at peace, and employed themselves in performing the exchanges for the people of every part of the earth, deriving vast advantage therefrom. Had they been permitted to carry out their peaceful policy, the benefits derived therefrom would have been incalculably greater than they were.

If we consider the United States separately, we find, as population becomes more dense, a constantly increasing security from the evils of war. The people of Massachusetts and Connecticut, in former times, were harrassed by the French and Indians. To them succeeded the people of New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia; and those of Alabama, Arkansas, and Missouri, the border States, now undergo the same species of disturbance.

In both countries insecurity is produced by incorrect views of the claims of the community to the services of individuals. Every man is bound to contribute his aid in maintaining peace -in enforcing the laws-and in defending his country; but that aid should be in the ratio of his interest in the maintenance of security. To call upon an individual of large fortune for a certain number of days of service in the militia, for which he may compound by the payment of a fine, is to require a contribution of the smallest kind, while a similar demand upon an individual with a wife and family dependent upon his daily labour for their daily bread, is a heavy tax. To the former the payment of the fine is but the ten thousandth part of his income, while to the latter it may be a tax of two per cent. upon his earnings for the year. Were private rights properly appreciated by those who are intrusted with the government, it would be seen that the community could have no claim upon an individual for his services without proper compensation therefor, and that if men were to be required to bear arms, they should be paid for the time so occupied, and not obliged to sacrifice for the benefit of others the convenience and comfort of themselves and their families. Were they so paid, each member of the community would contribute in the ratio of his interest in the preservation of order and tranquillity.

In the United States, this grievance has been but slightly felt, in consequence of the peaceful course that has been pursued. In England, large bodies of militia were kept on foot for many years, at heavy cost to the individuals who were obliged to serve. In both countries the system of voluntary enlistments

for the military service is pursued, the effect of which is to increase the cost of making war, the most certain means of securing the continuance of peace. For the naval service the policy of the two countries is different. The United States do not admit of conscription or impressment, and every person who serves on board of their ships is a volunteer. The ships of England, on the contrary, are during war filled with men torn from their wives and families,* who may be left dependent upon the poor rates for support, because the government will not pay the same wages that may be obtained in the merchant service. If we examine the history of the late war, we find the wealthy capitalist lending his property to the government, on condition of being paid interest for its use, while the poor sailor was knocked down in the streets of London or Liverpool, or taken from the deck of a merchantman, and compelled to give his services for a most inadequate compensation, while his family was, in many cases, left to starve. The necessary consequence of the system was dissatisfaction on the side of the men, and tyranny on that of the officers, carried to such an extent as would now scarcely be believed,‡ although but thirty years have since elapsed.

Security of person cannot be deemed complete, when persons are liable to be arrested and put on trial for crimes involving their liberty, or their lives, and are denied the aid of counsel in their defence. Such has been, until recently, the case in England, whereas, in the United States, counsel has always been granted to prisoners.

"The father, who has laboured amidst privations and sufferings, in order to earn bread for his family, may be torn from it, or, what is still more cruel, prevented from reaching a home containing all that is dear to him, and be forced on board a ship of war, without a title to redress, or even a right to complaint."Wakefield, Public Expenditure, p. 21.

"The pay of sailors in the royal navy not being high enough to tempt men to enter the service, the state has proceeded on the principle of helping itself to what it wants, and by royal prerogative sailors are knocked on the head, carried forcibly on board of his Majesty's ships, and compelled to serve for such wages as the state may be pleased to allow them, *** and the cat-o'nine-tails is the substitute for pay."—Examiner.

"Formerly, it was not extraordinary to hear that two vessels had escorted a third out of harbour, because a captain had practised such cruelty towards his crew as to put it out of his power to make them work the ship, except by placing them in fear of being fired into by vessels alongside."-Wakefield, Public Expenditure, p. 19.

Great insecurity results, in some cases, from a misconception of rights and duties. Every member of a community claims for himself the right of fixing the value of his own labour, but while doing so, many are disposed to forget that it is accompanied by the duty of permitting all others to exercise the same right for themselves. Labourers have an unquestionable right to combine for the purpose of raising their wages, and if they confined themselves to the assertion of their own claims there could be no possible objection thereto; but, unfortunately, such associations, while asserting their own rights, generally forget those of others, and compel men who are fully satisfied with their wages to quit work, on pain of being excluded from all fellowship.

In the United States, such combinations have existed at various times, but to a small extent compared with England. In the former they have rarely produced acts of violence, and they have never been of a character to entitle them to much consideration. A reason for this is to be found in the fact that the demand for labour is generally so great, that men do not remain long in the town in which a strike has taken place, and there is not the same opportunity for the production of irritation leading to violence.

In England, disturbances of a very serious character have resulted from this unfortunate misconception of rights and duties. "Acts of singular atrocity," says Dr. Ure,* "have been committed, sometimes with weapons fit only for demons to wield, such as the corrosive oil of vitriol dashed in the faces of the most meritorious individuals, with the effect of disfiguring their persons, and burning their eyes out of the sockets with the most dreadful agony."

In other places, it has been necessary to garrison houses and mills, and the persons and property of their owners were in imminent danger of destruction.† Populous districts have been for

Philosophy of Manufactures, p. 283.

"The demonstrations of vengeance, carried into effect in some instances, have at times forced the masters to arm themselves-to garrison their houses and mills, and have placed a whole district in a state of siege, with all the disorganization of social ties incident to civil warfare. No man was safe-no family secure from midnight disturbance; shots were fired into the rooms where it was believed the master had his resting place. By day, he had to use every precaution to avoid falling into the hands of an infuriated mob-his family reviled, hooted, and hissed wherever opportunity offered; no wonder that feelings of bit. terness were roused against those who thus wantonly violated all the forms of decency and justice.”—Gaskill, Artisans and Machinery, p. 280.

years in a state of confusion and excitement.* In others, it has been scarcely possible for decent people to walk the streets. Assassinations have taken place on several occasions. Such proceedings are destructive of the true interest of those concerned; they lessen the power of production, and diminish the proportion of the product retained by the labourer.

In both countries security is affected by the existence of privileges confined to certain classes. Thus, in England, the desire to preserve game for the use of those classes, has led to the passage of laws which forbid the farmer from killing or selling that which fattens upon his land. It leads to the formation of preserves, guarded by spring-guns and man-traps, in which the innocent are as liable to be taken as the guilty. The gamekeepers go armed, and rencontres, resulting in death, are of not unfrequent occurrence.§

In the southern States of the Union, the existence of slavery produces effects precisely similar. The proprietors will not brook interference with their rights, and death has, in several instances, resulted from the attempt having been made. These occurrences have, however, been almost altogether confined to the new States of Mississippi, Alabama, &c., in which population is widely scattered, and in which the habit of submission to the law has scarcely yet obtained.

"At no period during the last seven years, has the district (Manchester) been without the confusion and excitement of turn-outs, caused by these associations." -Wade, Middle and Working Classes, p. 276.

+ "Our streets (those of Amersham,) at night used to be in a state of great disorder. As a constable, for two years I was constantly three or four times a week out of bed to quell disturbances. Decent people could scarcely pass through the streets after dark.”—First Annual Report of Poor Law Commissioners, p. 276.

"It transpired on the trial that the prisoners had no personal ill-will to Mr. Ashton, but had undertaken his assassination in consideration of receiving £3 68. 8d. each-ten pounds in the whole-from the Trades' Union, to which Mr. Ashton had become obnoxious."-Companion to the Newspaper, Vol. II. p. 191.

"A more ferocious system of hostility has prevailed in many game preserving districts, between squire and clown, landlord and labourer, than is acted in open war, by any civilized belligerants.

"The poacher is led to offend by a powerful temptation, and driven to desperate resistance by the dread of the consequences in the event of apprehension; his violence begets violence again on the other side; or each, anticipating it in the other, resorts to it before the occasion arises, and thus the parties spring at each others throats, in the manner of animals prompted to a mad conflict by natural antipathy."-Fonblanque, England under Seven Administrations, Vol. I. p. 123.

In both countries, when outrages have been committed in defence of the property thus recognised by law, it is exceedingly difficult to cause punishment to follow the offence. In England, the nomination of the magistrates has always been in the hands of the aristocracy*-the preservers of game-and in the southern States, it rests with the aristocracy, who are the owners of slaves. In neither case is there much disposition to punish those who have executed summary justice.

Freedom of action has never been interfered with in the United States. Every man may travel from north to south, from east to west, without a passport, and without visiting police offices, as required on the continent of Europe, and without consulting overseers of the poor, as has until recently been required by the poor laws of England. There are no apprentice laws, and a man may change his trade as often as he thinks proper. There are no corporations possessing exclusive privileges, so that he may exercise any trade in any place that he thinks likely to yield him a proper return for his exertions.§

In an advertisement of the sale of a crown estate, by order of the Commissioners of Woods and Forests, we find the following:

"The owner of this manor and lordship (Havering atte Bower,) has the sole nomination and appointment of two of the magistrates, the tenants within the manor and lordship appointing the third, who exercise an exclusive jurisdiction, the magistrates for the county at large being prohibited from acting within this lordship.”—Fonblanque, I. p. 192.

+ We exclude from consideration here the question of slavery, proposing to notice it fully on a future occasion.

In many of the States, taxes have been most unwisely imposed upon those avant courriers of civilization—the pedlers. In some cities and towns, laws are enforced against hucksters. These are the remains of old modes of thinking, that will, it is to be hoped, soon pass away.

"No cause has, perhaps, more promoted, in every respect, the general improvement of the United States, than the absence of those systems of internal restriction and onopoly which continue to disfigure the state of society in other countries. No laws exist here, directly or indirectly confining men to a particular occupation or place, or excluding any citizen from any branch he may, at any time, think proper to pursue. Industry is, in every respect, free and unfettered; every species of trade, commerce, and professions, and manufacture, being equally open to all, without requiring any regular apprenticeship, admission, or license. Hence the improvement of America has led not only to the improvement of her agriculture, and to the rapid formation and settlement of new States in the wilderness; but her citizens have extended their commerce to every part of the globe, and carry on with complete success even those branches for which a monopoly had heretofore been considered essentially necessary.”—Gallatin.

"If he be a subject in all that concerns the mutual relations of citizens, he is VOL. II.-5.