A Discourse on the Love of our Country
(1789)
Preface to the Fourth Edition
Since the former editions of the following discourse, many animadversions upon it have been published. Under the abuse with which some of them are accompanied, I have been comforted by finding myself joined to the City of Paris, and the National Assembly of France. I cannot think of employing my rime in making any replies. Knowing that it has been the labour of my life to promote those interests of liberty, peace, and virtue, which I reckon the best interests of mankind, and believing that I have not laboured quite in vain, I feel a satisfaction that no opposition can take from me, and shall submit myself in silence to the judgment of the public without taking any other notice of the abuse I have met with than by mentioning the following instance of it.
In p. 195,1 have adopted the words of Scripture, Now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace and expressed my gratitude to God for having spared my life to see a 'diffusion of knowledge that has undermined superstition and error, a vast kingdom spuming at slavery, and an arbitrary monarch led in triumph and surrendering himself to his subjects'. These words have occasioned a comparison of me (by Mr. Burke in his Reflections on the Revolution in France) to Hugh Peters, attended with an intimation that like him, I may not die in peace, and he has described me, p. 99, etc. as a barbarian delighted with blood, profaning Scripture, and exulting in the riot and slaughter at Versailles on the 6th of October last year. I hope I shall be credited when, in answer to this horrid misrepresentation and menace, I assure the public that the events to which I referred in these words were not those of the 6th of October, but those only of the 14th of July and the subsequent days, when, after the conquest of the Bastile, the King of France sought the protection of the National Assembly and, by his own desire, was conducted amidst acclamations never before heard in France to Paris, there to shew himself to his people as the restorer of their liberty.
I am indeed surprised that Mr. Burke could want candour so much as to suppose that I have any other events in view. The letters quoted by him in p. 99 and 128 were dated in July 1789, and might have shewn him that he was injuring both me and the writer of those letters. But what candour or what moderation can be expected in a person so frantic with zeal for hereditary claims and aristocratical distinctions as to be capable of decrying popular rights and the aid of philosophy in forming governments, of lamenting that the age of chivalry is gone, and of believing that the insults offered by a mob to the Queen of France have extinguished for ever the glory of Europe?
Psalm cxxii. verses 2 and 4-9
Our feet shall stand within thy gates, O Jerusalem, whither the tribes go up, the tribes of the Lord unto the testimony of Israel. To give thanks to the name of the Lord, for there sit the thrones of judgment, the throne of the House of David. Pray for the peace of Jerusalem. They shall prosper that love thee. Peace be within thy walls, and prosperity within thy palaces. For my brethren and companions sake I will now say peace be within thee. Because of the House of the Lord our God, I will seek thy good.
In these words the Psalmist expresses, in strong and beautiful language, his love of his country and the reasons on which he founded it; and my present design is to take occasion from them to explain the duty we owe to our country, and the nature, foundation, and proper expressions of that love to it which we ought to cultivate. I reckon this a subject particularly suitable to the services of this day, and to the anniversary of our deliverance at the Revolution from the dangers of Popery and arbitrary power, and should I, on such an occasion, be led to touch more on political subjects than would at any other time be proper in the pulpit, you will, I doubt not, excuse me.
The love of our country has in all times been a subject of warm commendations and it is certainly a noble passion, but, like all other passions, it requires regulation and direction. There are mistakes and prejudices by which, in this instance, we are in particular danger of being misled. I will briefly mention some of these to you and observe,
First, that by our country is meant, in this case, not the soil or the spot of earth on which we happen to have been born, not the forests and fields, but that community of which we are members, or that body of companions and friends and kindred who are associated with us under the same constitution of government, protected by the same laws, and bound together by the same civil polity.
Secondly, it is proper to observe that even in this sense of our country, that love of it which is our duty does not imply any conviction of the superior value of it to other countries, or any particular preference of its laws and constitution of government. Were this implied, the love of their country would be the duty of only a very small part of mankind, for there are few countries that enjoy the advantage of laws and governments which deserve to be preferred. To found, therefore, this duty on such a preference would be to found it on error and delusion. It is, however, a common delusion. There is the same partiality in countries to themselves that there is in individuals. All our attachments should be accompanied, as far as possible, with right opinions. We are too apt to confine wisdom and virtue within the circle of our own acquaintance and party. Our friends, our country, and, in short, every thing related to us we are disposed to overvalue. A wise man will guard himself against this delusion. He will study to think of all things as they are, and not suffer any partial affections to blind his understanding. In other families there may be as much worth as in our own. In other circles of friends there may be as much wisdom, and in other countries as much of all that deserves esteem, but, notwithstanding this, our obligation to love our own families, friends, and country, and to seek, in the first place, their good, will remain the same.
Thirdly, it is proper I should desire you particularly to distinguish between the love of our country and that spirit of rivalship and ambition which has been common among nations. What has the love of their country hitherto been among mankind? What has it been but a love of domination, a desire of conquest, and a thirst for grandeur and glory, by extending territory and enslaving surrounding countries? What has it been but a blind and narrow principle, producing in every country a contempt of other countries, and forming men into combinations and factions against their common rights and liberties? This is the principle that has been too often cried up as a virtue of the first rank: a principle of the same kind with that which governs clans of Indians or tribes of Arabs, and leads them to plunder and massacre. As most of the evils which have taken place in private life, and among individuals, have been occasioned by the desire of private interest overcoming the public affections, so most of the evils which have taken place among bodies of men have been occasioned by the desire of their own interest overcoming the principle of universal benevolence and leading them to attack one another's territories, to encroach on one another's rights, and to endeavour to build their own advancement on the degradation of all within the reach of their power. What was the love of their country among the Jews, but a wretched partiality to themselves and a proud contempt of all other nations? What was the love of their country among the old Romans? We have heard much of it, but I cannot hesitate in saying that however great it appeared in some of its exertions, it was in general no better than a principle holding together a band of robbers in their attempts to crush all liberty but their own. What is now the love of his country in a Spaniard, a Turk, or a Russian? Can it be considered as any thing better than a passion for slavery, or a blind attachment to a spot where he enjoys no rights and is disposed of as if he was a beast?
Let us learn by such reflexions to correct and purify this passion, and to make it a just and rational principle of action.
It is very remarkable that the founder of our religion has not once mentioned this duty or given us any recommendation of it, and this has, by unbelievers, been made an objection to Christianity. What I have said will entirely remove this objection. Certain it is, that by inculcating on men an attachment to their country, Christianity would at the time it was propagated have done unspeakably more harm than good. Among the Jews it would have been an excitement to war and insurrections, for they were then in eager expectation of becoming soon (as the favourite people of Heaven) the lords and conquerors of the earth under the triumphant reign of the Messiah. Among the Romans, likewise, this principle had, as I have just observed, exceeded its just bounds and rendered them enemies to the peace and happiness of mankind. By inculcating it, therefore, Christianity would have confirmed both Jews and Gentiles in one of the most pernicious faults. Our Lord and his apostles have done better. They have recommended that Universal Benevolence which is an unspeakably nobler principle than any partial affections. They have laid such stress on loving all men, even our enemies, and made an ardent and extensive charity so essential a part of virtue, that the religion they have preached may, by way of distinction from all other religions, be called the Religion of Benevolence. Nothing can be more friendly to the general rights of mankind, and were it duly regarded and practised, every man would consider every other man as his brother, and all the animosity that now takes place among contending nations would be abolished. If you want any proof of this, think of our Saviour's parable of the good Samaritan. The Jews and Samaritans were two rival nations that entertained a hatred of one another the most inveterate. The design of this parable was to shew a Jew that even a Samaritan and consequently all men of all nations and religions were included in the precept, Thou shall love thy neighbour as thyself.
But I am digressing from what I had chiefly in view, which was, after noticing that love of our country which is false and spurious, to explain the nature and effects of that which is just and reasonable. With this view I must desire you to recollect that we are so constituted that our affections are more drawn to some among mankind than to others, in proportion to their degrees of nearness to us, and our power of being useful to them. It is obvious that this is a circumstance in the constitution of our natures which proves the wisdom and goodness of our Maker, for had our affections been determined alike to all our fellow-creatures human life would have been a scene of embarrassment and distraction. Our regards, according to the order of nature, begin with ourselves, and every man is charged primarily with the care of himself. Next come our families, and benefactors, and friends, and after them our country. We can do little for the interest of mankind at large. To this interest, however, all other interests are subordinate. The noblest principle in our nature is the regard to general justice and that good-will which embraces all the world. I have already observed this, but it cannot be too often repeated. Though our immediate attention must be employed in promoting our own interest and that of our nearest connexions, yet we must remember that a narrower interest ought always to give way to a more extensive interest. In pursuing particularly the interest of our country we ought to carry our views beyond it. We should love it ardently but not exclusively. We ought to seek its good, by all the means that our different circumstances and abilities will allow, but at the same time we ought to consider ourselves as citizens of the world, and take care to maintain a just regard to the rights of other countries.
The enquiry by what means (subject to this limitation) we may best promote the interest of our country is very important, and all that remains of this discourse shall be employed in answering it and in exhorting you to manifest your love to your country by the means I shall mention.
The chief blessings of human nature are the three following: truth, virtue, and liberty. These are, therefore, the blessings in the possession of which the interest of our country lies, and to the attainment of which our love of it ought to direct our endeavours. By the diffusion of knowledge it must be distinguished from a country of barbarians: by the practice of religious virtue, it must be distinguished from a country of gamblers, atheists, and libertines: and by the possession of liberty, it must be distinguished from a country of slaves. I will dwell for a few moments on each of these heads.
Our first concern as lovers of our country must be to enlighten it. Why are the nations of the world so patient under despotism? Why do they crouch to tyrants, or submit to be treated as if they were a herd of cattle? Enlighten them and you will elevate them. Shew them they are men and they will act like men. Give them just ideas of civil government and let them know that it is an expedient for gaining protection against injury and defending their rights, and it will be impossible for them to submit to governments which, like most of those now in the world, are usurpations on the rights of men and little better than contrivances for enabling the few to oppress the many. Convince them that the Deity is a righteous and benevolent as well as omnipotent being, who regards with equal eye all his creatures and connects his favour with nothing but an honest desire to know and to do his will, and that zeal for mystical doctrines which has led men to hate and harass one another will be exterminated. Set religion before them as a rational service consisting not in any rites and ceremonies, but in worshipping God with a pure heart and practising righteousness from the fear of his displeasure and the apprehension of a future righteous judgment and that gloomy and cruel superstition will be abolished which has hitherto gone under the name of religion, and to the support of which civil government has been perverted. Ignorance is the parent of bigotry, intolerance, persecution and slavery. Inform and instruct mankind, and these evils will be excluded. Happy is the person who, himself raised above vulgar errors, is conscious of having aimed at giving mankind this instruction. Happy is the scholar or philosopher who at the close of life can reflect that he has made this use of his learning and abilities, but happier far must he be if, at the same time, he has reason to believe he has been successful and actually contributed by his instructions to disseminate among his fellow-creatures just notions of themselves, of their rights, of religion, and the nature and end of civil government. Such were Milton, Locke, Sidney, Hoadly, etc. in this country, such were Montesquieu, Fenelon, Turgot, etc. in France. They sowed a seed which has since taken root and is now growing up to a glorious harvest. To the information they conveyed by their writings we owe those revolutions in which every friend to mankind is now exulting. What an encouragement is this to us all in our endeavours to enlighten the world? Every degree of illumination which we can communicate must do the greatest good. It helps to prepare the minds of men for the recovery of their rights, and hastens the overthrow of priestcraft and tyranny. In short, we may, in this instance, learn our duty from the conduct of the oppressors of the world. They know that light is hostile to them, and therefore they labour to keep men in the dark. With this intention they have appointed licensers of the press, and, in Popish countries, prohibited the reading of the Bible. Remove the darkness in which they envelope the world and their usurpations will be exposed, their power will be subverted, and the world emancipated.
The next great blessing of human nature which I have mentioned is virtue. This ought to follow knowledge and to be directed by it. Virtue without knowledge makes enthusiasts and knowledge without virtue makes devils, but both united elevates to the top of human dignity and perfection. We must, therefore, if we would serve our country, make both these the objects of our zeal. We must discourage vice in all its forms, and our endeavours to enlighten must have ultimately in view a reformation of manners and virtuous practice.
I must add here that in the practice of virtue I include the discharge of the public duties of religion. By neglecting these we may injure our country essentially. But it is melancholy to observe that it is a common neglect among us and in a great measure owing to a cause which is not likely to be soon removed: I mean, the defects (may I not say, the absurdities?) in our established codes of faith and worship. In foreign countries, the higher ranks of men, not distinguishing between the religion they see established and the Christian religion, are generally driven to irreligion and infidelity. The like evil is produced by the like cause in this country, and if no reformation of our established formularies can be brought about, it must be expected that religion will go on to lose its credit, and that little of it will be left except among the lower orders of people, many of whom, while their superiors give up all religion, are sinking into an enthusiasm in religion lately revived, and mistaking, as the world has generally done, the service acceptable to God for a system of faith souring the temper, and a service of forms supplanting morality.
I hope you will not mistake what I am now saying, or consider it as the effect of my prejudices as a Dissenter from the established church. The complaint I am making, is the complaint of many of the wisest and best men in the established church itself, who have long been urging the necessity of a revival of its Liturgy and Articles. These were framed above two centuries ago when Christendom was just emerging from the ignorance and barbarity of the dark ages. They remain now much the same as they were then and, therefore, cannot be properly adapted to the good sense and liberality of the present times. This imperfection, however, in our public forms of worship, affords no excuse to any person for neglecting public worship. All communities will have some religion, and it is of infinite consequence that they should be led to that which, by enforcing the obligations of virtue and putting men upon loving instead of damning one another, is most favourable to the interest of society.
If there is a Governor of the world who directs all events, he ought to be invoked and worshipped, and those who dislike that mode of worship which is prescribed by public authority ought (if they can find no worship out of the church which they approve) to set up a separate worship for themselves, and by doing this and giving an example of a rational and manly worship, men of weight, from their rank or literature, may do the greatest service to society and the world. They may bear a testimony against that application of civil power to the support of particular modes of faith which obstructs human improvement and perpetuates error, and they may hold out an instruction which will discountenance superstition, and at the same time recommend religion by making it appear to be (what it certainly is when rightly understood) the strongest incentive to all that is generous and worthy, and, consequently, the best friend to public order and happiness.
Liberty is the next great blessing which I have mentioned as the object of patriotic zeal. It is inseparable from knowledge and virtue and together with them completes the glory of a community. An enlightened and virtuous country must be a free country. It cannot suffer invasions of its rights, or bend to tyrants. I need not, on this occasion, take any pains to shew you how great a blessing liberty is. The smallest attention to the history of past ages and the present state of mankind, will make you sensible of its importance. Look round the world and you will find almost every country, respectable or contemptible, happy or miserable, a fruitful field or a frightful waste, according as it possesses or wants this blessing. Think of Greece, formerly the seat of arts and science and the most distinguished spot under heaven, but now, having lost liberty, a vile and wretched spot, a region of darkness, poverty, and barbarity. Such reflexions must convince you that if you love your country you cannot be zealous enough in promoting the cause of liberty in it. But it will come in my way to say more to this purpose presently.
The observations I have made include our whole duty to our country, for by endeavouring to liberalize and enlighten it, to discourage vice and to promote virtue in it, and to assert and support its liberties, we shall endeavour to do all that is necessary to make it great and happy. But it is proper that, on this occasion, I should be more explicit and exemplify our duty to our country by observing farmer that it requires us to obey its laws and to respect its magistrates.
Civil government (as I have before observed) is an institution of human prudence for guarding our persons, our property, and our good name, against invasion, and for securing to the members of a community that liberty to which all have an equal right, as far as they do not, by any overt act, use it to injure the liberty of others. Civil laws are regulations agreed upon by the community for gaining these ends, and civil magistrates are officers appointed by the community for executing these laws. Obedience, therefore, to the laws and to magistrates is a necessary expression of our regard to the community. Without it a community must fall into a state of anarchy that will destroy those rights and subvert that liberty which it is the end of government to protect.
I wish it was in my power to give you a just account of the importance of this observation. It shews the ground on which the duty of obeying civil governors stands, and that there are two extremes in this case which ought to be avoided. These extremes are adulation and servility on one hand, and a proud and licentious contempt on the other. The former is the extreme to which mankind in general have been most prone, for it has oftener happened that men have been too passive than too unruly, and the rebellion of Kings against their people has been more common and done more mischief than the rebellion of people against their Kings.
Adulation is always odious and when offered to men in power it corrupts them by giving them improper ideas of their situation, and it debases those who offer it by manifesting an abjectness founded on improper ideas of themselves. I have lately observed in this kingdom too near approaches to this abjectness. In our late addresses to the King on his recovery from the severe illness with which God has been pleased to afflict him, we have appeared more like a herd crawling at the feet of a master than like enlightened and manly citizens rejoicing with a beloved sovereign, but at the same time conscious that he derives all his consequence from themselves. But, perhaps, these servilities in the language of our late addresses should be pardoned as only forms of civility and expressions of an overflow of good nature. They have, however, a dangerous tendency. The potentates of this world are sufficiently apt to consider themselves as possessed of an inherent superiority which gives them a right to govern and makes mankind their own; and this infatuation is almost every where fostered in them by the creeping sycophants about them and the language of flattery which they are continually hearing.
Civil governors are properly the servants of the public and a King is no more than the first servant of the public, created by it, maintained by it, and responsible to it; and all the homage paid him is due to him on no other account than his relation to the public. His sacredness is the sacredness of the community. His authority is the authority of the community, and the term Majesty, which it is usual to apply to him, is by no means his own majesty, but the majesty of the people. For this reason, whatever he may be in his private capacity and though, in respect of personal qualities, not equal to or even far below many among ourselves — for this reason I say (that is, as representing the community and its first magistrate) he is entitled to our reverence and obedience. The words Most Excellent Majesty are rightly applied to him and there is a respect which it would be criminal to withhold from him.
You cannot be too attentive to this observation. The improvement of the world depends on the attention to it: nor will mankind be ever as virtuous and happy as they are capable of being till the attention to it becomes universal and efficacious. If we forget it we shall be in danger of an idolatry as gross and stupid as that of the ancient heathens, who, after fabricating blocks of wood and stone, fell down and worshipped them. The disposition in mankind to this kind of idolatry is indeed a very mortifying subject of reflexion. In Turkey, millions of human beings adore a silly mortal and are ready to throw themselves at his feet and to submit their lives to his discretion. In Russia, the common people are only a stock on the lands of grandees or appendages to their estates, which, like the fixtures in a house, are bought and sold with the estates. In Spain, in Germany, and under most of the governments of the world, mankind are in a similar state of humiliation. Who, that has a just sense of the dignity of his nature, can avoid execrating such a debasement of it?
Had I been to address the King on a late occasion, I should have been inclined to do it in a style very different from that of most of the addressers, and to use some such language as the following:
I rejoice, Sir, in your recovery. I thank God for his goodness to you. I honour you not only as my King, but as almost the only lawful King in the world, because the only one who owes his crown to the choice of the people. May you enjoy all possible happiness. May God shew you the folly of those effusions of adulation which you are now receiving, and guard you against their effects. May you be led to such a sense of the nature of your situation and endowed with such wisdom as shall render your restoration to the government of these kingdoms a blessing to it, and engage you to consider yourself as more properly the servant than the sovereign of your people.
But I must not forget the opposite extreme to that now taken notice of, that is, a disdainful pride derived from a consciousness of equality, or, perhaps, superiority in respect of all that gives true dignity to men in power and producing a contempt of them, and a disposition to treat them with rudeness and insult. It is a trite observation, that extremes generally beget one another. This is particularly true in the present case. Persons justly informed on the subject of government, when they see men dazzled by looking up to high stations and observe loyalty carried to a length that implies ignorance and servility, such persons, in such circumstances, are in danger of spuming at all public authority and throwing off that respectful demeanour to persons invested with it which the order of society requires. There is undoubtedly a particular deference and homage due to civil magistrates on account of their stations and offices; nor can that man be either truly wise or truly virtuous who despises governments and wantonly speaks evil of his rulers, or who does not, by all the means in his power, endeavour to strengthen their hands and to give weight to their exertions in the discharge of their duty. Fear God says St. Peter, Love the brotherhood. Honour all men. Honour the King. You must needs, says St. Paul, be subject to rulers, not only for wrath (that is, from the fear of suffering the penalties annexed to the breach of the laws) but for conscience sake. For rulers are ministers of God, and revengers for executing wrath on all that do evil.
Another expression of our love to our country is defending it against enemies. These enemies are of two sorts; internal and external, or domestic and foreign. The former are the most dangerous, and they have generally been the most successful. I have just observed that there is a submission due to the executive officers of a government which is our duty, but you must not forget what I have also observed that it must not be a blind and slavish submission. Men in power (unless better disposed than is common) are always endeavouring to extend their power. They hate the doctrine that it is a trust derived from the people and not a right vested in themselves. For this reason the tendency of every government is to despotism, and in this the best constituted governments must end, if the people are not vigilant, ready to take alarms, and determined to resist abuses as soon as they begin. This vigilance, therefore, it is our duty to maintain. Whenever it is withdrawn and a people cease to reason about their rights and to be awake to encroachments, they are in danger of being enslaved and their servants will soon become their masters.
I need not say how much it is our duty to defend our country against foreign enemies. When a country is attacked in any of its rights by another country, or when any attempts are made by ambitious foreign powers to injure it, a war in its defence becomes necessary: and, in such circumstances, to die for our country is meritorious and noble. These defensive wars are, in my opinion, the only just wars. Offensive wars are always unlawful and to seek the aggrandizement of our country by them, that is, by attacking other countries in order to extend dominion, or to gratify avarice, is wicked and detestable. Such, however, have been most of the wars which have taken place in the world, but the time is, I hope, coming when a conviction will prevail of the folly[22] as well as the iniquity of wars, and when the nations of the earth, happy under just governments, and no longer in danger from the passions of kings, will find out better ways of settling their disputes, and beat (as Isaiah prophecies) their swords into ploughshares and their spears into pruning-hooks.
Among the particulars included in that duty to our country by discharging which we should shew our love to it, I will only further mention praying for it and offering up thanksgivings to God for every event favourable to it. At the present season we are called upon to express in this way our love to our country. It is the business of this day and of the present service, and, therefore, it is necessary that I should now direct your attention to it particularly.
We are met to thank God for that event in this country to which the name of The Revolution has been given, and which, for more than a century, it has been usual for the friends of freedom and more especially Protestant Dissenters to celebrate with expressions of joy and exultation. My highly valued and excellent friend [Andrew Kippis], who addressed you on this occasion last year, has given you an interesting account of the principal circumstances that attended this event, and of the reasons we have for rejoicing in it. By a bloodless victory the fetters which despotism had long been preparing for us were broken, the rights of the people were asserted, a tyrant expelled, and a sovereign of our own choice appointed in his room. Security was given to our property, and our consciences were emancipated. The bounds of free enquiry were enlarged, the volume in which are the words of eternal life was laid more open to our examination, and that aera of light and liberty was introduced among us, by which we have been made an example to other kingdoms and become the instructors of the world. Had it not been for this deliverance, the probability is that, instead of being thus distinguished, we should now have been a base people, groaning under the infamy and misery of popery and slavery. Let us, therefore, offer thanksgivings to God, the author of all our blessings. Had he not been on our side, we should have been swallowed up quick, and the proud waters would have gone over our souls. But our souls are escaped, and the snare has been broken. Blessed then be the name of the Lord, who made heaven and earth.
It is well known that King James was not far from gaining his purpose, and that probably he would have succeeded had he been less in a hurry. But he wanted courage as well as prudence, and, therefore, fled and left us to settle quietly for ourselves that constitution of government which is now our boast. We have particular reason, as Protestant Dissenters, to rejoice on this occasion. It was at this time we were rescued from persecution, and obtained the liberty of worshipping God in the manner we think most acceptable to him. It was then our meeting-houses were opened, our worship was taken under the protection of the law, and the principles of toleration gained a triumph. We have, therefore, on this occasion, peculiar reasons for thanksgiving. But let us remember that we ought not to satisfy ourselves with thanksgivings. Our gratitude, if genuine, will be accompanied with endeavours to give stability to the deliverance our country has obtained, and to extend and improve the happiness with which the Revolution has blest us. Let us, in particular, take care not to forget the principles of the Revolution. This Society has, very properly, in its reports, held out these principles, as an instruction to the public. I will only take notice of the three following:
First, the right to liberty of conscience in religious matters.
Secondly, the right to resist power when abused. And
Thirdly, the right to chuse our own governors, to cashier them for misconduct, and to frame a government for ourselves.[23]
On these three principles, and more especially the last, was the Revolution founded. Were it not true that liberty of conscience is a sacred right, that power abused justifies resistance, and that civil authority is a delegation from the people. Were not, I say, all this true, the Revolution would have been not an assertion, but an invasion of rights, not a revolution, but a rebellion. Cherish in your breasts this conviction and act under its influence, detesting the odious doctrines of passive obedience, non-resistance, and the divine right of kings — doctrines which, had they been acted upon in this country, would have left us at this time wretched slaves — doctrines which imply that God made mankind to be oppressed and plundered, and which are no less a blasphemy against him, than an insult on common sense.
I would farther direct you to remember that, though the Revolution was a great work, it was by no means a perfect work, and that all was not then gained which was necessary to put the kingdom in the secure and complete possession of the blessings of liberty. In particular, you should recollect that the toleration then obtained was imperfect. It included only those who could declare their faith in the doctrinal articles of the church of England. It has, indeed, been since extended, but not sufficiently, for there still exist penal laws on account of religious opinions which (were they carried into execution) would shut up many of our places of worship, and silence and imprison some of the ablest and best men. The Test Laws are also still in force and deprive of eligibility to civil and military offices all who cannot conform to the established worship. It is with great pleasure I find that the body of Protestant Dissenters, though defeated in their attempts to deliver their country from this disgrace to it, have determined to persevere. Should they at last succeed, they will have the satisfaction, not only of removing from themselves a proscription they do not deserve, but of contributing to lessen the number of our public iniquities. For I cannot call by a gender name, laws which convert an ordinance appointed by our Saviour to commemorate his death into an instrument of oppressive policy, and a qualification of rakes and atheists for civil posts. I have said should they succeed, but perhaps I ought not to suggest a doubt about their success. And, indeed, when I consider that in Scotland the established church is defended by no such test; that in Ireland it has been abolished; that in a great neighbouring country it has been declared to be an indefeasible right of all citizens to be equally eligible to public offices; that in the same kingdom a professed Dissenter from the established church holds the first office in the state; that in the Emperor's dominions Jews have been lately admitted to the enjoyment of equal privileges with other citizens; and that in this very country, a Dissenter, though excluded from the power of executing the laws, yet is allowed to be employed in making them. When, I say, I consider such facts as these I am disposed to think it impossible that the enemies of the repeal of the Test Laws should not soon become ashamed and give up their opposition.
But the most important instance of the imperfect state in which the Revolution left our constitution, is the inequality of our representation. I think, indeed, this defect in our constitution so gross and so palpable, as to make it excellent chiefly in form and theory. You should remember that a representation in the legislature of a kingdom is the basis of constitutional liberty in it, and of all legitimate government, and that without it a government is nothing but an usurpation. When the representation is fair and equal, and at the same time vested with such powers as our House of Commons possesses, a kingdom may be said to govern itself, and consequently to possess true liberty. When the representation is partial, a kingdom possesses liberty only partially, and if extremely partial, it only gives a semblance of liberty; but if not only extremely partial but corruptly chosen, and under corrupt influence after being chosen, it becomes a nuisance and produces the worst of all forms of government: a government by corruption — a government carried on and supported by spreading venality and profligacy through a kingdom. May heaven preserve this kingdom from a calamity so dreadful! It is the point of depravity to which abuses under such a government as ours naturally tend, and the last stage of national unhappiness. We are, at present, I hope, at a great distance from it. But it cannot be pretended that there are no advances towards it or that there is no reason for apprehension and alarm.
The inadequateness of our representation has been long a subject of complaint. This is, in truth, our fundamental grievance, and I do not think that any thing is much more our duty, as men who love their country, and are grateful for the Revolution, than to unite our zeal in endeavouring to get it redressed. At the time of the American war, associations were formed for this purpose in London and other parts of the kingdom, and our present Minister himself has since that war directed to it an effort which made him a favourite with many of us. But all attention to it seems now lost, and the probability is that this inattention will continue and that nothing will be done towards gaining for us this essential blessing till some great calamity again alarms our fears, or till some great abuse of power again provokes our resentment or, perhaps, till the acquisition of a pure and equal representation by other countries (while we are mocked with the shadow) kindles our shame.
Such is the conduct by which we ought to express our gratitude for the Revolution. We should always bear in mind the principles that justify it. We should contribute all we can towards supplying what is left deficient, and shew ourselves anxious about transmitting the blessings obtained by it to our posterity, unimpaired and improved. But, brethren, while we thus shew our patriotic zeal, let us take care not to disgrace the cause of patriotism by any licentiousness or immoral conduct. Oh! how earnestly do I wish that all who profess zeal in this cause were as distinguished by the purity of their morals as some of them are by their abilities,[r] and that I could make them sensible of the advantages they would derive from a virtuous character, and of the suspicions they incur and the loss of consequence they suffer by wanting it. Oh! that I could see in men who oppose tyranny in the state a disdain of the tyranny of low passions in themselves, or, at least, such a sense of shame and regard to public order and decency as would induce them to hide their irregularities and to avoid insulting the virtuous part of the community by an open exhibition of vice! I cannot reconcile myself to the idea of an immoral patriot, or to that separation of private from public virtue, which some think to be possible. Is it to be expected that — but I must forbear. I am afraid of applications which many are too ready to make and for which I should be sorry to give any just occasion.
I have been explaining to you the nature and expressions of a just regard to our country. Give me leave to exhort you to examine your conduct by what I have been saying. You love your country and desire its happiness, and, without doubt, you have the greatest reason for loving it. It has been long a very distinguished and favoured country. Often has God appeared for it and delivered it. Let us study to shew ourselves worthy of the favour shewn us. Do you practise virtue yourselves, and study to promote it in others? Do you obey the laws of your country, and aim at doing your part towards maintaining and perpetuating its privileges? Do you always give your vote on the side of public liberty and are you ready to pour out your blood in its defence? Do you look up to God for the continuance of his favour to your country and pray for its prosperity, preserving, at the same time, a strict regard to the rights of other countries, and always considering yourselves more as citizens of the world than as members of any particular community? If this is your temper and conduct you are blessings to your country, and were all like you this world would soon be a heaven.
I am addressing myself to Christians. Let me, therefore, mention to you the example of our blessed Saviour. I have observed at the beginning of this discourse that he did not inculcate upon his hearers the love of their country or take any notice of it as a part of their duty. Instead of doing this, I observed that he taught the obligation to love all mankind and recommended universal benevolence as (next to the love of God) our first duty, and, I think, I also proved to you that this, in the circumstances of the world at that time, was an instance of incomparable wisdom and goodness in his instructions. But we must not infer from hence that he did not include the love of our country in the number of our duties. He has shewn the contrary by his example. It appears that he possessed a particular affection for his country, though a very wicked country. We read in Luke [xi]x. 42, that when, upon approaching Jerusalem, in one of his last journeys to it, he beheld it, he wept over it and said, Oh! that thou hadst known (even thou, at least in this thy day) the things that belong to thy peace. What a tender solicitude about his country does the lamentation over Jerusalem imply, which is recorded in the same gospel, chap. xiii and 34. Oh! Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them who are sent to thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen gathereth her brood under her wings, but ye would not.
It may not be improper farther to mention the love St. Paul expressed for his country when he declared that for the sake of his brethren and kinsmen he could even wish himself accursed from Christ (Rom. ix. 3.). The original words are an anathema from Christ, and his meaning is, that he could have been contented to suffer himself the calamities which were coming on the Jewish people, were it possible for him by such a sacrifice of himself to save them.
It is too evident that the state of this country is such as renders it an object of concern and anxiety. It wants (I have shewn you) the grand security of public liberty. Increasing luxury has multiplied abuses in it. A monstrous weight of debt is crippling it. Vice and venality are bringing down upon it God's displeasure. That spirit to which it owes its distinction is declining, and some late events seem to prove that it is becoming every day more reconcileable to encroachments on the securities of its liberties. It wants, therefore, your patriotic services and, for the sake of the distinctions it has so long enjoyed, for the sake of our brethren and companions and all that should be dear to a free people, we ought to do our utmost to save it from the dangers that threaten it, remembering that by acting thus we shall promote, in the best manner, our own private interest as well as the interest of our country, for when the community prospers the individuals that compose it must prosper with it. But, should that not happen, or should we even suffer in our secular interest by our endeavours to promote the interest of our country, we shall feel a satisfaction in our own breasts which is preferable to all this world can give, and we shall enjoy the transporting hope of soon becoming members of a perfect community in the heavens, and having an entrance ministered to us, abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
You may reasonably expect that I should now close this address to you. But I cannot yet dismiss you. I must not conclude without recalling particularly to our recollection a consideration to which I have more than once alluded, and which, probably, your thoughts have been all along anticipating: a consideration with which my mind is impressed more than I can express. I mean the consideration of the favourableness of the present times to all exertions in the cause of public liberty.
What an eventful period is this! I am thankful that I have lived to see it, and I could almost say, Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, for mine eyes have seen thy salvation. I have lived to see a diffusion of knowledge which has undermined superstition and error. I have lived to see the rights of men better understood than ever, and nations panting for liberty, which seemed to have lost the idea of it. I have lived to see thirty millions of people, indignant and resolute, spurning at slavery, and demanding liberty with an irresistible voice, their king led in triumph, and an arbitrary monarch surrendering himself to his subjects. After sharing in the benefits of one Revolution, I have been spared to be a witness to two other Revolutions, both glorious. And now, methinks, I see the ardor for liberty catching and spreading, a general amendment beginning in human affairs, the dominion of kings changed for the dominion of laws, and the dominion of priests giving way to the dominion of reason and conscience.
Be encouraged, all ye friends of freedom and writers in its defence! The times are auspicious. Your labours have not been in vain. Behold kingdoms, admonished by you, starting from sleep, breaking their fetters, and claiming justice from their oppressors! Behold, the light you have struck out, after setting America free, reflected to France and there kindled into a blaze that lays despotism in ashes and warms and illuminates Europe!
Tremble all ye oppressors of the world! Take warning all ye supporters of slavish governments and slavish hierarchies! Call no more (absurdly and wickedly) reformation, innovation. You cannot now hold the world in darkness. Struggle no longer against increasing light and liberality. Restore to mankind their rights and consent to the correction of abuses, before they and you are destroyed together.
22. See a striking representation of the folly of wars, in the last sections of Mr. Necker's Treatise on the Administration of the Finances of France. There is reason to believe that the sentiments on this subject in that treatise are now the prevailing sentiments in the court and legislature of France, and, consequently, that one of the happy effects of the revolution in that country may be, if not our own fault, such a harmony between the two first kingdoms in the world, strengthened by a common participation in the blessings of liberty as shall not only prevent their engaging in any future wars with one another, but dispose them to unite in preventing wars every where and in making the world free and happy.
23. Mr. Burke in his Reflections on the Revolution in France [1790], denies several of the principles which in these pages are said to be the principles of the Revolution. He asserts that our Kings do not derive their right to the crown from the choice of their people, and that they are not responsible to them. And yet, with wonderful inconsistency, he indicates (p. 123) that a wicked king may be punished, provided it is done with dignity and he is under the necessity of granting that King James was justly deprived of his crown for misconduct. In p. 19, he mentions the legal conditions of the compact of sovereignty by which our kings are bound. The succession of the crown he calls a succession by law (p. 28) and the law, he calls an 'emanation from the common agreement and original compact of the State', and the constitution also he calls the 'engagement and pact of society'. In p. 26 he cites, as an authority against the right of the people to chuse their own governors, the very act for settling the crown on William and Mary which was an exercise of that right and the words of which are:
'The Lords and Commons do in the name of all the people submit themselves, their heirs and posterities for ever', etc.
This act having been passed on purpose to establish a change in the succession for misconduct, it cannot be supposed that it was intended to deprive the nation for ever of the power of making again any such change, whatever reasons appearing to the nation sufficient might occur. That is, it cannot be supposed that it was the intention of the act to subject the nation for ever to any tyrants that might happen to arise in the new line of succession. And yet this is the sense in which Mr. Burke seems to understand it, and he grounds upon it his assertion in p. 27, 'that so far was the nation from acquiring by the Revolution a right to elect our kings, that, if we had possessed it before, the English nation did then most solemnly renounce and abdicate it for themselves and their posterity for ever'. Mr. Burke, before he published this assertion, should have attended to a subsequent act which has been recommended to my notice by the truly patriotic Earl Stanhope [Charles Stanhope, third Earl Stanhope (1753-1816)]. I mean the act of the 6th of Anne, chap 7th, by which it is enacted that, 'if any person shall by writing or printing maintain and affirm that the Kings or (Queens of this realm, with and by the authority of Parliament, are not able to make laws and statutes of sufficient validity to limit the Crown, and the descent, inheritance and government thereof, every such person shall be guilty of high treason, etc'.
Previous | Contents | Text Version