They carry on a very advantageous commerce with the English plantations, by which the city of Glasgow and many other ports of the Western Coast have greatly enriched themselves; which occasions a circulation of money throughout the whole kingdom.

England is the only mart for their linens, for which the English pay above £200,000 per annum. And the Scots, by their exemption from all duties, are enabled to sell them at 20 per cent. less disadvantage than the English can sell foreign linens of the same goodness.

They supply England also with black cattle, sheep, coals, and many other articles of their own product.

They are much easier taxed than even the Northern Counties of England.

If they have not the pomp and splendour of a court at Edinburgh, neither, on the other hand, do they contribute to the support of it. For all, or the far greater part, of the taxes raised in Scotland (if I am not misinformed are distributed among the natives of it.

They enjoy great security from foreign wars, for, as they have no fleet of their own, they must be exposed to continual depredations from abroad, if divided from England; and their trade with England and the plantations would be entirely cut off, and all their commerce precarious.

If some of their Burgh towns have been reduced, it has been owing to their own monopolies and restraints upon trade, which loss however has been abundantly compensated by the increasing trade and flourishing condition of a great many other towns and burghs.

The value of lands in Scotland is increased since the union; and that they have not advanced to a greater degree is owing to the known turbulent spirit of the Highlanders, which renders property more precarious there than in England.

The natives of Scotland have a much larger share in all places, civil and military, than they could reasonably expect from the small quota Scotland contributes towards the public burdens and taxes. This is not mentioned as if any here repined at it, for they have undoubtedly among them many persons of great learning, true courage, and singular merit, but only to show there is no just ground of complaint.

The riches of Scotland have of late years increased much

more in proportion than those of England; which is, at least, a strong presumptive proof that the union has been favourable to it.

To conclude, it is undoubtedly the interest of North and South Britain to maintain the union: let therefore the natives of both parts of this flourishing island, now incorporated, unite as brethren; and, laying aside every invidious distinction and reflection, let all of us, who are sincerely attached to the Protestant religion, and for supporting this ancient constitution, (founded on the basis of law and liberty,) have no other contention with one another, but who shall be most zealous to quell the present rebellion', to chastise the disturbers of the public peace, and to restore again that happy tranquillity, for which we were lately so justly envied by the neighbouring nations.

A SERMON

PREACHED AT THE MERCAT CROSS OF Edinburgh.

Eccles. Chap. X, Ver. 27.

Better is he that laboureth, and aboundeth in all things, than he that boasteth himself, and wanteth bread.

DEARLY beloved countrymen and fellow-citizens, suffer me to stop you a little in the furious career of your passion, to hear a few words of sober and unprejudiced reason; I hope they will not be the less grateful, if I accost you in that manner of rhetoric which your ears are most accustomed to. I have chosen an Apocryphal text, because my subject is not sacred, but secular; but if it has not the stamp of divine inspiration, it is taken from a book, which, of all that are not canonical, contains the most sublime, the most useful, and the most approved maxims of wisdom, whether private, economical or political; and, as all wisdom and truth cometh from God, in that sense my text may be said to be of divine authority.

Dearly beloved countrymen, a generous, a powerful, a victorious nation invites you to an intimate union with themselves, a nation whose laws are more just, whose government

The rising of 1745.

is more mild, whose people are more free, easy and happy, than any other in Europe; a nation who by their wealth, wisdom, and valour, have broke the most formidable power that ever threatened Christendom; to whose victorious arms even you yourselves owe your present security. This nation, I say, invites you to a copartnership of all the advantages they now enjoy, or may reasonably hope for: a gracious Queen, of the ancient line of our own Monarchs, desires nothing more than that the people, from whom she derives her blood, should enjoy the same liberty and plenty with others whom Providence has called her to govern. It might justly have been expected, that such a generous proposal would have been welcomed with the universal acclamations of all ranks and degrees of people; instead of that you have received it with riots, mobs, and tumults. If the offer had not been profitable, it was at least civil, and deserved a friendly reception, and a courteous answer: a treaty that was entered into at the desire of your own Parliament, as well as that of your neighbours, and carried on by the authority of the common Sovereign of both; such a treaty, I say, was a matter of that weight, as made it a very unfit subject for the judgment (much more for the scorn and contempt) of boys, apprentices, and tradesmen: but since the transcendent wisdom of your leaders have thought otherwise, let me beseech you in the words of my author, Eccles. xi. 7, 'Blame not before thou hast examined the truth; understand first and then rebuke.' To enable you in some measure to make such an enquiry, I have chosen the words of my text, 'Better is he that laboureth, and aboundeth in all things, than he that boasteth himself, and wanteth bread.'

From the words you may observe a very intimate conjunction betwixt three dismal companions, pride, poverty, and idleness; this is a worse union a great deal than that which we are to discourse of at present. These three love extremely to keep company, and I could never guess for what reason, unless it be to tease and vex one another: poverty does what she can to starve pride; and pride eats out the heart, blood, and guts of poverty; and laziness will not stir an inch to relieve either: that these three fatal sisters may not only be separated, but eternally banished this kingdom, it shall be the subject of my following discourse to show that it is better to increase

our trade, manufacture, and riches by an union with England, than to boast of our sovereignty and starve: 'For better is he that laboureth, and aboundeth in all things, than he that boasteth himself, and wanteth bread.'

And here indeed it must be proved that an union with England will increase our trade and manufacture: in order to which, I will ask the greatest zealot against the union a few questions, and let him answer me if he can. Is the great difference betwixt the wealth of Scotland and England entirely owing to the natural advantages of England, as of fruitfulness of soil, situation, &c. ; or does it not in some measure proceed from political causes? Scotland is equal, at least, in extent to a third of England; its people more healthful, more prolific, and more temperate; why has England then seven times the number of people? Every acre in Scotland is not barren, nor every acre in England fruitful; how comes it then that England has fifty times the riches of Scotland? For example, why does Oxfordshire, not so big as Fife, pay to a land-tax near as much as all Scotland? Are there not many places on each side the Firth of Forth, which exceed the town of Newcastle in soil, situation, products natural and artificial: how comes it to pass then that the town of Newcastle has more trade, more rich merchants, and pays more customs than all the towns in Scotland put together? It is plain these great differences do not proceed merely from natural, but likewise from political causes; nay, it is easy to assign a portion of England equal in extent, and much inferior in the gifts of nature to some part of Scotland, and yet triple in value.

I know Wales is brought by some as an instance to prove that an union will not increase the trade and riches of a mountainous country; it is said that their condition is not bettered by an union with England. To this I answer, first, that the matter of fact is false. If the objection has any strength, it ought to prove that Wales would not be the worse if deprived of the trade of England; a paradox too sublime for any Welshman, but most obvious to the elevated understandings of some of our worthy patriots. Secondly, I say, the comparison is not fairly stated betwixt the worst part of England and the best of Scotland. Wales in many places does not exceed the Highlands of Scotland in any thing

except the height of the mountains; but, setting aside all these things, let us state the comparison. The twelve very small counties of Wales contain 917 parishes, 58 market-towns, 316,000 people, and pay £43,752 sterling to the land-tax, which shews they are almost equal to half the number of people in Scotland, and pay near as much taxes as the whole. And it is known that Wales is more under-rated in their taxes, and easier in the excise than Scotland. Thus you see it would be hard to find twelve of the richest counties in Scotland to compare with an equal number, and less in extent, of the worst in England, which is, as I said, a demonstration that the riches of England are the effect of policy more than of nature; and is it not as plain, that the protection of the same laws, the influence of the same government, the partnership of the same plantations, and of all other privileges, foreign and domestic, will much better the condition of Scotland?

There is hardly any subject of trade, of the growth of England, which we are totally deprived of; and we have one peculiar, which kind Providence and nature have afforded us, though we never had the grace nor industry to make use of it; I mean our fish. Thus we starve with that commodity at our doors, from which our neighbours the Dutch draw the very foundations of their wealth and maritime power. Will you then still be fond of that ill government and ill management which even deprives you of the provision which indulgent nature has thrown into your mouths? But some will say, have not our convention of Burghs chosen men, skilled in the deepest mysteries of trade, of eminent abilities and great integrity; have not they told us that the trade of England is unsupportable; that it is intolerable, and not to be endured; which is as much as if they had said, we have not grandeur of soul to support so great wealth and prosperity: we must be contented to live like pedlars, whilst English merchants live like princes? Where is now your pride? Where is now your boasting?

But say you again, the same convention of Burghs, not less skilled in politics than in trade, has told us that the trade of England is precarious. It is hard to answer all the unreasonable fears and jealousies of people. Has Wales, since their union, ever complained of the breach of one article?