The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1822-10-05 00:00:00

themselves t• secure its important advantages.
They will either by one mighty effort beat down
every obstacle that opposes its progress, or by the
acceptance of successive compromise., rear up the
sacred fabric of freedom on perhaps • more tolid
and permanent foundation. This would be the in-
evitable progress of tuitions if each were left to
itself. It is not, however, to be thus left. Esch
nation has permitted the creation within itself of an
organised force, for the purpose of maintaining inter-
nal tranquillity, and of resisting foreign aggression.
This force in every ci-untry is necessarily in the
hands of the rulers. In every country this
force is separated as much as possible from the
MIMIC of the community ; an esprit de turps is im-
planted in it, and every means is employed to de-
tach its interests and feelings from thoseaf its fellow-
subjects. The lesgue of Sovereigns professedly sets
the whole organised military force of Europe in op-
position to the efforts of any separate people who
may attempt to improve the political institutions of
their cottony. It is iii all cases probable, that,
whenever any great and general change takes place
in the character and feelings of ■ nation, the sol-
diery will partake in the influence of such change,
acid it thence follows that native troops do not
afford to Sovereigns any thing like a secure gua-
nuitee fur the unmitigated permanence of their sway.
This danger and inconvenience it is attempted to ob-
elate by an alliance amongst Sovereigns, engaging
them reciprocally to become borrowers or lenders of
military force, as the maintenance of established
authority in any of their States may require. Na-
ples and Piedmont have already been coerced or
overawed into subjection by the legions of Austria
and Russia. The infant liberties of Spain and
Poi-togal are threatened from the same quarter.
The Bourbons find courage for incessant encroach-
ments on the chartered rights of their subjects, secure
that the whole collected army of Europe, which
placed them on their throne, is still ready at their
beck. Even in England it is not quite certain that
the enemies of Reform would be so peremptory in
their language, or sneer with such tranquil audacity
at the arguments in its favour, if Government had
no other dependance than on the respect and affec-
tion of subjects.
Europe is evidently in a new state—a state so
entirely changed, indeed, as it regards the relations
of nation and nation, and of Sovereign and subject,
as to demand • revision of the oldest and best-esta-
blished maxims of social and political morality, and
I perhaps • modification of some feelings which have
been hitherto deemed most natural to the heart of
man. Loyalty and patriotism, if not altogether
erased f►om the catalogue of moral virtues, are
evidently,ln this new state of things, forced down in
the scale of morality t• • point, comparatively low.
An antagonist principle is set in motion. Whilst
nations were left to the undisturbed management
of their own affair., and governments sought no
other protection than the good will of their sub-
jeets, loyalty and patriotism were compatible with
the most extended philanthropy, tend the most ar-
dent love of freedom. But is it fur • moment to
be imagined, that the nations of the earth, when
they behold their rulers leagued together for the
suppression of freedom, should not feel • common
sympathy fur its support, and that, feeling them-
selves linked together by one common interest, they
should not forget the boundaries which separate
them, and the varieties of language and habits by
which they are distinguished? Cun loyalty remain
an active principle in the mind of • nation wipes it
beholds its Sovereign proclaim his total want of
confidence in it for the protection of his authority ?
These are questions which it behoves the S igns
of Europe deeply to consider. T. B.