Volume IV Part 11 (1/2)

[13] Works, Vol. III. pp. 251-276, present edition.

[14] State Trials, Vol. V. p. 651.

[15] Page 676.

[16] The words necessary to the completion of the sentence are wanting in the printed trial--but the construction of the sentence, as well as the foregoing part of the speech, justify the insertion of some such supplemental words as the above.

[17] ”What we did was, in truth and substance, and in a const.i.tutional light, a revolution, not made, but prevented. We took solid securities; we settled doubtful questions; we corrected anomalies in our law. In the stable, fundamental parts of our Const.i.tution we made no revolution,--no, nor any alteration at all. We did not impair the monarchy. Perhaps it might be shown that we strengthened it very considerably. The nation kept the same ranks, the same orders, the same privileges, the same franchises, the same rules for property, the same subordinations, the same order in the law, in the revenue, and in the magistracy,--the same lords, the same commons, the same corporations, the same electors.”--_Mr. Burke's Speech in the House of Commons, 9th February, 1790._--It appears how exactly he coincides in everything with Sir Joseph Jekyl.

[18] See Reflections, pp. 42, 43.--Works, Vol. III. p. 270, present edition.

[19] Declaration of Right.

[20] Vindication of the Rights of Man, recommended by the several societies.

[21] ”Omnes omnium charitates patria una complect.i.tur.”--Cic.

[22] A few lines in Persius contain a good summary of all the objects of moral investigation, and hint the result of our inquiry: There human will has no place.

Quid _sumus_? et quidnam _victuri gignimur_? ordo Quis _datus_? et _metae_ quis mollis flexus, et unde?

Quis modus argento? Quid _fas optare_? Quid asper Utile nummus habet? _Patriae charisque propinquis_ Quantum elargiri _debet_? Quem te Deus esse _Jussit_? et humana qua parte _locatus es_ in re?

[23] It is no small loss to the world, that the whole of this enlightened and philosophic sermon, preached to _two hundred thousand_ national guards a.s.sembled at Blackheath (a number probably equal to the sublime and majestic _Federation_ of the 14th of July, 1790, in the Champ de Mars) is not preserved. A short abstract is, however, to be found in Walsingham. I have added it here for the edification of the modern Whigs, who may possibly except this precious little fragment from their general contempt of ancient learning.

”Ut sua doctrina plures inficeret, ad le Blackheth (ubi ducenta millia hominum communium fuere simul congregata) hujuscemodi sermonem est exorsus.

”Whan Adam dalfe and Eve span, Who was than a gentleman?

Continuansque sermonem inceptum, nitebatur per verba proverbii, quod pro themate sumpserat, introducere et probare, _ab initio omnes pares creatos a natura_, servitutem per injustam oppressionem nequam hominum introductam contra Dei voluntatem, quia si Deo placuisset servos crea.s.se, utique in principio mundi const.i.tuisset, quis servus, quisve dominus futurus fuisset. Considerarent igitur jam tempus a Deo datum eis, in quo (deposito servitutis jugo diutius) possent, si vellent, libertate diu concupita gaudere. Quapropter monuit ut essent viri cordati, et amore boni patrisfamilias excolentis agrum suum, et extirpantis ac resecantis noxia gramina quae fruges solent opprimere, et ipsi in praesenti facere festinarent. Prim _majores regni dominos occidendo. Deinde juridicos, justiciarios, et juratores patriae perimendo._ Postrem quoscunque scirent _in posterum communitati nocivos_ tollerent de terra sua, sic demum et _pacem_ sibimet _parerent et securitatem_ in futurum. _Si sublatis majoribus esset inter eos aequa libertas, eadem n.o.bilitas, par dignitas, similisque potestas._”

Here is displayed at once the whole of the grand _arcanum_ pretended to be found out by the National a.s.sembly, for securing future happiness, peace, and tranquillity. There seems, however, to be some doubt whether this venerable protomartyr of philosophy was inclined to carry his own declaration of the rights of men more rigidly into practice than the National a.s.sembly themselves. He was, like them, only preaching licentiousness to the populace to obtain power for himself, if we may believe what is subjoined by the historian.

”c.u.mque haec et _plura alia deliramenta_” (think of this old fool's calling all the wise maxims of the French Academy _deliramenta_!) ”praedica.s.set, commune vulgus c.u.m tanto favore prosequitur, ut _exclamarent eum archiepiscopum futurum, et regni cancellarium_.”

Whether he would have taken these situations under these names, or would have changed the whole nomenclature of the State and Church, to be understood in the sense of the Revolution, is not so certain. It is probable that he would have changed the names and kept the substance of power.

We find, too, that they had in those days their _society for const.i.tutional information_, of which the Reverend John Ball was a conspicuous member, sometimes under his own name, sometimes under the feigned name of John Schep. Besides him it consisted (as Knyghton tells us) of persons who went by the real or fict.i.tious names of Jack Mylner, Tom Baker, Jack Straw, Jack Trewman, Jack Carter, and probably of many more. Some of the choicest flowers of the publications charitably written and circulated by them gratis are upon record in Walsingham and Knyghton: and I am inclined to prefer the pithy and sententious brevity of these _bulletins_ of ancient rebellion before the loose and confused prolixity of the modern advertis.e.m.e.nts of const.i.tutional information.

They contain more good morality and less bad politics, they had much more foundation in real oppression, and they have the recommendation of being much better adapted to the capacities of those for whose instruction they were intended. Whatever laudable pains the teachers of the present day appear to take, I cannot compliment them so far as to allow that they have succeeded in writing down to the level of their pupils, _the members of the sovereign_, with half the ability of Jack Carter and the Reverend John Ball. That my readers may judge for themselves, I shall give them, one or two specimens.

The first is an address from the Reverend John Ball, under his _nom de guerre_ of John Schep. I know not against what particular ”guyle in borough” the writer means to caution the people; it may have been only a general cry against ”_rotten boroughs_,” which it was thought convenient, then as now, to make the first pretext, and place at the head of the list of grievances.

JOHN SCHEP.

”Iohn Schep sometime seint Mary priest of Yorke, and now of Colchester, greeteth well Iohn Namelesse, and Iohn the Miller, and Iohn Carter, and _biddeth them that they beware of guyle in borough_, and stand together in G.o.ds name, and biddeth Piers Ploweman goe to his werke, and chastise well _Hob the robber_, [probably the king,] and take with you Iohn Trewman, and all his fellows, and no moe.

”Iohn the Miller hath yground smal, small, small: The kings sonne of heauen shal pay for all.