 | A sketch of old England |  |
LETTER XXI.
In my last two or three letters, I attempted to give you some
idea of the real nature and spirit of this government, not by
vague declamations, borrowed from their own writers, or the
partial ignorance of foreigners, but by sketching some of those
finally, on a closer examination, are found to give a character
to the whole composition. Much has been said and written
of this government which it never deserved; and much which,
if it ever merited, it merits no longer. But it is difficult to
shake a long established belief, or to weaken our confidence
in a good character, sustained for a considerable length of
time. It is right it should be so, or else the fruits of a whole
age of virtuous actions might be blasted in a moment by a
breath of calumny.
As all things are however good by comparison, and as it is
the custom of most Englishmen to insist upon some mysterious,
occult, invisible, and indefinable superiority of their government
over all others, and most especially over our republic,
it may be worth while to institute a short comparison between
the two. Declamation is a good prop to error; but facts are
the best support of truth.
The independence of an English jury, of the present day,
has been greatly overrated, because, in a few instances, state
prosecutions have failed in the City of London. This fact
only proves what I have just urged, that an independence of
the king, or at least, a partial dependence on the people, is
essential to the security of the subject. The sheriff of London
is chosen by the livery of London, which is essentially a democratic
body. It is therefore highly probable, that in a cause
where the rights of the people are opposed to the pretensions
of the king, he will not summon a jury biassed in favour of the
latter.
In all the counties of Great Britain, with perhaps one or
two exceptions, where the right is vested in some nobleman,
the sheriffs are appointed by the king. That his majesty and
his council will select the most loyal supporters of the prerogative,
is at least naturally to be expected, and most especially
at the present crisis, when the people and the king are perpetually
in conflict. In the large cities, the appointment of the
sheriff is sometimes in the corporation or in the guilds; and in
proportion as these are popular, or the creatures of some
courtier, which last is generally the case, the independence of
juries may be inferred. Out of London, we hear of no acquittals
of radicals, nor any condemnation of soldiers for
riding over and shooting unarmed citizens, men, women, and
children.
But even admitting the trial by jury, and habeas corpus, to
subsist in this country in all their purity, still they are partially
suspended, of late almost every year, under some pretence
of public danger; that is, whenever the public sentiment,
be sufficiently calculated upon for the purposes of oppression.
Again: the security of a person is at the mercy of a press-gang,
from whose lawless fangs no man with a ragged coat is
exempt. Instances are continually occurring, where the sons
of the country people, in roaming about London, and elsewhere,
at the naval stations, are kidnapped by the press-gangs,
and carried on board of ships, where it rests with the caprice,
or the necessities of the officers, either to let him go or to take
him to sea, where he is not heard of by his friends for years.
On the other hand, the security of property, at least of the
produce of landed property, is, I may say, destroyed, by being
subjected to taxation by a parliament, in which the far greater
proportion of those who pay them have no representatives.
But admitting, for the sake of argument, that the two countries
are on a par, with respect to the two great ends of government,
security of person and property; I would then put their
excellence to the test, by inquiring, which attains these great
objects at the least sacrifice of property and independence?
The comparison is perfectly simple, as respects the first. There
are twenty millions of people in Great Britain, and ten in the
United States. Of the former, one-seventh are paupers, not
taxable; of the latter, about the same proportion are negroes,
also not taxable; at least their owners pay their taxes. We
will put the negroes against the paupers, and the proportion
will still remain the same; that is, about double the number
of taxable persons in this country, that there is in the United
States. We will put the whole of the expenditures of the
latter at twenty millions of dollars per annum, which is a very
large allowance for the present year, I am sure, and contrast it
with the 53,289,754l. sterling yearly expenditure of this government,
including interest on the public debt. The mere annual
expence of the British government, exclusive of the interest of
the public debt, amounts to upwards of twenty-two millions
of pounds sterling; that is to say, at the rate of about twenty-two
shillings sterling a head for every man, woman, and child in
Great Britain. Add to this the interest on the public debt, the
tithes, poor-rates, &c. and it will amount to between two or three
times as much more, making an average of about fourteen
dollars a head for every soul in Great Britain. In the United
States the average is less than two dollars, or about one-seventh.
It will appear, therefore, that the people of the United States
pay only one-seventh of the sum per annum for the security
of person and property, that the people of this country do for
the attainment of similar blessings.
Of the state of religion, morals, and manners, I have given
most frequent, and violations of decency most public and most
common, it is but empty boasting to make pretensions to superior
piety, morality, or refinement. There may be pious, virtuous,
and refined individuals, but the nation can possess no
extraordinary share of either. If we take this criterion, I
apprehend it will be found, that England has little to boast of
in these particulars. Certain it is, however, that in no city
have I heard of so many crimes, and so many violations of
public decency, as occur in London. If there be, in reality,
any extraordinary degree of evangelical piety, or orthodox
religion here, it does not appear to be of that species which
hold the reins of human passions, and places the curb in the
hard mouth of wilful wickedness. It seems to vent itself in
strange and abstract doctrines of mysterious subtlety—in Bible
and Missionary Societies, whose remote objects appear to
attract almost exclusive attention, while the corruptions, that
walk at noonday, and stink in our very nostrils, are either
neglected, or become indifferent, by being so common. It
would seem to consist in the doctrine of old fanaticism, or still
older hypocrisy, of making the conversion of one Pagan an
equivalent for the loss of a hundred Christian souls; of purchasing
pardon for the habitual breach of moral laws and
social duties, by an infuriated zeal in converting people who
inhabit the uttermost parts of the earth. That such a perversion
of the true ends of religion, and such principles of action,
should lead to an era of multiplied crimes, and endless offences
against human laws, is not any subject of surprise, since all
human experience goes to prove, that the separation of morality
and religion is in the end fatal to both.
| A sketch of old England | |