quiet of their lawful prince. ble and dutiful manner, solemnly protest and declare, that we will never resist a sovereign that shall think fit to destroy our Magna Charta, or invade those rights and liberties which those traitors procured for us; but will venture our lives and fortunes against such of our fellow-subjects who think they may stand up in defence of them."

We do, therefore, in the most hum

It happens very unluckily, that there is something so supple and insinuating in this absurd, unnatural doctrine, as makes it extremely agreeable to a prince's ear for which reason, the publishers of it have always been the favourites of weak kings. Even those who have no inclination to do hurt to others, says the famous satirist, would have the power of doing it if they pleased. Honest men, who tell their sovereigns what they expect from them, and what obedience they shall be always ready to pay them, are not upon an equal foot with such base and abject flatterers; and are, therefore, always in danger of being the last in the royal favour. Nor, indeed, would that be unreasonable, if the professors of non-resistance and passive-obedience would stand to their principle but instead of that, we see they never fail to exert themselves against an arbitrary power, and to cast off the oppression when they feel the weight of it. Did they not, in the late revolution, rise up unanimously with those who always de clared their subjection to be conditional, and their obedience limited? And very lately, when their queen had offended them in nothing, but by the promotion of a few great men to posts of trust and honour, who had distinguished themselves by their moderation and humanity to all their fellow-subjects, what was the behaviour of these men of meek and resigned principles? Did not the church-memorial, which they all applauded and cried up, as the language and sentiments of their party, tell H. M. that it

would not be safe for her to rely upon their doctrines of passiveobedience and non-resistance, for that 'nature might rebel against principles?' Is not this, in plain terms, that they will only practise non-resistance to a prince that pleases them, and passiveobedience when they suffer nothing? I remember, one of the rabble in Edipus, when he is upbraided with his rebellion, and asked by the prophet if he had not taken an oath to be loyal, falls a scratching his head, and tells him, ' Why yes, truly, he had taken such an oath, but it was a hard thing, that an oath should be a man's master.' This is, in effect, the language of the church in the above-mentioned memorial. Men of these soft, peaceable dispositions, in times of prosperity, put me in mind of Kirke's. Lambs; for that wast he name he used to give his dragoons that had signalized themselves above the rest of the army by many military achievements among their own countrymen.

There are two or three fatal consequences of this doctrine, which I cannot forbear pointing out. The first of which is, that it has a natural tendency to make a good king a very bad one. When a man is told he may do what he pleases with impunity, he will be less careful and cautious of doing what he should do, than a man who is influenced by fear, as well as by other motives to virtue. It was a saying of Thales, the wise Milesian, 'That of all wild beasts, a tyrant is the worst; and of all tame beasts, a flatterer.' They do, indeed, naturally beget one another, and always exist together. Persuade a prince that he is irresistible, and he will take care not to let so glorious an attribute lie dead and useless by him. An arbitrary power has something so great in it, that he must be more than man who is endowed with it but never exerts it.

This consequence of the doctrine I have been speaking of, is very often a fatal one to the people; there is another, which is no

* See Gent. Mag. 1789, vol. LIX., p. 611.—N.

less destructive to the prince. A late unfortunate king very visibly owed his ruin to it. He relied upon the assurances of his people, that they would never resist him upon any pretence whatsoever, and accordingly, began to act like a king who was not under the restraint of laws, by dispensing with them, and taking on him that power which was vested in the whole legislative body. And what was the dreadful end of such a proceeding? It is too fresh in every body's memory. Thus is a prince corrupted by the professors of this doctrine, and afterwards betrayed by them. The same persons are the actors, both in the temptation and the punishment. They assure him they will never resist, but retain their obedience under the utmost sufferings; he tries them in a few instances, and is deposed by them for his credulity.

I remember, at the beginning of King James's reign, the Quakers presented an address, which gave great offence to the high-churchmen of those times. But, notwithstanding the uncourtliness of their phrases, the sense was very honest. The address was as follows, to the best of my memory, for I then took great notice of it; and may serve as a counterpart to the foregoing one."

"THESE are to testify to thee our sorrow for our friend Charles, whom we hope thou wilt follow in every thing that is good.

On the 6th of February, 1684-85, the day on which King Charles II. died; his Successor thus addressed the Privy Council: "My Lords, before I enter upon any other business, I think fit to say something to you. Since it hath pleased Almighty God to place me in this station, and I am now to succeed so good and gracious a king, as well as so very kind a brother, I think it fit to declare to you, that I will endeavour to follow his example, and most especially in that of his great clemency and tenderness to his people. I have been reported to be a man for arbitrary power; but that is not the only story has been made of me and I shall make it my endeavour to preserve this government both in church and state as it is now by law established. I know the principles of the Church of England are for monarchy, and the members of it have shewed themselves good and loyal subjects; therefore I shall always take care to defend and support it." I

621

We hear that thou art not of the religion of the land, any more than we, and, therefore, may reasonably expect that thou wilt give us the same liberty that thou takest thyself.

We hope that in this and all things else, thou wilt promote the good of the people, which will oblige us to pray that thy reign over us may be long and prosperous."

Had all king James's subjects addressed him with the same integrity; he had, in all probability, sat upon his throne till death had removed him from it.

know too that the laws of England are sufficient to make the king as great a monarch as I can wish; and as I shall never depart from the just rights and prerogative of the Crown, so I shall never invade any man's property. I have often heretofore ventured my life in defence of this nation; and I shall still go as far as any man in preserving it in all its just rights and liberties."-N.

a The Gazettes of that period are particularly amusing. Let us hear the Grand Jury of Middlesex: "Never had people more cause of exultation than we, in that God hath miraculously bestowed your Majesty upon us; who are a prince that hath shewed the greatest prowess and conduct for the glory and happiness of this nation; a prince that hath shewed the most eminent marks of justice and virtue, even beyond all the princes that now tread upon the face of the earth; a prince that hath patiently undergone the utmost hazards by sea and land, to abate the malice and fury of the most ungrateful and insolent sort of people that ever the earth bore, the Fanaticks of this nation; a prince, that notwithstanding all provocations, was pleased lately to declare in council, that he will follow the example of our late deceased king in clemency and tenderness to his people, and will preserve this government both in church and state, as it is now established by law: In all humility we render our most hearty and humble thanks for this your most gracious declaration. And we faithfully promise, in our several stations, to expose our lives and fortunes in defence of your sacred person, your rights and prerogatives against all opposers whatso ever; beseeching Almighty God to grant your Majesty a long and pros perous reign."

The University of Oxford says, "As we can never swerve from the principles of our institution in this place, and our religion by law established in the Church of England, which indispensably bind us to bear all faith and true obedience to our Sovereign without any restrictions or limitations; so we cannot but most thankfully acknowledge that further obligation your Majesty hath laid upon us, by your royal assurance to defend that religion which to the great joy of all our hearts you have vouchsafed to give us in your late most gracious declaration... No consideration whatsoever shall be able to shake that stedfast loyalty and allegiance, which in the days of your blessed father, that glorious martyr, and in the late times of discrimination, stood here firm and unalterable to your royal brother and yourself, under the sharpest trials." &c., &c.-N.

THE READER."

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS.

[From Nichols' Edition.]

The Reader was published in opposition to "The Examiner," The Lover and The Reader, first published together as the Tatler, Spectator, and Guardian, in half sheets, were soon collected into one volume in 12mo. and a small number of them were printed in 8vo. upon royal and demy paper to complete sets of the author's works. They are now republished with care and illustrations, in the same forms, and with the same view. This step a consideration of the elegance and usefulness of Steele's writings and publications prompted, and will abundantly justify. With a more particular design, Steele assumed a very general title for his paper that gave him a great latitude in the choice of his subjects, and left him at liberty to treat with propriety on any topic the productions of the press might supply or suggest for entertainment, correction, or instruction, in whatever way he judged requisite or expedient. The chief scope and design of this work, will best be discovered by a general account of the paper above-mentioned, to which it was directly opposed. For this purpose it may be sufficient to quote some passages from a more full and particular account given in the notes on the Tatler, to which the curious are referred for farther satisfaction, and especially to the notes on the Tatler, in 6 vols. cr. 8vo., edit. of 1786, No. 210, and No. 229.

"The paper, intituled The Examiner, was an engine of state ad captandum vulgus, in the four last inglorious years of the reign of Queen Anne. It was employed occasionally, most commonly once, sometimes twice a week, to display the wisdom and blazon the integrity of her ministers during that period; to contrast their skill and virtues with the ignorance and vices of their predecessors; to whitewash or blacken characters; to state or mis-state facts; to varnish men and things, as simulation and dissimulation thought proper, and just as the nature and exigencies of their weak and wicked administration required. As it was directed to a variety of purposes, it was played off by a variety of hands, who, from the highest to the lowest, were venal prostitutes who did as they were de sired to do, and all wrought, to borrow the elegant words of one of their principals, like 'Scrub hang-dog instruments of mischief and under-spur leathers,' rather fortiter in re than suaviter in modo.”