"

future salvation. Whether or not you have a mind capable of pinning its faith on a book, is best known to yourself, but should it be so, I can only consider it with Rochefoucault, who says of women, and men with the minds of women, that they become religious when nature has decreed them unfit for gallantry and coquetry." I write with freedom to you, and claim from you the same indulgence as you have at all times claimed from the society you have mixed in, namely, to speak out freely. I well recollect your being in company with Mr. Cox, of Exeter, and by way of sarcasm, toasting" those things called Christians;" the toast was introduced by Mr. Cox, and heartily coincided in by you. I being then young and inconsiderate, looked on both of you as mad or wicked men, and felt ashamed of the company I had fallen into; but now, Sir, I respond the sentiment, and wish you and Mr. Cox to pity those things called Christians.

I write this letter more for your amusement and my own pastime than with any intent to perturb that serenity of mind which I hope you enjoy in your retirement; sorry should I be if it gave you a moment's uneasiness. I have resolved to follow that truly philosophic maxim of Epicurus, to seek all the pleasure that this life can possibly afford. I know nothing that can be so agreeable to old age as a peaceful retirement with the partner both of your pleasures and sorrows, such as I know you possess. If I could, for a moment, think that you were not at ease as to what becomes of the vital part when it is extinct in the body, I would solicit from you a correspondence on that subject, but at present I have a much higher opinion of you. When I consider the general contempt in which you have invariably held the outward line of conduct observed by mankind, when I consider the rectitude of principle and precision of conduct that has at all times been manifest even in those vagaries you were wont to amuse yourself and your neighbours with, I cannot imagine that you would suffer your mind to be made uneasy by any religious and hypocritical jargon, or unintelligible creeds. Hoping, therefore, that you are quite

at ease on these subjects, and that you have a competency to meet the few wants of nature during the few years you may calculate on remaining in your present state, with the satisfaction that your partner will not be left unprovided for, I shall cease to trouble you with any more ideas of my own, unless it should be your request-in the mean time, I have chalked out a path in which I intend to move through life, resolved to turn neither to the right nor to the left, heedless of either the clamours or the contempt of mankind.

I am, Sir,

Yours respectfully,

RICHARD CARLILE.

PHILOSOPHICAL ESSAYS ON GOVERNMENT AND RELIGION.-No. III.

"Most men, like carriers' horses, follow one another in a track, where if the fore-horses goes wrong, all the rest succeed him in his error; not considering that he who comes behind, may take an advantage to avoid that pit, which those that went before are fallen into."

Charles Blount.---Life of Apollonius Tyranæus.

"All wise princes, till they were overborn with faction, or solicited by peevish persons, gave toleration to differing Sects, whose opinions did not disturb the public interest. And the experience which Christendom hath had in this last age is argument enough, that toleration of differing opinions is so far from disturbing the public peace, or destroying the interest of princes and Commonwealths, that it advantages the public, and secures peaee; because there is not so much as the pretence of religion left to such persons to contend for, it being already indulged to them."

Ibid. Ibidem.

MANKIND are generally so attached to the customs of their ancestors that they respect even their very follies; and the man who is bold enough to expose the gross mistakes, absurdities, and contradictions which age have rendered venerable, will be sure at the same time to expose himself to the insults of ignorant People, and to the persecution of arbitrary power. This consideration, however, has but little weight with the man who has devoted his life to the study

of philosophy: he is prepared to meet the resentment of the ignorant, and the spite and malice of the unmasked hypocrite; he will neither shrink from danger, nor plunge headlong into it-he is unchangeable as the Truth he rests upon. I intend these observations as a preface to a short dissertation on Nobility and Aristocratical Government. "The word Noble did not originally signify a title which conferred any rights, and was not hereditary. NOBILITAS, among the Romans, signified that which is EMINENT, REMARKABLE; and not a distinct order of Citizens."*-Things have altered strangely since the time of the Romans. The Nobility, all over Europe, are now a distinct order of Citizens, have rights, titles, and privileges peculiar to themselves; and are, in fact, the men who govern all. In every country they assume a haughty repelling air, and treat with contempt the wise, the patriotic, and the brave, if they be not distinguished in the world for something more than mere virtue. A Nobleman will seldom condescend to read any thing which has been written by a Plebeian: a man who was born to no title is not likely to think or write with any dignity; he has always something about him which reminds one of his low birth; and in fact his very language and phraseology prove him to be one of the People. This is the cant of Nobility: and if one may judge of the language and phraseology of the Great, by the few specimens we have had of Royal and Noble authors, we may fairly conclude, with a very few exceptions, that there is an immense difference between those who are impelled to scribble by ennui or spleen, and those whose pens are guided by wisdom, and who are induced to lay their mature thoughts before the world by patriotism, or a love of fame. It is the same in every thing else. The rich and great have the reputation of wisdom, because they have money enough to bribe those into their service who really possess it, and who, not being much in the favour of fortune, are obliged to prostitute those talents to the service of a wealthy master, which, were they independent, and their choice consequently free, would reflect honour on the age, and country that produced them.

In this train of reflections the absurdity of hereditary Nobility is a striking feature. It is a very trite, but a very

1

* Voltaire. Essai sur Les Mours. tom. iii. p. 417.

true remark, that virtue is not hereditary. This being granted, does it not appear very ridiculous that a certain train of titles, rights, and privileges, which have been granted to a worthy man for his great abilities, or public virtues, should descend to his worthless son who possesses neither the one nor the other? But say these titles, rights, &c. are bestowed by the monarch; and that he is the best judge what a man's merits may be to whom he grants such signal favours. Granted: he may be best able to judge of the exact quantity of virtue with which a courtier's character ought to be seasoned-but what may be virtuous and deserving in a monarch's eyes, may be criminal, and deserving a halter in those of the People-virtue is generally measured by its degree of utility in the estimation of the person who judges. A man may be extremely useful, or agreeable to a king, in promoting his pleasures, smoothing, and giving a fair face to his vices, flattering his humours and caprices, and palliating or excusing his crimes. But this complying disposition, though it may procure its possessor a patent of. Nobility, is far from being beneficial to the Nation, which generally pays more respect to home-spun manly virtue, than to the polished insiduous manners of a courtier--the latter being generally the mask of vice-the former neither wearing nor requiring a mask. But that we may fortify our sage maxims by authority, I will adduce that of one of the greatest men that Europe ever produced to shew that virtue has little or nothing to do in a monarchical Government.

ment.

-

"Virtue is not the principle of a monarchical GovernIn monarchies, policy always endeavours to attain its end with the least virtue possible. Ambition in effeminacy, meanness mingled with pride, the desire of procuring riches without labour, aversion for truth, flattery, treason, perfidy, a contempt of all duties, a dread of the princes' virtues, with a proper degree of confidence on his weakness, but above all the perpetual ridicule with which virtue is attacked, are, I believe, the characteristics of the greater part of courtiers, in every age and country. Now it is very unfortunate that the Great men of every country should be knaves, and the Plebeians honest men-so that if by chance one honest man should be found among the People, it is the advice of the Cardinal de Richelieu that he ought not to be employed-so true it is, that virtue is not the moving spring of monarchy."*

Montesquieu, Esprit des Lois.

This character of Nobility was not drawn by an envious Plebeian; it was sketched by a French Baron; by a president of one of the Parliaments of France; by one who had every opportunity of becoming acquainted with courtiers, and an hereditary nobility-yet who would have painted them in more detestable colours or more to the life! Yet this is the order of men who have in all countries lorded it over the human race-these are the men who have rivet ed the chains of the People, and then insulted them in their humiliation who have supported monarchy while it authorized their feudal tyranny, or overwhelmed it when it could no longer suffer their insolence. Hereditary Nobility is an insult to human nature: it supposes one part of the human race to be essentially superior to the other from generation to generation-and the institution has condemned thousands of worthy men to labour unceasingly, for the support of a few effeminate, unfeeling wretches. And this is not all. Should some superior spirit arise among the People, whose penetrating mind could perceive the respect and deference which nature whispered were its due-should its eccentric splendour attract the attention of all around it-should it begin to acquire riches and fame and power, and use them with moderation-should his fellow-citizens begin to look upon the patriot as their natural leader--the jealous Nobility immediately interpose; blast his reputation, crush his hopes, and extinguish for ever the blazing torch that might have enlightened a world!

Such are the few desultory observations I have to offer at present on hereditary Nobility. I now turn to the Governments in which these patricians dominate to a disgusting picture, 'tis true; but to one that deserves to be sketched by the pencil of a Voltaire, or a Montesquieu.

After the defeat of the Helots, the Lacedæmonians were a nation of nobles; and the Helots were the prototypes of all the labouring slaves of succeeding ages. Those poor wretches were doomed to incessant toil, to robbery, insult, and every species of wretchedness, while their unfeeling lords were occupied in games, exercises, or war. Every day brought with it its peculiar train of miseries, the bright soul-cheering Sun, that awakens all Nature to festivity and joy, was, to the perpetual Slave, only the gloomy harbinger of wretchedness. He saw nothing lovely in nature: the gay, animated, sportive picture which she presents to man in those beautiful climes, was to him a dreary uninteresting blank. All that was beautiful, and all that was engaging