politics, like the general rules of morals, by which he decides every new and doubtful case. The belief that those principles are just, enables him to withstand the seductions of interest, and the ingenuity of projects: his conduct acquires somewhat of the firmness of integrity and wisdom.

The union of many in the same views enables the party to carry measures which would not otherwise gain attention. There is many a proposition eminently useful, yet not calculated to catch popular favour, which by the stout and strong working of a party at length becomes law. The waggon arrives at last at its destination; but a loose horse will probably return to the place from which he

set out.

The greatest benefit of all that is conferred by party is, perhaps, that it embodies the various opinions of the nation for the time being. Those opinions are at times so violent, that had they not a vent in Parliament they would break the machine to pieces. Happily the people, when they overturned Sir Robert Walpole, placed confidence (a confidence little justified,

perhaps) in his opponents; and when Lord North appeared to have ruined every thing, the nation looked for safety to Lord Rockingham and Mr. Fox. There may be a revolution in this country; but it is hardly possible that the country should not first try what may be done by a change of counsels. The change, indeed, may be too late to be effectual.

In reckoning up the bad effects of party, I have not spoken of the animosities and violent contentions it produces. Mock philosophers, sentimental women, and effeminate men, are always making lamentations over political divisions, and contested elections.

Men of noble minds know that they are the workshop of national liberty, and national prosperity.

It is from the heat and hammering of the stithy that freedom receives its form, its temper, and its strength.

Let us now proceed to the history of the two parties from the Revolution to the reign of George I.

We have seen that the Whigs refused to grant King William a permanent income that might

render him independent of his people; and he dissolved the Parliament in 1690 with some disgust. The next House of Commons was a Tory one; and Sir John Trevor, a violent Tory, was made First Commissioner of the Treasury. He undertook to distribute bribes in such a manner as to secure the votes of the majority; being the first systematic corruption after the Revolution. Trevor was afterwards punished for bribery in a question relating to the Orphans Bill. There arose at this time a violent struggle between the Whigs and Tories for the favour of the King, and the confidence of the people. The dismissal of Monmouth and Warrington attested and established the success of the Tories. They were supported by the small proprietors of land and the gentry of the country, who feared a bias to innovation on the part of the Whigs both in politics and religion. On the other hand, the Whigs were esteemed by the people as having been the original opposers of arbitrary power, and had the credit, as well as the responsibility, of the new settlement. In order to support it, they came forward with their wealth in a time of embarrassment,

and also prevailed upon their friends in the city, which was then, as in former times, a stronghold of liberty, to lend largely to the Government. By these means, the Whigs attached men of great wealth to the establishment, and distinguished themselves to their advantage from the Tories, who were unwilling, or unable, to advance considerable sums. Hence the King, who had placed his confidence in Ranelagh, Rochester, and Seymour, afterwards discovered an inclination to trust the Whigs, placed Somers and Shrewsbury in high situations, and gave his tardy consent to the Triennial Bill. After the peace of Riswick, the Whigs defended the maintaining of the Dutch Guards, in which perhaps they were right, though the line they took exposed them to much popular odium. The defeat of this favourite wish of our deliverer is a proof how extremely weak the royal authority was at this period. It would not be so easy perhaps to defend the Whig party in their transactions respecting a new East India Company. Still less can they escape blame for having suffered in silence the conclusion of the treaty of partition. By this treaty, William

imprudently trusted himself to the faith of the French King, and unwarrantably disposed of the whole of the Spanish monarchy during the life of the reigning sovereign. The partition, thus previously arranged, at once provoked the Spaniards and enraged the Emperor. It was rash in policy, unfounded in justice, and impracticable in execution. With arms thus imprudently furnished by their adversaries, the country party violently attacked the Whigs in the House of Commons: Orford and Somers were removed and disgraced: a Tory ministry was established, and was the last of King William.

Queen Anne came to the throne with violent prejudices in favour of Tory politics, both in church and state, and severe bills against occasional conformity were received with applause by a House of Commons composed chiefly of that party. But the natural inclinations of the Queen yielded to the advice of Marlborough, who, though himself a Tory, became convinced that Lord Rochester would not actively support the war, and that the Whigs alone