his confi- 
 deration - f nor ever will be with thofe who bear any 
 
 refemblance
 
 ( '35 ) 
 
 refemblance to that virtuous patriot and lover of 
 the rights of man. 
 
 There is alfo a time of infecurity, when in- 
 terefb cf all forts become objects of fpeculation. 
 Then it is, that their very attachment to wealth and 
 importance will induce feveral perfons of opulence 
 to lift themfelves, and even to take a lead with 
 the party which they think moft likely to prevail, in 
 order to obtain to themfelves confideration in fome 
 new order or diibrder of things. They may be 
 led to a6b in this manner, that they may fecure fome 
 portion of their own property; and perhaps to be- 
 come partakers of the fpoil of their own order. 
 Thofe who fpeculate on change, always make a 
 great number among people of rank and fortune, as 
 well as amongft the low and the indigent. 
 
 What fecurity againft all this ? All human fecu- 
 rities are liable to uncertainty. But if any thing 
 bids fair for the prevention of fo great a calamity, 
 it muft confift in the ufe of the ordinary means of 
 juft influence in fociety, whilft thofe means conti- 
 nue unimpaired. The public judgment ought to re- 
 ceive a proper direction. Ail weighty men may 
 have their fhare in fo good a work. As yet, not- 
 withftanding the ftrutting and lying independence 
 of a braggart philofophy, nature maintains her 
 rights, and great names have great prevalence. 
 Two fuch men as Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox, adding 
 to their authority in a point in which they concur, 
 even by their difunion in every thing elfe, might 
 frown thefe wicked opinions out of the kingdom. 
 But if the influence of either of them, or the influ- 
 ence of men like them, fhould, againft their ferious 
 intentions, be otherwife perverted, they may counte- 
 nance opinions which (as I have faid before, and 
 could wifh over and over again to prefs) they may 
 in vain attempt to control. In their theory, 
 thefe doflrines admit no limit, no qualification 
 K 4 whatfoever. 
 
 \
 
 ( '36 ) 
 
 whatfoever. No man can fay how far he will 
 go, who joins with thofe who are avowedly going 
 to the utmoft extremities. What fecurity is there 
 for flopping fhort at all in thefe wild conceits ? 
 Why, neither more nor lefs than this that the mo- 
 ral fentiments of fome few amongft them do put 
 fome check on their favage theories. But let us 
 take care. The moral fentimcnts, fo nearly con-* 
 neded with early prejudice as to be almoft one and 
 the fame thing, will afluredly not live long under a 
 difcipline, which has for^its bafis the deftruclion of all 
 prejudices, and the making the mind proof againft all 
 dread of confequences flowing from the pretended 
 truths that are taught by their philofophy. 
 
 In this ichool the moral fcntiments muft grow 
 weaker and weaker every day. The more cautious 
 of thefe teachers, in laying down their maxims, draw 
 as much of the conclufion as fuits, not with their 
 premifes, but with their policy. They truft the 
 reft to the fagacity of their pupils. Others, and 
 thefe are the moil vaunted for their fpirit, not 
 only lay down the fame premifes, but boldly 
 draw the conclusions to the deftrudtion of our 
 whole conftitution in church and flate. But 
 are thefe conciufions truly drawn ? Yes, mofl cer- 
 tainly. Their principles are wild and wicked. But 
 let juflice be done even to phrenfy and villainy. 
 Thefe teachers are perfectly fyftematic. No man 
 who aflumes their grounds can tolerate the Biitifh 
 conftitution in chuich or ftate. Thefe teachers 
 profefs to fcorn ail mediocrity ; to engage for per- 
 fection; to proceed by the fimpleft and fhorteft 
 course. They build their politics, not on conve- 
 nience but on truth ; and they profels to condu6t 
 men to certain happinefs by the afiertion of their 
 undoubted rights. With them there, is no com- 
 promife. All other governments are ufurpations, 
 which juftify and even demand refiftance. 
 
 Their
 
 ( '37 ) 
 
 Their principles always go to the extreme. They 
 who go with the principles of the ancient Whigs, \ 
 which are thofe contained in Mr, Burke's book, never 
 can go too far. They may indeed flop fhort of fome 
 hazardous and ambiguous excellence, which they will 
 be taught to poftpone to any reafonable degree of 
 good they may actually polFefs. The opinions 
 maintained in that book never can lead to an ex- 
 treme, becaufe their foundation is laid in an op- 
 pofition to extremes. The foundation of govern- 
 ment is there laid, not in imaginary rights of men, 
 (which at beft is a confufion of judicial with civil 
 principles) but in political convenience, and in human 
 nature j either as that nature is univerfal, or as it is 
 modified by locakhabits and focial aptitudes. The 
 foundation of government, (thofe who have read 
 that book will recollect) is laid in a provifion for our 
 wants, and in a conformity to our duties ; it is to 
 purvey for the one; it is to enforce the other. 
 Thefe doctrines do of themfelves gravitate to a mid- 
 dle point, or to fome point near a middle. They 
 fuppofe indeed a certain portion ofliberty to be eflfen- 
 tial to all good government ; but they infer that this 
 liberty is to be blended into the government; to 
 harmonize with its forms and its rules; and to be 
 made fubordinate to its end. Thofe who are not 
 with that book are with its oppofite. For there 
 is no medium befides the medium itfelf. That 
 medium is not fuch, becaufe it is found there; but 
 it is found there, becaufe it is conformable to truth 
 and nature. In this we do not follow the author; 
 but we and the author travel together upon the fame 
 fafe and middle path. 
 
 What has been laid of the Roman empire, is at 
 lead as true of the Bricifli conftitution {c Offingen- 
 " forum annorum fortuna, difciplinaque, compages h*c 
 t( coaluit\ qu< conve/li fine convellenttum exitio non 
 ." This Britifh conftitution has not been 
 
 ftruck
 
 ( '3* ) 
 
 ilruck out at an heat by a fet of prefumptuous men, 
 like the aflembly of pettifoggers run mad in Paris. 
 
 " 'Tis not the hafty produft of a day, 
 ' But the well-ripen'd fruit of wife delay." 
 
 It is the refult of the thoughts of many minds, in 
 many ages. It is no fimple, no fuperficial thing, nor 
 to be eftimated by fuperficial underftandings. An- 
 ignorant man, who is not fool enough to meddle 
 with his clock, is however fufficiently confident 
 to think he can fafely take to pieces, and put 
 together at his pleafure, a moral machine of another 
 guife importance and complexity, compofed of far 
 other wheels, and Tprings, and balances, and coun- 
 teracting and co-operating powfrs. Men little 
 think how immorally they act in rafhly med- 
 dling with what they do not underftand. Their de- 
 lufive good intention is no fort of excufe for their pre- 
 fumption. They who truly mean well mud be fear- 
 ful of acting ill. The Britifh conftitution may have 
 its advantages pointed out to wile and reflecting 
 minds ; but it is of too high an order of excellence 
 to be adapted to thofe which are common. It takes 
 in too many views, it makes too many combina- 
 tions, to be fo much as comprehended by Ih allow and 
 fuperficial underftandings. Profound thinkers will 
 know it in its reafon and fpirit. The lefs enquiring will 
 recognize it in their feelings and their experience. 
 They will thank God they have a ftandard, which, in 
 the moft effential point of this great concern, will put 
 them on a par with the moft wife and knowing. 
 
 If we do not take to our aid the foregone ftudies 
 of men reputed intelligent and learned, we ihall be 
 always beginners. But in effect, men muft learn 
 fpmewhere ; and the new teachers mean no more 
 than what they effect, that is, to deprive men of 
 the benefit of the collected wifdom of mankind, and 
 to make them blind difciples of their own particu- 
 lar
 
 ( '39 ) 
 
 lar prefumption. Talk to thefe deluded creatures, 
 (all the difciples and moil of the mailers) who are 
 taught to think themfelves fo newly fitted up and 
 furnifhed, and you will find nothing in their 
 houfes but the refufe of Knaves Acre ; nothing 
 but the rotten iluff, worn out in the fervice of 
 delufion and fedition in all ages, and which being 
 newly furbifhed up, patched, and varniihed, ferves 
 well enough for chofe who being unacquainted 
 with the conflift which has always been main- 
 tained between the fenfe and the qonfenfe of man- 
 kind, know nothing of the former exiftence and: 
 the antient refutation of the fame follies. It is near 
 two thoufand years fmce it has been obferved, that 
 thefe devices of ambition, avarice, and turbulence, 
 were antiquated. They are, indeed, the mofl an- 
 tient of all common places ; common places, fome- 
 times of good and neceffary caufes ; more frequent- 
 ly of the worft, but which decide upon neither. 
 Eadem Jemper caufa, libido et avaritia t et mutan- 
 darum rerum amor. Ceterum libertas et fyecioja no- 
 mina pretexuntur -, nee qiiifquam alienum Jermtium^ et 
 dominatiomm fibi conciiphit y ut non eadem ifta vocabula 
 ufiirparet. 
 
 Rational and experienced men, tolerably well know, 
 and have always known, how to diftinguiih between 
 true and falfe liberty ; and between the genuine 
 adherence and the falfe pretence to what is true. 
 But none, except thofe who are profoundly iludied, 
 can comprehend the elaborate contrivance of a fa- 
 bric fitted to unite private and public liberty with 
 public force, with order, with peace, with juflice, 
 and, above all, with the inftitutions formed for 
 beilowing permanence and liability through ages, 
 upon this invaluable whole. 
 
 Place, for inilance, before your eyes, fuch a man 
 as Montefquieu. Think of a genius not born in 
 every country, or every time; a man gifted by nature 
 
 with
 
 with a penetrating aquiline eye ; with a judgment 
 prepared with the moft extenfive erudition ; with 
 an herculean robuftnefs of mind, and nerves not to 
 be broken with labour j a man who could fpend 
 twenty year in one purfuit. Think of a man, like 
 the univerfal patriarch in Milton (who had drawn up 
 before him in his prophetic viiion the whole fmes 
 of the generations which were to iffue from his loins) 
 a man capable of placing in review, after having 
 brought together, from the eaft, rhe weft, the north, 
 and the fouth, from the coarfenefs of the rudeft bar- 
 barifm to the moft refined and fu'otf -. civilization, all 
 the fchemes of government which had ever prevailed 
 amongft mankind, weighing, meafuring, collaring, 
 and comparing them all, joining fact with theory, 
 and calling into council, upon all this infinite aiicm- 
 blage of things, all the fpeculations which have fa- 
 tigued the underflandings of profound reafoners in all 
 times ! Let us then confider, that all thefe were 
 but fo many preparatory freps to qualify a man, 
 and fuch a man, tinctured with no national preju- 
 dice, with no domeftic affection, to admire, and 
 to hold out to the admiration of mankind the 
 conftitution of England ! And J(hall we Engiiihmen 
 revoke to fuch a fuit ? Shall we, when fo much 
 more than he has produced, remains flill to be under- 
 ftood and admired, inftead of keeping ourfelves in 
 the fchools of real fcience, choofe for our teachers 
 men incapable of being taught, whofe only claim to 
 know is, that they have never doubted ; from whom 
 we can learn nothing but their own indocilityj 
 who would teach us to fcorn what in the filence of 
 cur hearts we ought to adore ? 
 
 Different from them are all the great critics. 
 They have taught us one effential rule. I think the 
 excellent and philofophic artift, a true judge, as well 
 as a perfect follower of nature, Sir Jofhua Reynolds 
 has fomewhere applied it, or fomething like it, in 
 
 his
 
 his own profeflioh. It is this, That if ever we 
 fhoukl find ourfelves difpofed not to admire thofe 
 writers or artifts, Livy and Virgil for inftance, Ra- 
 phael or Michael Angelo, whom all the learned had 
 admired, not to follow our osvn fancies, but to ftudy 
 them until we know how and what we ought to ad- 
 mire ; and if we cannot arrive at this combination ot 
 admiration with knowledge, rather to believe that we 
 are dull, than that the reit of the world has been im- 
 pofed on. It is as good a rule, at lead, with regard 
 to this admired conftitution. We ought to under- 
 ftand it according to our meafure ; and to venerate 
 where we are not able prefently to comprehend. 
 
 Such admirers were our fathers to whom we owe 
 this fplendid inheritance. Let us improve it with 
 zeal, but with fear. Let us follow our anceftors,men 
 not without a rational, though without an exclufive 
 confidence in themfelves j who, by refpefting the 
 reafon of others, who, by looking backward as well 
 as forward, by the modefty as well as by the energy 
 of their minds, went on, infenfibly drawing this 
 conftitution nearer and nearer to its perfection by 
 never departing from its fundamental principles, nor 
 introducing any amendment which had not a fub- 
 fifiing root in the laws, conftitution, and ufages of 
 the kingdom. Let thofe who have the truft of 
 political or of natural authority ever keep watch 
 againft the defperate enterprizes of innovation : Let 
 even their benevolence be fortified and armed. 
 They have before their eyes the example of a mo- 
 narch, infuked, degraded, confined, depofed ; his 
 family difperfed, fcattered, imprifoned; his wife in- 
 fulted to his face like the vileft of the fex, by the 
 vileft of all populace j himfelf three times dragged 
 by- thele wretches in an infamous triumph , his 
 children torn from him, in violation of the firft right 
 of nature, and given into the tuition of the moll 
 defperate and impious of the leaders of defperate 
 9 and
 
 and impious clubs ; his revenues dilapidated and 
 plundered ; his magiftrates murdered j his clergy 
 profcribed, perfecuted, famifhed ; his nobility de- 
 graded in their rank, undone in their fortunes, fu- 
 gitives in their perfons ; his armies corrupted and 
 ruined ; his whole people impoverifhed, difunitedj 
 difiblved ; whilft through the bars of hL prifon, and 
 amidft the bayonets of his keepers, he hears the tu- 
 mult of two conflicting factions, equally wicked and 
 abandoned, who agree in principles, in difpofitions^ 
 and in objects, but who tear each other to pieces 
 about the moft effectual means of obtaining their 
 common end ; the one contending to preferve for 
 a while his name and his perfon, the more eafily to 
 deftroy the royal authority the other clamouring 
 to cut off the name, the perfon, and the monarchy 
 Together, by one facrilegious execution. All this 
 accumulation of calamity, the greateft that ever 
 fell upon one man, has fallen upon his head, be- 
 caufe he had left his virtues unguarded by caution j 
 becaufe he was not taught that where power is con- 
 cerned, he who will confer benefits mud take fecu- 
 rity againft ingratitude. 
 
 I have ftated the calamities which have fallen 
 upon a great prince and nation, becaufe they were 
 not alarmed at the approach of danger, and be- 
 caufe, what commonly happens to men furprifed, 
 they loft all refource when they were caught in it. 
 When I fpeak of danger, I certainly mean to ad- 
 drefs myfelf to thofe who confider the prevalence 
 of the new Whig doctrines as an evil. 
 
 The Whigs of this day have before them, in 
 this Appeal, their conftitutional anceftors : They 
 have the doctors of the modern fchool. They 
 will choofe for themfelves. The author of the 
 ReBections has chofen for himfelf. If a new or- 
 der is coming on, and all the political opinions 
 mud pals away as dreams, which our anceftors 
 x have
 
 ( 143 ) 
 
 have worfhipped as revelations, I fay for him, that 
 he would rather be the laft (as certainly he is the 
 leaft) of that race of men, than the firft and great- 
 eft of thofe who have coined to themfelves Whig \ 
 principles from a French die, unknown, to the im J 
 prefs of our fathers in the conftitution. 
 
 FINIS.
 
 9082
 
 University of California 
 
 SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 305 De Neve Drive - Parking Lot 17 Box 951388 
 
 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90095-1388 
 Return this material to the library from which it was borrowed.