and the principles on which he himself had acted. In speaking of a bill which had passed in 1779, (moved by Lord Beauchamp) to prevent imprisonment for small debts, he delivered his sentiments concerning the debtor laws in general, and the general question of imprisonment for debt. "There are (he says) two capital faults in our law, with relation to civil debts. One is, that every man is presumed solvent; a presumption, in innumerable cases, directly against truth. Therefore the debtor is ordered, on a supposition of ability and fraud, to be coerced his liberty until he makes payment. By this means, in all cases of civil insolvency, without a pardon from his creditor, he is to be imprisoned for life. And thus a miserable mistaken invention of artificial science operates to change a civil into a criminal judgment, and to scourge misfortune or indiscretion with a punishment which the -law does not inflict on very great crimes.

"The next fault is, that the inflicting of that punishment is not on the opinion of an equal and a public judge; but is referred to the arbitrary discretion of a private, nay interested and irritated individual. He who formally is, and substantially ought to be, the judge, is in reality no more than ministerial, a mere executive instrument of a private man, who is at once judge and party. Every idea of judicial order is subverted by this procedure.

Y y

If the insolvency be no crime, why is it pu nished with arbitrary imprisonment? If it be a crime, why is it delivered into private hands to pardon without discretion, or to punish without mercy and without measure ?"

The opinion and sentiments of Burke on this. subject coincide with that of his sage friend, Johnson, who, in his Idler, No. 22, maintains the injustice and impolicy of imprisonment for debt at the pleasure of the creditor. "The end (he says) of all civil regulations is to secure private happiness from private malignity ; to keep individuals from the power of one another but this end is apparently neglected, when a man, irritated with loss, is allowed to be the judge of his own cause, and to assign the punishment of his own pain; when the distinction between guilt and. happiness, between casualty and design, is entrusted to eyes blind with interest, to understandings depraved by resentment."" There can be no reason why any debtor should be imprisoned, but that he may be compelled to payment; and a term should therefore be fixed, in which the creditor should exhibit his accusation of concealed property. If such property can be discovered, let it be given to the creditor; if the charge is not offered, or cannot be proved, let the prisoner be dismissed." These are the opinions of two very great men on this subject. Perhaps it may be thought that they consider the debtor too much, and the creditor too little.

Were a mitigation of confinement compatible with the security of property, were it practicable to compel, in every case, the debtor to give up his effects to the creditor, as from effects, not person, his reimbursement must proceed, confinement might appear no longer to answer any just purpose to the creditor. The creditor would then lose nothing, and the labour of the debtor be restored to society. If a diminution of misery be consistent with the recovery of right, if the debtor may be relieved and the creditor not incur loss, we may expect it from the humanity, knowledge, and discri, mination of that learned, able, and benevolent nobleman who has undertaken the cause of the unfortunate. In speaking of prisons, Burke takes occasion to bestow a very just and very eloquent encomium on the philanthropic How

ard. "I cannot name Mr. Howard without remarking, that his labours and writings have done much to open the eyes and hearts of mankind, He has visited all Europe, not to survey the sumptuousness of palaces, or the stateliness of temples; not to make accurate measurements of the remains of ancient grandeur, nor to form a scale of the curiosity of modern art; not to collect medals, or collate manuscripts; but to dive into the depth of dungeons, to plunge into the infection of hospitals, to survey the mansions of sorrow and pain, to take the gauge and dimensions of misery, depres-,

sion, and contempt; to remember the forgot ten, to attend to the neglected, to visit the for. saken, and to compare and collate the distresses of all men in all countries. His plan is original, and it is full of genius as it is of humanity. It was a voyage of discovery; a circumnavigation of charity. Already the benefit of his labour is felt more or less in every country; I hope he will anticipate his final reward, by seeing all its effects fully realized in his own. He will receive not by retail, but in gross, the reward of those who visit the prisoner; and he has so forestalled and monopolized this branch of charity, that there will be, I frust, little room to merit by such acts of benevolence hereafter."

During the year 1780, affairs in America, and indeed in Europe, wore a more favourable appearance to Britain. Charlestown and the whole province of South Carolina was reduced; and the British forces made every exertion that courage and conduct could produce. Still, however, the Americans exhibited no signs of submission. The authority of Britain was acknowledged in no part, but those occupied by her forces. A hatred of the mo ther country was generally prevalent throughout the colonies. In Europe, Admiral Rodney had, by a signal victory over the Spanish fleet, displayed the valour and superior skill of the British navy. He led his victorious fleet to the

West Indies, and there maintained the pre. eminence of our fleets by considerable advantages, a prelude to a decisive victory, equalling any in the former annals of British glory, though since equalled by the victories of the present war, of the present year, and of the present month. * The efforts of Rodney could not have been successful, but with a force that shewed that the First Lord of the Admiralty was not inattentive to his duty, and that Burke, in his imputation of negligence and incapacity to Lord Sandwich, was a party speaker, not an impartial thinker.

From the commencement of the American war, Holland had leaned to the colonies, and had supplied them with stores. After France and Spain had become hostile to Britain, she had also supplied those nations with warlike stores, contrary to the general principles of neutrality and particular treaties subsisting between her and Britain. Various remonstrances on this subject had been made to the Dutch, which were disregarded. The Ministry, therefore, resolv-. ing to imitate the example of the illustrious Pitt during the former war, gave orders for the seizure of ships laden with contraband goods. This order was rigorously executed; the Dutch ships were searched, and contraband articles

* Written Oct. 19, 1797.