Laws can infict, (p. 7.) And afterwards tells us, The Question is, Whether the Government shall fhew Mercy, or take a Reverend Divine's Advice, to flay Man and Woman, Infant and Suckling? (p. 8.) Thus again he tells us, The Friends to Jevere Counfels alledge, that the Government ought not to be moved by Compaffion; and that the Law fhould have its Course, (p. 9.) And in another place puts thefe Words in their Mouths, He may Still retain their Affection, and yet let the Laws have their Course in punishing the Guilty, (p. 18.). He goes upon the fame Suppofition in the following Paffages; It is impracticable in fo general a Corruption, to destroy All who are infected; and unless you deftroy All you do nothing to the Purpose, (p. 10.) Shall our Rightful King fhew himself lefs the true Father of his People, and afford his Pardon to None of thofe People who (like King Lear to his Daughters) had fo great a Confidence in his Virtue as to give him All? (p. 25.) I fhall only add, that the concluding Paragraph, which is work'd up with fo much artificial Horror, goes upon a Suppofition answerable to the whole Tenor of the Pamphlet; and implies, that the Impeach'd Lords were to be Executed without Exception or Discrimination.

Thus we see what is the Author's Idea of that Juftice againft which all his Arguments are levell'd. If, in the next place, we confider the Nature of that Clemency which he recommends, we find it to be no less universal and unreftrained.

He declares for a General Act of Indemnity, (p. 20.) and tells us, It is the Senfe of every dif paffionate Man of the Kingdom, that the Rebels may and ought to be pardoned, (p. 19.) One popular Act, fays he, wou'd even yet retrieve all, (p. 21.)

He

He declares himself not over-fond of the Doctrines of making Examples of Traitors, (ibid.) And that the Way to prevent Things from being brought to an Extremity, is to deal mildly with thofe unfortunate Gentlemen engaged in the Rebellion.

The Reader may now fee in how fallacious a Manner this Writer has ftated the Controverfy He fuppofes there are but two Methods. of treating the Rebels: That is by cutting off every one of them to a Man, or pardoning every one of them without Diftinction. Now if there be a third Method between these two Extremes, which is on all Accounts more eligible than either of them, it is certain, that the whole Courfe of his Argumentation comes to nothing. Every Man of the plaineft Understanding will eafily conclude, that in the Cafe before us, as in moft others, we ought to avoid both Extremes: That to deftroy every Rebel would be an exceffive Severity, and to forgive every one of them an unreasonable Weaknefs. The proper Method of Proceeding is that which the Author has purposely omitted: Namely, to temper Juftice with Mercy; and, according to the different Circumftances that aggravate or alleviate the Guilt of the Offenders, to restrain the Force of the Laws, or to let them take their proper Course. Punishments are neceffary to fhew there is Juftice in a Government, and Pardons to fhew there is Mercy; and both together convince the People, that our Conftitution, under a good Administration, does not only make a Difference between the Guilty and the Innocent, but even, among the Guilty, between fuch as are more or less criminal.

This middle Method, which has been always practifed by wife and good Governors, has

13

hitherto

hitherto been made ufe of by our Sovereign. If, indeed, a Stranger, and one who is altogether unacquainted with his Majefty's Conduct, fhould read this Pamphlet, he would conclude, that every Perfon engaged in the Rebellion was to die by the Sword, the Halter, or the Ax; nay, that their Friends and Abettors were involved in the fame Fate. Would it be poffible for him to imagine, that of the feveral Thousands openly taken in Arms, and liable to Death by the Laws of their Country, not above Forty have yet fuffer'd? How would he be furprised to hear, that, notwithstanding His Majefty's Troops have been victorious in every Engagement, more of His Friends have loft their Lives in this Rebellion, than of His traiterous Subjects; though we add to those who have died by the Hand of Juftice thofe of them who fell in Battle? And yet we find a more popular Compaffion endeavoured to be raised for the Deaths of the Guilty, who have brought fuch Calamities on their Country, than for the Innocent who perished in the Defence of it.

This middle Method of Proceeding, which has been purfued by His Majefty, and is wilfully overlooked by the Author, beft answers the Ends of Government; which is to maintain the Safety of the Publick by Rewards and Punifhments. It is also incumbent on a Governor, according to the received Dictates of Religion; which inftructs us, That he beareth not the Sword in vain ; but ought to be a Terror to Evildoers, and a Praife to them that do well. It is likewife, in a particular Manner, the Duty of a British King, who obliges himself by his Coronation-Oath to execute Justice in Mercy, that is, to mix them in his Administration, and not

to

to exercise either of them to the total Exclufion of the other.

But if we confider the Arguments which this Author gives for Clemency, from the good Effects it would produce, we fhall find, that they hold true only when apply'd to fuch a Mercy as ferves rather to mitigate than exclude Juftice. The Excellence of that unlimited Clemency, which the Author contends for, is recommended by the following Arguments.

Firft, That it endears a Prince to his People. This he defcants on in feveral Parts of his Book. Clemency will endear his Perfon to the Nation; and then they will neither have the Power nor Will to difturb him, (p. 8.) Was there ever a cruel Prince, that was not hated by his Subjects? (p. 42.) A merciful good-natur'd Difpofition is of all others the most amiable Quality, and in Princes always attended with a popular Love, (p. 18.)

It is certain, that fuch a popular Love will always rife towards a good Prince, who exercises fuch a Mercy as I have before defcribed, which is confiftent with the Safety of the Conftitution, and the Good of his Kingdom. But if it be, thrown away at random, it lofes its Virtue, leffens the Efteem and Authority of a Prince, and cannot long recommend him, even to the weakest of his Subjects, who will find all the Effects of Cruelty in fuch an ill-grounded Compaffion. It was a famous Saying of William Rufus, and is quoted to his Honour by Hiftorians: Whofoever fpares perjured Men, Robbers, Plunderers and Traitors, deprives all good Men "of their Peace and Quietnefs, and lays a Foun"dation of innumerable Mifchiefs to the Vir-❝tuous and Innocent."

Another Argument for unlimited Clemency is, that it fhews a courageous Temper: Clemency is likewife an Argument of Fearlefness; whereas Cruelty not only betrays a weak, abject, depraved Spirit; but also is for the most part a certain Sign of Cowardife, (p. 19.) He had a truly great Soul, and fuch will always difdain the Coward's Virtue, which is Fear; and the Confequence of it, which is Revenge, (p. 27.) This Panegyrick on Clemency, when it is governed by Reason, is likewife very right; but it may fo happen, that the putting of Laws in Execution against Traitors to their Country may be the Argument of Fearlefnefs, when our Governors are told that they dare not do it; and fuch Methods may be made ufe of to extort Pardons, as would make it look like Cowardise to grant them. In this last Cafe the Author fhould have remembred his own Words, that then only Mercy is meritorious when it is voluntary, and not extorted by the Neceffity of Affairs, (p. 13.) Befides, the Author fhould have confidered that another Argument which he makes ufe of for his Clemency, are the Refentments that may arife from the Execution of a Rebel An Argument adapted to a cowardly, not a fearless Temper. This he infers from the Difpofition of the Friends, Well-wishers, or Affociates of the Sufferers, (p. 4.) Refentment will inflame fome; in others Compaffion will, by degrees, rife into Refentment. This will naturally beget a Difpofition to overturn what they dislike, and then there will want only a fair Opportunity, (p. 11.) This Argument, like most of the others, pleads equally for Malefactors of all kinds, whom the Government can never bring to Juftice, without difobliging their Friends, Well-withers, or Affociates. But, I believe, if the Author would

cone