Sidor som bilder
PDF
ePub

nifterial flaves, "That private perfons are incompetent "judges of the conduct of their governors?" Is the brain of a ftatefman made of materials different from that of a citizen? Or has the former a Socratic dæmon [b] to confult? Does not the historic page lie open to both alike? From what other fountain can the minifter draw his political wisdom? What then gives him his boafted fuperiority; or on what does he found his pretenfions to myftery? The fubjects in a free country have a right to confider themselves as on the fame foot with the stockholders in a trading company. If a proprietor of East-India stock fees the directors pursuing measures detrimental to the intereft of the company, he will not, I believe, hesitate long about his being a competent, or an incompetent judge of directorial politics. He will foon make ENGLAND ring with his complaints. The fame every fubject has a right to do, whenever the conduct of the minifiry becomes juftly fufpicious. It has long been a problem in this free country, How "to punish libels against government, fo as to pre

[ocr errors]

ferve the liberty of the subject inviolate." Is there any better way of folving this difficulty than the Alexandrian [c] What need of punishment at all? If a miniftry will depend, for general approbation, on the manifeft rectitude of their conduct, what have they to fear from libellers? Befides, does punishment vindicate the conduct of a miniftry? docs it not, on the contrary, render it only the more fufpicious?

[b] SOCRATES pretended to have a fort of god (familiar fpirit, we should call him) who attended him, and gave him many ufeful hints. CRITO MINOR.

[c] ALEXANDER cut the Gordian knot, which he could not untie. CRITO MINOR.

fufpicious? Does a true church need perfecution to fupport it? What did LUTHER answer to thofe, who informed him, that his book was burnt, by order of the Pope?" It is eafier," fays the Reformer, "to "burn it twice, than to answer it once."

BUT, it will be faid, "Why is the character and con"duct of a minifter to be mifreprefented without penal "vindication, any more than that of a private person ?" The answer is obvious. The public has nothing to do with the character or conduct of a private perfon. If he misbehaves, the damage is particular; not general. If, on the contrary, a states-man proves faithless to his trust, all are fufferers. If we may freely and publicly enquire into his conduct (and furely lofers should have leave to fpeak) redrefs may be obtained. If we are afraid of declaring our doubts; if we fpeak, or write, under the dread of warrants and attachments; we shall probably find it necessary so prudently to mince the matter, that no one may take the alarm; and then the mischief goes on till it becomes irremediable.

IT has likewife been urged, "Ought not afperfion to be reftrained? ought not fcurrility to be punished ?" I anfwer, In all cafes, where the cure is not like to prove worfe than the disease, undoubtedly they ought. But, if government is to claim a power of inflicting pains and penalties on whatever they please to call afperfion and fcurrility, where will the neceflary examination into their conduct be, when we come to have a tyrant on the throne, or a knot of tyrants in the administration? Are minifters afraid of having their conduct enquired into ? Then let them (as the old woman faid to King PYRRHUS, when he told her, he had not leisure to hear her peti

[blocks in formation]

tion) quit their places to others, who fear not their country's trial. If minifters will give us fecurity, that they will fill their places as they ought, that is, with common integrity, we will infure them, that, without either warrant or attachment, they fhall be treated with decency, esteem, and gratitude; and that aspersion and fcurrility, if, by chance, any should rise against them, fhall be more effectually fuppreffed, and more severely punished, by the public difapprobation or neglect, than by any inflictions from government, confiftent with liberty. It is the too general misconduct of states-men, and the arts of partifans, that excite in the people fufpicions, fometimes indeed groundless; and render it the more difficult for the best-intentioned to keep matters tolerably quiet. Whoever, therefore, undertakes to govern, or administer government, in a free country, must not be furprized to fee the many behave, from time to time, as if it were an amusement to them to walk a little way out of their wits, and, after a short turn, walk back again. Let him caft an eye along the marginal contents of the hiftories of free states both of ancient and modern times, and he will obferve this kind of sport almoft continually going on, unlefs where the intervention of foreign wars obliges a divided people to unite for their common safety. The independent people, however, by which I here understand all thofe inhabitants of a country, who are unconcerned in the public adminiftration of affairs, are, in the furious agitations of party infeparable from freedom, lefs blameable than pitiable. Like the waves of an eccan worked up to a tempeft, their commotion is tremendous but, like the ocean, till roused by the winds, they are of themselves calm, till provoked by oppreffion, or worked up by the heads of parties, who, generally speaking, mean much more the gratification

of

of their own ambition, or avarice, than any thing tending to national emolument.

The ancient heathen GREEKS and ROMANS no fooner fell out among themselves, than they divided into two armies, for every man was a foldier; and immediately the unhappy native country was deluged with gore. In ENGLAND, it is our chriftian cuftom, on occafions of party altercation, to fhed much more ink than blood. And indeed, it is happy, that our rage vents itself in this manner. For, if all the papers and pamphlets which our political contefts have produced, had been printed with the latter inftead of the former, (ebeu quanta ftrages!) the grafs would by this time have been growing in our ftreets. I fuppofe the works of our political writers on both fides, fince the Revolulution, would, if thrown together, have, by this time, formed a monument to English patriotism [d], not much inferior in bulk to mount Parnaffus. The great pyramid, which covers about a dozen acres of land, would, I am convinced, appear but a mole-hill, in comparison with that printed mountain [e].

YET during the above period of almoft eighty years, it has, if I recollect rightly, happened only twice, to be of any material advantage to this nation, whether one or the other of the contending parties prevailed. The difgrace of the Tory miniftry, and establishment of the Whigs at the acceffion of K. GEORGE I. was of capital confequence to these kingdoms. The other adB 3 vantageous

[d] Lege partyism, meo periculo. BENTL. SECUND. [e] The author alludes here, I fuppofe, to the famous written mountains, as they are called, in the Defert, thought to have been covered with inscriptions by the Ifraelites in their journey. CRITO MINOR.

vantageous change of hands was the downfal of that miniftry, whofe pufillanimous conduct occafioned the loffes of MINORCA and OSWEGO, and who, by im. porting HESSIANS and HANOVERIANS, for our defence against our flat-bottomed enemy (afterwards, as well as often before, proved to be fo much inferior to us) gave reafon to fufpect them of a defign to terminate the late war in the fame inglorious manner, as the preceding. At these two periods, and no other fince the Revolution, as far as I can remember, the nation was fubftantially benefited by changes of men, because, indeed, the changes of men produced important changes, of meafures.

BUT has it not been generally feen, that the good people of this kingdom have fuffered themfelves to be excited to as great a rage on account of the placing, or difplacing of a set of grandees, as if fomewhat of fupreme importance to the national welfare had been tranfacted? How often have we been thrown into all the confufion of Babel, on the report of one patriot's being turned out, and another's being turned in! and how often have we been calmed again, on finding, that the new hero was kicked down ftairs, and the old one kicked up into his former place! Is it not a little unaccountable, that we should be fo anxious about the advantage of those who care fo little about ours! For what is party, but (as our humourous writer fums it up in a few words) "the madness of many for the gain of

66 a few?"

IN free countries (to the honour of human nature be it fpoken) nothing is fo trifling, but it may become occafionally

« FöregåendeFortsätt »