Letters concerning the English Nation/Letter VIII
THE Members of the English Parliament are fond of comparing themselves to the old Romans.
Not long since, Mr. Shippen open'd a speech in the house of Commons with these words, The Majesty of the People of England would be wounded. The singularity of the expression occasion'd a loud laugh; but this Gentleman, so far from being disconcerted, repeated the same words with a resolute tone of voice, and the laugh ceas'd. In my opinion, the Majesty of the people of England has nothing in common with that of the people of Rome, much less is there any affinity between their governments. There is in London a Senate, sbme of the members whereof are accus'd, (doubtless very unjustly) of selling their voices on certain occasions, as was done in Rome; this is the only resemblance. Besides, the two nations appear to me quite opposite in charact, with regard both to good and evil. The Romans never knew the dreadful folly of religious Wars, an abomination reserv'd for devout Preachers of patience and humility. Marius and Sylla, Cæsar and Pompey, Anthony and Augustus, did not draw their swords and set the world in a blaze, merely to determine whether the Flamen should wear his shirt over his robe, or his robe over his shirt; or whether the sacred Chickens should eat and drink, or eat only, in order to take the augury.
The English have hang'd one another by law, and cut one another to pieces in pitch battles, for quarrels of as trifling a nature. The Sects of the Episcoparians and Presbyterians quite distracted these very serious Heads for a time. But I fancy they'll hardly ever be so silly again, they seeming to be grown wiser at their own expence; and I don't perceive the least inclination in them to murther one another merely about syllogisms, as some Zealots among them once did.
But here follows a more essential difference between Rome and England, which gives the advantage entirely to the latter, viz, that the civil wars of Rome ended in slavery, and those of the English in liberty. The Engish are the only people upon earth who have been able to prescribe limits to the power of Kings by resisting them; and who, by a series of struggles, have at last establish'd that wise Government, where the Prince is all powerful to do good, and at the same time is restrain'd from committing evil; where the Nobles are great without insolence, tho' there are nd Vassals; and where the People share in the government without confusion.
The house of Lords and that of the Commons divide the legislative power under the King, but the Romans had no such balance. The Patricians and Plebeians in Rome were perpetually at variance, and there was no intermediate Power to reconcile them. The Roman Senate who were so unjustly, so criminally proud, as not to suffer the Plebeians to share with them in any thing, cou'd find no other artifice to keep the latter out of the Administration than by employing them in foreign wars. They consider'd the Plebeians as a wild beast, whom it behov'd them to let loose upon their neighbours, for fear they should devour their masters. Thus the greatest defect in the Government of the Romans rais'd 'em to be Conquerors. By being unhappy at home, they triumph'd over, and posses'd themselves of the world, till at last their divisions sunk them to Slavery.
The government of England will never rise to so exalted a pitch of glory, nor will its end be so fatal. The English are not fir'd with the splendid folly of making conquests, but would only prevent their neighbours from conquering. They are not only jealous of their own Liberty, but even of that of other nations. The English were exasperated against Lewis the Fourteenth, for no other reason but because he was ambitious; and declar'd war against him merely out of levity, not from any interested motives.
The English have doubtless purchas'd their Liberties at a very high price, and waded thro' seas of blood to drown the Idol of arbitrary Power. Other nations have been involv'd in as great calamities, and have shed as much blood; but then the blood they spilt in defence of their Liberties, only enslaved them the more.
That which rises to a Revolution in England is no more than a Sedition in other countries. A city in Spain, in Barbary, or in Turkey, takes up arms in defence of its Privileges, when immediately 'tis storm'd by mercenary Troops, 'tis punish'd by Executioners, and the rest of the Nation kiss the chains they are loaded with. The French are of opinion, that the government of this Island is more tempstuous than the sea which surrounds it, which indeed is true; but then 'tis never so but when the King raises the storm; when he attempts to seize the Ship of which he is only the chief Pilot. The civil wars of France lasted longer; were more cruel, and productive of greater evils than those of England: But none of these civil Wars had a wise and prudent Liberty for their object.
In the detestable Reigns of Charles the ninth, and Henry the third, the whole affair was only whether the people should be slaves to the Guises. With regard to the last war of Paris, it deserves only to be hooted at. Methinks I see a a croud of School-boys rising up in arms against their Master, and afterwards whipp'd for it. Cardinal de Retz, who was witty and brave, but to no purpose; rebellious without a cause; factious without design, and head of a defenceless Party, caball'd for caballing sake, and seem'd to foment the civil War merely out of diversion. The Parliament did not know what he intended, nor what he did not intend. He levied troops by act of Parliament, and the next moment cashier'd them. He threatned, he begg'd pardon; he set a price upon Cardinal Mazarine's head, and afterwards congratulated him in a public manner. Our civil wars under Charles the sixth were bloody and cruel, those of the League execrable, and that of the [1]Frondeurs ridiculous.
That for which the French chiefly reproach the English Nation, is, the murther of King Charles the First, whom his subjects treated exactly as he wou'd have treated them, had his Reign been prosperous. After all, consider on one side, Charles the first defeated in a pitch'd battle, imprison'd, try'd, sentenc'd to die in Westminster-hall, and then beheaded: And on the other, the Emperor Henry the seventh, poison'd by his chaplain at his receiving the sacrament; Henry the third stabb'd by a Monk; thirty assassinations projected against Henry the fourth; several of them put in execution, and the last bereaving that great Monarch of his life. Weigh, I say, all these wicked attempts, and then judge.
- ↑ Frondeurs, in its proper sense Slingers, and figuratively Cavillers, or lovers of contradiction; was a name given to a league or party that oppos'd the French ministry, i.e. Cardinal Mazarine in 1648. See Rochefault's Memoirs.
This work was published before January 1, 1929, and is in the public domain worldwide because the author died at least 100 years ago.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse