Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

grossly mistaken, these questions carry a deci. sive answer along with them.

Having cleared the freedom of the press from a restraint equally unnecessary and illegal, I return to the use which has been made of it in the present publication.

National reflections, I confess, are not justified in theory, nor upon any general principles. To know how well they are deserved, and how justly they have been applied, we must have the evidence of facts before us. We must be conversant with the Scots in private life, and observe their principles of acting to us, and to each other; the characteristic prudence, the selfish nationality, the indefatigable smile, the persevering assiduity, the everlasting profession of a discreet and moderate resentment. If the instance were not too important for an experiment, it might not be amiss to confide a little in their integrity. Without any abstract reasoning upon causes and effects, we shall soon be convinced, by experience, that the Scots transplanted from their own country, are always a distinct and separate body from the people who receive them. In other settlements, they only love themselves: in England, they cordially love themselves, and as cordially hate their neighbours. For the remainder of their good qualities I must appeal to the reader's observation, unless he will accept of my Lord Barring ton's authority in a letter to the late Lord Melcombe, published by Mr. Lee: he expresses himself with a truth and accuracy not very common in his Lordship's lucubrations. And

"Cockburn, like most of his countrymen, is as "abject to those above him, as he is insolent "to those below him." I am far from meaning to impeach the articles of the union. If the true spirit of those articies were religiously adhered to, we should not see such a multitude of Scotch commoners in the lower-house, as representatives of English boroughs, while not a single Scotch borough is ever represented by an Englishman. We should not see English peerages given to Scotch ladies, or to the elder sons of Scotch peers, and the number of sixteen doubled and trebled by a scandalous evasion of the act of union. If it should ever be thought adviseable to dissolve an act, the violation or

observance of which is invariably directed by the advantage and interest of the Scots, I shall say very sincerely with Sir Edward Coke, "When poor England stood alone, and had not "the access of another kingdom, and yet had "more and as potent enemies as it now hath, 66 yet the King of England prevailed."

Some opinion may now be expected from me, upon a point of equal delicacy to the writer, and hazard to the printer. When the character of the Chief Magistrate is in question, more must be understood than may be safely expressed. If it be really a part of our constitution, and not a mere dictum of the law, that the king can do no wrong, it is not the only instance, in the wisest of human institutions, where theory is at variance with practice. That the Sovereign of this country is not amenable to any form of trial known to the laws, is unquestionable. But exemption from punishment is a singular privilege annexed to the royal character, and no way excludes the possibility of deserving it. How long, and to what extent, a King of England may be protected by the forms, when he violates the spirit, of the constitution, deserves to be considered. A mistake in this matter proved fatal to Charles and his son. For my own part, far from thinking that the King can do no wrong, far from suffering myself to be deterred or imposed upon by the language of forms, in oppo. sition to the substantial evidence of truth, if it were my misfortune to live under the inauspicious reign of a Prince, whose whole life was employed in one base, contemptible struggle with the free spirit of his people, or in the detestable endeavour to corrupt their moral principles, I would not scruple to declare to him, "Sir, you alone are the author of the greatest "wrong to your subjects and to yourself. "stead of reigning in the hearts of your people, "instead of commanding their lives and for "tunes through the medium of their affections, "has not the strength of the crown, whether "influence or prerogative, been uniformly ex"erted, for eleven years together, to support a "narrow pitiful system of government, which "defeats itself, and answers no one purpose of

• Parliamentary History, vol. vii, p. 460.

In

"real power, profit or personal satisfaction to you f With the greatest unappropriated re"venue of any prince in Europe, have we not

seen you reduced to such vile and sordid dis"tresses, as would have conducted any other "man to a prison? With a great military, and "the greatest naval power in the known world, "have not foreign nations repeatedly insulted "you with impunity? Is it not notorious, that "the vast revenues, extorted from the labour "and industry of your subjects, and given you "to do honour to yourself and to the nation, "are dissipated in corrupting their representa"tives? Are you a Prince of the house of "Hanover, and do you exclude all the leading "Whig families from your councils? Do you "profess to govern according to law, and is it "consistent with that profession, to impart your "confidence and affection to those men only "who, though now, perhaps, detached from "the desperate cause of the Pretender, are "marked in this country by an hereditary at"tachment to high and arbitrary principles of "government? Are you so infatuated as to "take the sense of your people from the repre⚫sentation of ministers, or from the shouts of a "mob, notoriously hired to surround your coach, "or stationed at a theatre? And if you are in "reality, that public man, that King, that Ma"gistrate, which these questions suppose you "to be, is it any answer to your people, to say,

That, among your domestics, you are good"humoured: that to one lady, you are faithful; "that to your children, you are indulgent? Sir, "the man who addresses you in these terms, is "your best friend. He would willingly hazard

his life in defence of your title to the crown; "and, if power be your object, will still show

you how possible it is for a King of England, "by the noblest means, to be the most absolute "Prince in Europe. You have no enemies, Sir, but those who persuade you to aim at power without right, and who think it flattery to tell you, that the character of King dissolves the natural relation between guilt and punish"ment."

1 cannot conceive that there is a heart so callous, or an understanding so depraved, as to attend to a discourse of this nature, and not to

feel the force of it. But where is the man, among those who have access to the closet, resalute and honest enough to deliver it? The liberty of the press is our only resource. It will command an audience, when every honest man in the kingdom is excluded. This glorious privilege may be a security to the King, as well as a resource to his people. Had there been no star-chamber, there would have been no rebellion against Charles the First. The constant censure and admonition of the press would have corrected his conduct, prevented a civil war, and saved him from an ignominious death. I am no friend to the doctrine of precedents, exclusive of right; though lawyers often tell us, that, whatever has been once done, may lawfully be done again. I shall conclude this Preface with a quotation, applicable to the subject, from a foreign writer, whose Essay on the English Constitution I beg leave to recommend to the public, as a performance deep, solid, and ingenious.

"In short, whoever considers what it is that "constitutes the moving principle of what we "call great affairs, and the invincible sensibility "of man to the opinion of his fellow-creatures, "will not hesitate to affirm, that if it were pos "sible for the liberty of the press to exist in a "despotic government, and (what is not less "difficult) for it to exist without changing the "constitution, this liberty of the press would "alone form a counterpoise to the power of the "prince. If, for example, in an empire of the "east, a sanctuary could be found, which, ren"dered respectable by the ancient religion of "the people, might insure safety to those who "should bring thither their observations of any "kind; and that, from thence, printed papers "should issue, which, under a certain seal, "might be equally respected; and which, in "their daily appearance, should examine and "freely discuss the conduct of the cadis, the "bashaws, the vizir, the divan, and the sultan himself; that would introduce immediately some degree of liberty."

Monsieur de Lolme.

LETTERS OF JUNIUS.

LETTER I.

ADDRESSED TO THE

Printer of the Public Advertiser.

SIR,

January 21, 1769. THE submission of a free people to the execu tive authority of government, is no more than a compliance with laws which they themselves have enacted. While the national honour is firmly maintained abroad, and while justice is impartially administered at home, the obedience of the subject will be voluntary, cheerful, and, I might almost say, unlimited. A generous nation is grateful even for the preservation of its rights, and willingly extends the respect due to the office of a good prince into an affection for his person. Loyalty, in the heart and understanding of an Englishman, is a rational attachment to the guardian of the laws. Prejudices and passion have sometimes carried it to a criminal length, and, whatever foreigners may imagine, we know that Englishmen have erred as much in a mistaken zeal for particular persons and families, as they ever did in defence of what they thought most dear and interesting to themselves.

It naturally fills us with resentment, to see such a temper insulted and abused. In reading the history of a free people, whose rights have been invaded, we are interested in their cause. Our own feelings tell us how long they ought to have submitted, and at what moment it would have been treachery to themselves not to have resisted. How much warmer will be our resentment, if experience should bring the fatal example home to ourselves!

B

« ElőzőTovább »