to that, according to the different ideas which they might form of the powers and qualifications of thofe around them. A common agreement, therefore, between the people as the governed, and a felect few as governors, in which all men fhall unite, cannot be taken for granted, nor be prefumed to exift; until it be explicitly and openly avowed, and until those who are to be the common governors, be defignated by fome public mark of diftinction. Confequently, fuch contract cannot be made the foundation of civil government.

Of the Vindicator's vehemence of cenfure, we have already given several specimens. He is no less violent in his commendation. He declares he never read any book whatsoever more fatisfactory in point of argument, to his poor judgment, than Mr. Burke's Reflections; and, as to Mr. Burke himself, 'were the government of the country entrusted to his care,' the Vindicator could almoft difpenfe with his right of think. ing for himself on the means of being politically free.' In a word, the Vindicator writes like a young man, and is every where in extremes. When a few more years have passed over his head, he will probably find, that the language of extremes is not the language of truth. Pear.

ART. XVI. Rights of Man: being an Answer to Mr. Burke's Attack on the French Revolution. By Thomas Paine, Secretary for Foreign Affairs to Congrefs in the American War, and Author of the Work intitled " Common Senfe." 8vo. pp. 162. 35. Jordan. 1791.

MUCH as this pamphlet has been read and commended, we are very far from thinking it the beft that has appeared on that fide of the question which the author espouses. That it fhould find admirers we are not furprifed. In all parties, there will be men who overshoot the medium of truth; and who will be so pleased with any boldness and intrepidity of afsertion, in defence of their own caufe, that they will overlook every defect which accompanies it. Perhaps this is more likely to happen, where, as in the prefent cafe, the principles of the party are juft and right on the whole; and where the party itfelf is the most numerous, or, as it is called, the popular party: but these extravagant admirers are never the wifeft men in any party*.

Without admiring Mr. Paine's pamphlet, however, we are very ready to admit, that it contains many plain truths, often "Wife men," fays Mr. Burke, alluding to the Nil admirari of the poet, and of the philofopher, "wife men, as fuch, are not admirers."

REV. MAY 1791.

G

expreffed

expreffed in forcible, though feldom in accurate, language. It may be divided into two parts, narrative, and argumentative. The first, which contains an account of the circumflances immediately preceding the demolition of the Baftile; and of the events of the 5th and 6th of October 1789; and alfo traces the rife and progrefs of the French Revolution, from its origin to its eftablishment by the declaration of rights; is the best part; and derives additional value from the author's refidence in France, and connection with Frenchmen, particularly with M. de la Fayette. In the argumentative part, Mr. Paine's chief merit is that of placing" common fenfe" in a strong and ftriking light.

When he attempts to reafon fcientifically, on the first principles of government; on the rights which men retain, and on thofe which they give up, when they enter into fociety; on the unity of man, as he affectedly calls it; on government confidered as a contrivance of human wifdom; on hereditary fucceffion; and on the fuperiority of a republic to a monarchy; he reasons very fuperficially. He contends that we have no conftitution, in this country; because it cannot be produced, and quoted, article by article, from fome vifible, legal record! He might juft as well contend that there was no common law in this country, because it is a lex non fcripta. Though we have not fo much of the John Bull in us, as to believe that our conftitution, in every particular, is the best that ever did, or that ever will, or that poffibly can, exist, and that merely because it is ours*: yet we think, not only that we have a con-

In many particulars, we think the new conftitution of France much better than our own; and especially in those most important points, which relate to the election and duration of the reprefentative body, and to the entire feparation of religion from politics. On the fubje&t of this laft article, we fee with concern the pertinacious ftiffness of our civil and ecclefiaftical rulers. We have long felt for the cramped religion, the violated morality, and the infaared confciences, of our countrymen. We now feel for the honour of our country; and cannot forbear to remark, that if we of this island fill perfevere in impofing our tefts, and our fubfcriptions, after the unnatural and unhallowed alliance of church and ftate is no lefs wifely than virtuously diffolved, in a country of Catholics; it will be difgraceful to us as Proteftants. If we continue to impede and confound and embarrass the kingdom of heaven, by mixing it with the kingdom of this world, after they have been fevered, by an affembly, which fome among us do not fcruple (with what juftice, or liberality, we leave it to themfelves to fettle,) to ftigmatife as an aflembly of infidels and atheifts; it will be difgraceful to us, not only as Protefiants, but as the difciples of Chrift, and as the fervants of the living God.

Atitution,

1

fitution, but that we have a very good one too; if it were properly administered, and rendered as perfect in practice, as it is in theory-but then we also think, that much, perhaps all, of its virtue depends on this IF-and probably much of its ftability likewife: -for unless we seriously attend to this IF; and more especially, unless the reprefentative part of our conftitution be restored to its integrity, and become real, efficient, and independent, inftead of being nominal, fubfervient, and inftrumental; and unless the growing fungus of the national debt and oppreffive revenue, be reduced; who fhall fay how foon we may be driven into what Mr. Burke calls "a cafe of war," and what others call a revolution ;-and in fuch a cafe, who shall answer for the permanence of the prefent conftitution * ?

Though

* As Shakspeare faid, on another occafion, so say we, on this: "Much virtue in If;" and, with him, we add too, that, "your If is the only peace-maker." Some Tory, or, perhaps, fome Whig, for these are much the fame now-a-days, may be ready, with Richard of Glocefter, to retort: "Talk'ft thou to me of Ifs?-Thou art a traitor:-off with his head:"-but, thank Heaven! he must now confine his retort to a whifper. Whatever may be the will of fome, we exult in being able to fay, that there now exists no man, ecclefiaftical nor civil, in England nor in France, who has the power to execute fuch menaces. Oh! Liberty, thou goddess heavenly bright! fhed thy kindly influence on our neigbours, but forfake not, we beseech thee, our native nook of earth;" which,

blame worthy as it is,

With all its lofs of empire, and though squeez'd

By public exigence till annual food

Fails for the craving hunger of the State;

and though deftitute of "that humane addrefs and sweetness which politer France receives from Nature's bounty," yet," chief among the nations!" if thou wilt but reftore thy conftitution to its integrity; and preferve thy liberty;

-We, for the fake

Of that one feature, can be well content,
Disgraced as thou hast been, poor as thou art,
To feek no fublunary reft befide.

But once enflaved, farewell! We could endure
Chains no where patiently; and chains at home,
Where we are free by birthright, not at all.
Then what were left of roughness in the grain
Of British natures, wanting its excufe,
That it belongs to freemen, would difguft

And fhock us. We should then with double pain
Feel all the rigour of thy fickle clime;

Though we think, however, that Mr. Paine does not excel in scientific investigation, yet when he adheres to his "common fenfe," and contents himfelf with attacking the abfurdity and fophiftry, which have nothing to fupport them but the refined fubtleties of fyftem, or the blind prejudices of ancient cuftom; he is generally very fuccefsful. Thus, for inftance, he well expofes the weakness of the doctrine which is made the foundation of Mr. Burke's whole fyftem of civil government, viz. that men are bound for ever by the decisions of their ancestors; and have no right to go contrary to precedent, and chufe a conftitution for themfelves: but muft adhere irrevocably to that which they inherit, be it good or be it bad.

66

There never did, there never will, and there never can exift a parliament, or any defcription of men, or any generation of men, in any country, poffeffed of the right or the power of binding and controuling pofterity to the end of time," or of commanding for ever how the world fhall be governed, or who fhall govern it; and therefore all fuch clauses, acts, or declarations, by which the makers of them attempt to do what they have neither the right nor the power to do, nor the power to execute, are in themselves null and void. Every age and generation must be as free to act for itself, in all cafes, as the ages and generations which preceded it. The vanity and prefumption of governing beyond the grave, is the most ridiculous and infolent of all tyrannies. Man has no property in man; neither has any generation a property in the generations which are to follow. The parliament or the people of 1688, or of any other period, had no more right to difpofe of the people of the prefent day, or to bind or to controul them in any shape whatever, than the parliament or the people of the prefent day have to difpofe of, bind, or controul, thofe who are to live a hundred or a thousand years hence. Every generation is and must be competent to all the purposes which its occafions require. It is the living, and not the dead, that are to be accommodated. When man ceases to be, his power and his wants ceafe with him; and having no longer any participation in the concerns of this world, he has no longer any authority in directing who fhall be its governors, or how its government fhall be organized, or how administered.'

Those who have quitted the world, and those who are not yet arrived at it, are as remote from each other as the utmost ftretch of mortal imagination can conceive. What poffible obligation then can exift between them, what rule or principle can be laid down,

And if we must bewail the bleffing loft

For which our Hampdens and our Sidneys bled,
We would at leaft bewail it under fkies
Milder, among a people lefs austere,

In fcenes which having never known us free,
Would not reproach us with the lofs we felt.

COWPER.

that

that two non-entities, the one out of existence, and the other not in, and who never can meet in this world, that the one fhould controul the other to the end of time?'—

The error of thofe who reafon by precedents drawn from antiquity, refpecting the rights of man, is, that they do not go far enough into antiquity. They do not go the whole way. They ftop in fome of the intermediate ftages of an hundred or a thoufand years, and produce what was then done as a rule for the prefent day. This is no authority at all. If we travel till farther into antiquity, we fhall find a direct contrary opinion and practice prevailing; and if antiquity is to be authority, a thoufand fuch authorities may be produced, fucceffively contradicting each other: but if we proceed on, we shall at last come out right; we fhall come to the time when man came from the hand of his Maker. What was he then? Man. Man was his high and only title, and a higher cannot be given him.'

We are now got at the origin of man, and at the origin of his rights. As to the manner in which the world has been governed from that day to this, it is no farther any concern of ours than to make a proper ufe of the errors or the improvements which the hiftory of it prefents. Those who lived a hundred or a thousand years ago, were then moderns as we are now. They had their ancients, and those ancients had others, and we alfo fhall be ancients in our turn. If the mere name of antiquity is to govern in the affairs of life, the people who are to live an hundred or a thousand years hence, may as well take us for a precedent, as we make a precedent of those who lived an hundred or a thousand years ago. The fact is, that portions of antiquity, by proving every thing, establish nothing. It is authority against authority all the way, till we come to the divine origin of the rights of man at the creation. Here our enquiries find a refting-place, and our reafon finds a home. difpute about the rights of man had arofe at the diftance of an hundred years from the creation, it is to this fource of authority they must have referred, and it is to the fame fource of authority that we muft now refer.'

After bringing down the main pillars of the Right Hon. Gentleman's grand and decorous pile, and laying them in the duft; this leveller, as he, no doubt, will be deemed, thus rudely defaces the Corinthian capitals:

The French conftitution fays, There shall be no titles; and of confequence, all that clafs of equivocal generation, which in fome countries is called "ariftocracy," and in others "nobility," is done away, and the peer is exalted into MAN.

Titles are but nick-names, and every nick-name is a title, The thing is perfectly harmless in itself, but it marks a fort of foppery in the human character which degrades it. It renders man into the diminutive of man in things which are great, and the counterfeit of woman in things which are little. It talks about its fine blue ribbon like a girl, and fhews its new garter like a child. A certain writer of fome antiquity, fays, "When I was a child, I

G 3

thought