acknowledges as Sovereign, fhall be, ipfo facto, Sovereign of Ireland. Now this fingle point would have been quite fufficient for a unity of power and strength, if to the office of King all thofe prerogatives had continued annexed, which were annexed to it by the old Constitution; for by that Conftitution the land proprietors of both kingdoms were bound to military fervices equally, as well as the merchants of both kingdoms equally, in regard to the revenue from customs, at the fole will of the King. I fay, therefore, that according to the old Conftitution, the united ftrength of both kingdoms was effectually bound together, by the fingle fundamental principle of acknowledging the fame King with the fame prerogatives; but, according to the prefent political frame in each island, the acknowledgment of that point alone leaves the fundamental part of the Conftitution of both kingdoms incomplete; for the regulation of the defence of a State is fundamental to every constitution. To complete the conftitutional connection between Great Britain and Ireland, therefore, 'tis not enough for both islands to have the fame King, and the fame freedom of commerce; but it is alfo neceffary to have the fame common principle of general defence,' to be put in action by the fame fuperintending and directing power. The regulation of the defence of a state is as fundamental to every constitution, as the defence itfelf; for a force without direction is no force. The conftitutional principle for the people of Great Britain and Ireland to rally to, is, that the force of the two kingdoms ought to be brought to one point, that their political power ought to be made one, by one fixed fundamental law, and the arguments I have already produced prove, that this unity of power would be accomplished in the most conftitutional manner by a land tax. But I mean further to fhew, that fuch a fundamental law of union would be as beneficial to Ireland as it is conftitutional. The state of Ireland to this moment, when compared to the natural fertility of her lands, the numbers of her people, and the richness of her furrounding feas, is far from being fo profperous as might be expected. This unprofperous state of Ireland has been generally attributed to the restraints laid, for above an hundred years paft, upon its foreign commerce by English Acts of Parliament; but if the Irish themfelves will take the pains to trace the commercial confequences of thofe reftraints, they will foon be convinced. that they have not obftructed her profperity fo much as is generally believed. That thofe restraints when firft laid on, were grievous and oppreffive, can hardly be doubted; but as the productions of nature are various, and the wants of men are various, active industry when shut out from fome channels of commerce, will in length of time open to itself other channels; which laft may be more profitable to it, than thofe it was excluded from would have been. Thus the farmers in the neighbourhood of Conftantinople, who have been prohibited from planting vines, may have raifed from their lands products that enrich themfelves and their country, more than vineyards are generally found to do; for it has long been remarked in France, that the wine countries are the poorest and leaft profitable. Nearly the fame thing may have happened I 2 in in Ireland in regard to her foreign commerce; for though Great Britain formerly, with great injuftice and impolicy, excluded Ireland from fome channels of foreign trade; yet that her foreign trade of late is become very confiderable, appears from the state of her exports and imports for feveral years paft. Let any one compare the amount of the exports of Ireland, with those of the opuTent kingdom of France, and the foreign trade of the former will be found to equal that of the latter, if not to exceed it, taking the extent and population of both countries into confideration. Nothing therefore deferves more to be ranked among vulgar errors, than the opinion, which attributes the prefent unprofperous state of Ireland, and the general poverty of its inhabitants, to their late limited foreign trade. Such an opinion is worthy of the fhallow politician Swift; but the very judicious and truly patriotic Doctor Berkley, bishop of Cloyne, formed conclufions quite different, even on the fuppofition that Ireland were wholly restrained from all foreign trade, making it one of his queries, whether Ireland might not be profperous and happy, though it were furrounded with a wall of brass forty feet high ?" To the arguments urged by our author in proof of the beneficial effects of a land-tax in Ireland, he adds an obfervation to fhew that exclufive of its other advantages to Irefand, fuch a tax would directly fave to that kingdom 100,000l. As it is computed that a million of the land rents of Ireland are fpent in Great Britain, an Irish land tax of a real two fhillings in the pound, or one-tenth, equally affecting all those rents, would confequently deduct from this exported million, one-tenth, or 100,000l. This would be a real gain to Ireland, and a much fairer way of taxing the abfentees, than by fingling their rents out alone as an object of taxation; for in fact, though it would be much for the local benefit of their eftates, that land poffeffors fhould live pon them, yet, while they live within the dominions of the fame Sovereign, they cannot properly be called abfentees; otherwise Scotland, Northumberland, Yorkshire, Devonshire, Cornwall, &c. would have as much reafon to complain of abfentees as Ireland. A free government avoids putting too much regulation into its adminiftration, and will rather fuffer fome abufes, than enforce, by a direct command, what may feem to be an infringement of perfonal liberty, namely, the reftraining any citizen from refiding or living where he pleafes. Richard II. and fome fubfequent kings endeavoured to drive the Irish land poffeffors from England by a tax of 138. 4d. in the pound of their eftates; and Queen Elizabeth, James I. and Charles I. by different proclamations and profecutions in the Star Chamber, endeavoured to drive the English country gentlemen from London to refide in their feveral counties; but the modern fpirit of the British government is very different, and would rather that the public fhould fuffer fome detriment, than that the individual fhould fuffer what he might think oppreffive. The real abfentee is he who lives out of the dominion of his Sovereign, upon a revenue drawn from that dominion; and, for more than than a financial reafon, a wife government ought, by penalties, to difcourage all fuch abfentees. While all Italy formed one State under the dominion of Rome, it was indifferent to government whether a Ligurian lived in Calabria, or a Calabrian in Liguria; but fince Genoa and Naples form two different States, the cafe is altered; and within thefe fifty years the government of Naples have compelled thofe Genoefe, who held eftates within the Neapolitan dominions, either to fell their lands, or to refide.' The matters contained in this ingenious publication deferve the public attention; and it deferves to be observed, that the author has in general expreffed himself with distinctness and precifion. ART. XIV. Fugitive Pieces. 2s. 6d. Dilly. THESE mifcellaneous pieces, confifting of verses, criticifms, dialogues, and lamentations, were written, the author tells us, at a very early age, and will therefore, he hopes, escape the frown of cenfure, and the lash of severity. When a very young writer, in all the fervour of partiality for his own productions, hurries them into public notice, great allowance ought to be made for the errors of inexpeFience. The fame indulgence, however, cannot be juftly claimed, where the crude efforts and obfervations of youth are thought by maturer age worthy of inftructing and entertaining the world. Where this is the cafe, we cannot help concluding that the author has increased in years, but not in wifdom; and that therefore his productions though written ever fo long before, are the proper teft of his abilities at the time of their publication. Of the poetry in this collection we shall only observe, that' it is of that infipid kind, which neither calls for cenfure nor applaufe. The critical papers we fhall think worthy of a more minute inveftigation; as in them the opinions and talents of fome writers of reputation are called in queftion. Dr. Warton is accufed of plagiarifm in the following paffage of his Ode to Fancy. 'O! Nymph with loosely flowing hair, Thy waist with myrtle girdle bound, Thy brows with Indian feather's crown'd,' Our author refers us to Spencer, Canto 12, B. 3. where Britomarte redeems Amoret, and fees Fancy in the inchant ed chamber: "His garment neither was of filk nor fay, Their tawny bodies in their proudest plight, &c." I 3 Why Why Dr. Warton fhould not have thought of adorning his nymph with Indian feathers without being ob liged to this paffage for it, is beyond our comprehenfion. If fuch diftant refemblances be thought fufficient to conftitute a charge of plagiarifm, no poet would ever be able to eftablish any claim to originality. The laft line of the following paffage from Pope, Dr. Warton has objected to, and our author thinks very unjustly. And fcarce are feen the proftrate Nile or Rhine : A fmall Euphrates thro' the piece is roll❜d And little eagles wave their wings in gold.' "The circumftance in the last line is puerile and little." Warton on Pope, Vol. II. p. 268. "Surely this obfervation," fays our author, "can hardly be juft: the circumftance inftead of being puerile and little, feems rather rich and poetical; it likewife fomewhat_contradicts his commendation of a paffage, quoted Vol. I. p. 25. of a fimilar nature, and which is there faid to be finely imagined: The figur'd fireams in waves of filver roll'd, And on their banks Augufia roje in gold." Our author feems to have forgot, that the epithet little was the chief caufe of Dr. Warton's paffing a cenfure upon the former paffage. The bird of Jove naturally excites a grand and majeftic idea, which being checked by fuch a di-. minutive reprefentation becomes trivial and unpleafing. No fuch defect can be attributed to the latter paffage; which, in our opinion, is exceedingly beautiful. "Lord Chesterfield," fays this writer," in some easy verfes addreffed to a Lady, has this falfe, though pretty thought: "The dews of the evening induftrioufly fhun, They're the tears of the fly for the lofs of the fun." "This blunder feems to have originated from two causes; in the first place from his lordship's ignorance of the nature of dews, which are exhalations from the earth and afcend and in the fecond, from his having probably by.accident, feen an ode of Renat Rapin, who calls the Grasshopper "Cæli caducis ebria fletibus.' "The claffical and learned part of Lord Chesterfield's character," continues our author, "when brought to the teft, ftands but upon a fimilar foundation with his morality; and the cenfure he has ventured to brand the Greek epigrams with will ever fummon up the indignation of every fcholar; he certainly either was unable to conftrue them, or, if he could, had not sufficient tafte to enjoy them. He was a man of the world, elegant, fuperficial, and debauched; his learning had little folidity, and his morals lefs principle." Who, upon hearing a decifion urged with fuch an air of confequence, would not rather doubt his own opinion, than fuppofe that fuch a dictatorial writer could be mistaken? We reviewers, however, who by profeffion are obliged to examine a little into affertions before we admit them to be valid, find that boldnefs is not always the teft of truth. In the prefent inftance, an elegant writer is accused of a falfe thought, which in reality is as confiftent with true philofophy as it is expreffed with grace and beauty, That the dews fall in the evening, from the air not being able to retain that water in folution with it, which by the fun's affiftance it attracted in the day time, is a truth of which any one who pretends to the fmalleft knowledge in natural philofophy is fully convinced. The author of this couplet, therefore, we may conclude, was indebted not to an ode of Renat Rapin, but to nature herfelf for his beautiful idea. As to the other cenfure which this writer deals out fo liberally against him, we will venture to foretell that the wit, acumen, and elegance of a Chesterfield will be remembered, when the malevolent enemies of his fame, of a much higher order than the critic before us, will be neglected and forgotten. We fhall conclude this article by obferving, that though the author has difcovered ignorance and want of judgment in many of his critical decifions; there are fome inftances in which he has fhewn tafte and ingenuity. He would not have failed fo frequently if he had placed lefs confidence in his own abilities. ART. XV. Obfervations on the Importance of the American Revo lution, and the Means of making it a Benefit to the World. To which is added, a Letter from M. Turgot, late ComptrollerGeneral of the Finances of France: With an Appendix containing a Tranflation of the Will of M. Fortune Richard Cately, published in France. By Richard Price, D. D. L. L. D. and Fellow of the Royal Society of London, and of the Academy of Arts and Sciences in New-England. 8vo. 2s. 6d. London. Cadel. FE EW men poffefs happier talents and difpofitions than the author of thefe obfervations, who to a genius metaphyfical and profound adds the benevolent and enlarged views of a citizen of the world, bursting the narrow bounds of the amor patriæ, fo much extolled, but in truth a contracted paffion, and concerned for the dignity and the happiness of human nature. That philofophical acumen which I 4 has |