to imply that his opinion was changed, or, at least, that it was become less favourable. Again, should he proceed to engage himself in a different party, it would still further tend to throw disgrace on the former; and, without clear and satisfactory reasons for his conduct, there would be some ground to complain of his injustice towards his first associates, if not likewise of his injustice towards the public, by transferring his credit and assistance to those who might be less disposed or capable to advance the general welfare.

(2.) The consideration last suggested may deserve a more distinct notice. The world in general is very liberal in promise, but very sparing in performance. When an honest citizen contemplates some patriotic band at a distance, nothing can be more flattering to his wishes, as nothing can appear more favourable to the welfare of his country. Purity of principle, disinterested views, unanimous counsels, are the promi nent features which attract his attention, and command his reverence; he hastens to

list himself under such a standard; but then the scene is changed. Instead of the immaculate and compacted body of patriotism which he had imagined, he finds corruption of principle, interested views, and divided counsels; or if there be one point in which the whole confederacy is agreed, it is, to turn out the present administration, and to occupy their places. Disgusted and repelled by the discovery, he betakes himself to a second or a third party, where he still finds the same selfish and jarring principles at work, and perhaps with increased depravity. All this should warn him against a shifting humour, and dispose him to abide by the party in which he is already engaged; at least not to change it for another, without very strong grounds to believe that he shall change for the better.

(3.) Again: A frequent change of party is too much for an ordinary citizen to support; it must destroy his credit with every party, and also with the public at large. It is only, as we have observed, for a few eminent men, whose dignity and

influence is from themselves, to sustain such ́ a conduct. Such men indeed can never properly be ranked with any party, though they may lend themselves occasionally to all; they shed a lustre on others which they receive from none, and, whether separate or associated, shine the same in their own brightness. This honourable distinction the common patriot should not seek to emulate; he must shine with a borrowed light; alone and insulated he shines no more. It ought therefore to be his business, as a public man, to choose well his party; to co-operate with it in the manner which he judges most conducive to the general benefit; and never to desert it upon rash or interested considerations. Thus will he act with a degree of credit to himself, and with most advantage to his country.

3. The third rule I would suggest is, To guard against the spirit of a party.

(1.) First let it be observed, that this precaution is necessary in all parties and communities, whether religious or civil. Each has its characteristic bent or temper by

which it is distinguished. In regard to religion, there is no church without some tendency;-in its government, either to laxity or intolerance;-in its ritual, to a negligent indecorum, or to a superstitious nicety ;-in its devotion, to warmth and enthusiasm, or to coldness and indifference;—and in its doctrine, to high and overstrained notions, or to mere deism and natural religion. Among the regular orders of the Romish church, which are so many distinct communities, some are prone to fanaticism, others to a cruel superstitious discipline, and many to a lazy indulgence. In regard to politics, (which are more immediately our subject) a spirit of despotism lurks in a monarchy; of anarchy in a republic; of discord and petty tyranny in an aristocracy. Under a mixed government, all these spirits are in conflict, and prevail by turns. Nay, there is no association in trade or manufactures, in arts or science, no guild or corporation without this esprit de corps, which is sure to operate upon every member, according to his individual character, and particular circumstances.

(2.) Another reason for guarding against the spirit of which we are speaking, is, that its influence is no less powerful than it is extensive. Man is very much the product of his situation in whatever capacity we view him, civil, religious, or literary. The instances are extremely few of those who rise above the genius of their age or country; or even above that of the particular body or society, with which they regularly act or associate. Notwithstanding any smaller individual differences, the family likeness remains. The monk retains the spirit of his order, and the liveryman of the cominon-hall; not only the lawyer, the physician, and divine, but also men of ordinary callings, receive a certain turn and character from their several professions. We can therefore have no cause to wonder if the same law extend itself over the political world; if the courtier and the patriot are much the same in all ages; and if the spirit of every state-party, like some mighty vortex, bears along with it almost all those who are placed within the sphere of its influence.