442 
‘¢ Now, having gone thus far in the 
efcription of rebellion, I think myfeif 
obliged to teil you, what I conceive not to 
be rebellion. Wholoever, then, takes 
arms to maintain the politic conflitution 
or government of his country, im the con- 
dition it then is, I mean, to defend it 
from being changed or invaded by the 
craft or force of any man (although it be 
the prince or chief magiftrate himfelf), 
provided that fuch taking up of arms be 
commanded or authorized by thofe who 
are, by the-order of that government, le- 
gally entrufted with the cuitody of the li 
berty of the people, and foundation of 
the government; this I hold to be fo far 
from rebellion, that J believe it laudable ; 
nay, the duty of every member of fuch 
commonwealth; for, he who fights to 
fupport and defend the government he 
was born and lives under, cannot deferve 
the odious name of rebel, but he who en- 
deavours to defiroy it; if this be not 
granted, it will be in vain to frame any 
mixed government in the world,”” 
Machiavel, doubtlefs, when he bore fo 
confpicuous a part in the revolution which 
expelled the Medici from Florence, and 
afterwards, when, as it was ftongly fuf- 
pected, he was involved in the unfuccels- 
ful attempt to deftroy Cardinal Guilio de’ 
fedici (afterwards Pope Clement VII.) 
who had affumed the government of Flo- 
rence, in the minority of that ‘¢ monfter of 
luft and cruelty,’’ Alexander, confidered 
himfelf as juftifably defending from the 
craft or force of the chief magiftrate,” 
«« the politic conftitution of his country.” 
One cannot avoid remarking, in this 
place, that the fentiments of Machiavel, 
on the (ubje&t of refiftance to corftituted 
authorities, appear to be fimilar to, if not 
exactly the fame, with thole laid dewn by 
Sir William Blackftone, in his Commen- 
taries on the Laws of England: the more 
fenGble nerves of the latter, indeed, 
tremble at the bare contemplation of fuch 
a refiftance in the part of the people m 
defence of their invaded liberties; he ac- 
knowledges both the right and the necefli- 
ty of fuch rehitance in extreme cafes, 
however, in very unequivocal terms. ¢ All 
oppreflion (fays Blackftone, B. I. Ch. Taig 
which may happen to fpring from any 
branch of the (overeign power muft ne- 
ceflarily be out of the reach of any /lated 
rule or exprefs legal provifion ; but if ever 
they unfortunately happen, the prudence 
of the times muft provide new remedies 
upon new emergencies. Indeed, it is 
found by experience (continues he, almoft 
in the words of Machiavel), that when- 
Defence of Machiavel. 
{June I, 
ever the unconftitutional eppre‘fions, even 
of the fovereign power, advance with gi- 
gantic ftrides, and threaten defola ion to 2 
itate, mankind will not be reafoned out of 
the feelings of humanity, nor will facri- 
fice their liberty by a fcrupulous adhe- 
rence to thofe political maxims which 
were originally eftablifhed to preferve it.” 
Again :—* Jn thefe, therefore, or other 
circumftances,”’ (reterring to thofe which 
produced theexpulfion of Jamesil.)@which 
a fertile imagination may furnith, fince 
both law and hiftory are filent, it becomes 
us to be filent too, leaving to future gene- 
rations, whenever neceflity and the fafety 
of the whole fhiall require it, the exertions 
of thofe inherent, though latent, powers 
of fociety, which no climate, no time, no 
conftitution, no contraét, can ever deftrey 
or diminifh.” 
Thefe writers probably agree (fuch in- 
croachments of the fovergign power being 
‘“‘neceflarily out of thereach of any ffatedrule 
or exprefs legal provifien,” and therefore the 
peoplehaving no other remedy than arms), 
that fince it would be of ill-confequence, to 
ufe the words of Machiavel, ** to make 
every private man judge when: the rights 
of the people are invaded, which would be 
apt to produce frequent, and fometimes 
caufelefS, tumults ; therefore it hath been the 
great wifdom of the founders of moft mo- 
narchies, to appoint guardians to their 
liberty, which, if it be not othcrwife ex- 
prefled, is and ought to be underfteod to 
refide in the eftates of the country,” &c. 
It does not appear, however, from this 
paflage, to have once entered into the ima- 
gination of Machiavel, that thefe eftates 
themfelves might poffibly confpire againft 
that public liberty of which they are ap- 
pcinted the protectors: Sir W. Blackftone 
féems to have had his fufpicions more 
alive, when he {peaks of * the oppreffions 
which may {pring from any branch of the 
fovereign power.” ta 
But it is time that we fhould come to 
Machiavel’s Vindication of himfelf again 
the fecond charge, namely, that of ** im- 
piety in vilifying the chureh,-and of fo 
making way for atheifm.”’ It appears, that 
in the fifteenth century, as well as in the 
eighteenth, the man who dared diflent 
from the eftablifhed religion of his coun- 
try was branded with the opprobricus 
charge of atheifm: Machiavel, a Floren- 
tine, avowed his abhorrence of Popery, a 
religion, whofe influence he confidered as 
corruptive of the morals, and fatal te the 
liberties, of man. He defends himfelf 
from this fecond accufation by admitting 
the premifes, and denying the confe- 
QUENCES 4 
tt 
4 1 
ee ee ee ee 
iy? = 
SS 
™~™. oe 
