be supposed, that when men first paid a voluntary obedience to him whom they considered as the father of his family, that obedience resulted from a consideration of the necessity of legal subordination; or that when the chieftain of a barbarous nation, and his barons, raised the rude structure of feudal government, they reflected on the balance of power, so necessary to the regulation of a well formed state. The first, by a kind of instinctive veneration, obeyed him whom, from his infancy, he had been taught to revere as the father of his race; the latter, interested, and uninfluenced by patriotic principles, knew no other motive than the love of plunder and rapine-he fought not for others, but himself-he exacted the price of his toil with unrelenting vigour-and, in pursuing, as he thought, the best means to secure his own possessions, he, unknowingly, laid the foundations of a better institution. From this reasoning it is not to be concluded that, in a more polished period, men did not guard their liberties by laws expressly calculated for that purpose ;-Holland and England are strong instances to the contrary-since the laws of both were framed at a time when society was in a more advanced period, and, consequently, such political refinement might be attributed to them without incurring the charge of absurdity.

From this view we may see, that as *monarchy may degenerate into tyranny, aristocracy into oligarchy, and democracy into anarchy, that constitution which can unite the various excellences of each, without the defects, will approach nearest to perfection.

To expatiate on a subject which has filled volumes

* Machiavel.

would be useless, and I only wish to add a few remarks to the number of those which have been already made. England, from the peculiarity of her constitution, is placed in a very singular situation. We have seen the liberties of the nations. around us gradually sinking, whilst our own have, as gradually, been increased and strengthened from the very blows which seemed to threaten their destruction ;they are not the sickly productions of the moment, but the vigorous offspring of time and wisdom. The kings of France and Spain, by a series of successful efforts, have imposed the yoke of absolute dominion on their subjects; and Sweden has voluntarily resigned her rights; England is at present the only monarchy where the regal power is under any limitation. In speaking of our constitution, the fault of too much refinement has frequently been incurredthe antiquity of the parliament has been carried beyond its due bounds, even to the Saxon æra—and the constitution supposed to have existed, almost in its present form, from the date of the Magna Charta. That famous deed, it is true, is the grand foundation on which we have built our system, but, in its original intent, it only secured the privileges of the barons, without any consideration of the people. The cautious policy of Henry VII. first gave any weight to the commons in this nation, but his imperious son effectually checked their growing influence, and kept them in the most servile subjection; and Elizabeth, who, with the pride, had imbibed the despotic principles of her father, did not allow them a greater latitude. Under the mild and pacific administration of James, the commons acquired a greater degree of importance than they had hitherto been accustomed

to; but even then it was not usual to assemble the parliament, as a regular part of the legislature, except when the king demanded any supplies. In the reign of the unfortunate Charles, they assumed a bolder tone, denied the king's power of taxation without their consent, and, by the famous petition of rights, insisted on being regularly assembled once in three years. From this era we may date the existence of our constitution in its present form. The limits between the regal prerogative and popular privileges were exactly ascertained; the due balance between the three estates of king, lords, and commons, was fixed; and no further room for alteration or dispute left. The last and finishing stroke was the bill of rights, confirmed by William the Third after the expulsion of James the Second. These rights and privileges it is our fortune to enjoy unimpaired; and may they be transmitted to future ages, as perfect as we have received them.

I have thus endeavoured to give a short analysis of the progress of government, in a manner that appeared to me most natural. To the deep-read politician this essay may seem trivial, and its contents superficial; I am conscious that the observations have not the force of novelty or the depth of reflection, but if I have collected in a narrow compass what before was scattered through volumes, in a manner that may prove beneficial to my fellow-citizens-if I inspire one patriotic sentiment, or kindle one spark of that laudable ambition which is the source of all great actions-if any of the future great shall acknowledge that he is the least indebted to the assistance and instructions of GREGORY GRIFFIN, my labours are fully compensated.

A.

No. 24. MONDAY, APRIL 30, 1787.

An quodcunque facit Mæcenas te quoque verum est?

Whate'er Mæcenas does, must thou do too?

IT is a common observation with those who observe at all, that those passions, which, under the guidance of a strong mind, are most consistent with the dignity of human nature, when they assume absolute dominion over a weak one tend most effectually to vilify and debase it.

Of these, perhaps, speaking comprehensively of its good and evil, there is none so generally beneficial to society as emulation; for there is hardly an eminent character, in whatever line of greatness, but has been originally drawn from indolence and obscurity by the example of superior excellence, and the hopes of attaining those heights to which some daring adventurer has previously led the way.

To avoid mentioning the innumerable instances of this, which every day crowd upon our observation, I will rather examine to what pernicious effects this glorious enthusiasm may lead, when operating on a mind incapable of directing it, or intoxicated by habitual success and adulation.

Alexander the Great, whose admiration for the bravery of Achilles blinded him to the vicious excesses which every where characterise that hero, never sullied his victories more than by his imitation of an action, which the poet has even been censured for attributing to a man in whom he designed to represent the most finished idea of barbarous virtue. At the siege of Gaza, exasperated at the obstinate resistance of Betis, the eunuch of Darius, he inhumanly insulted that virtue which, even in an enemy,

claims respect, by dragging him round those walls he had so gallantly defended; quoting the cruel treatment of Hector, though he had not even the plea, insufficient as it was, which palliates this piece of barbarity in his great model of excellence.

But if we turn with horror from this instance of weakness, we cannot but smile at the ridiculous servility of the famous Pyrrhus, who afterwards carried his imitation of Alexander to such lengths, as to affect even his deformities; and we are told, that a happy similarity to his predecessor, in a wry neck, was no uncommon topic of flattery among his courtiers.

When we see men who are held up as the pageants of human grandeur, upon whose decisions, nay, almost ideas, depended the revolutions of empires, so subject to the failings of human nature, we cannot be surprised at finding a faithful transcript of the passions by which they have been biassed in the heroes of our little republic, and a similar imitation of those, whose characters or abilities have procured them the admiration of their fellow-citizens.

When I call it a republic, I speak at random on a subject on which, in some future lucubration, I may dwell longer, and introduce to the politicians of the great world, a system of government which is consistent with none which the power of legislature has hitherto been able to regulate; a government, which, though founded on the law of the strongest, is so tempered with the principles of equity, as to have subsisted for centuries without any material revolution; an aristocracy of such gradual progression from despotism to slavery, as to render the distance less oppressive, though not less awful; and honours