Injuries done to by the violation

the community

of the laws.

Self protecting rights of the community.

traitorous cell of darknefs the lurking fpirit of feduction? Expofed to the broad day light of the British constitution, his hideous deformity will overwhelm with horror the very dupes of his artful difguife.

According to the principles already laid down, there can be no greater coercion upon fubjects to obey the laws of their country, than what is impofed by our conftitution. As each individual gives his affent to every law, fo has he an interest in their observance and prefervation. Every fort of condemnation, refiftance, and oppofition to the law, is an injury to those, who enacted it; the contempt of magiftrates is an infult to the community, whofe delegates they are; the impeachment of their authority is an arraignment of the power of the people, who gave it; and a difrefpect for the king is the most direct contempt of the people, whofe majefty is collected in his awful perfonage.

The grand protecting principle of our conftitution is, not to permit an injury without a remedy; nor can it be conceived, that the conftitution itself, which is the fource and refervoir of all the laws and rights of the people, should leave itself and the community so unprotected, as to be unable to preserve the collective corporate rights of the whole,

whilft it enables individuals to preferve their fubordinate rights, which fpring out of

them.

The

It is evident, that whoever has a right to be protected, has a tranfcendent right to preferve the means of his protection. rights and liberties of Englishmen can only be protected by the conftitution and government; and they can no longer protect, than they preferve their refpect, vigor, and energy. It is not only the intereft, but the duty of every Englishman to fupport and preferve them; and therefore political criminality cannot be carried to a higher pitch, than a determined intention, defire, and attempt to vilify, weaken, and overturn the conftitution and government. If the mind be clearly bent upon the mifchief, the means adopted to bring it to bear are very immaterial; though no means can be more obnoxious, than attempts to infect the minds of others with the deadly contagion, by fpreading it as widely as poffible, in books difguifed under delufive and infidious titles. For confident I am, that few of my countrymen would read, much lefs would they encourage and promote the circulation of any book, which befpoke upon the face of it an avowed intention and defign of traducing, difturbing, and overturning

overturning the conftitution and government of Great Britain. As the author and publifher of fuch a book would upon an impartial trial by Englishmen certainly be found guilty of fedition and treafon, fo could the encouragers and promoters of fuch a feditious and treasonable libel little expect to be innocently acquitted by a fair and upright jury of their countrymen.

If the private rights of individuals are to be protected and preferved from civil injury and invafion, how neceffary for that very purpose is it, that the protecting and preferving power itself should be kept up in unimConfiderations paired vigor and perfection; nay fo transcendently superior to private confiderations are the confiderations of the state, that

of ftate tran

fcendent over private confiderations.

"though laws prevent confequences injurious to particulars, where they can confistently with focial good, yet in matters, which concern the exiftence of the fociety, or government, confequences injurious to particulars must not only be fuffered to take place, but even fought for and indulged, if they have a tendency to prevent confequences injurious to government itself. On this reason

* Yorke's Confiderations on the Law of Forfeiture, p. 40, 41.

ftand

So adds

"No- To attempt the

ftand those fevere laws, which have been
made in several states against neutrality in
times of common danger. It is agreeable
to the policy and original compact of go-
vernment to blend and involve the intereft
of every member with its own."
this learned conftitutional writer.
thing is more natural, than the conftruction,
which civil laws have put on treafons against
government, than when a man endeavours
the diffolution of it, he means to difclaim all
those benefits and rights, which it has either
made him capable to enjoy, or the inftrument
to convey." Whence elsewhere comparing
the imperial with the confular fate of ancient
Rome, he fays: "An unguarded faying
was treafon against emperors; but in a fiee
ftate a man could only be accused of actions,
which had a direct tendency to overturn go-
vernment." And although he fays, that
Auguftus on account of the licentious writ-
ings and converfation of Caffius Severus,
had caused the matter of libel to be treated
capitally, as a crime of lefa mojeflas, yet

"the mildness of his nature inclined him, and the liberty of Rome fo lately loft, made

* Yorke's Confiderations on the Law of Forfeiture, p. 51.

+ Ibid. p. 50.

diffolution of

government, is rights of foci

to difclaim the

ety.

it

Execution of the laws neceffary for the prefervation of fociety.

it his intereft, not to deviate in things of this
high importance from the conftitution of his
country.
At the fame time he faw his own
fecurity and the tranquillity of the ftate de-
pended on the exacteft fupport of his au-
thority, and the execution of thefe laws."
With little plaufibility can the right of pub-
licly arraigning government be infisted upon
by thofe, who trace our civil rights from an
early date.
«The old Britons were very
careful of domestic peace, in preventing pri-
vate caballing and feditious reflections upon
adminiftration; their law allowing none but
the magiftrates to talk of the affairs of the
commonwealth, and that only in open
council."

It is neceffary in every ftate, but emphatically fo in the political government of Great Britain, in which the people make the laws, that the authority and execution of them should be ftrictly and even rigorously fupported." The profperity and greatness of empires ever depended, and ever must depend upon the ufe their inhabitants make of their reafon, in devifing wife laws, and the

Gurdon, vol. i. p. 17. who quotes Bodin de Rep.

1. i. c. 4.

+ Erkine's Argument in the Cafe of the Dean of St. Afaph, p. 211.