liberty so incorporated, and in a manner identified with justice, must be infinitely dear to every man, who is capable of conceiving what it is. But whenever a separation is made between liberty and justice, neither is, in my opinion, safe. I do not believe that men ever did submit, certain I am that they never ought to have submitted, to the arbitrary pleasure of one man, but under circumstances, in which the arbitrary pleasure of many persons in the community, pressed with an intolerable hardship upon the just and equal rights of their fellows. Such a choice might be made as among evils. The moment will is set above reason and justice in any community, a great question may arise in sober minds, in what part or portion of the community that dangerous dominion of will may be least mischievously placed. * *

"I have nothing to check my wishes towards the establishment of a solid and rational scheme of liberty in France. On the subject of the relative power of nations, I may have prejudices; but I envy internal freedom, security, and good order, to none. When, therefore, I shall learn that in France, the citizen, by whatever description he is qualified, is in a perfect state of legal security, with regard to his life, to his property, to the uncontrolled disposal of his person, to the free use of his industry and his faculties ;-when I hear that he is protected in the beneficial enjoyment of the estates, to which, by the course of settled law, he was born, or is provided with a fair compensation for them; that he is maintained in the full fruition

of the advantages, belonging to the state and condition of life, in which he had lawfully engaged himself, or is supplied with an equitable equivalent; when I am assured, that a simple citizen may decently express his sentiments upon public affairs, without hazard to his life or liberty, even though against a predominant and fashionable opinion; when I know all this of France, I shall be as well pleased as every one must be, who has not forgot the general communion of mankind, nor lost his natural sympathy in local and accidental connexions."

This paper, though not published by one of Mr. Burke's friends, is in itself too masterly and too characteristic, to be mistaken for the work of any other writer of the age; and the sentiments surely are such, as the most ardent lover of liberty cannot find fault with. In a second communication to the same correspondent, he becomes more explicit as the scene itself becomes changed:

"As for me, I have read, and with some attention, the authorized or rather equally authentic documents on this subject; from the first instructions to the representatives of the several orders, down to this time. What else I have read has been for the greater part on the side of those who have a considerable share in the formation and

conduct of public measures. A great many of the most decisive events, I conceive, are not disputed as facts, though, as usual, there is some dispute about their causes and their tendencies. On comparing the whole of fact, of public document, and

of what can be discerned of the general temper of the French people, I perfectly agree with you that there is very little likelihood of the old government's regaining its former authority. Were the King to escape from his palace, where he is now, in reality, a prisoner with his wife and almost his whole family, to what place could he fly? Every town in France is a Paris. I see no way by which a second revolution can be accomplished. The only chance seems to consist in the extreme instability of every species of power, and the uncertainty of every kind of speculation. In this I agree with you; in most other particulars I can by no means go so far. That a police is established in Paris, I can readily believe. They have an army, as I hear, of 6000 men. *** They have the means of preserving quiet; and since they have completely attained their ends, they must have the disposition. A total anarchy is a self-destructive thing. But if the same ends should hereafter require the same course, which have been already pursued, there is no doubt but the same ferocious delight in murder, and the same savage cruelty, will be again renewed. If any of those horrid deeds, which surely have not been misrepresented to us, were the acts of the rulers, what are we to think of an armed people under such rulers? Or if (which possibly may be the case) there is in reality and substance no ruler, and that the chiefs are driven before the people, rather than lead them; and if the armed corps are composed of men, who have no fixed principle of obedience, and

are embodied only by the prevalence of some general inclination; who can repute himself safe among a people so furious, and so senseless? * * *

"In all appearance, the new system is a most bungling and unworkmanlike performance. I confess I see no principle of coherence, co-operation, or just subordination of parts in this whole project, nor any the least aptitude to the conditions and wants of the state to which it is applied, nor any thing well imagined for the formation, provision, or direction of a common force. The direct con

trary appears to me. *** Man is a gregarious animal. He will by degrees provide some convenience suitable to this his natural disposition; and this strange thing (the system adopted by the National Assemby) may some time or other assume a more habitable form. The fish will at length make a shell which will fit him. I beg pardon for dwelling so long, and employing so much thought upon a subject, on which its contrivers have evidently employed so little. I cannot think, with you, that the Assembly have done much. They have, indeed, undone a great deal; and so completely broken up their country as a State, that I assure you there are few here such antigallicans as not to feel some pity on the deplorable view of the wreck of France. I confess to you, that till I saw it, I could not conceive that any men in public could have shown so little mercy to their country.

"You say, my dear sir, they read Montesquieu -I believe not. If they do, they do not understand him. He is often obscure, sometimes misled

by system; but on the whole, a learned and ingenious writer, and sometimes a most profound thinker. Sure it is that they have not followed him in any one thing they have done. Had he lived at this time, he would certainly be among the fugitives from France. With regard to the other writers you speak of, I do believe the directors of the present system to be influenced by them. Such masters! Such scholars! Who ever dreamt of Voltaire and Rousseau as legislators? The first has the merit of writing agreeably; and nobody has ever united blasphemy and obscenity so happily together. The other was not a little deranged in his intellects, to my almost certain knowledge. But he saw things in bold and uncommon lights, and he was very eloquent.-But as to the rest, I have read long since the Contrat Social. It has left very few traces upon my mind. I thought it a performance of little or no merit; and little did I conceive that it could ever make revolutions,

and give law to nations. people here are willing

their scholars too, and

that we should become reform our State on the

French model. They have begun; and it is high time for those who wish to preserve morem majorum to look about them."

At the moment this was written, few indeed could agree in opinion with the sagacious writer, of the evils attendant on the Revolution. Yet after every allowance for the generous feelings of the moment, all considerate men must have been convinced, that the utter subversion of every thing