Transcripts
Some writers have so confounded society with government as to leave little or no distinction
Speaker:between them, whereas they're not only different but have different origins.
Speaker:Society is produced by our wants and government by our wickedness.
Speaker:The former promotes our happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively
Speaker:by restraining our vices.
Speaker:The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions.
Speaker:The first is a patron, the last a punisher.
Speaker:Society in every state is a blessing, but government, even in its best state, is but
Speaker:a necessary evil, in its worst state an intolerable one, for when we suffer or are exposed to
Speaker:the same miseries by a government which we might expect in a country without government,
Speaker:our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer.
Speaker:Like dress is the badge of lost innocence.
Speaker:The palaces of kings are built on the ruins of the bowers of paradise, for were the impulses
Speaker:of conscience clear, uniform, and irresistibly obeyed, man would need no other lawgiver.
Speaker:But that not being the case, he finds it necessary to surrender up a part of his property to
Speaker:furnish means for the protection of the rest, and this he is induced to do by the same prudence
Speaker:which in every other case advises him out of two evils to choose the least.
Speaker:Wherefore, security being the true design and end of government, it unanswerably follows
Speaker:that whatever form thereof appears most likely to ensure it to us, with the least expense
Speaker:and greatest benefit, is preferable to all others.
Speaker:In order to gain a clear and just idea of the design and end of government, let's suppose
Speaker:a small number of persons settled in some sequestered part of the earth, unconnected
Speaker:with the rest, they will then represent the first peopling of any country or of the world.
Speaker:In this state of natural liberty, society will be their first thought.
Speaker:A thousand motives will excite them there too.
Speaker:The strength of one man is so unequal to his wants, and his mind so unfitted for perpetual
Speaker:solitude that he is soon obliged to seek assistance and relief of another who, in his
Speaker:turn, requires the same.
Speaker:Four or five united would be able to raise a tolerable dwelling in the midst of a wilderness,
Speaker:but one man might labor out the common period of life without accomplishing anything.
Speaker:When he had felt his timber, he could not remove it, nor erect it after it was removed.
Speaker:Hunger in the meantime would urge him from his work, and every different want call him
Speaker:a different way.
Speaker:In his disease, nay, even misfortune would be death, for though neither might be mortal,
Speaker:yet either would disable him from living, and reduce him to a state in which he might
Speaker:rather be said to perish than to die.
Speaker:This necessity, like a gravitating power, would soon form our newly arrived emigrants
Speaker:into society, the reciprocal blessing of which would supersede and render the obligations
Speaker:of law and government unnecessary while they remained perfectly just to each other.
Speaker:But as nothing but heaven is impregnable to vice, it will unavoidably happen that in proportion
Speaker:as they surmount the first difficulties of emigration, which bound them together in a
Speaker:common cause, they'll begin to relax in their duty and attachment to each other, and this
Speaker:remissness will point out the necessity of establishing some form of government to supply
Speaker:the defect of moral virtue.
Speaker:Some convenient tree will afford them a state house, under the branches of which the whole
Speaker:colony may assemble to deliberate on public matters.
Speaker:It is more than probable that their first laws will have the title only of regulations,
Speaker:and be enforced by no other penalty than public dis-esteem.
Speaker:In this first parliament, every man by natural right will have a seat, but as the colony
Speaker:increases, the public concerns will increase likewise, and the distance at which the members
Speaker:may be separated will render it too inconvenient for all of them to meet on every occasion
Speaker:as at first when their number was small, their habitations near, and the public concerns
Speaker:few and trifling.
Speaker:This will point out the convenience of their consenting to leave the legislative part to
Speaker:be managed by a select number chosen from the whole body, who are supposed to have the
Speaker:same concerns at stake which those have who appointed them, and who will act in the same
Speaker:manner as the whole body would act were they present.
Speaker:If the colony continues increasing, it will become necessary to augment the number of
Speaker:the representatives, and that the interest of every part of the colony may be attended
Speaker:to, it will be found best to divide the whole into convenient parts, each part sending its
Speaker:proper number, and that the elected might never form to themselves an interest separate
Speaker:from the electors, prudence will point out the propriety of having elections often, because
Speaker:as the elected might by that means return and mix again with the general body of the
Speaker:electors in a few months, their fidelity to the public will be secured by the prudent
Speaker:reflection of not making a rod for themselves, and as this frequent interchange will establish
Speaker:a common interest with every part of the community, they'll mutually and naturally support each
Speaker:other, and on this, not on the unmeaning name of the king, depends the strength of government
Speaker:and the happiness of the governed. Here then is the origin and rise of government, namely
Speaker:a mode rendered necessary by the inability of moral virtue to govern the world.
Speaker:Here too is the design and end of government, vis freedom and security, and however our
Speaker:eyes may be dazzled with snow or our ears deceived by sound, however prejudice may warp
Speaker:our wills or interest darken our understanding, the simple voice of nature and of reason will
Speaker:say it is right. I draw my idea of the form of government from
Speaker:a principle in nature which no art can overturn, vis that the more simple anything is, the less
Speaker:liable it is to be disordered, and the easier repaired when disordered, and with this maximan
Speaker:view I offer a few remarks on this so much boasted constitution of England. That it was
Speaker:noble for the dark and slavish times in which it was erected is granted. When the world was
Speaker:overrun with tyranny, the least removed therefrom was a glorious rescue, but that it is imperfect,
Speaker:subject to convulsions and incapable of producing what it seems to promise is easily demonstrated.
Speaker:Absolute governments, though the disgrace of human nature, have this advantage with
Speaker:them that they are simple. If the people suffer, they know the head from which their suffering
Speaker:springs, no likewise the remedy, and are not bewildered by a variety of causes and cures.
Speaker:But the constitution of England is so exceedingly complex that the nation may suffer for years
Speaker:together without being able to discover in which part the fault lies. Some will say in
Speaker:one, and some in another, and every political physician will advise a different medicine.
Speaker:I know it's difficult to get over local or long-standing prejudices, yet if we will
Speaker:suffer ourselves to examine the component parts of the English constitution, we shall
Speaker:find them to be the base remains of two ancient tyrannies compounded with some new republican
Speaker:materials. First, the remains of monarchical tyranny in the person of the king. Secondly,
Speaker:the remains of aristocratic tyranny in the persons of the peers. Thirdly, the new republican
Speaker:materials in the persons of the commons on whose virtue depends the freedom of England.
Speaker:The two first, by being hereditary, are independent of the people, wherefor in a constitutional
Speaker:sense they contribute nothing towards the freedom of the state. To say that the constitution
Speaker:of England is a union of three powers reciprocally checking each other is farcical, either the
Speaker:words have no meaning or their flat contradictions. To say that the commons is a check upon the
Speaker:king presupposes two things. First, that the king is not to be trusted without being looked
Speaker:after, or in other words, that a thirst for absolute power is the natural disease of monarchy.
Speaker:Secondly, that the commons, by being appointed for that purpose, are either wiser or more
Speaker:worthy of confidence than the crown. But as the same constitution which gives the commons
Speaker:a power to check the king by withholding the supplies, gives afterwards the king a power
Speaker:to check the commons by empowering him to reject their other bills. It again supposes
Speaker:that the king is wiser than those whom it is already supposed to be wiser than him,
Speaker:a mere absurdity.
Speaker:There's something exceedingly ridiculous in the composition of monarchy. It first excludes
Speaker:a man from the means of information, yet empowers him to act in cases where the highest judgment
Speaker:is required. The state of a king shuts him from the world, yet the business of a king
Speaker:requires him to know it thoroughly. Wherefore, the different parts, by unnaturally opposing
Speaker:and destroying each other, prove the whole character to be absurd and useless.
Speaker:Some writers have explained the English constitution thus. The king, say they, is one, the people
Speaker:another. The peers are in house in behalf of the king, the commons in behalf of the people,
Speaker:but this hath all the distinctions of in house divided against itself. And though the expressions
Speaker:be pleasantly arranged, yet when examined they appear idle and ambiguous. And it will
Speaker:always happen that the nicest construction that words are capable of, when applied to
Speaker:the description of something which either cannot exist or is too incomprehensible to be within
Speaker:the compass of description, will be words of sound only. And though they may amuse the ear,
Speaker:they cannot inform the mind, for this explanation includes a previous question. Viz, how came
Speaker:the king by a power which the people are afraid to trust and always obliged to check? Such
Speaker:a power could not be the gift of a wise people, neither can any power which needs checking
Speaker:be from God, yet the provision which the constitution makes, supposes such a power to exist.
Speaker:But the provision is unequal to the task. The means either cannot or will not accomplish
Speaker:the end, and the whole affair is a phalo-de-say, for as the greater weight will always carry
Speaker:up the less, and as all the wheels of a machine are put in motion by one, it only remains
Speaker:to know which power in the constitution has the most weight, for that will govern. And
Speaker:though the others or a part of them may clog or as the phrase is, check the rapidity of
Speaker:its motion, yet so long as they cannot stop it, their endeavors will be ineffectual. The
Speaker:first moving power will at last have its way, and what it wants in speed is supplied by
Speaker:time. That the crown is the overbearing part in the English constitution needs not be
Speaker:mentioned, and that it derives its whole consequence merely from being the giver of places and
Speaker:pensions is self-evident. Wherefore, though we have been wise enough to shut and lock a door
Speaker:against absolute monarchy, we at the same time have been foolish enough to put the crown
Speaker:in possession of the key. The prejudice of Englishmen in favor of their own government
Speaker:by king, lords, and commons arises as much or more from national pride than reason.
Speaker:Individuals are undoubtedly safer in England than in some other countries, but the will
Speaker:of the king is as much the law of the land in Britain as in France, with this difference
Speaker:that instead of proceeding directly from his mouth, it is handed to the people under the
Speaker:more formidable shape of an act of parliament. For the fate of Charles I hath only made kings
Speaker:more subtle, not more just. Wherefore, laying aside all national pride and prejudice in favor
Speaker:of modes and forms, the plain truth is that it is wholly owing to the constitution of the
Speaker:people and not to the constitution of the government that the crown is not as oppressive
Speaker:in England as in Turkey. An inquiry into the constitutional errors in the English form of
Speaker:government is at this time highly unnecessary, for as we are never in a proper condition
Speaker:of doing justice to others while we continue under the influence of some leading partiality,
Speaker:so neither are we capable of doing it to ourselves while we remain fettered by any obstinate
Speaker:prejudice. And as a man who is attached to a prostitute is unfitted to choose or judge
Speaker:of a wife, so any pre-possession in favor of a rotten constitution of government will
Speaker:disable us from discerning a good one.
Speaker:Mankind being originally equals in the order of creation, the equality could only be destroyed
Speaker:by some subsequent circumstance. The distinctions of rich and poor may in a great measure be
Speaker:accounted for, and that without having recourse to the harsh, ill-sounding names of oppression
Speaker:and avarice. Oppression is often the consequence, but seldom or never the means of riches, and
Speaker:though avarice will preserve a man from being necessitously poor, it generally makes him
Speaker:too timorous to be wealthy. But there is another and greater distinction for which no truly
Speaker:natural or religious reason can be assigned, and that is the distinction of men into kings
Speaker:and subjects. Male and female are the distinctions of nature, good and bad the distinctions of
Speaker:heaven, but how a race of men came into the world so exalted above the rest and distinguished
Speaker:like some new species is worth inquiring into, and whether they are the means of happiness
Speaker:or of misery to mankind. In the early ages of the world, according to the scripture chronology,
Speaker:there were no kings, the consequence of which was there were no wars. It is the pride of
Speaker:kings which throw mankind into confusion. Holland, without a king, hath enjoyed more peace for
Speaker:this last century than any of the monarchical governments in Europe. Antiquity favors the
Speaker:same remark, for the quiet and rural lives of the first patriarchs hath a happy something
Speaker:in them, which vanishes away when we come to the history of Jewish royalty. Government
Speaker:by kings was first introduced into the world by the heathens, from whom the children of
Speaker:Israel copied the custom. It was the most prosperous invention the devil ever set on foot for the
Speaker:promotion of idolatry. The heathens paid divine honors to their deceased kings, and the Christian
Speaker:world hath improved on the plan by doing the same to their living ones. How impious is the
Speaker:title of sacred majesty applied to a worm, who in the midst of his splendor is crumbling
Speaker:into dust? As the exalting one man so greatly above the rest cannot be justified on the equal
Speaker:rights of nature, so neither can it be defended on the authority of scripture. For the will
Speaker:of the Almighty, as declared by Gideon and the prophet Samuel, expressly disapproves of
Speaker:government by kings. All anti-monarchical parts of scripture have been very smoothly glossed
Speaker:over in monarchical governments, but they undoubtedly merit the attention of countries which have
Speaker:their governments yet to form. Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesars is the scripture
Speaker:doctrine of courts, yet it is no support of monarchical government, for the Jews at that
Speaker:time were without a king, and in a state of vassalage to the Romans. Nearly 3,000 years
Speaker:passed away from the mosaic account of the creation till the Jews under a national delusion
Speaker:requested a king. Till then, their form of government, except in extraordinary cases
Speaker:where the Almighty interposed, was a kind of republic administered by a judge and the
Speaker:elders of the tribes. Kings they had none, and it was held sinful to acknowledge any
Speaker:being under that title but the Lord of Hosts. And when a man seriously reflects on the
Speaker:idolatrous homage which is paid to the persons of kings, he need not wonder that the Almighty
Speaker:ever jealous of his honor should disapprove of a form of government which so impiously
Speaker:invades the prerogative of heaven. Monarchy is ranked in scripture as one of the sins
Speaker:of the Jews for which a curse in reserve is denounced against them. The history of that
Speaker:transaction is worth attending to. The children of Israel being oppressed by the many knights,
Speaker:and marched against them with a small army, and victory through the divine interposition
Speaker:decided in his favor. The Jews elate with success and attributing it to the generalship
Speaker:of Gideon, proposed making him a king saying, Rule thou over us, thou, and thy son, and
Speaker:thy son son. Here was temptation in its fullest extent. Not a kingdom only, but an hereditary
Speaker:one. But Gideon in the piety of his soul replied, I will not rule over you, neither shall my
Speaker:son rule over you, the Lord shall rule over you. Words need not be more explicit. Gideon
Speaker:doth not decline the honor, but denyeth their right to give it. Neither doth he compliment
Speaker:them with invented declarations of his thanks, but in the positive style of a prophet charges
Speaker:them with disaffection to their proper sovereign, the King of Heaven. About 130 years after
Speaker:this, they fell again into the same error. The hankering which the Jews had for the idolatrous
Speaker:customs of the heathens is something exceedingly unaccountable. But so it was that laying hold
Speaker:of the misconduct of Samuel's two sons, who were entrusted with some secular concerns,
Speaker:they came in an abrupt and clamorous manner to Samuel, saying, Behold, thou art old, and
Speaker:thy sons walk not in thy ways. Now, make us a king to judge us like all the other nations.
Speaker:And here, we cannot but observe that their motives were bad, because they might be like
Speaker:unto other nations, i.e. the heathens, whereas their true glory laid in being as much unlike
Speaker:them as possible. But the thing displeased Samuel when they said, Give us a king to judge
Speaker:us, and Samuel prayed unto the Lord, and the Lord said unto Samuel, Harken unto the voice
Speaker:of the people in all that they say unto thee, for they have not rejected thee, but they
Speaker:have rejected me, that I should not reign over them. According to all the works which
Speaker:they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt, even unto this day,
Speaker:wherewith they have forsaken me and served other gods. So do they also unto thee. Now,
Speaker:therefore, Harken unto their voice, howbeit, protest solemnly unto them, and show them the
Speaker:manner of the king that shall reign over them. i.e. not of any particular king, but the general
Speaker:manner of the kings of the earth, whom Israel was so eagerly copying after, and notwithstanding
Speaker:the great distance of time and difference of manners, the character is still in fashion.
Speaker:And Samuel told all the words of the Lord unto the people that asked of him a king, and
Speaker:he said, This shall be the manner of the king that shall reign over you. He will take your
Speaker:sons and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen, and some shall run
Speaker:before his chariots. This description agrees with the present mode of impressing men. And
Speaker:he will appoint him captains over thousands and captains over fifties, and will set them
Speaker:to ear his ground, and to read his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments
Speaker:of his chariots. And he'll take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and
Speaker:to be bakers. This describes the expense and luxury as well as the oppression of kings.
Speaker:And he will take your fields and your olive yards, even the best of them, and give them
Speaker:to his servants. And he'll take the tenth of your feed and of your vineyards, and give
Speaker:them to his officers and to his servants. By which we see that bribery, corruption, and
Speaker:autism are the standing vices of kings. And he will take the tenth of your men's servants,
Speaker:and your maid's servants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to
Speaker:his work. And he'll take the tenth of your sheep, and ye shall be his servants, and ye
Speaker:shall cry out in that day, because of your king, which ye shall have chosen. And the
Speaker:Lord will not hear you in that day. This accounts for the continuation of monarchy.
Speaker:Neither do the characters of the few good kings which have lived since either sanctify
Speaker:the title or blot out the sinfulness of the origin. The high encomium given of David takes
Speaker:no notice of him officially as a king, but only as a man after God's own heart.
Speaker:Nevertheless, the people refuse to obey the voice of Samuel, and they said,
Speaker:Nay, but we will have a king over us, that we may be like all the nations, and that our
Speaker:king may judge us, and go out before us and fight our battles. Samuel continued to reason
Speaker:with them, but to no purpose. He said before them they're in gratitude, but all would
Speaker:not avail. And seeing them fully bent on their folly, he cried out, I will call unto the
Speaker:Lord, and he shall send thunder and rain, which then was a punishment, being in the
Speaker:time of wheat harvest, that ye may perceive, and see that your wickedness is great, which
Speaker:ye have done in the sight of the Lord, in asking you a king. So Samuel called unto
Speaker:the Lord, and the Lord sent thunder and rain that day, and all the people greatly feared
Speaker:the Lord and Samuel, and all the people said unto Samuel, Pray for thy servants unto
Speaker:the Lord thy God, that we die not, for we have added unto our sins this evil, to ask
Speaker:a king. These portions of scripture are direct and positive. They admit of no
Speaker:equivocal construction, that the Almighty hath here entered his protest against monarchical
Speaker:government as true, or the scripture is false, and a man hath good reason to believe that
Speaker:there is as much of kingcraft as priestcraft in withholding the scripture from the public
Speaker:in popish countries, for monarchy in every instance is the popery of government.
Speaker:To the evil of monarchy we have added that of hereditary succession, and as the first
Speaker:is a degradation and lessening of ourselves, so the second, claimed as a matter of right,
Speaker:is an insult and an imposition on posterity, for all men being originally equals, no one
Speaker:by birth could have a right to set up his own family in perpetual preference to all
Speaker:others forever, and though himself might deserve some decent degree of honors of his
Speaker:co-temporaries, yet his descendants might be far too unworthy to inherit them.
Speaker:One of the strongest natural proofs of the folly of hereditary right in kings is that
Speaker:nature disapproves it, otherwise she would not so frequently turn it into ridicule by
Speaker:giving mankind an ass for a lion. Secondly, as no man at first could possess any other
Speaker:public honors than were bestowed upon him, so the givers of those honors could have no power
Speaker:to give away the right of posterity, and though they might say we choose you for our head,
Speaker:they could not, without manifest injustice to their children, say that your children
Speaker:and your children's children shall reign over ours forever, because such an unwise,
Speaker:unjust, unnatural compact might, perhaps in the next succession, put them under the
Speaker:government of a rogue or a fool. Most wise men, in their private sentiments,
Speaker:have ever treated hereditary right with contempt, yet it is one of those evils which,
Speaker:when once established, is not easily removed. Many submit from fear, others from superstition,
Speaker:and the more powerful part shares with the king the plunder of the rest.
Speaker:This is supposing the present race of kings in the world to have had an honorable origin,
Speaker:whereas it is more than probable that could we take off the dark covering of antiquity,
Speaker:and trace them to their first rise, that we should find the first of them nothing better than the
Speaker:principal ruffian of some restless gang, whose savage manners or preeminence in subtility
Speaker:obtained him the title of chief among plunderers, and who, by increasing in power and extending
Speaker:his depredations, overawed the quiet and defenseless to purchase their safety by frequent
Speaker:contributions. Yet, his electors could have no idea of giving hereditary right to his descendants,
Speaker:because such a perpetual exclusion of themselves was incompatible with the free and unrestrained
Speaker:principles they professed to live by. Wherefore, hereditary succession in the early ages of monarchy
Speaker:could not take place as a matter of claim, but as something casual or supplemental.
Speaker:But as few or no records were extant in those days, and traditionary history stuffed with fables,
Speaker:it was very easy, after the lapse of a few generations, to trump up some superstitious
Speaker:tale conveniently timed, Muhammad-like, to cram hereditary right down the throats of the vulgar.
Speaker:Perhaps the disorders which threatened, or seemed to threaten, on the decease of a leader and the
Speaker:choice of a new one, for elections among ruffians could not be very orderly, induced many at first
Speaker:to favor hereditary pretensions, by which means it happened, as it hath happened since, that what
Speaker:at first was submitted to as a convenience was afterwards claimed as a right. England,
Speaker:since the conquest, hath known some few good monarchs, but groaned beneath a much larger
Speaker:number of bad ones, yet no man in his senses can say that their claim, under William the Conqueror,
Speaker:is a very honorable one. A French bastard landing with an armed bandit, and establishing himself
Speaker:King of England against the consent of the natives is in plain terms a very paltry, rascally original.
Speaker:It certainly hath no divinity in it. However, it is needless to spend much time in exposing
Speaker:the folly of hereditary right, if there are any so weak as to believe it, let them promiscuously
Speaker:worship the ass in lion, and welcome, I shall neither copy their humility, nor disturb their
Speaker:devotion. Yet, I should be glad to ask how they suppose kings came at first. The question admits
Speaker:but of three answers, vis, either by lot, by election, or by usurpation. If the first king
Speaker:was taken by lot, it establishes a precedent for the next, which excludes hereditary succession.
Speaker:Saul was by lot, yet the succession was not hereditary. Neither does it appear from that
Speaker:transaction there was any intention it ever should. If the first king of any country was by
Speaker:election, that likewise establishes a precedent for the next. For to say that the right of all
Speaker:future generations is taken away by the act of the first electors, in their choice not only of a king
Speaker:but of a family of kings forever, hath no parallel in or out of scripture but the doctrine of original
Speaker:sin, which supposes the free will of all men lost in Adam. And from such comparison, and it will admit
Speaker:of no other, hereditary succession can derive no glory. For as in Adam all sinned, and as in the
Speaker:first electors all men obeyed, as in the one all mankind were subjected to Satan, and in the other
Speaker:to sovereignty. As our innocence was lost in the first, and our authority in the last, and as both
Speaker:disable us from re-assuming some farmer's state and privilege, it unanswerably follows that original
Speaker:sin and hereditary succession are parallels. Dishonorable rank in glorious connection, yet
Speaker:the most subtle suffice cannot produce a juster simile. As to usurpation, no man will be so hardy
Speaker:as to defend it, and that William the Conqueror was a new surfer is a fact not to be contradicted.
Speaker:The plain truth is that the antiquity of English monarchy will not bear looking into.
Speaker:But it's not so much the absurdity as the evil of hereditary succession which concerns mankind.
Speaker:Did it ensure a race of good and wise men it would have the seal of divine authority?
Speaker:But as it opens a door to the foolish, the wicked and the improper, it hath in it the nature of
Speaker:oppression. Men who look upon themselves born to reign and others to obey soon grow insolent.
Speaker:Selected from the rest of mankind, their minds are early poisoned by importance,
Speaker:and the world they act in differs so materially from the world at large that they have but little
Speaker:opportunity of knowing its true interests, and when they succeed to the government are frequently
Speaker:the most ignorant and unfit of any throughout the dominions. Another evil which attends hereditary
Speaker:succession is that the throne is subject to be possessed by a miner at any age, all which time
Speaker:the regency, acting under the cover of a king, have every opportunity and inducement to betray
Speaker:their trust. The same national misfortune happens when a king worn out with age and infirmity enters
Speaker:the last stage of human weakness. In both these cases the public becomes a prey to every miscreant
Speaker:who can tamper successfully with the follies either of age or infancy. The most plausible plea
Speaker:which hath ever been offered in favor of hereditary succession is that it preserves a nation from
Speaker:civil wars, and were this true it would be weighty, whereas it is the most bare faced falsity ever
Speaker:imposed upon mankind. The whole history of England disowns the fact. Thirty kings and two miners
Speaker:have reigned in that distracted kingdom since the conquest, in which time there have been,
Speaker:including the revolution, no less than eight civil wars and nineteen rebellions.
Speaker:Wherefore, instead of making for peace, it makes against it and destroys the very foundation
Speaker:it seems to stand on. The contest for monarchy and succession between the houses of York and
Speaker:Lancaster laid England in a scene of blood for many years. Twelve pitched battles, besides
Speaker:skirmishes and sieges, were fought between Henry and Edward. Twice was Henry prisoner to Edward,
Speaker:who, in his turn, was prisoner to Henry. And so uncertain is the fate of war and the temper of
Speaker:a nation, when nothing but personal matters are the ground of a quarrel, that Henry was taken in
Speaker:triumph from a prison to a palace, and Edward obliged to fly from a palace to a foreign land.
Speaker:Yet, as sudden transitions of temper are seldom lasting, Henry, in his turn, was driven from the
Speaker:throne and Edward recalled to succeed him. The parliament always following the strongest side.
Speaker:This contest began in the reign of Henry VI and was not entirely extinguished till Henry VII,
Speaker:in whom the families were united, including a period of sixty-seven years, vis from 1422 to 1489.
Speaker:In short, monarchy and succession have laid, not this or that kingdom only, but the world in blood
Speaker:and ashes, which is a form of government which the word of God bears testimony against, and blood
Speaker:will attend it. If we inquire into the business of a king, we shall find that in some countries
Speaker:they have none, and after sauntering away their lives without pleasure to themselves or advantage
Speaker:to the nation, withdraw from the scene and leave their successors to tread the same idle round.
Speaker:In absolute monarchies, the whole weight of business, civil and military, lies on the king.
Speaker:The children of Israel, in their request for a king, urged this plea, that he may judge us
Speaker:and go out before us and fight our battles. But in countries where he is neither a judge
Speaker:nor a general, as in England, a man would be puzzled to know what is his business.
Speaker:The nearer any government approaches to a republic, the less business there is for a king.
Speaker:It is somewhat difficult to find a proper name for the government of England. Sir William Meredith
Speaker:calls it a republic, but in its present state, it is unworthy of the name, because the corrupt
Speaker:influence of the crown, by having all the places in its disposal, have so effectively swallowed
Speaker:up the power and eaten out the virtue of the House of Commons, the republican part in the
Speaker:constitution, that the government of England is nearly as monarchical as that of France or Spain.
Speaker:Men fall out with names without understanding them, for it is the republican and not the
Speaker:monarchical part of the constitution of England, which Englishmen glory in,
Speaker:vis the liberty of choosing a House of Commons from out of their own body. And it's easy to see
Speaker:that when republican virtue fails, slavery ensues. Why is the constitution of England sickly,
Speaker:but because monarchy hath poisoned the republic, the crown hath engrossed the commons?
Speaker:In England, a king hath little more to do than to make war and give away places, which in plain terms
Speaker:is to impoverish the nation and set it together by the ears. A pretty business indeed for a man
Speaker:to be allowed 800,000 sterling a year for, and worshipped into the bargain. Of more worth is
Speaker:one honest man to society and in the sight of God than all the crowned ruffians that ever lived.
