had the truest notions of freedom, that when a prince was laid aside for maladministration, the nobles, and people, if they thought it necessary for the public weal, did resume the administration of the supreme power, (the power itself having been always in them,) and did not only alter the succession, but often the very form of government too; because they believed there was no natural right in one man to govern another, but that all was by institution, force, or consent. Thus, the cities of Greece, when they drove out their tyrannical kings, either chose others from a new family, or abolished the kingly government, and became free states. Thus the Romans, upon the expulsion of Tarquin, found it inconvenient for them to be subject any longer to the pride, the lust, the cruelty and arbitrary will of single persons, and therefore, by general consent, entirely altered the whole frame of their government. Nor do I find the proceedings of either, in this point, to have been condemned by any historian of the succeeding ages. But a great deal has been already said by other writers upon this invidious and beaten subject; therefore I shall let it fall; though the point is commonly mistaken, especially by the lawyers; who, of all others, seem least to understand the nature of government in general; like under-workmen, who are expert enough at making a single wheel in a clock, but are utterly ignorant how to adjust the several parts, or regulate the movements.

To return therefore from this digression: it is a Church of England man's opinion, that the freedom

of a nation consists in an absolute unlimited legis. lative power, wherein the whole body of the people are fairly represented; and in an executive duly li mited; because on this side likewise, there may be dangerous degrees, and a very ill extreme. For, when two parties in a state are pretty equal in power, pretensions, merit, and virtue, (for these two last are with relation to parties and a court, quite different things) it has been the opinion of the best writers upon government, that a prince ought not in any sort to be under the guidance or influence of either because he declines by this means from his office of presiding over the whole, to be the head of a party; which, beside the indignity, renders him answerable for all public mismanagements, and the consequences of them; and in whatever state this happens, there must either be a weakness in the prince or ministry; or else the former is too much restrained by the nobles, or those who represent the people.

To conclude: a Church of England man may, with prudence and a good conscience, approve the professed principles of one party more than the other, according as he thinks they best promote the good of church and state; but he will never be swayed by passion or interest, to advance an opinion, merely because it is that of the party he most approves; which one single principle, he looks upon as the root of all our civil animosities. To enter into a party, as into an order of friars, with so resigned an obedience to superiors, is very unsuitable both with

the civil and religious liberties we so zealously assert. Thus the understandings of a whole senate are often enslaved by three or four leaders on each side, who, instead of intending the public weal, have their hearts wholly set upon ways and means, how to get or to keep employments. But to speak more at large, how has this spirit of faction mingled itself with the mass of the people, changed their nature and manners, and the very genius of the nation! broke all the laws of charity, neighbourhood, alliance, and hospitality; destroyed all ties of friendship, and divided families against themselves! and no wonder it should be so, when in order to find out the character of a person, instead of inquiring whether he be a man of virtue, honour, piety, wit, good sense, or learning; the modern question is only, whether he be a whig or a tory; under which terms, all good and ill qualities are included.

Now, because it is a point of difficulty to choose an exact middle between two ill extremes, it may be worth inquiring in the present case, which of these a wise and good man would rather seem to avoid : taking therefore their own good and ill characters, with due abatements and allowances for partiality and passion, I should think, that in order to preserve the constitution entire in church and state, whoever has a true value for both, would be sure to avoid the extremes of whig, for the sake of the former; and the extremes of tory, on account of the latter.

I have now said all that I could think convenient, upon so nice a subject, and find I have the ambition

common with other reasoners, to wish at least that both parties may think me in the right; which would be of some use to those who have any virtue left, but are blindly drawn into the extravagancies of either, upon false representations, to serve the ambition or malice of designing men, without any prospect of their own. But if that is not to be hoped for, my next wish should be, that both might think me in the wrong which I would understand as an ample justification of myself, and a sure ground to believe, that I have proceeded at least with impartiality, and perhaps with truth.

A TRUE CHURCHMAN SET IN A JUST

AND CLEAR LIGHT;

OR,

AN ESSAY TOWARDS THE RIGHT CHARACTER OF A

:

FAITHFUL SON OF THE ESTABLISHED CHURCH.

BY DR. EDWARD SYNGE,

ARCHBISHOP OF TUAM IN IRELAND.

SIR,

WHEN, the other day, at Mr. B.'s lodging, to one that asked me whether I were a high or a low churchman, I made answer that I hoped I was neither; for that I so well approved of the constitution of our church, as far as I understood it, that, with God's blessing, I was fully resolved in all things to conform to it, and willingly to act neither above nor below it; and that therefore, with relation to the established church, I would own no other title but that of a true churchman: you may remember you said you would gladly know from me the exact character of such a true churchman, and how he is to be distinguished from both the others. In return to which request of yours, I here send you the most faithful draught that I am able to make, according to the best of my apprehensions of him': but how he is to be distinguished, and in what and how many things he differs from the high or low