where unhappily, it feems, already to have gained but too FATAL a foundation.

Unanimity and concord are certainly neceffary towards improving the advantages of peace in favour of a nation which owes its greatnefs to the extenfion and profperity of its trade. Nor will it be difputed that the city of London hath at least as great an intereft in the national profperity, and confequently in the measures of government, on which the former must always depend, as any other distinct community in the kingdom. Why then it may be asked, did not the common council promote an addrefs to his majefty, which is fo obvious a means of advancing the harmony of the nation, and confequently of their own intereft? The anfwer is, not because they are wanting in duty to the king, and regard to their own welfare, but because they entertain more juft conceptions of these matters than others, who have pursued a contrary conduct; for he must have a fhort fight, indeed, who, cannot diftinguish between the pretended and the real means of promoting the welfare of his country, as they now prefent themselves to his obfervation. They are to blame for the confequence who first offended, and ftill perfift to hold out the cause of difcord; not they who refufe to connive at the cause till the confequence becomes incurable. His prefent majefty's confpicuous virtues, as they have defervedly gained him the hearts of all his faithful fubjects; fo it is not strange that thofe fubjects are defirous of rendering him every return of true duty and attachment in their power; and thefe alone are the principles that reftrain the city of London from prefuming to prefent to him, as true, profeffions tending to the praife of fome men, who are known to be undeferving of them. If it had been foretold in the year 1715 or 1745, that abettors of rebellion in favour of a popish

X 3

popish pretender, against the illuftrious princes, who then wielded the fceptre of these kingdoms, fhould in a few years become favoured, and even promoted, by thofe entrusted with the adminiftration of government under any of their fucceffors; would not the future completion of fuch a prediction have been looked upon as one of the greatest evils that could befal any prince inheriting the British throne on revolution principles? principles, which, from nature and from education, have ever been exploded by, and are incompatible with, the political creed of every adherent to the house of Stuart. For how can fuch adherents reconcile their pretended attachment to his prefent majefty, with thofe notions of the hereditary, indefeafible right of kings, which have ever been cherifhed by them, even to fuch a degree as to induce them to countenance the banners of rebellion against the predeceffors of a prince, who holds his power contrary to the sentiments which they have always difcovered, and for whom, therefore, it is impoffible (according to their known principles), they can entertain a true attachment. Can the Ethiopian change his fkin? no, but he may difcolour it. For what end fhould he do the latter; but that thereby he may the more effectually attain the primary object of his purfuit? Would not any of thefe men pretend it an high affront to their honour; should any one impute it to them that they were time-fervers, and did not act from principle? certainly they would. Every one knows what were their principles in the year 1745; let it be fhewn then, by what miraculous power thofe principles have been fo fuddenly altered as to fit them for public ftations in the year 1763, for which they proved themselves fo very unfit at the former period. But if for the fcourge of thefe kingdoms, men of principles fo alarming to its fecurity, fhould at any future time be found poffeffed

of the means to approach the throne, fhould artfully join with others, who may be fo far intoxicated with the luft of power, and the means of gratifying it, as even to facrifice to their own boundlefs ambition the popularity of an amiable fovereign, who by their artful united endeavours might be deprived of the council of his true and natural friends, driven, perhaps from his prefence, for refufing to concur in deceiving him, I fay, fhould this kingdom ever happen to fall into circumftances fo alarming, who that was really zealous for its welfare, the happiness of his prince, and that of pofterity, would not refufe to concur in any attempt that fuch minifters might fet on foot for their own convenience, and to conceal from their mafter the knowledge of his danger? If ever fuch an occafion should be offered of teftifying true affection and loyalty from a fubject to a fovereign, bis will certainly be the greateft, not who does join in a fpecious addrefs, to continue an impofition on his prince; but his who takes the best means in his power to convey the knowledge of truth to the throne. And this the common council of London, in fuch circumftances, would not have it more effectually in their power to perform, than by obferving a filence in refpect to meafures which they could not confcientioully commend.

Thefe are the fuggeftions of common sense and common honesty, as they appear to the apprehenfion of a private individual, who' neither is, nor defires to be known by, or connected with, the great; but who is a firm friend to that glorious revolution, to which we are indebted for the bleffings derived from the fucceffion of the illuftrious houfe of Hanover to the throne of these kingdoms, who is zealous for the continuance of those bleffings to our latest pofterity; but who firmly believes they must either be continued to us upon the fame prin

X 4

principles as those by which they were at first introduced, or that they will not, they cannot in the nature of things, be long continued to us at all. PRO REGE ET PRO PATRIA.

Detection of falfities propagated by the ministerial

CON

writers.

YONSIDERING how many lies are vented every week by the hawkers of the ministry, it is surprising that they cannot treat the public with fome variety. The town begins to regret the Auditor and Briton, who, if they furpaffed all fcriblers in impudence and infamy, at leaft put as much novelty into their papers, as they did into matters of fact. They not only invented, but invented fresh and fresh. The prefent fet are errant cheats, and make the minifters pay for thefame lies over and over again. The lie moft in vogue with them, is an approaching coalition of parties: an event they and their masters want, and doubtlefs wish to fee, but as far from happening, as any good to this country, while its affairs are in fuch incapable hands.

Few words will fhew the impoffibility of fuch a coalition. Can men, who have faved their coun→ try and raised its reputation to a height unknown in ftory, coalefce with those who have facrificed all this glory, have restored our conquests to the fame afpiring and encroaching enemy, and who have given back fo much of what was purchafed by the blood of the valiant, and the treasures of the impoverifhed? Can they, who reduced France to fue for peace, unite with thofe who have begged peace of France? Can they, who fent back Buffy with fcorn, when he dared to prefent a bullying memorial from Spain, unite with those who would even then have temporised, who have declared for peace on any terms, and who have accepted terms, that

are

1

are only to be matched by thofe accepted at Utrecht ?

- Can great lords, who have been threatened that the peerage fhould be humbled, who have been treated with infults never practiced towards Jacobites and rebels, who have feen their own and the fervices of their ancestors forgotten, who have been affronted by a mushroom favourite, of neither English birth nor English abilities; can they unite with that favourite, who began the winter with arrogance, and closed it with pufillanimity, and who, having laid a plan for oppreffing this country, had almost accomplished his purpose, but being feized with a panick, ran away from his own victory? Or can they unite with men, who condefcend to act as deputies for the favourite, and who, for running his risk, are paid with fine-cures and double fine-cures for themselves and for every mafter and mifs of their generation?

Can men, who, for the fake of their country, their confcience, and their honour, have fhewn that they would facrifice their intereft, renounce their places, and incur perfecution, be fo volatile and profligate as in fix months to join with the plunderers and perfecutors of their countrymen? Has this oppofition forgot the infamy that attended a celebrated earl when he fold his party, and stipulated for a few places for his own dependents?

The oppofition is formed of men of the first characters, of the most exalted abilities, of the highest birth, of the moft unquestionable morals. With whom is it propofed they fhould unite? With peace-brokers, money-jobbers, gamesters, with the favourite's fubftitutes, Scotch poets, and outlawed Jacobites; with the tools that L-d H-left in place, or the tools that left his 1-d-p in the lurch?

The