« PreviousContinue »
purity of his intentions. The want of this confidence is
what afflicts him more than all his other misfortunes; • and he could bear with patience the groffest calumnies, if • they did not make an impression on the people. At the
very thought of this effect of them, I have seen the tears ' come into his eyes. It is that, (faid he on the 3d of last
August, 1792) it is that circumstance that wounds my
very soul-But the people, I trust, will one day know how • much their happiness was the object of my concern, my
only wish, and my greatest want. Oh! how many of • the misfortunes which I am doomed to suffer, would • become light, and lose their power of afflicting me, if I o could but once perceive the fligthest mark of the return of
my people's love." O! most unhappy, and most deluded ' people of France ! surely when you hear that your Sove• reign uttered these affectionate exprefsions, your eyes also
ought to be filled with tears !'
Mr. Printer, if you think these passages, in favour of the character of the late unfortunate King of France, worth publishing in your useful paper, I may perhaps send you another extract from the same book to the same effect. Mr. Pope fays, that "An honest man's the noblest work of God. Now I take Lewis the XVIth to have been really an honest man; and, if so, he is not the lels to be honoured on that account, because he was a King; but rather the reverse, on account of the temptations to which Kings are exposed from their high station, and the flattery with which they are continually surrounded, even from their early youth, and which has a strong tendency to corrupt thern,
A CONSTANT READER.
F. M. ON MR. COURTNAY'S INTENDED MOTION, CONCERNING THE PROCESS OF ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS, AGAINST PERSONS MARRIED TOGETHER IN SOME MANNER NOT ALLOWED BY LAW.
To the PrixTER of the PUBLIC ADVERTISER.
May 9, 1793 I Cannot but wonder at Mr. Courtnay's having put-off his intended motion concerning the women that are now in prison, by process of the Ecclesiastical courts, on account of the difficulty of providing a. remedy to this grievance. The remecy appears to me to be very obvious—it is fimply this: To allow of some other mode of marrying, as legal, besides that prescribed by the church of England.
As the law now stands, there is no other mode of marrying that is clearly and indisputably legal.--I say clearly and indisputably legal, because I know that the marriages of Jews and Quakers are spoken-of in Lord Hardwicke's marriage-act, passed in the year 1752, as if they were legal ; which may be considered as a sort of collateral, or occasional, legislative confirmation of them. Yet, if a Quaker was to die intestate, and in poffeffion of a landed cstate of inheritance, and his wife was to claini her dower of one third part of his said landed estate during her lise ; and the intestate's nexı heir, (18, for instance, his brother,) was to dispute her claim to such dower, on the ground of her not having been lawfully married to the intestate, I do not see how she could ever establish her marriage; as the only knov'n way of prova ing a marriage in such an action for dower, is to procure from the bishop of the diocese in which the marriage
was foleninized, his certificate that the said parties were at such a time and place joined-together in holy matrimony, legitimo matrimonio copulati; which certificate, I presume, would not be granted to the Quaker's wife. And still less does our law allow the validity of marriages performed according to the ceremonies of the Mahometan religion, or any other religion less known to Englishmen. Yet it is certain, that all persons who are permitted to live in England, ought to be permitted to marry there; and it is likewise certain, that, according to the principles of the Protestant religion, marriage is not a facrament, but a civil contract. It seems, therefore, to be reasonable that an act of Parliament should be passed to this effect, to wit, ift, To make all the marriages celebrated in the meeting-houses, or chapels, of Protestant difTenters, (duly licensed according to the Toleration-act) lawful: and 2ndly, To declare all marriages celebrated by Quakers, in their meeting-houses, and by Jews in their fynagogues, to be also lawful: and, 3dly, To declare that all marriages that shall be entered-into before the Justices of the Peace of any county, at their Quarter-feffions, or other general feflions, and perhaps, even before any two Justices of the Peace, shall also be lawful. This would accommodate persons of all religions, and of all different fects of religion, and prevent such grievances as those which Mr. Courtenay propores 10 relieve. In the mean while, it must be observed, that the Ecclefiaftical courts are not to be blamed for their conduct in this unfortunate businefs, as they have only done their duty with respect to the persons brought before them upon a charge of Incontinence, upon the principles of the Law, as it now stands.
I am your
REASONS WHY THE WAR WITII FRANCE COULD
NOT BE AVOIDED.
To the PRITER of the PUBLIC ADIENTISER.
Sept. 28, 1793. I am one of those who lament the war we are now en-, gaged in with France as a very great evil, but think it is an evil of neceflity, that could not have been avoided, and therefore must be submitted-to with patience, and carriedon (as it has been) with vigour.
My reason for thinking it could not have been avoided is, that it seems to have been a fixed principle of the new republican governours of France (though not of the makers of the former Constitutional Monarchy, as it is called) to extend their new mode of government to other nations. Their resolutions of the 15th and 301h of laf December, 1792, prove this beyond a doubt; and their bold and wanion Declarations of war against both Spain and GreatBritain at the fame time, and their invasion of Holland by laying fiege to Williamstadt, and taking poffesfion of Breda, are notorious confirmations of it. And lately Mr. Mallet du Pan, the bold and upright author of the valuable French periodical paper, called Le Mercure de France, which was published every week (if I mistake not) from the first meet. ing of the States General of France in May, 1789, to the beginning of August, 1792, when Monarchy and the Liberty of the Press were abolished together, and the practice of
affaffination and of summary trial and condemnation by the mob, or, as they are called, the fovereign people, acting in their own persons, and not by their representatives, was adopted, and, at least, connived-at by the Convention-I say, this Mr. Mallet du Pan has lately given us an extract from a letter of Monsieur Brissot (a great leader of the republican party in France) written in confidence to one of his friends, (who was a Member of the French Convention, and deputed by them to superintend the Generals of their armies,) which expresily avows this most dangerous and holile principle. The words of Monsieur Briffot are as follows: “ Il faut incendier les quatre coins de l'Europe : Notre salut est là :" That is, “ We mult set the four cora ners of Europe on fire : Our safety lies in that.”- This passage of Mr. Briffot's letter is contained in the 37th page of a pamphlet of Mr. Mallet du Pan, lately published, which is entitled, “ Considérations fur la Nature de la Révolution de France, et sur les Caufes qui en prolongent la durée, and contains much curious and important information.-Mr. Mallet likewise informs us (in page 32 of the same pamphlet, note 1), that this fame Monsieur Brissot, about last September, 1792, when the mob of Paris was plandering and beheading the editors of news-papers of a contrary party to himself (who is also a publisher of a news-paper), excused all these enormities by saying, “That “ it was proper to yield to the peculiar circumstances of " the times, and to let the laws sleep a little with respect " to the perpetrators of them ;" and be further informs us, that the fame Monsieur Briffot publickly and folemnly boasted, “ That he had been the caufe of the French “ Government's declaring war against the Austrians in April,
1792, with a view to find an opportunity, on the first « failure of success of the French arnis, of throwingtheblame “ of such failure upon the King, and accusing him of collud