The question is upon the method of procuring and adminiftering them. In that deliberation I shall always advise to call in the aid of the farmer and the physician, rather than the profeffor of metaphyfics.

The fcience of constructing a commonwealth, or renovating it, or reforming it, is, like every other experimental science, not to be taught à priori. Nor is it a fhort experience that can instruct us in that practical fcience; because the real effects of moral causes are not always immediate; but that which in the first instance is prejudicial may be excellent in its remoter operation; and its excellence may arife even from the ill effects it produces in the beginning. The reverse also happens; and very plausible schemes, with very pleasing commencements, have often shameful and lamentable conclufions. In states there are often some obfcure and almost latent causes, things which appear at first view of little moment, on which a very great part of its profperity or adversity may most effentially depend. The science of government being therefore so practical in itself, and intended for fuch practical purposes, a matter which requires experience, and even more experience than any perfon can gain in his whole life, however fagacious and observing he may be, it is with infinite caution that any man ought to venture upon pulling down an edifice which has answered in any tolerable degree for ages the common purposes of fociety, or of building it up again, without having models and patterns of approved utility before his eyes.

Thefe

These metaphyfic rights entering into common life, like rays of light which pierce into a denfe medium, are, by the laws of nature, refracted from their straight line. Indeed in the gross and complicated mass of human paffions and concerns, the primitive rights of men undergo such a variety of refractions and reflections, that it becomes abfurd to talk of them as if they continued in the fimplicity of their original direction. The nature of man is intricate; the objects of society are of the greatest possible complexity; and therefore no simple disposition or direction of power can be fuitable either to man's nature, or to the quality of his affairs. When I hear the fimplicity of contrivance aimed at and boafted of in any new political constitutions, I am at no loss to decide that the artificers are grossly ignorant of their trade, or totally negligent of their duty. The simple governments are fundamentally defective, to say no worse of them. If you were to contemplate society in but one point of view, all these simple modes of polity are infinitely captivating. In effect each would anfwer its fingle end much more perfectly than the more complex is able to attain all its complex purposes. But it is better that the whole should be imperfectly and anomalously answered, than that, while some parts are provided for with great exactness, others might be totally neglected, or perhaps materially injured, by the over-care of a favourite member.

The pretended rights of these theorists are all extremes; and in proportion as they are metaphysically phyfically true, they are morally and politically false. The rights of men are in a fort of middle, incapable of definition, but not impossible to be difcerned. The rights of men in governments are their advantages; and these are often in balances between differences of good; in compromises sometimes between good and evil, and sometimes, between evil and evil. Political reafon is a computing principle; adding, fubtracting, multiplying, and dividing, morally and not metaphyfically or mathematically, true moral denominations.

By these theorists the right of the people is almost always fophistically confounded with their power. The body of the community, whenever it can come to act, can meet with no effectual resistance; but till power and right are the fame, the whole body of them has no right inconfiftent with virtue, and the first of all virtues, prudence. Men have no right to what is not reasonable, and to what is not for their benefit; for though a pleasant writer faid, Liceat perire poetis, when one of them, in cold blood, is faid to have leaped into the flames of a volcanic revolution, Ardentem frigidus Ætnam infiluit, I confider such a frolic rather as an unjustifiable poetic licence, than as one of the franchises of Parnassus; and whether he were poet or divine, or politician that chose to exercise this kind of right, I think that more wife, because more charitable thoughts would urge me rather to fave the man, than to preserve his brazen flippers as the monuments of his folly.

The

The kind of anniversary sermons, to which a great part of what I write refers, if men are not shamed out of their present course, in commemorating the fact, will cheat many out of the principles, and deprive them of the benefits of the Revolution they commemorate. I confess to you, Sir, I never liked this continual talk of resistance and revolution, or the practice of making the extreme medicine of the constitution its daily bread. It renders the habit of society dangerously valetudinary: it is taking periodical doses of mercury fublimate, and swallowing down repeated provocatives of cantharides to our love of liberty.

This distemper of remedy, grown habitual, relaxes and wears out, by a vulgar and prostituted use, the spring of that spirit which is to be exerted on great occafions. It was in the most patient period of Roman fervitude that themes of tyrannicide made the ordinary exercise of boys at school-cum perimit savos classis numerofa tyrannos. In the ordinary state of things, it produces in a country like ours the worst effects, even on the cause of that liberty which it abuses with the diffoluteness of an extravagant speculation. Almost all the high-bred republicans of my time have, after a short space, become the most decided, thorough-paced courtiers; they foon left the business of a tedious, moderate, but practical resistance to those of us whom, in the pride and intoxication of their theories, they have flighted, as not much better than tories. Hypocrify, of course, delights in the

most sublime speculations; for, never intending to go beyond speculation, it costs nothing to have it magnificent. But even in cafes where rather levity than fraud was to be suspected in these ranting speculations, the issue has been much the fame. These profeffors, finding their extreme principles not applicable to cases which call only for a qualified, or, as I may say, civil and legal resistance, in such cafes employ no resistance at all. It is with them a war or a revolution, or it is nothing. Finding their schemes of politics not adapted to the state of the world in which they live, they often come to think lightly of all public principle; and are ready, on their part, to abandon for a very trivial intereft what they find of very trivial value. Some indeed are of more steady and perfevering natures; but these are eager politicians out of parliament, who have little to tempt them to abandon their favourite projects. They have fome change in the church or state, or both, constantly in their view. When that is the cafe, they are always bad citizens, and perfectly unfure connexions. For, confidering their speculative designs as of infinite value, and the actual arrangement of the state as of no estimation, they are at best indifferent about it. They fee no merit in the good, and no fault in the vicious management of public affairs; they rather rejoice in the latter, as more propitious to revolution. They fee no merit or demerit in any man, or any action, or any political principle, any further than as they may forward or retard their design

of

: