at these rencounters. I do not believe that a gentleman of New-England could be persuaded to be present at such a scene by any inducement whatever, unless to perform his duty as a magistrate in committing and punishing such disturbers of society.

66

Dr. Paley observes, When the state relies for its defence on a militia, it is necessary, that arms be put into the hands of the people at large;" and mentions, that upon this plan a great proportion of the inhabitants must ultimately be instructed in the use of them. He then subjoins, "Now what effects upon the civil condition of the country may be looked for from this general diffusion of the military character, becomes an inquiry of great importance and delicacy. Nothing, perhaps, can govern a nation of armed citizens, but that which governs an army-despotism. The country would be liable to what is even worse than a settled or constitutional despotism; to perpetual rebellions, and perpetual revolutions, to short and violent usurpations," &c.

The people of New-England have always had, and have by law always been required to have, arms in their hands. Every man is, or ought to be, in the possession of a musket. The great body of our citizens, also, are trained with a good degree of skill and success to military discipline. Yet I know not a single instance, in which arms have been the instruments of carrying on a private quarrel. Nor do I believe, that such a subject is even thought of by one person in fifty thousand, so often as once in twelve months; I believe I might say with truth, so much as once during life. On a country, more peaceful and quiet, it is presumed, the sun never shone. I must, however, acknowledge that there have been, since the settlement of this country, several mobs, and two or three more serious commotions. In Connecticut, the government, whether of the colony or the state, has never met with a single serious attempt at resistance to the execution of its laws. That of Massachusetts was for some time opposed during the latter part of the revolutionary war, and the three years which followed the peace. Several mobs assembled at different times, composed of people from various parts of the county of Hampshire. The first of them were employed in resisting the British government; the rest rose in opposition

to that of the state. Their last effort was in the proper sense an insurrection; and that which immediately preceded it, deserved substantially the same name. In the last, the insurgents, amounting to several hundreds, attempted to take possession of the public arsenal at Springfield; but were dispersed by General Shepard, with the loss of two or three of their number. Some of the ring-leaders were afterwards taken, tried, and sentenced to suffer death; but were pardoned. The cause of these disturbances was the hard pressure of poverty, produced by the ruin of the continental currency, the want of a circulating medium, and a general train of difficulties following from these, and enhanced by a taxation, severe in the amount, and distressing in the mode. The period was also that, in which the former government was annihilated, and the new one imperfectly established. In all these inroads upon good order, detestable as mobs are, not a person lost his life, except those just mentioned.

In New-England, horse-racing is almost, and cock-fighting absolutely unknown. I need not remind you to what a degree these barbarous and profligate sports prevail in Great Britain. In New-England there never was such a thing as a bull-baiting. Suffer me to recal to your remembrance the debates, not long since held in the British parliament on this subject, the decision of that august body, and the speech delivered at that time by the Hon. Mr. Windham.

Our laws provide effectually for the comfortable maintenance of all the poor, who are inhabitants; and, so long as they are with us, of poor strangers, in what country soever they are born; and, when they are sick, supply them with physicians, nurses, and medicines.

The children of the poor are furnished with education and apprenticeships, at the public expense. There is not a country on Earth, where the provision for the wants and sufferings of the poor is so effectual as in New-England. The number of these people is, I acknowledge, very small; and our contributions to their relief are of course small, compared with those in England. At the same time they are abundantly sufficient for their comfortable support. The facts, that the object itself is so limited, that it is distributed into so many hands, that these have no interest in stinting the public

charity, except what is involved in the nature of things, that they are responsible for all their conduct, and that their accounts are regularly laid before the respective town-meetings, or in the instances where this is not done may at any time be called before the public eye, secure a just application of the public bounty, in a degree, which I think it must be impossible to reach in England.

The private charities of New-England are certainly liberal; inferior, I acknowledge, to those in Great Britain, but superior to those of every other country. Our ancestors brought with them not a small portion of the liberal British spirit. The missionary societies, established here, are a strong proof of the position. In this excellence of character the inhabitants of the eastern coast of Massachusetts stand at the head of their countrymen. But the same spirit spreads honourably through our country.

A poor debtor, confined in prison, may, upon surrendering his property above the value of five pounds, always be discharged, unless the creditor will be at the expense of the maintenance allowed him by law; and this is so considerable, that scarcely an instance of such a nature occurs. Indeed public opinion is so hostile to this inhumanity, that few men have sufficient hardihood to look it in the face. There is, perhaps, no country in the world, where public opinion has equal influence. When one man injures another in such a manner, as that the injury, elsewhere, would create a duel; the injurious person is, ordinarily, sufficiently punished by the general discountenance. The knowledge of this more effectually prevents injuries here, than duelling has ever done elsewhere.

I am, Sir, &c.

LETTER VI.

Various Traits of Character of the People of New-England, compared with similar Traits of the Inhabitants of Great Britain. Difficulties found by Englishmen in judging of the Character and Circumstances of the People of this Country.

DEAR SIR;

IN the early part of this work I observed, that every man in New-England, almost without an exception, lives on his own ground, and that the lands are universally holden in fee simple, and by law descend to the children in equal shares. Elsewhere I have observed also, that every freeman is eligible to any office; and that a great proportion of them actually hold public 'offices at some time or other of their lives. The spirit of independence, naturally resulting from these facts, and from the ample means of subsistence generally furnished by the former of them, you will easily believe, constitutes a distinguishing trait in the character of its inhabitants. This spirit is cherished by the frequency, with which the opportunities of exercising the privilege of election occur. All officers of the parish, town, or state, are elected annually; with the single exception, that in Connecticut the representatives to the legislature are elected semi-annually*. Nations, possessed of civil liberty, have ever thought it wise to cultivate this spirit. In Great Britain particularly, it has been the perpetual boast of her citizens. In the opinion of other nations, your countrymen have carried it beyond the bounds, which reason can justify; and have rendered themselves less amiable, and less acceptable, than from their solid, sturdy virtues might be wished. That you may not

* Under the new constitution, representatives are elected but once a year.-Pub.

think me as destitute of candour and liberality as I think the men whose opinions I have combated, I will subjoin the following testimony from one of the most admired of your modern poets.

I see the lords of human kind pass by,

Pride in their port, defiance in their eye;
Intent on high designs; a thoughtful band,
By forms unfashion'd, fresh from nature's hand;
Fierce in their native hardiness of soul;

True to imagin'd right; above control;

While e'en the peasant boasts these rights to scan,
And learns to venerate himself as man.

Thine, freedom, thine the blessings pictur'd here;
Thine are those charms, that dazzle and endear:
Too blest indeed were such without alloy;
But, foster'd e'en by freedom, ills annoy.
That independence Britons prize too high,
Keeps man from man, and breaks the social tie;
The self-dependent lordlings stand alone,
All claims that bind and sweeten life unknown.
Here, by the bonds of nature feebly held,
Minds combat minds, repelling and repell'd;
Ferments arise, imprison'd factions roar;
Repress'd ambition struggles round her shore;
Till, over-wrought, the general system feels
Its motion stop, or frenzy fires the wheels.
Nor this the worst*.

It is unnecessary to comment on this picture, as well as on the lines, which immediately follow. Allowing it to be just, it exhibits more of a trace of savage character than every thing of which I have been a witness among my own countrymen. We are styled proud, haughty, insolent republicans. Among your literary people the republican days of Rome and of Greece are accounted their best days. Even they, therefore, do not consider a republican government as necessarily injurious to the human character. Yet the Romans and Greeks were both much more haughty than we are; nay, your own countrymen are much more haughty. This I know with certainty, both by the books, and by the conversation of gentlemen from most parts of the continent of Europe. Indeed, you must have seen the names of proud

* Goldsmith's Traveller.