Such I have presumed to suppose, would be the
ai^ument upon this question between a man of plain
sense, and a professor of, what is called, liberal
principles. The plain man, you see, is as great a
supporter as the other of the natural right of resist-
ance against a case of oppression sufficient to call for



itrG HISTORICAL ESSAY. SECT. II,

it, when it happens; but he does not entangle it, like
Mackintosh, by laying down beforehand what causes
are to justify this resistance; still less the outrageous
doctrine of a reformatory revolt, or the right to de-
mand securities beyond the existing constitution, at
the pleasure of the governed. The plain man, too,
lays aside all sophistical notions of the inherent,
never dying, inalienable, and unalterable right of
sovereignty in the people, which he thinks does not
exist; and, which if it did, would, and under bold
and visionary or wicked men, does involve us in
consequences destructive of all security.
The dangerous effects which may flow from this
doctrine are so well drawn out and displayed by, in
my opinion, the wisest intellect of his time, that I
think I shall do well in reproducing it upon this
occasion. It is Burke who will speak.
