Concludes with a Remark on a Paper of his, intitled, A Difcourfe on Infidelity, fign'd SoCRATES (fee p.1071.) Whatever imaginary Deity he would be- A ftow on Virtue and Morality, in Oppofition to the Principle of Self-Love, he is actually efpoufing the Cause of Immorality, by deftroying the natural and genuine Principle by which alone it can fubfift.-If the Pleasure which each B Individual proposes to himself, in the doing a virtuous and friendly Action, be not the Motive upon which he acts, it's impoffible any Principle fhould be found in human Nature, upon which Morality can be fupported. It will therefore be incumbent on him to prove, that "the Concern which a friendly Man feels at the Misfortunes of one he has a Regard for, proceeds from any other Motive, than the Pleafure he propofes to himself of being freed from the Uneafinefs he feels on D Account of his Friend; and that the Relief he gives him is not acting upon the Principle of Self-Love: Since, if the Misfortunes of his Friend gave him no Uncasiness, he could have no Motive to relieve him." To fay, that a benevolent Man and E a felfish Man are diftinct Characters, is faying nothing. They are indeed diftinct in the Estimation of Mankind, and in Nature too, while the benevolent Man's Uneafinefs is produced by the Regard he has for his Friends, and F the felfish Man's by the Regard he has for himself; but does this prove Self-Love is not the immediate Motive of both their Actions? Are they not both prompted to Action from fome Uneafiness, in the removing of which G a Good is propofed to each Individual? The Caufe of this Uneafinefs is not material. Socrates can't distinguish between the immediate Spring of moral Actions, which is the Defire of Good founded upon Uneafiness, and that which produces this Uneafinefs. When he has thought of this, he will hardly burt his Head again in a Controversy, which, in the Manner he conducts it, may be very injurious to his Patron, by weakening that Principle upon which alone be feems to have any Credit with any Part of Mankind, and even with Socrates himfelf. London Journal, Jan. 6. No. 706. Of Tyranny, Anarchy, and Free Go vernments. Dolizers of Power have fo debauch'd tions of human Nature, Morals, and Politicks, that fome celebrated Writers have fuppofed Mankind fo ill made, that they could not fubfift without Subjection to Power. Anarchy, or the State of Man without Government, they have reprefented as Chaos and Confufion; and a State of Nature, as a continual War of every Man against every Man. Thus human Nature, Truth, Juftice, and the Honour of God, are prostituted to the Support of arbitrary Power; altho' a State of Nature is infinitely preferable to Tyranny and arbitrary Power. A State of Nature is, where every Man's allowed to do what he will with his own Person and Property, confiftent with otherMen's; and thofe common Rights are fo eafily difcerned, that the Indians live much better than Men under any Tyranny and arbitrary Government. Their Virtue and Happiness are owing to their being untaught by thofe whofe highest Interest it is to deceive them. The great Inequality of Property is the Source of almost all Murders, Robberies, and other Vices among ourfelves; which the wiser and happier Savages knowing nothing of, are blef fed with Security and Eafe: For, they naturally affent to that divine Truth, fufficient unto the Day is the Evil, and the Good thereof too; every Man provides for himself and his Offspring, Hand, invading no Man's Property, is invaded by no Man; and they are content to die as they live, not worth a Groat; when they have no Occafion for it, they have no Occafion for Go vernment: For all Government owes its Divine, are debauch'd as much in their That Government only is just and perfectly free, where there are no Laws but what relate to the Security of Perfon and Property; where the Sub- C ject may do what he pleafes with his Perfon and Property, confillently with the Rights of others; and where there is no Power but the Civil, where there are no Laws but of a Civil Nature, and thofe Laws the ftanding Measure D of Government and Obedience; and where there is also a dernier Refort, or real Power left in the Community to Gesture, expreffing our Ideas and Conceptions in the moft graceful and The Government of England comes E the nearest to this Plan of any in the World. We have our Defects indeed; and one is, a Spiritual Power extend- ing to Men's Perfons and Properties, iffuing out Writs and Proceffes in its own Name, by virtue of an Authority which feemed diftinct from Civil. There fhould be no Power Spiritual, but what relates to Spirits or Minds, fuch as turning out diforderly Members; and that should be without any confe- quent Penalties relating to Body or E- We have other Defects, fuch as be- ing unequally reprefented, the Ufelef nefs of fome Laws, the Unreasonable- nefs of others, &c. But with all our Defects, our Government is fo good, that it deferves to be well guarded. We should guard against the Growth of Prerogative, and the least Exercise of Ecclefiaftical Power; but above all, a- The Weekly Miscellany, Jan. 6. No. 4• 'HE following Letter was written before the Diffenters Refolved to defift from their attempt to get the Cor- pora- poration and Teft Acts repealed; but ciple advanced in a Paper pretended to THE Common Question in all Com- C D What Methods they intend to use They would be thought to have a An uncommon Zeal for the Honour of We have lived with them inoffen- G H D I fuppofe, fays D'anvers, it will not be denied that we have at present the finest Navy, and the braveft Seamen in the World; and I hope the former will not be suffer'd to decline, nor the latter by being difcourag'd or ill Ulage be forc'd into foreign Service. But the common Method of Manning our Fleets by Impreffing, I am perfwaded, is inconfiftent with Magna Charta, the E Rights of Englishmen, and of pernicious Confequence to Trade. Whilft we are able to keep up fuch a naval Power, we fhall eafily maintain the Sovereignty of the Seas, and fafely defpife any Attempts from Abroad. F But Mr Walsingham fays there can be no abfolute Dependance on a naval Force, to oppofe or defeat an Invafion; fee p. 652. Vol. II.] Nobody can be ignorant that the neceffary Preparations for fuch an Enterprize take up a- G great deal of Time, and require fuch a Number of Ships, that all Europe must be afleep, if it should pafs unobferved. The Spanish Armada confifted but of 18,000 Men; and K. William brought but 14,000 in 6 or 700 Ships; fo that nothing but the most egregious Indolence can expofe us to fuch an Attempt, without fome Warning and Time for Defence. This was the Cafe H of the late K. James, who paid no Regard to the repeated Advices from France, concerning the Pr. of Orange's Designs, till the Prince declared it himfelf, and was ready to fet Sail. As to K. James's Fleet lying Windbound in the Mouth of the Thames, when the Pr. of Orange fail'd by, its doubted whether our Deliverer was not as much obliged to the Affections of the Officers and Seamen, who compos'd that Fleet, as to the Winds. But granting that some foreign Power in the Interest of the Pretender should conjure up a great naval Armament on a Sudden, and steal it into England in a dark Night, or by a favourable Wind, what are they to do? "The Cafe then is thus, fays Mr Trenchard, that 20,000 Men, of which few can be Horse, are landed in EngLand, without any human Probability of being fupply'd from Abroad. This Army thall never march 20 Miles into the Country; for they cannot put themselves in a marching Pofture in lets than a Fortnight or 3 Weeks, by which Time we may have 100,000 Militia drawn down upon them; whereof 10,000 fhall be Horfe, and as ma ny Dragoons as we pleafe; and if this Militia does nothing but drive the Country, cut off their Foragers, and intercept Provifions, their Army mult be deftroy'd in a fhort Time." If then our Militia is back'd only with 5 or 6000 regular Troops, what Danger can we apprehend from an Invafion - This was the Opinion of the late D. of Marlborough, who declared he would undertake to defeat any Body of Men, which could be poifibly landed on us by Surprize, with only his own Regiment of Guards, two or three of Dragoons, and fuch a Train of Artillery as he could easily draw out whereas they could not bring any with them of Confequence; nor ftand long, having no fortify'd Towns to fecure themselves. The Succefs of the Revolution was entirely owing to the Dilaffection fpread fpread amongst all Ranks and Degrees of People. Militia are the natural, ftrongeft and most proper Defence of free Countries; and were always rely'd upon in Eng- A land, till the Reign of K. Charles II. Sir Robert Cotton, in his Advice to K. Charles I. lets him know how the When the D. of Alençon came to the Court of Q. Elizabeth, and for fome Time had admir'd the Riches of the City, the Conduct of her Governpent, and the Magnificence of her Court, he ask'd her, amidst fo much Splendour, where were her Guards ? Pointing to the People, (who received her in Crouds with repeated Acclamations) Thefe faid fhe, my Lord, are my Guards. Thefe have their Hands, Hearts, and Purfes always at my Command. To this it has been objected by the Hon. Gentleman and his Advocates, that the Circumftances of Affairs in Europe are entirely alter'd in this Respect. This Alteration took Place when most of the free States of Europe were converted into abfolute Monarchies. Yet ftill in Holland and other free States the inland Towns are defended by their Militia and Burghers only. B C D E The Difficulty is, in getting them disbanded, as Mr Gay obferves: Soldiers are perfect Devils in their Way, [lay Remarks on the Craftsman.. THE Inconfiftency of the Craftfman may be eafily evinced, if we only compare his Journal of the 15th of April laft (fee p. 701) with the foregoing of the 6th Inftant. prove, Suppofing, as he affirms, that the Militia were the only Forces made use of in the Wars between the Houses of York and Lancaster; how does this that our Ancestors relied wholly on the Militia against an Invafion of foreign regular Troops? Or, fuppofing the Militia in thofe Days, os even in the Reign of Q. Elizabeth, were to be relied on against a foreign Invafion, will the Craftsman affert, that the Militia of thefe Days, (who, he acknowledges, are good for nothing but cramming their Guts) equals in Bravery the Militia in thofe Reigns ? But, fays he, nothing can be more abfurd than to fuppofe that the Militia can't be made useful; yet complains, that it's in vain to propose any Scheme of this Kind, whilft no Pains are fpared to make the Militia contemptible; tho' in the Paragraph juft before, he had himself called them F«Men fit for no Service, befides cramming their Guts at the Expence of their induftrious Fellow-Subjects. I would not be thought to mean, adds D'anvers, that our Militia are fit to defend our Country or indeed for any Thing, befides furnishing the Town with a ridiculous Diverfion, and cramming their Guts at the Expence of their Industrious Fellow-Subjects. For this Reason they are laid afide every where G but in Middlefex. See p. 208. Vol. I. But it's abfurd to fuppofe that the Militia cannot be made ufeful.-From whence is our present Army rais'd but from the Budy of the People? Do's clapping a red Coat upon a Man's Back H make him a Soldier? May not a great Part of the prefent Army when difbanded be incorporated into the Militia? Mr Trenchard is his great Oracle. In the Quotation which Mr D'anvers takes from him, two Things are to be obferved;-one, that Mr Trenchard fupposes 20,000 regular Forces may be landed upon us in a dark Night; the other, that the 100,000 Militia are not fuppofed to have been made useful, but Men fit for no Service but cramming their Guts: With which, no doubt, the Nation would be better pleafed than 18,000 regular Forces. For, fuppofe thefe 20,coo regular Forces landed in Scotland, what is to be done? Draw down, |