by give a decifive turn to a county election Was it in erecting a chamber confultation of furgeons with authority to examine into and fuperfede the legal verdict of a jury? Or did his Majefty confult the laws of this country, when he permitted his fecretary of state to declare, that, whenever the civil magiftrate is trifled with, a military force must be sent for, without the delay of a moment, and effectually employed? Or was it in the barbarous exactness, with which this illegal, inhuman doctrine was carried into execution ?--If his Majefty had recollected thefe facts, I think he would never have faid, at leaft with any reference to the measures of his government, that he had made the laws the rule of his conduct. To talk of preferving the affections or relying on the fupport of his fubjects while he continues to act upon thefe principles, is indeed paying a compliment to their loyalty, which I hope they have too much fpirit and understanding to deferve.

His Majefty, we are told, is not only punctual in the performance of his own duty, but careful not to affume any of thofe powers which the conftitution has placed in other hands. Admitting this last affertion to be ftrictly true, it is no way to the purpose. The city of London have not defired the King to affume a power placed in other

hands.

hands. If they had,

perfon, who dared to

I fhould hope to fee the prefent fuch a petition, immediately impeached. They folicit their King to exert that conftitutional authority which the laws have vested in him, for the benefit of his subjects. They call upon him to make ufe of his lawful prerogative in a cafe, which our laws evidently fuppofed might happen, fince they have provided for it by trufting the fovereign with a difcretionary power to diffolve the parliament. This request will, I am confident, be fupported by remonftrances from all parts of the kingdom. His Majefty will find at laft, that this is the fenfe of his people, and that it is not his intereft to fupport either ministry or parliament, at the hazard of a breach with the collective body of his fubjects.-That he is the King of a free people is indeed his greatest glory. That he may long con

I

LETTER XXXV.

SIR,

April 3, 1770.

N my last letter I offered you my opinion of the truth and propriety of his Majesty's answer to the City of London, confidering it merely as the fpeech of a minister, drawn up in his own defence, and delivered, as ufual, by the chief Magiftrate. I would feparate, as much as poffible, the King's perfonal character and behaviour from the acts of the present government. I wish it to be understood that his Majefty had in effect no more concern in the fubftance of what he faid, than Sir James Hodges had in the Remonftrance, and that as Sir James, in virtue of his office, was cbliged to speak the fentiments of the people, his Majefty might think himself bound, by the fame official obligation, to give a graceful utterance to the fentiments of his minifter. The cold formality of a well repeated leffon is widely diftant, from the animated expreffion of the heart.

This diftinction, however, is only true with respect to the measure itself. The confequences of it reach beyond the minifter, and materially affect his Majesty's honour. In their own nature they are formidable enough to alarm a man of prudence, and difgraceful enough to afflict a man of spirit.

A fub

A fubject, whofe fincere attachment to his Majesty's perfon and family is founded upon rational principles, will not, in the present conjuncture, be fcrupulous of alarming, or even of afflicting his fovereign. I know there is another fort of loyalty, of which his Majefty has had plentiful experience. When the loyalty of Tories, Jacobites, and Scotchmen, has once taken poffeffion of an unhappy prince, it feldom leaves him without accomplishing his destruction. When the poison of their doctrines has tainted the natural benevolence of his difpofition, when their infidious counfels have corrupted the Stamina of his government, what antidote can restore him to his political health and honour, but the firm fincerity of his English fubjects?.

It has not been ufual in this country, at least fince the days of Charles the First, to fee the fovereign perfonally at variance, or engaged in a direct altercation with his fubjects. Acts of grace and indulgence are wifely appropriated to him, and fhould conftantly be performed by himself, He never should appear but in an amiable light to his fubjects. Even in France, as long as any ideas of a limitted monarchy were thought worth preferving, it was a maxim, that no man fhould leave the royal prefence difcontented. They have loft

or

or renounced the moderate principles of their government, and now, when their parliaments venture to remonftrare, the tyrant comes forward, and anfwers abfolutely for himfelf. The fpirit of their present conftitution requires that the King should be feared, and the principle, I believe, is tolerably fupported by the fact. But, in our political fyftem, the theory is at variance with the practice, for the King fhould be beloved. Measures of greater feverity may, indeed, in fome circumftances, be neceffary; but the minifter who advifes, fhould take the execution and odium of them entirely upon himfelf. He not only betrays his mafter, but violates the fpirit of the English conftitution, when he expofes the chief magiftrate to the perfonal hatred or contempt of his fubjects. When we speak of the firmnefs of government, we mean an uniform fyftem of measures, deliberátely adopted, and refolutely maintained by the fervants of the crown, not a peevish asperity in the language or behaviour of the fovereign. The government of a weak, irrefolute monarch may be wife, moderate, and firm;-that of an obftinate, capricious prince, on the contrary, may be feeble, undetermined, and relaxed. The reputation of public measures depends upon the minifter, who is refponfible, not upon the King, whofe private opi

4