part of England and Ireland; that we stamp his (I had almost said, adored) name on our handkerchiefs, on the cheerful bowl, yea, and on our vessels of various kinds, as well as upon our hearts? Why is all this, but because of the inseparable connection between Wilkes and liberty; liberty that came down, if not fell, from heaven; whom all England and the world worshippeth? 7. But mean time might it not be advisable to consider, (if we are yet at leisure to consider any thing,) what is liberty? Because it is well known the word is capable of various senses. And possibly it may not be equally desirable in every sense of the word. 8. There are many nations in America, those particularly that border on Georgia and Carolina, wherein if one disapproves of what another says, or perhaps dislikes his looks, he scorns to affront him to his face, neither does he betray the least dissatisfaction. But as soon as oppor tunity serves, he steps from behind a tree and shoots him. And none calls him that does it to an account. No; this is the liberty he derives from his forefathers. 9. For many ages the free natives of Ireland, as well as the Scottish Highlands, when it was convenient for them, made an excursion from their woods or fastnesses, and carried off, for their own proper use, the sheep, and oxen, and corn of their neighbours. This was the liberty which the O'Neals, the Campbells, and many other septs and clans of venerable antiquity, had received by immemorial tradition from their ancestors. 10. Almost all the soldiers in the Christian world, as well as in the Mohammedan and Pagan, have claimed, more especially in time of war, another kind of liberty; that of borrowing the wives and daughters of the men that fell into their hands; sometimes, if they pleaded scruple of conscience or honour, using a little necessary force. Perhaps this may be termed the liberty of war. But I will not positively affirm, that it has never been used in this free country, even in the time of peace. 11. In some countries of Europe, and indeed in England, there have been instances of yet another sort of liberty, that of calling a monarch to account; and, if need were, taking off his head; that is, if he did not behave in a dutiful manner to our sovereign lords the people. 12. Now, that we may not always be talking at random, but bring the matter to a determinate point, which of these sorts of liberty do you desire? Is it the First sort; the liberty of knocking on the head, or cutting the throats, of those we are out of conceit with? Glorious liberty indeed! What would not king mob do to be gratified with it but for a few weeks? But, I conceive, calm, sensible men, do not desire to see them entrusted with it. They apprehend there might be some consequences which, upon the whole, would not redound to the prosperity of the nation. 13. Is the Secord more desirable; the liberty of taking, when we see best, the goods and chattels of our neighbours? Undoubtedly, thousands in the good city of London (suppose we made the experiment here first) would be above measure rejoiced thereat, would leap as broke from chains. O how convenient would it be to have free access, without any let or hinderance, to the cellars, the pantries, the larders, yea, and the coffers of their rich, overgrown landlords! But perhaps it would not give altogether so much joy to the lord mayor or aldermen; no, nor even to those stanch friends of liberty, the common councilmen. Not that they regard their own interest at all; but, setting themselves out of the question, they are a little in doubt whether this liberty would be for the good of trade. 14. Is it then the Third kind of liberty we contend for; the liberty of taking our neighbours' wives and daughters? Ye pretty gentlemen, ye beaux esprits, will ye not, one and all, give your voices for this natural liberty? Will ye not say, "If we cry out against monopolies of other kinds, shall we tolerate the monopoly of women?" But hold. Are there not some among you too, who have wives, if not daughters of your own? And are you altogether willing to oblige the first comer with them? I say the first comer; for, observe, as you are to give the liberty you take, so you must not pick and choose your men; you know, by nature, all men are on a level. Liberty! Liberty! No restraint! We are freeborn Englishmen; down with the fences! Lay all the inclosures open!" No; it will not do. Even nature recoils. We are not yet polished enough for this. 66 15. Are we not ripe, however, for the Fourth kind of liberty, that of removing a disobedient king? Would Mr. Wilkes, would Mr. Horne, would any free Briton, have any objection to this? provided only, that, as soon as our present monarch is removed, we have a better to put in his place. But who is he? King John? That will not sound well, even in the ears of his greatest admirers. And whoever calmly considers the characters and endowments of those other great men, who may think themselves much fitter for the office than his present majesty, will hardly concur in their opinion; so that a difficulty lies in your way. Whatever claim you may have to this liberty, you must not use it yet, because you cannot tell where to find a better prince. 16. But to speak seriously. These things being set aside, which the bawling mob dignify by that name; what is that liberty, properly so called, which every wise and good man desires? It is either religious or civil. Religious liberty is a liberty to choose our own religion, to worship God according to our own conscience, according to the best light we have. Every man living, as man, has a right to this, as he is a rational creature. The Creator gave him this right when he endowed him with understanding. And every man must judge for himself, because every man must give an account of himself to God. Consequently, this is an indefeasible right; it is inseparable from humanity. And God did never give authority to any man, or number of men, to deprive any child of man thereof, under any colour or pretence whatever. What an amazing thing is it, then, that the governing part of almost every nation under heaven should have taken upon them, in all ages, to rob all under their power of this liberty! yea, should take upon them, at this day, so to do! to force rational creatures into their own religion! Would one think it possible, that the most sensible men in the world should say to their fellow creatures, "Either be of my religion, or I will take away your food, and you and your wife and children shall starve: if that will not convince you, I will fetter your hands and feet, and throw you into a dungeon: and if still you will not see as I see, I will burn you alive?" 17. It would not be altogether so astonishing, if this were the manner of American savages. But what shall we say, if numberless instances of it have occurred, in the politest nations of Europe? Have no instances of the kind been seen in Britain? Have not England and Scotland seen the horrid fires? Have not the flames burning the flesh of heretics shone in London as well as in Paris and Lisbon? Have we forgot the days of good Queen Mary? No; they will be had in everlasting remembrance. And although burning was out of fashion in Queen Elizabeth's days, yet hanging, even for religion, was not. It is true, her successor did not go quite so far. But did even King James allow liberty of conscience? By no means. During his whole reign, what liberty had the Puritans? What liberty had they in the following reign? If they were not persecuted unto death; (although eventually, indeed, many of them were; for they died in their imprisonment;) yet were they not continually harassed by prosecutions in the bishops' courts, or star chamber? by fines upon fines, frequently reducing them to the deepest poverty? and by imprisonment for months, yea, for years, together, till many of them, escaping with the skin of their teeth, left their country and friends, fled to seek their bread in the wilds of America? "However, we may suppose all this was at an end under the merry monarch, King Charles the Second." Was it indeed? Where have they lived who suppose this? To waive a thousand particular instances; what will you say to those two public monuments, the Act of Uniformity, and the Act against Conventicles? In the former it is enacted, to the eternal honour of the king, lords, and commons, at that memorable period: "Every parson, vicar, ́or other minister whatever, who has any benefice within these realms, shall, before the next twenty-fourth of August, openly and publicly declare his unfeigned assent and consent to all and every thing contained in the Book of Common Prayer, or shall, ipso facto, [by the act itself,] be deprived of all his benefices! Likewise, if any dean, prebendary, master, fellow, chaplain, or tutor, of any college, hall, house of learning, or hospital, any public professor, or any other person in holy orders, any schoolmaster, or teacher, or tutor in any private family, do not subscribe hereto, he shall be, ipso facto, deprived of his place, and shall be utterly disabled from continuing therein." Property for ever! See how well English property was secured in those golden days! So, by this glorious Act, thousands of men, guilty of no crime, nothing contrary either to justice, mercy, or truth, were stripped of all they had, of their houses, lands, revenues, and driven to seek, where they could, or beg their bread. For what? Because they did not dare to worship God according to other men's consciences! So they and their families were, at one stroke, turned out of house and home, and reduced to little less than beggary, for no other fault, real or pretended, but because they could not assent and consent to that manner of worship which their worthy governors prescribed! But this was not all. It was farther enacted by the same merciful lawgivers: "If any person act as a teacher, tutor, or schoolmaster, in any private family, before he has subscribed hereto, he shall suffer three months' imprisonment, without bail or mainprize." Liberty for ever! Here is security for your person, as well as your property. 4 By virtue of the Act against Conventicles, if any continued to worship God according to their own conscience, they were first robbed of their substance, and, if they persisted, of their liberty; often of their lives also. For this crime, under this "our most religious and gracious king," (what were they who publicly told God he was such ?) Englishmen were not only spoiled of their goods, but denied even the use of the free air, yea, and the light of the sun, being thrust by hundreds into dark and loathsome prisons! 18. Were matters much better in the neighbouring kingdom? Nay, they were inexpressibly worse. Unheard-of cruelties were practised there, from soon after the Restoration till the Revolution. (See Wodrow's "History of the Sufferings of the Church of Scotland.") What fining, plundering, beating, maiming, imprisoning, with the most shocking circumstances! For a specimen, look at Dunotter Castle; where young and old, of both sexes, (sick or well, it was all one,) were thrust together between bare walls, and that in the heat of summer, without a possibility of either lying or sitting; yea, without any convenience of any kind; till many of them, through hunger, thirst, heat, and stench, were set at liberty by death! Considering this; considering how many others were hunted over their native mountains, and shot whenever they were overtaken, with no more ceremony than beasts; considering the drowning, hanging, cutting off of limbs, and various arts of torturing, which were practised by order of King Charles, and often in the presence of King James, who seemed to enjoy such spectacles; it would be no wonder if the very name of an Englishman was had in abomination from the Tweed to the Orkneys. 19. But is this the case at present with us? Are we abridged of our religious liberty? His late majesty was desired, about thirty years ago, to take a step of this kind. But his answer was worthy of a king, yea, the king of a free people: "I tell you, while I sit on the English throne, no man shall be persecuted for conscience' sake." And it is certain he made his promise good from the beginning of his reign to the end. But perhaps the case is altered now. Does his present majesty tread in his steps? He does: he persecutes no man for conscience' sake. If he does, where is the man? I do not ask, Whom has he committed to the flames, or caused to die by the common hangman? or, Whom has he caused to die many deaths, by hunger and thirst, cold and nakedness? but, Whom has he tortured or thrust into a dungeon, yea, or imprisoned at all, or fined, for worshipping God according to his own conscience, in the Presbyterian or any other way? O, compare King Charles, gracious Charles the Second, with King George, and you will know the value of the liberty you enjoy. 20. In the name of wonder, what religious liberty can you desire, or even conceive, which you have not already? Where is there a nation in Europe, in the habitable world, which enjoys such liberty of conscience as the English? I will be bold to say there is nothing like it in Holland, in Germany, (Protestant or Popish,) in either the Protestant or Popish cantons of Switzerland; no, nor in any country under the sun. Have we not in England full liberty to choose any religion, yea, or no religion at all? to have no more religion than a Hottentot, shall I say? nay, no more than a bull or a swine? Whoever therefore in England stretches his throat, and bawls for more religious liberty, must be totally void of shame, and can have no excuse but want of understanding. 21. But is not the ground of this vehement outcry, that we are deprived of our civil liberty? What is civil liberty? A liberty to enjoy our lives and fortunes in our own way; to use our property, whatever is legally our own, according to our own choice. And can you deny, "that we are robbed of this liberty?" Who are? Certainly I am not. I pray, do not face me down that I am. Do not argue me out of my senses. If the Great Turk, or the King of France, wills that a man should die, with or without cause, die he must. And instances of the kind continually occur; but no such instances occur in England. I am in no more danger of death from King George, than from the Queen of Hungary. And if I study to be quiet and mind my own business, I am in no more danger of losing my liberty than my life. No, nor my property; I mean, by any act of the king. If this is in any degree invaded, it is not by the king, or his parliament, or army, but by the good patriots. Hark! Is hell or Bedlam broke loose? What roaring is that, loud as the waves of the sea? 66 It is the patriot mob." What do they want with me? Why do they flock about my house? "Make haste! illuminate your windows in honour of Mr. Wilkes." I cannot in conscience; I think it is encouraging vice. "Then they will all be broken." That is, in plain English, Give them twenty shillings, or they will rob you of five pounds. Here are champions for the laws of the land! for liberty and property! O vile horse-guards! That dared, so grim and terrible, to' advance True, they did nothing and said nothing. Yet, in default of the civil powers, who did not concern themselves with the matter, they hindered the mob from finishing their work. 22. Why then, these men, instead of any way abridging it, plainly preserved my liberty and property. And by their benefit, not the care of those to whom it properly belonged, I still enjoy full civil liberty. I am free to live, in every respect, according to my own choice. My life, my person, my property, are safe. I am not murdered, maimed, tortured at any man's pleasure; I am not thrown into prison; I am not manacled; see, I have not one fetter, either on my hands or feet. And are not you as free as I am? Are not you at liberty to enjoy the fruit of your labours? Who hinders you from doing it? Does King George? Does Lord North? Do any of his majesty's officers or soldiers? No, nor any man living. Perhaps some would hinder you, if you acted contrary to law; but this is not liberty, it is licentiousness. Deny the fact who can; am not I free to use my substance according to my own discretion? And do not you enjoy the self-same freedom? You cannot, you dare not, deny it. At this hour I am at full liberty to use my property as please. And so are you; you do, in fact, use your house, your goods, your land, as is right in your own eyes. Does any one take them from you? No; nor does any one restrain you from the full enjoyment of them. What then is the matter? What is it you are making all this pother about? Why are you thus wringing your hands, and screaming, to the terror of your quiet neighbours, "Destruction! slavery! bondage! Help, countrymen! Our liberty is destroyed' We |