Thoughts on civil liberty, on licentiousness, and faction/Section 22

 

SECT.XXII.

 

Some Objectious obviated.

 

SHOULD it be objected to the Writer, that while he blames the Practice in others He indiscriminately characterizeth whole Bodies of Men who dissent from public Measures; he would reply, that the Accusation is groundless: For he hath expressly distinguished Those who dissent on Principles of Liberty, from such as dissent on Motives of Licentiousness and Faction.

Should it be objected, that he hath attacked even private Characters, in the Way of indirect Description: This Accusation would be equally ill-founded. For all personal Peculiarities are avoided, save only the single Facts alluded to, as the Proofs of his Allegations: These were essentially necessary for the Support of the Argument; and relate not to private Life, but to public and political Conduct.

Should it be objected, that he hath indirectly censured Those, whose Conduct he had formerly applauded: He replies, that he never was attached to Men, but Measures.

Should it be objected, that some of these characteristic Marks may seem to involve Men of good Morals in private Life: He would reply, that the Affections of good Men in private Life may not always extend to the Public.

Should it be objected, that some of these characteristic Marks may seem to involve Men, who have been eminently serviceable to their Country in public Stations: He would reply, that He ever hath been, and ever will be proud to do Justice to Merit, when exercised in any public Station.

Should it be objected, that he questions the Conduct of Those only who are now out of Power: He would reply, that he formerly questioned their Conduct with the same Freedom, when in the Fulness of their Power: And that his Reasons in both Instances were the same; because in both Instances he judged their general Conduct to be essentially ill-founded, narrow, selfish, reprehensible.