REVOLUTION REYNOLDS. 



855 



Everett, and in 18^j, into those of Mr Jared 

 Sparks, from whom if. was transferred, in 1S30, to 

 the present editor, Mr Alexander H. Everett. A 

 general index of the twenty-five first volumes was 

 published in 1830. The work contains a mass of 

 valuable information in regard to American poli- 

 tico, law, history, &c. The American Quarterly 

 Review (Philadelphia, 1827) is edited by Mr 

 Robert Walsh. The Southern Review (Charleston 

 1828), which was very ably conducted by the late 

 Mr Elliot and Mr Legare, was discontinued with 

 the close of the eighth volume (1832). 



REVISE, among printers; a second or third 

 proof of a sheet to be printed ; taken off in order 

 to be compared with the last proof, to see whether 

 all the mistakes marked in it are actually cor- 

 rected. 



REVOLUTION, AND INSURRECTION. We 

 shall not here go into the question of the great 

 changes wrought in the condition of society by 

 political revolutions, which seem necessary to its 

 progress, but shall confine ourselves to a few re- 

 marks on the right of insurrections against esta- 

 blished governments. There has been much 

 speculation on the subject, whether citizens, under 

 any circumstances, are allowed to take up arms 

 against established authorities, and, if so, under 

 what circumstances, &c. Without being able to 

 enter here into all the arguments on this subject, 

 the question may be briefly considered thus : If 

 governments are instituted merely for the benefit 

 of the people, it is clear that, if they have failed to 

 answer their end, and will not submit to such 

 changes as the people consider necessary, the 

 people have the right, nay, are even under obliga- 

 tion, to overturn the existing system by force, on 

 the general principle that all rights may be main- 

 tained by force when other means fail. The prin- 

 ciple is so evident that it would never have been 

 disputed, had it not been for monarchs and their 

 supporters, who dreaded its application. In ex- 

 treme cases, it is admitted by all. None, for 

 instance, would have denied the Arabs in Egypt, 

 or the Berbers in Barbary, the right to rise against 

 what was called their government a band of cruel 

 and rapacious robbers. But at what point does 

 this right of insurrection begin ? This point it is 

 impossible to fix in the abstract. A treatise not 

 confined to narrow limits, like this article, might. 

 make a full statement of cases imaginary or real, 

 and point out what was demanded in each ; might 

 hold up to view the evils of a bad government on 

 one side, and of civil war on the other, and endea- 

 vour to show under what circumstances it was 

 better to endure the one or to hazard the other ; 

 but it could not lay down any general rule but the 

 vague one already given. The character of insur- 

 rections, which, while they present some of the 

 brightest and some of the foulest spots in history, 

 always derange the frame-work of society, is such, 

 tliat they will not, generally speaking, be lightly 

 entered into. Fanatics may sometimes take up 

 arms from slight causes ; but, generally speaking, 

 that principle in human nature which leads men to 

 endure the evils of established systems as long as 

 they are endurable, will be a sufficient security 

 against the abuse of the indefinite rule which we 

 have stated. But while we maintain the right o 

 insurrection, under certain circumstances, from the 

 inalienable rights of mankind, we also admit tha 

 it can never be lawful in the technical sense of the 

 word, because it is a violation of all rules of posi 

 live law. All the rights which a citizen, as such 

 enjoys, emanate from the idea of the state ; an< 

 the object of an insurrection is the destruction, a 



east for the time, of that order which lies at the 

 wsis of the state, by the substitution of force for 

 aw. The right of a citizen, as such, to rebel, is a 

 contradiction in terms, as it implies that the state 

 authorizes its own destruction. An insurrection 

 >ecomes lawful, in the technical sense of the word 

 only when it has become a revolution, and has 

 established a new order in the place of the old. 

 iVe speak, of course, of insurrections against esta- 

 )lislied governments. An insurrection to over- 

 throw an usurpation is of a totally different charac- 

 er, as its object is the restoration of the established 

 order, which, has been arbitrarily interrupted. 

 While, therefore, the right of insurrection is inhe- 

 rent in man, it can never be rationally admitted as 

 a principle of any constitution of government; and 

 t was equally unphilosophical and inexpedient for 

 one of the early French constitutions to give the 

 ight of opposing by force the exercise of unlawful 

 sower ; but, from the constitution of human society, 

 t hardly seems possible to avoid the occurrence 

 jf forcible changes in political systems. Nothing 

 n this world can last for ever ; institutions esta- 

 alished centuries ago, to answer the demands of a 

 state of things which has long ceased to exist, fre- 

 quently become extremely oppressive, from their 

 nconsistency with the new tendencies which have 

 sprung up in society. Sometimes the evil may be 

 remedied without bloodshed ; sometimes happy 

 accidents facilitate a change ; at other times, how- 

 ever, the old order of things assumes a tone of 

 decided hostility to the new tendencies ; and this 

 s what must be expected in a large proportion of 

 cases. Then it is that revolutions break out, and 

 eventually establish a new order, from which new 

 rights and laws emanate. While, therefore, the 

 philosopher and historian acknowledge the neces- 

 sity, and even obligation, of insurrections, they 

 will, nevertheless, not fail to utter a solemn admo- 

 nition against resorting rashly to this extreme 

 remedy for violated right. There is a solidity, an 

 authority, a completeness, in a political system 

 which has acquired maturity by slow degrees and 

 long struggles, that can never belong to any new 

 system suddenly substituted in its stead. There 

 can be no security for permanent liberty till the 

 civic element has become developed, and men 

 have become attached to a given sjstem of social 

 connexions. The common principle, therefore, of 

 weighing the evil to be risked against the good to 

 be gained, by a political revolution, needs to be 

 strongly impressed upon every people in a state of 

 political excitement. 



REVOLUTIONARY TRIBUNAL. See Ter- 

 rorism. 



REYNARD THE FOX. See Renard. 



REYNOLDS, SIB JOSHUA, an eminent English 

 painter, was bom at Plympton, in Devonshire, in 

 1723, being the tenth child of the master of the 

 grammar-school of that town. He early discovered 

 a predilection for the art of drawing, which induced 

 his father to place him, at the age of seventeen, 

 with Hudson, the most famous portrait- painter in 

 London, with whom he remained three years, and 

 then, upon some disagreement, returned into 

 Devonshire. He passed some time without any 

 determinate plan, and, from 1746 to 1749, pursued 

 his profession in Devonshire and London, and ac- 

 quired numerous friends and patrons. Among the 

 latter was captain (afterwards lord) Keppel, whom 

 he accompanied on a cruise in the Mediterranean. 

 He then proceeded to Rome, in which capital and 

 other parts of Italy he spent three years. On his 

 return to London, he painted a full length portrait 

 of captain Keppel, which was very much admired, 



