the control must be granted to be imaginary. That oppofition of intereft, which is fuppofed to preclude all confpiracy against the people, can no longer exift. That this is the state of England, the molt fuperficial obfervation muft evince. The great proprietors, titled and untitled, poffefs the whole force of both Houses of Par. liament that is not immediately dependent on the Crown. The Peers have a great influence in the Houfe of Commons. All political parties are formed by a confederacy of the members of both Houfes. The Court party, by the influence of the Crown, acting equally in both, fupported by a part of the independent Ariftocracy, The oppofition by the remainder of the Ariftocracy, whether Commoners or Lords. Here is every fymptom of collusion: no veftige of control. The only cafe, indeed, where it could arife, is where the intereft of the Peerage is diftinct from that of the other great proprietors. But these separate interests are few and paltry, and have established fo feeble a check, that the history of England will not afford one undifputed example of pretended control. The rejection of the Peerage Bill of George the First is urged with great triumph by De Lolme. There it feems the Commons rejected the bill, purely actuated by their fears, that the Ariftocracy would acquire a ftrength from a limitation on the number of Peers, deftructive of that balance of power which forms the Constitution. It is unfortunate that political theorists do not confult the biftory as well as the letter of legislative proceedings. It is a matter of perfect notoriety, that the rejection of that bill was occafioned by the feceffion of Sir Robert (then Mr.) Walpole from the Cabinet, and the oppofition of him and his party to it was merely as a ministerial meafure. The debate was not guided by any general legislative principles. It was fimply an experiment on the ftrength of two parties contending for power. The reader will, no doubt, feel a high reverence for the Conftitutional principles of that Parliament, when he is informed that to it we owe the Septennial A&t! In fact, if fuch a check existed in much greater force it would be of little importance to the general question." Through a diverfity of members and interefts," if we may believe Mr. Burke, "GENERAL LIBERTY had as many fecurities as there were separate views in the several orders." And if by GENERAL LIBERTY be understood that of the collective body of thefe orders, the pofition is undeniable. But if it means what it ought to mean, the liberty of mankind, nothing can be more falfe. The higher clafs in fociety, whatever be their names, of nobles, bishops, judges, or poffeffors of landed and commercial wealth, have ever been united by a common view, far more powerful than thofe petty repugnancies of intereft to which this variety of defcription may give rife. Whatever may be the little conflicts of ecclefiaftical with fecular, of commercial with landed opulence, they have one common intereft to preferve the elevated place to which the focial order has raised them. There never was, or will be, in civilized fociety, but two grand interefts, that of the RICH and that of the POOR. The differences of intereft among the feveral claffes of the rich will be ever too flender to preclude their confpiracy against mankind. In the mean time, the the privileges of their feveral ORDERS will be guarded, and Mr. Burke will decide that GENERAL LIBERTY is fecure!-It is thus that a Polish Palatine harangues in the Diet on the liberty of Poland, without a blush at the recollection of his bondfmen.-It is thus that the Affembly of Jamaica, amid the flavery and the fale of MEN, profanely appeal to the principles of freedom. It is thus that Antiquity, with her pretended political philofophy, "cannot boaft one philofopher who queftioned the juftice of fervitude, nor with all her pretended public virtue, one philanthropist who deplored the mifery of flaves.' The legislative negative allowed to the King of France, is next difcuffed, and fhewn to be a more important and efficacious prerogative than that which is allowed to our King; though Mr. M. doubts the utility of any fpecies of royal veto, either abfolute or fufpenfive. On the queftion of Peace and War, he approves of the decifion of the National Affembly, and juftifies them, at fome length, for not vefting fo dangerous a power in the hands of an individual. On the subject of the Organization of the Army, we meet with fome truly admirable remarks: An army, with the fentiments and habits which it is the fyftem of modern Europe to infpire, is not only hoftile to freedom, but incompatible with it. A body of men poffeffed of the whole force of a state, and fyftematically divested of every civil fentiment, is a monfter that no rational polity can tolerate, and every circumftance clearly fhews it to be the object of French legislation to deftroy it, not as a body of armed citizens - but as an ARMY. This is wifely, and gradually to be effected. Two grand operations conduct to itarming the people, and unfoldiering the army. The first of thefe meafures, the formation of the municipal army, certainly makes the nation independent of its military fervants. An army of four millions can never be coerced by one of a hundred and fifty thousand; neither can they have a feparate fentiment from the body of the nation, for they are the fame. Whence the horror of Mr. Burke at thus arming the nation, under the title of a municipal army, has arifen, it is even difficult to conjecture. Has it ceafed to be true, that the defence of a free State is only to be committed to its citizens? Are the long oppofition to a ftanding army in England, its tardy and jealous admiffion, and the perpetual clamour (at length illufively gratified) for a militia, to be exploded, as the gross and uncourtly fentiments of our unenlightened ancestors? The Affembly have put arms into the hands of the citizens, and by that means have for ever precluded both their own defpotifm and the ufurpation of the army. "They must rule," fays Mr. Burke," by an army." If that be their fyftem, their policy is ftill more wretched than he has reprefented it. For they fyftematically ftrengthen those who are to be governed, while they fyftematically enfeeble their engine of To ufe the language of M. Calonne, "armant le peuple & popularifant l'armée." government. government. They fortify the people, and weaken the army. They reduce them felves and their army to dependence on the nation, whom alone they ftrengthen and arm. A military democracy, if it means a deliberative body of foldiers, is the most execrable of tyrannies; but if it be understood to denote a popular government, where every citizen is disciplined and armed, it must then be pronounced to be the only free government which retains within itfelf the means of preservation. The profeffed foldiers, rendered impotent to any dangerous purpose by the ftrength of the municipal army, are by many other étremftances invited to throw off those abject and murderous habits which form the perfection of a modern foldier. In other States the foldiery were in general disfranchifed. They were too poor to be citizens. But in France a great part may enjoy the full rights of citizens. They are not then likely to facrifice their fuperior to their inferior capacity, or to elevate their military importance by committing political fuicide. They feel themselves fervile as foldiers, they are conscious of being fovereign as citizens. That diffufion of political knowledge among them, which is ridiculed and reprobated by Mr. Burke, is the only remedy that could have fortified them against the feduction of an afpiring Commander. That alone will teach them, that in lending themselves to his views, they fubmit themselves to his yoke; that to deftroy the liberty of others, they must facrifice their own. They have, indeed, gigantic ftrength, and they may crush their fellow-citizens, by dragging down the focial edifice, but they muft themselves be overwhelmed by its fall. THE An DESPOTISM OF ARMIES IS THE SLAVERY OF SOLDIERS. army cannot be strong enough to tyrannize, that is not itself cemented by the moft abfolute interior tyranny. The diffufion of these great truths will perpetuate, as they have produced, a revolution in the character of the French foldiery. They will, therefore, in the fenfe of defpotic difciplinarians, ceafe to be an army; and while the foldiers affume the fentiments of citizens, and the citizens acquire the difcipline of foldiers, the military character will be diffufed, and the military profeffion annihilated. Military services will be the duty of all citizens, and the trade of none. To this object their fyftem evidently and inevitably tends. If a feparate body of citizens, as an army, is deemed neceffary, it will probably be formed by rotation. A certain period of military fervice will be exacted from every citizen, and may, as in ancient Republics, be made a neceffary qualification for the purfuit of civil honours. In the prefent ftate of France, the national guard is a fufficient bulwark against the army, fhould it relapfe into its ancient habits; and in its future ftate, no body fufceptible of fuch dangerous habits feems kely to exift. "Gallos quoque in bellis floruiffe audivimus," may indeed be the fentiment of our children. The glory of heroifm, and the fplendor of conqueft, have long enough been the patrimony of that great nation. It is time that it should seek a new glory, and a new fplendor, under the fhade of freedom, in cultivating the arts of peace, and extending the happiness of humanity.' From From the laft fection of the work, in which Mr. Mackintosh, with great ability, juftifies the conduct of the English admirers of the French Revolution, it is the lefs neceffary to extract any thing; as we have made many previous felections on fubjects of domestic politics, from the works of Mr. M.'s predeceffors in the controverfy; and as the fpecimens which we have already given of the prefent performance, will, we doubt not, induce our readers to perufe the whole of a work which we warmly recommend to their notice. Pear. Art. 24. A bort Review of the Trade of the Eaft India Company, between the Years 1785 and 1790; taken from Papers laid before the House of Commons during the two laft Seffions of Parliament. By a Proprietor. 4to. pp. 26. 25. Debrett. 1791. WITHOUT entering into the particulars of inveftments, freight, cuftoms, and charges, the refult of the tables introduced in this pamphlet is to fhew, that the East India trade, which employs a fum of twenty millions fterling, exclufive of the value of ninety-five chartered fhips of ninety thousand tons burden, not to be fitted for fea under one million and a half, and for freight of which near a million is annually paid to the owners; which pays in cuftoms upwards of five hundred thousand, in commiffion and charges at home three hundred and fifty thousand, in dividends and intereft above five hundred thousand, and exports annually of British commodities, including private adventures, to the value of one million of pounds fterling;'-that this immenfe concern has not, for the last five years, yielded prime coft, but has been conducted to the pofitive lofs of 1,302,7041.! If figures are really as obftinate as they are currently deemed, how comes it to pafs that oppofite parties can draw direct contrary conclufions from the fame arithmetical premises?-To have recourfe to this convenient if once more, if the ftatement in this publication ftands uncontroverted, the author may well add,' what appears in these sheets will probably fuffice to fhew the danger of relying upon eftimates of commercial operations, or upon ftatements drawn to serve a prefent purpose, and which are followed up immediately by refolutions and votes of affistance.' MR. HASTINGS'S TRIAL. N. Art. 25. A Comparative Review of the Adminiftration of Mr. Haftings and Mr. Dundas, in War and in Peace. By Ralph Broome, Elq. 8vo. PP. 43. IS. Stockdale. 1791. Major Scott and Captain Broome are certainly very troublesome men, in thus continually teazing our minifters with argumenta ad homines: bomines: but great men know how to treat little men, when they grow impertinent, by going fteadily on, without deigning to appear conscious even that fuch men exift. N. Art. 26. A Letter from Major Scott, to Philip Francis, Efq. 8vo; pp. 73. 2s. 6d. Debrett. 1791. The preface to this letter, and the letter elf, contain a most fevere review of the glaring inconfiftences in the conduct of minifters, and in the managers of the profecution against Mr. Haftings. As for us old obfervers of men and things, this fluctuation of opinions and principles, in order to fuit occafions, is so much a matter of courfe among ftatefmen, that we rank it with the omnium rerum viciffitudo of old Wing the almanac maker. FRENCH REVOLUTION. N. Art. 27. Answer to the Reflections of the Right Hon. Edmund Burke. From the fize of this little pamphlet, it will be readily concluded, that it cannot be a complete reply to Mr. Burke's book. It does not profefs to be fuch. M. Depont only means to rectify a few of Mr. Burke's errors in fact and in reafoning; among which, one, not the least important, is the affertion, that freedom of fpeech is not granted, by the National Affembly, to perfons who oppofe the revolution. Here M. Depont obferves, that it is a wellknown fact, that a member of that defcription propofed with vehemence, in that very Affembly, a plan for a counter-revolution; and that he was heard with coolness. Another error of magnitude, is that of confounding the revolution with the conftitution. The former, (that is, the fubverfion of the old government,) fays M. Depont, was the work of the people, and was both neoeffary and juftifable. The latter, (that is, the new inftitutions,) was the work of the National Affembly, and from unavoidable circumftances of embarraffment, is imperfect, and can only be judged by experience, and matured by time. Mr. Burke is charged with a fimilar error, of no lefs confequence in reafoning, when he confounds the French nation with a vile herd of ruffians, who are guilty of outrages; and with titled ruffians, ftill more vile, by whom they are encouraged, fupported, and employed. M. Depont concludes with the pleafing intelligence, that the constitution advances to its proper point; whatever may be faid, it will be completed; and an enlightened fpirit makes fuch progrefs, that the return of troubles appears very improbable. The ariftocrats are defeated, the ruffians are extinguished, the demagogues are difregarded, and there is the fairest profpect, that equal and impartial liberty will be established and preferved, in fpite of all its enemies.' Left any of our readers fhould be unacquainted with the cir cumftance, we think it proper to mention, that M. Depont is the young gentleman to whom Mr. Burke addreffed his celebrated" Reflections." |