The Statesman.
London, England, 1813-09-13 00:00:00

opritem.4._ • _
THE INVASION OF

•
110 THE EDITOR OF THE
Sll,—More letters than one
your Paper for the avowed purpose
Nation the. project of invading
restore the house of Bounuom to .
last of these letters has been accomua
lice, in which you inform your
though you do not approve tin
letter, yet you
.have given them
regard for the personal tespectal
and his successful labours in 60
—Far be it from me to detract tl
from your commendation, in eitl
same time I must remark, that
personal good qualities, or Mem
thing; and an esteem for his opi,
merit of all public measures depen,

tice and expediency, not upon
virtues of him who proposes them. If I conceive
that any project publicly offered to the considera-
tion of the nation at large is either unjust or impoli-
tic, it my duty to oppose it, though R should be
Advanced by my own brother ; and if, on the con-
trary, ;my expedient beneficial to the state should
proceed from my greatest enemy, ,I ought to over-
look our private difference on suck an occasion.—
These are my sentiments respecting public measures,
and consequently I shall form my opinion on this
project of Ilonrbon Restoration from its own intrin-
sic merits, without any regard to the origin whence

it comes;
. I have often Wand when travelling, that I was
better able to judge of a country when I bad passed
it and looked back upon it, than when I was in the.
middle of it. I will now do the same, and turn back
Icy eyes to this measure, as it appeared twenty years
ago. Tie principal fi.are in the retrospect is the
Duke of BRUNSWICK entering Champaigne, at the
head of the Allied Army, with tire aild sword, and
threatening the people with nothing less than exter-
mination, if they did not immediately restore the
then Representative of the House of Bounnex to
all the despotic power that had been enjoyed by. his
ancestors : was this conduct in the Allies against the
French jolt ? Was it politic ? If it was neither con-
sistent with justice and good policy then, why should
it be so nos? These are the questions I shall attempt
to answer.

To the first question. I answer, that the attempt to
restore LOUIS to absolute power was not just, for
several reasons, and particularly because such a
power in him was not a right, hut an usurpation. If
a man loses a flock of sheep, he may pursue them,
assert his right in them, pass it to his heirs, for they
are his property ; but which way did the Bowman*
-acquire a property in the French •people? It was
said t,- be derived from inheritance;—but who begin
? Was not he an usurper ? The French people.
were originally free ; as free as the English ever were.
How did they lose that freedom? It fell a sacrifice
to the fraud and force of their Kings. Well, then,
here is usurpation beyond the possibility of question.
"What sass BAILEY'S Dictionary, what JoHNsON'S?
They tell us, that an usurper is one who possesses
himself by fraud, or force, of the right, or property,
of another. This is what the Kings of France did
towards their people; and, therefore, they were
usurpers. Louis XVI. himself was an usurper, till
the time of the Constitution, when he received from
his people a legitimate authority ; but this he would
not submit to govern by,—he broke his oath, and
forfeited his lawful right: and let it be remembered,
that it was to supersede this lawful Kingship, and
make him again just such an usurper as he had been,
that the Allies entered France with fire and
sword, and set the Jacobins an example of butchery
and cruelty which they followed but too successfully.
Saint AUGUSTINE, discoursing on the principles of
public justice, lays it down► as a maxim, that the
only lawful government is by consent of the people;
and there are passages in the Bible confirming this,
doct►ine. Reason, as well as authority, must cou.l
'since us, that it teas a most unjust and cruel thing to'
resort to war, and bloodshed, and desolation, for
the purpose of forcing the French people to submit,
again to lawless power, after having regained their
original liberty. It was its us a much greater offence
than in other Governments, because the principles
of Saint ACGUSTINE are those of the English Con.
stitution ; we, in England, acknowledge no power
as lawful that does not proceed from the people;
and yet our servile jackals of Ministers joined
in many a coalition to force upon France a
lawless and unlimited power, against the consent of
the people. FOIITESCUE says, that a Kiug of Eng-
land " is ordained for the defence of the law of his
subjects, and of their bodies and goods, whereunto
he receiveth power of his People, so that he cannot
govern his people by any other power." Ilere is
essence of • Cons''