66 ef the union-act; which is, that the author of the Crifis may be fairly proved, from his own citations, to be guilty of HIGH TREASON. In a paper of his called the Englishman, of October 29. there is an advertisement about taking in fubfcriptions for printing the Crifis, where the title is publifhed at length with the following claufe, which the author thought fit to drop in the publication; [" and that no power on earth can bar, alter, or make void "the prefent fettlement of the crown, &c." By Richard Steele.] In his extract of an act of parliament made fince the union, it appears to be "high treafon for any perfon, by writing or print"ing, to maintain and affirm, that the kings or "queens of this realm, with and by the authority "of parliament, are not able to make laws and "ftatutes of fufficient force and validity to limit "and bind the crown, and the defcent, limitation, "inheritance, and government thereof." This act being fubfequent to the fettlement of the crown, .confirmed at the union, it is probable fome friend of the author advised him to leave out thofe treafonable words in the printed title-page, which he had before publifhed in the advertisement; and accordingly we find, that in the treatife itfelf he only "of"fers it to every good fubject's confideration, whe"ther this article of the fettlement of the crown is 66 not as firm as the union itself, and as the fettle"ment of Epifcopacy in England, &c." And he thinks the " Scots understood it fo, that the fuc"ceffion to the crown was never to be controvert"ed." These I take to be only treasonable infinuations; but the advertisement before-mentioned is actually high-treafon; for which the author ought to be profecuted, if that would avail any thing under a jurif diction, where curting the QUEEN is not above the penalty of twenty marks. Nothing is more notorious than that the Whigs of Q late late years, both in their writings and difcourfes, have affected, upon all occafions, to allow the legitimacy of the pretender. This makes me a little wonder to fee our author labouring to prove the contrary, by producing all the popular chat of those times, and other folid arguments from Fuller's narrative: but it must be fuppofed, that this gentleman acts by the commands of his fuperiors, who have thought fit at this juncture to iffue out new orders for reafons beft known to themselves. I wish they had been more clear in their directions to him upon that weighty point, whether the fettlement of the fucceffion in the house of Hanover be alterable or no. I have obferved where, in his former pages, he gives it in the negative; but in the turning of a leaf, he hath wholly changed his mind. He tells us, "he wonders there can be found any Briton "weak enough to contend against a power in their "own nation, which is practifed in a much greater degree in other states: and how hard it is, that "Britain fhould be debarred the privilege of efta"blishing its own fecurity, by relinquithing only "those branches of the royal line, which threaten "it with deftruction; whilft other nations never "fcruple upon lefs occafions to go much greater lengths;" of which he produceth inftances in France, Spain, Sicily, and Sardinia; and then adds, can Great Britain help to advance men to other "thrones, and have no power in limiting its own? "How can a fenator, capable of doing honour to "Sir Thomas Hanmer," be guilty of fuch ridiculous inconfiftencies.? The author of the "Conduct "of the allies," fays he," hath dared to drop in"finuations about altering the fucceffion." The "author of the "Conduct of the allies" writes fenfe and English; neither of which the author of the Crifis understands. The former thinks it wrong in point of policy to call in a foreign "C power to be guarantee of our fucceffion, because "it "it puts it out of the power of our own legislature "to change our fucceffion without the consent of "that prince or state who is guarantee, whatever "neceffity may happen in future times." Now, if it be high treafon to affirm by writing, that the legislature hath no fuch power; and if Mr. Steele thinks it ftrange, that Britain fhould be debarred this privilege, what could be the crime of putting fuch a cafe, that in future ages a neceffity might happen of limiting the fucceffion, as well as it hath happened already? When Mr. Steele " reflects upon the many fo"lemn, ftrong barriers (to our fucceffion) of laws " and oaths, &c." he "thinks all fear vanifheth " before them." I think fo too, provided the epithet folemn goes for nothing; becaufe, although I have often heard of a falemn day, a folemn feast, and a Jolemn coxcomb, yet I can conceive no idea to myfelf of a folemn barrier. However, be that as it will, his thoughts, it seems, will not let him reft, but, before he is aware, he asks himself feveral questions; and fince he cannot refolve them, I will endeavour to give him what fatisfaction I am able. The first is, What are the marks of a lafting fecurity? To which I anfwer, that the figns of it in a kingdom or state are, first, good laws; and, fecondly, thofe laws well executed: we are pretty well provided with the former, but extremely defective in the latter. Secondly, What are our tempers and our hearts at home? If by ours he means thofe of himself and his abettors, they are moft damnably wicked; impatient for the death of the QUEEN; ready to gratify their ambition and revenge by all defperate methods; wholly alienate from truth, law, religion, mercy, confcience, or honour. Thirdly, In what hands is power lodged abroad? To answer the queftion naturally, Louis XIV. is King of France, Philip V. (by the counfel and acknowledg ments of the Whigs) is King of Spain, and fo on. If by power he means money; the Duke of Marl? borough is thought to have more ready money than all the kings of Chriftendom together; but by the peculiar difpofition of providence it is locked up in a trunk, to which his ambition hath no key; and that is our fecurity. Fourthly, Are our unnatural divifions our firength? I think not; but they are the fign of it, for being unnatural they cannot Jaft; and this fhews, that union, the foundation of all ftrength, is more agreeable to our nature. Fifthly, Is it nothing to us, which of the princes of Europe has the longest fword? Not much, if we can tie up his hands, or put a strong shield into those of his neighbours; or if our fword be as fharp as his is long; or if it be neceffary for him to turn his own fword into a ploughfbare; or if fuch a word happeneth to be in the hands of an infant, or ftruggled for by two competitors.Sixthly, The powerful hand that deals out crowns and kingdoms all around us, may it not in time reach a king out to us too? If the powerful hand he means be that of France, it may reach out as many kings as it pleafeth; but we will not accept them. Whence does this man get his intelligence? I fhould think, even his brother Ridpath might furnish him with better. What crowns or kingdoms hath France dealt about? Spain was given by the will of the former King, in confequence of that infamous treaty of partition, the adviser of which will, I hope, never be forgot in England. Sicily was difpofed of by her Majefty of Great Bri tain; fo in effect was Sardinia. France indeed once reached out a king to Poland, but the people would not receive him. This question of Mr. Steele's was therefore only put in terrorem, without any regard to truth.-Seventhly, Are there no pretenfions to cur crown that can ever be revived? There may, for ought I know, be about a dozen; and thofe in time may poffibly beget a hundred ; but we must do as well as we can. Captain Beffus, when when he had fifty challenges to anfwer, protefted he could not fight above three duels a-day." If "the pretender should fail," fays the writer, "the "French King has in his quiver a fucceffion of "them; the Duchefs of Savoy, or her fons, or"the Dauphin her grandfon.? Let me fuppofe the Chevalier de St. George to be dead; the Duchefs: of Savoy will then be a pretender, and confequently must leave her husband, becaufe his Royal Highnefs (for Mr. Steele has not yet acknowledged him for a king) is in alliance with her British Majefty; her fons when they grow pretenders, muft undergo the fame fate. But I am at a lofs how to difpofe of the Dauphin, if he happen to be King of France before the pretendership to Britain falls to his share; for I doubt he will never be perfuaded to remove out of his own kingdom, only because it is too near England. 66. But the Duke of Savoy did, fome years ago, 66 put in his claim to the crown of England in right ❝ of his wife, and he is a prince of great capacity, “in strict alliance with France, and may therefore very well add to our fears of a Popish fucceffor." Is it the fault of the prefent, or of any miniftry, that this prince put in his claim? muft we give him opium to destroy his capacity? or can we prevent his alliance with any prince, who is in peace with her Majefty? Muft we fend to ftab or poison all the Popish princes, who have any pretended title to our crown by the proximity of blood? What, in the name of God, can thefe people drive at ! what is it they demand! Suppofe the present Dauphin were now a man, and King of France, and next Popish heir to the crown of England; is he not excluded by the laws of the land? But what regard will he have to our laws? I anfwer, Hath not the QUEEN as good a title to the crown of France? and how is fhe excluded, but by their law against the fucceffion of females, which we are not bound to acknowledge? O 3 |