duce nothing but moral results! Political liberty and social order are things which do not depend upon the principles of truth and morality, as the Major's first element states; they are defined by truth and morality, and have a still deeper principle as an element ! That the Major has found no such thing as this constitution; but that it is altogether an invention, a paltry invention, intended to form an excuse for the want of more boldness and honesty, is evident, in this, his ignorance of what are the elements of political liberty and social order! A constitution that shall form the foundation of political liberty and social order, which are one and the same thing, each embracing the other, can have but one element -legislation that shall be wholly moral in effect! Three of the Major's elements, or those which he calls: "Principles, Arms-bearing, and Judicature," are superfluous words, and defiue nothing! We must first admit a people to exist, and to be in want of establishing some practice by which they can best form a community. This people are not an element; they are the physical base from which the' elements nesessary to form a constitution arise and to which they relate; nor can this people be called a principle; which the Major wrongly makes the first of his elements, and says, it is essential though general. Principle is a thing which is the result of practice, and is not in itself an element.

To put arms-bearing before legislation is a perfect monstrosity, and to call it an element is ridiculous! The necessary legislation would provide the necessary arms-bearing: in fact, the necessary legislation is the only real element in agood constitution of society, as magistracy itself arises out of, or would be instituted by the, legislature. Magistracy could not begin before legislation, as it defines nothing more than the practice, the principle, the application, or administration of the law. It must therefore follow legislation and arise out of it. Magistracy embraces the word judicature, and they form one and the same thing. Even a juryman is a magistrate. He is delegated to examine accusations and to administer a part of the law: he is therefore to all intents and purposes, a magistrate, whilst a Juryman. That there must be orders in magistracy, if the community be large, is evident. A chief magistracy is essential, as a point for communication with other communities; but, whether, it should reside in one or more individuals, must be a matter that would depend on circumstances, and is not essential to be fixed. It would be a result of legislation, and always suited to the wants and conditions of the people. Even a constable or a peace-officer, is a magistrate: a certain part of the administration of the law would fall to his share; and his appointment would result from and not be independent of the legislature.

The gradation of society appears to me to be something of this kind: we are a species of animals that wish to live in the greatest state of ease, happiness, and security; we are prone to immorality, and apt to prey upon the properties of each other: laws, are, therefore, necessary to restrain this immorality, and to protect morality from

being preyed upon: it is necessary, that those laws should affect all equally; and as we are animals who differ in our notions of right, some practice to ascertain the major amount of consent, must exist, and that amount must rule the minor amount of dissent. This is as

certained by voting, for an object defined and understood, and applies in the first instance to the choice of a representative legislator, as well as, subsequently in an assembly of those legislators met for legislation, that is, the people are first to vote the legislators, and and then the legislators are to vote the laws, upon the practice of allowing the major amount of consent to rule the minor amount of dissent in both instances.

A Legislature thus established would begin to make laws. Every member would state what he thought necessary to be done, and out of these statements, and the discussions that would arise upon them, laws would be produced. Laws produced, a magistracy would be required to put them in action; for the administration of the laws could not be safely left to the whole people: in fact it would engage all their time to do it, and therefore representatives become necessary to administer them, which, as a delegated power limited by law, to administer other laws, well understood by every member of the community, would constitute what we call magistracy, or judicature, or conservation of peace and property, or what not.

As this magistracy would be itself a law, instituted by the legislature, the appointments would arise from the best mode that could be devised; and in all cases of local magistracy, there is not a doubt but the delegation would be referred back to the people, as those best qualified to chuse proper men or women: for I can see no objection to employ intelligent and moral women in such services. In fact, everything is required to be performed by the people as a whole, and women are a part of the people, which they can more conveniently perform as a whole, than by delegated powers. So here it may be clearly seen, that moral legislation is the only necessary element to produce social order, or the fullest extent of liberty that can be devised or conceived; I would not even exclude women from any part of the elections or the elected. If well educated there would not be a shade of difference between man and woman.

The legislature would provide for every thing that could be done for the defence of the community: and if there was danger of being invaded by the members of any other community, without consent; then the arms-bearing would always be decreed, so long as the probability of invasion existed. It may be easily seen, that if mankind were divided into communities, and those communities regulated upon this practice of equal legislation, and equal administration of law, it could never become the interest of one community to invade the property and destroy the lives of the members of another: universal peace would be their interest, and universal peace they would all combine to preserve.

The contrast now is, in the existing practice of legislation and government among mankind, to suffer one man to become a keeper of

millions, and after treating them like dogs, to use them as dogs! to turn them forth as instruments of destruction upon each other, which could not be effected by any other species of animals upon each other; in short, to make them baser beasts of prey than any other species of animals, and to use them for the horrid purpose of increasing the amount of all kinds of animal pain, but more particularly the amount of human pain! Ignorance is the cause; knowledge the only remedy for this evil! Man, take your choice of the two systems.

It is a matter of very remote chance, and scarcely probable, that a community, such as is now found in this Island, will ever be able to revert, all at once, to this element of moral legislation. Even if the existing system was suspended, it would be so far difficult to make the people wise enough to follow their own interest, in their present ignorant state, as to leave the result, for a long time, uncertain. It would not, it could not be worse than at present, and much good would eventually arise, as may be seen, even now, in France, but mischievous men, and mischievous factions, would be continually rearing their heads and disturbing the surface, guided by their own private interests and void of respect for the general interests. This would be found to be the case with the royal and aristocratical families; with the priests of all sects; and with all kinds of clubs and factions, secret and open, from the King and his followers, to those who now call themselves Radical Christian Political Reformers. It is therefore a matter of great importance, so to enlighten the people, as to undermine all these secret and sectarian influences. This is a matter I have continually before my mind: and to which my pen is always inclined. We ought to take lessons from what has passed in France, and from what is now passing in Spain and Portugal. If necessary and useful Revolution could be accomplished without an angry word, it would be, of that kind, the most agreeable to me; but, on the other hand, I would not shrink from a contest of words, or blows, or arms, but am always ready to obtain it at the price it is worth.

By the time the reader has gone thus far with me, he will have seen that all the talk about Constitutions, whether old or new, whether in theory or in practice, is all useless trash. When I use the word constitution, I always feel a confusion of the mind. I see nothing fixed about me, and I see, that to talk about a standard for any thing, that shall be necessarily binding on those who do not consent to set it up, either as a majority or minority, is idle talk and cannot be acted upon. Taking oaths to preserve any existing order of things, is a violation of the first and only principle of moral legislation, it may be opposed to the wants of the people in their majorities, and being so opposed must be immoral.

Major Cartwright calls his Constitution, a law to the legislature: but, pray tell me, who has the right, who can dare to assume the power to give this law to the legislature? It is a complete tying the hands of the Legislators, against which I would protest, if I was elected by a body of people, as one of a number, of Legislators; and

would do my utmost to overthrow any such a constitution. Under such a constitution the legislature is not independent. There could be no disagreement among mankind, if they whould learn to define and to understand the words they use. The word constitution is like the word religion, a source of dissension which ought to be removed altogether. It does no good, and is of no use to the people as a whole. The necessary means to the necessary end, is all that is necessary; and a fair examination of the matter, proves, that a competent legislature is all that is necessary: which the people as a whole should put up and take down as they think proper.

If I were elected a member of the House of Commons of this country, I should respect nothing that existed, if I thought its abolition calculated to do more good than its existence. I would have motiou after motion against every thing that I disliked; and I should dislike nothing, if I could not shew good reasons for it. I would move for the abolition of the title of King, or its change to that of Chief Magistrate; and instead of putting a million of pounds sterling, annually to the disposal of such a person, I should move that it be reduced to a few thousands, or an equivalent for services to be performed.

I would move for the abolition of the House of Lords as a wholly useless part of the legislature. I would move for the abolition of the army and the establishment of the independence of all our colonies. I would move for the abolition of all tithes and all compulsory payments to the priests. I would move for the breaking up of all corporate interests of every kind, as injurious to the people as a whole. I would move for a different mode of electing the members of that House of Commons; and that all magistrates should be elected by the people as a whole, or in districts, instead of being elected by one, or a few individuls: in short, there is nothing, I put upon paper, but I would say in that House, and that too, in as serious, as calm, and as solemn a manner, as that in which I write it. When I see a few men in that house to talk and act upon such a principle, then I shall think some good is about to be done. What is a man, who is obliged to pay an outward respect or homage to that which is not respectable? I call him: a SLAVE, and I had rather be a prisoner than a slave. I will never stifle my convictions of right to humour those of another, nor those of all the people in the country, if I were conscientiously opposed to them. I would very soon infuse something like a spirit of free discussion into any assembly where I could get a footing, upon the conviction, that free discussion must be the basis of moral legislation. FREE DISCUSSION IS THE ONLY NECESSARY CONSTITUTION: THE ONLY NECESSARY LAW TO THE LEGISLATURE. Let Major Cartwright shew the contrary if he can: and if he cannot, I advise him to burn his book, as mischievous in its effects upon the great question of moral reform.

The duty of a moral legislator is to know no truth he fears to to utter: or in other words not to fear to utter what he knows to be truth. There is not a man of this stamp belonging to the existing

legislature of this country. Whoever reads the reports of the debates in the two Houses of Parliament, cannot fail to see, that the hardest task our legislators have to perform is, to stifle their convictions of that which is true and proper to be done! We hear many of them professing to lament the evils which pervade the people of this and the neighbouring Island; yet not one is there to be found to speak out manfully and honestly as to what is necessary to be done to remove those evils. Obscure hints are now and then thrown out; but the moment the interested part of the members rise to reprobate all measures that go to undermine their powers and their profits, your opposition members becomes quite humble, belies his words and his conscience by an explanation, that is to all parties, as evidently false as it is hypocritical. Such is a true picture of the exist ing legislature of this country: whoever is pleased or whoever is offended at the exhibition. No good will be done so long as falsehood is the prevailing rule in discussion; in fact, nothing passes in our Parliament worthy of being called discussion: there are occasionally some eloquent declamations and condemnations upon the branches of different deep rooted abuses; but there is no discussion that strikes at the roots of an abuse; and this defect is the very cause why the horrid mass of talking that is there put forth does no kind of good or produces no effect. The only remedy for abuse, or for any kind of evil, and that shall bring about moral legislation, is to know no truth you fear to utter; to respect no power that is corrupt and injurious in its operations upon the community.

The Major's book is put forth as a book of authority, which the Reformers are called upon to hoist as a standard and rallying point! or I should not have been so severe upon it. It is put forth with a degree of superstition: it is not allowed to be sold with other profane books: it is advertised to be sold at a shop or house used for its particular sale, and all the rules of the trade are violated in its publication. Thomas Cleary is the High Priest to deliver this BREAD FRUIT OF NATIONAL LIFE! this BANNER OF FREEDOM! this STANDARD OF ENGLAND! to a worshipping multitude, if such can be found: about which I doubt, for a single order has not yet come to my shop for the book to my knowledge! That no profane Bookseller shall have the administering of this new BALM OF GILEAD, this POLITICAL PANACEA to the dying people, the regular trade profit is refused! But all will not do; the people begin to suspect the goodness of all lore that is founded upon the word constitution: it is the