manna falls while he hath never any occafion for thinking of the morrow, and the anguish of the people, that obtains nothing but at the price of irksome labour, and of painful fweat, is calculated to inspire every bofom with defpair!"

Let the advisers of thefe calamitous measures now inform us, whether they are fure of preferving military difcipline in its full feverity, of preventing all the effects of the eternal jealousy fubfifting between the national and the foreign troops, of reducing the French foldiers to the state of mere automata, to have separate interes, feparate thoughts, feparate fentiments from their fellow citizens. What imprudence in their fyftem, to march the foldiers to the fcene of our affemblies, to electrify them by the contact of the capital, to intereft them in our political difcuffions! No; fpite of the blind devotion of military obedience, they will not forget what we are ; they will view in us their relations, their friends, their family, taking care of their deareft interefts; for they form a part of that nation which hath entrusted to our care its liberty, its property, its honour. No; fuch men, fuch Frenchmen, will never totally abandon their intellectual faculties; they will never believe that duty confifts in ftriking without inquiring who are the victims."

The addrefs is in the fame ftyle, and is, we think, one of the most finished productions which the French revolution has yet produced. The addrefs to the king, advifing the difmiffion of the miniflers, is only inferior to it. In this addrefs, we find the first origin of the form that the affembly has no confidence in the minifters; the language often made ufe of fince, to hint the neceflity of a refignation. In the fpeech on the fame fubject, Mirabeau replies to what was urged by M. Mounier refpecting the conduct of England in fimilar emergencies. This paffage is interefting to ourfelves. We fhall only add to the tranflator's note, that the conduct of the French patriot is a little ungrateful, if he knew of the extravagant reiterated applaufes beflowed on the revolution by the English whigs.

"But look, you fay, at Great Britain! what popular commotions are not caufed in that kingdom, by this very right which you lay claim to? It is this that hath ruined England England ruined Mighty God! What unfortunate intelligence! from what quarter did the mifchief come? What earthquake, what convulsion of nature hath swallowed up that famous ifland, that inexhauftible treafury of illuftrious examples, that claffic country of the friends of liberty? But you give me comfort-England fill flourishes for the eternal inftruction of the world: England, in a glorious filence, is now healing thofe wounds which in the height of a burning fever the inflicted on herfelf! England dif

2

plays

plays all the various arts of industry, explores every fource of human profperity, and even now hath just filled up a vast chasm in her conftitution, with all the vigour of the most energetic youth, and the impofing maturity of a people grown old in state affairs. You are thinking, then, merely of fome parliamentary diffenfions (there, as in other places, it is often no more than talk, which hath no other importance than the intereft of loquacity); or rather, it feems to be the last diffolution of parliament which affrights you to this degree.

"I will not fay, that, according to what you have advanced, it is evident that you are unacquainted with the causes and the particulars of that great event, which is not a revolution, as you are pleased to call it; but I will fay, that that example affords a proof irrefiftible, that the influence of a national assembly over an administration can never be calamitous, fince that influence is null, the very moment the fenate abufes it.

"In fact, what hath been the iffue, in this uncommon circumstance, where the king of England, fupported by a very weak minority, did not hesitate to cope with the national affembly, formidable as it was, and diffolve it? On a sudden, the fantastic edifice of a coloffal oppofition tottered on its frail foundation, on that aspiring and factious coalition which feemed to threaten a univerfal ufurpation *. And what was the cause of this so fudden change? The cause was, that the people was of the king's opinion, and not of that of the parliament. The fupreme magistrate of the nation quelled the legislative ariftocracy by a fimple appeal to the people, to that people which hath never but one intereft; because the public welfare is effentially its own. Its reprefentatives, invested with an invisible power, and with almost a real dictatorship when they are the organs of the general inclination, are no more than powerlefs pigmies when they dare to substitute, in place of their facred miflion, the interested views and paffions of private individuals."

The fpeech on the veto is more clear, argumentative, and connected than any other: it was revised and published by the author. Mirabeau, who, by the way, was not always fuccefsful in his motions, argued for an abfolute veto; and this was only preferable to a fufpenfive veto, when we take in the whole of his propofal, that the taxes, the pay of the army, and every financiering decree, fhould be annual. This might have introduced confufion in other refpects, and perhaps the prefent determination may be more fimple and expedient.

The laft fpeech, and the intended reply, is on the property of the clergy, which, on the motion of Mirabeau, was de

I thought the French patriots and the English oppofition were better friends than this occafion feems to indicate. W.

clared

clared to belong to the nation. But oratory and metaphyfical diftinctions cannot change the nature of right and wrong. Mirabeau fucceeded in the affembly, but he will fail before the tribunal of pofterity. From this speech, however, we may felect a paffage or two, illuftrative of the orator's talents and abilities. The establishments founded by the kings, he urges, with fome propriety, are the property of the nation, as founded on the public expence, with the treasures of the nation. The foundations of the nobility are fometimes of the fame kind; and the question, as we have formerly had occafion to ftate it, refts on the donation of individuals. On this part of the fubject, he exerts all his talents, all his ingenuity.

"As to the estates derived from foundations made by fimple individuals, it is equally eafy to prove, that, in appropriating them to herself upon the inviolable condition of furnishing the neceffary charges, the nation commits no outrage against the right of property, nor against the will of the founders, fuch as we must fuppofe it to be in the order prescribed by law.

In fact, gentlemen, what is property in general? It is the right which all have given to a fingle perfon to poffefs exclusively a thing, to which, in its natural ftate, all had an equal right: and, after this general definition, what is private property? It is an estate acquired by virtue of the laws.

"I return to this principle, because an honourable member who spoke, fome days ago, upon this queftion, did not ftate it perhaps with the fame precifion as thofe other truths, the principles and confequences of which he hath fo ably unfolded. Yes, gentlemen, it is the law alone which conftitutes property, fince it is only the public will which can effect the renunciation of all, and give a title, as the warrant of enjoyment, to a fingle perfon.

"If we be supposed out of the protection of law, what is the confequence?

"Either all poffefs, and then, nothing being peculiar to any one perfon, there is no fuch thing as property."

The argument we may take up in another view.

"I might remark, that every member of the clergy is an of ficer of the ftate; that the service of the altar is a public func tion; and that, as religion is the concern of all, for that fole reafon its minifters fhould be paid by the nation, like the judge who gives fentence in the name of the law, like the foldier who, in the name of the community, defends the common property. "I might conclude from this principle, that, if the clergy had no revenue, the state would be obliged to supply one: now,

an

an eftate which ferves only to pay our debts, is certainly our property.

"I might conclude, moreover, that the clergy could acquire eftates for no other purpose than the difcharge of the state, fince, in granting thefe eftates, the founders have done what, in their place, and in their default, the nation must have done."

We need make no comments on these observations; they need no refutation. The lowest allowance is 1200 livres a year, equal to 50 pounds fterling, on the lowest computation; we wish every English clergyman had as much. House and gardens are not included. The great objection that we formerly made to the ftipends was, that the higher orders had fo little, that the prizes to be attained by fuperior knowledge, learning, and piety were not greater.

A fpeech of Mirabeau in the affembly of Provence is subjoined. Mr. White obferves, it breathes, in different parts, all the fpirit of Demofthenes.' We cannot, however, enlarge our extracts. We trust that we fhall induce our readers to peruse the whole work: we meant no more; and can affure them they will not be disappointed.

An Hiftorical Sketch of the French Revolution from its Commencement to the Year 1792. 8vo. 7s. Boards. Debrett, 1792.

AGES muft elapfe before history can dip her pen, to deli

neate the particular traits of a revolution, or to draw the portraits of the actors. In more recent times, paffions and prejudices interpofe fallacious media, and those who can see, are afraid left the imperfectly fmothered flame may again break out and deftroy them. Every work of this kind from France is peculiarly liable to fufpicion; and for an Englishman to decide on the motives and conduct of the actors in fo vaft a scene, whofe connections and difpofitions he cannot understand, may be deemed prefumptions. Yet a cool enquirer, at a distance from the fcene, may collect the documents which fucceffively appear, and a philofophical inveftigator may connect actors with probable motives, events with apparent, though diftant, caufes, and produce a work, which if not strictly hiftorical, may furnish the future hiftorian with information, and be both pleafing and interesting to his own cotemporaries. Our author's fketch is of this kind: to a minute attention he seems to have joined extenfive information, and to a general fidelity of detail, judicious and interefting reflections. His peculiar bias is obvious and confeffed, and may confequently be guarded againft, where it may appear to C. R. N. AR. (IV.) April, 1792. Hh operate:

operate: he comes near to that clafs of which we have profeffed ourselves followers, a friend to a fubordination of ranks, and an advocate for regulated-liberty; and politically, for two diflinct houfes of parliament, regulated by a limited and hereditary monarchy. The French revolution is now, however, ground often trodden, a subject trite, hackneyed, stale. It is not our intention again to go over the well-known narrative, but to follow our author in thofe parts, where, by comparing different publications, or the conduct of men at different times, he has been enabled to give a new view of either motives or actions.

After a fhort introduction, and fome account of the fources from whence this narrative is drawn, our author proceeds to fome,obfervations on the origin of regal government in Europe. It was certainly, as he remarks, a military ariftocracy; and, when a fortunate leader could not by his own powers raife himself above the reft, his companions beftowed on one a precarious and a limited authority. This obfervation, so far as it refpects France, involves many important circumftances. The afpiring fpirit of the aristocrats, the perfecu tion of these military defpots, feems to have induced the kings of France very early to court the tiers etat, and to raise their political importance: they were admitted even in the first year of the 14th century to the flates, and, probably, earlier; the mode of election was nearly that, which modern refinement confiders as an improvement, viz. the interpofing an intermediate body of electors between the people and their re prefentatives; and, being thus raifed by the king as a check on the nobles, or protected by him, the name of the king became fo popular, that their attachment was at least an habitual enthufiaftic veneration for the perfon of the monarch; a veneration which has rapidly declined, and is almoft loft within the three last years.

Some general obfervations on former ftates-general are premifed; and the narrative of events, from the acceflion of Louis XVI. to the meeting which afterwards became the national affembly,' follow. The character of M. Necker is a juft one, but his failings, though not concealed, are touched with a gentle hand. To M. Caloune the author is not, perhaps, equally impartial, but his character, he obferves, affords an awful leffon to princes, that a man of pleasure and of expence will never be trufted by the people as a ftatefman. It is a leflon, that we hope will fink deep on the minds not only of princes, but of thofe who with to be trufted. Among the abufes in France are mentioned the manorial rights, and our author doubts, whether it should be juft or even popular in