to accept such offices as groom of the bedchamber, master of the
hounds, lords in waiting, captain of the honourable band of
gentlemen-pensioners, is it astonishing that the bulk of the people
should not ask of an occupation, what is it? but what may be gained by
it?

If the long equestrian train of equipage should make your Lordship sigh
for the poor who are pining in hunger, you will find that little is
thought of snatching the bread from their mouths to eke out the
'_necessary_ splendour' of nobility.

I have not time to pursue this subject further, but am so strongly
impressed with the baleful influence of aristocracy and nobility upon
human happiness and virtue, that if, as I am persuaded, monarchy cannot
exist without such supporters, I think that reason sufficient for the
preference I have given to the Republican system.

It is with reluctance that I quit the subjects I have just touched upon;
but the nature of this Address does not permit me to continue the
discussion. I proceed to what more immediately relates to this Kingdom
at the present crisis.

You ask with triumphant confidence, to what other law are the people of
England subject than the general will of the society to which they
belong? Is your Lordship to be told that acquiescence is not choice, and
that obedience is not freedom? If there is a single man in Great Britain
who has no suffrage in the election of a representative, the will of the
society of which he is a member is not generally expressed; he is a
Helot in that society. You answer the question, so confidently put, in
this singular manner: 'The King, we are all justly persuaded, has not