What a dreadful thing is a ftanding army, for the conduct of the whole or any part of which, no man is refponfible! In the present state of the French crown army, is the crown refponsible for the whole of it? Is there any general who can be responsible for the obedience of a brigade? Any, colonel for that of a regiment? Any captain for that of a company? And as to the municipal army, reinforced as it is by the new citizen-deferters, under whofe command are they? Have we not feen them, not led by, but dragging their nominal commander with a rope about his neck, when they, or those whom they accompanied, proceeded to the most atrocious acts of treafon and murder? Are any of these armies? Are any of these citizens?

We have in fuch a difficulty as that of fitting a ftanding army to the ftate, he conceived, done much better. We have not distracted our army by divided principles of obedience. We have put them under a fingle authority, with a fimple (our common) oath of fidelity; and we keep the whole under our annual infpection. This was doing all that could be fafely done.

He felt fome concern that this ftrange thing called a Revolution in France, fhould be compared with the glorious event commonly called the Revolution in England; and the conduct of the foldiery, on that occafion, compared with the behaviour of some of the troops of France in the pre

fent

fent inftance. At that period the Prince of Orange, a prince of the blood royal in England, was called in by the flower of the English ariftocracy to defend its antient constitution, and not to level all diftinctions. To this prince, fo invited, the aristocratick leaders who commanded the troops went over with their feveral corps, in bodies, to the deliverer of their country. Ariftocratick leaders brought up the corps of citizens who newly enlifted in this cause. Military obedience changed its object; but military difcipline was not for a moment interrupted in its principle. The troops were ready for war, but indifpofed to mutiny.

But as the conduct of the English armies was different, fo was that of the whole English nation at that time. In truth, the circumftances of our revolution (as it is called) and that of France are juft the reverse of each other in almost every particular, and in the whole spirit of the tranfaction. With us it was the cafe of a legal monarch attempting arbitrary power-in France it is the cafe of an arbitrary monarch, beginning, from whatever caufe, to legalife his authority. The one was to be refifted, the other was to be managed and directed; but in neither cafe was the order of the state to be changed, left government might be ruined, which ought only to be corrected and legalifed. With us we got rid of the man, and preserved the constituent parts of the ftate. There

they get rid of the constituent parts of the ftate, and keep the man. What we did was in truth and substance, and in a constitutional light, a revolution, not made, but prevented. We took folid fecurities; we fettled doubtful questions; we corrected. anomalies in our law. In the ftable fundamental parts of our conftitution we made no revolution; no, nor any alteration at all. We did not impair the monarchy. Perhaps it might be fhewn that we strengthened it very confiderably. The nation kept the fame ranks, the fame orders, the fame privileges, the fame franchises, the fame rules for property, the fame fubordinations, the fame order in the law, in the revenue, and in the magiftracy; the fame lords, the fame commons, the fame corporations, the fame electors.

The church was not impaired. Her eftates, her majefty, her splendour, her orders and gradations continued the fame. She was preferved in her full efficiency, and cleared only of a certain intolerance, which was her weakness and disgrace. The church and the ftate were the fame after the revolution that they were before, but better fecured in every part.

Was little done because a revolution was not made in the constitution? No! Every thing was done; because we commenced with reparation not with ruin. Accordingly the ftate flourished. Inftead of lying as dead, in a fort of trance, or ex

pofed

pofed as fome others, in an epileptick fit, to the pity or derifion of the world, for her wild, ridiculous convulfive movements, impotent to every purpose but that of dashing out her brains against the pavement, Great Britain rose above the ftandard, even of her former felf. An æra of a more improved domestick profperity then commenced, and still continues, not only unimpaired, but growing, under the wafting hand of time. All the energies of the country were awakened. England never preserved a firmer countenance, or a more vigorous arm, to all her enemies, and to all her rivals. Europe under her respired and revived. Every where she appeared as the protector, affertor, or avenger of liberty. A war was made and supported against fortune itself. The treaty of Ryfwick, which first limited the power of France, was foon after made: the grand alliance very fhortly followed, which shook to the foundations the dreadful power which menaced the independence of mankind. The ftates of Europe lay happy under the shade of a great and free monarchy, which knew how to be great without endangering its own peace at home, or the internal or external peace of any of its neighbours.

Mr. Burke faid he fhould have felt very unpleafantly if he had not delivered these fentiments. He was near the end of his natural, probably ftill nearer the end of his political career; that he

was weak and weary; and wished for reft. That he was little disposed to controversies, or what is called a detailed oppofition. That at his time of life, if he could not do fomething by fome fort of weight of opinion, natural or acquired, it was ufelefs and indecorous to attempt any thing by mere ftruggle. Turpe fenex miles. That he had for that reafon little attended the army business, or that of the revenue, or almoft any other matter of detail for fome years paft. That he had, however, his task. He was far from condemning fuch oppofition; on the contrary, he most highly applauded it, where a juft occafion exifted for it, and gentlemen had vigour and capacity to pursue it. Where a great occafion occurred, he was, and while he continued in parliament, would be amongst the most active and the moft earneft, as he hoped he had fhewn on a late event. With respect to the conftitution itself, he wifhed few alterations in it. Happy if he left it not the worse for any fhare he had taken in its fervice.

Mr. Fox then rofe, and declared, in fubftance, that fo far as regarded the French army, he went no farther than the general principle, by which that army fhewed itself indifpofed to be an inftrument in the fervitude of their fellow citizens, but did not enter into the particulars of their conduct. He declared, that he did not affect a democracy. That he always thought any of the fimple,