7 Aug 1809 +

Parl Reform

Ch. Necessity Hume

Humes Concession

1

23

What is curious is that if Hume were taken for judge the matter would be decided and that not exclusively in favour of parliamentary reform, i.e. a government without corruption that being what he himself has expressly declared against but in favour of a commonwealth, viz. in the estimation of every person in whose eyes that form of government were preferable to absolute monarchy.

But that in such a case Humes authority any more than any body elses authority ought to weigh for any thing, much less be regarded as decisive - or will be so in the judgment of any one who holds himself capable of weighing reason and forming a judgment for himself - but that those persons whose sole look out is for a shove to gain their faith again, and who in their adherence to such their opinions, begged or borrowed those opinions are, are not among the least tenacious, /tenacious - that in persons of this description it may be visible/ may on that the authority of Hume which they might /may/ have supposed to be in their favour, is in fact against them.

"Did the House of Commons" (says he) ["]depend in the same maxims on the King" (viz as the King is made dependent on the House of Commons by the power of the purse) "and had none of the members any property but from his gift, would not he command their resolutions, and be from that moment, absolute."

Thus far, David Hume: from which taking into the account, on the footing on which they have since some out, the facts relative to and probative of that dependence, it will be sufficiently clear that in his opinion, at least supposing his view of the matter confined to those facts, the King would at the moment at which I am writing be pronounced to be already absolute.

+ Essays &c [...?] p.107[?].