LETTER. fThe RIGHT GOVERNMENT of a COMMON WEALTH EXAMINED. [Continued from our IT*happens universally, whtn the people in a body, or by a single representative afiembly, at empt to exercise all the powers of government, 'hey always create three or four idols, who make <* bargain with each other fir It, to do nothing which lhall displease any one : Thele hold this agreement, until one thinks himlelf able to dif emban ass himfelf of the other two ; then they quarrel, and the Itrongelt becomes single tyrant, cut why is the name of Pompey omitted, who was the third of this triumvirate? Because it would have been too unpopular ; it would have tooeafily confuted his argument, and have turn ed against himfelf,to have said that this aflociation was between Pompey, Cnefar, and Crafius, against Cato, the senate, the constitution, and liberty, which was thefaift. Can you find a people who will never be divided in opinion ? who will be al ways unanimous ! The people of Rome were di • vided, as all other people ever have been and will be, into a variety of parties and factions. Pom pey, Crafius, and Caesar, at the head of differ ent parties, were jealous of each other: Their divisions ltrengthened the senate and its friends, andfurnilheil meansand opportunities of defeating many of their ambitious designs. Ca:far perceived it, and paid his court both to Pompey and Crafius, in order to hinder them from joining the senate against him. He separately represented the ad vantage which their enemies derived from their mifunderHandings, and the ease with which, if united, they might concert among themfelvesall arfairs of the republic, gratify every friend, and disappoint every enemy. ihe other example, of Augustus, Lepidus,and .Antony, is equally unfor tunate : Both are demonstrations that the people did think of usurping others rights, and that tliey did not mind any way to preserve their own.— The Senate was now annihilated, many of them murdered : Augustus, Lepidus, and Antony, were popular demagogues,who agreed together to fleece the flock between them,until the molt cunning of the three destroyed the other two, fleeced the ftieep alone, and transmitted the Ihears to a line of tyrants. How can this writer fay then, that, " while the government remained untouched in " the people's hands, every particular man lived " fafe ?" The ilirec't contrary is true. Every man lived fafe, only while the Senate remained as a check and balance to the people ; the moment that contfoul was destroyed, no man was fafe. While the government remained untouched in the various orders, the Consuls, Senate, and people, mutually balancing each other, it might be said, with some truth, that no man coidd be undone, unless a true and fatisfadtory reason was rendered to the world for his deftruiftion ; but as soon as the Senate was deftrcyed, and the government came untouched into the people's hands, no man lived fafe but the Triumvirs and their tools ; any man might be, and multitudes of the belt men were, ■undone, without rendering any reason to the world for their deftruiftion, but the will, the fear, or the revenge of some tyrant. Thele popular leaders, in our author's own langitage, " laved " and destroyed, deprefled and advanced, whom " they plealed, with a wet finger." • The second argument to prove that the people, in their fuccefiive single allcmblies, are the J)elt keepers of their own liberties, is, " because it is " ever the people's care to fee that authority be " so constituted, that it fliall be rather a burthen " than profit to those that undertake it; and be " qualified with such slender advantages of profit " or pleasure, that men fliall reap little by the « enjoyment. The happy confcquence whereof " is this, that none but honest, generous, and " public spirits, will then defile to be in autho " rity, and that only for the common good. " Hence it was, that in the infancy of the Roman " liberty there was no canvafling for voices; but " single and plain-hearted men were called, in " treated, and in a manner forced with impor " tunity to the helm of government, in regard of " that great trouble and pains that followed the " employment. Thus Cincinnatus was fetched " out of the field from his plough, and placed, " much against his will, in the fublimc dignity of "Dictator: So the noble Camillus, and Fabius, " and Curius, were, with much ado, drawn from " the recreation of gardening to the trouble of " governirg; and the consul year being over, " they returned with much gladness again to " their private employment." The firft question which would arise in the inind of an intelligent and attentive reader would be, whether this were bin lefque, and a epublic traves ty ? But as the principle of this second reason is very pleasing to a large body of narrow fpii its in every fociciy, and as it ljasbeen a lopted by some refpciTtable au;lioriries,without lii£icientconfiie; - ation, it may be proper to £jjve it a lerious inves tigation* Tiie people have, in some countries and seasons, made their fc;*iecs irk.fir.nc ; and i: i- willi some ro make authority a burthen, But what has been the confequencc to the people I Their service has been delerted, and they have been betrayed. Those very persons >vho have flattered the meanness of the stingy, by offering to fervethem gratis, ana bypurchaling their fuf frages, have carried the liberties and properties of their conftirueiits to market, and fold them for very handsome private profit to the monarchical and ariftocratical portions offociety : And so long as the rule of making their lervice a burthen is pei filled in, so long will the people be served with the fame kind of address and fidelity, by hypocritical pretences to disinterested benevo lence and patriotifin, until their confidence is gained, their affections secured, and their entliu iiafm excited, and by knavish bargains and sales of their cause and intercft afterwards. But al though there is always among the people a party who are jultly chargeable with meanness and ava rice, envy and ingratitude, and this party has sometimes been a majority, who have literally made tlie?r service burthemfome, yet this is noi the general character of the people; a more universal fault is, too much affection, Confidence, and gratitude, not to fucli as really serve them, whether with or against their inclinations, but to those who flatter their inclinations, and gain theit hearts. Honest and generous spirits will disdain to deceive the people; and if the public service is wilfully rendered burthenfome, they will really be averse to be in it : but hypocrites enough will be found, who will pretend to be also loath tc serve, and feign a reluctant consent for the public good, while they mean to plunder in every way they can conceal. There are conjunctures whenji is the duty of a good citizen to hazard and facrifice all for his country : but, in ordinary times, it is equally the duty and interest of the community not to fufferit. Every wife and free people, like the Romans, will eflablifh the maxim, to fuffer nc generous action for the public to go unrewarded, Can our author be supposed to be lincere, in re coinmendingit as a principle of policy to any na> tion to render her service in the army, navy, 01 in council, a burthen, an unpleasant employ ment to all her citizens I Would he depend upor finding human spirits enough to fill public offices who would be fufficiently elevated in patriotifrc and general benevolence to facrifice their ease health, time, parents, wives, children, and every comfort, convenience, and elegance of life, for the public good Is there any religion or mora lity that requires this? Which permits the many to live in affluence and ease, while it obliges i few to live in misery for their fakes ? The peo ple are fond of calling public men their ser vants, and some are not able to conceive them tc be servants, without making them Have*, and treating them as planters treat their negroes :— But, good makers, have a care how you use your power; you may be tyrants as well as public officers. It seems, according to our author him (elf, that honefly and generosity of spirit, and the pallion for the public good, were not motives ftronw enough to induce his heroes to defireto be in public life ; they inuft be called, intreated, and forced. By single and plain-hearted men, he means the fame, no doubt, with those described by the other exprelfions, honest, generous, and public spirits. Cincinnatus, Camillus, Kabius, and Cm ius, were men as simple and as generous as any; and tliefe all, by his own account, had a strong aversion to public service. Either these great characters inuft be supposed to have practii'ed the Ado Epifcopari, to have held up a fictitious aversion for what they really desired, or we must allow their reluctance to have been lin cere. If counterfeit, these examples do not de serve our imitation ; if sincere, they will never be followed by men enough to carry 011 the bulineis of the world. The glory of these Roman cha racters cannot be obfeured, nor ought the admi ration of their sublime virtues to be diminished ; but fucli examples are as rare among ttatefinen, as Homers andMiltons among poets. A free peo ple of common sense will not cfepend upon finding a fufficient number of such characters at any one time, but less a succession of them for any lor