and attacks, if they are objects of jealoufy and hatred to their neighbours. A reputation, on the other hand, for moderation and juftice, conciliates the confidence and good. will of their neighbours, and leaves them in the undisturbed poffeffion of the arts that improve and bless mankind. If a nation be characterised for breach of faith to its engagements, and ambitious defigns againft its neighbours, every other state will naturally be its enemies. But, when fovereign powers, both in their internal and external political œconomy, pay regard to the law of nature and nations, they thereby conciliate confidence and approbation among their neighbours, which is of infinite confequence to them in the whole conduct of their affairs. It is true, that civil and political rights avail but little against the overbearing force of conquering arms. But, in the present state of Europe, when the vigilant eye of political jealoufy watches every movement of flates and princes, the poffeffion of juft claims is of mighty advantage as a veil to conceal or to prevent all apprehenfion of inordinate ambition. It is not, therefore, either impertinent or ufeleis for men of letters, even while contending powers have made provifion for war, and ftand in a threatening pofture with their hands on their fwords, to difcufs their claims, and to appeal to those great principles of reafon and juftice from which states and princes, any more than individuals are not exempted. In the performance under review, which is divided into eight chapters, Mr. Linguet, juftly celebrated for his political abilities, confiders the famous queftion concerning the opening of the Scheldt, both on the principles of the law of nature and nations, and on the more confined maxims of particular ftates, concerned for their own particular interefts. In the first chapter, entitled "State of the Question now agitated between his Imperial Majefty and the United Pro-,' vinces, on the Subject of the Scheldt," our author makes a number of general obfervations on the prefent declining and melancholy ftate of the Auftrian Netherlands; and is decidedly of opinion, that nothing more, is neceffary than the opening of the Scheldt to restore them to their former grandeur. He alfo makes a number of remarks on the inutility of the Scheldt, under the reftrictions now impofed on its navigation; pays fome just compliments to the emperor, and gives a fummary view of the reafons which the Dutch alledge for their exclufive right to the ufe of that river namely, that it was granted to them by the treaty of Munfter, and that the republic has rendered eminent fervices to the Houfe of Auftria. In In the second chapter our author difcuffes the question, Whether gratitude for the fervices done to the House of Auftria by the United Provinces can be a motive for permitting the exclufive navigation of the Scheldt? The Dutch are reprefented as pleading their fervices to the Auftrians. But our author thinks, that all these services have been compenfated by others not lefs effential. In the third chapter Mr. Linguet examines the question, Whether the treaty of Munfter is, on the principles of juftice, an invincible obftacle to the opening of the Scheldt? In the courfe of his reafoning on this queftion, our author afks "Suppofe the emperor were to tell the Dutch, I open the Scheldt in virtue of the fame right by which you became an independent republic, what reply could they make " It is very true, that iniquitous promifes or compacts even between individuals, extorted by violence, are not, in the judgment of moft moralifts, binding; much lefs are fuch compacts obligatory among fovereign princes; for the order of fociety may require fuch facrifices, in certain circumftances, from individuals; but no reafon can be given why a juft privilege may not be refumed by fovereign powers by the faine means with which it was extorted; yet, still we cannot but object to the reafoning implied in the question put by Mr. Linguet; for the reply to that question is exceedingly plain-" When we erected ourfelves into an independent republic, we broke no treaty, were under no allegiance to any fovereign. It is true indeed, we once were fubject to Spain: but Philip II. by his unheard of cruelties, infringed that tacit compact of reciprocal protection and obedience which incorporates the fupreme powers into one body with their fubjects. That bigotted and inhuman tyrant, inftead of affording protection and promoting the happiness of his people, inflicted on them numberlefs miferies. They had therefore recourfe to the law of nature: they took up arms in their own defence, and with equal juftice and fuccefs maintained the rights and liberties of freemen. But if you open the Seheldt, the exclufive navigation of which was granted by our cruel oppreffors, as fome finall compenfation for former severities, and as the price of peace; you violate the treaty of Munster." In the fourth chapter our author inquires, whether that claufe of the treaty of Munfter which ftipulates to the Dutch the exclufive navigation of the Scheldt, be agreeable to the law of nature; and concludes in the negative. In the fifth chapter he inquires, whether the fhutting of the Scheldt be not contrary to the law of nations? On this queftion he obferves, that the fea is free, and that therefore all all rivers which make a part of the fea ought to be free likewife. This appears to be a kind of fophifm. The dif pute is not concerning the property of the water in the river Scheldt, but who fhall have a right to fail on it. Navigable rivers ought to be open to all nations, not because they flow into the ocean, but because like the ocean they may be failed on by all. In the fixth chapter Mr. Linguet confiders, whether the opening of the Scheldt would be as hurtful to the states as they seem to apprehend, and whether, in every respect, they ought not to prefer this option to war. He endeavours to fhew, that the free navigation of the Scheld would be for the advantage of the Dutch themfelves, as well as of the emperor. His reasoning on this point is at once ingenious and fatisfactory. In the feventh chapter our author confiders the effect of the opening of the Scheldt on the interefts of the other powers in other words, the part they would probably take, if hoftilities between the emperor and the Dutch were commenced. He confines his reafoning and conjectures on this part of his fubject to the king of Pruffia and the court of Verfailles. Frederic, he fhews, has not the fame motive for oppofing the emperor in his claims on the United Provinces, that he had for refifting his attack on the Bavarian, The ties of blood naturally tend to keep peace for fome time between Auftria and France; nor would it be found policy, he thinks, in the court of Versailles, on account of the opening of the Scheldt, to hazard a war. The title of the eighth chapter, is "A fpeech delivered, or to be delivered by a French minifter, to the council of state at Versailles, with refpect to the opening of the Scheldt." In this chapter the interefts of France, in relation to this fubject, are very fully and very ably pointed out by our author. With regard to our author's morality, it is evident that, he is not, willing to relax the feverity of general principles. in favour of particular claims in particular circumstances. The vast variety of incidents in the hiftory of nations, the effential changes which fo often happen in heir fituations feem to emancipate them in fome cafes from those laws which regulate the conduct and preferve order among individuals in fociety. And, if we were to have refpect only to the interefts of ftates, we fhould, perhaps, conclude with Mr. Hume-that virtue is founded in utility. As juftice is the general good of particular communities, fe, in an enlarged view, it is alfo the good of the great community formed by all the nations in the world. In general, there is ENG. REV. Vol. V. JUNE. 1785. G& nothing nothing that fo eminently conduces to this good, as the prefervation of good faith. But faith pledged, in certain fituations, for the fulfilment of engagements, iniquitous in themselves, but neceffary at the time to the public tranquillity, may, without any violation of metaphyfical or moral truth, be recalled in circumftances where the general good of the world requires its revocation. If we confider the world as one great commonwealth, Holland with all its dependencies, will appear like a fingle city, whofe good muft give way to that of the public. This was exactly the idea entertained by Henry the Great, in his grand project for keeping Europe in perpetual peace. The dominium eminens of a state is founded on the fame principle as that on which a canal is cut through a country for the improvement of trade and navigation. There is a dominium eminens in the republics compofed of the different nations, which is rightly exercised when any one of them appropriates to itself fuch gifts of nature as, without injury to one, may be enjoyed by the whole. In the navigation of feas and rivers the whole world has an intereft; the fhips of one nation may float on the waters without excluding thofe of another. Monopolies of common benefits are unjuft. Let the capitals and industry of Holland flow through the Scheldt, as well as those of other states; or, if that be neceffary, let them be diverted into other channels: but let not a bridle be impofed upon the industry of the Germans, as a fpur to excite and to fupport that of the Hollanders. Although the dignity of the fubject naturally elevates the ftile of general politics, yet there is an unvaried pomp in that of Mr. Linguet which cannot be approved. Notwith ftanding his profeffions of impartiality in his advertisement, it is very clear that he is a warm advocate for the emperor. At the fame time, he is a lively, ingenious, and well-informd writer. MONTHLY CATALOGUE. POLITICA L.. Art. 17. Mr. Fox's Reply to Mr. Pitt, upon reporting the Fourth Propofition of the Irish Syftem; purporting that all laws for the Regulation of Trade and Navigation fhall have equal Force in Ireland as in England. On Tuesday May 31, 1785. 8vo. 6d. Kearsley. TH HIS Reply coincides, almost entirely, with a publication, which first appeared in a morning paper, as the report of a speech, highly celebrated by those who heard it in the fenate; and which ̧ *The Morning Herald. gratified, gratified, in an eminent degree, at the expence of the minifter, Mr. Fox's numerous admirers. The re-publication of the speech, in the prefent form, in which fome errors in the former impreffions are corrected, has been fuggefted, probably, by the spirit of party. Yet it will, no doubt, be acceptable, on more liberal confiderations, to the lovers of ingenious and animated declamation. Mr. Fox's allufion to a former debate, which was somewhat mifplaced and disfigured in the daily papers, appears here to more ad vantage. "I cannot help (fays Mr. Fox) remarking the vaft disparity ir the tone of temper, and the ftyle of expreffion, exhibited by the Hon. Gentleman upon this night, from those which he deemed it expedient to adopt when he opened the eighteen propofitions to this Houfe. On that night I quoted a paffage, Telephus aut Peleus cum pauper, et exul uterque, And I quoted it to exemplify the change which the deplorable fituation into which his rafhnefs, his ignorance, or what is not more reputable than either, a fervile adoption of other men's fancies, and thrusting forward the crude heap of difcordant and dangerous materials, which form this miferable project, had involved the Hon. Gentleman. Upon that occafion I could not help obferving, that the ampulla and the fefquipedalia verba that the Hon. Gentleman's magnificent terms, his verbofe periods, and those big bombastic fentiments which conftitute in general the principal part of his orations, had for once forfaken him, or been relinquifhed, for language and for manners better accommodated to his disastrous condition. Then we faw the avowed confederacy of the Hon. Gentleman, with those about him, (meaning Mr. Jenkinson) whose co-operation in the general fyftem of his government the Hon. Gentleman is fo commonly anxious to disavow, but whofe opinions he fo uniformly propagates and afferts, Then we faw that prepofterous ambition, that gaudy pride, and vaulting vanity, which glare upon the obferver beyond all the other characteristic features of the Hon. Gentleman, and which prompt him to look down with contempt upon his political coadjutors to fancy himself the great overfeer, the Surveyorgeneral, of the British government,We faw this glittering affemblage melt away, and that Hon. Gentleman defcend to a curious and most affecting fympathy with the other fupporters of this system, as well as into fomething like a modeft and civil demeanour towards those who oppofed it. But alas! the Hon. Gentleman's deviation into a moderate and humble courfe of argument, into a courte befitting a man detected in ten thousand instances of folly, precipitancy, rafhnefs, weaknefs, and confummate ignorance of the fubject in difcuffion, was but tranfient and temporary. The hopes of reform in his conduct were as delufive and fallacious, even as the many hopes of other reforms which that Hon. Gentleman has gulled a variety of perfons in this country to entertain upon points of more importance. Upon this night the Hon. Gentleman has relapfed into his own favourite and darling habits--the ampulle and fefquipeZalia verba are again refumed with additional redundancy. Nerved Gg 2 with |