Is Independence "Common Sense"? | Thomas Paine's Revolutionary Text (Chapters 1 & 2)
Fire up your lanterns of liberty! We're diving into the first two
chapters of Thomas Paine's revolutionary pamphlet, "Common Sense."
Published in 1776, this powerful text challenged the British monarchy
and ignited the flames of American independence.
In this video, we'll explore Paine's arguments against hereditary
government, analyze his concept of "common sense" as a foundation for
society, and unpack his fiery critique of the British monarchy. Was
independence truly "common sense" for the American colonies? Let's find
out!
This video is perfect for anyone interested in:
The American Revolution
Political philosophy
The role of government
The ideas of the Founding Fathers
Early American literature
Join the discussion in the comments below!
Bonus: Let us know which chapters you'd like us to cover next!
Transcript
Some writers have so confounded society with government as to leave little or no distinction
Speaker:between them, whereas they're not only different but have different origins.
Speaker:Society is produced by our wants and government by our wickedness.
Speaker:The former promotes our happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively
Speaker:by restraining our vices.
Speaker:The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions.
Speaker:The first is a patron, the last a punisher.
Speaker:Society in every state is a blessing, but government, even in its best state, is but
Speaker:a necessary evil, in its worst state an intolerable one, for when we suffer or are exposed to
Speaker:the same miseries by a government which we might expect in a country without government,
Speaker:our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer.
Speaker:Like dress is the badge of lost innocence.
Speaker:The palaces of kings are built on the ruins of the bowers of paradise, for were the impulses
Speaker:of conscience clear, uniform, and irresistibly obeyed, man would need no other lawgiver.
Speaker:But that not being the case, he finds it necessary to surrender up a part of his property to
Speaker:furnish means for the protection of the rest, and this he is induced to do by the same prudence
Speaker:which in every other case advises him out of two evils to choose the least.
Speaker:Wherefore, security being the true design and end of government, it unanswerably follows
Speaker:that whatever form thereof appears most likely to ensure it to us, with the least expense
Speaker:and greatest benefit, is preferable to all others.
Speaker:In order to gain a clear and just idea of the design and end of government, let's suppose
Speaker:a small number of persons settled in some sequestered part of the earth, unconnected
Speaker:with the rest, they will then represent the first peopling of any country or of the world.
Speaker:In this state of natural liberty, society will be their first thought.
Speaker:A thousand motives will excite them there too.
Speaker:The strength of one man is so unequal to his wants, and his mind so unfitted for perpetual
Speaker:solitude that he is soon obliged to seek assistance and relief of another who, in his
Speaker:turn, requires the same.
Speaker:Four or five united would be able to raise a tolerable dwelling in the midst of a wilderness,
Speaker:but one man might labor out the common period of life without accomplishing anything.
Speaker:When he had felt his timber, he could not remove it, nor erect it after it was removed.
Speaker:Hunger in the meantime would urge him from his work, and every different want call him
Speaker:a different way.
Speaker:In his disease, nay, even misfortune would be death, for though neither might be mortal,
Speaker:yet either would disable him from living, and reduce him to a state in which he might
Speaker:rather be said to perish than to die.
Speaker:This necessity, like a gravitating power, would soon form our newly arrived emigrants
Speaker:into society, the reciprocal blessing of which would supersede and render the obligations
Speaker:of law and government unnecessary while they remained perfectly just to each other.
Speaker:But as nothing but heaven is impregnable to vice, it will unavoidably happen that in proportion
Speaker:as they surmount the first difficulties of emigration, which bound them together in a
Speaker:common cause, they'll begin to relax in their duty and attachment to each other, and this
Speaker:remissness will point out the necessity of establishing some form of government to supply
Speaker:the defect of moral virtue.
Speaker:Some convenient tree will afford them a state house, under the branches of which the whole
Speaker:colony may assemble to deliberate on public matters.
Speaker:It is more than probable that their first laws will have the title only of regulations,
Speaker:and be enforced by no other penalty than public dis-esteem.
Speaker:In this first parliament, every man by natural right will have a seat, but as the colony
Speaker:increases, the public concerns will increase likewise, and the distance at which the members
Speaker:may be separated will render it too inconvenient for all of them to meet on every occasion
Speaker:as at first when their number was small, their habitations near, and the public concerns
Speaker:few and trifling.
Speaker:This will point out the convenience of their consenting to leave the legislative part to
Speaker:be managed by a select number chosen from the whole body, who are supposed to have the
Speaker:same concerns at stake which those have who appointed them, and who will act in the same
Speaker:manner as the whole body would act were they present.
Speaker:If the colony continues increasing, it will become necessary to augment the number of
Speaker:the representatives, and that the interest of every part of the colony may be attended
Speaker:to, it will be found best to divide the whole into convenient parts, each part sending its
Speaker:proper number, and that the elected might never form to themselves an interest separate
Speaker:from the electors, prudence will point out the propriety of having elections often, because
Speaker:as the elected might by that means return and mix again with the general body of the
Speaker:electors in a few months, their fidelity to the public will be secured by the prudent
Speaker:reflection of not making a rod for themselves, and as this frequent interchange will establish
Speaker:a common interest with every part of the community, they'll mutually and naturally support each
Speaker:other, and on this, not on the unmeaning name of the king, depends the strength of government
Speaker:and the happiness of the governed. Here then is the origin and rise of government, namely
Speaker:a mode rendered necessary by the inability of moral virtue to govern the world.
Speaker:Here too is the design and end of government, vis freedom and security, and however our
Speaker:eyes may be dazzled with snow or our ears deceived by sound, however prejudice may warp
Speaker:our wills or interest darken our understanding, the simple voice of nature and of reason will
Speaker:say it is right. I draw my idea of the form of government from
Speaker:a principle in nature which no art can overturn, vis that the more simple anything is, the less
Speaker:liable it is to be disordered, and the easier repaired when disordered, and with this maximan
Speaker:view I offer a few remarks on this so much boasted constitution of England. That it was
Speaker:noble for the dark and slavish times in which it was erected is granted. When the world was
Speaker:overrun with tyranny, the least removed therefrom was a glorious rescue, but that it is imperfect,
Speaker:subject to convulsions and incapable of producing what it seems to promise is easily demonstrated.
Speaker:Absolute governments, though the disgrace of human nature, have this advantage with
Speaker:them that they are simple. If the people suffer, they know the head from which their suffering
Speaker:springs, no likewise the remedy, and are not bewildered by a variety of causes and cures.
Speaker:But the constitution of England is so exceedingly complex that the nation may suffer for years
Speaker:together without being able to discover in which part the fault lies. Some will say in
Speaker:one, and some in another, and every political physician will advise a different medicine.
Speaker:I know it's difficult to get over local or long-standing prejudices, yet if we will
Speaker:suffer ourselves to examine the component parts of the English constitution, we shall
Speaker:find them to be the base remains of two ancient tyrannies compounded with some new republican
Speaker:materials. First, the remains of monarchical tyranny in the person of the king. Secondly,
Speaker:the remains of aristocratic tyranny in the persons of the peers. Thirdly, the new republican
Speaker:materials in the persons of the commons on whose virtue depends the freedom of England.
Speaker:The two first, by being hereditary, are independent of the people, wherefor in a constitutional
Speaker:sense they contribute nothing towards the freedom of the state. To say that the constitution
Speaker:of England is a union of three powers reciprocally checking each other is farcical, either the
Speaker:words have no meaning or their flat contradictions. To say that the commons is a check upon the
Speaker:king presupposes two things. First, that the king is not to be trusted without being looked
Speaker:after, or in other words, that a thirst for absolute power is the natural disease of monarchy.
Speaker:Secondly, that the commons, by being appointed for that purpose, are either wiser or more
Speaker:worthy of confidence than the crown. But as the same constitution which gives the commons
Speaker:a power to check the king by withholding the supplies, gives afterwards the king a power
Speaker:to check the commons by empowering him to reject their other bills. It again supposes
Speaker:that the king is wiser than those whom it is already supposed to be wiser than him,
Speaker:a mere absurdity.
Speaker:There's something exceedingly ridiculous in the composition of monarchy. It first excludes
Speaker:a man from the means of information, yet empowers him to act in cases where the highest judgment
Speaker:is required. The state of a king shuts him from the world, yet the business of a king
Speaker:requires him to know it thoroughly. Wherefore, the different parts, by unnaturally opposing
Speaker:and destroying each other, prove the whole character to be absurd and useless.
Speaker:Some writers have explained the English constitution thus. The king, say they, is one, the people
Speaker:another. The peers are in house in behalf of the king, the commons in behalf of the people,
Speaker:but this hath all the distinctions of in house divided against itself. And though the expressions
Speaker:be pleasantly arranged, yet when examined they appear idle and ambiguous. And it will
Speaker:always happen that the nicest construction that words are capable of, when applied to
Speaker:the description of something which either cannot exist or is too incomprehensible to be within
Speaker:the compass of description, will be words of sound only. And though they may amuse the ear,
Speaker:they cannot inform the mind, for this explanation includes a previous question. Viz, how came
Speaker:the king by a power which the people are afraid to trust and always obliged to check? Such
Speaker:a power could not be the gift of a wise people, neither can any power which needs checking
Speaker:be from God, yet the provision which the constitution makes, supposes such a power to exist.
Speaker:But the provision is unequal to the task. The means either cannot or will not accomplish
Speaker:the end, and the whole affair is a phalo-de-say, for as the greater weight will always carry
Speaker:up the less, and as all the wheels of a machine are put in motion by one, it only remains
Speaker:to know which power in the constitution has the most weight, for that will govern. And
Speaker:though the others or a part of them may clog or as the phrase is, check the rapidity of
Speaker:its motion, yet so long as they cannot stop it, their endeavors will be ineffectual. The
Speaker:first moving power will at last have its way, and what it wants in speed is supplied by
Speaker:time. That the crown is the overbearing part in the English constitution needs not be
Speaker:mentioned, and that it derives its whole consequence merely from being the giver of places and
Speaker:pensions is self-evident. Wherefore, though we have been wise enough to shut and lock a door
Speaker:against absolute monarchy, we at the same time have been foolish enough to put the crown
Speaker:in possession of the key. The prejudice of Englishmen in favor of their own government
Speaker:by king, lords, and commons arises as much or more from national pride than reason.
Speaker:Individuals are undoubtedly safer in England than in some other countries, but the will
Speaker:of the king is as much the law of the land in Britain as in France, with this difference
Speaker:that instead of proceeding directly from his mouth, it is handed to the people under the
Speaker:more formidable shape of an act of parliament. For the fate of Charles I hath only made kings
Speaker:more subtle, not more just. Wherefore, laying aside all national pride and prejudice in favor
Speaker:of modes and forms, the plain truth is that it is wholly owing to the constitution of the
Speaker:people and not to the constitution of the government that the crown is not as oppressive
Speaker:in England as in Turkey. An inquiry into the constitutional errors in the English form of
Speaker:government is at this time highly unnecessary, for as we are never in a proper condition
Speaker:of doing justice to others while we continue under the influence of some leading partiality,
Speaker:so neither are we capable of doing it to ourselves while we remain fettered by any obstinate
Speaker:prejudice. And as a man who is attached to a prostitute is unfitted to choose or judge
Speaker:of a wife, so any pre-possession in favor of a rotten constitution of government will
Speaker:disable us from discerning a good one.
Speaker:Mankind being originally equals in the order of creation, the equality could only be destroyed
Speaker:by some subsequent circumstance. The distinctions of rich and poor may in a great measure be
Speaker:accounted for, and that without having recourse to the harsh, ill-sounding names of oppression
Speaker:and avarice. Oppression is often the consequence, but seldom or never the means of riches, and
Speaker:though avarice will preserve a man from being necessitously poor, it generally makes him
Speaker:too timorous to be wealthy. But there is another and greater distinction for which no truly
Speaker:natural or religious reason can be assigned, and that is the distinction of men into kings
Speaker:and subjects. Male and female are the distinctions of nature, good and bad the distinctions of
Speaker:heaven, but how a race of men came into the world so exalted above the rest and distinguished
Speaker:like some new species is worth inquiring into, and whether they are the means of happiness
Speaker:or of misery to mankind. In the early ages of the world, according to the scripture chronology,
Speaker:there were no kings, the consequence of which was there were no wars. It is the pride of
Speaker:kings which throw mankind into confusion. Holland, without a king, hath enjoyed more peace for
Speaker:this last century than any of the monarchical governments in Europe. Antiquity favors the
Speaker:same remark, for the quiet and rural lives of the first patriarchs hath a happy something
Speaker:in them, which vanishes away when we come to the history of Jewish royalty. Government
Speaker:by kings was first introduced into the world by the heathens, from whom the children of
Speaker:Israel copied the custom. It was the most prosperous invention the devil ever set on foot for the
Speaker:promotion of idolatry. The heathens paid divine honors to their deceased kings, and the Christian
Speaker:world hath improved on the plan by doing the same to their living ones. How impious is the
Speaker:title of sacred majesty applied to a worm, who in the midst of his splendor is crumbling
Speaker:into dust? As the exalting one man so greatly above the rest cannot be justified on the equal
Speaker:rights of nature, so neither can it be defended on the authority of scripture. For the will
Speaker:of the Almighty, as declared by Gideon and the prophet Samuel, expressly disapproves of
Speaker:government by kings. All anti-monarchical parts of scripture have been very smoothly glossed
Speaker:over in monarchical governments, but they undoubtedly merit the attention of countries which have
Speaker:their governments yet to form. Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesars is the scripture
Speaker:doctrine of courts, yet it is no support of monarchical government, for the Jews at that
Speaker:time were without a king, and in a state of vassalage to the Romans. Nearly 3,000 years
Speaker:passed away from the mosaic account of the creation till the Jews under a national delusion
Speaker:requested a king. Till then, their form of government, except in extraordinary cases
Speaker:where the Almighty interposed, was a kind of republic administered by a judge and the
Speaker:elders of the tribes. Kings they had none, and it was held sinful to acknowledge any
Speaker:being under that title but the Lord of Hosts. And when a man seriously reflects on the
Speaker:idolatrous homage which is paid to the persons of kings, he need not wonder that the Almighty
Speaker:ever jealous of his honor should disapprove of a form of government which so impiously
Speaker:invades the prerogative of heaven. Monarchy is ranked in scripture as one of the sins
Speaker:of the Jews for which a curse in reserve is denounced against them. The history of that
Speaker:transaction is worth attending to. The children of Israel being oppressed by the many knights,
Speaker:and marched against them with a small army, and victory through the divine interposition
Speaker:decided in his favor. The Jews elate with success and attributing it to the generalship
Speaker:of Gideon, proposed making him a king saying, Rule thou over us, thou, and thy son, and
Speaker:thy son son. Here was temptation in its fullest extent. Not a kingdom only, but an hereditary
Speaker:one. But Gideon in the piety of his soul replied, I will not rule over you, neither shall my
Speaker:son rule over you, the Lord shall rule over you. Words need not be more explicit. Gideon
Speaker:doth not decline the honor, but denyeth their right to give it. Neither doth he compliment
Speaker:them with invented declarations of his thanks, but in the positive style of a prophet charges
Speaker:them with disaffection to their proper sovereign, the King of Heaven. About 130 years after
Speaker:this, they fell again into the same error. The hankering which the Jews had for the idolatrous
Speaker:customs of the heathens is something exceedingly unaccountable. But so it was that laying hold
Speaker:of the misconduct of Samuel's two sons, who were entrusted with some secular concerns,
Speaker:they came in an abrupt and clamorous manner to Samuel, saying, Behold, thou art old, and
Speaker:thy sons walk not in thy ways. Now, make us a king to judge us like all the other nations.
Speaker:And here, we cannot but observe that their motives were bad, because they might be like
Speaker:unto other nations, i.e. the heathens, whereas their true glory laid in being as much unlike
Speaker:them as possible. But the thing displeased Samuel when they said, Give us a king to judge
Speaker:us, and Samuel prayed unto the Lord, and the Lord said unto Samuel, Harken unto the voice
Speaker:of the people in all that they say unto thee, for they have not rejected thee, but they
Speaker:have rejected me, that I should not reign over them. According to all the works which
Speaker:they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt, even unto this day,
Speaker:wherewith they have forsaken me and served other gods. So do they also unto thee. Now,
Speaker:therefore, Harken unto their voice, howbeit, protest solemnly unto them, and show them the
Speaker:manner of the king that shall reign over them. i.e. not of any particular king, but the general
Speaker:manner of the kings of the earth, whom Israel was so eagerly copying after, and notwithstanding
Speaker:the great distance of time and difference of manners, the character is still in fashion.
Speaker:And Samuel told all the words of the Lord unto the people that asked of him a king, and
Speaker:he said, This shall be the manner of the king that shall reign over you. He will take your
Speaker:sons and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen, and some shall run
Speaker:before his chariots. This description agrees with the present mode of impressing men. And
Speaker:he will appoint him captains over thousands and captains over fifties, and will set them
Speaker:to ear his ground, and to read his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments
Speaker:of his chariots. And he'll take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and
Speaker:to be bakers. This describes the expense and luxury as well as the oppression of kings.
Speaker:And he will take your fields and your olive yards, even the best of them, and give them
Speaker:to his servants. And he'll take the tenth of your feed and of your vineyards, and give
Speaker:them to his officers and to his servants. By which we see that bribery, corruption, and
Speaker:autism are the standing vices of kings. And he will take the tenth of your men's servants,
Speaker:and your maid's servants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to
Speaker:his work. And he'll take the tenth of your sheep, and ye shall be his servants, and ye
Speaker:shall cry out in that day, because of your king, which ye shall have chosen. And the
Speaker:Lord will not hear you in that day. This accounts for the continuation of monarchy.
Speaker:Neither do the characters of the few good kings which have lived since either sanctify
Speaker:the title or blot out the sinfulness of the origin. The high encomium given of David takes
Speaker:no notice of him officially as a king, but only as a man after God's own heart.
Speaker:Nevertheless, the people refuse to obey the voice of Samuel, and they said,
Speaker:Nay, but we will have a king over us, that we may be like all the nations, and that our
Speaker:king may judge us, and go out before us and fight our battles. Samuel continued to reason
Speaker:with them, but to no purpose. He said before them they're in gratitude, but all would
Speaker:not avail. And seeing them fully bent on their folly, he cried out, I will call unto the
Speaker:Lord, and he shall send thunder and rain, which then was a punishment, being in the
Speaker:time of wheat harvest, that ye may perceive, and see that your wickedness is great, which
Speaker:ye have done in the sight of the Lord, in asking you a king. So Samuel called unto
Speaker:the Lord, and the Lord sent thunder and rain that day, and all the people greatly feared
Speaker:the Lord and Samuel, and all the people said unto Samuel, Pray for thy servants unto
Speaker:the Lord thy God, that we die not, for we have added unto our sins this evil, to ask
Speaker:a king. These portions of scripture are direct and positive. They admit of no
Speaker:equivocal construction, that the Almighty hath here entered his protest against monarchical
Speaker:government as true, or the scripture is false, and a man hath good reason to believe that
Speaker:there is as much of kingcraft as priestcraft in withholding the scripture from the public
Speaker:in popish countries, for monarchy in every instance is the popery of government.
Speaker:To the evil of monarchy we have added that of hereditary succession, and as the first
Speaker:is a degradation and lessening of ourselves, so the second, claimed as a matter of right,
Speaker:is an insult and an imposition on posterity, for all men being originally equals, no one
Speaker:by birth could have a right to set up his own family in perpetual preference to all
Speaker:others forever, and though himself might deserve some decent degree of honors of his
Speaker:co-temporaries, yet his descendants might be far too unworthy to inherit them.
Speaker:One of the strongest natural proofs of the folly of hereditary right in kings is that
Speaker:nature disapproves it, otherwise she would not so frequently turn it into ridicule by
Speaker:giving mankind an ass for a lion. Secondly, as no man at first could possess any other
Speaker:public honors than were bestowed upon him, so the givers of those honors could have no power
Speaker:to give away the right of posterity, and though they might say we choose you for our head,
Speaker:they could not, without manifest injustice to their children, say that your children
Speaker:and your children's children shall reign over ours forever, because such an unwise,
Speaker:unjust, unnatural compact might, perhaps in the next succession, put them under the
Speaker:government of a rogue or a fool. Most wise men, in their private sentiments,
Speaker:have ever treated hereditary right with contempt, yet it is one of those evils which,
Speaker:when once established, is not easily removed. Many submit from fear, others from superstition,
Speaker:and the more powerful part shares with the king the plunder of the rest.
Speaker:This is supposing the present race of kings in the world to have had an honorable origin,
Speaker:whereas it is more than probable that could we take off the dark covering of antiquity,
Speaker:and trace them to their first rise, that we should find the first of them nothing better than the
Speaker:principal ruffian of some restless gang, whose savage manners or preeminence in subtility
Speaker:obtained him the title of chief among plunderers, and who, by increasing in power and extending
Speaker:his depredations, overawed the quiet and defenseless to purchase their safety by frequent
Speaker:contributions. Yet, his electors could have no idea of giving hereditary right to his descendants,
Speaker:because such a perpetual exclusion of themselves was incompatible with the free and unrestrained
Speaker:principles they professed to live by. Wherefore, hereditary succession in the early ages of monarchy
Speaker:could not take place as a matter of claim, but as something casual or supplemental.
Speaker:But as few or no records were extant in those days, and traditionary history stuffed with fables,
Speaker:it was very easy, after the lapse of a few generations, to trump up some superstitious
Speaker:tale conveniently timed, Muhammad-like, to cram hereditary right down the throats of the vulgar.
Speaker:Perhaps the disorders which threatened, or seemed to threaten, on the decease of a leader and the
Speaker:choice of a new one, for elections among ruffians could not be very orderly, induced many at first
Speaker:to favor hereditary pretensions, by which means it happened, as it hath happened since, that what
Speaker:at first was submitted to as a convenience was afterwards claimed as a right. England,
Speaker:since the conquest, hath known some few good monarchs, but groaned beneath a much larger
Speaker:number of bad ones, yet no man in his senses can say that their claim, under William the Conqueror,
Speaker:is a very honorable one. A French bastard landing with an armed bandit, and establishing himself
Speaker:King of England against the consent of the natives is in plain terms a very paltry, rascally original.
Speaker:It certainly hath no divinity in it. However, it is needless to spend much time in exposing
Speaker:the folly of hereditary right, if there are any so weak as to believe it, let them promiscuously
Speaker:worship the ass in lion, and welcome, I shall neither copy their humility, nor disturb their
Speaker:devotion. Yet, I should be glad to ask how they suppose kings came at first. The question admits
Speaker:but of three answers, vis, either by lot, by election, or by usurpation. If the first king
Speaker:was taken by lot, it establishes a precedent for the next, which excludes hereditary succession.
Speaker:Saul was by lot, yet the succession was not hereditary. Neither does it appear from that
Speaker:transaction there was any intention it ever should. If the first king of any country was by
Speaker:election, that likewise establishes a precedent for the next. For to say that the right of all
Speaker:future generations is taken away by the act of the first electors, in their choice not only of a king
Speaker:but of a family of kings forever, hath no parallel in or out of scripture but the doctrine of original
Speaker:sin, which supposes the free will of all men lost in Adam. And from such comparison, and it will admit
Speaker:of no other, hereditary succession can derive no glory. For as in Adam all sinned, and as in the
Speaker:first electors all men obeyed, as in the one all mankind were subjected to Satan, and in the other
Speaker:to sovereignty. As our innocence was lost in the first, and our authority in the last, and as both
Speaker:disable us from re-assuming some farmer's state and privilege, it unanswerably follows that original
Speaker:sin and hereditary succession are parallels. Dishonorable rank in glorious connection, yet
Speaker:the most subtle suffice cannot produce a juster simile. As to usurpation, no man will be so hardy
Speaker:as to defend it, and that William the Conqueror was a new surfer is a fact not to be contradicted.
Speaker:The plain truth is that the antiquity of English monarchy will not bear looking into.
Speaker:But it's not so much the absurdity as the evil of hereditary succession which concerns mankind.
Speaker:Did it ensure a race of good and wise men it would have the seal of divine authority?
Speaker:But as it opens a door to the foolish, the wicked and the improper, it hath in it the nature of
Speaker:oppression. Men who look upon themselves born to reign and others to obey soon grow insolent.
Speaker:Selected from the rest of mankind, their minds are early poisoned by importance,
Speaker:and the world they act in differs so materially from the world at large that they have but little
Speaker:opportunity of knowing its true interests, and when they succeed to the government are frequently
Speaker:the most ignorant and unfit of any throughout the dominions. Another evil which attends hereditary
Speaker:succession is that the throne is subject to be possessed by a miner at any age, all which time
Speaker:the regency, acting under the cover of a king, have every opportunity and inducement to betray
Speaker:their trust. The same national misfortune happens when a king worn out with age and infirmity enters
Speaker:the last stage of human weakness. In both these cases the public becomes a prey to every miscreant
Speaker:who can tamper successfully with the follies either of age or infancy. The most plausible plea
Speaker:which hath ever been offered in favor of hereditary succession is that it preserves a nation from
Speaker:civil wars, and were this true it would be weighty, whereas it is the most bare faced falsity ever
Speaker:imposed upon mankind. The whole history of England disowns the fact. Thirty kings and two miners
Speaker:have reigned in that distracted kingdom since the conquest, in which time there have been,
Speaker:including the revolution, no less than eight civil wars and nineteen rebellions.
Speaker:Wherefore, instead of making for peace, it makes against it and destroys the very foundation
Speaker:it seems to stand on. The contest for monarchy and succession between the houses of York and
Speaker:Lancaster laid England in a scene of blood for many years. Twelve pitched battles, besides
Speaker:skirmishes and sieges, were fought between Henry and Edward. Twice was Henry prisoner to Edward,
Speaker:who, in his turn, was prisoner to Henry. And so uncertain is the fate of war and the temper of
Speaker:a nation, when nothing but personal matters are the ground of a quarrel, that Henry was taken in
Speaker:triumph from a prison to a palace, and Edward obliged to fly from a palace to a foreign land.
Speaker:Yet, as sudden transitions of temper are seldom lasting, Henry, in his turn, was driven from the
Speaker:throne and Edward recalled to succeed him. The parliament always following the strongest side.
Speaker:This contest began in the reign of Henry VI and was not entirely extinguished till Henry VII,
Speaker:in whom the families were united, including a period of sixty-seven years, vis from 1422 to 1489.
Speaker:In short, monarchy and succession have laid, not this or that kingdom only, but the world in blood
Speaker:and ashes, which is a form of government which the word of God bears testimony against, and blood
Speaker:will attend it. If we inquire into the business of a king, we shall find that in some countries
Speaker:they have none, and after sauntering away their lives without pleasure to themselves or advantage
Speaker:to the nation, withdraw from the scene and leave their successors to tread the same idle round.
Speaker:In absolute monarchies, the whole weight of business, civil and military, lies on the king.
Speaker:The children of Israel, in their request for a king, urged this plea, that he may judge us
Speaker:and go out before us and fight our battles. But in countries where he is neither a judge
Speaker:nor a general, as in England, a man would be puzzled to know what is his business.
Speaker:The nearer any government approaches to a republic, the less business there is for a king.
Speaker:It is somewhat difficult to find a proper name for the government of England. Sir William Meredith
Speaker:calls it a republic, but in its present state, it is unworthy of the name, because the corrupt
Speaker:influence of the crown, by having all the places in its disposal, have so effectively swallowed
Speaker:up the power and eaten out the virtue of the House of Commons, the republican part in the
Speaker:constitution, that the government of England is nearly as monarchical as that of France or Spain.
Speaker:Men fall out with names without understanding them, for it is the republican and not the
Speaker:monarchical part of the constitution of England, which Englishmen glory in,
Speaker:vis the liberty of choosing a House of Commons from out of their own body. And it's easy to see
Speaker:that when republican virtue fails, slavery ensues. Why is the constitution of England sickly,
Speaker:but because monarchy hath poisoned the republic, the crown hath engrossed the commons?
Speaker:In England, a king hath little more to do than to make war and give away places, which in plain terms
Speaker:is to impoverish the nation and set it together by the ears. A pretty business indeed for a man
Speaker:to be allowed 800,000 sterling a year for, and worshipped into the bargain. Of more worth is
Speaker:one honest man to society and in the sight of God than all the crowned ruffians that ever lived.
