honest man in the kingdom is excluded. This glorious privilege may be a security to the King, as well as a resource to his people. Had there been no star-chamber, there would have been no rebellion against Charles the First. The constant censure and admonition of the press would have corrected his conduct, prevented a civil war, and saved him from an ignominious death.—I am no friend to the doctrine of precedents exclusive of right; though lawyers often tell us, that whatever has been once done, may lawfully be done again.
I shall conclude this preface with a quotation, applicable to the subject, from a foreign writer[1], whose Essay on the English Constitution I beg leave to recommend to the public, as a performance deep, solid, and ingenious.
"In short, whoever considers what it is, that constitutes the moving principle of what we call great affairs, and the invincible sensibility of man to the opinion of his fellow-creatures, will not hesitate to affirm that, if it were possible for the liberty of the press to exist in a despotic government,
