Historical voices

Burke appears to have no idea of principles when he is contemplating Governments.

But, in the instance of France we see a Revolution generated in the rational contemplation of the Rights of Man, and distinguishing from the beginning between persons and principles.

The rage was against the man, and he became the victim.

Burke considers as a reproach to the French Revolution (that of bringing it forward under a reign more mild than the preceding ones) is one of its highest honors.

The despotic principles of the government were the same in both reigns, though the dispositions of the men were as remote as tyranny and benevolence.

Burke might have been in the Bastille his whole life, as well under Louis XVI. as Louis XIV., and neither the one nor the other have known that such a man as Burke existed.

Between the Monarchy, the Parliament, and the Church there was a rivalship of despotism; besides the feudal despotism operating locally, and the ministerial despotism operating everywhere.

There were, if I may so express it, a thousand despotisms to be reformed in France, which had grown up under the hereditary despotism of the monarchy, and became so rooted as to be in a great measure independent of it.

When a man reflects on the condition which France was in from the nature of her government, he will see other causes for revolt than those which immediately connect themselves with the person or character of Louis XVI.

It strengthens itself by assuming the appearance of duty, and tyrannizes under the pretence of obeying.

This was the case in France; and against this species of despotism, proceeding on through an endless labyrinth of office till the source of it is scarcely perceptible, there is no mode of redress.

Every place has its Bastille, and every Bastille its despot.

When despotism has established itself for ages in a country, as in France, it is not in the person of the king only that it resides.

In the case of Charles I. and James II. of England, the revolt was against the personal despotism of the men; whereas in France, it was against the hereditary despotism of the established Government.

A casual discontinuance of the practice of despotism, is not a discontinuance of its principles: the former depends on the virtue of the individual who is in immediate possession of the power; the latter, on the virtue and fortitude of the…

All the tyrannies of former reigns, acted under that hereditary despotism, were still liable to be revived in the hands of a successor.

The Monarch and the Monarchy were distinct and separate things; and it was against the established despotism of the latter, and not against the person or principles of the former, that the revolt commenced, and the Revolution has been…

That crisis was then arrived, and there remained no choice but to act with determined vigor, or not to act at all.

When it becomes necessary to do anything, the whole heart and soul should go into the measure, or not attempt it.

These principles had not their origin in him, but in the original establishment, many centuries back: and they were become too deeply rooted to be removed, and the Augean stables of parasites and plunderers too abominably filthy to be…

It was not against Louis XVI. but against the despotic principles of the Government, that the nation revolted.

Burke's periods, with music in the ear, and nothing in the heart.

Burke's book has the appearance of being written as instruction to the French nation; but if I may permit myself the use of an extravagant metaphor, suited to the extravagance of the case, it is darkness attempting to illuminate light.

In such cases, who is to decide, the living or the dead?