Maintains the liberty of the _Press_, in opposition to those who argue for the necessity of _some_ restraint, which, if granted, he says, might be made use of to destroy all newspapers whatsoever, except the _Gazette_. After repeating most of the points in debate, he defends his _Hague_ letter (for which the government thought fit to call him to an account) in as much as there was nothing in it asserted, but only supposed; and adds, he has as much right to reason upon suppositions as Mr. _Osborne_; and to censure the conduct of ministers, as he hath to approve it; for unless the right is reciprocal, the liberty of the press is no liberty at all. As to what Mr. _Walsingham_ had allow’d, that we have a right to reason upon political affairs, tho’ not to lay down false facts; he replies, that he has asserted no falsehoods, and only exercised the natural right of every _Free Briton_, to offer his opinion on affairs. Concludes with saying, that if he should be call’d upon to defend himself in a court of justice he must submit to the law; and abide the judgment of his country. _See_ p. 298. London Journal. _Jan. 2._ No. 596. against the _Craftsman_, No. 233. The _Craftsman_ having in his said _Journal_ advanced several arguments for the disbanding the _Army_ and repealing the _Riot Act_, the Author of the _London Journal_ undertakes here to confute them. He admits that a Government ought to have no more power than is necessary for the safety and protection, the preservation and happiness of the people, but adds that the laws alone, without a power to execute, and provide against all sudden emergencies, and possible dangers, will not answer these ends. Asserts that the possibility of powers being abused is not a sufficient reason to strip the Government of such a security, or to lodge the safety of the King in the affections of the people, which are variable and easily seduced, and (as the _Craftsman_ allows) very precarious, when he makes a doubt whether his present Majesty enjoys them. Not only _Armies_ and _Riot Acts_, but even the very law itself, by ill designing men may be used for our destruction, which were made for our safety. But must we part with the law, because we may suffer by the law? Every nation round us is arm’d, and must we alone stand naked and defenceless? If the liberties of many nations have been destroy’d by _standing armies_, the liberties of many have been preserv’d by them. Mentions the _Revolution_ as an instance, and believes the Pr. of _Orange_ would not have so easily succeeded, had the army been as true to the King as they were to their country. That the disbanding the army after the peace of _Riswick_ embolden’d the _French King_ to set his Grandson on the Throne of _Spain_, and declare the Pretender, which involv’d us in a ten years war: That nothing more intimidated the Ministry in the last four years of Q. _Anne_’s reign, than the honesty and bravery of the gentlemen of the army.