LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE ADDRESSERS, ON THE LATE PROCLAMATION.

COULD I have commanded circumſtances with a wiſh, I know not of any that would have more generally promoted the progreſs of knowledge, than the late Proclamation, and the numerous rotten Borough and Corporation Ad⯑dreſſes thereon. They have not only ſerved as advertiſements, but they have excited a ſpirit of enquiry into principles of government, and a de⯑ſire to read the RIGHTS OF MAN, in places, where that ſpirit and that work were before un⯑known.

The people of England, wearied and ſtunned with parties, and alternately deceived by each, had almoſt reſigned the prerogative of thinking. Even curioſity had expired, and a univerſal langour had ſpread itſelf over the land. The oppoſition [4]was viſibly no other that a conteſt for power, whilſt the maſs of the nation ſtood torpidly by as the prize.

In this hopeleſs ſtate of things, the Firſt Part of RIGHT OF MAN made its appearance. It had to combat with a ſtrange mixture of prejudice and indifference; it ſtood expoſed to every ſpecies of newſpaper abuſe; and beſides this, it had to remove the obſtructions which Mr. Burke's rude and out⯑rageous attack on the French Revolution had art⯑fully raiſed.

But how eaſily does even the moſt illiterate reader diſtinguiſh the ſpontaneous ſenſations of the heart, from the laboured productions of the brain. Truth, whenever it can fully appear, is a thing ſo naturally familiar to the mind, that an acquaintance commences at firſt ſight. No ar⯑tificial light, yet diſcovered, can diſplay all the properties of day-light; ſo neither can the beſt invented fiction fill the mind with every con⯑viction which truth begets.

To overthrow Mr. Burke's fallacious work was ſcarcely the operation of a day. Even the pha⯑lanx of Placemen and Penſioners, who had given the tone to the multitude, by clamouring forth his political fame, became ſuddenly ſilent; and the final event to himſelf has been, that as he roſe like a rocket, he fell like the ſtick.

It ſeldom happens, that the mind reſts ſatisfied with the ſimple detection of error or impoſition.— Once put into motion, that motion ſoon becomes [5]accelerated: where it had intended to ſtop, it diſcovers new reaſons to proceed, and renews and continues the purſuit far beyond the limits it firſt preſcribed to itſelf.—Thus it has happened to the people of England. From a detection of Mr. Burke's incoherent rhapſodies, and diſtorted facts, they began an enquiry into firſt principles of Go⯑vernment, whilſt himſelf, like an object left far behind, became inviſible and forgotten.

Much as the Firſt Part of RIGHTS OF MAN impreſſed at its firſt appearance, the progreſſive mind ſoon diſcovered that it did not go far enough. It detected errors; it expoſed abſurdities; it ſhook the fabric of political ſuperſtition; it generated new ideas; but it did not produce a regular ſyſtem of principles in the room of thoſe which it diſ⯑placed. And, if I may gueſs at the mind of the Government-party, they beheld it as an unexpected gale that would ſoon blow over, and they forbore, like ſailors in threatening weather, to whiſtle, leſt they ſhould encreaſe the wind. Every thing, on their part, was profound ſilence.

When the Second Part of ‘RIGHTS OF MAN, combining Principle and Practice,’ was prepar⯑ing to appear, they affected, for a while, to act with the ſame policy as before; but finding their ſilence had no more influence in ſtilling the pro⯑greſs of the work, than it would have in ſtopping the progreſs of time, they changed their plan, and affected to treat it with clamorous contempt. The Speech-making Placemen and Penſioners, [6]and Place-expectants, in both Houſes of Parlia⯑ment, the Outs as well as the Ins, repreſented it as a ſilly, inſignificant performance; as a work in⯑capable of producing any effect; as ſomething, which they were ſure the good ſenſe of the people would either deſpiſe or indignantly ſpurn; but ſuch was the overſtrained awkwardneſs with which they harangued and encouraged each other, that in the very act of declaring their confidence they betrayed their fears.

As moſt of the rotten Borough Addreſſers are obſcured in holes and corners throughout the country, and to whom a newſpaper arrives as rarely as an almanac, they moſt probably have not had the opportunity of knowing how this part of the farce (the original prelude to all the Addreſſes) has been acted. For their information, I will ſuſpend a while the more ſerious purpoſe of my Letter, and entertain them with two or three Speeches in the laſt Seſſion of Parliament, which will ſerve them for politics till Parliament meets again.

You muſt know, Gentlemen, that the Second Part of RIGHTS OF MAN, (the book againſt which you have been preſenting Addreſſes, though, it is moſt probable, that many of you did not know it) was to have come out preciſely at the time that Par⯑liament laſt met. It happened not to be publiſhed till a few days after. But as it was very well known that the book would ſhortly appear, the parliamen⯑tary Orators entered into a very cordial coalition to [7]cry the book down, and they began their attack by crying up the bleſſings of the Conſtitution.

Had it been your fate to have been there, you could not but have been moved at the heart-and-pockets-felt congratulations that paſſed between all the parties on this ſubject of bleſſings; for the Outs enjoy places and penſions and ſinecures as well as the Ins, and are as devoutly attached to the firm of the houſe.

One of the moſt conſpicuous of this motley groupe is the Clerk of the Court of King's Bench, who calls himſelf Lord Stormont. He is alſo called Juſtice General of Scotland, and Keeper of Scoon (an oppoſition man) and he draws from the public for theſe nominal offices, not leſs, as I am informed, than ſix thouſand pounds a year, and he is, moſt probably, at the trouble of count⯑ing the money, and ſigning a receipt, to ſhew, per⯑haps, that he is qualified to be Clerk as well as Juſtice. He ſpoke as follows: ^*

‘THAT we ſhall all be unanimous, in ex⯑preſſing our attachment to the conſtitution of theſe realms I am confident. It is a ſubject upon which there can be no divided opinion in this houſe. I do not pretend to be deep read in the knowledge of the Conſtitution, but I take upon me to ſay, that from the extent of my knowledge (for I have ſo many thouſands a year for nothing) it appears to me, that from the period of the Revolution, for it was [8]by no means created then, it has been, both in theory and practice, the wiſeſt ſyſtem that ever was formed. I never was (he means he never was till now) a dealer in political cant. My life has not been occupied in that way, but the ſpecu⯑lations of late years ſeem to have taken a turn, for which I cannot account. When I came into public life, the political pamphlets of the time, however they might be charged with the heat and violence of parties, were agreed in ex⯑tolling the radical beauties of the Conſtitution itſelf. I remember (he means he has for⯑gotton) a moſt captivating eulogium on its charms by Lord Bolingbroke, where he re⯑commends his readers to contemplate it in all its aſpects, with the aſſurance that it would be found more eſtimable the more it was ſeen. I do not recollect his preciſe words, but I wiſh that men who write upon theſe ſub⯑jects would take this for their model, inſtead of the political pamphlets, which I am told, are now in circulation, (ſuch, I ſuppoſe, as Rights of Man)—pamphlets which I have not read, and whoſe purport I know only by report, (he means, perhaps, by the noiſe they make.) This, however, I am ſure, that pamphlets tending to unſettle the public reverence for the conſtitution, will have very little influence. They can do very little harm —for (by the bye, he is no dealer in political cant) the Engliſh are a ſober-thinking people, and are more intelligent, more ſolid, more ſteady in their [9]opinions, than any people I ever had the fortune to ſee. (This is pretty well laid on, though, for a new beginner.) But if there ſhould ever come a time when the propagation of thoſe doctrines ſhould agitate the public mind, I am ſure, for every one of your Lordſhips. that no attack will be made on the conſtitution, from which it is truly ſaid that we derive all our proſperity, with⯑out raiſing every one of your Lordſhips to its ſupport. It will then be found that there is no difference among us, but that we are all deter⯑mined to ſtand or fall together, in defence of the ineſtimable ſyſtem’—of places and penſions.

After Stormont, on the oppoſition ſide, ſat down, up roſe another noble Lord! on the miniſte⯑rial ſide, Grenville. This man ought to be as ſtrong in the back as a mule, or the ſire of a mule, or it would crack with the weight of places and offices. He roſe, however, without feeling any in⯑cumbrance, full maſter of his weight; and thus ſaid this noble Lord to t'other noble Lord!

‘The patriotic and manly manner in which the noble Lord has declared his ſentiments on the ſubject of the conſtitution, demands my cordial approbation. The noble Viſcount has proved, that however we may differ on par⯑ticular meaſures, amidſt all the jars and diſ⯑ſonance of parties, we are unanimous in princi⯑ple. There is a perfect and entire conſent (be⯑tween us) in the love and maintenance of the conſtitution as happily ſubſiſting. It muſt un⯑doubtedly [10]give your Lordſhips concern, to find, that the time is come! (heigh ho!) when there is propriety in theſe expreſſions of regard TO (O! O! O!) THE CONSTITUTION. And that there are men (confound—their—po-li-tics) who diſ⯑ſeminate doctrines hoſtile to the genuine ſpirit of our well balanced ſyſtem, (it is certainly well balanced when both ſides hold places and penſions at once.) I agree with the noble Viſ⯑count that they have not (I hope) much ſucceſs. I am convinced that there is no danger to be apprehended from their attempts: but it is truly important and conſolatary (to us place-men, I ſup⯑poſe) to know, that if there ſhould ever ariſe a ſerious alarm, there is but one ſpirit, one ſenſe, (and that ſenſe I preſume is not common ſenſe) and one determination in this houſe.’—which un⯑doubtedly is to hold all their places and penſions as long as they can.

Both thoſe ſpeeches (excepting the parts en⯑cloſed in parentheſes, which are added for the pur⯑poſe of illuſtration) are copied verbatim from the Morning Chronicle of the 1ſt of February laſt; and when the ſituation of the ſpeakers is conſider⯑ed, the one in the oppoſition, and the other in the miniſtry, and both of them living at the public ex⯑pence, by ſinecure, or nominal places and offices, it required a very unbluſhing front to be able to deliver them. Can thoſe men ſeriouſly ſuppoſe any nation to be ſo completely blind as not to ſee through them? Can Stormont imagine that the [11] political cant, with which he has larded his ha⯑rangue, will conceal the craft? Does he not know that there never was a cover large enough to hide itſelf? Or can Grenville believe, that his credit with the public encreaſes with his avarice for places?

But, if theſe orators will accept a ſervice from me, in return for the alluſions they have made to the Rights of Man, I will make a ſpeech for either of them to deliver on the excellence of the conſti⯑tution, that ſhall be as much to the purpoſe as what they have ſpoken, or as Bolingbroke's capti⯑vating encomium. Here it is.

If the Clerk of the Court of King's Bench ſhould chuſe to be the orator of this luminous en⯑comium on the conſtitution, I hope he will get it well by heart before he attempt to deliver it, and not to have to apologize to Parliament, as he did in the caſe of Bolingbroke's encomium, for for⯑getting his leſſon; and, with this admonition, I leave him.

Having thus informed the Addreſſers of what paſſed at the meeting of Parliament, I return to take up the ſubject at the part where I broke off in order to introduce the preceding ſpeeches.

I was then ſtating, that the firſt policy of the Government party was ſilence, and the next, cla⯑morous contempt; but as people generally chooſe to read and judge for themſelves, the work ſtill went on, and the affectation of contempt, like the ſilence that preceded it, paſſed for nothing.

[18]Thus foiled in their ſecond ſcheme, their evil genius, like a will-with-a-wiſp, led them to a third; when all at once, as if it had been unfolded to them by a fortune-teller, or Mr. Dundas had diſcovered it by ſecond ſight, this once harmleſs, inſignificant book, without undergoing the altera⯑tion of a ſingle letter, became a moſt wicked and dangerous Libel. The whole Cabinet, like a ſhip's crew, became alarmed; all hands were piped upon deck, as if a conſpiracy of elements was forming around them, and out came the Proclamation and the Proſecution; and Addreſſes ſupplied the place of prayers.

Ye ſilly ſwains, thought I to myſelf, why do you torment yourſelves thus? The RIGHTS OF MAN is a book calmy and rationally written; why then are you ſo diſturbed? Did you ſee how little or how ſuſpicious ſuch conduct makes you appear, even cunning alone, had you no other faculty, would huſh you into prudence. The plans, principles, and arguments, contained in that work, are placed before the eyes of the nation, and of the world, in a fair, open, and manly manner, and nothing more is neceſſary than to refute them. Do this, and the whole is done; but if ye cannot, ſo neither can ye ſupreſs the reading, nor convict the Author; for that Law, in the opinion of all good men, would convict itſelf, that ſhould condemn what cannot be refuted.

Having now ſhewn the Addreſſers the ſeveral ſtages of the buſineſs, prior to their being called [19]upon, like Caeſar in the Tyber, crying to Caſſius, "help, Caſſius, or I ſink!" I next come to remark on the policy of the Government, in promoting Addreſſes; on the conſequences naturally reſulting therefrom; and on the conduct of the perſons con⯑cerned.

With reſpect to the policy, it evidently carries with it every mark and feature of diſguiſed fear. And it will hereafter be placed in the hiſtory of extraordinary things, that a pamphlet ſhould be produced by an individual, unconnected with any ſect or party, and not ſeeking to make any, and almoſt a ſtranger in the land, that ſhould com⯑pleatly frighten a whole Government, and that in the midſt of its moſt triumphant ſecurity. Such a circumſtance cannot fail to prove, that either the pamphlet has irreſiſtible powers, or the Govern⯑ment very extraordinary defects, or both. The Nation exhibits no ſigns of fear at the Rights of Man; why then ſhould the Government, unleſs the intereſt of the two are really oppoſite to each other, and the ſecret is beginning to be known? That there are two diſtinct claſſes of men in the nation, thoſe who pay taxes, and thoſe who receive and live upon the taxes, is evident at firſt ſight; and when taxation is carried to exceſs, it cannot fail to diſunite thoſe two, and ſomething of this kind is now beginning to appear.

It is alſo curious to obſerve, amidſt all the fume and buſtle about Proclamations and Addreſſes, kept up by a few noiſy and intereſted men, how [20]little the maſs of the nation ſeem to care about either. They appear to me, by the indifference they ſhew, not to believe a word the Proclamation contains; and as to the Addreſſes, they travel to London with the ſilence of a funeral, and having announced their arrival in the Gazette, are depo⯑ſited with aſhes of their predeceſſors, and Mr. Dundas writes their hic jacet.

One of the beſt effects which the Proclamation, and its echo the Addreſſes have had, has been that of exciting and ſpreading curioſity; and it re⯑quires only a ſingle reflection to diſcover, that the object of all curioſity is knowledge. When the maſs of the nation ſaw that Placemen, Benſioners, and Borough-mongers, were the perſons that ſtood forward to promote Addreſſes, it could not fail to create ſuſpicious that the public good was not their object; that the character of the books, or writings, to which ſuch perſons obſcurely alluded, not daring to mention them, was directly contrary to what they deſcribed them to be, and that it was neceſſary that every man, for his own ſatisfaction, ſhould exerciſe his proper right, and read and judge for himſelf.

But how will the perſons who have been in⯑duced to read the Rights of Man, by the clamour that has been raiſed againſt it, be ſurprized to find, that, inſtead of a wicked, inflamatory work, in⯑ſtead of a licencious and profligate performance, it abounds with principles of government that are uncontrovertible—with arguments which every [21]reader will feel, are unanſwerable—with plans for the increaſe of commerce and manufactures—for the extinction of war—for the education of the children of the poor—for the comfortable ſupport of the aged and decayed perſons of both ſexes— for the relief of the army and navy, and, in ſhort, for the promotion of every thing that can benefit the moral, civil and political condition of Man.

Why, then, ſome calm obſerver will aſk, why is the work proſecuted, if theſe be the goodly mat⯑ters it contains? I will tell thee, friend; it contains alſo a plan for the reduction of Taxes, for leſſening the immenſe expences of Government, for abo⯑liſhing ſinecure Places and Penſions; and it pro⯑poſes applying the redundant taxes, that ſhall be ſaved by theſe reforms, to the purpoſes men⯑tioned in the former paragraph, inſtead of apply⯑ing them to the ſupport of idle and profligate Placemen and Penſioners.

Is it, then, any wonder that Placemen and Pen⯑ſioners, and the whole train of Court expectants, ſhould become the promoters of Addreſſes, Pro⯑clamations, and Proſecutions? or, is it any wonder that Corporations and rotten Boroughs, which are attacked and expoſed, both in the Firſt and Se⯑cond Parts of Rights of Man, as unjuſt monopolies and public nuiſances, ſhould join in the cavalcade? Yet theſe are the ſources from which Addreſſes have ſprung. Had not ſuch perſons come for⯑ward to oppoſe the Rights of Man, I ſhould have doubted the efficacy of my own writings: but [22]thoſe oppoſers have now proved to me, that the blow was well directed, and they have done it juſtice, by confeſſing the ſmart.

The principal deception in this buſineſs of Ad⯑dreſſes has been, that the promoters of them have not come forward in their proper characters. They have aſſumed to paſs themſelves upon the Public, as a part of the Public bearing a ſhare of the bur⯑then of Taxes, and acting for the public good; whereas, they are in general that part of it that adds to the public burthen, by living on the pro⯑duce of the public taxes. They are to the pub⯑lic what the locuſts are to the tree: the burthen would be leſs, and the proſperity would be greater, if they were ſhaken off.

"I do not come here," ſaid ONSLOW, at the Surry County meeting, ‘as Lord Lieutenant and Cuſtos Rotulorum of the county, but I come here as a plain country gentleman.’ The fact is, that he came there as what he was, and as no other, and conſequently he came as one of the beings I have been deſcribing. If it be the cha⯑racter of a gentleman to be fed by the public, as a pauper is by the pariſh, Onſlow has a fair claim to the title; and the ſame deſcription will ſuit the Duke of Richmond, who led the Addreſs at the Suſſex meeting.—He alſo may ſet up for a gen⯑tleman.

As to the meeting in the next adjoining county, (Kent) it was a ſcene of diſgrace. About two hundred perſons met, when a ſmall part of them [23]drew privately away from the reſt, and voted an Addreſs: the conſequence of which was, that they got together by the ears, and produced a riot in the very act of producing an Addreſs to prevent Riots.

That the Proclamation and the Addreſſes have failed of their intended effect, may be collected from the ſilence which the Government party it⯑ſelf obſerves. The number of Addreſſes has been weekly retailed in the Gazette; but the number of Addreſſers has been concealed. Several of the Addreſſes have been voted by not more than ten or twelve perſons; and a conſiderable number of them by not more than thirty. The whole num⯑ber of Addreſſes preſented at the time of writing this letter is three hundred and twenty, (rotten Boroughs and Corporations included) and even admitting, on an average, one hundred Addreſſers to each Addreſs, the whole number of Addreſſers would be but thirty-two thouſand, and nearly three months have been taken up in procuring this num⯑ber. That the ſucceſs of the Proclamation has been leſs than the ſucceſs of the Work it was in⯑tended to diſcourage, is a matter within my own knowledge; for a greater number of the cheap edition of the Firſt and ſecond Parts of RIGHT OF MAN has been ſold in the ſpace only of one month, than the whole number of Addreſſers (admitting them to be thirty-two thouſand) have amounted to in three months.

[24]It is a dangerous attempt in any Government to ſay to a Nation, "thou ſhalt not read." This is now done in Spain, and was formerly done under the old Government of France; but it ſerved to procure the downfal of the latter, and is ſubverting that of the former; and it will have the ſame ten⯑dency in all countries; because thought, by ſome means or other, is got abroad in the world, and cannot be reſtrained, though reading may.

If Rights of Man were a book that deſerved the vile deſcription which the promoters of the Ad⯑dreſs have given of it, why did not theſe men prove their charge, and ſatisfy the people, by pro⯑ducing it, and reading it publicly? This moſt certainly ought to have been done, and would alſo have been done, had they believed it would have anſwered their purpoſe. But the fact is, that the book contains truths, which thoſe time-ſervers dreaded to hear, and dreaded that the people ſhould know; and it is now following up the Ad⯑dreſſes in every part of the nation, and convicting them of falſhoods.

Among the unwarrantable proceedings to which the Proclamation has given riſe, the meetings of the Juſtices in ſeveral of the towns and counties ought to be noticed. Thoſe men have aſſumed to re-act the farce of General Warrants, and to ſuppreſs, by their own authority, whatever publi⯑cations they pleaſe. This is an attempt at power, equalled only by the conduct of the minor deſpots [25]of the moſt deſpotic governments in Europe, and yet thoſe Juſtices affect to call England a Free Country. But even this, perhaps, like the ſcheme for garriſoning the country, by building military barracks, is neceſſary to awaken the country to a ſenſe of its Rights, and, as ſuch, it will have a good effect.

Another part of the conduct of ſuch Juſtices has been, that of threatening to take away the li⯑cences from taverns and public-houſes, where the inhabitants of the neighbourhood aſſociated to read and diſcuſs the principles of Government, and to inform each other thereon. This, again, is ſimiliar to what is doing in Spain and Ruſſia; and the reflection which it cannot fail to ſuggeſt is, that the principles and conduct of any Govern⯑ment muſt be bad, when that Government dreads and ſtartles at diſcuſſion, and ſeeks ſecurity by a prevention of knowledge.

If the Government, or the Conſtitution, or by whatever name it be called, be that miracle of per⯑fection which the Proclamation and the Addreſſes have trumpeted it forth to be, it ought to have defied diſcuſſion and inveſtigation, inſtead of dreading it. Whereas, every attempt it makes, either by Proclamation, Proſecution, or Addreſs, to ſuppreſs inveſtigation, is a confeſſion that it feels itſelf unable to bear it. It is error only, and not truth, that ſhrinks from enquiry. All the numerous pamphlets, and all the newſpaper falſhood and abuſe, that have been publiſhed [26]againſt the "RIGHTS OF MAN," have fallen before it like pointleſs arrows; and, in like manner, would any work have fallen before the Conſtitution, had the Conſtitution, as it is called, been founded on as good political principles as thoſe on which the RIGHTS OF MAN is written.

It is a good Conſtitution for courtiers, placeman, penſioners, borough-holders, and the leaders of Parties, and theſe are the men that have been the active leaders of Addreſſes; but it is a bad Conſtitution for at leaſt ninety-nine parts of the nation out of an hundred, and this truth is every day making its way.

It is bad, firſt, because it entails upon the nation the unneceſſary expence of ſupporting three forms and ſyſtems of Government at once, namely, the monarchical, the ariſtocratical, and the democra⯑tical.

Secondly, becauſe it is impoſſible to unite ſuch a diſcordant compoſition by any other means than perpetual corruption; and therefore the corruption ſo loudly and ſo univerſally complained of, is no other than the natural conſequence of ſuch an unnatural compound of Governments; and in this conſiſts that excellence which the numerous herd of placemen and penſioners ſo loudly extol, and which, at the ſame time, occaſions that enormous load of taxes under which the reſt of the nation groans.

Among the maſs of national deluſions calculat⯑ed to amuſe and impoſe upon the multitude, the [27]ſtanding one has been, that of flattering them into taxes, by calling the Government, (or as they pleaſe to expreſs it, the Engliſh conſtitution) ‘the envy and the admiration of the world.’ Scarcely an Addreſs has been voted in which ſome of the ſpeakers have not uttered this hackneyed non⯑ſenſical falſhood.

Two Revolutions have taken place, thoſe of America and France; and both of them have re⯑jected the unnatural compounded ſyſtem of the Engliſh government. America has declared againſt all hereditary Government, and eſtabliſhed the re⯑preſentative ſyſtem of Government only. France has entirely rejected the ariſtocratical part, and is now diſcovering the abſurdity of the monarchical, and is approaching faſt to the repreſentative ſyſtem. On what ground, then, do thoſe men con⯑tinue a declaration, reſpecting what they call the envy and admiration of other nations, which the voluntary practice of ſuch nations, as have had the opportunity of eſtabliſhing Government, contra⯑dicts and falſifies. Will ſuch men never confine themſelves to truth? Will they be for ever the de⯑ceivers of the people?

But I will go farther, and ſhew, that, were Go⯑vernment now to begin in England, the people could not be brought to eſtabliſh the ſame ſyſtem they now ſubmit to.

In ſpeaking upon this ſubject (or on any other) on the pure ground of principle, antiquity and pre⯑cedent [28]ceaſe to be authority, and hoary-headed error loſes its effect. The reaſonableneſs and propriety of things muſt be examined abſtractedly from cuſtom and uſage; and in this point of view, the right which grows into practice to-day is as much a right, and as old in principle and theory, as if it had the cuſtomary ſanction of a thouſand ages. Principles have no connection with time, nor characters with names.

To ſay that the Government of this country is compoſed of King, Lords, and Commons, is the mere phraſeology of cuſtom. It is compoſed of men; and whoever the men be to whom the Go⯑vernment of any country is entruſted, they ought to be the beſt and wiſeſt that can be found, and if they are not ſo, they are not fit for the ſtation. A man derives no more excellence from the change of a name, or calling him King, or calling him Lord, than I ſhould do by changing my name from Thomas to George, or from Paine to Guelph, I ſhould not be a whit the more able to write a book, becauſe my name were altered; neither would any man, now called a King or a Lord, have a whit the more ſenſe than he now has, were he to call himſelf Thomas Paine.

As to the word "Commons," applied as it is in England, it is a term of degradation and re⯑proach, and ought to be aboliſhed. It is a term unknown in free countries.

But to the point.—Let us ſuppoſe that Govern⯑ment was now to begin in England, and that the plan of Government, offered to the nation for its [29]approbation or rejection, conſiſted of the following parts:

Firſt—That ſome one individual ſhould be taken from all the reſt of the nation, and to whom all the reſt ſhould ſwear obedience, and never be permitted to ſit down in his preſence, and that they ſhould give to him one million ſterling a year.—That the nation ſhould never after have power or authority to make laws but with his expreſs conſent, and that his ſons and his ſons' ſons, whether wiſe or fooliſh, good men or bad, fit or unfit, ſhould have the ſame power, and alſo the ſame money annually paid to them for ever.

Secondly—That there ſhould be two houſes of Legiſlators to aſſiſt in making laws, one of which ſhould, in the firſt inſtance, be entirely appointed by the aforeſaid perſon, and that their ſons and their ſons' ſons, whether wiſe or fooliſh, good men or bad, fit or unfit, ſhould for ever after be hereditary Legiſlators.

Thirdly—That the other houſe ſhould be choſen in the ſame manner as the houſe, now called the Houſe of Commons, is choſen, and ſhould be ſub⯑ject to the controul of the two aforeſaid hereditary Powers in all things.

It would be impoſſible to cram ſuch a farago of impoſition and abſurdity down the throat of this or any other nation, that were capable of reaſoning upon its rights and its intereſt.

They would aſk, in the firſt place, on what ground of right, or on what principle, ſuch ir⯑rational [30]and prepoſterous diſtinctions could, or ought to be made; and what pretenſions any man could have, or what ſervices he could render, to entitle him to a million a year? They would go farther, and revolt at the idea of conſigning their children, and their childrens' children, to the do⯑mination of perſons hereafter to be born, who might, for any thing they could foreſee, turn out to be knaves or fools; and they would finally diſcover, that the project of hereditary Governors and Legiſlators was a treaſonable uſurpation over the rights of poſterity. Not only the calm dictates of reaſon, and the force of natural affection, but the integrity of manly pride, would impel men to ſpurn ſuch propoſals.

From the groſſer abſurdities of ſuch a ſcheme, they would extend their examination to the prac⯑tical defects—They would ſoon ſee that it would end in tyranny accompliſhed by fraud. That in the operation of it, it would be two to one againſt them, becauſe the two parts that were to be made hereditary, would form a common intereſt, and ſtick to each other; and that themſelves and their repreſentatives would become no better than hewers of wood and drawers of water for the other parts of the Government.—Yet call one of thoſe powers King, the other, Lords, and the third, the Com⯑mons, and it gives the model of what is called the Engliſh Government.

I have aſſerted, and have ſhewn, both in the Firſt and ſecond Parts of Rights of Man, that [31]there is not ſuch a thing as an Engliſh Conſti⯑tution, and that the people have yet a Conſti⯑tution to form. A Conſtitution is a thing ante⯑cedent to a Government; it is the act of the people creating a Government and giving it powers, and defining the limits and exerciſe of the powers ſo given. But whenever did the people of England, acting in their original conſtituent character, by a delegation elected for the expreſs purpoſe, declare and ſay, ‘We, the people of this land, do conſtitute and appoint this to be our ſyſtem and form of Government.’ The Government has aſſumed to conſtitute itſelf, but it never was conſtituted by the people, in whom alone the right of conſtituting reſides.

I will here recite the preamble to the Federal Conſtitution of the United States of America. I have ſhewn in the Second Part of rights of Man, the manner by which the Conſtitution was formed and afterwards ratified; and to which I refer the reader.—The preamble is in the following words: ‘WE, THE PEOPLE of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, eſta⯑bliſh juſtice, inſure domeſtic tranquillity, provide for common defence, promote the general welfare, ſecure the bleſſings of li⯑berty to ourſelves and our poſterity, DO OR⯑DAIN AND ESTABISH THIS CONSTITUTION for the United States of America.’

[32]Then follow the ſeveral articles which appoint the manner in which the ſeveral component parts of the Government, legiſlative and executive, ſhall be elected, and the period of their duration, and the powers they ſhall have: alſo, the manner by which future additions, alterations, or amendments, ſhall be made to the Conſtitution. Conſequently, every improvement that can be made in the ſcience of Government, follows in that country as a matter of order. It is only in Governments founded on aſſumption and falſe principles, that reaſoning upon, and inveſtigating ſyſtems and prin⯑ciples of Government, and ſhewing their ſeveral excellencies and defects, are termed libellous and ſeditious. Theſe terms were made part of the charge brought againſt Locke, Hampden, and Sydney, and will continue to be brought againſt all good men, ſo long as had government ſhall continue.

The Government of this country has been oſ⯑tentatiouſly giving challenges for more than an hundred years paſt, upon what it called its own excellence and perfection. Scarcely a King's Speech, or a Parliamentary Speech, has been utter⯑ed, in which this glove has not been thrown, till the world has been inſulted with their challenges. But it now appears that all this was vapour and vain boaſting, or that it was intended to conceal abuſes and defects, and huſh the people into taxes. I have taken the challenge up, and in behalf of the public have ſhewn, in a fair, open, and candid man⯑ner, [33]both the radical and practical defects of the ſyſtem; when, lo! thoſe champions of the Civil Lift have fled away, and ſent the Attorney-General to deny the challenge, by turning the acceptance of it into an attack, and defending their Places and Penſions by a proſecution.

I will here drop this part of the ſubject, and ſtate a few particulars reſpecting the proſecution now pending, by which the Addreſſers will ſee that they have been uſed as tools to the proſecuting party and their dependents. The caſe is as follows:

The original edition of the Firſt and Second Parts of RIGHTS OF MAN, having been expen⯑ſively printed (in the modern ſtile of printing pamphlets, that they might be bound up with Mr. Burke's Reflections on the French Revolution,) the high price precluded the generality of people from purchaſing; and many applications were made to me from various parts of the country to print the work in a cheaper manner. The people of Sheffield requeſted leave to print two thouſand copies for themſelves, with which requeſt I immediately complied. The ſame requeſt came to me from Rotherham, from Leiceſter, from Cheſter, from ſe⯑veral towns in Scotland; and Mr. James Mack⯑intoſh, Author of Vindicia Gailica, brought me a requeſt from Warwickſhire, for leave to print ten thouſand copies in that country. I had already ſent a cheap edition to Scotland; and finding the ap⯑plications increaſe, I concluded that the beſt method of complying therewith, would be to print a very [34]numerous edition in London, under my own di⯑rection, by which means the work would be more perfect, and the price be reduced lower than it could be by printing ſmall editions in the country of only a few thouſands each.

The cheap edition of the Firſt Part was begun about the middle of laſt April, and from that mo⯑ment, and not before, I expected a proſecution, and the event has proved that I was not miſtaken. I had then occaſion to write to Mr. Thomas Walker, of Mancheſter, and after informing him of my intention of giving up the work for the pur⯑poſe of general information, I informed him of what I apprehended would be the conſequence; that while the work was at a price that precluded an extenſive circulation, the Government-party, not able to controvert the plans, arguments, and principles it contained, had choſen to remain ſi⯑lent; but that I expected they would make an attempt to deprive the maſs of the nation, and eſpecially the poor, of the right of reading, by the pretence of proſecuting either the Author or the Publiſher, or both. They choſe to begin with the Publiſher.

Nearly a month, however, paſſed, before I had any information given me of their intentions. I was then at Bromley, in Kent, upon which I came immediately to town, (May 14) and went to Mr. Jordan, the publiſher of the original edition. He had that evening been ſerved with a ſummons, to appear at the Court of King's Bench on the Mon⯑day [35]following, but for what purpoſe was not ſtated. Suppoſing it to be on account of the work, I appointed a meeting with him on the next morn⯑ing, which was accordingly had, when I provided an attorney, and took the expence of the defence on myſelf. But finding afterwards that he abſent⯑ed himſelf from the attorney employed, and had en⯑gaged another, and that he had been cloſeted with the Solicitors of the Treaſury, I left him to follow his own choice, and he choſe to plead Guilty. This he might do if he pleaſed; and I make no objec⯑tion againſt him for it. I believe that his idea by the word Guilty, was no other than declaring him⯑ſelf to be the publiſher, without any regard to the merits or demerits of the work; for were it to be conſtrued otherwiſe, it would amount to the ab⯑ſurdity of converting a publiſher into a Jury, and his confeſſion into a verdict upon the work itſelf. This would be the higheſt poſſible refinement upon packing of Juries.

On the 21ſt of May, they commenced their pro⯑ſecution againſt me, as the Author, by leaving a ſummons at my lodgings in town, to appear at the Court of King's Bench on the 8th of June fol⯑lowing; and on the ſame day. (May 21) they iſſued alſo their Proclamation. Thus the Court of St. James's, and the Court of King's Bench, were playing into each other's hands at the ſame inſtant of time, and the farce of Addreſſes brought up the rear; and this mode of proceeding is called by the proſtituted name of Law. Such a thundering ra⯑pidity, [36]after a miniſterial dormancy of almoſt eigh⯑teen months, can be attributed to no other cauſe than their having gained information of the for⯑wardneſs of the cheap Edition, and the dread they felt at the progreſſive increaſe of political know⯑ledge.

I was ſtrongly adviſed by ſeveral gentlemen, as well thoſe in the practice of the Law, as others, to prefer a bill of indictment againſt the publiſher of the Proclamation, as a publication tending to in⯑fluence, or rather to dictate the verdict of a Jury on the iſſue of a matter then pending; but it appeared to me much better to avail myſelf of the opportu⯑nity which ſuch a precedent juſtified me in uſing, by meeting the Proclamation and the Addreſſes on their own ground, and publicly defending the Work which had been thus unwarrantable attacked and traduced.—And conſcious as I now am, that the Work entitled RIGHTS OF MAN, ſo far from being, as has been maliciouſly or erroneouſly re⯑preſented, a falſe, wicked, and ſeditious Libel, is a work abounding with unanſwerable truths, with principles of the pureſt morality and benevolence, and with arguments not to be controverted—Con⯑ſcious, I ſay, of theſe things, and having no object in view but the happineſs of mankind, I have now put the matter to the beſt proof in my power, by giving to the public a cheap edition of the Firſt and Second Parts of that Work. Let every man read and judge for himſelf, not only of the merits or demerits of the Work, but of the matters therein [37]contained, which relate to his own intereſt and happineſs.

If, to expoſe the fraud and impoſition of monar⯑chy, and every ſpecies of hereditary government— to leſſen the oppreſſion of taxes—to propoſe plans for the education of helpleſs infancy, and the com⯑fortable ſupport of the aged and diſtreſſed—to en⯑deavour to conciliate nations to each other—to ex⯑tirpate the horrid practice of war—to promote univerſal peace, civilization, and commerce—and to break the chains of political ſuperſtition, and raiſe degraded man to his proper rank;—if theſe things be libellous, let me live the life of a Libeller, and let the name of LIBELLER be engraven on my tomb.

Of all the weak and ill-judged meaſures which fear, ignorance, or arrogance, could ſuggeſt, the Proclamation, and the project for Addreſſes, are two of the worſt. They ſerved to advertiſe the work which the promoters of thoſe meaſures wiſhed to keep unknown; and in doing this, they offered violence to the judgment of the people, by calling on them to condemn what they forbad them to know, and they put the ſtrength of their party to that hazardous iſſue that prudence would have avoided—The County Meeting for Middleſex was attended by only one hundred and eighteen Ad⯑dreſſers. They, no doubt, expected, that thouſands would ſlock to their ſtandard, and clamour againſt the Rights of Man. But the caſe moſt probably is, that men, in all countries, are not ſo blind to [38]their Rights and their Intereſt, as Governments be⯑lieve.

Having thus ſhewn the extraordinary manner in which the Government-party commenced their at⯑tack, I proceed to offer a few obſervations on the proſecution, and on the mode of trial by Special Jury.

In the firſt place, I have written a book; and if it cannot be refuted, it cannot be condemned. But I do not conſider the proſecution as particularly levelled againſt me, but againſt the general right, or the right of every man, of inveſtigating ſyſtems and principles of Government, and ſhewing their ſeveral excellencies or defects. If the preſs be free only to flatter Government, as Mr. Burke has done, and to cry up and extol what certain Court ſycophants are pleaſed to call a ‘glorious Conſti⯑tution,’ and not free to examine into its errors or abuſes, or whether a Conſtitution really exiſt or not, ſuch freedom is no other than that of Spain, Turkey, or Ruſſia; and a Jury, in this caſe, would not be a Jury to try, but an Inquiſition to con⯑demn.

I have aſſerted, and by fair and open argument maintained, the right of every nation at all times, to eſtabliſh ſuch a ſyſtem and form of Government for itſelf as beſt accords with its diſpoſition, in⯑tereſt, and happineſs; and to change, or alter it, as it ſees occaſion. Will any Jury deny to the Nation this right? If they do, they are traitors, and their Verdict would be null and void. And [39]if they admit the right, the means muſt be admit⯑ted alſo; for it would be the higheſt abſurdity to ſay, that the right exiſted, but the means did not. The queſtion, then, is, What are the means by which the poſſeſſion and exerciſe of this National Right are to the ſecured? The anſwer will be, that of maintaining, inviolably, the right of free inveſ⯑tigation; for inveſtigation always ſerves to detect error, and to bring forth truth.

I have, as an individual, given my opinion upon what I believe to be not only the beſt, but the true ſyſtem of Government, which is the repre⯑ſentative ſyſtem, and I have given reaſons for that opinion.

Firſt, Becauſe, in the repreſentative ſyſtem, no office of very extraordinary power, or extravagant pay, is attached to any individual; and conſe⯑quently, there is nothing to excite thoſe national contentions and civil wars, with which countries under monarchical governments, are frequently convulſed, and of which the Hiſtory of England exhibits ſuch numerous inſtances.

Secondly, Becauſe the repreſentative is a ſyſtem of Government always in maturity; whereas mo⯑narchical government fluctuates through all the ſtages, from non-age to dotage.

Thirdly, Becauſe the repreſentative ſyſtem ad⯑mits of none but men, properly qualified, into the Government, or removes them if they prove to be otherwiſe. Whereas, in the hereditary ſyſtem, a nation may be encumbered with a knave or an [40]ideot, for a whole life-time, and not be benefited by a ſucceſſor.

Fourthly, Becauſe there does not exiſt a right to eſtabliſh hereditary government, or in other words, hereditary ſucceſſors, becauſe hereditary government always means a government yet to come, and the caſe always is, that thoſe who are to live afterwards have always the ſame right to eſtabliſh government for themſelves, as the people had who lived before them; and, therefore, all laws attempting to eſtabliſh hereditary government, are founded on aſſumption and political fiction.

If theſe poſitions be truths, and I challenge any man to prove the contrary; if they tend to in⯑ſtruct and enlighten mankind, and to free them from error, oppreſſion, and political ſuperſtition, which are the objects I have in view, in publiſhing them, that Jury would commit an act of injuſtice to their country and to me, if not a act of per⯑jury, that ſhould call them falſe, wicked, and ma⯑licious.

Dragonetti, in his treatiſe "on Virtues and Re⯑wards," has a paragraph worthy of being recorded in every country in the world—‘The ſcience, (ſays he,) of the politician, conſiſts in fixing the true point of happineſs and freedom. Thoſe men would deſerve the gratitude of ages, who ſhould diſcover a mode of government that con⯑tained the greateſt ſum of individual happineſs with the leaſt national expence.’ But if Juries are to be made uſe of to prohibit enquiry, to ſup⯑preſs [41]truth, and to ſtop the progreſs of knowledge, this boaſted palladium of liberty becomes the moſt ſucceſsful inſtrument of tyranny.

Among the arts practiſed at the Bar, and from the Bench, to impoſe upon the underſtanding of a Jury, and obtain a Verdict where the conſciences of men could not otherwiſe conſent, one of the moſt ſucceſsful has been that of calling truth a libel, and of inſinuating, that the words ‘falſely, wickedly, and maliciouſly,’ though they are made the for⯑midable and high ſounding part of the charge, are not matters for conſideration with a Jury. For what purpoſe, then, are they retained, unleſs it be for that of impoſition and wilful defamation?

I cannot conceive a greater violation of order, nor a more abominable inſult upon morality and upon human underſtanding, than to ſee a man ſit⯑ting in the judgment ſeat, affecting, by an anti⯑quated foppery of dreſs, to impreſs the audience with awe; then cauſing witneſſes and Jury to be ſworn to truth and juſtice, himſelf having offici⯑ally ſworn the ſame; then cauſing to be read a pro⯑ſecution againſt a man, charging him with having wickedly and maliciouſly written and publiſhed a cer⯑tain falſe, wicked, and ſeditious book; and having gone through all this with a ſhew of ſolemnity, as if he ſaw the eye of the Almighty darting through the roof of the building like a ray of light, turn, in an inſtant, the whole into a farce, and, in order to obtain a verdict that could not otherwiſe be ob⯑tained, tell the Jury that the charge of falſely, wick⯑edly, [42]and ſeditiouſly, meant nothing; that truth was out of the queſtion; and that whether the perſon accuſed ſpoke truth or falſhood, or intended virtu⯑ouſly or wickedly, was the ſame thing; and finally conclude the wretched inquiſitorial ſcene, by ſtat⯑ing ſome antiquated precedent, equally as abomina⯑ble as that which is then acting, or giving ſome opinion of his own, and falſely calling the one and the other—Law. It was, moſt probably, to ſuch a Judge as this, that the moſt ſolemn of all reproofs was given—‘The Lord will ſmite thee, thou whit⯑ened wall.’

I now proceed to offer ſome remarks on what is called a Special Jury.—As to what is called a Spe⯑cial Verdict, I ſhall make no other remark upon it, than that it is in reality not a verdict. It is an attempt on the part of the Jury to delegate, or of the Bench to obtain, the exerciſe of that right which is committed to the Jury only.

With reſpect to Special Juries, I ſhall ſtate ſuch matters as I have been able to collect, for I do not find any uniform opinion concerning the mode of appointing them.

In the firſt place, this mode of trial is but of modern invention, and the origin of it, as I am told, is a follows:

Formerly, when diſputes aroſe between Mer⯑chants, and were brought before a Court, the caſe was, that the nature of their commerce, and the me⯑thod of keeping Merchants accounts, not being ſufficiently underſtood by perſons out of their own [43]line, it became neceſſary to depart from the com⯑mon mode of appointing Juries, and to ſelect ſuch perſons for a Jury whoſe practical knowledge would enable them to decide upon the caſe. From this introduction, Special Juries became more general; but ſome doubts having ariſen as to their legality, an act was paſſed in the 3d of Geo. II. to eſtabliſh them as legal, and alſo to extend them to all caſes, not only between individuals, but in caſes where the Government itſelf ſhould be the Proſecutor. This moſt probably gave riſe to the ſuſpicion ſo gene⯑rally entertained of packing a Jury; becauſe, by this act, when the crown, as it is called, is the Pro⯑ſecutor, the Maſter of the Crown-office, who holds his office under the Crown, is the perſon who either wholly nominates, or has great power in nominating the Jury, and therefore it has greatly the appearance of the proſecuting party ſelecting a Jury.

The proceſs is as follows:

On motion being made in Court, by either the Plaintiff or Defendant, for a Special Jury, the Court grants it or not, at its own diſcretion.

If it be granted, the Solicitor of the party that applied for the Special Jury gives notice to the So⯑licitor of the adverſe party, and a day and hour are appointed for them to meet at the office of the Maſ⯑ter of the Crown-office. The Maſter of the Crown-office ſends to the Sheriff or his deputy, who attends with the Sheriff's book of Freeholders. From this book, forty-eight names are taken, and [44]a copy thereof given to each of the parties; and on a future day notice is again given, and the Solicitors meet a ſecond time, and each ſtrikes out twelve names. The liſt being thus reduced from forty-eight to twenty-four, the firſt twelve that appear in Court, and anſwer to their names, is the Special Jury for that cauſe. The firſt operation, that of taking the forty-eight names, is called nominating the Jury; and the reducing them to twenty-four is called ſtriking the Jury.

Having thus ſtated the general proceſs, I come to particulars, and the firſt queſtion will be, how are the forty-eight names, out of which the Jury is to be ſtruck, obtained from the Sheriff's book? for herein lies the principal ground of ſuſpicion, with reſpect to what is underſtood by packing of Juries.

Either they muſt be taken by ſome rule agreed upon between the parties, or by ſome common rule known and eſtabliſhed before-hand, or at the diſ⯑cretion of ſome perſon, who, in ſuch a caſe, ought to be perfectly diſintereſted in the iſſue, as well officially as otherwiſe.

In the caſe of Merchants, and in all caſes between individuals, the Maſter of the office, called the Crown-office, is officially an indifferent perſon, and as ſuch may be a proper perſon to act between the parties, and preſent them with a liſt of forty-eight names, out of which each party is to ſtrike twelve. But the caſe aſſumes an entire different character when the Government itſelf is the Proſecutor. The Maſter of the Crown-office is then an officer [45]holding his office under the Proſecutor; and it is therefore no wonder that the ſuſpicion of packing Juries ſhould, in ſuch caſes, have been ſo prevalent.

This will apply with additional force, when the proſecution is commenced againſt the Author or Publiſher of ſuch Works as treat of reforms, and of the abolition of ſuperfluous places and offices, &c. becauſe in ſuch caſes every perſon holding an office, ſubject to that ſuſpicion, becomes intereſted as a party; and the office, called the Crown-office, may, upon examination, be found to be of this de⯑ſcription.

I have heard it aſſerted, that the Maſter of the Crown office is to open the Sheriff's book as it were per hazard, and take thereout forty-eight fol⯑lowing names, to which the word Merchant or Eſ⯑quire is affixed. The former of theſe are cer⯑tainly proper, when the caſe is between Merchants, and it has reference to the origin of the cuſtom, and to nothing elſe. As to the word Eſquire, every man is an Eſquire who pleaſes to call him⯑ſelf Eſquire; and the ſenſible part of mankind are leaving it off. But the matter for enquiry is whe⯑ther there be any exiſting law to direct the mode by which the forty-eight names ſhall be taken, or whether the mode be merely that of cuſtom which the office has created; or whether the ſelection of the forty-eight names be wholly at the diſcretion and choice of the Maſter of the Crown-office? One or other of the two latter appears to be the caſe, be⯑cauſe the act already mentioned, of the 3d of [46]Geo. II. lays down no rule or mode, nor refers to any preceding law—but ſays only, that Special Juries ſhall hereafter be ſtruck, ‘in ſuch manner as Spe⯑cial Juries have been and are uſually ſtruck.’

This act appears to me to have been what is generally underſtood by a "deep take in." It was fitted to the ſpur of the moment in which it was paſſed, 3d of Geo. II when parties ran high, and it ſerved to throw into the hands of Walpole, who was then Miniſter, the management of Juries in Crown proſecutions, by making the nomination of the forty-eight perſons, from whom the Jury was to be ſtruck, follow the precedent eſtabliſhed by cuſtom between individuals, and by this means it ſlipt into practice with leſs ſuſpicion. Now, the manner of obtaining Special Juries through the medium of an officer of the Government, ſuch for inſtance as a Maſter of the Crown-office, may be impartial in the caſe of Merchants, or other indivi⯑duals, but it becomes highly improper and ſuſpici⯑ous in caſes where the Government itſelf is one of the parties. And it muſt, upon the whole, appear a ſtrange inconſiſtency, that a Government ſhould keep one officer to commence proſecutions, and another officer to nominate the forty-eight perſons from whom the Jury is to be ſtruck, both of whom are officers of the Civil Liſt, and yet continue to call this by the pompous name of the glorious Right of trial by Jury!

In the caſe of the King againſt Jordan, for pub⯑liſhing RIGHTS OF MAN, the Attorney-General moved for the appointment of a Special Jury, and [47]the Maſter of the Crown-office nominated the forty-eight perſons himſelf, and took them from ſuch part of the Sheriff's book as he pleaſed. The trial did not come on, occaſioned by Jordan withdraw⯑ing his plea; but if it had, it might have afforded an opportunity of diſcuſſing the ſubject of Special Juries; for though ſuch diſcuſſion might have had no effect in the Court of King's-Bench, it would, in the preſent diſpoſition for enquiry, have had a conſiderable effect upon the Country; and in all national reforms, this is the proper point to begin at. Put a Country right, and it will ſoon put Go⯑vernment right. Among the improper things acted by the Government in the caſe of Special Juries, on their own motion, one has been that of treating the Jury with a dinner, and afterwards giving each Juryman two guineas, if a verdict be found for the proſecution, and only one if otherwiſe; and it has been long obſerved, that in London and Weſt⯑minſter there are perſons who appear to make a trade of ſerving, by being ſo frequently ſeen upon Special Juries.

Thus much for Special Juries. As to what is called a Common Jury, upon any Government pro⯑ſecution againſt the Author or Publiſher of RIGHTS OF MAN, during the time of the preſent Sheriffry, I have one queſtion to offer, which is, whether the preſent Sheriffs of London, having publicly prejudged the caſe, by the part they have taken in procuring an Addreſs from the county of Middleſex, (however di⯑minutive and inſignificant the number of Addreſſers [48]were, being only one hundred and eighteen) are eligi⯑ble or proper perſons to be entruſted with the power of returning a Jury to try the iſſue of any ſuch proſe⯑cution?

But the whole matter appears, at leaſt to me, to be worthy of a more extenſive conſideration than what relates to any Jury, whether Special or Com⯑mon; for the caſe is, whether any part of a whole nation, locally ſelected as a Jury of twelve men al⯑ways is, be competent to judge and determine for the whole nation, on any matter that relates to ſyſtems and principles of Government, and whether it be not applying the inſtitution of Juries to pur⯑poſes for which ſuch inſtitution was not intended? For example,

I have aſſerted, in the Work RIGHTS OF MAN, that as every man in the nation pays taxes, ſo has every man a right to a ſhare in government, and conſequently that the people of Mancheſter, Bir⯑mingham, Sheffield, Leeds, Hallifax, &c. &c. have the ſame right as thoſe of London. Shall then twelve men, picked out between Temple-bar and Whitechapel, becauſe the book happened to be firſt publiſhed there, decide upon the rights of the inhabitants of thoſe towns, or of any other town or village in the nation?

Having thus ſpoken of Juries, I come next to offer a few obſervations on the matter contained in the information or proſecution.

The work, RIGHTS OF MAN, consiſts of Part the Firſt, and Part the Second. The Firſt Part the [49]proſecutor has thought it moſt proper to let alone; and from the Second Part he has ſelected a few ſhort paragraphs, making in the whole not quite two pages of the ſame printing as in the cheap edi⯑tion. Thoſe paragraphs relate chiefly to certain facts, ſuch as the Revolution of 1688, and the coming of George the Firſt, commonly called of the Houſe of Hanover, or the Houſe of Brunſwick, or ſome ſuch houſe. The arguments, plans, and princi⯑ples, contained in the work, the proſecutor has not ventured to attack. They are beyond his reach.

The Act which the proſecutor appears to reſt moſt upon for the ſupport of the proſecution, is the Act intituled, ‘An Act, declaring the rights and liberties of the ſubject, and ſettling the ſucceſ⯑ſion of the crown,’ paſſed in the firſt year of William and Mary, and more commonly known by the name of the "Bill of Rights."

I have called this Bill ‘A Bill of wrongs and of inſult.’ My reaſons, and alſo my proofs, are as fol⯑lows:

The method and principle which this Bill takes for declaring rights and liberties, are in direct con⯑tradiction to rights and liberties; it is an aſſumed attempt to take them wholly away from poſterity—for the declaration in the ſaid Bill is as follows:

‘The Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, do, in the name of all the people, moſt humbly and faithfully ſubmit themſelves, their heirs, and poſterity for ever;’ that is, to William [50]and Mary his wife, their heirs and ſucceſſors. This is a ſtrange way of declaring rights and liberties. But the Parliament who made this declaration in the name, and on the part, of the people, had no authority from them for ſo doing—and with reſpect to poſterity for ever, they had no right or authority whatever in the caſe. It was aſſumption and uſur⯑pation. I have reaſoned very extenſively againſt the principle of this Bill in the firſt part of Rights of Man; the proſecutor has ſilently admitted that reaſoning, and he now commences a proſecution on the authority of the Bill, after admitting the rea⯑ſoning againſt it.

It is alſo to be obſerved, that the declaration in this Bill, abject and irrational as it is, had no other intentional operation than againſt the family of the Stuarts, and their abettors. The idea did not then exiſt, that in the ſpace of an hundred years, poſte⯑rity might diſcover a different and much better ſyſtem of government, and that every ſpecies of here⯑ditary government might fall as Popes and Monks had fallen before. This, I ſay, was not then thought of, and therefore the application of the Bill, in the preſent caſe, is a new, erroneous, and illegal application, and is the ſame as creating a new Bill ex poſt facto.

I has ever been the craft of Courtiers, for the purpoſe of keeping up an expenſive and enormous Civil Lift, and a mummery of uſeleſs and anti⯑quated places and offices at the public expence, to [51]be continually hanging England upon ſome indivi⯑dual or other, called king, though the man might not have capacity to be a pariſh conſtable. The folly and abſurdity of this is appearing more and more every day; and ſtill thoſe men continue to act as if no alteration in the public opinion had taken place. They hear each other's nonſenſe, and ſup⯑poſe the whole nation talks the ſame Gibberiſh.

Let ſuch men cry up the Houſe of Orange, or the Houſe of Brunſwick, if they pleaſe. They would cry up any other houſe if it ſuited their pur⯑poſe, and give as good reaſons for it. But what is this houſe, or that houſe, or any houſe to a nation? ‘For a nation to be free, it is ſufficient that ſhe wills it.’ Her freedom depends wholly upon her⯑ſelf, and not on any houſe, nor on any individual. I aſk not in what light this cargo of foreign houſes appears to others, but I will ſay in what light it appears to me.—It was like the trees of the foreſt ſaying unto the bramble, come thou and reign over us.

Thus much for both their houſes. I now come to ſpeak of two other houſes, which are alſo put into the information, and thoſe are, the Houſe of Lords, and the Houſe of Commons. Here, I ſup⯑poſe, the Attorney-General intends to prove me guilty of ſpeaking either truth or falſhood; for, ac⯑cording to the modern interpretation of Libels, it does not ſignify which, and the only improvement neceſſary to ſhew the compleat abſurdity of ſuch [52]doctrine, would be, to proſecute a man for utter⯑ing a moſt falſe and wicked truth.

I will quote the part I am going to give, from the office Copy, with the Attorney General's inuen⯑does, encloſed in parentheſes as they ſtand in the in⯑formation, and I hope that civil liſt officer will cau⯑tion the Court not to laugh when he reads them, and alſo to take care not to laugh himſelf.

The information ſtates, that Thomas Paine being a wicked, malicious, ſeditious, and evil-diſpoſed per⯑ſon, hath, with force and arms, and moſt wicked cun⯑ning, written and publiſhed a certain falſe, ſcandalous, malicious, and ſeditious libel; in one part thereof, to the tenor and effect following, that is to ſay—

‘With reſpect to the two Houſes, of which the Engliſh Parliament (meaning the Parliament of this Kingdom) is compoſed, they appear to be effectually influenced into one, and, as a Legiſ⯑lature, to have no temper of its own; The Mi⯑niſter, (meaning the Miniſter employed by the King of this Realm, in the adminiſtration of the Govern⯑ment thereof) whoever he, at any time may be, touches IT, (meaning the two Houſes of Parlia⯑ment of this Kingdom) as with an opium wand, and IT (meaning the two Houſes of Parliament of this Kingdom) ſleeps obedience.’—As I am not ma⯑licious enough to diſturb their repoſe, though it be time they ſhould awake, I leave the two Houſes, and the Attorney General, to the enjoyment of their dreams, and proceed to a new ſubject.

[53]The Gentlemen, to whom I ſhall next addreſs my⯑ſelf, are thoſe who have ſtiled themſelves ‘Friends of the people,’ holding their meeting at the Free⯑maſons' Tavern, London.

One of the principal Members of this Society, is Mr. Grey, who, I believe, is alſo one of the moſt independent Members in Parliament. I collect this opinion from what Mr. Burke formerly mentioned to me, rather than from any knowledge of my own. The occaſion was as follows:

I was in England at the time the bubble broke forth about Nootka Sound; and the day after the King's Meſſage, as it is called, was ſent to Parlia⯑ment, I wrote a note to Mr. Burke, that upon the condition the French Revolution ſhould not be a ſubject (for he was then writing the book I have ſince anſwered) I would call on him the next day, and mention ſome matters I was acquainted with, reſpecting that affair; for it appeared to me extra⯑ordinary, that any body of men, calling themſelves Repreſentatives, ſhould commit themſelves ſo pre⯑cipitately, or, "ſleep obedience," as Parliament was then doing, and run a nation into expence, and, perhaps a war, without ſo much as enquiring into the caſe, or the ſubject, of both which I had ſome knowledge.

When I ſaw Mr. Burke, and mentioned the cir⯑cumſtances to him, he particularly ſpoke of Mr. Grey, as the fitteſt Member to bring ſuch matters forward; for, ſaid Mr. Burke, ‘I am not the pro⯑per [54]perſon to do it, as I am in a treaty with Mr. Pitt about Mr. Haſtings's trial.’ I hope the At⯑torney General will allow, that Mr. Burke was then ſleeping his obedience.—But to return to the Society—

I cannot bring myſelf to believe, that the general motive of this Society is any thing more than that by which every former parliamentary oppoſition has been governed, and by which the preſent is ſufficiently known. Failing in their purſuit of power and place within doors, they have now (and that not in a very mannerly manner) endeavoured to poſſeſs themſelves of that ground out of doors, which, had it not been made by others, would not have been made by them. They appear to me to have watched, with more cunning than candour, the progreſs of a certain publication, and when they ſaw it had excited a ſpirit of enquiry, and was ra⯑pidly ſpreading, they ſtepped forward to profit by the opportunity, and Mr. Fox then called it a Libel. In ſaying this, he libelled himſelf. Politicians of this caſt, ſuch, I mean, as thoſe who trim between parties, and lye by for events, are to be found in every country, and it never yet happened that they did not do more harm than good. They embar⯑raſs buſineſs, fritter it to nothing, perplex the people, and the event to themſelves generally is, that they go juſt far enough to make enemies of the few, without going far enough to make friends of the many.

[55]Whoever will read the declarations of this So⯑ciety, of the 25th of April, and 5th of May, will find a ſtudied reſerve upon all the points that are real abuſes. They ſpeak not once of the extrava⯑gance of Government, of the abominable liſt of un⯑neceſſary and ſinecure places and penſions, of the enormity of the Civil Liſt, of the exceſs of taxes, nor of any one matter that ſubſtantially affects the nation; and from ſome converſation that has paſſed in that Society, it does not appear to me that it is any part of their plan, to carry this claſs of reforms into practice. No Oppoſition Party ever did, when it gained poſſeſſion.

In making theſe free obſervations, I mean not to enter into contention with this Society, their inci⯑vility towards me is what I ſhould expect from place-hunting reformers. They are welcome, how⯑ever, to the ground they have advanced upon, and I wiſh that every individual among them may act in the ſame upright, uninfluenced, and public ſpi⯑rited manner that I have done. Whatever reforms may be obtained, and by whatever means, they will be for the benefit of others, and not of me. I have no other intereſt in the cauſe than the intereſt of my heart. The part I have acted has been wholly that of a volunteer, unconnected with party; and when I quit, it ſhall be as honourably as I began.

I conſider the reform of Parliament, by an ap⯑plication to Parliament, as propoſed by the Society, [56]to be a worn-out hackneyed ſubject, about which the nation is tired, and the parties are deceiving each other. It is not a ſubject that is cognizable before Parliament, becauſe no Government has a right to alter itſelf, either in whole or in part. The right, and the exerciſe of that right, apper⯑tains to the nation only, and the proper mean is by a national convention, elected for the purpoſe, by all the people. By this, the will of the nation, whether to reform or not, or what the reform ſhall be, or how far it ſhall extend, will be known, and it cannot be known by any other means. Partial addreſſes, or ſeparate aſſociations, are not teſti⯑monies of the general will.

It is, however, certain that the opinions of men, with reſpect to ſyſtems and principles of govern⯑ment, are changing faſt in all countries. The al⯑teration in England, within the ſpace of little more than a year, is far greater than could then have been believed, and it is daily and hourly increaſing. It moves along the country with the ſilence of thought. The enormous expence of Government has provoked men to think, by making them feel; and the Proclamation has ſerved to increaſe jealouſy and diſguſt. To prevent, therefore, thoſe commo⯑tions which too often and too ſuddenly ariſe from ſuffocated diſcontents, it is beſt that the general WILL ſhould have the full and free opportunity of being publicly aſcertained and known.

[57]Wretched as the ſtate of repreſentation is in England, it is every day becoming worſe, becauſe the unrepreſented parts of the nation are increaſing in population and property, and the repreſented parts are decreaſing. It is, therefore, no ill grounded eſtimation to ſay, that as not one perſon in ſeven is repreſented, at leaſt fourteen millions of taxes, out of the ſeventeen millions, are paid by the unrepreſented part; for although copyholds and leaſeholds are aſſeſſed to the land-tax, the holders are unrepreſented. Should then a general demur take place as to the obligation of paying taxes, on the ground of not being repreſented, it is not the Repreſentatives of rotten Boroughs, nor Special Juries, that can decide the queſtion. This is one of the poſſible caſes that ought to be foreſeen, in order to prevent the inconveniencies that might ariſe to numerous individuals, by provoking it.

I confeſs I have no idea of petitioning for rights. Whatever the rights of people are, they have a right to them, and none have a right either to withhold them, or to grant them. Government ought to be eſtabliſhed on ſuch principles of juſtice as to exclude the occaſion of all ſuch applications, for wherever they appear they are virtually accu⯑ſations.

I wiſh that Mr. Grey, ſince he has embarked in the buſineſs, would take the whole of it into con⯑ſideration. He will then ſee that the right of re⯑forming the ſtate of the Repreſentation does not [58]reſide in Parliament, and that the only motion he could conſiſtently make, would be, that Parliament ſhould recommend the election of a convention by all the people, becauſe all pay taxes. But whether Parliament recommended it or not, the right of the nation would neither be leſſened nor increaſed thereby.

As to Petitions from the unrepreſented part, they ought not to be looked for. As well might it be expected that Mancheſter, Sheffield, &c. ſhould petition the rotten Boroughs, as that they ſhould petition the Repreſentatives of thoſe Bo⯑roughs. Thoſe two towns alone pay far more taxes than all the rotten Boroughs put together, and it is ſcarcely to be expected they ſhould pay their court either to the Boroughs, or the Borough-mongers.

It ought alſo to be obſerved, that what is called Parliament, is compoſed of two houſes that have always declared againſt the right of each other to interfere in any matter that related to the circum⯑ſtances of either, particularly that of election. A reform, therefore, in the repreſentation cannot, on the ground they have individually taken, become the ſubject of an act of Parliament, becauſe ſuch a mode would include the interference, againſt which the Commons on their part have proteſted; but muſt, as well on the ground of formality, as on that of right, proceed from a National Convention.

[59]Let Mr. Grey, or any other man, ſit down and endeavour to put his thoughts together, for the purpoſe of drawing up an application to Parliament for a reform of Parliament, and he will ſoon con⯑vince himſelf of the folly of the attempt. He will find that he cannot get on; that he cannot make his thoughts join, ſo as to produce any effect; for whatever formality of words he may uſe, they will unavoidably include two ideas directly oppoſed to each other; the one in ſetting forth the reaſons, the other in praying for the relief, and the two, when placed together, would ſtand thus:—‘The Repreſentation in Parliament is ſo very corrupt, that we can no longer confide in it,—and, there⯑fore, confiding in the juſtice and wiſdom of Parlia⯑ment, we pray,’ &c. &c.

The heavy manner in which every former pro⯑poſed application to Parliament has dragged, ſuffi⯑ciently ſhews, that though the nation might not exactly ſee the awkwardneſs of the meaſure, it could not clearly ſee its way by that mean. To this alſo may be added another remark, which is, that the worſe Parliament is, the leſs will be the in⯑clination to petition it. This indifference, viewed as it ought to be, is one of the ſtrongeſt cenſures the public can expreſs. It is as if they were to ſay, "Ye are not worth reforming."

Let any man examine the Court-Kalendar of Placemen in both Houſes, and the manner in which the Civil Liſt operates, and he will be at [60]no loſs to account for this indifference and want of confidence on one ſide, nor of the oppoſition to reforms on the other.

Beſides the numerous liſt of paid perſons exhi⯑bited in the Court-Kalendar, which ſo indecently ſtares the nation in the face, there is an unknown number of maſked Penſioners, which renders Par⯑liament ſtill more ſuſpected.

Who would have ſuppoſed that Mr. Burke, holding forth as he formerly did againſt ſecret in⯑fluence, and corrupt majorities, ſhould become a concealed Penſioner? I will now ſtate the caſe, not for the little purpoſe of expoſing Mr. Burke, but to ſhew the inconſiſtency of any application to a body of men, more than half of whom, as far as the nation can at preſent know, may be in the ſame caſe with himſelf.

Towards the end of Lord North's adminiſtra⯑tion, Mr. Burke brought a bill into Parliament, generally known by the name of Mr. Burke's Reform Bill; in which, among other things, it is enacted, ‘That no penſion, exceeding the ſum of three hundred pounds a year, ſhall be granted to any one perſon, and that the whole amount of the penſions granted in one year ſhall not exceed ſix hundred pounds; a liſt of which, together with the names of the perſons to whom the ſame are granted, ſhall be laid before Par⯑liament in twenty days after the beginning of each ſeſſion, until the whole penſion liſt ſhall be [61]reduced to ninety thouſand pounds.’ A proviſory clauſe is afterwards added, ‘That it ſhall be lawful for the Firſt Commiſſioner of the Treaſury, to return into the Exchequer, any penſion or an⯑nuity, without a name, on his making oath that ſuch penſion or annuity is not directly or indi⯑rectly for the benefit, uſe, or behoof, of any Member of the Houſe of Commons.’

But ſoon after that Adminiſtration ended, and the party Mr. Burke acted with came into power, it appears, from the circumſtances I am going to relate, that Mr. Burke became himſelf a Penſioner in diſguiſe; in a ſimiliar manner, as if a penſion had been granted in the name of John Nokes, to be privately paid to and enjoyed by Tom Stiles. The name of Edmund Burke does not appear in the ori⯑ginal tranſaction: but after the penſion was ob⯑tained, Mr. Burke wanted to make the moſt of it at once, by ſelling or mortgaging it; and the gen⯑tleman, in whoſe name the penſion ſtands, applied to one of the public offices for that purpoſe. This unfortunately brought forth the name of Edmund Burke, as the real Penſioner of 1,500l. per annum. When men trumpet forth what they call the bleſ⯑ſings of the Conſtitution, it ought to be known what ſort of bleſſings they allude to.

As to the Civil Liſt, of a million a year, it is not to be ſuppoſed that any one man can eat, drink, or conſume the whole upon himſelf. The caſe is, that above half this ſum is annually apportioned among [62]Courtiers, and Court Members, of both Houſes, in places and offices, altogether inſignificant and per⯑fectly uſeleſs, as to every purpoſe of civil, rational, and manly government. For inſtance,

Of what uſe in the ſcience and ſyſtem of Govern⯑ment is what is called a Lord Chamberlain, a Ma⯑ſter and a Miſtreſs of the Robes, a Maſter of the Horſe, a Maſter of the Hawks, and an hundred other ſuch things. Laws derive no additional force, nor additional excellence, from ſuch mummery.

In the diſburſements of the Civil Liſt for the year 1786 (which may be ſeen in Sir John Sinclair's Hiſtory of the Revenue) are four ſeparate charges for this mummery office of Chamberlain.

beſides £. 1,119 charged for Alms.

From this ſample, the reſt may be gueſſed at. As to the Maſter of the Hawks, (there are no hawks kept, and if there were, it is no reaſon the people ſhould pay the expence of feeding them, many of whom are put to it to get bread for their children) his ſalary is 1,372l. 10 s.

And beſides a liſt of items of this kind, ſufficient to fill a quire of paper, the Penſion liſts alone are 107,404l. 13s. 4d. which is a greater ſum than [63]all the expences of the federal Government in Ame⯑rica amount to.

Among the items, there are two I had no expecta⯑tion of finding, and which, in this day of enquiry after Civil Liſt influence, ought to be expoſed. The one is an annual payment of one thouſand ſeven hundred pounds to the Diſſenting Miniſters in Eng⯑land, and eight hundred pounds to thoſe of Ireland.

This is the fact; and the diſtribution as I am in⯑formed, is as follows: The whole ſum of £. 1,700 is paid to one perſon, a diſſenting Miniſter in Lon⯑don, who divides it among eight others, and thoſe eight among ſuch others as they pleaſe. The Lay⯑body of the Diſſenters, and many of their principal Miniſters, have long conſidered it as diſhonourable, and have endeavoured to prevent it, but ſtill it continues to be ſecretly paid; and as the world has ſometimes ſeen very fulſome Addreſſes from parts of that body, it may naturally be ſuppoſed that the receivers, like Biſhops and other Court-Clergy, are not idle in promoting them. How the money is diſtributed in Ireland, I know not.

To recount all the ſecret hiſtory of the Civil Liſt is not the intention of this publication. It is ſuffi⯑cient, in this place, to expoſe its general character, and the maſs of influence it keeps alive. It will neceſſarily become one of the objects of reform; and therefore enough is ſaid to ſhew that, under its operation, no application to Parliament can be ex⯑pected to ſucceed, nor can conſiſtently be made.

[64]Such reforms will not be promoted by the Party that is in poſſeſſion of thoſe places, nor by the Op⯑poſition who are waiting for them; and as to a mere reform in the ſtate of the Repreſentation, under the idea that another Parliament, differently elected to the preſent, but ſtill a component third part of the ſame ſyſtem, and ſubject to the controul of the other two parts, will aboliſh thoſe abuſes, is altogether deluſion; becauſe it is not only impracticable on the ground of formality, but is unwiſely expoſing another ſet of men to the ſame corruptions that have tainted the preſent.

Were all the objects that require a reform ac⯑compliſhable by a mere reform in the ſtate of the Repreſentation, the perſons who compoſe the pre⯑ſent Parliament might, with rather more propriety be aſked to aboliſh all the abuſes themſelves, than be applied to as the mere inſtruments of doing it by a future Parliament. If the virtue be wanting to aboliſh the abuſe, it is alſo wanting to act as the means, and the nation muſt, of neceſſity, proceed by ſome other plan.

Having thus endeavoured to ſhew what the ab⯑ject condition of Parliament is, and the impropriety of going a ſecond time over the ſame ground that has before miſcarried, I come to the remaining part of the ſubject.

There ought to be, in the conſtitution of every country, a mode of referring back, on any extraor⯑dinary occaſion, to the ſovereign and original con⯑ſtituent [65]power, which is the nation itſelf. The right of altering any part of a Government cannot, as already obſerved, reſide in the Government, or that Government might make itſelf what it pleaſed.

It ought alſo to be taken for granted, that though a nation may feel inconveniencies, either in the ex⯑ceſs of taxation, or in the mode of expenditure, or in any thing elſe, it may not at firſt be ſufficiently aſſured in what part of its government the defect lies, or where the evil originates. It may be ſup⯑poſed to be in one part, and on enquiry be found to be in another; or partly in all. This obſcurity is naturally interwoven with what are called mixed Governments.

Be, however, the reform to be accompliſhed whatever it may, it can only follow in conſequence of firſt obtaining a full knowledge of all the cauſes that have rendered ſuch reform neceſſary, and every thing ſhort of this is gueſs-work or frivolous cunning. In this caſe, it cannot be ſuppoſed that any application to Parliament can bring forward this knowledge. That body is itſelf the ſuppoſed cauſe, or one of the ſuppoſed cauſes, of the abuſes in queſtion; and cannot be expected, and ought not to be aſked, to give evidence againſt itſelf. The enquiry, therefore, which is of neceſſity the firſt ſtep in the buſineſs, cannot be entruſted to Parliament, but muſt be undertaken by a diſtinct body of men, ſeparated from every ſuſpicion of corruption or in⯑fluence.

[66]Inſtead, then, of referring to rotten Boroughs and abſurd Corporations for Addreſſes, or hawking them about the country to be ſigned by a few de⯑pendant [...]enants, the real and effectual mode would be to come at once to the point, and to aſcertain the ſenſe of the nation by electing a National Con⯑vention. By this method, as already obſerved, the general WILL, whether to reform or not, or what the reform ſhall be, or how far it ſhall extend, will be known, and it cannot be known by any other means. Such a body, empowered and ſupported by the nation, will have authority to demand in⯑formation upon all matters neceſſary to be enquired into; and no Miniſter, nor any other perſon, will dare to refuſe it. It will then be ſeen whether ſe⯑ventern millions of taxes are neceſſary, and for what purpoſes they are expended. The concealed Pen⯑ſioners will then be obliged to unmaſk; and the ſource of influence and corruption, if any ſuch there be, will be laid open to the nation, not for the pur⯑poſe of revenge, but of redreſs.

By taking this public and national ground, all objections againſt partial Addreſſes on one ſide, or private aſſociations on the other, will be done away. THE NATION WILL DECREE ITS OWN REFORMS; and the clamour about Party and Faction, or Ins or Outs, will become ridiculous.

The plan and organization of a Convention is eaſy in practice.

[67]In the firſt place, the number of inhabitants in every county can be ſufficiently enough known, from the number of houſes aſſeſſed to the Houſe and Window-light tax in each county. This will give the rule for apportioning the number of Mem⯑bers to be elected to the National Convention in each of the counties.

If the total number of inhabitants in England be ſeven millions, and the total number of Members to be elected to the Convention be one thouſand, the number of Members to be elected in a county containing one hundred and fifty thouſand inha⯑bitants will be twenty-one, and in like proportion for any other county.

As the election of a Convention muſt, in order to aſcertain the general ſenſe of the nation, go on grounds different from that of Parliamentary elec⯑tions, the mode that beſt promiſes this end will have no difficulties to combat with from abſurd cuſtoms and pretended rights. The right of every man will be the ſame, whether he lives in a city, a town, or a village. The cuſtom of attaching Rights to place, or in other words to inanimate matter, inſtead of to the perſon, independently of place, is too abſurd to make any part of a rational argument.

As every man in the nation of the age of twenty-one years pays taxes, either out of the property he poſ⯑ſeſſes, or out of the product of his labour, which is property to him; and is amenable in his own per⯑ſon to every law of the land; ſo has every one the [68]ſame equal right to vote, and no one part of a na⯑tion, nor any individual, has a right to diſpute the right of another. The man who ſhould do this ought to forfeit the exerciſe of his own right, for a term of years. This would render the puniſhment conſiſtent with the crime.

When a qualification to vote is regulated by years, it is placed on the firmeſt poſſible ground, becauſe the qualification is ſuch as nothing but dy⯑ing before the time can take away; and the equa⯑lity of Rights, as a principle, is recognized in the act of regulating the exerciſe. But when Rights are placed upon, or made dependant upon pro⯑perty, they are on the moſt precarious of all tenures. "Riches make themſelves wings, and fly away," and the rights fly with them; and thus they be⯑come loſt to the man when they would be of moſt value.

It is from a ſtrange mixture of tyranny and cowar⯑dice, that excluſions have been ſet up and conti⯑nued. The boldneſs to do wrong at firſt, changes afterwards into cowardly craft, and at laſt into fear. The Repreſentatives in England appear now to act as if they were afraid to do right, even in part, leſt it ſhould awaken the nation to a ſenſe of all the wrongs it has endured. This caſe ſerves to ſhew that the ſame conduct that beſt conſtitutes the ſafety of an individual, namely, a ſtrict adherence to prin⯑ciple, conſtitutes alſo the ſafety of a Government, and that without it ſafety is but an empty name. [69]When the rich plunder the poor of his rights, it becomes an example to the poor to plunder the rich of his property; for the rights of the one are as much property to him as wealth is property to the other, and the little all is as dear as the much. It is only by ſetting out on juſt principles that men are trained to be juſt to each other; and it will always be found, that when the rich protect the rights of the poor, the poor will protect the property of the rich. But the gaurantee, to be effectual, muſt be parliamentarily reciprocal.

Excluſions are not only unjuſt, but they fre⯑quently operate as injuriouſly to the party who mo⯑nopolizes, as to thoſe who are excluded. When men ſeek to exclude others from participating in the exerciſe of any right, they ſhould, at leaſt, be aſſured that thay can effectually perform the whole of the buſineſs they undertake; for unleſs they do this, themſelves will be loſers by the monopoly. This has been the caſe with reſpect to the monopo⯑lized right of Election. The monopolizing party has not been able to keep the Parliamentary Re⯑preſentation, to whom the power of taxation was entruſted, in the ſtate it ought to have been, and have thereby multiplied taxes upon themſelves equally with thoſe who were excluded.

A great deal has been, and will continue to be ſaid, about diſqualifications, ariſing from the com⯑miſſion of offences; but were this ſubject urged to its full extent, it would diſqualify a great number of the preſent Electors, together with their Repreſen⯑tatives; [70]for, of all offences, none are more deſtruc⯑tive to the morals of Society than Bribery and Cor⯑ruption. It is, therefore, civility to ſuch perſons to paſs this ſubject over, and to give them a fair opportunity of recovering, or rather of creating character.

Every thing, in the preſent mode of electioneer⯑ing in England, is the reverſe of what it ought to he, and the vulgarity that attends elections is no o [...]er than the natural conſequence of inverting the order of the ſyſtem.

In the firſt place, the Candidate ſeeks the Elec⯑tor, inſtead of the Elector ſeeking for a Repreſenta⯑tive; and the Electors are advertized as being in the intereſt of the Candidate, inſtead of the Candi⯑date being in the intereſt of the Electors. The Candidate pays the Elector for his vote, inſtead of the Nation paying the Repreſentative for his time and attendance on public buſineſs. The complaint for an undue election is brought by the Candidate, as if he, and not the Electors, were the party ag⯑grieved; and he takes on himſelf, at any period of the elector, to break it up, by declining, as if the election was in his right, and not in theirs.

The compact that was entered into at the laſt Weſtminſter election between two of the Candidates (Mr. Fox and Lord Hood) was an indecent viola⯑tion of the principles of election. The Candidates aſſumed, in their own perſons, the rights of the Electors; for it was only in the body of the Elec⯑tors, [71]and not at all in the Candidates, that the right of making any ſuch compact or compromiſe could exiſt. But the principle of Election and Repreſen⯑tation is ſo compleatly done away, in every ſtage thereof, that inconſiſtency has no long [...]r the power of ſurpriſing.

Neither from elections thus conducted, nor from rotten Borough Addreſſers, nor from County-meetings, promoted by Placemen and Penſioners, can the ſenſe of the nation be known. It is ſtill corruption appealing to itſelf. But a Convention of a thouſand perſons, fairly elected, would bring every matter to a decided iſſue.

As to County-meetings, it is only perſons of lei⯑ſure, or thoſe who live near to the place of meeting, that can attend, and the number on ſuch occaſions is but like a drop in the bucket compared with the whole. The only conſiſtent ſervice which ſuch meetings could render, would be that of apportion⯑ing the county into convenient diſtricts; and when this is done, each diſtrict might, according to its number of inhabitants, elect its quota of County Members to the National Convention; and the vote of each Elector might be taken in the pariſh where he reſided, either by ballot or by voice, as he ſhould chuſe to give it.

A National Convention thus formed would bring together the ſenſe and opinions of every part of the nation, fairly taken. The ſcience of Government, and the intereſt of the Public, and of the ſeveral [72]parts thereof, would then undergo an ample and rational diſcuſſion, freed from the language of par⯑liamentary diſguiſe.

But in all deliberations of this kind, though men have a right to reaſon with, and endeavour to con⯑vince each other, upon any matter that reſpects their common good, yet, in point of practice, the majority of opinions, when known, forms a rule for the whole, and to this rule every good citizen prac⯑tically conforms.

Mr. Burke, as if he knew, (for every concealed Penſioner has the opportunity of knowing) that the abuſes acted under the preſent ſyſtem, are two fla⯑grant to be palliated, and that the majority of opi⯑nions, whenever ſuch abuſes ſhould be made pub⯑lic, would be for a general and effectual reform, has endeavoured to preclude the event, by ſturdily denying the right of a majority of a nation to act as a whole. Let us beſtow a thought upon this caſe.

When any matter is propoſed as a ſubject for conſultation, it neceſſarily implies ſome mode of deciſion. Common conſent, ariſing from abſolute neceſſity, has placed this in a majority of opinions; becauſe without it there can be no deciſion, and conſequently no order. It is, perhaps, the only caſe in which mankind, however various in their ideas upon other matters, can conſiſtently be unanimous; becauſe it is a mode of deciſion derived from the [73]primary original right of every individual concern⯑ed; that right being firſt individually excerciſed in giving an opinion, and whether that opinion ſhall arrange with the minority or the majority, is a ſub⯑ſequent accidental thing that neither increaſes nor diminiſhes the individual original right itſelf. Prior to any debate, enquiry or veſtigation, it is not ſup⯑poſed to be known on which ſide the majority of opinions will fall, and therefore whilſt this mode of deciſion ſecures to every one the right of giving an opinion, it admits to every one an equal chance in the ultimate event.

Among the matters that will preſent themſelves to the conſideration of a National Convention, there is one, wholly of a domeſtic nature, but, ſo marvelouſly loaded with confuſion, as to appear, at firſt ſight, almoſt impoſſible to be reformed. I mean the condition of what is called Law.

But, if we examine into the cauſe from whence this confuſion, now ſo much the ſubject of univer⯑ſal complaint, is produced, not only the remedy will immediately preſent itſelf, but with it, the means of preventing the like caſe hereafter.

In the firſt place, the confuſion has generated it⯑ſelf from the abſurdity of every Parliament aſſum⯑ing to be eternal in power, and the laws partake in a ſimiliar manner of this aſſumption. They have no period of legal or natural expiration; and, however abſurd in principle, or inconſiſtent in practice many of them have become, they ſtill are, if not eſpe⯑cially [74]repealed, conſidered as making a part of the general maſs. By this means the body of what is called Law, is ſpread over a ſpace of ſeveral hun⯑dred years, comprehending laws obſolete, laws re⯑pugnant, laws ridiculous, and every other kind of laws forgotten or remembered; and what renders the caſe ſtill worſe is, that the confuſion multiplies with the progreſs of time. ^*

To bring this miſshapen monſter into form, and to prevent its lapſing again into a wilderneſs ſtate, only two things, and thoſe very ſimple, are ne⯑ceſſary.

The firſt is, to review the whole maſs of laws, and to bring forward ſuch only as are worth retaining, and let all the reſt drop; and to give to the laws ſo brought forward a new era commencing from the time of ſuch reform.

Secondly, that at the expiration of every twenty-one years, (or any other ſtated period) a like review ſhall again be taken, and the laws found proper to be retained, be again carried forward, commencing with that date, and the uſeleſs laws dropt and diſcon⯑tinued. By this means there can be no obſolete laws, and ſcarcely ſuch a thing as laws ſtanding in direct or equivocal contradiction to each other, and [75]every perſon will know the period of time to which he is to look back for all the laws in being.

It is worth remarking, that whilſt every other branch of ſcience is brought within ſome commo⯑dious ſyſtem, and the ſtudy of it ſimplified by eaſy methods, the laws take the contrary courſe, and be⯑come every year more complicated, entangled, con⯑fuſed, and obſcure.

Among the paragraphs which the Attorney Ge⯑neral has taken from the Rights of Man, and put into his information, one is, that were I have ſaid, ‘that with reſpect to regular law, there is ſcarcely ſuch a thing.’

As I do not know whether the Attorney-General means to ſhew this expreſſion to be libellous, be⯑cauſe it is TRUE, or becauſe it is FALSE, I ſhall make no other reply to him in this place than by remark⯑ing, that if almanack makers had not been more ju⯑dicious than law-makers, the ſtudy of almanacks would by this time have become as abſtruſe as the ſtudy of law, and we ſhould hear of a library of al⯑manacks as we now do of ſtatutes; but by the ſim⯑ple operation of letting the obſolete matter drop, and carrying forward that only which is proper to be retained, all that is neceſſary to be known, is found within the ſpace of a year, and laws alſo ad⯑mit of being kept within ſome given period.

I ſhall here cloſe this letter, ſo far as it reſpects the Addreſſers, the Proclamation, and the Proſecu⯑tion; and ſhall offer a few obſervations to the [76]Society ſtiling itſelf ‘THE FRIENDS OF THE PEOPLE.’

That the ſcience of government is beginning to be better underſtood than in former times, and that the age of fiction and political ſuperſtition, and of craft and myſtery is paſſing away, are matters which the experience of every day proves to be true, as well in England as in other countries.

As therefore it is impoſſible to calculate the ſilent progreſs of opinion, and alſo impoſſible to govern a nation after it has changed its habits of thinking, by the craft or policy that it was governed by be⯑fore; the only true method to prevent popular diſ⯑contents and commotions is, to throw, by every fair and rational argument, all the light upon the ſubject that can poſſibly be thrown; and, at the ſame time, to open the means of collecting the general ſenſe of the nation; and this cannot, as already obſerved, be done by any plan ſo effectually as a National Con⯑vention. Here individual opinion will quiet itſelf by having a centre to reſt upon.

The ſociety already mentioned, (which is made up of men of various deſcriptions, but chiefly of thoſe called Foxites,) appears to me, either to have taken wrong grounds from want of judgment, or to have acted with cunning reſerve. It is now amuſing the people with a new phraſe, namely, that of ‘a tempe⯑rate and moderate reform,’ the interpretation of which is, a continuance of the abuſes as long as poſſible. If we cannot hold all lot us hold ſome.

[77]Who are thoſe that are frightened at reforms? Are the public afraid that their taxes ſhould be leſ⯑ſened too much? Are they afraid that ſinecure places and penſions ſhould be aboliſhed too faſt? Are the poor afraid that their condition ſhould be rendered too comfortable? Is the worn-out mechanic, or the aged and decayed tradeſman, frightened at the pro⯑ſpect of receiving ten pounds a year out of the ſur⯑plus taxes? Is the ſoldier frightened at the thoughts of his diſcharge, and three ſhillings per week during life? Is the ſailor afraid that preſs-warrants will be aboliſhed? The Society miſtakes the fears of bo⯑rough-mongers, placemen, and penſioners, for the fears of the people; and the temperate and moderate Reform it talks of, is calculated to ſuit the condition of the former.

Thoſe words, "temperate and moderate," are words either of political cowardice, or of cunning, or ſeduction.—A thing, moderately good, is not ſo good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is a ſpecies of vice. But who is to be the judge of what is a temperate and moderate Reform? The Society is the repreſentative of nobody; neither can the un⯑repreſented part of the nation commit this power to thoſe in Parliament, in whoſe election they had no choice; and, therefore, even upon the ground the Society has taken, recourſe muſt be had to a Na⯑tional Convention.

[78]The objection which Mr. Fox made to Mr. Grey's propoſed Motion for a Parliamentary Reform was, that it contained no plan.—It certainly did not. But the plan very eaſily preſents itſelf; and whilſt it is fair for all parties, it prevents the dangers that might otherwiſe ariſe from private or popular diſ⯑content.