66

that Dr. Price confiders Britain as no free ftate, becaufe the majority of the people do not elect: and yet, this very doctor, p. 33, afferts, "that Britain is a free country." But this will appear to be a flender felf-contradiction, in comparison with thofe which will be feen hereafter. It is free, then, in direct oppofition to that circumftance, which is indifpenfible in the conftitution of a free government. The Doctor is to reconcile this abfurdity, or to renounce his definition of a free flate.

But whence does it arife, that the adequateness of reprefentation confifts in the members being chofen by a majority of the people? can the numbers, by which a reprefentative is elected make him adequate to the truft? then the most confummate fool, the most abandoned betrayer of the people's rights, the most notorious, bondburning felon, fo chofen, muft be adequate to the truft of legiflation. Hitherto it has been thought, that fuperior understanding, and unfhaken integrity, have been the qualities that can, alone, render a man equal to the legiflative authority. But the Doctor has difcovered, that the adequateness of reprefentation confifts in those who do not reprefent, and not in thofe who do.

With respect to the Doctor's practicability of electing the members by an unbieffed majority of the people, I hope that evidence has been adduced, from the nature of man, and from experience, derived from the conduct of thofe people, by whom laws were enacted in the freeft ftates of antiquity, fufficient to prove, that laws neither can, nor ever have been inftituted, by a majority of opinions but of votes; arifing from a confidence in thofe by whom they have been led and directed; and that, in like manner, the reprefentatives will be elected. And I appeal to the judgement of all men, whether the people, at large, would be better qualified to determine of the propereft men to be entrusted with the powers of legiflation, than thofe who now elect; not to fay that the thing is impracticable, becaufe every man in Britain muft give a separate vote for each of the five hundred and fiftyeight reprefentatives, with whofe perfon and character the greatest part of the electors must be totally unacquainted. For, certainly, a majority of no one county, city nor borough can have a right to elect thofe who afe

to

to represent the whole, without the confent of the reft. In what manner, then, can the adequateness of reprefentation be improved, by elections made by a majority of the people? will thofe, who are now precluded, and are the least inftructed of the community, encrease the flock of understanding beyond that which the electors now poflefs? will it enable them to diftinguish, with more precifion, the wifeft and most honeft men? will they be more unbiafled, or lefs under the direction of those who now direct in all elections, than the prefent electors? will not the fame men, at least the greater part of them, be returned, by every county, city and borough, who are now chofen in the prefent way; or when difmiffed, will their places be fupplied by others, more capable of the charge? how, then, can an univerfal right of voting improve the adequateness of reprefentation, or increase the liberty of the people? for fuch is the fact, that, when the Doctor ftiles that a free ftate, enjoying civil liberty, in which the reprefentatives are chofen by a majority of the people, he violates his own definition. In page 3, he fays, he "means to apply to civil liberty all he fhall fay "of the other kinds of liberty." He has faid, "in all

thefe cafes, there is a force, which ftands opposed to "the agent's own will, and which, as far as it operates, "produces fervitude." Hence, does it not refult, that all thofe, who are reprefented by men for whom they could not vote, their votes being confined to a single county, city or borough, and all who oppofed them in their particular places of election, are reduced to slavery. Can men, fo chofen, be an adequate reprefentation, according to the Doctor's method of a majority: and will that state be free or felf governed, when those who voted against them, and thofe who did not vote for them, are represented by the perfons fo elected? adequateness of reprefentation, therefore, cannot confift in being chofen by a majority. Civil liberty is, confequently, no more invaded by delegating, to the minority of a people, the right of electing for the whole community, than to a few the right of reprefenting that community. The fairness and adequateness of reprefentation, by whomfoever the members are elected, confift in the elected being of intelligence equal to the duty; in being upright in the dif

charge

charge of it; and in their being alike the reprefentatives of every individual in the whole community. That fuch they are, refpecting the laft requifite, in this kingdom, is inadmiffible of contradiction. The town, which fends no members; the meaneft man, who has no vote, have equally a right to be governed by juft laws, to apply to the commons, and to be relieved, on petition, with the great city of London, and the lord mayor himself. In this alone confifts the being fairly and adequately represented.

But it seems," the shortness of the time in which the "members hold their places," is another means of the people's being adequately reprefented. This militates against the Doctor's definition of liberty. For, therein, it is the election by a majority that, folely, conftitutes a free and felf-governed ftate. How, then, can the fhortnefs of the time make that ftate more free and more selfgoverned, wherein the members are fo elected? will the people become wifer by one year's experience than by more; and, if they reject the old members, will they be more difcerning in the choice of the new? will the fhortness of the time impart to these members a legiflative knowledge more adequate to their charge than a longer? will it change their hearts, erafe the defire of riches and render them more honeft than at prefent? or will the election of the members, for a fhort time, make them representatives for more than all the people, and, thereby render them more adequate? but let me recur to the experience of antecedent ages. In the reigns of Edward the fecond, and Richard the fecond, there were, at least, as many new parliaments as years; and yet in no other æras was the nation fo calamitously involved in ruin and distraction, nor were there fuch flagrant contradictions in one parliament to thofe which had been enacted in another. Can any man, therefore, believe that the fhortness of parliaments will encrease the civil liberty of the people?

Notwithstanding the preceding opinion of Dr. Price, relative to the advantages to be derived from short parliaments, from what he fays, p. 18, that, "fhould any events ever arife, which fhould render the fame oppo"fition neceffary that took place in the time of king "Charles

1

"Charles the firft, and James the fecond," he is "afraid "all that is valuable to us will be loft." I am perfuaded, that fuch another as the long parliament, which eftablifhed an eternal houfe of commons, and refcinded all right of a general election from the people, murdered their fovereign, and fubverted the conftitution in church and ftate, is what he would now prefer to all others, however fhort might be their duration. All that was valuable was then loft indeed and fo it would have remained, had not the fanatic democratics, and their prefbyterian government been driven, from their rebellious ufurpations, by the restoration of Charles the second, and of the ancient conftitution of the realm. Such were the preceding mifchiefs, which were introduced in the reign of the first Charles. Is the Doctor now afraid, that the remnant of them will be loft in this of George the third? happy nation, could that arrive! the feeds of rebellion would be then extirpated; peace, harmony, and real liberty would be eftablished, and His Majefty's fame be exalted above that of all his predeceffors. But it is the apprehenfion of those who love their country, that as the defcendants of the old republican fanatics are now labouring to a like end with that of their rebellious ancestors, they may again prevail, to the ruin of all that is dear to good fubjects; unless a more active vigilance, and ftronger exertion of the executive power be speedily put in practice.

But it feems, "they must be chofen by the unbiaffed "voices of a majority of the ftate, and fubject to their "inftructions." On what an impoffible if is this liberty to be founded? In order to render men unbiaffed, intereft, dependance for bread, and want must be banished from the ftate. Love, hatred, ambition, envy, hope, fear and every other paffion and defire must be extirpated from the heart; ignorance, imbecility, and prejudice from the head, and all men be new made and reduced to a perfect impartiality before they can be fit to vote. It was an impious expreffion of one of the Spanish kings, that, had he been prefent when the Almighty framed the univerfe, he could have advifed him how to have done it better. It is not impoffible the Doctor may be of the fame opinion refpecting the formation of man; fince he accufes his maker of mixing fo much of the brute in his compofition,

and

and expects from him what he was never intended to perform. If we never have a new houfe of commons till it be chosen by unbiaffed men, the prefent, like the old prefbyterian Rump, or the Whig parliament, in the reign of George the firft, muft protract their time without the confent of the people and fit to all eternity, if they can: or we shall have no more reprefentatives.

But thefe members, fo chofen, muit "be fubject to "the inftructions of a majority of the people alfo, What bleffed inftructions would be then transmitted to parliament! would not the Cornifh men inftruct the commons to permit nothing but pewter; the Staffordfhire men nothing but their earthen ware, to be used in household and other utenfils, to the exclufion of each other and of all plate, porcelaine and other utenfils made of different materials. The filverfmiths, 'chinamen, and others, would inftruct them to abolish the ufe of the preceding utenfils. The Northumberland men would inftruct them to prohibit the use of all fuel but coals, and those of the woodland counties all but wood. All counties, cities and towns, all the bodies corporate in trades, merchants, manufacturers. and others would be eternally inftructing the houfe to promote their particular interefts, and to oppofe thofe of all the reft. And thus, in confequence of these reciprocal contradictions, improper laws would be enacted, or none at all, until a majority of the people could be of one opinion; and then, by Dr. Price's definition of civil liberty, all the minority, by the force of the majority, which opposed and defeated their difcretion and will, would be reduced to flavery. Yet according to the Doctor, were the people thus permitted to be eternally at cross purposes with each other, "liberty would be enjoved in its bigheft de"gree." But the Doctor has faid it: the patriots affect to believe and propagate it: the city gives gold and liberty and yet, could his vagaries be carried into execution, the nation, in one feffion of parliament, would discover him to be either ignorant or deceitful; and the people ftone him, as he paffled the ftreets, for the evils which he had brought upon them.

:

To the preceding paffages he adds, p 10, that, "if they are chofen for long terms, by part only of the

ftate,