king rapid and steady advancement. Notwithstanding the load of, taxes, and the tedium of war, which now gaul the ncek of Britain, wealth and refinement spread their fostering wings over the favoured mountains of Caledonia. It is only, however, within these 20 years, since about the conclusion of the American war, that these happy times have blessed this northern climate. For some years before that period, Scotland may be said to have made some of these attainments; but, still, however, the mists which had arisen from the bustle of the union, and the heats of the two successive rebellions intercepted the rays of improvement. But now the peasant basks in the sunshine of prosperity and plenty, and the husbandman glories in the improvement of his crops and cattle. The education of the peasantry is one of the principal causes of this.--Every parish has a schoolmaster who can teach at least writing reading and arithmetic. These masters are appointed, and afforded a salary, less than five fine healthy children. You are then placed in the mucle chair, and regaled with butter, cheese, and milk variously prepared for use, the, productions of the excellent cow, which every cottager has, or, if you, please, with the greater refinement of tea collations, all the tokens of hospitality and prosperity. Next, you are charmed wi the alphabetical prattle of the children, while you cannot often but wonder at the philosophically sensible, and even very abstract conversation of the goodmun taking all toge ther one cannot help exclainring in the language of Virgil, "Q! fortunatos nimium, sua si bona norint Agrico as! Quibus, ipsa, procul discordibus "armis, "Fundit humo facilem victum, justissima tellus!" You may be apt to think, Mr. Cobbett, that this picture, drawn by me, is too flatter ing; but, I appeal to any of your Scotch acquaintance who is acquainted with the present real state of his country, it the colour and a free house by the heritors, or landing is brighter than the life. The English holders of the parish; and with this, und their school-fees besides, together with the profits of a few boarders, whom many of them keep, they spend very happy lives. It is the universal practice, without a single exception, for every father of the lowest circumstances to send his children to be educated at the parish school, which he can do very cheaply, the fees being modified by the heritors. The consequence of this is, that every male, and nearly 3-4ths of the females, can at least, read, write, and cast accounts very dexterously. Every Scotchman can read, and actually does read, if possible to excess, that book, which our religion declares to be the standard of truth, and which unprejudiced, even antichristian philosophy must allow to be the most complete, most sound, and, at the same time, simplest system of morality which ever has, or, proba. bly, ever will appear. Every Scotchman can read the history of his country, and while he does so, he is inspired with an indelible regard for the welfare of those liberties and possessions for which his warlike ancestors so long and so bravely fought. When one enters the habitation [whatever it may be called] of a Scotch peasant, `instead of finding those "gardenless, floor"less, and chimneyless cabins," [as you are pleased most erroneously to call them] all to the south of the Tay, one meets with nothing but a neat commodious small house, in many cases consisting of two apartments; there, placed around a heartsome bleezing ingle, one sees the happy master and mistress of the house, with upon an average not coltages may equal, but cannot surpass the greater part of the modern Scotch ones in neatness and convenience; but, it is to te recollected that Scotland is exposed to much greater severity of weather than England, and bas, on that account, so much the more merit. But, now, to make it the more appear, that the education of the lower orders is the principal cause of these things, I must, unwillingly, have recourse to some animad. versions on your reasonings, regarding Mr. Whitbread's bill.-I. cannot, after impartial reflection, but agree with Mr. Whitbread, that poverty arises from vice; and vice is propagated by want of education." You grant the first of these propositions; and I am astonished to see how in any way you can doubt the other, Besides many reasons for a want of education propagating vice, which for want of room I must now supe press; it is very plain, that in a civilised pe riod of society, as we are, unless a habit of mental amusement is acquired, the only en tertainment will consist in animal, and consequently, vicious gratifications, for which there are so many surrounding objects. Now, from this indubitable principle, it manifestly follows, that even the ploughman unless be can read, so as to amuse himself when his work is over, the alehouse will be his resort, where he becomes himself a beggar, and brings his family upon the, poor's roil. You may say, indeed, that his reading will corrupt his principles both moral and politi cal but rely upon it, that his want of edu cation will lead him farther astray. Pimps and demagogues, or, if you please, hireling declaimers, are now too numerous, too anxious, and too successful in deluding ignorance. The peasants time would at least harmlessly be spent in reading [to suppose the worst] the most immoral and factions productions; and, I am fully convinced, would not be in such danger, as if he were left in ignorance, which is the disgrace and the blindfolder of mankind. A taste and a sight of vice before the deceiver comes is the best antidote against it. In the next place, were the peasantry obliged, as is the case in Scotland, to educate their children, the school fees would employ the surplus part of their income, which would otherwise have been squandered in idleness, debauchery, and vice. You reason indeed, [P. R. p. 331] with regard to England, where the poverty of the lower orders has for some years been much augmented, that "pampalets, re"views, magazines, newspapers, &c. have "encreased ten-fold;" and that, therefore, reading, and consequently education, must have also increased. There is, however, a fallacy in this argument. The increase of these publications has not proceeded from the extension of the art of reading, but from some of those who were able to read formerly, reading more than they did; and from others [which is a very numerous class] of those who could read formerly now using these publications, whereas they never thought of them some years ago. But, although you admit [P. R. p. 330] in an abstract point of view, that poverty arises from vice, and that, from a want of education; yet you argue that the poverty of the lower orders of England, proceeds from the "taxing system." In the first place, it is obvious that the taxes are equally severe in proportion upon the English and Scotch peasantry, yet the latter have been thriving, and are actually in the most flourishing state as I have described. To me it would appear that the peasantry are the only order of the community whom the taxes do not affect. The spirit of agriculture and commerce is, notwithstanding all the surrounding disadvantages, at present so brisk that labour is every where sought after. Every labourer, consequently, who chuses to be industrious and economical, may niake a very comfortable livelihood; nor are his profits drained away by the taxes, because his establishment and income are so small that they do not come within the range of the taxing system." With regard to your ideas of the words ig norance and learning, [p. 331] I must beg leave to differ from you. Every man is supposed to be acquainted with that part of the business of life which falls within the sphere of his action. If he knows nothing more, if he is unpossessed of the power of reading and writing, which are the most compendious means of taking a glimpse of the general business of hfe, we correctly term him ignorant. The Californian, or the Otaheitan may be much more dexterous in every one of the acquirements of the most expert ploughman, yet none hesitate to call him both ignorant and savage. I cannot see why our letterless peasants, who might be better, are not much more deserving of these epithets. To me it appears, and I am sure would far less appear to Mr. Whitbread puzzling, to "suggest benefits that the pea santry might derive from an acquaintance "with letters." [p. 332] I have shewn already that it would keep them more sober, both by restraining themselves, and by depriving them of the means of vice in supporting the expence of their childrens education; and I may modestly ask, would it not make them more upright, in enabling them the better to understand those instruc tions which every Sunday the church affords them? With regard to Scotland, I am cer tain this question can be answered in the affirmative. Ignorance [in the sense I use it] has been the constant attendant of slavery and bigotry; and on this account universal education and learning, as it would add to the beauty, so it would also add to the secu rity of the British constitution. Men," as Mr. Whitbread, I think, justly observed, might have risen in life had they been "taught reading and writing." Why, their reading or writing would lead them to the city, [as you think p. 332] it is impossible for me to perceive. A peasant who is con scious that he could neither write a letter to his master, nor keep an account, however skilled he may be in all the arts of husbandry, will have little emulation to improve himself, and far less to rise in life. It requires no great acuteness to observe besides, that the poor ought to be educated solely for the advantage of the army and navy. Our common peasantry supply the British sons of Mars and of Neptune; and when any of these, through real actual merit, are raised in rank, were they able to write and read, they would be capable to command their inferiors, and would add greatly to the glory and strength of the British arms, as tending to abolish that abominable practice of purchasing, which slights merit, and checks every laudable exertion. The education of the poor is an abstract political subject; and must, therefore, be reasoned about on general documents. Your argument, therefore, [p. 334] founded on the particular case of Scotch colonies in America is, if not irrele- "principles and maxims which may contrivant, very feeble. Colonies have often a "bute to the public good, and the prosperity different character from their mother state; "of individuals," which was the maxim of and, what is to be observed, the Scots; at the a politician, whose principles no one can time these colonies alluded to existed, had controvert, and which is humbly recomnot sufficiently reaped the fruits of their plan mended to your attentive and dispassionate of education. I deny that the comparative consideration, by your constant reader and amount of the taxes of England and Scot-well wisher. SCOTO-BRITANNUS. land, is a fair criterion whereby to judge "of their relative ingenuity, industry, and DOMINION OF THE SEAS. 105 18 "enterprise." [p. 335] Besides other obSIR,Upon that most important sub- jections to this criterion, it is a very strong | ject, the Donfinion of the Seas, a corre one; that a great part of the taxes which are spondent has, in the last number of your paid in London, &c. which is the emporium Register, contended, that occupancy, or of Scotland, as well as England, are paid by first possession, confers right" but, it Scotchmen, whose efter prizing genius does not apppear to me, that this proposimakes them resort there for the greater ad- tion is laid down with sufficient precision;" vancement of their trade, which would other- for we are left to conjecture to what it is wise be all levied in Scotland. As a proof that a right is conferred by occupancy, or of the enterprize of my countrymen, it is a first possession. Waving, however, for the well known and undeniable fact, that there present, the consideration of what the subare infinitely more Scotchimen than English- ject of the right may be, the doctrine, it' men in the West Indies, in proportion; and, seems, is, that the right itself may consist I have been told by a learned Doctor, who in occupancy, or in first possession: but, resided a number of years in Hindostan, and Sir, every one must see, that what is in the who is now a member of the Royal Society present occupation, or possession; of one of Edinburgh, that there are actually more man, may have been first possessed by Scotchmen than Englishmen in the East In- another; so that two claimants thus situdies.-The practice, in the North of Scot- ated wonld, upon resorting to your correland, introduced in a great measure by Sir spondent's rule, be, I think, somewhat John Sinclair, [see the Ed. Farmer's Ma- puzzled to discover to which of them the gazine of converting a number of small right would be awarded; although they farms into one large farm, and letting that might exert to the utmost those endow to a South of Scotland farmer, was the cause ments which, according to your correspond. of the emigration of which you have taken ent, are possessed in the same high perfecnotice, [p. 330] as affording a proof of the tion since the fall of Adain as before; that want of industry and ingenuity in the Scotch is to say, "reason to see good from evil, peasantry: but, I think it would be easy to and to do justice and avoid injustice."—~ prove the contrary from this event, because, Presuming, therefore, that occupancy, or to go to a foreign and unknown land, where present possession, which signifies the same houses are to be built, and the land proba-thing, is meant, let us endeavour to ascer bly to be cleared of wood before it can be cultivated for subsistence, atgues more ingenuity, industry, and enterprize than to remain at home, deprived of agricultural concerns, and of both conveniency and materials for practising a mechanical profession. The Scotch, at present, believe me, Mr. Cobbett, are an industrious, ingenious, and enterprizing people; and, after what has been said, I think it can hardly be doubted, or denied, that they owe these qualities, in a great measure, to their excellent plan of education, under the protection of the English constitution. Is it not probable then, à priori, that England would be benefited by something similar? To conclude," a legisla"tor occupied like the father of his country "with the happiness of his people, will "watch national education, to the end that children may suck in with the milk, the tain what is the subject of the right which must therefore mean something different from what his own remarks, in the outset of his communication, import; and, indeed, before one gets through the whole, it is sufficiently perceptible that He means the reverse to what his former observations mean; for after having finished his argument, he inquires if it is not proved that "those vessels which are on the sea acquire a temporary right to that part of it which they occupy, and that it is unjust to deprive them or molest them in the enjoyment of it?" This argument, however, not having had the effect, even in the slightest degree, of reconciling me to the doctrine, that we have not a right to the Dominion of the Sea, permit me to offer to your readers some comments upon the observations which your correspondent has made with a view to its support. His argument, then, Sir, is, it seems, that the Omnipotent Being gave to man "dominion over the sea and earth," and that the reason with which his Creator endowed him shews that it is "occupancy which confers right," and to be sure, Sir, in the primitive condition of mankind, when all was in common, and the spontaneous productions of the earth profusely afforded the means of subsistence, notions of temporary right only, and not of permanent ownership in any determined spots, would be imbibed-a right to exclusive possession, which would cease when the act of passession ceased. But, with what consistency can the notions which were entertained by the itinerant tribes of old, be, in the present state of the world, twisted into any thing at all resembling argument to prove that we have not a right to the Dominion of the Seas? Your correspondent, Sir, has already enabled us to decide with tolerable accuracy: but he shall shew us more distinctly-"On what other ground," he asks, "can it be supported, that one man should be entitled solely to possess this or that portion of land, but that he derived it from the first man who had the good fortune to gain possession of it?" Now, can any thing be more consistent? The right of the -possessor does not now, in this stage of the gentleman's argument, consist in the individual's own actual occupancy of the land, but because he derived it from the first possessor. How the first possessor could transmit to others, that right, which it stands confessed on all bands endured no longer than his own actual possession, your correspondent has not discovered to us; nor will I distress my brain by any attempt to guess. The answer to the question, however, is, that the title of an individual to any particular piece of land, arises, not from its having been awarded to him or his ancestors, by the dictates of natural reason, but, by the law of the country in which he lives. It would, indeed, be rather a difficult task to account for the right (for instance) of the eldest son to the inheritance of his father, in exclusion of all his brothers and sisters, upon any principle of natural reason and justice. But your correspondent fancies that he sees something applicable to the point in dispute in the case of an estate granted to John for the life of Thomas, where Thomas survives John Here, the law of England not having provided for such a contingency, by bestowing the right upon any particular person, he who first gets possession of it after the death of John will be entitled to retain it until the death of Thomas; but not because the law of nature, dictated by ratural reason, awards it to him for the right which he confeired was to the possession so long as the occupant was disposed to keep it, which might be after the death of Thomas-but because the law of England did not allow of any person being turned out of possession, unless some other person could make it appear that he was by law entitled to it; which in this anomalous case could not be done. Let it, however, for the sake of the arguiment, be admitted, that the case of occupancy just now spoken of, and the temporary posses sion of a person in a theatre, or of a ship in a dock or river, to the particular seat or spot occupied, bears some resemblance-or, if your correspondent pleases, a complete analogy-to ancient occupancy; how will that serve him? What of argument is there in it to prove that we are not entitled to the Dominion of the Seas, we having fought for and acquired that dominion, and that dominion being, moreover, essential to our security? Absolutely nothing. If the argument be that dominion over the sea was the gift of God to all mankind, and therefore no nation in particular can justify the claim of absolute dominion over any defined portion of it, the short answer to it, is, that dominion over the earth was equally the gift of God to mankind in general, and that upon the principle upon which he con tends against out dominion of the sea, Eng lishmen can have no better right to this island than the inhabitants of any other nation. If he tells me that we have acquired this country, and are entitled be Cause we have continued to maintain the possession of it; I shall tell him in return, that we have acquired the dominion of the sea, and have never as yet abandoned that dominion, I say as yet," Mr. Cobbett, for God knows how soon the fine-spun conceits of natural equity, which certain men in a certain quarter (who call themselves Englishmen, and Whigs, and patriots forsooth, are known to entertain, may be enabled to work the destruction of this firmest bulwark of our country's honour! Returning to your correspondent, it is to be observed, that he has not advanced any thing at all in the way of elucidation, which is, in the least degree, to the purpose; for in all the cases which he has stated (except that of the fisherman, which follows the princi pál question, and is governed by it) if the alleged right be infringed, there is a superior human power to punish such infringement, viz. the law of the country. But, suppose that when all things were in common, two individuals, or two tribes, were equally desirons of possessing any particular unoccu pied spot or territory, and that they both arrive to take possession at the same time, natural reason would not dictate that it be. longed to one of them rather than to the other; and there is no established law, in such a state, to be appealed to, or to which either would be bound to submit. What does the writer suppose would decide the point but FORCE. A nation is made up of a number of single families, united, with a view to their common protection and security, against other combinations of individuals, forming other nations. Well, then, suppose any particular nation to occupy a small island, which, by reason of its population being inferior in number, would be in danger of being over-run by more populous nations, unless it could preserve the D mi nion of the Seas by which it is encircled; and the case supposed is not one merely fictitious, for it is the case of both Great Britain and Ireland at this day Is there a man living, and possessing at the same time a sane mind and an uncorrupt heart, who can either doubt our right to preserve that dominion, in which consists our own safeguard, or be so very lukewarm in the cause of his country, as to be willing to abandon it? Most truly is it said, 'in the motto to your last number, that "the sovereignty of the seas is the true defence of this kingdom;" and I do, Mr. Cobbett, most earnestry hope, that you will not cease to ring that tocsin in the ears of the dozing and besotted part of the community, that they may, 'in common with their more vigilant and reflecting fellow citizens, be roused to a sense and perception of that imminent perit which now threatens the honour of the nation, nay her very existence as an independ ent state and which will continue to lowe; so long as the Sovereignty of the Seas shait cease to be maintained with the same zeal and spirit by which it was originally acquired. Men may prattle about the rights of nations, and may iterate the crude hypotheses of the different theoretic writers upon those rights; bnt they will, I believe, find their noddles sadly perplexed to assign any solid ground or reason, why, at the call of other natiors leagued together, any particular one ought to abandon that domition in which its own protection against those very nations themselves manifestly consists.I am, Sir, your well-wisher, WROC.-Lincoln's Inn, September 21. "DOMINION OF THE SEAS," AND EXPATRIATION OF BRITISH SUBJECTS." SIR, perceive in your last week's Register, the letters of two gentlemen learned in the law; the one addressed to you on the "Dominion of the Seas," and the other on the Expatriation of British Subjects:" the first gentleman favouring us with an illustration of the practical law of occupancy soon after the Deluge; and the second, less partial of antiquity, contenting himself only with some copious fragments from a great, luminary of the law in the reign of Queen Elizabeth. Now, Mr. Cobbett, though I feel extremely grateful for all legal lucubrations, and have considerable respect for those gentlemen who are schooled in forensic learning, yet, I shall in this instance, beg to enter my protest against both their opinions; particularly the author of the latter letter, whose principles I not only dissent from, but whose conduct. in publicly asserting them, has my full measure of reprobation." DOMINION OF THE SEAS." As this subject necessarily embraces the consideration of the "Law of Nations, ' it will be of some utility to consider, what that selfsame thing is, which falls under that appellation. It has been, I think, asserted by you, Mr. Cobbett, that that law must be nugatory which no tribunal can énforce or punish for non-acquiescence; to that proposition I cannot exactly concede. A law is a rule of action; and I apprehend a conscientions man may lay down for himself a rule or conduct, from which he will not deviate, though there should be no tribunal that could enforce his obedience, or even censure his aberration. I am of opinion, therefore, that in civilised society, there may be laws for whose disobedience no penalties can attach, and yet that they are far from nugatory. The social or moral duties of man, are laws, for instance, which the upright member of |