Europe from the. Peace of Utrecht. 
pidity, beyond. the circle of those classes. 
to, which the allurements of parade and 
luxury,and the | hopes of accumulation 
canbe extended; butin the deter classes 
of the ,community,.as.they: are courtée- 
ously called, (i.e, the better conditioned) 
is. not. properly, almost; universally, in 
phrase or inference, substituted in the 
place,of rights 2, or are not rights them- 
selyes. almost exclusively talked of in 
reference) tothe. protection and the 
encouregement of accumulating pro- 
perty. | Splendid, mansions and rolling 
carriages, multiplying out of number, 
obscure from our eyes the beggary and 
wretchedness'of thousands of neglected 
labourers ; and even our sympathies are 
invited, to. change their reference from 
the sufferings of our fellow beings to 
pounds (shillings and pence. If con- 
flagrations reduce a village, or a factory 
to,ashes,,or inundations deluge a track 
of. country, the, detail that is dwelt 
upon,.is not the nuinber ef wretched 
labourers, or manufacturers, with their 
dependent families, that are reduced to 
want and wretchedness, but the amount 
in hundreds, and thousands: of pecuniary 
loss that, is, to fall upon-a few “ proprie- 
tors.” What, state of mind more favour- 
able coulda court or a government 
require, which should wish to establish 
the pomp ‘of military dominion and the 
influence of unawed corruption in the 
place. of chartered. liberties, and inhe- 
rent.or,traditionary rights ? 
With a brief expression of general 
approbation, we must hurry through the 
succesive sections on the Relations of 
Gavernments to each other ; the Balance 
of Power ;,the.Law of Nations; and 
the, Reformation ;* and must satisfy 
ourselyes from the pages they occupy 
with the quotation of a single paragraph. 
“The whole system of the balance of 
power may be considered as having been 
subyerted by the partition of Poland. The 
suceess of that enterprize put an end at 
oncé to tlie’ moral feeling’ and physical 
divisions on which the ancient law of Eu- 
rope” was founded. Catherine of Russia 
despised a code which had been established 
and recognized while her empire was still 
wholly barbarous ; her neighbour of Prussia, 
wealc in territory, unprincipled in conduct, 
“We must not, however, neglect to 
quote the well-grounded datum, that “ The 
Reformation, and the French Revolution, 
may be regarded as the great stations from 
which future historians will date the events 
of.modern. history.’’ The world has not 
yet done, nor ever will have done, with the 
occasions for remembering and. understand-, 
ing both. 
. 
583 
readily joined her; and Maria Theresa, 03 
the disgrace of her name, for the misfortune 
of Europe, and.to her own unavailing regret, 
sanctioned the. destruction \of the law of 
nations, which, it has been truly said, had 
often before been violated, but) was now 
totally overthrown,”’ ; 
In the ensuing section on Internal 
Government, his Lordship enters freely 
into the statement and examination of 
“the extent of the authority of kings, 
and the inviolability of the law under 
which they claimed it. 
“ They assumed an absolute right of dis- 
posing of the lives and properties of their 
subjects by a commission from the Divine 
Creator of all things, authorizing them and 
their descendants to reign for ever. .This 
doctrine was compounded partly of the 
slavish maxims of the Roman. Imperial 
law; partly of the Jewish dispensation ; 
and partly of the precepts found in the 
books of revealed religion. The theory of 
the Roman law was, that the Emperor held 
by various titles all the authority which the 
Roman people once divided amongst the 
various offices of Consul, Pontifex, Tribune 
of the people, Military-Tribune, &c:» ‘The 
Jewish dispensation teaches us’ that kings 
were selected by heayen itself to. reign over 
the Jews. The epistles of St. Paul enjoin 
his disciples to obey, and order them, to 
preserve inviolate that allegiance which, in 
the fervour of enthusiasm, created by a new 
revelation, they were probably inclined to 
renounce.* Fortified with these authorities, 
and supported by the lawyers and clergy of 
their dominions, the kings of Europe did 
not hesitate to claim.a power which Augus- 
tus or Charlemagae, would have: deemed 
exorbitant. In England, indeed, this de- 
grading dogma, did not long prevail. Lord 
Shaftesbury, speaking of it in one of his 
speeches, calls it the Laudean doctrine, 
but 
* The p e of St. Paul, ‘* Let every soul be 
subject unto the higher powers. For there is no 
power but of God: the powers that be are ordaincd 
of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power 
resisteth the ordinance of God,” has been the source 
of the slavish doctrines held by Christian divines in 
modern times. Yet upon the slightest examination 
the interpretation affixed to it during several centu- 
ries of ignorance or bigotry will appear erroneous. 
The enemies of Christ wished to impute to him that 
his intentions aimed at the destruction of the govern- 
ments of the earth in order to substitute his own 
power, and even some of his own followers imagined 
that by the new dispensation they were not absolved 
all civil duties, and were to form part ofa society 
constituted on a new basis. Todo away this error, 
Christ said, ‘* Render unto Cesar the thi gs which 
are Cesar’s:” and with the same view, St. Paul 
informed his followers that fien vee absolved from 
the duties of allegiance, and that civil government 
was an institution approved by God. In short, the 
Christian religion left_the guesion of government 
exactly where it found it, and by no means introduced 
new political maxims. Neither Christ nor his apos- 
tles anywhere recommend any particular form of 
government as divine, teach that a monarchy is more 
sacred than a republic, or abolish the: rights inherent 
in mankind of constituting their government in the 
form and manner they think best adapted for their 
happiness and security. : 
