1

which fubfifted in France before the re

volution.

AFTER having given a very favourable account of the ftate of France previous to the late revolution, Mr. Burke fays, • Whether the system, if it deferves such a name, now built on the ruins of that • antient monarchy, will be able to give a • better account of the population and

wealth of the country, which it has • taken under its care, is a matter very • doubtful. Instead of improving by the change, I apprehend, that a long feries of years must be told before it can recover in any degree the effects of this philofophic revolution, and before the ⚫ nation can be replaced on its former foot

ing ". A confiderable scarcity of fpecie may naturally have been occafioned by many of the nobility, and other perfons

3 Reflections on the Revolution in France, p. 196.

of

of opulence, having quitted Paris; and their emigration must also, for the prefent, have been injurious to trade and commerce. But these are temporary evils, which it was not in the power of the National Affembly to prevent, and for which they can deserve no cenfure. It may also be true, that the population of France, upon the whole, may for the present be decreased. But the nation will not eventually be the worfe for being deferted by the friends of defpotism; and there can be no doubt, but that when a free conftitution of government has been for fome time firmly established, the wealth, the population, and the general profperity of the kingdom, will receive a very high degree of augmentation. Unfavourable circumftances might, however, at first naturally be expected; for it could not reasonably be fuppofed, that bleffings of fo ineftima

ble a value, as thofe of civil and religious liberty, could be obtained in such a country as France, without fome inconveniences, fome dangers, and fome facrifices.

Or all the proceedings of the National Affembly of France, nothing feems to have excited fo much indignation in Mr. Burke, as the confifcation of the estates of the church; and he is extremely defirous of perfuading his correfpondent, that the inhabitants of this country in general feel the fame indignation that he does upon the fubject. He affirms of the people of England, that they fee with horror and alarm ⚫ that enormous and shameless act of profcription and he alfo fays, I affure you, that there is not one public man in ⚫ this kingdom, whom you would wish to quote; no not one of any party or defcription, who does not reprobate the

39 Reflections on the Revolution in France, p. 156. • dishonest,

honeft, perfidious, and cruel confifcation, which the National Affembly has ⚫ been compelled to make of that property, which it was their firft duty to • protect 4°.'

I SHOULD be extremely unwilling to believe, that Mr. Burke has advanced what he does not himself suppose to be true; but, I confefs, I can no more believe, that the generality of the people of this country, or the more respectable public men, view the fale of the church lands in France in the fame light that Mr. Burke does, than I could believe an assertion, that the generality of the respectable public men in this country were Mahometans. I am fully convinced, that the greatest part of the people of this country, whether public or private men, have viewed this tranfaction without any horror, and with very little alarm, and

40 Reflections on the Revolution in France, p. 156.

that by many it has been entirely approved. MUCH of Mr. Burke's reasoning, concerning the proceedings of the National Affembly refpecting the lands of the church, is inconclufive, because it is grounded upon a principle that very few perfons will admit befides himself; namely, that the poffeffions of the church were to be confidered in the fame light, and as equally sacred, with private property. But in any country, if large eftates, or incomes, are appropriated to the support of a particular clafs of men in the community, for the discharge of public offices, or for services to be rendered to the community, the interpofition of the government, or legifla ture, in the appropriation or difpofal of fuch eftates, or incomes, or even the feizure, and confifcation of them, has always been confidered as a very different thing from the feizure or confifcation of private

property.