I Shall Have Liberty To Think For

If Aristotle, Livy, And Harrington Knew What A Republic Was, The British Constitution Is Much More Like A Republic Than An Empire. They Define A Republic To Be A Government Of Laws, And Not Of Men. If This Definition Is Just, The British Constitution Is Nothing More Or Less Than A Republic, In Which The King Is First Magistrate. This Office Being Hereditary, And Being Possessed Of Such Ample And Splendid Prerogatives, Is No Objection To The Government's Being A Republic, As Long As It Is Bound By Fixed Laws, Which The People Have A Voice In Making, And A Right To Defend.

I Desire No Other Inscription Over My Gravestone Than: 'here Lies John Adams, Who Took Upon Himself The Responsibility Of Peace With France In The Year 1800'.

The Arts And Sciences, In General, During The Three Or Four Last Centuries, Have Had A Regular Course Of Progressive Improvement. The Inventions In Mechanic Arts, The Discoveries In Natural Philosophy, Navigation And Commerce, And The Advancement Of Civilization And Humanity, Have Occasioned Changes In The Condition Of The World And The Human Character Which Would Have Astonished The Most Refined Nations Of Antiquity. A Continuation Of Similar Exertions Is Everyday Rendering Europe More And More Like One Community, Or Single Family.

The Fundamental Law Of The Militia Is, That It Be Created, Directed And Commanded By The Laws, And Ever For The Support Of The Laws.

Were I To Define The British Constitution, Therefore, I Should Say, It Is A Limited Monarchy, Or A Mixture Of The Three Forms Of Government Commonly Known In The Schools, Reserving As Much Of The Monarchical Splendor, The Aristocratical Independency, And The Democratical Freedom, As Are Necessary That Each Of These Powers May Have A Control, Both In Legislation And Execution, Over The Other Two, For The Preservation Of The Subject's Liberty.