In the course of all these operations, at length comes out the grand arcanum,—­that in reality, and in a fair sense, the lands of the Church (so far as anything certain can be gathered from their proceedings) are not to be sold at all.  By the late resolutions of the National Assembly, they are, indeed, to be delivered to the highest bidder.  But it is to be observed, that a certain portion only of the purchase-money is to be laid down.  A period of twelve years is to be given for the payment of the rest.  The philosophic purchasers are therefore, on payment of a sort of fine, to be put instantly into possession of the estate.  It becomes in some respects a sort of gift to them,—­to be held on the feudal tenure of zeal to the new establishment.  This project is evidently to let in a body of purchasers without money.  The consequence will be, that these purchasers, or rather grantees, will pay, not only from the rents as they accrue, which might as well be received by the state, but from the spoil of the materials of buildings, from waste in woods, and from whatever money, by hands habituated to the gripings of usury, they can wring from the miserable peasant.  He is to be delivered over to the mercenary and arbitrary discretion of men who will be stimulated to every species of extortion by the growing demands on the growing profits of an estate held under the precarious settlement of a new political system.

When all the frauds, impostures, violences, rapines, burnings, murders, confiscations, compulsory paper currencies, and every description of tyranny and cruelty employed to bring about and to uphold this Revolution have their natural effect, that is, to shock the moral sentiments of all virtuous and sober minds, the abettors of this philosophic system immediately strain their throats in a declamation against the old monarchical government of France.  When they have rendered that deposed power sufficiently black, they then proceed in argument, as if all those who disapprove of their new abuses must of course be partisans of the old,—­that those who reprobate their crude and violent schemes of liberty ought to be treated as advocates for servitude.  I admit that their necessities do compel them to this base and contemptible fraud.  Nothing can reconcile men to their proceedings and projects but the supposition that there is no third option between them and some tyranny as odious as can be furnished by the records of history or by the invention of poets.  This prattling of theirs hardly deserves the name of sophistry.  It is nothing but plain impudence.  Have these gentlemen never heard, in the whole circle of the worlds of theory and practice, of anything between the despotism of the monarch and the despotism of the multitude?  Have they never heard of a monarchy directed by laws, controlled and balanced by the great hereditary wealth and hereditary dignity of a nation, and both again controlled by a judicious check from the reason and