XXIII. 1790. of our Revolution, as it is called, and that of BOOK France, are just the reverse of each other in almost every particular, and in the whole spirit of the transaction. What we did was in truth and substance not a revolution made, but prevented. We took solid securities; we settled doubtful' questions; we corrected anomalies in our law. In the stable fundamental parts of our constitution we made no revolution; no, nor any alteration at all. We did not impair the monarchy. The nation kept the same ranks, the same subordinations, the same franchises, the same order in the law, the revenue, and the magistracy-the same lords, the same commons, the same corporations, the same electors. The church was not impaired: Her estates, her majesty, her splendor, her orders and gradations, continued the same: she was preserved in her full efficiency, and cleared only of that intolerance which was her weakness and disgrace. Was little done then, because a revolution was not made in the constitution? No-every thing was done; because we commenced with reparation, not with ruin. Instead of lying in a sort of epileptic trance, exposed to the pity or derision of the world for her wild, ridiculous, convulsive movements, the state flourished; Great Britain rose above the standard of her former self. All the energies of the country were awakened, and a new æra of prosperity commenced, which still continues, XXIII. 1790. -Vindi Mr. Fox and the friends of BOOK not only unimpaired, but receiving growth and improvement under the wasting hand of time." Mr. Fox, notwithstanding his personal regard cated by and friendship for Mr. Burke, thought it necessary, in justice to the rectitude and dignity of his the people. own character, to declare "his total dissent from opinions so hostile to the general principles of liberty; and which he was grieved to hear from the lips of a man whom he loved and revered-by whose precepts he had been taught, by whose example he had been animated to engage in their defence. He vindicated the conduct of the French army, in refusing to act against their fellow-citizens, from the aspersions of Mr. Burke, who had charged them with abetting an abominable sedition by mutiny and desertion-declaring that, if he could view a standing military force with less constitutional jealousy than before, it was owing to the noble spirit manifested by the French army, who, on becoming soldiers, had proved that they did not forfeit their character as citizens, and would not act as the mere instruments of a despot. The scenes of bloodshed and cruelty that had been acted in France, no man (said Mr. Fox) could hear of without lamenting. But when the grievous tyranny that the people had so long groaned under was considered, the excesses they had committed in their efforts to shake off the yoke could not excite our astonishment so much as our regret. XXIII. 1790. And as to the contrast which Mr. Burke had ex- BOOK hibited, respecting the mode in which the two revolutions in England and France were conducted, it must be remembered, that the situation of the two kingdoms was totally different. In France, a free constitution was to be created: in England, it wanted only to be secured. If the fabric of government in England suffered less alteration, it was because it required less alteration. If a general destruction of the antient constitution had taken place in France, it was because the whole system was radically hostile to liberty, and that every part of it breathed the direful spirit of despotism." Mr. Sheridan, with still less reserve and attention to personal respect, reprobated the political sentiments which had been that night advanced by Mr. Burke. "The people of France, (said Mr. Sheridan) it is true, have committed acts of barbarity and bloodshed which have justly excited indignation and abhorrence. That detestation and abhorrence however are still more justly due to the government of France prior to the revolution, the tyranny and oppression of which had deprived the people of the rights of men and of citizens, and driven them to that degree of desperation which could alone have incited those unexampled acts of cruelty and revenge which had been practised in the first agitation and violence of the effort to regain their freedom. Could it be expected, that BOOK XXIII. 1790. men in their situation should be capable of acting with the same moderation and the same attention to humanity and sensibility as characterised freemen? Were the mad outrages of a mob an adequate ground for branding the National Assembly with the stigma of being a bloody, ferocious, and tyrannical democracy? It was a libel on that illustrious body thus to describe them. A better con. stitution than that which actually existed it is allowed that France had a right to expect. From whom were they to receive it? From the bounty of the monarch at the head of his courtiers? or from the patriotism of marshal Broglio at the head of the army? From the faint and feeble cries emitted from the dark dungeons of the Bastille? or from the influence and energy of that spirit which had laid the Bastille in ashes? The people, unhappily misguided as they doubtless were in particular instances, had however acted rightly in their great object. They had placed the supreme authority in those hands by whom alone it could be justly exercised, and had reduced their sovereign to the rank which properly belongs to kings-that of administrator of the laws established by the free consent of the community." The house appeared, during a long and most interesting discussion, greatly agitated by this shock and conflict of opinions. But Mr. Pitt preserved a cautious and po litic silence as to the merits of the revolution which XXIII. 1790. had taken place; venturing nevertheless to pro- BOOK nounce that the present convulsions in France must sooner or later terminate in general harmony and regular order, and lavishly applauding Mr. Burke, for the zealous and seasonable attachment he had displayed to the principles of the British constitution. The spirit by which the court was now actuated still more evidently appeared in their conduct relative to the dissenters, who had signalized themselves by the exuberance of their joy at the late events in France. Since the favorable decision of the late session relative to the repeal of the Test Laws, they had not ceased their efforts by every means in their power to increase the number of their friends in the house of commons. Provincial meetings were convened by them in every part of the kingdom; and resolutions, framed in terms for the most part harsh and revolting, passed, expressive of their sentiments of the injustice and oppression under which they suffered. And in contemplation of the approaching general election, they had even the gross indiscretion, in many of their public votes, to recommend a marked preference in favor of those who had shewn themselves the friends and advocates of equal and universal liberty. In the stead Mr. Fox's of Mr. Beaufoy, a friend and partisan of the mi-a repeal of nister, Mr. Fox was now solicited to move the house a third time for the repeal of the acts in motion for the test: |