Fourthly. Standing armies have in all ages been destructive to the Liberties of the states into which they have been admitted.—MONTESQUIEU[76] observes, that the preservation of Liberty in ENGLAND requires, that it should have no land forces.—Dr. FERGUSON calls the establishment of standing armies “A FATAL REFINEMENT in the present state of civil government.”[77]—Mr. _Hume_ pronounces “our standing army a mortal distemper in the British constitution, of which it must _inevitably_ perish.”[78]—Formerly, the nation was apprehensive of this danger; and the _standing army_ was a constant subject of warm debate in both Houses of Parliament. The principal reason then assigned for continuing it was, the security of the House of HANOVER against the friends of the _Pretender_. This is a reason which now exists no more; the House of _Hanover_ being so well established as not to want any such security.—The standing army also is now more numerous and formidable than ever; and yet all opposition to it is lost, and it is become in a manner a part of the constitution.

Fifthly. For many years after the accession the national debt was thought an evil so alarming, that the reduction of it was recommended every year from the throne to the attention of Parliament as an object of the last importance. The FUND appropriated to this purpose was called the ONLY HOPE of the kingdom; and when the practice of alienating it begun, it was reckoned a kind of sacrilege, and zealously opposed in the House of _Commons_, and protested against in the House of _Lords_. But now, though the debt is almost _tripled_, we sit under it with perfect indifference; and the sacred fund, which repeated laws had ordered to be applied _to no other purpose_ than the redemption of it, is always alienated of course, and become a constant part of the current supplies, and much more an encouragement to dissipation than a preservative from bankruptcy.

Two Tracts on Civil Liberty, the War with America, and the Debts and Finances of the Kingdom — Part 95

Sixthly. Nothing is more the duty of the representatives of a nation than to keep a strict eye over the expenditure of the money granted for public services.—In the reign of King William, the House of Commons passed almost every year bills for appointing commissioners for taking, stating and examining the public accounts; and, particularly, the army and navy debts and contracts. In the reign of Queen Ann such bills became less frequent. But since the accession, only two motions have been made for such bills; one in 1715, and the other in 1741; and both were rejected.

Two Tracts on Civil Liberty, the War with America, and the Debts and Finances of the Kingdom — Part 95