CANADIAN NOMS-DE-PLUME IBENTIPIED. 275 



shewing the impossibility of such works as ' The Glory and Shame of 

 England ' being published without risk of detection and exposure, 

 or in throwing any additional light on those questions which are now 

 agitating the public on both sides of the Atlantic." I give a passage 

 from the thirteenth chapter as a specimen of the wiiter's clear and 

 vigorous style. Lister had asserted that " English liberty had its 

 broadest foundations during," as he chose to call it, " Cromwell's 

 splendid administration." Libertas then proceeds : " Now, we never 

 knew any man who was a genuine friend of liberty, who admired 

 Olivei' Cromwell. With such persons you will invariably find that 

 it is republicanism, not liberty, that they admire. It is not tyranny 

 that they dislike, but monarchy. Cromwell was, like many repub- 

 licans, a seeker of power. Republicanism was with him, as with 

 Napoleon Bonaparte, the ladder by which he reached that power. 

 Both kicked away the ladder when the power was attained. Will 

 our author say," asks Libertas, " what stone was ever laid on the 

 temple of freedom by Cromwell after he reached his elevation 1 He 

 broke up the remains of the Rump Parliament with a military force, 

 crying out as the last vestige of popular power disappeared, ' Take 

 away that bauble.' He summoned another Parliament, consisting of 

 his own creatures, who went such lengths in folly that even their 

 master was ashamed of them." Then a little fui-ther on : "We have 

 often been astonished to hear men, styling themselves democratical 

 republicans, praising Napoleon Bonaparte. That unprincipled man 

 went farther lengths than Cromwell ; and yet because he was 

 not born to royalty, and because he overturned ancient dynasties, he 

 is still looked on with respect by republicans, and all his tyranny 

 and ambition are forgotten. The splendid administration and 

 splendid talents of these ambitious men, only rendered them more 

 dangerous to the liberties and independence of nations. The solution 

 of such strange inconsistency is plainly this : that many republicans 

 are not favourable to liberty, and many understand nothing of its 

 genuine principles. It is too readily assumed that republicanism is 

 synonymous with freedom, but such is not necessarily the case. 

 Oppression by a majority is just as much oppression as by a king or 

 aristocracy ; and the oppression becomes truly fearful, when that 

 majority delegates its power to wicked and selfish men, and is so 

 ignorant that it is not aware when that power is abused." 



