G. We are constituents, because we constitute or appoint deputies to administer our rights.

P. You see then there is a constitution of right independent of your appointment, and there is a constitution of persons to administer that right.

G. This last, I suppose, is what is usually intended, when we say the British constitution consists of king, lords and commons.

P. I suppose so.

G. I have understood, that the laws of society require us to give up some of our natural rights to public convenience.

P. It must be so.

You said, man had a natural right to use his limbs, and senses, and mental powers.

G. Yes.

P. But man living in company can have no right to abuse his genius to defraud another man, or his hands to strike him.

G. Certainly. He would be guilty of a wrong by depriving another of a right.

P. What then are the private rights of men in society?

G. I have understood, they are either that residuum of natural liberty, which is not required to be given up, or they are civil privileges, which society engages to provide in lieu of the natural liberties given up by individuals,

P. So the British civil constitution is nothing but a declaration of the natural rights of mankind? G. So I think. Pray, Sir, how old is this declaration of rights?

P. It is of the most remote antiquity, and at least coeval with our form of government. Even in the time of Alfred, above nine hundred years ago, the maxims of common law were called folcrighte, folkright, or rights of the people.

G. Have these rights been perpetually allowed?

P. Far from it; they have often been invaded. Sometimes one order of men, and sometimes another have violated these rights; but the violation being unnatural and repugnant to the constitution, has always produced convulsions in the state, and when the convulsion has been over the constitution has revived again.

G. These rights then are prior to Magna Charta? P. Magna Charta is a declaration of ancient rights, and you will find at different periods of our history, near forty declarations of rights, as the petition of right in the reign of Charles I. The habeas corpus act in the reign of Charles II. The bill of rights at the accession of William and

Mary, and the act of settlement, limiting the crown to the present royal family. All these are declaratory of the true, ancient, and indubitable rights of the people of this kingdom, the last statute expressly declaring that LIBERTY BY LAW IS THE BIRTHRIGHT OF THE PEOPLE OF ENGLAND.

G. According to this doctrine, the people of England constitute, as was said before, a form of government for the preservation of these rights?

P. You said they were constituents, and the form of government, which they have constituted is

that, which they judge the best, a mixt monarchy.

P. How many forms of government are there in the world?

G. Political writers say, only three.

P. What is a democracy, one of the three?

G. A democracy is that form of government, which lodges sovereign power in an aggregate assembly, consisting of all the members of a community.

P. What is an aristocracy?

G. An aristocracy lodges sovereign power in a council composed of select members.

P. And what is a monarchy?

G. In a monarchy sovereign power is lodged in a single person.

P. What requisites ought to be found in a well constituted form of government?

G. Political writers say three-wisdom, to discern the real interest of the community-goodness to endeavour always to pursue that real interestand power, to carry this knowledge and intention into action.

P. And are these three requisites found in your constitution, which is mixt or made up of the three forms?

G. They are not only found there, but they are found there in union, which union is the excellence of our constitution, and gives it its singular beauty and superiority over the three.

P. What are the properties of the three forms of government you mentioned?

G. They say a democracy excels in virtue-an aristocracy in wisdom-and a monarchy in power. P. What are the imperfections of the three?

G. Monarchs are more remarkable for extending and abusing power than for either wisdom or virtue. It is not the imperfection of the man; but of the condition he is in.

P. You may depend upon monarchy, then, for power.

G. Yes, but not for the use of it.

P. What is the imperfection of aristocracy? G. You may depend upon a select council for wisdom: but not for virtue and power.

P. And what is the imperfection of a democracy? G. You may depend on a democracy for political virtue, for they keep a jealous eye on the rights and liberties of mankind at large: but for wisdom to invent means, and for power to carry their good designs into execution, they must not be depended on. It is not the fault of individuals, it is the imperfection of the condition they are in.

P. So, by uniting the three you correct the imperfections of each, and produce a perfect form of government, a perfect constitution.

G. Pardon me, Sir, I do not say so.

P. Why what can disconcert your constitution? G. Perhaps it is not so perfect in its kind as it might be but, if it were, it is human, and therefore liable to wear away: if you will pardon the expres

sion, I can conceive a thousand events, that might damnify this most excellent frame of government. P. Name one.

G. Suppose the splendour and power of the monarch should blind the wisdom, and bribe away the virtue of the other two branches of the legislature?

P. The two would then become subservient to one, and in effect your constitution would be destroyed.

G. The effect would be destroyed I allow; but the name might remain.

P. So much the worse; the damage would not be so soon perceived. Suppose such an event to happen, what ought you to do?

G. I should think it my duty as a good citizen, to try to rouse the attention of my fellow citizens to the danger, and in my little sphere I would endeavour to abate the malignant influence.

P. It would seem then you only value the form of your government for the sake of government itself?

G. It ought to be so.

P. Recapitulate the subject.

G. British civil constitution is a phrase, strictly speaking, expressive first of a natural constitution of rights, native and inherent in all the inhabitants of this kingdom and in all mankind-next of a body of laws, peculiar to this kindgom, declaratory of these natural rights and lastly, of a form of making and executing these laws by king, lords, and commons,