520], 
tors declare, “ The maintaining 
our: natural, civil,» and: political 
rights* 5”? for this “last right (if 
they will use the term) has exist- 
ence only subsequent to, and in 
consequence of, the formation of 
society. The natural rights of men, 
in which it is allowed all continue 
equal, are not infringed, although 
the offices of state are restridted to 
particular classes. And theircivil 
rights: may. be equally respe¢ted or 
violatedci inany form of government 
whatever; if the latter should 
happen, no more is proved, than 
that. the Beverage neglect or be- 
tray their duty.’ 
“dn chapter HI. book I. Mr. M. 
examines. another favourite posi- 
tion of the French revolutionists, 
viz. “the will of the majority is 
binding on the whole ;’? and he 
cortroverts. it, if not with com. 
plete success, at least with. great 
Ingenuity. His first objection is 
founded “on the difficulty, if not 
impossibility, of ascertaining what 
is the unbiassed will of the majority 
of ‘a nation as to ics particular 
question : 
‘In cities (says he}; a very 
small portion. of the inhabitants 
may, with the advantages of union 
-and: preconcerted operations, dic- 
tatewith uncontrollable authority 
tothe whole. 
Romans (among whom this prin- 
ciple prevailed) were content to 
surround the forum, and pre- 
occupy all the avenues to the hust- - 
ings with anarmed mob, by means of 
which the most alert faction passed 
what laws it pleased+. ‘he tero- 
cious Parisians, by a liberal exer- 
cise of the Janthorn and pike, awe 
_ far more secure. 
The less sanguinary. 
ANNUAL REGISTER, 1796. 
their opponents into'silence; and’ 
compel. them to adopt ‘the same 
Opinions. ° As to the will of a* 
great nation, we need only. refer 
tothe arguments so ‘often‘used by” 
ouropposition, to prove thefutility 
of addrésses, as evincive of ithe gc. 
neral opinion, The sameargaments 
may be applied with equal. ‘force to 
petitions or resolutions of any:kind, 
on any particular . question; from’ 
corporate bodies or districts. = It 
is more difficult indeed for a faction 
to establish a tyrannic sway over 
an’ extensive country, than ‘over a 
singie city ; but that sway, iftonce 
established, is, from the obstacles 
which the discontented meet~ in 
their endeavours to form a union, 
_ The inferior but 
united force of Paris itself, awed 
into. acquiescence by a faction, 
has easilyvquelled the successive in. 
surrections in La Vendee, Lyons, 
Marseilles, “Toulon, and various’ 
other places and provinces of 
France; though there can be no 
doubt but that the discontented 
would, if united, as easily have 
overwhelmed the city of Paris.’ 
Supposing this difficulty about 
ascertaining the wili of the majo. 
rity to. be removed, there would 
remain a strong objection to the 
principle itself. He aliows, for 
argumentation, the right of the 
majority of a nation to change the. 
constitution from monarchy to a 
republic, or its religion from Chris- 
tianity to Paganism: but it docs not 
foliow that the majority has any 
right to legislate for the minority. 
Such.a change as is above stated, 
he contends, wouldamount toa dis- 
solution of the compaét on which 
* New Constitution of France, by Sa iowce te. 
+ ‘Fergus. Rom, Repub, book iii, chap. 3. and passim,’ 
the 
