by the belief that it cripples all their exertions in war. England, once free from this mill-stone, they imagine, would be free to encounter her enemies. The usefulness of such an act of injustice tolerably well reconciles them to its principle.

The most successful answer to the measure will be, to question its utility. The whole taxes fall far short of the expenditures of the nation in time of war. Suppose the debt sponged off, and all the products of the taxes applied to necessary expenses, how shall the deficiency be made up? By new loans? Shall the British Chancellor of the Exchequer, with the sponge in one hand, hold out a subscription-paper in the other? Who would lend? or escape the madhouse if he did? If loans could be obtained, a new national debt would be scored up, at the rate of some millions a year; and, as soon as the size of the debt had begun to terrify some by its effect in crippling the energies of the government, and to tire others by the pressure of taxes, it must be sponged off again. Be it remembered, the violent remedies of great evils are, almost always, aggravations of those evils. If the minister, unable or unwilling to borrow, should raise taxes within the year, equal to the expenditures of war, what becomes of the plea of necessity?

On the whole, is it not right, that the property of a nation should defend its liberty? And is this to be done to the extent that the public safety may require, unless the government can obtain loans in its necessity, that it will provide for in its prosperity? A great public debt is, no doubt, a great evil; but the loss of liberty and independence is one infinitely greater.

It

is some alleviation of that evil, for any government (for all are prone enough to become corrupt) habitually to guide its measures and its counsels, by the experience, that its good faith is its good policy. It ought to make men better, to contemplate the example of a state, tried, and tempted by adversity, and groaning under the load of taxes, yet still faithful to its engagements, and enjoying an ample resource in the confidence of its creditors, by deserving their confidence, and keeping their property sacred from violation. Such a state gives an illustrious lesson of morality to its subjects. It fulfils the great duty of all governments, which is to protect property. This is not all. It will seem, to some practical men, still more to the purpose, that such a state will have the control, in the extreme exigencies of the public affairs, of the last shilling of private property. Such is the spectacle of the British government.

It is left to others to compute, how essential a part of the national wealth consists of property in the national debt, and how much poorer the nation would be by sponging it off. Such a measure would aggravate necessity; but we cannot conceive how it would supply means. As this violation of the public faith would be the most tremendous, as also the most unequal and unfair tax, that ever was levied on a state, it is natural to suppose, the dread of it would sanction other very strong measures to get at the wealth of the subjects by taxes, and that they would cheerfully acquiesce, at least, in their temporary adoption.

CHAPTER XIV.

THE LIBERTY OF THE PRESS NOT THE MAIN SAFEGUARD OF THE BRITISH CONSTITUTION.

We are, heART AND SOUL, FRIENDS TO THE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS. It is, however, the prostituted companion of liberty, and somehow or other, we know not how, its efficient auxiliary. It follows the substance like its shade; but, while a man walks erect, he may observe, that his shadow is almost always in the dirt. It corrupts, it deceives, it inflames. It strips virtue of her honours, and lends to faction its wildfire and its poisoned arms, and in the end is its own enemy and the usurper's ally. It would be easy to enlarge on its evils. They are in England, they are here, they are every where. It is a precious pest and a necessary mischief, and THERE WOULD BE NO

LIBERTY WITHOUT IT.

Before the art of printing was known, bad ministers were crushed by public odium. The favourites of Edward the Second of England were as effectually overpowered by it, as if the press had been used. The freedom of the press cannot hinder its being venal. Had it then existed, those odious favourites would have used it to palliate their crimes. They would have bought the press; and, no doubt, they would have been patriots in type, till they were stripped of the means of corruption; and then again they would have been odious monsters. In our time this boasted luminary vents more smoke than light;

so that the circumstances of transactions and the characters of men are to be clearly known only by waiting for the evidence of history in a future age, when it will be of very little comparative importance, whether the subject be understood or mistaken.

Though nobody will deny the influence of public opinion upon government, still it is a distinct question, what is the boasted salutary influence of the press ? It might help the cause of truth and liberty; it might produce as well as gratify a thirst for inquiry. But who pretend to be the instructors of the people? men who are themselves instructed, or needy, ignorant profligates? The use of the press must be supposed to lie in helping a nation to discern and to judge. Experience seems to show, that the press makes every thing more apparent than the truth; and by eternally pretending to judge, the public opinion is without authority or influence; it is counterfeited by fools, and perverted by knaves. But a plain people, without a press, would know oppression, when they felt it; and there is no government, which is not supported by military force, that would disregard the complaints of an indignant nation. By the help of the press we see invisible things; we foresee evils in their embryo, and accumulate on the present moment all that is bitter in the past, or terrible in the future. A whole people are made sick with the diseases of the imagination. They turn their best men out of office on the strength of their suspicions; and trust their worst men in spite of their knowledge of them. It is the press that has spoiled the temper of our liberty, and may shorten its life.

Still, we repeat, we would by no means wish to

see the liberty of the press abridged.

But how

it is that we are dieted upon poisons and yet live, we

pretend not to say.

From these deductions we venture to pronounce, that the freedom of the press is not the cause of the security of the British people, or of the duration of their constitution. It is not our business to make a theory; but we should think, that the freedom of that constitution arises rather from the distinct existence and political power of three orders, than from the press. The press could tell of oppression, if it had happened; but the lords and commons could remove and punish it.

But though we cannot possibly discover how the freedom of the press can secure the constitution of an hereditary government, we can easily see, how in a popular state the abuse of the press may fortify a faction in power. It is not merit, it is not wisdom. that in such a state can confer power; it is faction which has an interest in accumulating wealth and privilege upon its members, and persecution on its rivals. We know a country, where the press is successfully used for the concealment of the truth. Newspapers written all on one side are read all on one side; and the truth and argument of the adverse party are as little known, and have less chance of being understood by the other, than the language of Hindostan, or the religion of Thibet.

THE END.