INTELLIGENCE EXTRAORDINARY.

THE great revolution that hath taken place in America, will undoubtedly involve many circum­stances of considerable importance and curious spe­culation. None, perhaps, more remarkable than this, that the philosophical world may expect to be entertained with a phenomenon in mechanics, alto­gether new, and which cannot fail to engage uni­versal attention.

THE Americans having observed the great irre­gularities to which the political systems of Europe [Page 179] are liable, have invented a method of regulating the affairs of their empire by ACTUAL MECHANISM. For this purpose an immense pendulum hath been constructed, of which the point of suspension is fixed somewhere in the orbit of the planet Mars, and the Bob is composed of certain heterogeneous matter of great specific gravity, called the Ameri­can Congress.

THIS miraculous pendulum is to vibrate between Annapolis, on the Chesapeak, and Trenton, on the Delaware; a range of about 180 miles.

IT will require the most subtle mathematical in­vestigations to ascertain the true path of this poli­tical bob: for it is pretty certain that it will not move in a straight line, nor in a cycloid, nor in a parabola, nor in an hyperbola, nor in any other known curve; but will have a motion peculiar to itself, forming a crooked line, the properties of which cannot be reduced to any of the rules with­in the present system of mathematics.

ALTHOUGH the oscillations of this pendulum will not be performed in, yet they will average equal times. Two vibrations must be made in two years: but these vibrations may bear no determatine proportion to each other; for their relative propor­tions [Page 180] will depend entirely upon the specific gravity of the bob: which being, from the nature of its composition, very variable, will render the oscil­lations equally variable with respect to each other: and, which is very extraordinary, al­though in all other instances, the more ponderous a body is, the more it is disposed to rest, and the shorter and slower will its vibrations be when suspended, it will be the reverse in the present case; for the bob will be inclined to moti­on more or less, in proportion as the matter of which it may be composed shall happen to be more or less dull and heavy.

BY the oscillations of this pendulum and its hea­vy bob, are thirteen wheels of the American ma­chine to be regulated. And, it is expected, that the different combinations of motions, the actings, and counter-actings, the checks, and counter-checks of the moving parts, will so correct and ballance each other, as to produce, in the final result, a movement so perfectly equable, that the great desiderata, viz. the perpetual motion, and the discovery of longitude, will no longer puzzle the brains and drain the purses of seekers in science.

BUT the most entertaining consequence of this improvement in politics will be, that it will render [Page 181] visible the locomotive faculties of the several na­tions in Europe; so far at least as the same may be ascertained by their respective ambassadors and envoys. For, as they must all follow the move­ments of the American bob, they will do this ac­cording to the genius of the countries to which they respectively belong. The volatile and active will always keep within reach of the object of pur­suit: the careless and indolent will loiter by the way; and the dull and phlegmatic be so distanced, that by the time they shall have arrived at one of the limits of oscillation, they will find it necessary to tack about and follow the pendulum in its return to the other.

IN order to render this alternate peregrination as convenient as may be to their ministers, the se­veral governments of Europe are to raise by con­tribution the sum of four hundred thousand guineas for the purpose of levelling the roads between Annapolis and Trenton, building bridges, and erecting houses of residence in each of those towns, if those can properly be called houses of residence wherein the inhabitants are to have no rest.

SOME have thought that when this monstrous pendulum shall be once set in motion, it will not be possible to confine it within the proposed limits; [Page 182] but that it will by its great weight (contrary to the usual laws of gravitation) enlarge its field of action, and acquire a velocity which will cause it to swing from New-Hampshire to Georgia.

A further improvement hath also been suggest­ed; which is this—Many philosophers have been of opinion, that the most regular and proper mo­tion of a pendulum would be to cause it to swing in a horizontal circle, and not in a vertical plane, as the common practice is, so that the string or rod may describe a cone, of which the apex will be in the point of suspension, and the base formed by the circumference of the circular plane in which the bob moves.

SHOULD this idea prove just (which Mr. Rit­tenhouse has been directed to ascertain) the revo­lutions of America will be performed in a circle, whose diameter, north and south, will be from a point in St. John's river, Nova-Scotia, to the mouth of the great river Missisippi, and west and east, from the Lake in the Woods, to an unknown distance in the Atlantic ocean. The only incon­venience will be the cutting a circular road through mountains and forests for the accommo­dation of foreign ministers and the officers of [Page 183] congress; and the providing sufficient ships at the point where the the said line of circumvolution shall leave the continent, and enter on the waters of the Atlantic, in order that their excellencies, and their honours, may be attendant on this sub­lunary planet in every part of its orbit.

FOR THE PENNSYLVANIA PACKET.

FROM what hath appeared in the public papers respecting the late contest between the judges of the court of oyer and terminer, and the grand jury for the city and county of Philadelphia, this sub­ject hath claimed the general attention of the coun­try, and the rights and duties of juries have been dis­cussed in almost every company—ignorantly enough no doubt. But the people, ever jealous of their liber­ties, [Page 195] are ready to take alarm on any appearance of danger, without regarding the quarter from whence the invasion arises, or the motives that induced it: the robes of office are not long enough to screen the invader from censure, nor the seemingly harmless motive of pride palliate the offence. Are our li­berties safe or are they not? is the only question with the people at large. Friends may explain, and sycophants may flatter, but strict right knows neither friends nor flatterers.

FOR my own part, I confess I am no lawyer; and wonder how it should come to pass that I should appear in the Pennsylvania Packet on a law subject—but the thing is unavoidable—as I feel myself urged by what I conceive to be a sense of duty.

I had, some how or other, acquired a notion that there were but two screens between the sub­ject and the rigour of the law. I mean the grand jury, and the power of pardon, lodged some­where in every system of government. The first, as a security to the innocent accused, that he may not be brought to a disgraceful, vexatious, and ex­pensive trial; and the other, a merciful interference to relax the rigid cords of conviction, in cases where, though the crime may have been sufficient­ly [Page 196] ascertained, yet concomitant circumstances may justify an extension of pardon.

I imagined that the grand inquest of the county, when duly returned, composed a body of trust and power inferior to none but the legislature itself. That they are constitutionally independent of every influence and controul in the line of their office, and not accountable for their decisions, unless in cases of manifest corruption and breach of the laws. That they are superior to and not the servants of the court, in as much as the court with all its powers cannot proceed against a citizen, or any individual in the criminal line, without the sanc­tion and consent of this grand inquest (except in cases of attainder or contempts in the face of the court). For, as to the doctrine of proceeding by information, I do not fully understand it; yet know enough to hope it, will never gain an esta­blishment in this country.

I thought the power of a grand jury, indepen­dent as it is, could never give any just cause of jealousy; because it is lodged in a kind of repre­sentation of the people of the county, if the she­riff does his duty with integrity and discretion—in a number of men hastily drawn together, between whom there could not have existed any previous [Page 197] collective connection, and, therefore, no danger of collusion; and particularly because their office and power are so temporary that there is not time to form any systematical abuses of either

I had further conceived, that as the grand jury were impannelled merely for the purpose of pro­tecting the innocent, by bringing the guilty, and none but the guilty, to an open trial, they must of course have a right to make a strict enquiry, ac­cording to the tenor of their official oath—that is, to command to be brought before them all manner of legal testimony, of what nature soever, that may in any wise tend to the discovery of truth, and of the whole truth; and that they may and ought to do this of right, uninfluenced, and unau­thorised by any interfering power. Because, if the grand jury were prohibited from all testimony but such as the court should furnish, and obliged to receive as authentic, nothing but the dictates of the judges or the attorney general (who in truth ought to be no more than assistants and advisers of the grand jury in matters of form only), they would be an unnecessary wh [...]el in the political machine, and serve no purpo [...] but that of giving a legal sanction to the will of [...]he court.

[Page 198]THESE, and some other extravagant notions, found myself possessed of whenever I conversed on the subject, but could not recollect the source from whence I had drawn my ideas.

AT length I saw a piece in the Freeman's Journal of the 15th instant, signed ADRIAN; and was horribly shocked to find sentiments and doc­trines advanced on this subject so very contrary to those which I had entertained. As I doubt not but this performance must have been written by a very great man, from the elegance of the stile, and by a very great lawyer, from the subtlety of the rea­soning, I began to fear that I was all in the wrong. I thought of it night and day, till at last I disco­vered tha [...] the store from which I had taken all my prejudices was close at my elbow. You must know that we have in the house an old folio book which my grandfather had brought with him from Eng­land. My father had made no other use of it but to strap his razor on the leathern cover thereof when he had occasion to shave himself; and as it concerned the politics of a distant country one hundred years ago, and as our family were no po­liticians, it had lain for a long time neglected on the upper shelf of a closet. I recollected, how­ever, that about twelve or fourteen years ago, I had in some idle hour, taken up this book, and read [Page 199] with some attention a piece therein respecting the rights and powers of a grand jury.

I hope our new pope is not as infallible as his predecessor of the same name: if he is, my au­thor, and consequently myself, must be greatly mis­taken. I shall not pretend to say which is most to be depended upon; but as the doctrine respects a very important right of the people, I shall con­trast the two authors, and leave the decision to abler judges.

THE book to which I refer is entitled ‘STATE TRACTS, being a collection of several choice trea­tises relating to government from the year 1660 to 1689.’ And the treatise which had engaged my particular attention is entitled ‘The security of Englishmen's lives; or the trust, power, and duty of the grand juries of England; explained according to the fundamentals of the English go­vernment, and the declaration of the same made in parliament by many statutes.’

IN the preface to this book we are told—‘This is a collection that will in general set forth the true and legal constitution of our ancient famous English government—In particular, here will be seen the trust, power, and duty of grand [Page 200] juries, and the great security of Englishmens lives in their faithful discharge thereof.’

WITH respect to Adrian's performance, I am willing to suppose that his narrative of the case in question may be true, not having had an opportu­nity of informing myself more certainly. All that I know of the matter is that a writer in Mr Oswald's paper had presumed to censure the conduct of the chief justice in two instances: for which offence two indictments had been sent to the grand jury against Mr Oswald as a publisher of libels. Had the testimony been sufficient to support these in­dictments: had the jury returned them true bills, and had a conviction ensued, the consequence would have been, at least this—that one citizen having offended another, would have been thrown into the power of the offended party to be puni­shed according to that measure of resentment which his wounded pride might instigate

ADRIAN is pleased to say—"For these false and scandalous libels on the court and the justice of the country, which ought not only to be above impu­tation but free of suspicion, Mr Oswald was arre­sted."—These libels, says Adrian, were false; but nineteen honest and impartial men, declare, upon [Page 201] oath, that they were not false^*—and not only upon oath, but according to Adrian's own asserti­on, ‘after keeping the bill two days, and hear­ing divers testimonies.’ It appears then that the grand jury did deliberately, and not hastily, or unwarily, reject those bills.

NOTWITHSTANDING the oath of secrecy ta­ken by the grand jury, Adrian thinks he has fished out the reasons by which they were gover­ne'd—‘It is said, (says he,) that upon examining several other persons it was made out, some how, that the printer had been misinformed: thence it was inferred, that mistake merely involved no guilt.’

ADRIAN had just before observed,that the jus­tice of the country should not only be above im­putation but free of suspicion. Now, I am inclined to think, that the grand jury, for the time, more nearly represents the justice of the country than even the learned judges themselves: and yet Adrian suspects that they made out testimony some how or other—an insinuation at least that they had [Page 202] acted unfairly—whether they did so or not, I leave to themselves to answer—I am not their champion in this particular instance—I contend only for ge­neral principles; and shall proceed to select from Adrian's performance some doctrinal passages, which seem to be inconsistent with the tenor of my old book.

‘WAS there not, (says he,) the usual probable evidence for an open enquiry by a petit jury? If there was, why stifle the cause in the chamber of the grand inquest?’ Probable evidence, and stifle a cause—horrid language! are men's lives, repu­tations, and fortunes to be hung upon the tenter-hooks of logical probabilities: and is the fair ac­quittal of a fellow-citizen from a heinous charge to be called a stifled cause?—Oh, sovereign pontiff, have mercy upon us! ‘Upon this, the chief-ju­stice seemingly provoked at their irregularities (I hope it was in appearance only) asked the grounds on which the grand jury had proceeded, and how they came to receive witnesses not admitted by the court?’ This, dilated into plain language, will stand thus:—Gentlemen, you are enjoined by your oath of office, diligently to enquire, and pre­sentment make, of the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. But, remember you are to shut your [...]ars against all testimony but such as [Page 203] I shall send you, otherwise you may perhaps find this fellow innocent of the charge, when it is my desire that he should be punished.

‘THEY declined (or one for the rest did so) giving any reasons for their conduct, under pretence that they were sworn not to reveal the secrets of the state, or their fellows; as if this oath restrained them.’ Adrian then promises, that he will hereafter shew the public—‘the true nature and constitution of a grand jury, that part of legal machinery, composed of unlearned men, (to use the phraseology of the profession,) which is regulated and controlled by the law, as other juries, at every step, and in every in­stance of their trust, and submitted to the legal direction of the court.’ Observe, reader, how irreverently his holiness speaks of one of the most respectable bodies in our government—little reve­rence, indeed, would be due, if they were no other than what he represents them to be: I wish to know what trust can be said to be committed to a body of men who are to be regulated and controll­ed at every step and in every instance? But let us contrast these modern doctrines, and this Adri­anatic idea of a grand jury with select passages from an author of the last century.

[Page 204]HE first speaks of the laws and government of England, in general, and gives the construction of grand and petit juries, but says—‘It is not de­signed at this time to undertake a discourse of of petit juries: but to consider the nature and power of grand inquests: and to shew how much the reputation, the fortunes, and the lives of Englishmen depend on the conscientious per­formance of their duty.’

‘IT was absolutely necessary for the support of government, that some should be entrusted to en­quire after all such, as by treasons, felonies, or les­ser crimes, disturbed the peace, that they might be prosecuted and brought to condign punish­ment; and it was no less needful for every man's quiet and safety, that the trust of such inquisitions should be put into the hands of persons of under­standing and integrity, indifferent and impartial: that might suffer no man to be falsely accused or defamed, nor the lives of any to be put in jeopar­dy, by the malicious conspiracies of great or small; or the perjuries of any profligate wretch­es. For these necessary honest ends was the institution of grand-juries.’

‘OUR ancestors thought it not best to trust this great concern of their lives and interests in [Page 205] the hands of any officer of the king's▪ or in any judges named by him, or in any certain number of men during life, lest they should be awed or influenced by great men, corrupted by bribes, flatteries, or love of power, or become negligent, or partial to friends and relations, or pursue their own quarrels, or private revenges, or connive at conspiracies of others, and indict thereupon.’

HE then goes on to shew what sort of men a grand jury ought to be composed of, and in what character the law considers them, viz.—Men ‘most honest and most sufficient for knowledge and abi­lity of mind and estate.’ —And not, according to the phraseology of ADRIAN, a legal machine, composed of unlearned men.

—‘I knew too well, says my author, that the wisdom and care of our ancestors in this in­stitution of grand juries, hath not been of late considered as it ought, nor the laws concerning them duly observed, nor have the gentlemen, nor other men of estates in the several counties, dis­cerned how insensibly their legal power and ju­risdiction in their grand and petit juries is decay­ed, and much of the means to preserve their own lives and interests taken out of their hands. 'Tis a wonder they were not more awakened [Page 206] with the attempts of the late lord chief justice K—, who would have usurped a lordly dicta­torial power over the grand jury of Somerset­shire, and commanded them to find a bill of in­dictment for murder, for which they saw no evi­dence; and upon their refusal, he not only threat­ened the jury, but assumed to himself an arbitra­ry power to fine them. Here was a bold battery made upon the ancient fence of our reputations and lives. If that justice's will had passed for law, all the gentlemen of the grand jury must have been the basest vassals to the judges, and have been penally obliged jurare in verbo magistri, to have sworn to the directions or dictates of the judges. But, thanks be to God! the late long parliament (though filled with pensioners) could not bear such a bold invasion of the English li­berties; but upon the complaint of one sir Hugh Windham, foreman of the said jury, and a mem­ber of that parliament, the commons brought the then chief justice to the bar to acknowledge his fault, whereupon the prosecution ceased.’

‘GRAND juries are our only security, inasmuch as our lives cannot be drawn into jeopardy by all the malicious crafts of the devil, unless such a number of our honest countrymen shall be satis­fied in the truth of the accusation.’

[Page 207] ‘THEREFORE every grand juryman is sworn as the foreman, in the words following, viz. You shall diligently enquire, and true presentment make of all such articles, matters, and things, as shall be given you in charge; and of all other matters and things as shall come to your own knowledge, touching the present service: the (king's) counsel, your fellows, and your own, you shall keep secret: you shall present no man for hatred or malice, nei­ther shall you leave any one unpresented for favour or affection, for love or gain, or any hopes thereof; but in all things you shall present the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, to the best of your knowledge: SO HELP YOU GOD!’

‘HENCE it evidently appears, that every grand jury is bound to enquire diligently after the truth of every thing for which they shall indict or present a man.—When a grand jury is sworn to enquire diligently, it is natural and necessary to their business to think of whom they should enquire; and it is plainly and easily resolved that they ought to enquire of every man that can or will inform them.—It seems, therefore, from the words of the oath, that there is no bound or limit set (save their own understanding or conscience) to any number or sort of persons of whom they are bound to enquire. They ought [Page 208] first and principally to enquire of one another, mutually what knowledge each of them hath of the matter in question before them. The law presumes that some at least of so many sufficient men of the county must know or have heard of all notable things done against the public peace. —If the parties, and the facts whereof they are accused, be known to the jury or any of them, their own knowledge will supply the room of many witnesses. Next, they ought to enquire of all such witnesses as the prosecutors will pro­duce against the accused. They are bound to examine all fully and prudently, to the best of their skill. Every juryman ought to ask such questions (by the foreman at least) as he thinks necessary to resolve any doubt that may arise in him, either about the fact, or witnesses, or other­wise, if the jury be then doubtful, they ought to receive all such further testimony as shall be of­fered them, and to send for such as any of them do think able to give testimony in the case de­pending.’

‘NO directions can legally be imposed upon them by any court or judges. An honest jury will thankfully accept good advice from judges, as they are assistants; but they are bound by their oaths to present the truth, the whole truth, [Page 209] and nothing but the truth, to the best of their own, not the judge's, knowledge; neither can they, without a breach of that oath, resign their consciences, or blindly submit to the dictates of others; and therefore, ought to receive or reject such advices, as they judge them good or bad.’

‘THE language wherein the oath is penned, is known and understood by every man, and the words in it have the same signification as they have wheresoever they are used. The judges (without assuming to themselves a legislative power) cannot put a new sense upon them, other than according to their genuine common mean­ing. They cannot magisterially impose their opinions upon the jury, and make them forsake the direct words of their oath to pursue their glosses. They are carefully to examine what sort of men the witnesses are.—It is undoubtedly law which we find reported in Stiles, that though there be witnesses to prove the bill, yet the grand inquest is not bound to find it if they see cause to the contrary.’ —St. Rep. 11.

MY author then considers the nature and intent of the secrecy imposed on the grand jury by their oath; which is chiefly to prevent combinations of [Page 210] witnesses, escapes of the guilty, and conspiracies a­gainst the accused: and then says,

‘IF it should be said, that whatsoever reasons there are for this oath of secrecy, yet it cannot deprive the king of the benefit of having the evi­dence made public, if he desires it, and that the grand jury do not break their oaths when the king, or the prosecutor for him, will have it so, 'tis not hard to shew that such notions have no foundation in law or reason, and seem to come from men who have not well studied the first principles of the English government.’

‘IT ought to be taken for a scandal upon the king, when he is represented in a court of justice, as if he were partially concerned; or rather in­clined to desire, that a party accused should be found guilty, than that he should be declared innocent, if he be so in truth.^* Queen Eliza­beth had a true sense of our law, when the lord Burleigh, upon sir Edward Coke, her then at­torney, coming into her presence, told her, this is he who prosecutes pro domina regina: for our lady the queen; and she said she would have the [Page 211] form of the record altered, for it should be attor­natus-generalis qui pro domina veritate sequitur: the attorney-general who prosecutes for our lady the truth.’

‘NOW suppose a man perfectly innocent and in some measure knowing in the law, should be ac­cused of treason or felony: if the judges should deny unto the grand jury the liberty of examin­ing any witnesses except in open court, where no­thing shall be offered that may help to clear the prisoner, but every thing aggravated that gives colour for the accusation; such persons only pro­duced as the king's counsel or the prosecutor shall think fit to call: how can innocence secure any man from being arraigned?’

‘FEW men at first see the danger of little chan­ges in fundamentals; and those who design them usually act with such craft, as, besides giving spe­cious reasons, they take great care that the true reason shall not appear. Every design, there­fore, of changing the constitution, ought to be most warily observed, and strictly opposed.’

‘THERE are two vulgar errors concerning the duty of grand juries, which, if not removed, will in time destroy all the benefit we can expect [Page 212] from that constitution, by turning them into a mere matter of form, which were designed for so great ends. Many have of late thought, and affirmed it for law, that the grand jury is neither to make so strict enquiry into matters before them, nor to look for so clear evidence of the crime as the petit jury; but that their present­ments being to pass a second examination, they ought to indict upon a superficial enquiry, and bare probabilities. Whereas, should either of these opinions be admitted, the prejudice to the subject would be equal to the total laying aside grand juries. There being in truth, no differ­ence between arraigning without any present­ment from them at all, and their presenting upon slight grounds.—For the first, that grand juries ought not to make so strict enquiry: it were to be wished, that we might know how it comes to pass, that an oath should be obligatory unto a petit jury and not unto the grand. The truth is, that grand juries have both a larger field for their enquiry, and are in many respects better capacitated to make a strict one than the petit juries. These last are confined, as to the person and the crime specified in the indictment; but, they are at large obliged to search into the whole matter that any way concerns every case before them.—The petit jury are bound to move with­in [Page 213] the circle of the indictment made by the grand jury.—'Tis true that upon hearing the party or his witnesses, the petit jury may acquit or judge the facts in the indictment to be less heinous or malicious than they were presented by the grand jury, but cannot aggravate them; which being considered, it will easily appear, by the intent and nature of the powers given unto the grand juries, that they are by their oaths obliged to keep all injustice from entering the first gates of courts of judicature, and to secure the innocent not only from punishment, but from all disgrace, vexation, expence or danger.’

‘IT is necessary to know what they mean by a probable cause or evidence, who say that our law requires no more for an indictment. Proba­ble is a logical term, relating to such propositions as have an appearance, but no certainty of truth. These may be allowed in rhetoric, which work­eth upon the passions: but courts of justice are not erected to bring men into condemnation, but to find who deserves to be condemned; and those rules are to be followed by them, which are least liable to deception. If the word probable be taken in a common, rather than a strict logi­cal sense, it signifies no more than likely, or ra­ther likely than unlikely. When a matter is [Page 214] found to be so, the wager is not even—there is odds upon one side. And this may be very good betting in a Tennis-court or at a horse race; but he that would make the administration of justice to depend upon such points seems to put a very small value upon the fortunes, liberties, and reputations of men; and to forget that those who sit in courts of justice have no other busi­ness there than to preserve them.’

‘IT hath been said (in a book entitled the grand juryman's oath and office) that their work is no more than to present offences fit for trial, and for that reason give in only a verisimilar or probable charge: And others have affirmed that a far less evidence will warrant a grand jury's indictment, than a petit jury's verdict. But nothing can be more opposite to the justice of our laws than such opinions. All laws, in doubtful cases, direct a suspension of judgement, or a sentence, in favour of the accused person: but if this were hearkened to, grand juries should upon their oaths affirm him criminal, when the evidence is upon such uncertain grounds, that they cannot but doubt whether he is so or not.’

‘'TIS scarcely credible that any learned in our laws should tell a grand jury that a far less [Page 115] evidence will warrant their indictment (being but an accusation) than the petit jury ought to have for their verdict’—‘There is no real difference between affirming in writing that an indictment of treason is true, as is the practice of grand juries, and saying that the party indic­ted thereupon is guilty of the treason whereof he is indicted, as is the course of petit juries. They are both upon their oaths, which are equally obligatory unto both. The one there­fore must expect the same proof for their satis­faction as the other, and as clear evidence must be required for an indictment as for a ver­dict.’

—‘WHATEVER ground this doctrine of in­dicting upon slight proofs may have got in our days, it is (as we have seen) both against law and reason, and contrary to the practice of for­mer times. My lord Coke, in his comment on Westm. 2d. tells us, that in those days (and as yet it ought to be) indictments taken in the absence of the party, were formed upon plain and direct proofs, and not upon probabilities and inferences. Herein we see that the practice of our forefathers, and the opinion of this great and judicious lawyer, were directly against this new doctrine; and some that have carefully [Page 216] looked backwards observed that there are very few examples of men acquitted by petit juries, because grand juries of old were so wary in can­vassing every thing narrowly, and so sensible of duty in proceeding unto truth upon satisfactory evidence, that few or none were brought unto trial till their guilt seemed evident.’

‘THEREFORE let the grand juries faithfully perform their high trust, and neither be cheated nor frighted from their duty. Let them pursue the good old way, since no innovation can be brought in, that will not turn to the prejudice of the ac­cused person and themselves. Let them not be deluded with frivolous arguments, so as to in­validate a considerable part of our law, and ren­der themselves insignificant cyphers, in expec­tation that petit juries will repair the faults they commit; since that would be no less than to slight one of the best fences that the law provides for our lives and liberties, and very much to weaken the other.’

SUCH are the quotations I have thought fit to make from this valuable old book; and wish the whole treatise on this subject were reprinted.

[Page 217]I shall be told, I suppose, that this is not law, and is of no authority—Of this I do not pretend to judge—but sure I am that it is reason; and if it is not law, it ought to be. What is generally called law authority is the opinion or decision of some learned judge on the point in question; but it should be observed▪ that grand juries are not like to have any contests, nor have they ever had any that I know of, except with the learned judges themselves: now, if the judge's opinion is to de­termine the point and become law authority, there can be little doubt but he will do it as much in favour of his own power, and that of his succes­sors, as possible.

IT does not appear by my old folio book, who was the author of this treatise on grand juries; it contains, however, the sentiments of a freeman one hundred years ago; and hath been deemed so judicious a performance as to gain a place amongst a valuable collection of authentic papers; and to be particularly pointed at and strongly recom­mended in the preface to this collection.

HOW very different are the opinions and doc­trines of this writer from those of Adrian! He is for giving the accused all possible chance for his vindication, even before he is brought to the test [Page 218] of a petit jury—Adrian is for giving him no chance at all, in the first instance, but seems to think that nothing less than the absolute impossibility of pro­curing even probable proof against him should acquit him there, and justice will be done af­terwards by the petit jury. And that he may be thankful for his final escape, after having been ruined in health, reputation, and estate by con­finement, infamy, fees and costs—my good old author seems to be of opinion, that it should be a cause of satisfaction and joy when a fellow-citizen is acquitted of a crime laid to his charge; but Adrian thinks a man accused, and not hanged, is a cause stifled. Lastly, my author esteems the grand inquest for the county as a most respectable body, in which the law hath placed the highest trust and confidence; but our new pope declares that it is no more than a legal machine, to be go­verned and controlled in all its movements by the judges of the court—which of these doctrines is most likely to be founded in truth, to promote the administration of justice, and secure the liberty of the subject, let the public determine.

SOME ACCOUNT OF A NEWLY DISCOVERED AND MOST COMMODIOUS METHOD OF WRITING; WHEREBY AN AUTHOR OF LITTLE OR NO GENIUS WILL BE ENABLED TO EXPRESS HIMSELF WITH MECHANICAL PRO­PRIETY. INVENTED AND FIRST MADE KNOWN BY A. B. GENT.

GENIUS is the gift of heaven, and manifests it­self by emanations altogether unexpected and surprising. Its powers are not to be obtained by application and study, but they may be assisted by art. When genius hath brought forth, art takes up and nurses the child, and carefully consult­ing its features, deduces rules for a happy con­ception.

[Page 246]SUCH being the connection between genius and art, it is but reasonable that a mutual intercourse of good offices should subsist between them. For my own part, I must confess that nature hath not been over bountiful to me in the article of genius; but I am desirous of exerting the little she hath given in behalf of those who may have no more than myself. For this purpose I have devised a method of writing on any subject; in which not only the sound may be an echo to the sense, if any sense there be, but the eye also shall be gratified with an exhibition of mechanical elegance and propriety; the only elegance perhaps to which such writers can attain.

BY this scheme the construction of a paragraph, the progress of a line, and even the disposition of the words, may all contribute to enforce the idea intended.

IT would be a tedious talk to form a system of rules for this new method of writing, or to give a description at large of my useful device; one ex­ample will fully explain the whole, so as to enable an author of the meanest capacity to understand and profit by the design; and a little practice will make it familiar to him.

For the Pennsylvania Gazette.

LOOKING over a file of papers, which lay on my table, I found a very extraordinary speech, delivered by a very extraordinary orator, in our house of assembly in April last, which I had taken down in short hand, but not from the mouth of the speaker. I much wonder that this oration, with the surprising circumstances that attended it, have not been noticed in any of the public prints: I hope the following account of that transaction will not be thought unworthy of a place in the Pennsylvania Gazette.

ON the 12th of April last, the house took into consideration, and debated by paragraphs, a bill entitled, ‘An act for regulating party-walls and partition-fences, in the city of Philadelphia, &c.’ when, to the amazement of all present, the business was interrupted by a voice, perfectly articulate, proceeding from the capital of one of the columns which supported the ceiling of the room.

[Page 253]THIS voice claimed a right to be heard on the subject of the bill then before the house.

AFTER the first surprise at such an unusual pro­digy had a little subsided, the right of a column to interfere in the business of the house was consi­dered and objected to; and it was urged, that no instance had ever occured where a wooden mem­ber—a blockhead—had presumed to speak in that assembly: that this column could, by no con­struction of law, be admitted as the represen­tative of any part or district of Pennsylvania, having never been ballotted for, elected, or returned as a member of assembly—That the house, when fully met, necessarily consisted of a certain number of members, and no more, and that this number is full and complete, by the returns from the several counties, as ap­pears by the records of the house: therefore, if this column should be allowed a voice, there must be a supernumerary member somewhere, which would be an absolute violation of the con­stitution. And lastly, that it is contrary to the order of nature that an inanimate log should interfere in the affairs of rational beings; providence ha­ving been pleased to distinguish so obviously be­tween men and things.

TO all this the column firmly replied—That he [Page 254] was, properly speaking, a standing member of that house, having been duly fixed in his station by those who had the right and power to place him there—That he was the true representative of a numerous race, descended in a direct line from the aborigines of this country—those venerable ancestors who gave the name of Pennsylvania to this state, and whose posterity now inhabit eve­ry county in it—That he was not only a member of the house, but one of its principal supporters, in as much as they could never make a house with­out him—That he had faithfully attended the pub­lic business, having never been fined as an absentee —And that those very members who now opposed him, had confided in his wisdom and intregrity, by constantly appealing to him ^* in every contest about the rules and internal economy of the house. And, lastly, that as the bill under consideration so nearly concerned his fellow creatures; and as he found himself miraculously endowed with the power of speech for this occasion, he was determined to make use of it in behalf of those who could not speak for themselves. After much debate, it was determined that the house would hear what this importunate post had to say respect­ing [Page 255] the bill before them: but peremtorily re­fused to allow him a vote on this or any other business in that assembly.

THE columnar orator, having obtained leave, addressed the house in the following and words.

"I am happy, oh! fellow citizens that speech hath been given me on this important occasion: and that I have your permission to exercise a power, thus wonderfully obtained, in the cause of truth and justice.

"I stand here this day an upright advocate for injured innocence. What fury—what madness— oh! deluded senators! hath induced you to propose the extirpation of those to whom you are indebted for so many of the elegancies, comforts, and bles­sings of life? If the voice of justice is not to be regarded within these walls, let your own inte­rests influence your conduct on this occasion. For I hope to shew that your safety and happiness are much more deeply concerned, in the business you are upon, than you are at present aware of.

"By the 12th section of the bill now depen­pending, it is proposed to cut down and remove [Page 256] all the trees standing in the streets, lanes, or alleys of this city—What! do we then hold our lives on such an uncertain tenure? Shall the respectable and inoffensive inhabitants of this city stand or fall according to the caprice of a few ignorant petiti­oners? And will this house without remorse, with­out even the form of trial, give its sanction to an edict, which hath not a parallel since the sangui­nary days of Herod of Jewry! But I hope to con­vince this honourable house that trees, as well as men, are capable of enjoying the rights of citizen­ship, and therefore ought to be protected in those rights—that having committed no offence, this arbitary edict cannot constitutionally pass a­gainst them—and that your own, and the wel­fare of your constituents, is nearly concerned in their preservation and culture.

"THE superiority which man hath assumed over what he calls the irrational and inanimate parts of the creation, is a superiority only founded in in his own pride and ignorance of our nature and faculties—The same divine hand that for­med you formed us; also the same elements that nourish you nourish us like you; we are compo­sed of bones, blood-vessels, fibres, and, for ought you know, muscles and nerves—Wit­ness [Page 257] the whole class of sensitive plants, wherein involuntary motion is made sensible even to your gross vision—like you, we die, and return to the earth from which we sprang, and then even the wisest amongst you cannot distin­guish between the dust of an elm and of a emperor.

"BUT I go much farther, and assert from your own authorities, that we sleep and wake; that we are male and female; that we are married and given in marriage; and that we propogate our species to fuller effect, and in a manner somewhat similar to what you do yourselves. In support of these doctrines, I could cite many respectable au­thorities from the ancients; and amongst the mo­derns Grew, Millington, Ray, Camerarius, More­land, Geoffroy, Vaillant, and above all, your favou­rite Linnaeus.

"WHEREIN then doth the vast difference be­tween men and the vegetable kingdom consist? I am bold to ask, wherein doth it consist? Oh! cries yon­der loquacious lord of the creation, we can converse, we can reason: Oh! cries yonder restless and fidgetting member, we can move from place to place. To the latter I answer, so can an ass, an owl, an Eel, and to much better advantage than he can, with all his [Page 258] locomotive faculties. The former requires a more serious reply.

"WE can converse, we can reason. Be it so, Man, arbitrary man, hath affixed certain ideas to certain sounds. If these sounds or noises are adapted to his miserable apprehension, they are called language, reason, music, and what not. But if the man should not be wise enough to understand the meaning of the noise he hears, he does not hesitate to pro­nounce it jargon, nonsence, unintelligible stuff— Thus, for instance, a man stands up and makes a long noise, called philosophy, divinity, law, &c. an ass lifts up his head, and makes a much greater noise, and it is called braying: yet to his own species, the ass is an intelligent creature, and his language is well un­derstood by them. If then man can thus mistake the matter with respect to brutes, although he sees that nature hath given them the apparent organs of speech, and daily hears them exercise these organs for the purposes intended, may he not also be mistaken with respect to the language of plants? a language too refined to make any impression on his gross and callous senses? That such a language doth actually exist, might be proved from the authority of holy writ; wherein we are frequently told, that the valleys rejoice and sing, and the cedars of Lebanon praise the Lord. But [Page 259] I shall content myself with reading to your honours a passage to this purpose from that ingenious au­thor Cyrano de Bergerac—Voyage to the Moon p. 91.

‘—THIS fancy of eating by himself made me cu­rious to know the reason of it. I was answered, that he chose not to taste either the odor of meats or of herbs,unless they had died spontane­ously: because he imagined them beings capable of grief. I am not much surprised, replied I, that some orders of people here abstain from flesh and things that have sensitive life; yet it seems to me ridiculous to fear hurting a cab­bage in the cutting. For my part, replied the de­mon, I must own there appears to me good rea­son for such an opinion. For is not a cabbage a being existing in nature as you are? Have you not both her equally for your mother? and she is more immediately so to the vegetable than to the rational production. The generation of the latter she hath left to the whim of a pa­tent: a rigour she doth not extend to the former, in as much as she obliges one to produce ano­ther. And whilst one man is scarcely able to get more than a score of his species at best, a head of cabbage shall produce four or five hundred of [Page 260] its own sort. Should we say that nature hath a greater esteem for a man then she has for a cab­bage, it would be only with a view to make us laugh; for nature is in incapable of passion, and can neither love nor hate. If she was susceptible of love, she certainly would have a greater ten­derness for the inoffensive cabbage, than for the unrelenting man who destroys it.’ And again p. 95.

‘—Who has given us the knowledge of certain beings superior to us, to whom we are neither related nor proportioned, and whose existence we find it as difficult to conceive, as the manner in which a cabbage can address itself to its own species? To understand which com­munication our senses are too weak, remember, if you can, amongst all the species of animals one more proud than the cabbage: who, while you destroy him, is above complaining; yet tho' he disdains to murmur, he thinks, nevertheless, the more. If he wants such organs as you are master of, formed for wailings and tears, yet he has o­thers where-with to implore heaven to revenge the injury done him, and expects it will not be with-held. It is not unlikely but you may ask, how I know the cabbage has these fine thoughts? but inform me first, can you prove it has not? or that, at the close of the night, the Russia cab­bage [Page 261] does not say to the savoy, good savoy, your most humble servant!’

"BUT still, says man, we have rationality and risibility to distinguish us from the rest of the creation; that is, when nature gave one man the power to reason, she gave another the power to laugh at him. For our parts, we confess, we never reason; we are satisfied with being directed by the laws of nature, which fully enable us to answer the end of our creation. We pretend not to be wiser than the hand that made us, and therefore we are guilty of no follies or excesses. We employ none of our powers in devising means for the more speedy and effectual destruction of our species: we do all the good we can; and when we can do no more, we retire from our present form of exi­stence to make room for our successors.

"THIS rationality, on which you so much value yourselves, is, in my opinion, a striking mark of imbecility and disgrace, a punishment inflicted on your race, doubtless, for some heinous offence heretofore committed. The intelligent beings of the spiritual world never reason; they see truth intuitively; they know the whole chain of causes and effects; they see, that in a triangle, the great­est angle must be subtended by the longest side, [Page 262] without any reasoning upon the problem. And in terrestrial nature there is no creature but man that is obliged to reason. They all perform their respective functions with precision and certainty under the influence of a law that cannot err; whilst your reason is ever involving you in difficul­ties and absurdities; is ever deducing false con­clusions from false premises; and the wiser you think yourselves the more mischief you generally do: what is reason one day is not reason ano­ther. About thirty years ago you reasoned upon the disease called the small-pox; and thousands in every city and country fell sacrifices to your ra­tional system. But you have now discovered that your system is no longer rational, and have adopt­ed a quite different mode of practice. Accident, not reason, discovered your error; and fact and nature contradicted the learned arguments of ma­ny a lengthy treatise on the subject: and this has been the case in every art and science; the solid reasonings of one age have been disputed, found fallacious, and despised by another.

BESIDES this, your reason teaches you to square all nature by your ideas of truth, and you know not what truth is: For instance, you eat, and drink, and walk, and you say I have life: but yonder willow can do none of these, therefore it is inani­mate. [Page 263] Deluded man! Can your weak intellects discover all the nice gradations of life—from the stone to the moss that grows upon it; from the moss to the sensitive plant, so called; from the sensitive plant to the polypus; from the polypus to the oyster; from the oyster to the ape; from the ape to the man; from the man to the angel; from the angel to an infinite series of beings whom you know nothing of? Do you not see that all the exhibitions in nature are but so many different modifications and manifestations of one original essence or principle? Is not the gravity which re­tains Jupiter in his orbit, the same gravity which operates on a grain in the scales of a Jew? The intelligent beings above you amuse themselves with the ridiculous blunders your rationality is continu­ally making. They despise the wretch, who, stretch­es every faculty of his mind to amass a hoard of wealth, which he has not the spirit to enjoy; they pity the inevitable fate of the voluptuous, and the vain toils of ambition; but they laugh incessantly at the folly of him who ransacks the earth to ga­ther sticks and stones, shells and bones, and after spending years in arranging them to his mind, makes a raree-show of his collection, and struts a philosopher, full of self-importance and vain conceit.

[Page 264]"IF follies, absurdities, and mistakes, were the only effects of your boasted reason, they might be patiently borne with; but when you exercise it to over-reach, ruin, and destroy each other; when you exert its powers to conceal or embarrass truth; to establish falsehood and injustice; to lead the blind out of his way, and the lame into a ditch; to render yourselves more ingeniously wicked, and more effectually mischievous; those divine in­telligences look down with disgust and horror on your boasted reason. They turn aside from the hateful object, and contemplate with pleasure the stately oak and the wide spreading beech; the water-loving willow, and the fruitful vine; e­ven all the vegetable creation, which from the pine that waves on the mountains' height, to the herb that drinks the dew of the valley, fill with exact propriety their respective stations, and are invariably governed by the laws of nature, which are the laws of truth and wisdom.

AFTER all, your reason is but instinct broke lose; or rather instinct is reason confined within proper limits, and directed to the proper objects. Do not then presume upon a faculty which, upon the whole, will be found to be the curse of your species. To prove this, you need only look into history for the facts and characters of former [Page 265] times; or to look round you for those of the present.

"I might now, may it please your honours, point out many circumstances wherein nature hath evi­dently and most advantageously distinguished the vegetable part of her works from man, by giv­ing them a real and substantial superiority. But, lest I should wander too far in so large a field, and encroach upon your patience, I will confine myself to one instance only—when a man dies, when he can no longer perform the functions of life, his body becomes, in a few hours, a loath­some mass of corruption, which his nearest friends hurry away, and put out of sight forever. It is not so with us, witness my appearance here this day. It is now many years since I lost my vegetable life by the fatal ax—my skin was stript off, and my limbs lopt away—and yet you see my body is still of use, and I stand here firm, sound, and hearty. And, barring an accident from all consuming fire, I shall attend future debates in this house, when those whom I have the honour now to address shall be no more.

"HAVING, as I hope, fully proved that trees, as well as men, are capable of citizenship, I shall now proceed to consider the crimes with which the trees of this city have been charged, and which [Page 266] the 12^th section of the bill before the house is intended to punish.

‘The preamble to this section sets forth— Whereas trees growing in the public streets, lanes, and alleys of the said city of Philadelphia do obstruct the prospect and passage through the same, and also disturb the water-courses and foot-ways, by the extending and encrease of the roots thereof, and must tend to spread fires when any break out within the said city: Be it therefore enacted, &c.’

"YOUR honours have an old saying, called a pro­verb, which naturally occurs on this occasion: It is easy to find a stick to beat a dog. That is, a man is never at a loss for a reason for punishing those who are in his power, and whom he wishes to op­press. But these trees, it seems, obstruct the pro­spect—of what? of many wretched buildings and some dirty alleys. For I deny that any one ele­gant street or building in this city is more ob­structed by trees than is necessary to the comfort of the inhabitants, and to give beauty to the pro­spect. Men of taste have always thought that a due mixture of trees and buildings—the beauties of nature and art harmonizing with each other —elegant architecture discovered through luxu­riant [Page 267] foliage, compose an exhibition truly delightful and sublime. But it seems your honours think otherwise. This preamble, therefore, should have stood thus—‘Whereas a moderate proportion of trees is supposed to be a great ornament to [...] city, and whereas we have no taste whatever for elegance and ornament: Be it therefore enacted, &c.’

"IT is said, that these trees obstruct the passage: but surely this charge is not supported by fact. They have modestly ported themselves as close to the gutters and water-courses as they can, leaving both foot-way and cart-way free and open. If, how­ever, any straggler should be found so obstructing the passage, let him die the death—I have nothing to say in his behalf: but it is farther urged, that the aforesaid trees disturb and disorder the water-courses and foot-ways by the extension of their roots—if so, cut off the offending roots, but do not destroy the whole tree. When justice exceeds her limits, she forfeits her name. Lastly, trees com­municate fire—Now, a tree hath no greater ene­my in nature than fire: cut him into inch pieces, grind him into dust, it will still exist as wood for ma­ny, many years. Fire alone can suddenly separate its component parts, and destroy its name. How then can it be apprehended that we should unite [Page 268] with our most inveterate foe for the destruction of the city, or join in the mischievous purposes of a common incendiary, whose power we have most reason to dread?

"BESIDES the charges laid in the bill, two others have been suggested against these devoted trees, viz. that they obstruct the operation of the engines in case of fire; and that they are not well affected to the present government, because they remained with the enemy when they had possession of the city.

"AS to the first, little need be said in answer. When the case occurs, let the obstacle be re­moved. It is as easy to procure an ax as an act of assembly; and the removal may be easily and speedily accomplished. But to depopulate a whole city, for the possible offence of a few individuals, is surely neither law nor reason.

"IN reply to the second charge, I would ask, Will any one pretend to say, that the leaving or not leaving the city on the approach of the ene­my marks the true line of distinction between whig and tory? It is confessed that we remained when others fled; we stood our ground, and heroic­ally suffered in our country's cause. Turn, worthy [Page 269] senators! Turn your eyes to yonder fields! Look towards the banks of the Schulkyl! Where are now those verdant groves that used to close the prospect and enrich the scene? Where are now those venerable oaks, that o'er the evening walk of sober citizen, of musing bard, of sportive youths, and sighing nymphs and swains, were wont to spread their hospitable shade? Alas! nought now remains but lifeless stumps that moulder in the summer's heat and winter's frost—the habitations fit of poisonous funge, toads, and ever gnawing Worms. Hinc illae Lachrymae! These were thy feats, oh, Howe! Excuse, great Sirs, this weakness in a post, or rather join your sympathetic tears with mine—the loss is yours—a loss, the import­ance of which you have not, perhaps, duly consi­dered; which I shall now endeavour to present to your attention.

"HAVING shewn, and I hope to the satisfaction of my hearers, the rank my fellow-trees hold in the scale of beings: their capacities of pleasure and pain, having also obviated the charges brought against them, and touched upon their sufferings in the great political revolution in this country, I come now to the last argument intended for their defence, I mean the great life and importance they are of to mankind. And here I shall be ve­ry [Page 270] concise, avoiding to mention those numerous circumstances in which trees obviously contribute to the pleasure, convenience, and profit of men, con­fining myself to one serious consideration, viz. How far the healths and lives of the citizens of Phila­delphia may be concerned in the business you have now in hand. A few hours will be sufficient to execute this fatal law; but it will take many years to repair the damage when you shall have disco­vered your error. Consider, therefore, oh! rash and capricious mortals, what you are about to do; whilst consideration may be of any use, caution is never too late, repentance may be. Know that these trees, whom you are about to extirpate, are your best, your safest physicians; the health of your citizens depends upon their preservation and growth; and you are now to decide, not only upon the existence of a few trees, but possibly on the lives of hundreds of your fellow-creatures. I say, these trees are your best, your safest physi­cians. They have published no books, therefore they have no systems to defend. Their practice is ever uniform, dictated by nature, and establish­ed by success, and, therefore, they make no whim­sical experiments, uncertain in every thing but mi­sery and death. In a word, they have no occasion to kill one hundred in order to learn how to cure one.

[Page 271]"IN the autumn they modestly drop their foli­age, to admit the comfortable rays of the sun to your dwellings, their leaves being then of no far­ther use to you. But no sooner does the spring advance, but they arm themselves in your defence; they see the enemy approach—innumerable little deaths, in various subtle forms. These are by the fermenting heats of summer, generated in every pool, gutter, and common sewer, and in all the murky filth of your city. No sooner have the poisonous atoms acquired sufficient malignity, but they leave their native cells and float in air. One of these inhaled, infects the blood; and soon a hus­band, son, or father falls. To prevent this, the friendly tree spreads its broad and numerous foli­age. Every leaf is expanded to intercept and ab­sorb the floating mischief. And thus receiving and digesting the noxious particles, they purify the ambient air. For this important philosophy, you are indebted to Priestley, Ingenhouse, and Fonta­na. The enemy had studied these authors, when they cut the trees from yonder plain: hoping thereby to leave the atmosphere poisoned for your destruction. Is it not obvious that diseases most prevail when vegetation begins to cease? About the middle of August most leaves have acquired their utmost growth; they are then saturated with the noxious vapours, and can no longer perform [Page 272] their friendly office: and from that time, to the first frost of the season, (which concludes the ge­neration of these pernicious airs,) sickness and deaths are most frequent.

"AND will you then, oh, guardians of the peo­ple! will you, by a fatal decree, banish from among you, those salutary citizens, to whom you are so much indebted for the blessings of health, with­out which, every other temporal blessing is of little value? And what advantage do you propose to yourselves by the execution of this law? your streets and alleys, indeed, will not be obstructed by trees, but they may be obstructed by frequent funerals and mournful processions.—I will not pro­long the subject—If your honours will but balance the imaginary good with the real dangers that will attend your present purpose, I am confident, that your zeal for the public safety, will induce you to remove—not the trees from the streets of this city, but the 12^th section from the bill under conside­ration.

"I have but one thing more to add; and that is, that by the 15^th section of your constitution, you are enjoined not to pass any law, except on occa­sions of sudden necessity, until the next session af­ter the same hath been proposed and published for [Page 273] consideration. No such necessity appears in the present case—the roots and branches of these de­voted trees will not encrease to such a ruinous and enormous size, between this and the next session of assembly, as to render immediate amputation ne­cessary.

"I would be far from supposing this honourable house capable of malice or partiality; yet I must observe, that this bill hath been hurried through the forms of legislation with unusual speed. You have spent much precious time in determining whe­ther A. or B. should sit for a certain time in a cer­tain chair; but do not hesitate to doom to death a number of quiet, harmless, and beneficent citizens, without remorse, without enquiry, without even the common forms of justice."

HERE the orator ceased, and was dumb. The house was more surprised at the manner, than at­tentive to the matter of this curious speech. The question was put, and the clause passed without a dissenting voice; notwithstanding the importunate eloquence of this philosophic post.

FULL AND TRUE ACCOUNT OF A TERRIBLE UPROAR WHICH LATELY HAPPENED IN A VERY EMINENT FAMILY.

IT is not long since the lady Pennsylva, a person of high distinction, and much esteemed for her wis­dom, wealth, and importance, was, to the surprise of every one, delivered of fine boy. She was dotingly fond of this infant; and the more so as the tongue of slander had endeavoured to cast infamy on her and the child, by plainly calling her a whore and the boy a bastard. But it was well known to her intimate acquaintance that she had been pri­vately married to Patriotism, a very worthy and honourable gentleman, who was indeed the father of the child. But Patriotism unfortunately died soon after the lady Pennsylva was brought-to-bed.

[Page 298]THE untimely death of the father greatly en­deared the son to the disconsolate widow; and more especially, as the boy bore a striking likeness of her lost husband.

SHE called him Independence; she nursed him with care and attention, and endeavoured to pro­cure such servants in her family as would feed and tend him, rather from motives of real affection than from mercenary views. But such disinterested persons were not easily found. Jealousies had al­ready taken place. Some envied others for their stations and wages, and hatred and contempt in­fected the family, till at last the jarring views and interests of the servants broke out into an open rupture—The case was this—

THE lady Pennsylva had hired a wet-nurse for her child—her name was Reedina—and no one doubted but that she had a sincere affection for the baby. Nevertheless, she had but an uneasy time of it. Having not the best temper in the world, she not only had many quarrels of her own upon hand, but she took part also in those of the other servants; in which she did not exercise upon all occasions an impartiality becoming the station she filled in the family. In short, she suffered her­self to be influenced by those who were not her [Page 299] equals in abilities; and who made use of her power and influence to gratify their own ambitious views.

IN due course of time, Reedina's milk dried a­way,^* and it became necessary to get another nurse for the infant.

REEDINA, though necessarily removed from her station, was not willing to resign her sway in the family; but wishing to have it still in her power to shew favour to those whose party she had espoused, and to punish those who had been too free in their strictures on her conduct, she found out one ma­dam Potterini, and strongly recommended her as a fit person to supply her place.

MADAM Potterini was a very good sort of wo­man, and truly attached to young Independence; but then she was altogether unskilful in the affairs of a nursery. She knew not how to dress the ba­by with propriety; and in case of teething, lax, belly-ach, or other disorders incident to the tender state of infancy, she was ignorant of the treatment proper on such occasions; having never had the opportunity of acquiring that kind of knowledge. [Page 300] Reedina, nevertheless, recommended her in the strongest terms as a suitable nurse for the child, and got all those servants who were in her interest to join in the recommendation; not that she thought madam Potterini equal to the task, for she well knew to the contrary: but expected that Potteri­ni's ignorance in the business of a nursery would render her dependent upon her for advice in all things, so that she in fact might govern the family as heretofore, although out of place.

THOSE who hated Reedina, saw through this design, and opposed a Mrs. Richardson to madam Potterini, as a person better qualified to do honour to the station.

NO sooner was this rivalship known, but Reedina's party became outrageous—every thing that calum­ny could invent, or malice insinuate, was poured forth against Mrs. Richardson, and high panegyrics wrought up in favour of madam Potterini. These were all answered with equal malignity by the partizans of the other side against Reedina and her adherents. Nothing but railing and reviling was heard in the house—abuse was answered by abuse, and slander ballanced by slander.

AT length the good lady Pennsylva, hoping to [Page 301] put an end to these disgraceful altercations, made her election, and committed the care of her son, and the superintendency of her family to Mrs. Richardson. But this determination had not the desired effect: scolding, lying, and abuse were car­ried to greater heights than ever; the servants were all formed into parties, and the peace of the family was entirely broken up.

NOW the principal partizans had arranged them­selves in the following order:

ON one side, was Mrs. Richardson, the wet nurse: to her adhered Kitty Oswald, one of the chamber-maids; miss Jackson, the seemstress; Peggy [...]us [...], the cook; her brother Jacob, the clerk; Tom Fallon, the scullion, with many others.

ON the side of the malecontents, appeared Ree­dina, the late nurse; Thomas, the chief steward; George, the under steward; Fanny Belly, the second chamber-maid; cock-eyed Moll and Doll Frow­sey, her understrappers; together with Jonathan, the late coachman; Wilkins, the footman; Henry, the lick-spit, and several more.

THESE persons, however, opposed to each other, equally professed a warm attachment to [Page 302] young Independence, and to the interests of the fa­mily; but neither side would allow that the other had any sincerity in these professions. They mu­tually charged each other with disaffection, and terms of obloquy and reproach were dealt about without the least regard to common decency.

THEIR disputes and animosities were at length wrought up to such a pitch of rancour and inveteracy as to break out in actual warfare:— but all things in order—Before a poor mortal un­dertakes a task so arduous, he should, out of decen­cy and in compliance to ancient custom, invoke supernatural help: and, if he should have creduli­ty enough to believe that assistance hath been grant­ed, and even fancy that he feels himself inspired, there is no doubt but he will perform his task with a vigour and spirit proportionable to the strength of his faith.

COME then, thou heavenly muse! who hast as­sisted in describing the bloody frays of wrangling mortals, from the famous siege of Troy in ancient times, to the more famous siege of York-town in Virginia, of recent date! Or, if there should be two of your divinityships, one more skilled in the mortal contests of the field, and the other bet­ter versed in private broils and warfare of the fist [Page 303] and tongue—even thou, who heretofore didst guide the pen of Butler, when he sang the frays of Hudibras, with rabble rout—thou, who didst thy aid afford when Fielding, in exalted prose, describ­ed the valorous feats of Molly Seagrim, in the field of death, or Mrs. Partridge, in domestic strife—refuse me not thy help! but teach me how to scold!—Alas! my invocation is in vain—the goddess hears me not—I must therefore try what mere mortal strength can do; and with no other help or inspiration, but what Kitty Oswald and Fanny Belly can afford, must venture to proceed.

IT was on a Friday morning—a day of the week branded with ill fortune from the earliest times; the lady Pennsylva had gone abroad on some occa­sion or other. Kitty and Fanny, the two chamber-maids, were about their ordinary occupation, when Kitty's brush, in sweeping the room, happened to strike against Fanny's heel, as she was making up the bed: whereupon the following dialogue en­sued.

‘I think, miss Kitty, it would be well for you to learn to handle a brush before you pretend to the business of a chamber-maid in a gentlewo­man's family: and I think it very hard that peo­ple, who have served as I have done, should be [Page 304] insulted by every upstart hussey that comes into the house.’

‘UPSTART! (exclaimed Kitty with some heat) and pray who are you? you six-penny retailer of scandal and lies.—You were in high luck, to be sure, when George, the under-steward, and Jona­than, the coachman, sent for you out of the country to do their dirty work.^* I think nurse Reedina had little to do when she suffered such a mischievous baggage to come into a decent fa­mily; I know of no good you and your under­strappers, cock-eyed Moll and Doll Frowsey, have done, unless setting the servants together by the ears, and disturbing the peace of the whole fa­mily, may be called doing good.’

"GET out, you b—ch!" replied Fanny—

BUT, gentle reader, to avoid trouble to myself, and not to offend nice ears, I propose to omit the flowers of scurrillity which bloomed on this occa­sion; [Page 305] yet for the benefit of those who wish to have this dialogue seasoned according to the taste of the times, I shall direct this narrative, in the future editions thereof, to be printed with blanks in the proper places, which the reader may fill up accord­ing to his fancy out of Tom Brown, Ned Ward, or the more modern eloquence of the FREEMAN'S JOURNAL and INDEPENDENT GAZETTEER.

—‘GET out, you b—ch! (replied Fanny) you had better not mention nurse Reedina, George, the steward, and Jonathan, the coachman:— pray who are Jenny Richardson, Pegg Rush, and all the gang of you?—Did not nurse Ri­chardson call young master a bastard before he was born?—Yes, you jade—and after he was born, she would have seen him starve before she would have given him a pannykin of pap; and yet she must be set up, to be sure, over the heads of better people than and herself: as for Peggy, the cook, she had better by half attend to her busi­ness, and not employ her time in fomenting quar­rels in the house, and setting mistress against her best servants: for it is well known, that Pegg told my lady, that all those who assisted at her lying-in, were rabscallions and tatterdemallions:^* and so, miss Kitty, before you set about abusing [Page 306] other people, please to look at home at your own troop of trumpery.’

‘SINCE you come to that, madam Trollop, (an­swered Kitty,) I can soon be even with you.— Did not George, the steward, and Jonathan, the coachman, your great patrons and friends, cabal and rail against general Worthy, our master Pa­triotism's chief friend, and now his executor? and did not he say he ought to be turned out of the house? for which Jonathan got a good flogging with his own horse-whip! and, more­over, did not nurse Reedina treat with a villain about poisoning young master soon after he was born?—yes, she did—and Peggy Rush knows, or at least says she knows, that Reedina would strangle him this moment if she could.’

THERE is such an intimate sympathy between the tongue and the hands, that when the former is in full exercise, the latter cannot long remain inac­tive: for words like trumpets are but preludes to battle. Fanny replied only by spitting full in Kit­ty's face: and so to fisty-cuffs they went without further ceremony, and with as keen an appetite as ever Dr. ***** sat down to a turtle feast.

AS a dog, which hath not only a natural hatred, [Page 307] but a contempt for the cat, (who, though the weaker animal, excels in cunning and malice,) should puss presume to lift her paw against him, sei­zes and shakes her until his mouth is filled with hair, the spoils of the enemy: just so the enraged Kitty fell furiously upon poor miss Belly, and tore from her head, not only her gauze cap, but a handful of those ornaments, in which, like Sampson's, her chief strength lay: for Fanny was proud of her locks, as they were very pliable, and would set any way her admirers chose they should: she, however, like gri­malkin aforesaid, flew upon her adversary, and in a moment imprinted eight lines of vengeance on Kitty's cheeks, which lamented the injury in tears of blood.

SOME authors have inadvertently mentioned ten marks of retaliation: but it should be observed that the thumbs seldom do execution on these occa­sions. Be it as it may, this is certainly a very an­cient method of wiping off old scores by making new ones.

THE noise of this battle soon brought the family together. Kitty being Fanny's superior in strength, and finding her strength encreased by pain and rage, grasped her antagonist round the waist, lifted her from the floor, and in the presence of the whole [Page 308] houshold, turned up her coats, and spanked her right soundly with the dust-pan. Cock-eyed Moll and Doll Frowsey seeing their principal thus expos­ed, and in the hands of the enemy, soused the con­tents of two chamber-pots in Kitty's face.

THE company immediately arranged themselves according to their respective parties, and the battle became general. Peggy, the cook, emptied a hot dripping-pan on Reedina's head, whilst Jacob, the clerk, spattered her with a bottle of ink; Felon, the scullion, threw a quart of slush on George, the steward's old scarlet cloak; but George avoided fighting openly, and only slily pinched his adversa­ries as opportunities offered; Reedina attacked nurse Richardson with a carving knife, with which she not only slashed her cloaths, but gave some ug­ly wounds in the flesh: whilst Mrs. Richardson en­deavoured to defend herself with a pillow snatched from the cradle. All was uproar and confusion, and in the tumult, the cradle was overset, and little Independence lay sprawling and bawling upon the floor, unnoticed and unpitied by the furious com­batants.

IN the midst of the storm, up rose Thomas, the chief steward, and with great solemnity commanded silence in the name of the lady Pennsylva. Hosti­lities [Page 309] being suspended, he called upon Kitty, and severely reprimanded her as being the author, or at least the encourager, of all this animosity: he reproached her as a virago, a common scold, and threatened to have her well ducked and turned out of doors: he emphatically rebuked her for abusing poor Fanny, the chamber-maid, and swore that she should answer for her conduct to her mistress.

KITTY, who had spunk enough, could not bear this:—‘Yes, Mr. Thomas, (said she,) you may well stand up for poor Fanny the chamber-maid, as you call her, and good reason why, truly, for all the house knows she is your whore. How long is it, pray, since she brought forth a bastard in the shape of a law-book?^* Its features are too like its precious father to be mistaken: you are a fit person, truly, to preach up order and decency—you, who have secretly encouraged your trollop in all her provoking insolence, and scandalous lies. Fanny may say what she pleases— it is all proper—it is all right—she is a girl of spirit, and will make people know their places:—but, if I open my mouth, it is all calumny, slander, and breach of the peace—and what not. As to your threats, I scorn them; nature gave me a [Page 310] tongue, and I will make use of it in spite of you or your pitiful whore—You silence me!—you duck me, and turn me out of doors!—I hope we are not come to that pass yet, that no one is to be allowed freedom of speech in this family, without your gracious licence: but I will ask my lady when she comes home, whether or no, she has thought proper to put the keys of our mouths into your pocket. I know you think yourself a very great man, Mr. Thomas—and you are a very great man, Mr. Thomas, to be sure; but for all that, I hope poor servants may perform the functions of nature without waiting for your permission—and so for the future, Mr. Thomas,’—Her tongue was running on at this rate, like the din of a brass candlestick tumb­ling down stairs, when a thundering rap at the door announced the arrival of lady Pennsylva: hav­ing heard of the terrible uproar in her family, from some of the neighbours, she had hurried home, and was no sooner admitted into the house, but she rushed to the scene of action.

THE first object that drew her attention, was the poor infant kicking and screaming under the cradle, which had been turned topsey-turvey over him. She took him up from the floor, and sooth­ed him in her bosom with maternal tenderness: [Page 311] she then took a survey of the belligerent powers, as they stood before her, reeking hot with the fury of battle, and exclaimed with horror:—‘Heaven preserve me! what do I see? can these be the servants of my house? can these be the chosen few in whom I have placed so much confidence, and to whose nurture and care I have entrusted my darling child?—the hope of my family?— Go, miserable wretches; go, and cleanse your­selves from filth, and repair your disordered dress; for I will not hold converse with you in your present tattered and bespattered conditi­on: and see that you all meet me an hour hence in the great hall:—but first, Reedina, give up that carving knife; would you make a slaugh­ter-house of my apartments?—oh, shame! shame!’ Saying this, she hurried away to her chamber, oppressed with grief: and the comba­tants silently stole off, some one way, some another, to prepare as well as they could, for the meeting in the great hall.

AT the appointed time, the lady Pennsylva re­paired to the hall, and seating herself in an armed chair, with her little son in her lap, she rang the bell; a summons which soon brought all the house­hold into her presence. After a few moments of [Page 312] serious and expressive silence, she thus addressed them.

‘WHERE is now that heroic ardour which once animated my friends in the defence of my righteous cause, against a cruel and powerful foe? Where is now that disinterested zeal—that divine enthusiasm, which once determined you to brave every extremity, in support of me and my infant son, when a cloud, black with ven­geance, hung heavy over the fortunes of my house! Where is now that virtuous magnanimity, which, like a tower of strength, stood firm a­gainst the most severe attacks?—But, why do I ask where? alas! I know too well, that they all lie buried in the sacred tomb of my departed lord.’

‘YOU, for your abilities and supposed attach­ment to me and mine, have been selected to be the special guardian of my honour and interests; but yon have most ungratefully exercised those abili­ties in sowing discord in my family, and distracting my affairs. When you thus attack each other with all the rancour and malice of mutual enemies, you weaken my strength, and forward the views and wishes of those who seek the downfall of my house. Look at this darling infant, and con­sider for a moment, how nearly his life is con­nected [Page 313] with your conduct.—Would you wish to see him branded with infamy?—cast out, and torn by dogs?’—Here the good lady shed tears in abundance.—‘I believe you would not—or do you wish to see him live, and grow to a state of manhood, and become a protector and a blessing to you and your's?—If so, for heaven's sake, cease these intestine broils—he lives in your uni­on—he dies in your discord.’

‘BUT should these base and vulgar quarrels be productive of no such serious consequences; they at least affect, nay, deeply wound, the reputation of my family. What must my friend the French nobleman think of us? What must the Dutch merchant next door, or the Spanish don over the way, think of us? Perhaps you care not— But, I ask, what do you think of yourselves? I appeal to your own consciences, whether in these inveterate altercations, you find your passions raised by a zeal for me, and a jealousy for my welfare, for this is what you all pretend—or, whether ambition, revenge, or avarice is not the true source of these animosities? It is easy to gild a foul design with a fair motive; but the touch-stone of adversity will expose the baser metal; and God only knows how soon your sincerity may be brought to the test. My heart [Page 314] is full and heavy; I shall not enlarge—I love you all; and my warmest wish is, that those whom I love, may love one another.’

‘WHAT I had principally in view in ordering your attendance here, was to inform you, that my dear deceased husband hath directed by his will, that at the end of every seven months, pro­per persons shall be appointed to enquire into the oeconomy of my family, and the conduct of my servants;^* they are to be severe and impartial judges. The time of this enquiry is now near at hand; I shall, therefore, not investigate the oc­casion and circumstances of this day's uproar; but resign you to those judges, who will not fail to punish the guilty, and rectify all abuses: in the mean time, however, I would earnestly and most pathetically recommend it to you, Mrs. Richardson, and to you, Mr. Thomas, to exert yourselves in preserving the peace of the family, by discouraging all acrimonious altercations, re­conciling jarring interests, and distributing justice with moderation and impartiality.—Away! and leave me to the digestion of that sorrow, from which you alone can relieve me by your future harmony and good conduct.’

[Page 315]SHE ceased, and the company immediately dis­persed in silence; but, in going out, Fanny could not resist an opportunity that offered of treading upon Kitty's toes; and then, with great formality asked her pardon for the accident.^*

A REMARKABLE HISTORICAL FACT, Mentioned in the records of the empire of CHINA, to be found in the great library of the royal city of PEKING, vol. 3458: translated from the original, by an English gentleman who resided many years in that country, and now first published in the English language.

IN the reign of HOANG-TI, who was co-tempo­rary with Noah, a cacoethes, or malignant distem­per, raged amongst the officers and servants of the emperor's court. The symptoms by which it ma­manifested itself, were a most licentious delirium, and a virulent apathy, without any apparent cause of phrenzy, or visible diminution of health and strength: the infected violently attacked each other, and even strangers, if they crossed their way, by discharging, periodically, a black corrosive sali­va, which always stained and sometimes infected those on whom it fell, to the great annoyance of the whole court.

WHEREUPON the great emperor HOANG-TI, ever careful for the good of his people, issued his [Page 317] royal mandate, commanding Cu-tan-sla-ash, his chief surgeon, and Pois-on-al, his chief physician, and Whim-sic-al, his chief metaphysician, to take the infected parties under their care; and after ex­amining into the cause of this extraordinary disease, to apply the proper remedies, and then make re­port to him of the whole matter.

IN pursuance of this mandate of the emperor HOANG-TI, many persons were apprehended, and carried to the grand infirmary. Amongst these were Chink-Chink, the poet, who was one of the royal council; Twing-Twang, the musician, who was also a mandarine; Fee-fa-fum, of the military; Quil-king-gum, the scribe; Rush-Tush, the politi­cian; Tsang-hu, and Van-ho-ai, men of letters; with Fal-fool-fi-reb-rand, Van-hoc, and many others of inferior note.

AFTER Cu-tan-sla-ash, the surgeon, Poi-son-al, the physician, and Whim-sic-al, the metaphysician, had duly considered the case, they were unanimously of opinion, that this disease was occasioned by obstruc­tions in the pori belarii, ductus hypaticus, and ductus pancreaticus: that in consequence of these obstruc­tions, the bile not being duly elaborated by the liver, or sweetened and corrected by the pancrea­tic juice, was extravasated into the abdomen, from [Page 318] whence, ascending through the epigastric region into the thorax, it soon reached the salival glands, and so mixed with the chyle: that a great part was usually discharged through the mouth by spitting and sputtering; but the remainder being swallowed into the stomach, pervaded the whole circulation of digestion, and finally went off in foetid urine, or in a clammy and offensive sweat.

HAVING thus discovered the diagnostic symp­toms, the curative indications readily presented, viz. to deterge the intestines by potent cathartics, to dislodge the obstructions by vigourous concussi­ons, and to open a way for the virulent matter, by promoting sensible and insensible perspiration: and after much deliberation, it was concluded, that all these purposes might be affected by one simple ope­ration, viz. THE BASTINADO; provided it should be administered to the patient usque ad sudorem & putorem.

AGREEABLY to this determination of Cu-tan-sla-ash, the surgeon, Pois-on-al, the physician, and Whim-sic-al, the metaphysician, the patients were forthwith bound hand and foot, and the operation administered with great alacrity.

THE effect was truly astonishing: some, indeed, [Page 319] required more, and others less, of the salutary ex­ercise, according to the strength of the disease, and obstinacy of the patient: but in the end, all reco­vered and were released; except only the unfortu­nate Quil-king-gum, in whom the distemper was so inveterate, that he died under the operation, be­fore any favourable symptoms appeared: this be­ing the case, it was agreed between Cu-tan-sla-ash, Pois-on-al and Whim-sic-al, that the body of the de­ceased should be opened, in order to a more certain discovery of the nature of this extraordinary disease.

THIS was accordingly done, and these learned men having made the investigation with great skill and attention, formed a report of the case, and laid the same before the emperor, in obedience to his royal mandate.

THE report was in these words.

"TO the great and mighty HOANG-TI, empe­ror of CHINA, governor of the world, the inven­tor of arts, and the father of his people:

"THE report of Cu-tan-sla-ash, his chief surge­on; and of Pois-on-al, his chief physician, on in­specting the body of Quil-king-gum, the scribe, deceased.

[Page 320]"IN obedience to the royal command, we have attended to the cacoethical disease which had seized many persons belonging to your imperial court; and we are most happy in informing your majesty, that we have by proper applications restored all the patients that fell under our care, to composure, health and harmony, except the scribe Quil-king-gum, who, unfortunately expired under the opera­tion necessary to his cure. This circumstance, however, hath afforded us an opportunity of dis­covering, by occular testimony, the nature and seat of his disease.

"THE deductions from these facts we leave to the learned Whim-sic-al, your majesty's chief meta­physician.

"WE have only to add, that in order to con­firm the cure of those patients, whom we have been so fortunate as to restore, we have prepared emollient cataplasms of spices and aromatic herbs, to be applied to the breast, with a view to soften, sweeten, and correct any remaining malignity about the region of the heart."

SIGNED, Cu-tan-sla-ash, with the signature of a human skull. Pois-on-al, with the signature of leaf of hemlock.

[Page 321]"TO the great H [...]ang-ti, emperor of China, go­vernor of the world, the inventor of arts, and the father of his people.

"THE report of whim-sic-al, the metaphysician, on considering the case of Quil-king-gum, the scribe, as set forth in the report of Cu-tan-sla-ash, the surgeon, and Pois-on-al, the physician.

"YOUR majesty's chief surgeon and chief phy­sician, having carefully and judiciously represented the remarkable circumstances, which occurred in opening the body of Quil-king-gum the scribe; it is my duty to explain to your majesty how this de­rangement in the corporeal system became the ef­ficient cause of that obliquity of conduct and acri­mony of temper so conspicuous in the life and man­ners of the deceased.

"EVER zealous to gratify the desires of my sovereign, it is with great concern I find myself under the necessity of praying your majesty's in­dulgence in this particular, until I shall have com­pleted a work which has been the attention and study of my whole life.

[Page 322]"THIS work which I shall have the honour of laying at the feet of the great Hoang-ti, will con­tain a full and satisfactory account of the original elements of the spiritual and material kingdoms: It will trace the various phenomena that arise from the innumerable combinations of these elementary principles.

"I shall shew that in this visible world all things are but so many different exhibitions of one ori­ginal essence; as the leaves, flowers, and fruit of a plant are only varied displays of the same nu­tritious juice.

"I shall shew that fire is only condensed light, air is condensed fire, water condensed air; that earth is condensed water, and that metals, stones, and all the fossile kingdom are different modifica­tions of condensed earth.

"SO also with regard to spirit; I shall con­vince your majesty, and I hope, the whole world, that spirit or mind, abstracted from all adjuncts, is a simple essence or unity; not compounded of parts, but of powers only: That there can, there­fore, be no original difference between souls; in­asmuch as one unity cannot differ from another, [Page 323] except only in identity, and their powers being all essential must therefore be all equal.

"THAT to accomplish the inscrutable purposes of the great Creator, spirit became connected with, and inclosed in material organs: and being so incorporated cannot exhibit or exercise any of its powers, but such as the organization of the body with which it is connected is capable of making manifest.

"THAT, upon these principles, differences in temper and abilities are not occasioned by an ori­ginal difference of souls, but are the consequences of a different organization of bodies. Inferring from this system, that the soul of an ideot, when disengaged from the faulty body with which it was united, hath all the powers and faculties of the soul of a philosopher. And, further, that the soul of an horse is as truly spiritual as the soul of a man.

"I shall have the honour also to shew, that, not­withstanding this hypothesis, virtue and vice are not merely the effect of mechanism; but that the soul having an innate sense of right and wrong, and a power of controul over the body, can at plea­sure, restrain or encourage its mechanical propen­sities; [Page 324] of which I shall give a variety of convinc­ing examples. The body is the slave of an active soul, but may by inattention and indulgence be­come the master. When the will of the soul is strong, it is in vain for the body to plead lassitude, weakness, or pain. Hence it is that the sailor braves contending elements, the soldier faces fire and sword, and the martyr smiles amidst sur­rounding flames. For Volition is an essential qua­lity of the soul, and however poorly it may exhi­bit its powers, according to the circumstances of the material engine with which it is so intimately connected, it is always free to will.

"IN this work I shall also explain to your ma­jesty's comprehension all the mysteries of volun­tary and involuntary motion; and trace the spirit from her first pantings in the punctum saliens, to the last struggles of animal life.

"YOUR majesty will then plainly see, that the character and conduct of the late Quil-king-gum was perfectly consonant with the frame and con­stitution of his body, as represented by Cu-tan-sla-ash, your chief surgeon, and Pois-on-al, your chief physician; and you will know also how far he [Page 325] might, and how far he could not, have counter­acted the propensities of his mechanical nature.

"FOR the present, I can do no more than give a short abstract of deductions from his case.

"BUT the physical and metaphysical laws by which the temper of the soul becomes thus conso­nant with certain arrangements and derangements of body, are so subtile, and so deeply involved in the great arcana of nature, that the most simple and common phaenomenon cannot be fully account­ed for without developing the whole wonderful system.

"THUS when I shall explain to your majesty the cause by which a philosopher in a fever be­comes a madman, and in a lethargy a fool, you will know all the mysteries of spirit and matter, separate or conjoined: you will fully comprehend the cause of waking, sleeping, and dreaming: you will see the source from whence the artist de­rives his fancy, and the poet his fire.

"IN all these points I shall have the honour to give the great Hoang-ti full satisfaction, when I shall have completed the arduous work I have in hand.

[Page 326]"IN the mean time, I pray your majesty to suspend that ardent thirst for knowledge which characterises your auspicious reign, and extend your royal indulgence to your faithful slave."

SOME ACCOUNT OF A NEW WORK ENTITLED DIALOGUES OF THE DEAD.

THIS manuscript was not found in digging the vaults of the new Quaker meeting house in Arch Street; nor was it discovered in a leaden box by the labourers employed in the regulation of Seventh Street; neither was it washed out by a flood through the subterraneous aqueducts of the city into that place of general contribution the D [...]ck; but it was found, where it might natu­rally be expected, in the pocket of the author.

LUCIAN, in an [...]ient, and Lord Littleton in modern times, with many others, wrote dialogues of the dead; and the piou [...] Mrs. Rowe established a regu­lar post between the spiritual and temporal king­doms. Aesop also cau [...]ed [...]irds, beasts, and fishes, to hold [...]miliar conversations, like so many christians, [Page 328] in good decent language. These were bold strokes in literature. But our author outstrips them far. That intelligent beings, under any form of exist­ence, should be capable of a mutual communica­tion of ideas, is not an absurd or improbable suppo­sition. That the brute species, manifestly possessed of ideas and furnished with at least apparent or­gans of speech, might maintain a friendly conversa­tion is not difficult to conceive: but that dead carcases should utter sentiments, and hold recipro­cal intercourse, seems to be a shocking violation of the bounds of probability. Our author, how­ever, attempts to justify the ground he hath cho­sen by a system of philosophy, whimsical enough, of which the principal outlines are these.

HE states the position, that whatever exists hath identity, or that which distinguishes it from another being however similar. That bodies are sensible of their identity, which is manifested by the resistance they make to any change of form, or to any diminution or addition of substance. That all material bodies have atmospheres adhering to their superficies, or rather that those atmospheres are the component parts of the bodies themselves, expanded and rarefied to an imperceptible degree of fineness. So that bodies have, in fact, no per­ceptible out-lines. What appears to us, he says, [Page 329] to be the external outlines of any body, is no­thing more than that line of division in its atmo­sphere which separates those particles which are gross enough to become the objects of vision, from those which are too refined for that purpose. And therefore, he infers, to no two men does the same object appear of equal magnitude, unless their eyes should be formed exactly alike, and pos­sessed of precisely equal powers. From which he concludes, that no one can certainly say here this body is, but there it is not.

HE asserts further, that these atmospheres, sur­rounding not only the whole, but every molicule of a body, must ever prevent an actual contact of parts however closely pressed together; and there­fore, there is not to be found in all nature a truly solid body. That when bodies lye so near each other that their atmospheres interfere, there must be an actual intercourse of parts between them, of which they are more or less sensible according to the vigour and activity of their respective atmo­spheres. And that by such an interference of at­mospheres, sentiments may be communicated, espe­cially if the component parts of the effluviae have been highly sublimated.

[Page 330]ON this hypothesis our author founds his work, entitled Dialogues of the Dead. One of these dia­logues is selected as a specimen of his manner. It is the third dialogue of the second book; supposed to pass between the carcases of a dog and a cat lying in one of the streets of this city.

TO THE FREEMEN OF PENNSYLVANIA.

IN the 9^th section of our constitution or frame of government it is written —‘The members of the house of representatives shall be chosen an­nually by ballot, by the freemen of the common­wealth, on the second Tuesday in October for ever.’ And in the last clause of the same section, is also written, that the general assembly—‘shall have no power to add to, alter, abolish, or in­fringe any part of this constitution.’

[Page 77]NOW I say, and it is most manifest, that our late assembly have, not by implication, but directly and expressly, violated the constitution, and have a­bridged and infringed the essential right intended to be secured by the 9^th section.

THEY have passed a law declaring, that if a free man, however fully entitled to vote, shall come on the second Tuesday in October at 30 seconds after eight o'clock, and offer his ballot, it shall not be received; his right shall be forfeited; his vote shall be illegal, and of no effect—What! because I am old and infirm—because I have not strength to push through a croud, and force a pas­sage through contending parties—because I am a peacable, modest man, and cannot kick constitutio­nalists, and elbow republicans, out of my way, must I be disfranchised? must I be told—"Sir, you are too late—your vote is good for nothing."—I appeal to the constitution—see, here it is! It says I may vote on the second Tuesday in October— this is the second Tuesday in October—I am qualified to vote, and here is my ticket—‘You are mistaken, (say the judges and inspectors) this is not Tuesday—we are advanced 30 se­conds upon Wednesday morning.’ How can that be gentlemen? Is not a day at least 12 hours long?—some say 24 hours—‘Ay! it [Page 78] used to be so formerly; but the act of assem­bly has altered that matter, and made the second Tuesday in October but six hours long, viz. from 2^* to 8 o'clock.’ But, pray gentle­men, here are 40, here are 50, here a hundred citizens want to give in their votes. We are come to exercise the right of freemen; the right our constitution has given us, according to law— according to the 9^th section of our frame of go­vernment; and we think the assembly cannot de­prive us of this right—"No matter: what signi­fies what you think? Here is the law; read it; you must be disfranchised for this year at least— you have committed an unpardonable offence— you have forfeited your right—you have come 30 seconds after 8 o'clock—Go! Go home! eat hearty, and become stout and strong—learn to box, to push, to kick, to swear, to wrangle and scramble, and next year, perhaps, you may stand some chance, but you must not complain now —the law is equitable—it is as good for constitu­tionalist goose, as for republican gander—ei­ther party may have the benefit of it; but the strongest will prevail." But, gentlemen, for God's sake! I am neither a goose nor a gander; I only want to vote. "Away! Away! we will hear no [Page 79] more; the act of assembly shuts the door in your face."

BUT, seriously, I look upon this abridgement of the time of voting as a dangerous innovation and direct violation of the constitution. It is calculated to serve party purposes, and to secure the present reigning influence in the seats of power.

LET me suppose a case, not impossible or extra­vagant—may I not say, not improbable—Suppose a set of judges, or inspectors, or a majority of ei­ther, to be strong in the interests of a particular party—Suppose a number of voters of the same party to be collected together, to go early to the place of election, and take possession of all the ave­nues—will it not be in the power of these judges and inspectors to create what delays they please? to institute scrupulous and tedious enquiries? to make many mistakes, and to be very nice and ac­rate in rectifying these mistakes? in short, by a thousand artifices, not easily detected, so to spend the time allotted, that others may have little or no chance left? Let the proceedings of next Tuesday be well watched: for myself, I am no party man; but I have impartially considered the conduct of those in power, and have found it such as ought to [Page 80] alarm the cool and dispassionate freemen of the commonwealth.

HA [...]E they not made the constitution a stalking horse to cover their sinister designs? Have they not moulded, and expounded, and twisted it every way (as lord Peter did his father's will) for the advancement of their ambitious views? Have they not reversed and abolished charters without legal cause? Have they not passed ex post facto and par­tial laws, either to serve those they did, or to pu­nish those they did not like? And have they not by their late law disfranchised many hundred citizens of their right to vote at the general elec­tion? They certainly have—for I am confident, that let the inspectors, clerks, &c. be ever so in­dustrious and impartial, it is impossible that a con­tested election can be fairly completed within the time prescribed, viz. from two to eight o'clock; and that, if an account should be taken through­out the state, of those who will be necessarily ex­cluded from voting by this law, they will amount to many hundreds. Heretofore, elections have been known to continue two or three days, and the closing of the poll was never attempted till all had a full and fair opportunity. But it seems to be a general scramble now—first come [Page 81] first served—and wo to your eight o'clock gen­try.

THE charter and estates of the college were forcibly wrested from the rightful possessors; be­cause, as it was said, the trustees had many years ago passed a rule which seemed to narrow the foun­dation of that institution: and yet the same men, who were then such rigorous observers of origi­nal institutions, can now abridge the time allowed by our frame of government for voting at general elections, and arbitrarily cut away at least one half of that time—and this shall be no offence at all—Lord Peter will expound the constitution, and make all right.

IF my fellow-citizens see this matter in the light I do, they will bring this law to the test, by making the following experiment:—let three or four re­spectable citizens (having an indisputable right to vote) in each or any of the counties, reserve their tickets till some short time after eight o'clock, and then offer them to the proper officers in the pre­sence of witnesses. If their votes should be refu­sed, as they probably will, let a suit be instituted, and so bring the question to a legal issue: I am persuaded there is no court but will adjudge the act to be illegal and of no force, as to this clause, [Page 82] because the constitution is paramount to any act of assembly; and it expressly declares, that the free­men of the state may vote on the second Tuesday in October for ever.

IF the assembly have a right to limit the time of voting to eight o'clock, they have the same right to fix it at seven, or six, or three: and so some future assembly may take from us the right of voting al­together, by making the period so short, that, by the time the clerks have ruled their books and mended their pens, the golden moments may elapse, and the minutes of grace pass away.

A curious question in law.—Does the act mean true or apparent time? For the sun will on that day be 12 minutes too fast: be this as it may, it will be very proper that the state-house clock should be cleaned, and put under good regulation, previous to the election, and that it should be set with great accuracy on the morning of the day (if any morn­ing can be allowed to a day of six hours) by some sworn artist, and in the presence of the judges. But I don't know what they will do in the coun­try, where there are no public clocks: the watches of the judges may happen to go a little too fast, or too slow, according to their judgment of the run of votes. For, let me observe, that ten or a dozen [Page 83] additional votes may be of the greatest importance in a contested election, and change the political complexion of the state.^*

A WORD OF ADVICE: OR THE PENNSYLVANIA ASSEMBLYMAN'S VADE-MECUM.

ALTHOUGH the constitution of Pennsylva­nia, amongst other good things, enjoins that the people should choose men most noted for wisdom, to represent them in general assembly; yet as electors are not always so attentive to this injunction as they should be, it may be presumed that in so promiscuous a body as our general assembly, composed of men collected from every part of the state, there may be some, to whom a word or two of instruction may not be amiss. To such, if any such there should be in our present assembly, the following rules of legislative conduct are submitted.

[Page 85]1^st. You are to consider your election into the general assembly of the state, as one of the most important events of your life; because the powers with which the constitution hath invested you, and the duties of your station, are of the most extensive and serious consequences: no less than to bear a part in the framing and establishing of laws, which are to bind the citizens of this great common­wealth: and therefore,

2^d. You are to consider yourself not merely a member for the county which elected you, but a representative of the state at large; consequent­ly, should the supposed particular interests of that county come in competition with the general in­terests of the state, you should not hesitate in giv­ing it up: for the public good should be the polar star of your conduct. Members of assembly are too apt to think, that if by their vote or influence they can screen the county in which they live from a share of the public burthen, or procure for it some extraordinary privilege, they will merit great applause from their neighbours, whom they sup­pose their only constituents. But such narrow principles dishonour the seat of legislation. A com­monwealth is one body politic: its division into counties is artificial, and for convenience in the ad­ministration of justice, and other good purposes; [Page 86] but the true interests of each, and of the whole, are inseparable. Should members of assembly accus­tom themselves to think otherwise, and boast of advantages gained for a particular county at the expence of the general good, it would be, as if the left hand should boast, that it had cunningly con­trived to make the right hand do the most work. If you ought not to consider yourself as the repre­presentative only of a particular county; much less are you to suppose that it is your duty to support, at all events, the interests and influence of a designated party. Such a conduct would be a direct violation of your oath of office.

3^d. THE people have vested you personally with the power of legislation, and you cannot delegate or assign that power to any other person or per­sons whatever. Your constituents look for the exercise of your judgment, and for your vote foun­ded thereon, and not for another's through you. Attend to arguments and opinions, within and without; make full use of every means that may inform your understanding: but when you come to give your vote, let that vote be purely and strict­ly your own. It would be a wicked prostitution of the trust reposed in you, should you, by any compact with a select number of your brethren, bind yourself to give your voice contrary to your [Page 87] judgement: for instance, should you hold private meetings with such select members, and engage with them to give your aye or nay in the general assembly, on a question to be agitated, according to the determination of a majority of this private assembly,^* this would be a very serious and dan­gerous offence—an offence for which you might [...]e impeached and disgraced.

4^th. As the people expect to be governed by laws of your making, it is highly improper to apply to the judges of the supreme court to frame bills for you, or to revise bills already framed; except in cases of mere technical knowledge. Judges should have nothing to do with the making of laws, which they are afterwards to explain and execute. It is a determined maxim in politics, that the legis­lative and executive powers of government should be kept carefully separate and distinct. How very improper would it be, should a judge, in explaining a disputed point of law, have it in his power to say —I know the intention of the legislature to have been thus, or thus, for I myself framed and drew this law. It is always dangerous to suffer the judges to tamper with the laws of the land, in any stage of their process, either in the making or pub­lishing them. Much better would it be for the [Page 88] people to receive the laws pure from the source of legislation, even though a few technical errors should sometimes occur, than to submit them to be revised, corrected, and amended by the learning of the bench, especially in a constitution which admits but of one branch of legislature. Should an oc­casion happen wherein the house would wish to be informed on a mere point of law, the proper way is, to state queries in writing, and send them to the judges for their answer: but on no account should a bill of the house be submitted to their correction. The judges already have a very formidable influ­ence in the execution of the laws: if, by custom, they should acquire a like influence over the mak­ing of them, the people would be exposed to all the dangers of an absolute government, without even the small security of responsibility. If the same officious hands are to cook the broth, and make us sup it, we shall soon have reason to complain of scalded mouths and sick stomachs.

5^th. As it is of the greatest importance that the acts of the legislature, and the minutes of the house, should be preserved pure and unadul­terated, it may not be amiss to keep a watch­ful eye over the clerk of the house, as it is much in his power to play tricks with the laws, minutes, and papers of the assembly, should he be so dispo­sed. [Page 89] To prevent this, it is your duty to see that the laws, as soon as enacted, are faithfully and im­mediately lodged in the roll's-office, and upon no no account suffer the clerk to take them to his own lodgings. After the seals have been affixed to a law, the house, or a committee of the house, should never lose sight of it, till it is safely lodged with the recorder.

You should also take care that the votes of the house are, in due time, entered fairly on the book of minutes, and compared with the rough drafts; and that the printed copies be compa­red with, and corrected by, the fair entries; and not the fair entries made from the printed Minutes.

You should frequently inspect the files of the house to see that the papers are properly arran­ged and endorsed; for this will enable you to detect the clerk in case he should attempt to with­draw, secret, or destroy any of the papers entrus­ted to his care. And it would not be a miss if you should now and then take up a return, peti­tion, or other paper, which the clerk hath been reading to the house, to see whether he has given it a faithful reading or not. These attentions are proper, can give no just cause of offence, and will keep the clerk strictly in his duty.

[Page 90]6^th. There are some members in every assembly who are not qualified to make a figure on the floor. These may nevertheless well answer the purpose of their appointment, and discharge the trust reposed in them, by a conscientious exercise of judgement, firmness of mind, and integrity in voting. There are others who can add to these qualities the talents of eloquence, reasoning, and persuasion. Should you be of the former de­scription, give all possible attention to the argu­ments urged for and against the point in question; but in order to guard against the impositions of sophistry, the fallacy of which you may not have ingenuity enough to detect, together with the ar­guments, take into consideration the character of the speaker. If you have observed and know him to be a man of an open, candid, and independent spirit, you may with the more safety yield to the impressions his eloquence shall make; but if you have reason to believe that he is subtle, selfish, and crafty, or that he is either the tool or the ring leader of a party, hear him with jealousy, and risk no more than what strong conviction will justify. At all events, let no reasoning, however ingeni­ous, induce you to give your vote contrary what you feel and believe to be for the promotion of ge­neral justice and the public good. There is in [Page 91] every good mind an internal sense of right and wrong, which you may safely depend upon, even though your understanding should not be highly illuminated: and it will be better to run the risk of an error of judgement than not to vote ac­cording to this internal sense. There cannot be a more contemptible situation, than for a man so highly intrusted to resign himself implicitly to the government of another in the very business for which he was so intrusted. Since the public voice has placed confidence in you, you ought to have confidence in yourself.

SHOULD you be one of those who are accu­stomed to public speaking, and qualified to take a part in the debates of the house, guard against a habit of opposition, which may insensibly grow upon you. In questions of trivial importance be content with voting according to your judgement, and reserve your powers of elocution for great occasions. Let not the vigour of debate ever push you beyond the bounds of civility, or induce you to infringe the rules of the house; and never suffer your temper to be unhinged—If you do, your opponent will gain an advantage over you, which perhaps, neither the subject of debate, nor his arguments thereupon, would have given him.

[Page 92]LASTLY—Never suffer a desire of displaying your abilities, nor a thirst for victory in debate, to lead you astray from what ought to be the ultimate object of the official conduct of every member of the legislature—The promotion of general justice and of the public good.

OBSERVATIONS ON THE BILL ENTITLED "AN ACT FOR AMENDING THE PENAL LAWS OF THIS STATE."

THE bill published for consideration, entitled ‘an act for amending the penal laws of this state,’ will probably be taken up before long, in order to be passed into a law.

So great a revolution in the municipal law of our country, ought not to take place without due consideration on the part of the legislature, and such attention to the subject by the citizens at large, as the importance of it seems to require.

I have daily looked for some strictures on this bill in our public papers, and am surprised to find that it hath hitherto passed unnoticed. When­ever a public act is likely to interfere with the in­terests or views of any set of men, or party, all hands go to work, and we are distracted with ar­guments pro and con; but measures which have [Page 94] not that immediate tendency, however replete with remote mischief, are too frequently neglect­ed, although a little timely exertion might prevent evils which, when they arrive, cannot easily be removed.

A report has been lately made to the house, recommending an abridgement of the fees and sa­laries of public officers. Immediately the whole fraternity is in an uproar—the craft—the craft is in danger! At the head of the malecontents, with solemn step and stately stride, appears the pro­found and formidable Jurisperitus, sounding forth his own praise, as with a brazen trumpet, and loudly descanting on his vast abilities and un­paralleled services. One might suppose, from his account, that if the gentlemen at present in office should be affronted, and throw up their commis­sions, the whole commonwealth could not furnish another set of equal wisdom, integrity, and sound whiggism.

THE lamentable outcry of Jurisperitus has led me to consider the bill under consideration, only in one point of view, viz. the enormous power it will vest in the judges of the supreme court, in ad­dition to those other powers which have been [Page 95] from time to time accumulating in their hands. Let us look at the list which Jurisperitus hath himself enumerated.

BESIDES the great power and influence neces­sarily attendant on the office of chief justice— ‘he is, by vitue of that office, ^* judge in the high court of errors and appeals; a judge of the court of admiralty sessions for the United States of America; a judge of the court of admiralty sessions for this state, and a trustee of the uni­university. He is also to decide upon all claims against estates forfeited to the commonwealth, and the forfeiting persons; and has power to perpetuate testimony; take care of the persons and estates of ideots and lunaticks; and is to de­termine all causes relating to alimony and di­vorce.’ To this catalogue our present assem­bly have added an act to empower the justices of the supreme court to supply defects in the titles to lands, occasioned by the loss of deeds, &c. and the now proposed bill for amending the penal laws, will give them a power to punish criminals ac­cording to their discretion, within the limits of fourteen years cruel servitude.

[Page 96]WHEN we consider the sum total of power, and of course of influence, thus insensibly accumulating in the hands of two or three individuals, it seems highly expedient that government should not only avoid further delegations of special powers; but keep a watchful eye over the exercise of those al­ready delegated.

THERE is not, in our system of jurisprudence, a more formidable body of operative power than that vested in the judges of the supreme court. The executive council, and house of assem­bly, are composed of many individuals, and these liable to annual changes; but the judges are few in number, and permanent in office for seven years at least, and hold their commissions, as Jurisperitus observes, in fact, during good behaviour. The exact time at which a judge's commission expires, is not matter of public notoriety: when this hap­pens, it may be renewed in so secret and speedy a manner by his friends in council, that before those who may have been injured by mal-administration can make complaint, or the people have an oppor­tunity of expressing their disgust, if any there should be, the judge is re-instated, and then no dog must bark. Excessive power has a natural tendency to debauch the best disposition; but when it falls into the hands of a proud, capricious, and ambi­tious [Page 97] man, its operation should be watched with a jealous eye.

THE effect of the proposed alteration in the pe­nal laws, will be to invest the judges of the su­preme court with a discretionary power to punish within certain limits. This is, in fact, vesting them with legislative authority within those limits. It is a distinguishing mark of a free government, that the people shall know before hand, the penal­ty which the laws annex to every offence; and, therefore, such a system is called a government of of laws, and not of men. But within the scope of the present bill, no offender can tell what his pu­nishment is to be, till after conviction. The quan­tum, at least, is to be determined by the particular state of mind the judge happens to be in at the time of passing sentence. Vexations and disap­pointments may send his honour to court in a ve­ry ill humour, and then wo to the culprits.

‘THE knowledge of this part of jurisprudence (says Blackstone, vol. IV. p. 2.) which teaches the nature, extent, and degrees of every crime, and adjusts to it its adequate and necessary pe­nalty, is of the utmost importance to every in­dividual in the state. For, (as a very great [Page 98] master of the crown law ^* has observed upon a similar occasion) no rank or elevation in life, no uprightness of heart, no prudence or circum­spection of conduct, should tempt a man to con­clude that he may not at some time or other be deeply interested in these researches. The in­firmities of the best amongst us, the vices and un­governable passions of others, the instability of all human affairs, and the numberless unforeseen events which the compass of a day may bring forth, will teach us, upon a moment's reflection, that to know with precision what the laws of our country have forbidden, and the deplorable consequences to which a wilful disobedience may expose us, is a matter of universal con­cern’—‘The criminal law (p. 3.) should be founded upon principles which are permanent, uniform, and universal.’

HOW seriously applicable these maxims and ob­servations are in a government, which, from the nature of its constitution, must ever be exposed to the virulence of contending parties, will be ob­vious to every one. Under such a government, no judge should be trusted with discretionary pow­er in the administration of penal law. There is sufficient reason to believe, that a scarlet robe is [Page 99] not a certain security against the operation of par­ty influence, petulence of temper, or an ambitious thirst of power.

THERE is no reading the bill in question, with­out observing, that the burthen of the song is, the discretion of the court; such and such crimes shall be punished with a servitude not exceeding fourteen years, at the discretion of the court; such others, not exceeding seven years, at the discretion of the court; and so on, in almost every section. And, finally, the 15^th section gives to these discreet judges a power to determine on the reformation of the punished party, and to grant or refuse him, at their discretion, a certificate, announcing to all men, that he is actually so reformed. Which certificate is to operate as a legal ‘discharge from all claims and demands of the party injured, and also as a pardon of the guilt and infamy of the offence, and give the party a new capacity and credit.’ The thing would have been com­plete if the act had given these demi-gods a power of granting religious absolution, as well as tempo­ral restoration.

THERE are some crimes of such infamy, that the stain is not wiped off by the party's suffering the penalty of the law. One who has stood in [Page 100] the pillory for perjury, cannot afterwards serve on a jury. But the effect of a pardon is to restore him, in the eye of the law, to the same credit he had before the accusation (except only in cases where the blood is attainted). The power of pardon is lodged, in England, (other than in cases of im­peachment) exclusively in the crown: and, in Pennsylvania in the executive council. But, by this bill, the power of pardon, after punishment, is vested in the same men who awarded the penalty— a power incompatible with the genius of the common law, or the common rules of political prudence.

THE common law of England abhors the trust­ing judges with a discretionary dispensation of pu­nishments; most of the instances wherein they are so intrusted are by virtue of special acts of par­liament, and ought to be considered as exceptions to the general rules of common law. This reli­ance on the discretion of judges cannot safely be extended to matters of so serious import, as the awarding a severe and disgraceful servitude within the large limits of fourteen days to fourteen years; and afterwards granting a pardon, with all its legal operations, or with-holding it, according to the ca­price of the judge, who, like our present chief jus­tice, may be only a man, and not a God, not­withstanding [Page 101] the inherent virtues of his com­mission.

I am far from objecting to the general intent of this bill: I think, with the assembly, that the Bri­tish criminal law, which hath hitherto been our model, is by much too sanguinary, and has an­nexed punishments to crimes in very undue pro­portions—proportions not drawn from policy, reason, or equity. But this bill, if passed into a law, will make the matter worse than before. I acknowledge, that under the system proposed by this bill, a discretionary power must be lodged somewhere, and think it can no where be lodged so safely as with the jury who find the fact. The proportion of punishment, equitably due according to the nature of the offence, is not a question in­volved in the technical subtleties of the law; but arises from the particular circumstances of the case, all things considered; and an honest, impar­tial, and conscientious jury, are as competent to this purpose, as the most profound judge. They will necessarily have heard the state of the whole matter, with the arguments for the prosecution, and in behalf of the prisoner; and being a tempo­rary body, accidentally brought together, and im­pannelled for the occasion, are more likely to do substantial justice, than a judge who is so hackneyed [Page 102] in criminal prosecutions, as to consider a citizen accused and not convicted, as a cause stifled, ¹³ or lost to the commonwealth.

IF juries were so entrusted, they would proba­bly hold their office in higher estimation than they do now: they would spurn at the idea of their being ¹⁴ legal machines, subject to the management of the court: and feeling themselves competent to the business, would execute their duty with dignity, propriety, and good conscience.

As juries determine the quantum of damage in a civil action, there seems to be no reason why they should not also determine the quantum of pu­nishment in a criminal process, within such li­mits as the law shall prescribe.

WHY should the legislature assign so large and dangerous a field of power to judges, because of their supposed law knowledge, in a matter where law knowledge can be of no possible use? For, after the fact has been fairly found, the subtleties of law are at an end, at least they have nothing to do with the intrinsic demerit of the offence.

[Page 103]I have been told, and I believe it is so, that one of the judges framed this bill; no wonder then that the chorus of the song should be—at the dis­cretion of the court: I wish they would get the court of admiralty to set these pleasant words to music; it would delight their honours much, if they have any ears for music, but I am told they have none; they would, however, strain hard to bear a bob in the burthen of so charming a song.

REASONABLE objections may perhaps be made to the vesting even a jury with such enormous power. If so, I cannot see why the general in­tent of the bill may not be answered by annex­ing to the several crimes, as heretofore defined in law, periods of servitude, fixed and ascertained according to enormities of their respective offen­ces; and so make our penal laws less sanguinary. If the portionment of punishment should not in all instances be strictly equitable, they will at least be certain and known; and council may par­don or reprieve, in particular cases, when circum­stances shall make such an interference proper and just.

I sincerely wish this subject may be taken up by some abler hand. It is time [...]o be alarmed at the vast power gradually accum [...]ting in the hands of [Page 104] two or three individuals. When we see judges becoming professed and busy partymen: when we see them constantly interfering in the business of the legislature: influencing members of assem­bly: drawing reports for committees, and framing bills for the house: usurping jurisdiction not gi­ven them by law: expounding acts of assembly with dictatorial authority at improper times, and in improper ^* places; and working every engine to promote their own power and influence—I say, when we see these things, we see symptoms of a growing tyranny, strong as Bunbury's symptoms of horsemanship: we see that the discretion of such men ought not to be so largely trusted. If this act should take place, the form of our government will in effect be changed—It will no longer be republican it will be despotic, at least within the field of criminal jurisprudence, which is a large and important field. For what is depotism? but a discretionary use of power, without being legal­ly amenable for the just exercise of it. In this situation will our judges be by virtue of this act. For who shall call them to account? If they [Page 105] should award one man four weeks, and another fourteen years punishment for the same offence— for a crime of the same enormity, under all cir­cumstances, will an action lie against them, or can they be impeached for the injustice? Surely not—The legislature having vested them with discretionary powers, they will be the sole judges of that discretion.

IT is time to look about—Our assemblies have been too much disposed to look upon the supreme court as a reservoir for all power, which they knew not where else to lodge. Let them take care that this reservoir does not overflow, and de­luge them, with their rights and liberties.

I hope my fellow citizens will see the danger of the proposed act for amending the penal laws of the state: that these observations will induce some other hand to take up the subject; and that every one will join in checking the exorbitant power of the supreme court

For the Pennsylvania Packet.

I OBSERVE by the paper of this day, that Wed­nesday next is appointed by our house of assembly for taking up the bill called the penal law, which has been published for consideration, and is now ripe for the forms of legislation. This bill seems to be of very serious importance in the jurisprudence of our commonwealth. Innovations are always to be suspected, and prudence dictates that novel­ties, under the guise of improvement, should be strictly scrutinized, lest an ostensible benefit should serve as an introduction to many overballancing evils. But I trust that our representatives will proceed with proper caution in a measure which will not only change the long established system of penal laws, but will, in effect, amount to a transfer of the great power of apportioning punishments to crimes from the sovereignty of the state, where it certainly ought to be, to two or three individuals, where it certainly ought not to be.

[Page 107]I heartily approve of the general purpose of this bill, in making penal laws less sanguinary, by sub­stituting periods of disgraceful labour in the room of fatal executions and corporal punishments; but in as much as it leaves the apportionment of these periods to the discretion of the supreme court, it is a bill pregnant with dangerous conse­quences, and establishes a despotic form of go­vernment within the field of its operation. For, true despotism is nothing more than a power to punish according to will and pleasure.

TRUE it is, that our legislature still reserves the right of ascertaining the crime; but if the degree of punishment is to be determined by the will of the court, it may not be long before some learned judge will enlarge on the inconvenience of the le­gislature's troubling itself with such matters, and prepare a bill for investing himself, and his bre­thren, with the whole dispensation of criminal law.

IN a government like ours, it is highly necessary to be watchful over the movements of those in whom we confide—much more so than in go­vernments less free; because those in whom we trust have the all powerful sanction of the people at large for whatever they do within the precincts [Page 108] of legal power, and it is certainly within these limits to ruin us according to law.

OUR assembly have undoubtedly a right to enact this bill into a law—Let us indulge imagi­nation in, at least, possible consequences should it be enacted.

OUR judges have unavoidably an official in­fluence over the petit jury in criminal trials. They also recommend to council for pardon, when they think fit, and the council not only ne­ver execute against their recommendation; but, as I am told, seldom pardon without it. And now, by this bill, they are to be empowered by law to apportion punishments to crimes according to their own discretion. By their means the severi­ties of law and the high prerogative of mercy will be vested in the same individuals—In men subject to passions and prejudices, are unfit to be so highly trusted.

SUPPOSE a case—A and B have committed precisely the same offence, viz. Burglary. A has respectable connections and friends; B has none. A's friends are not only respectable, but they happen to be of the same party in the politicks of the state with his honour: or they belong to [Page 109] the same religious congregation. B is a foreigner; he has no friends or connections; or, if he has, they are of the adverse party to the judge—may we not suppose the discretion of the court would exercise itself very differently with respect to these criminals, however equal their demerits? A few days may serve to expiate the crime of A; but B must labour fourteen years for not having better friends and more powerful influence in his fa­vour. This may seem too strong a case; but it is no more than what the law will justify. Any speci­ous reasons for such a discrimination will be suffici­ent to excuse the judges as men, for what they may do as officers, under the law.

IF it did not appear from the face of this bill that it is a direct violation of our constitution, by making our government a government of men, and not of laws in criminal cases; yet the quarter from which it originated ought to raise a virtuous jealousy in the minds of the people. It is a dan­gerous symptom when we see men, already high in power, grasping still at more, and ever devising ways and means to encrease their official influ­ence.

TO point out all the evils, and political sole­cisms of the bill under consideration, would require more time, and more law knowledge, than I can [Page 110] command; but I am confident that such an establish­ment will be injurious to the security and justice intended by the common law, and subversive of the spirit of our free constitution.

I hope our legislature will not hastily part with so high a prerogative of sovereign power, or subject the citizens of this state, who may hereafter of­fend, to be punished at the discretion of the judges.

I conclude with an extract to the purpose from 4 Black. ch. 29. pa. 377.

‘It is, moreover, one of the glories of our English law, that the nature, though not always the quantity or degrees ^*, of punishment, is as­certained for every offence; and that it is not left in the breast of any judge, or even of a jury, to alter the judgement which the law has beforehand ordained for every subject alike, without respect of persons. For if judgments were to be the private opinions of the judge, men would then be slaves to their magistrates, [Page 111] and would live in society without exactly knowing the conditions and obligations which it lays them under. And besides, as this pre­vents oppression on the one hand; so, on the other it stifles all hopes of impunity or mitigation with which an offender might flatter himself, if, his punishment depended on the humour or discretion of the court. Whereas, where an established penalty is annexed to crimes, the criminal may read their certain consequence in that law which ought to be the unvaried rule, as it is the inflexible judge, of his actions.’

A SUIT IN THE HIGH COURT OF HONOUR. ^*

AT a court held on the 27th of April Anno Domini 1781. Present, the honourable the jud­ges of the said court, in their robes, and the offi­cers in their respective places—A. B. clerk of the said court, notified to their honours, that a libel had been filed by F. H. versus J. W. Esq. and humbly prayeth the leave of the court to ex­hibit the said libel: and then, with the consent of their honours, he proceded to read the same with [Page 113] an audible voice in manner and form following; that is to say.

WHEREUPON it is ruled and ordered, that a cer­tified copy of the foregoing declaration and libel be served on the said J. W. esq. in order that he may file his defence and answer thereto.

AFTERWARDS, to wit, on the 23^d day of April, in the year aforesaid, the said J. W. esqr. cometh and defendeth himself against all and every the manifo [...] [...]landers, defamations, appellations, and untruths in the said libel contained, and doth call upon, challenge, and demand of the said F. H. that he forthwith prove and establish, by good and sufficient testimony before this honourable court, some one or more of his slanders aforesaid; and the said J. W, respondent as aforesaid, doth further pray and demand, that if the said F. H. shall fail in proof thereof, that the name of the said J. W. may be erased and expunged from all and every [Page 116] part of the said libel, and of the record thereof, and the name of him the said F. H. be inserted in the place or places thereof: and that the name of him the said F. H. may be entered on the rascal's record, according to the constitution and laws of this honourable court—So answereth, J.W.

ET postea, scilicet 26^mo Aprilis praedicta F. H. in curiam venit, et sustentat, et probat declara­tionem ejus, et facit bonum asseverationes et vili­ficationes ejus contra eundem J. W. et super hoc dat curiae haec honorabili intelligere quod bien­nium, vel juxta, est quod commodavit praedicto J. W. unum librum vel libellum intitulatum Epis­tolae obscurorum virorum plenum funni; et qui­cunque legit in eodem libro ridebit multum et pin­quescebit; et quod bonum et necessarium est pro salute corporis et etiam mentis habere et legere in isto libro: Et praedictus F. H. super verbum et honorem ejus declarat et dicit quod frequenter et saepissime postulavit eundem librum intitulatum ut praedictum, a praedicto J. W.: et quod praedictus J. W. non curans pro salute vel jucunditate vel solamine praedicti F. H. non vult eundem libel­lum [Page 117] reddire ad eum, ut in vera honestate debet facere; sed vi et armis, contra legem, contra bo­nam fidem et justitiam detinet eundem, ad grave et terribile damnum praedicti F. H. Per quam causam praedictus F. H. dicit et ostendit haec curiae honorabili, quod valde macescit, et timet quod prius longum tempus erebit nil nisi pel­lis et ossa et quod non potest ridere saepius quam semel vel bis in mense, et qui nunquam ridet, nun­quam pinguescebit; ergo, super fidem et verita­tem credit quod praedictus J. W. voluit ponere eum ad mortem. Ergo, damat in curia hac hono­rabili contra praedictum J. W. et accusat eum, et dicit et protestat quod iste J. W. est rabscallianus, tatterdemallianus, ninkumpoopus, et skunkus, et quod opportet esse ita recordatus; ut omnes ho­mines maledicant eum in secula seculorum.

WHEREUPON, curia vult advisare, and now on the 27^th of April aforesaid, judgement is given a­gainst the respondent, Nisi, &c. That is to say, unless he the said J. W. shall, bona fide, restore and deliver the said book, entitled epistolae obscurorum virorum, to him the said F. H. on or before the 5^th day of May next ensuing. But and if the said J. W. shall, and do well and truly restore the said book to the libellant in this cause, on or before the 5^th [Page 118] day of May, then the said parties shall withdraw their several pleas, replications, and rejoinders from this court, so that the same may not be, or appear on the records thereof.

WHEREUPON the court adjourned, sine die.

SURVEYING.

I HAVE been long urged by an invincible pro­perty to attempt some thing for the public good, or public convenience, so as to render my name famous amongst the benefactors of mankind. As my desire is much stronger than my abilities, I am obliged to be content with humble attempts at discoveries of limited importance; for I confess that my genius is not of the highest rank.

THE project which has lately employed my thoughts, and which I am now about to commu­nicate, will not be valued as conducive to the happiness of mankind in a serious sense; yet I hope the novelty of the design, and its affording a con­siderable gratification at a very small expence, will entitle me to some reputation with the public: espe­cially when it shall be considered, that I do not, like other projectors and discoverers, make an emolu­ment of my ingenuity, but freely give the fruits of my speculations to my beloved fellow citizens, [Page 128] in the first place, and through to them, to the world at large.

I have frequently thought that the arts and sciences might be extended beyond the limits of their professed objects, and applied with advantage to other purposes than those for which they seem directly intended. I remember that when I was a boy, my father saw me boring a hole with the leg of my compasses, for which he reproved me, and advised me never to use a thing in a way which it was not designed—But Dr. Franklin, who was present▪ declared himself of a different opinion; and said he had often admired the dexterity of a ser­vant who would occasionally sweep the hearth with the bellows, and blow the sire with the hearth-brush.

I once saw an elaborate work of an ingenious Frenchman, by which any person was enabled to compose an infinite number of minuets without the least knowledge of music, or any other instru­ment, but a box and dice.

THIS readiness in applying things to purposes for which they seem not designed has often been of the greatest importance in cases of extre­mity. The adventures of Robinson Crusoe, and [Page 129] the histories of perilous voyages and ship-wrecks, afford innumerable instances of the great advantage of such a talent.

I am by profession a surveyer; not indeed of the first rate reputation, yet I can execute my business with tolerable accuracy, and have given satisfaction to my employers. I, not long since, surveyed a tract of land, the boundaries of which were so singular, that when I came to plot the lines and courses from my table book, I was surprised to find that the survey exhibited the lines of a hu­man face. This suggested to me the idea of apply­ing the art of surveying to the purpose of portrait painting—Only consider, candid reader, what an advantage this must be to the world—Who is there that does not wish to see a true and faith­ful likeness of those eminent personages he reads of in history? Their actions indeed are recor­ded; but these may appear in very different lights to different people, and admit of very vari­ous comments, for want of knowing the secret mo­tives which influenced those actions. Now there is no better way known, of ascertaining a man's intrinsic character, than by the indication of his countenance: hence the science of physiognomy, and the great encouragement portrait painting hath found. But painting on canvass is very ex­pensive, [Page 130] and original likenesses very scarce. As to engravings, they are by no means to be depen­ded upon; every copyist varies more and more from the original: so that by the time a man has been dead forty or fifty years, however emi­nent he may have been, the prints bearing his name, are no more like him, than the sign of the king of Prussia in third street is like that monarch. The thing should be brought to a mathematical certainty. And this, I flatter myself, I have been so lucky as to accomplish.

THE operation is quite easy, both to the party and to the artist. There is nothing more neces­sary that to take a correct outline of the person's profile, by throwing the shadow of his face ^* upon a sheet of paper—a familiar and well known prac­tice, then let the artist take his scale and dividers, and carefully measure all the courses and distances of the lines which form the boundaries of the shadow. By the same means of courses and di­stances, the situation, form, and size of the eye, eye brow, mouth, &c. &c. may be precisely as­certained; and thus by the help of a few letters and figures, may the exact likenesses of great per­sonages be transmitted to posterity, and made as [Page 131] public as a common advertisement, and at as little expence.

WHAT satisfaction would it not afford us at this day to be possessed of an accurate survey of the faces of Julius Caesar, Mark Anthony, Cicero, Virgil, Horace, and other renowned characters, who are now only known by their works and exploits.

MY project will, moreover, be particularly bene­ficial to private families; a man may, in the division of his estate, so contrive it as to leave his likeness in a tract of land. So that his grandson will have nothing to do but consult his title deeds, take down the lines and courses of his farm, and by plotting them on paper may at any time pro­duce the portrait of his deceased ancestor, and survey his ground and his grandfather at one and the same time; whose resemblance will be thus se­cured to his family, subject to no variation, but the variation of the needle.

MY scheme will be sufficiently manifested by an example. And this I shall give by transcribing from my table book the courses and distances of the tract of land which gave me the first idea of applying the practice of surveying to the purposes of portrait painting.

[Page 132]THE following is an exact copy of the courses and distances, and the drawing is plotted from them with as much accuracy as the subject would admit.

FROM an assumed point A, run a line S. 67° 30′ W. 52 perches, to a point B; thence N. 5° W. 64 perches to C; thence N. 7° W. 36 perches to D; thence due west, 60 perches to E; thence N. 48° E. 110 perches to F; thence N. 13° E. 60 perches to G; thence N. 45° E. 190 perches to H; thence N. 77° E. 108 perches to I; thence S. 5° W. 240 perches to K; thence along the same course 120 perches to L; thence S. 78° W. 180 perches to M; and thence 30 perches to the place of beginning.

THESE lines form external boundaries of the tract. For a further description, the following courses and distances must be observed.

FROM the point A continue the line B A, 100 perches to N; thence N. 29°. E. 48 perches to a point. From the point C a soul ditch runs eastward 35 perches. From the point D it is 25 perches to the edge of a circular hill bending westward, and over D is an eliptical hollow 40 perches long, where it joins the southermost part [Page 133] of the circular hill. The soil of this eliptical hol­low is very moist and unctuous: and fit for the cul­tivation of Tobacco—From the point F a piece of woodland runs N. 48° E. 59 perches to a point, and thence tends south-easterly 45 perches. This copse of woods is of an eliptical form, beginning very narrow at F and encreasing to 10 perches in width at the northernmost point of the curve, and thence decreases in width to the south-eas­ternmost point, where it is very thin.

IN a due north and south line passing through the point M, and at the distance of 180 perches north of M, assume a point 0, and from that point draw a line N. 70° W. 30 perches. From a point in this line, a little to the westward of 0, draw another line running southwestwardly 25 per­ches, forming an angle of 35° with the other line. About 20 perches from the angular point 0 draw a circular line perpendicularly and looking westward. These three lines will form a mixed triangle, whereof two of the legs will be right lines, and the third a portion of a sphere. The northern leg of this triangle is fringed with rushes, being the edge of a watery soil, it must therefore be penciled somewhat thicker and stronger than the southern leg, which should be rather faintly sketched than absolutely drawn.

[Page 134]FROM the point G run a line N. 60° E. 150 perches to a point P; thence South 46° E. 20 perches to Q; thence south 30° W. 130 perches to R; thence due south 20 perches to S; thence S. 62° E. 95 perches to T; and thence 70 perches to K.

FROM the middle of the line S T, there is a circular piece of rising ground, being 45 perches on the line S T, and stretching south-westerly 25 perches. At the foot of this rising ground is a copse, thick covered with wild brush and coarse underwood, of a circular shape, whose diameter from N. E. to S. W. is 45 perches, and from N. W. to S. E. 40 perches.

ALL the space bounded by the lines G, H, I, K, T, S, R, Q, P, is a cold, moist, and barren soil, producing nothing but a profusion of coarse reeds, rank and long. These have been so blown down by westerly winds, that from G they tend to the E. N. E; from P Q to the N. E. and from R S eastwardly. These reeds run over the boundary line I K very straggling and irre­gular, so as to cover and conceal that line: and therefore the line I K must not be drawn abso­lute, but only dotted, or traced, being no more than the average course of the long reeds. From [Page 135] the whole line T K, the reeds run due south, and are very thick and long. All this must be ex­pressed by the pencil. Lastly, all the sharp angles of the figure must be moderately rounded off, and all the lines made somewhat arching, but sparing­ly. The eye of the artist will best direct him how to dress the lines and angles so as to answer the general design.

IF the above courses and distances are carefully laid down upon paper, and the directions observ­ed, they will produce the drawing of a human face: and if the draftsman should have any to­lerable judgment in things of this kind, and a warm imagination, he may fancy that he discovers a likeness of some person or other. I plotted my scale of ½ inch to 100 perches.

I have it in contemplation to improve my device, by ascertaining, in fixed terms, the manner in which a profile so drawn may be coloured to the life, and thereby make the likeness perfect. For this purpose I had recourse to heraldry; and hoped by means of or, argent, gules, &c. to dictate precisely the complexion, colour of the hair, eyes, &c. but could not find terms sufficient to express the neces­sary teints: and as to the termination ish, which some make use of, as in blueish, greenish, redish, [Page 136] &c. it is too vague and indeterminate for the pur­pose. Unless, therefore, I can find some known art or science which will furnish definitions of co­lours as certain and intelligible, as surveying gives us lines and courses, I shall be obliged to com­pose a set of appellations answerable to all the principal colours, and as many of their gradations and mixtures as are usual in portrait painting. These being once admitted, will serve for ever after. Thus, in engraving, the directions of the strokes of the engraver ascertain the colours or blazoning of a coat of arms. When it became generally admitted that horizontal strokes should indicate blue, perpendicular strokes, red; dia­gonal strokes, green; and so on, all uncertain­tainty was removed.

PERHAPS Mr. Pine and Mr. Peale may take it into their heads, that I have made this discovery public, with a malicious intention to injure them in their profession; but I protest before all men, that I have a considerable esteem for those ingenious gentlemen, and would willingly have suppressed my project out of tenderness to them, had not an urgent sense of the duty I owe to my fellow-citi­zens at large, overbalanced the influence of pri­vate attachments.

[Page 137]IT will be in vain for any projector, in France, England, or elsewhere, to dispute with me the ho­nour of this invention, unless he can produce a publication of a similar scheme, bearing date prior to this month of November 1784. But, to pre­vent all mistakes, I wish our philosophical society would be so good as to make a minute of my disco­very: and it would be still better, if Mr. Patter­son would give the foregoing survey, as a task to the lads of the university under his tuition.

^* For the Pennsylvania Pack [...]t.

A Man who is disposed to be entertained may find amusement in the most common occurrences of life. Objects strike the eye, and incidents af­fect the mind, very differently in different persons. Some men accustom themselves to see every thing in a ludicrous point of view; others, in a serious light; and, the multitude are content with m [...]re per­ception; that is, barely seeing and hearing, with­out making any other further use of their senses.

THIS diversity of disposition is founded in the original constitutions of the parties. The humorist was funny and roguish when a boy; following the propensity of his nature, he acquires an habitual facility in associating ludicrous ideas with the most ordinary, and seemingly the most barren incidents [Page 139] of life. His eye immmediately discovers any sin­gularity of countenance, or manner, because he is always loooking for singularities; and he finds something to divert him in the most common transactions, because he is always hunting for diversion.

I have myself, some tincture of this disposition; and, when disengaged from more serious business, I sally forth with a design to seek for entertainment. A variety of sources immediately present. For in­stance: it requires no great effort of imagination to suppose that the major part of the inhabitants of this great city are actually mad. Impressed with this idea, I observe the countenance, gait, and manner of every one I meet, and endeavour to class my lunatics under different species of frenzy.

ONE fellow drives along with such heedless impetuosity, that he treads in the gutters instead of stepping over them, and runs against the posts, which he might easily avoid. Another, has such strong marks of anxiety, expressed in every feature of his face, that his whole soul seems to be ab­sorbed in some sale, purchase, or other pursuit. A third, is haranguing with great vehemence to two or three ignoramuses who devour his politics with open ears. And, I see a fourth, in a violent [Page 140] passion, cursing and swearing like a sailor in a storm. But there is no end to the variety of cha­racters that present, and consequently no end to this source of observation and entertainment.

AT another time, I apply to the streets for a different species of diversion. I walk round a square, and attend to all the scraps and fragments of conversation I can pick up en passant. When I return home I write these on separate pieces of paper: and then amuse myself with arranging them in such order as to produce, if possible some apparent connection. If this cannot be done, I make another excursion, and collect more materials, till out of a great number, I am enabled to accom­plish my purpose. For example—

BUT my present fancy is to suppose the public newspapers to be so many real theatres, on which some comedy or farce is daily exhibited for my en­tertainment. About nine o'clock the packet of [Page 142] the day is brought in: I take my seat: the cur­tain rises, and the play begins.

For instance:

A very familiar dialogue commences, in which each performer endeavours to display the charac­ter of his antagonist in as striking a manner as pos­sible to my great satisfaction. I imagine I see the pro­fessional battle. The divine throws text of scripture in the face of his adversary, and hampers him with the cords of logical conclusions; whilst the physician squirts clysters at the divine, and claps cantharides on his back.

BUT the most comical part of the scene is this. The learned divine hoists the university, and expos­ing its naked skin, exclaims with admiration—"Oh, charming! behold and see what a broad bottom is [Page 143] here!" Whereupon the physician immediately hoists Dickenson college, and with equal eloquence descants upon its narrow bottom.—"Look, says the divine, on this capacious disk—on the one side sits the pope; on the other side sits Luther; and see how snug Calvin lies between them both." "Its all wrong, replies the physician, Calvin has no busi­ness there: he will be choaked—he will be suffoca­ted—he will be squeezed to death—here is a fine narrow bottom more fit for his accommodation. He can have it all to himself—he is a usurper there, but this is his own flesh and blood." From words they proceed to blows. The divine is heated with zeal seven times hotter than Nebuchadnezzar's fur­nace: he vociferates—"The sword of the Lord and of Gideon!" and forthwith flogs away on the narrow bottom of poor Carlisle. The physician is also enraged. "By the bones of Boerhaave, and the dust of Hypocrates, says he, I will be even with you:" and without further prelude, falls to scourging the pope, Luther, and Calvin all at once upon the broad bottom of the university.—But the scence changes—

^* Mr. Tweedledum begins the attack with a full discord in a sharp third, and leaves it unresolved, which to be sure is very shocking. Mr. Tweedle­dee replies in the natural key; but in a sharp third also. Tweedledum then changes the modulation, and after running a rapid division, closes with a chromatic arpegio in a flat third. There is no bearing this. The parties are enraged—Tweedle­dum seizes the diapason pipe of an organ—Twee­dledee defends himself with a silver mounted flute: and to it they go—blasting away at each other with astonishing vigour and dexterity. Methinks I hear the shrill tones of the flute, now ranging through the upper octave, and maintaining acknow­ledged superiority; and now descending into the [...]owery plains of the fruitful tenor, and yielding to the powerful vibrations of the dreadful organ pipe.

THUS it is, that by the help of imagination, and a talent for considering circumstances in a singular point of view, I am enabled to find entertainment in occurrences which are scarcely noticed by others. [Page 145] But I never make sport of matters really serious. The miseries, misfortunes, and sufferings of our fellow creatures can never be proper subjects of ridicule; but the passions, follies, and absurdities of mankind are surely lawful occasions of laughter.

^* THE COBLER. N^o I.

WHETHER it is owing to some solitary hours I pass in my subterraneous shop, or to the overflow­ings of a large accumulation of ideas, acquired in a life of travel and adventures; or that the in­cessant motion of my elbows, necessary in my oc­cupation, which, for reasons unknown, may irritate and provoke the mind to discharge its contents, as the motion of a ship operates upon the sto­machs, or that by some secret influence of the phi­losophical walls that surround me I am induced, [Page 170] or rather compelled to become an author, I know not—But so it is—If any fortune-teller had foretold that in the year 1787 I should make my appearance as an essayist, before the respecta­able public, I should have laughed at the prophet, and despised his art. And yet I remember I had a dream, some twenty years ago, the interpreta­tion of which seems now to be plain enough, al­though at the time I could make nothing of it.

I thought I had lost myself in a thick wood, without any road or path to direct my way. Whilst I was considering what course I should take, a wild goose and a parrot descended from a large tree, and after several circuitous flights, alighted, the one on my right shoulder, and the other on left. These birds were certainly figurative of my authorship and genius.

WHEN a writer makes his first appearance on the public stage, he is like an unknown stranger introducing himself into a large assembly: all eyes are turned towards him, and the whisper goes round ‘Who is he? Who is he? Do you know him? Do you? Not I, sir, not I, madam:’ where­by it becomes necessary that he should give some account of himself. I shall endeavour to satisfy [Page 171] this reasonable expectation in as few [...] I can.

I was born in an obscure village in England. My father could neither read nor write, but had a most profound veneration for men of genius and learning. He carried this blind passion so far, that he was frequently the subject of ridicule; and sometimes suffered real loss by sharpers who imposed themselves upon him for scholars, and authors neglected by the ungrateful world, or men of genius, on the point of producing the most important discoveries.

MY father resolved to do better by me than his father had done by him; and therefore put me to a charity-school as soon as I was eight years old. After two years cruel persecution, I was whipped through the spelling-book as far as words of five syllables. It took me three months and a half to spell the word liberality; in which time I received 97 strokes of the ferule on my right hand, and 53 on my left; 8 times I wore the dunce's cap; and 5 times publicly whipt. Besides these, I received one hundred and thirteen stripes with a rattan across my shoulders, and suffered two hundred and twenty five pinches of my right ear. At last I could spell the word liberality. [Page 172] But being no longer able to bear this cruel disci­pline, I took to my heels and ran off.

I was running enough to elude the search my father made for me for two years, and subsisted by hiring myself occasionally as a servant. At last, I offered myself to a farmer, who had seen an adver­tisement answering my description. He secured me, and sent me back to my father, who loaded me with reproaches and abuse. He gave overall expectation of making me a scholar, and fixing his hopes upon my brother Dick, bound me ap­prentice to a shoemaker.

I was almost as unsuccessful here as at the free-school. I acquired a tolerable knack at botching and patching, but could never arrive at the skill of making a whole shoe.

AFTER I had in vain tried for four years to make myself master of the business, I conceived a thorough dislike to the trade, and throwing down my strap and last, I once more threw myself into the hands of fortune.

My father died soon after, and my mother did not think me worth enquiring after.

[Page 173]I went through various scenes of employ for se­ven years: In which time I had great opportu­nities of making observations on men and manners. I contracted many prejudices; I stored up many opinions, and learned many words: but the word liberality was never out of my mind; it had been impressed on my memory, and, I may say, engraved on my flesh.

AT length I engaged in the service of a man very famous in the learned world; a celebrated author in theology and natural philosophy. I lived with him many years. I adopted all his prin­ciples, not because I understood them, but because I lived with him, and they were his principles, and because I derived no small credit from this connection; as the moon is admired for the light she affords, not that she is luminous in herself, but because she is within the influence of the sun's rays. I was more than the servant, I was the companion of this great man; and as the multi­tude are apt to think that knowledge may be taken, like the itch or small-pox, by contagion, I acquired a considerable literary reputation amongst illiterate men. I turned the electric wheel for my patron; I kindled his fire; I brought him water; I handed him books from the shelves, and bottles from the closet; and so I became a philosopher. Moreover, [Page 174] I carried his manuscripts to the printer, and brought back the printed sheets for correction; and so I became a theologist. It is true, I was of­ten unlucky in my zeal to serve him; I inadvert­ently discharged his accumulated electricity; I cracked his jars, and broke his bottles; I burned his clothes with vitriol, and his flesh with aqua­fortis; and frequently stumbled in my way to the printer's, and plunged his manuscript in the ken­nel. But he was a philosopher, and bore all with patience.

STILL the word liberality pressed upon my mind. My master and I differed in opinion about dephlogisticated air: I thought he was very illi­beral; and so we parted, and I determined to tra­vel far and near in search of true liberality.

I ran through most of the countries in Europe, in hopes of finding this precious jewel. But, alas! to no purpose. In Spain and Portugal they be­lieve in transubstantiation and the pope's infallibi­lity, and the people of France believe in nothing at all; of course there could be no liberality in those countries. In Italy, they prefer the philo­sophy of Ingenhouzen, to that of my master and friend; this I thought very illiberal, notwithstand­ing our difference. In Geneva, they believe in [Page 175] predestination, a doctrine I abhor: and in Swit­zerland, the citizens make a practice of hiring themselves as soldiers to foreign princes.

I once thought I should find what I was in search of, amongst the rude but uncorrupted inhabitants of the Alps: but after sojourning with them many days, I discovered that they esteemed the large wens which most of them had hanging to their chins as very ornamental, for my part I thought them extremely ugly, and so I concluded, that there could be no liberality on the Alps.

IT would be a useless task to enumerate all the particulars in which the people of every nation differed from me in opinion, and disappointed me in the object of my pursuit. True genuine libe­rality was not to be found amongst them.

AT length I returned to England. Here I found things worse than ever. My friend's the­ology was publicly contested, and some of his doc­trines even reprobated. Not only this, but the nation was engaged in a war with the people of America, on principles which I could not approve. Convinced, that there was no liberality in England▪ I determined to cross the Atlantic, and seek for it in America.

[Page 176]ON my arrival in this country, I was much cha­grined to find that the doctrine of the Trinity was generally received and professed; a doctrine a­gainst which I had acquired the strongest antipa­thy from my master, the great philosopher. How­ever, as war raged in the country, there was no time for theological disquisitions; and as the jus­tice of the war was clearly on the side of the Americans, I resolved to take an active part in their cause, and enlisted myself a soldier in the Pennsylvania line. I went through inexpressible toil and danger, in marches, counter-marches, skirmishes and battles, and was finally wounded at the siege of York-Town, when lord Cornwallis and his army surrendered to the allied forces of France and America.

After the peace, I supported myself by cobling and patching, and employed my leisure hours in combating the doctrine of the Trinity, and devising grand schemes for public utility.

AT length government thought fit to establish a corps of invalids, and sitted up the east wing of the state-house for their accommodation, and I now belong to this corps. As we have no great deal to do, our duty being very slight, I have spent much time in watching the progress of a [Page 177] building near our quarters, intended as a hall for the Philosophical Society. Although it is not quite a year since the first stone was laid, the cel­lar is already completed; but when the roof will be raised, can be known only to men of profound erudition and nice calculation—to finish my histo­ry, of which but little now remains—

As I stood looking on, whilst the labourers were digging this philosophical cellar, I took particular notice of the several stratums of loam, sand and gra­as they appeared. I procured samples of each, and submitting them to hyperstratical experiments, I found that they were all of different pacific gravi­ties. This extraordinary circumstance strongly prejudiced me in favour of the society and their proposed hall, and I concluded that I should cer­tainly find true liberality in the bottom of this sci­entific cellar.

As soon as it was completed, and covered with rough boards, I conveyed my bench and cobling tools to this subterraneous temple of Minerva. And here I may be seen daily toiling for public utility in the double capacity of cobler and author.

MY situation, so contiguous to the seat of le­gislation and other offices of state, has made me of [Page 178] no small use in the commonwealth. And the truth is, that I am now opprest with public business—I have heeltaped counsellors; patched the upper leather of judges; examined the soles of assembly men, and given some of them better understandings.

NOTWITHSTANDING that the care of the state is thus daily pressing upon me, I enjoy good health, owing to the sallibrity of my philosophical work-shop: for, it is so ingeniously constructed, that the atmospheric air is compelled to descend and displace the memphitic air common in cellars and confined places.

FROM this profound habitation I shall date my future essays, and expect that my performances will procure me no small credit with the public, if the people have any liberality.

FOR THE PENNSYLVANIA PACKET.

I Mentioned in a former essay that my greatest ambition is to become famous by the invention of some ingenious or useful project which shall be generally approved and adopted. At the same time I communicated to the public, a device, which, from its novelty and convenience, I thought could not fail of success. In vain, however, have I looked for that applause which I still think justly due to the fruit of genius, ripened by the labours [Page 180] of the understanding. The author and his con­trivance are no more thought of.

I have at different times, published several other devices of rare invention, which have all found the same fate. Whether the fault lies with me, or with the public, I shall not presume to say; but as my love of fame is invincible, I shall go on projecting and contriving in hopes some lucky hit may accomplish my purpose, by procuring me the honour I so ardently desire.

As I am now growing old in the business, ex­perience and frequent disappointments have taught me to be less sanguine in my expectations; and, like other authors, to depend more on a for­tuitous possession of the public caprice than on the intrinsic merits of my own performance.

MY present design, which I offer with great modesty, respects an improvement in the art of printing; and is a device to ender it not only expressive of an author's narrative, opinions, or ar­guments; but also of the peculiarities of his tem­per and the vivacity of his feelings.

As I have as due a regard to literary honesty as to any other kind of honesty, I candidly confess [Page 181] that I took the hint from an ingenious work of a Mr. Steele of London, who has contrived and published a scheme for noting down, in certain musical characters, the risings, fallings, and various inflections of the voice in common conversation or in public speaking. So that not only the matter of an oration, but even the manner of the orator may be secured and transmitted to posterity.

MY contrivance has this advantage over his, that no new characters are necessary to it. Those commonly used in printing are sufficient for the purpose. Besides, his project is only calculated to ascertain the fortes and pianos, and various slides of the human voice in speaking; whereas mine is contrived to designate the fortes and pianos, and various slides of the temper in writing.

MY system is founded in a practice which na­ture herself dictates, and which every one must have observed, I mean that of elevating the voice in proportion to the agitation of mind, or ear­nestness of the speaker. Thus a reprimand is given in a higher tone than admonition: and a person in a fright or in passion, exerts his lungs according to the quantum of terror or rage with which he is affected.

NOW I would have the degrees of vociferation [Page 182] —such as pianissimo, piano, forte, fortissimo, with all the intermediate gradations designated by the size of the letters which compose the emphatic words. And for this the various species of types from [...] Pearl [...] up to Five Line Pica, will afford an ample scale.

THE ingenious authors of advertisements have I confess, in some sort anticipated my design. We often see.

stop thief! stop thief! bawled out in double Pica Italics. The name of [Page 183] a ship to be sold, or some choice article to be dispo­sed of, in English Roman.

AND as a further enforcement to attention, I have seen the figure of a hand, with a crier's bell in the act of ringing, advertising an auction of household furniture. Every one striving to be heard in preference by a superior magnitude of types. At present there are none who roar out in louder, or blacker characters, than the printers themselves for Rags.

THERE is no looking at the first page of the daily advertiser without imagining a number of people hallowing and bawling to you to buy their goods or lands, to charter their ships, or to in­form you that a servant or a horse hath strayed a­way. For my part I am so possessed with this idea, that as soon as I take up the paper of the day, I turn over to articles of Intelligence as quick as possible, lest my eyes should be stunned by the [Page 184] occular uproar of the first page. For I am a peaceable man, and hate nothing more than the confused noise of a mob.

MY project, then, consists in this, that the prin­ter in composing any work should adapt the size of his types to the spirit of his author, so that a reader may become, in some degree personally acquainted with a writer whilst he is perusing his work. Thus an author of cool and equable spi­rits might take Bourgeois Roman for his medium, and would probably never rise higher than Great Primer; whilst a passionate man, engaged in a warm con­troversy, might thunder away in French Canon.

[Page 185]IT follows of course that authors of great vi­gour, should be charged higher than meek writers for printing a work of the same length, on account of the extraordinary space their per­formances must necessarily occupy; for these gi­gantic, wrathful types, like ranters on a stage, or Burgoyne at Saratoga, will demand sufficient elbow room.

For example—suppose a newspaper quarrel to happen between M and L^*

M begins the attack pretty smartly in Long primer.

L replies in Pica Roman.

M advances to Great Primer.

L retorts in Double Pica; [Page 186] and at last the contest swells up to Rascal, Villain, Coward, in five line pica; which indeed is as far as the art of printing or a modern quarrel can conveni­ently go.

A philosophical reason might be given to prove that large types will more forcibly affect the optic nerve than those of a smaller size, and therefore become mechanically expressive of ener­gy and vigour; but I leave this discussion for the amusement of the gentlemen lately elected into our philosophical society. It will satisfy me if my scheme should be adopted and found useful.

[Page 187]I recollect a case in point; some few years be­fore the war, the people of a western county, known at that time by the name of the Paxton boys, assembled on account of some discontents, and came down in great numbers, with hostile intentions against the peace of government, and with a particular view to some leading men in the city. Sir John St Clair, who had assumed military com­mand for the defence of the city on this occasion, met one of the obnoxious persons ^* in the street, and told him that he had seen the manifesto of the insurgents, and his name particularized by letters "as long as my fingers." The gentleman imme­diately packed up his most valuable effects and sent them with his family across the Delaware for security. Had Sir John only said, that he had seen his name mentioned in the manifesto, it is probable he would not have been so seriously alarmed; but the unusual size of the letters was to him a plain indication that the insurgents were determined to carry their resentment to a proportionable extremity

I could confirm my scheme by innumerable in­stances in fact and practice. The title page of every book is an example. It announces the sub­ject treated of in conspicuous characters; as if the author stood at the door of his edi [...]ier, calling out [Page 188] to every one to enter and partake of the enter­tainment he has prepared; and some even scream out their invitation in red letters.

THE journeymen printers have also a custom founded on the same principles. They distinguish every sheet of printing by a letter of the alphabet, which may be seen at the bottom of the first page of every sheet in any book. When they have pro­ceeded in this alphabetical enumeration as far as the letter O, they are sure to send the editor a proof sheet with an O! as big as a dollar; intimating, that the fatigue and labour they have gone through is so great, as to make them cry aloud for some gratuitous re­freshment.

IT was reserved for me to improve these hints into a project of general utility. It is indeed high time that such a system should be formed and di­vulged. [Page 189] For what, alas! are a few Capitals and Italies in the hands of a vigorous author? and yet these are the only typographical emphatics now in use. In personal altercations, nature has furnished ample means of expression. The muscles of the face; the motion of the eyes; the action of the body; the limbs, and even the hands and fingers —all unite in enforcing the feelings of the soul, and giving additional expression to language—Let art do the best she can in cases where these natu­ral signs of sentiment cannot be displayed.

IT is truly lamentable, and has given me much concern, to observe with what languor a late reli­gious dispute, and also a late law controversy, have been conducted; not for want of a proper spirit in the combatants, but merely for want of suf­ficient vehicle of rage and resentment.

FOR these reasons I hope my proposed im­provement in the art of printing will be eagerly a­dopted by gentlemen disputants, and no less so by the gentlemen printers: as the one will find a new and comprehensive field opened for the ex­hibition of their refined sentiments, exquisite sen­sibilites, and energy of thought; and the othe [...] derive no small emolument from the advanced prices which they may reasonably charge for [Page 190] printing the controversial essays, and vigo­rous effussions, of men of spirit and high edu­cation.

I am, I confess, enamoured of my project, and heartily wish some quarrel, may soon take place and swell even high as high as Five Line Pica, that the whole system of typographical expression may be displayed in one energetic example, and the utility of my project fully manifested—Just as Mr — of the humane societ [...] [...]ously waited▪ and I believe secretly wished that an accident might happen to evince the efficacy of a grappel he had [Page 191] contrived for discovering and drawing up drowned bodies.

LEST, however, such a quarrel should not speedily occur I hereby give public notice (in English Roman N^o [...]) that having nothing else to do, and having no wife or child to lament the consequences of my folly, I propose to take up any gentleman's discontent, animosity or affront, and to conduct the same in public contest against his adversary as far as Great Primer, or even French Canon, [Page 192] but not further, without the special leave of the original proprietor of the quarrel, provided; how­ever, that the dispute began in Bourgeois Roman for if it originated only in Pearl, Nonparei [...], or minion, I shall hardly think it worth my notice.

To shew that I am in earnest in this offer, I shall leave my address with the printer of this publication, that any gentleman quarreller may readily find a champion for the cause which he does not choose to championize himself.

I axious [...]y wait the issue of this my proposed scheme; not without sanguine hopes that it may prove the lucky hi [...] I have been so long pursuing, [Page 193] and procure me that public renown and popular favour, which, hitherto, I have in vain laboured to acquire.

OBSERVATIONS OF A FOREIGNER ON THE JURY TRIALS OF ENGLAND. COMMUNICATED IN A LETTER TO HIS FRIEND.

I Informed you in my last of the rout I took to arrive at this great city. I described as well as I could, the places I passed through; the manners of the people; the incidents that occurred; and the impositions to which I was obliged to submit. I hope my letters got to hand; not only because they cost me no small trouble to write—by trouble, I [Page 195] mean confinement, which you know I hate—but because I think they will afford you some amuse­ment.

WELL—here I am, and here I have been since the beginning of December last. I have several times attempted to continue my narrative and opi­nions for your entertainment, according to promise, but could not find myself disposed to sit long enough for the purpose. At present I am necessarily con­fined by a severe cold; and to this indisposition you are indebted for the letter I am now going to write. You will sincerely wish me better health, when you shall know the dulness of the subject I have undertaken.

YOU will reasonably expect some account of the polite amusements of this metropolis—the manners and taste of the fashionable world—their theatres, concerts, R [...]elagh, Pantheon, &c. &c. &c. But no; I will give you these some other time. At present I have a very different object in view, which has happened to engage much of my atten­tion; and, as I always sit down to write what I think, not to think what I shall write, I must take the subject which impresses my mind at the time, or not write at all.

[Page 196]THE great question—"What is the best form of government?" seems as far from being determined as ever; the politicians of different nations not having come to any compromise on this important subject. The reason, I suppose is, because no form of government can be devised that shall necessarily involve in itself the happiness or unhappiness of the people. There is, in fact, no mechanical affinity between these two objects. The multitude are happy or not, according to their ideas of the go­vernment by which they are restrained; and these ideas are not the produce of speculative knowledge, but are derived from the prejudices of education: whilst the more enlightened judge of government by the manner in which its powers are exercised and justice administered. So that instead of deter­mining on the happiness of a people by the nature of their political constitution, we should reverse the position, and judge of their political constituti­on by its effects on the people; or, in other words, that is the best government which is best admini­stered. This truth seems to be generally admitted by writers on the subject. The pursuit now, is not for a form of government that shall necessarily and mechanically make the people most happy; but for such a constitution as may be most effectual in securing them from being made miserable.

[Page 197] GREAT-BRITAIN is, I believe, the only nation that hath fairly tried the experiment. All other governments, that I know of, have certain desig­nated characters: they are either despotic, monar­chical, aristocratical, or democratical. But the English constitution is none of these, and yet par­takes of the nature of each. Their writers tell us, that by mixing the forms, they enjoy all their re­spective advantages, and that they reciprocally check each other, so as to counteract all their pe­culiar dangers and inconveniences.

ALL this is made very clear in theory; but if we attend to facts, we shall find that the scheme does not fully answer the great purposes it seems to promise. Their history is a proof; wherein we see perpetual struggles between the crown and the people for encroachments of power on the one hand, or an extension of privileges on the other: and their annual publications, and frequent changes of men in office, in modern as well as ancient times, shew them to be subject to all the evils of faction and instability. The truth is, that so nice an ad­justment of so complicated a machine—such a due proportion of strength in the component parts that they shall not interfere with or impede each other —such an accurate disposition of heterogeneous powers, that each shall naturally find out its own [Page 198] specific gravity, and rest in quiet, can only exist in theory; the passions of mankind will ever prevent its continuance in fact.

DON'T be alarmed: I am not going to discuss this intricate subject at large; I wonder how I got so far into it: I have neither leisure, inclination, or ability to pursue it. I had fixed my attention only on one particular part of the English constitution, on which I mean to give you my sentiments; and respecting this, I have been for some weeks past making assiduous and minute enquiries—I mean the administration of justice by grand and petit juries.

I must first give you as concise a detail as I can of this establishment, that you may the better un­derstand my observations upon it.

GRAND JURIES are only made use of in cases of criminal process, or public offence; petit juries in all cases of trial, whether for a breach of the laws, for private wrongs, or property in dispute. ^*

THE sheriff of the county or district, in pursu­ance [Page 199] of a writ directed to him by the judges, makes out a list of 24 honest and substantial free-holders, that is men of character, who possess a real or land­ed estate in the county. To each of these he sends a written or printed notice to attend the court on a certain day. If the sheriff does his duty, these ought to be men most respectable for property, in­tegrity, and abilities; so that poverty may not in­duce them to a corrupt abuse of their office, or ig­norance lead them to an absurd exercise of it.

NOT less than twelve, or more than twenty-three, are competent to the formation of a grand jury. Generally from fifteen to eighteen are considered as a suitable number.

WHEN these are convened in court, the oath of office is administered to them, which is a very strict one. They swear that they will not accuse any person for hatred or malice; or suffer any of­fender to escape unaccused from any favour or af­fection, or hope of reward. Thus qualified they retire to any apartment they please to perform the duty the law hath assigned to them.

THEY are called the grand inquest for the coun­ty: because it is their business to enquire of all of­fences that may have been committed within that [Page 200] district, and present them to the notice of the court. They are to receive information from every source; but particularly from the officer called the king's attorney, or the prosecutor in behalf of government. The bills of accusation are all framed by this offi­cer, who sends them to the grand jury for enquiry, together with the witnesses in support of the bills.

THE jury then proceed to make a careful inves­tigation of the charge, to examine the witnesses, and consider the whole matter in a large and liberal view; but the accused person is not suffered to ap­pear and make his defence, this not being the time assigned for that purpose.

IF the grand jury, or a majority of them, find suf­ficient cause to believe that the party is guilty of the crimes alledged against him, their foreman, in behalf of the whole body, endorses on the bill billa vera, or a true bill; if otherwise, he endorses the word ignoramus, as much as to say, this charge may be true, but we do not know that it is so. The rejection of a bill by the grand jury does not operate as an acquittal; for the party may be again indicted for the same offence, if fuller testimony in support of the accusation can afterwards be pro­cured.

[Page 201]THE bills, thus endorsed, are brought into court and delivered to the judges. The party against whom the bill is found (as it is called) must be then sent for, and personally appear in court. If this cannot be done, the trial must be put off till he can be taken and brought to answer.

WHEN the accused person appears, the bill, now called an indictment, is distinctly read to him by the clerk of the court, who peremptorily demands of him whether he is guilty or not guilty of the charge as laid in the indictment. If the party absolutely re­fuses to answer, the court cannot, according to the strict rules of common law, proceed against him; because he does not voluntarily submit his cause to that jurisdiction, by assenting to or denying the ac­cusation: for the law does not allow that any court hath an official power to determine on a man's life or property, unless by his own act he consents, or seems to consent, to submit himself to its jurisdicti­on; and this is supposed to be done by his enter­ing his plea, that is, by acknowledging or denying the charge brought against him.

THERE have been instances in former times of persons standing mute, and refusing to plead to the indictment; to remedy which, a most absurd and barbarous practice was admitted to enforce an an­swer. [Page 202] The party was taken to prison, and laid upon his back, naked, on the floor of a dungeon, his arms and legs were tied by four cords to the four corners of the dungeon: he was sparingly fed with the most coarse and ordinary bread that could be got, and drink brought him from the nearest ken­nel; a weight was also laid upon his breast, and a like weight daily added, until, by his intolerable situation, he was compelled to answer guilty or not guilty. This operation is called in their books paine forte & dure. But this savage process is now obsolete: and it is declared by statute, that stand­ing obstinately mute shall be an equivalent to a confession of guilt, and sentence shall be passed ac­cordingly. The case never occurs now. The pri­soner generally pleads not guilty, and is thereby said to join in issue, and put himself upon his trial. If he is a stranger, or so poor that he cannot en­gage an advocate to assist him in his defence, the judges always assign him council, and allow him some short time for preparation.

WHEN the day of trial comes, the prisoner is again sent for to court; for it is essential to the process that he should be personally present during the whole business. The sheriff hath previously summoned a number of persons to serve on the pe­tit jury. Twelve persons, and no more, are neces­sary [Page 203] for this purpose; but he generally returns forty-eight or more names to the court, according to circumstances, because the accused hath a right to make many objections. These names are called over in court, and the persons who appear are pre­sented one by one before the prisoner, who is de­sired to look at him, and say whether he has any objection to his being one of the jury which is to determine his fate. If the crime charged is capital, the prisoner has a legal right to challenge perempto­rily twenty of the persons offered for jurymen, that is, to set them aside from caprice, from a dislike to their countenances, or any other secret motive, without giving any reason for his so doing; and he has, moreover, a right to challenge or object to as many more as he ran give sufficient reasons for rejecting: such as the person offered being in any degree interested in the event; his having pre­judged the matter, by declaring his opinion in conversation; his having heretofore been convict­ed of perjury, with many other causes of legal disability.

WHEN this investigation is gone through, and twelve unexceptionable persons appear, who have all been sworn, well and truly to try the cause de­pending, and a true verdict give according to the evidence, they are put together in a convenient [Page 204] place, to hear the whole matter, and must not se­parate until a final decision is given; nor must any person whisper or speak to them (except when they ask questions of the court or of the witnesses) or deliver any message or writing to them; any of these happening would vitiate the whole process. Yet the judges, the lawyers employed, or the pri­soner, may address them aloud in open court. If a juryman should have occasion to retire during the trial, he must ask leave of the court, and a constable must attend him the whole time of his absence, and the proceedings must be suspended till his return.

THE trial commences by the king's attorney^* reading the indictment aloud to the jury: after which he produces his witnesses in support of the accusation. These witnesses must all be examined on oath, and deliver their testimony viva voce in the presence of the prisoner, and of the whole court. After the king's attorney hath done with a witness, the advocate for the prisoner cross examines him: he asks him questions which may tend to embarrass him: he presses him as to the certainty of his knowledge: he endeavours to make him contra­dict himself; or say something that may indicate [Page 205] passion or interest; and exercises every art that may tend to invalidate his testimony, or weaken its force. If these manoeuvres, however, are carried too far, the judge will, or ought to, interfere, and check a too great licentiousness in the treatment of a witness. When the king's attorney hath pro­duced all his testimony, he addresses the jury; he recapitulates what the witnesses have advanced; he enforces the law, and applies it to the present case; and supports his arguments by authorities from the books respecting cases of the like na­ture.

THE council for the prisoner then produces his witnesses in behalf of the accused, who are also se­verally cross examined by the king's attorney. When the whole of the testimony has been exhibi­ted, of which the judges and the council take notes in writing, the lawyer for the prisoner begins his defence: he dwells upon, and enforces every fa­vourable circumstance: he endeavours to invali­date or throw doubts upon the proofs against him: he labours to explain away the law, and finally addresses himself to the tender feelings of the jury. He must now display the whole of his abilities, for he is not allowed to speak again. The king's at­torney then replies; he obviates the objections that have been made, either to the testimony or to [Page 206] his statement of the law; he points at the weak­ness of the defence; and enlarges upon the proof against the prisoner; and, lastly, submits the whole matter to the determination of the jury.

THERE is then a customary, but not a necessary, indulgence allowed to the prisoner in capital cases: and this I think a very pathetic part of the process. The accused person has been all this time a silent spectator of the proceedings; but he is now permitted to address the jury himself, and tell his own story in his own way.

THIS, considering his critical situation, is cer­tainly a very interesting part of the ceremony; es­pecially if the party is indeed innocent of the crime alledged, but labouring under a combina­tion of unlucky circumstances and untoward ap­pearances. I have been more affected by the sim­ple narrative of the prisoner himself, than by all the finished eloquence of the council who under­took his defence.

AFTER this, the judge sums up the whole of the testimony to the jury: he omits unnecessary de­tails, and brings pointedly into view all those cir­cumstances which are of any importance either for or against the prisoner: and opens and ex­plains [Page 207] the law, if in the least doubtful, and often instructs the jury what determination they ought, in his opinion, to give.

THE jury, being now charged with the whole matter, are conducted to some private apartment, where they are shut up, and a constable is placed on the out side of the door; and there they must remain, secluded from all external communi­cation whatever, without meat, drink or suste­nance of any kind until they shall have unanimously agreed in their judgment. Any one dissenting voice will annihilate the verdict or decision. When they have all agreed, they give notice thereof to the constable at the door, who immediately sends information to the judge. The court, if not then sitting, forthwith convenes, and the prisoner is again sent for; for it is absolutely necessary that the verdict should be given in his presence. The jury then come into court, and the clerk having called over their names, to shew that none are mis­sing, asks them if they have agreed in their ver­dict?—they answer in the affirmative. He then demands of them, whether the prisoner is guilty or not guilty of the crime with which he stands charged?—to which the foreman of the jury, in behalf of the rest, answers guilty or not guilty, as the case may be. This the clerk immediately re­cords; [Page 208] and then desires the jury to attend to their verdict, as the court hath recorded it, demanding assent, which is again given.

THIS determination is called a verdict, or vere-dictum. Because the law presumes that what­ever twelve impartial men, so selected, so sworn, and so instructed, shall, with united voice, declare, must inevitably be the truth: neither will the law suffer a verdict, so given and recorded, to be after­wards doubted or contested.

IF the prisoner has been found guilty, the judge asks him what he has to say why the sentence of the law should not be pronounced against him? For, even in this last stage, the prisoner may, if he can, shew some defect in the proceedings, some uncer­tainty in the indictment, or other irregularity of force sufficient to arrest the judgment. For when the law presumes that the jury have de­livered the truth, it supposes the whole proceed­ings to have been fair, regular and legal; other­wise the verdict is not founded on such a basis as the law requires, and therefore is not that legal un­controvertible truth it looks for. If the prisoner has no such plea to make, judgement is pronoun­ced against him; and he has no chance left but that of the king's pardon.

[Page 209]THERE are several minutiae in this process, and some exceptions which I have omitted; but the above is the general outline of trial in criminal cases.

IN disputes about property, and actions for da­mages, the same principle pervades the conduct of the suit; that is, to give the accused person all pos­sible opportunity of defence. In civil causes, however, there is no grand jury; neither of the parties have a right to make peremptory challen­ges; and the jury are not so rigidly treated as in cases of life and death; yet their determination or verdict must be unanimous, as in the former case; and there is no reversing their verdict, but by discovering some error in the proceedings, or some fraud or corruption in the jury

SUCH is the mode of administring justice in this country. A system which is deemed the palladi­um of British liberty, and the subject of perpetual panegyrick. And no wonder; since, as a system, nothing can be more perfect; inasmuch as it is cal­culated to shield the poorest individual in the community against the secret strokes of wealthy malice, or the open violence of overweening power.

[Page 210]BUT I have given you a delineation of what the practice ought to be, not what it may be. If the several parts of this machine should in all instances operate according to their respective destinations, and no further, it would be very difficult for a guilty per­son to escape, and next to impossible that an innocent man should suffer: and in contests about property, there would be the greatest reason to expect that impartial and substantial justice must take place.

I could myself enlarge, with the zeal of an En­glishman, on the external beauty of this admirable fabric, and its apparent strength as a bulwark a­gainst oppression. But let us now consider the dis­eases to which this constitution is liable, and how far the good purposes of an excellent theory may be evaded or perverted in the execution.

IN the first place, the sheriff selects and returns such persons as he pleases to serve on both juries: and here he has uncontrolled opportunity of gra­tifying his own partialities, if he has any, respecting the persons to be tried, or the cause depending: for it matters not what private passions or prejudi­ces the juries may have, provided they are legally unexceptionable; and popular governments are so subject to party rage, that such partialities in the sheriff may sometimes be expected.

[Page 211]INDEED, it is not uncommon for people here to form a judgment of the issue of a doubtful cause, from a knowledge of the jury which is to deter­mine it. It is to guard against the sheriff's packing a jury, as it is called, that peremptory challenges are allowed in capital cases.

WHEN the grand jury is formed, the judge al­ways addresses them from the bench. This is cal­led charging the grand jury, and should, according to the original design, be no more than a general delineation of their duty, and the law definitions of the crimes and offences of which they are to make enquiry, and present to the jurisdiction of the court: because these men being [...]elected from the mass of the people, are not supposed to be versed in legal precision and niceties. But the judge often takes this opportunity of going farther: he insinuates to them, that they may indict on mere probable testi­mony; that they should attend only to the testimo­ny in behalf of the prosecution, and have nothing to do with any witnesses but those whom the king's attorney shall send to them; and that if they find the bill, it will amount to nothing more than a kind of legal accusation, which, if wrong, will be afterwards set right by the petit jury. But this is a deviation from the original constitution, which placed the grand jury at the first entrance [Page 212] of the law to screen the innocent from malicious prosecutions. For what with confinement, ex­pence, and infamy, a man may be effectually ruin­ed by the grand jury's finding a bill against him, although he may be afterwards fully acquitted by the petit jury.

THUS charged, however, the grand jury retire. Now it should be considered that these are called off from their ordinary business to perform a tem­porary duty, not very agreeable in itself, and at­tended with no profit; but, on the contrary, some­what expensive. The ideas they have imbibed from the charge, have a great tendency to relax the binding force of their oath of office: their present duty is in the law line, and they do not pretend to understand law: but the judge who does under­stand it, has instructed them; and on his opinion they rest the sanctity of their oath, and the rights of their station. When such principles prevail, the real use of a grand jury is in a great measure set aside, and the institution becomes rather a burthen­some ceremony, than a real advantage.

THE judge has a manifest influence over both the grand and petit juries; but he must exercise this with moderation and discretion; for the peo­ple have in general a pretty just knowledge of [Page 113] their fundamental rights; these they will suffer to be impaired through indolence, inattention, or per­suasion, but will never suffer them to be directly violated or called in question. The judge may insinuate any thing, but if he openly assumes un­constitutional powers over the jury, he is sure to be opposed with invincible firmness. And when ever an open contest of this kind happens, the ju­ry will certainly have the popular current in their favour, unless they should be so notoriously in the the wrong as to preclude all defence of their conduct.

THE petit jury, are now to be formed, or, as it is called, impannelled. And here again is a large field for contrivance and address. In suits for damages or for property, great dexterity is ex­ercised on both sides for securing proper men on the jury. So great are the apprehensions of un­fairness and disadvantage in this particular, that it is common for the parties in the suit to demand that the cause shall be tried by what is called a struck jury. When this happens the prothonotary, or clerk of the court, makes out a list of 48 good and law­ful men of the county, and from this list the par­ties, or their attornies for them, alternately strike out the names of such as they do not approve until there are but 24 names left. These [Page 214] 24 are summoned by the sheriff to attend the court, and the first 12 of the number who shall make their appearance on the day of trial, and answer to their names, are to compose the jury who are to determine the cause.

AFTER the jury have been impannelled, have heard the testimony and the arguments, and the judge has summed up the whole matter, they retire to form their verdict. For this pur­pose, as I before observed, they are excluded from all external communication, sustenance, or comfort. By these means they are compelled to make up a unanimous opinion or starve, be the case never so doubtful or difficult. In this lies the principal fallacy of the system; inasmuch as it is next to an impossibility that twelve men, of various tempers, abilities and knowledge, should freely and decidedly unite in judgment on a disputable and uncertain case. The truth is, they seldom suffer any great extremities for conscience sake^*. The last impressions they received came from the judge; his station, his authority, his knowledge in the law, will give an almost invincible force to these impressions. And the result is, that nine times in ten, the verdict, especially in civil cases, is made conformably to his opinion.

[Page 215]THE designated legal power of an English judge is not very considerable; but the official influence he has over the determinations of juries, subjects, in a great degree, the lives and property of the people to his judgment or caprice. And this masked power is the more dangerous; because, if he should be partial, unjust, or corrupt, his conduct is screened by the intervention of the jury, the fi­nal decision being their verdict, not his.

BUT suppose the judge states the case impar­tially to the jury, without making any attempt to bias their judgment; the consequence is, that some leading man in the jury will bring over the rest to his opinion, or some very obstinate man wear out the patience of his fellows. There have been instances when eleven have agreed upon a verdict and the persevering twelfth has com­pelled them to change their minds, and yield to the superior strength of his constitution. It of­ten happens that a verdict is put to the vote, and the minority accedes to the opinion of the majority. But most commonly the verdict is determined by the advice of the judge, or the opinion of one of the jury of more reputed knowledge than the rest. So that in disputable cases, it seldom, if ever, happens that the final verdict is that free, clear, and una­nimous decision of twelve impartial men, under [Page 216] oath, which the law presumes, and which the sy­stem requires. If two or more of the jury should be of contrary opinions, and neither will give way, no verdict can possibly be given in. In such a case, which sometimes occurs, there is but one remedy, which indeed is not countenanced by law, but suggested by necessity. It is this. The sheriff, or some body for him, steals away one of the jury from the bar, so that when the clerk calls over their names, it is found that there are but eleven jurymen, and this invalidates all the proceedings. The business must be put off to another court, and the whole process begun de novo.

IF, when the verdict is given in, the judge should not approve of it, he sometimes takes the liberty of sending back the jury to reconsider the mat­ter; but if they persist, he must finally submit and record the verdict. But such cases seldom occur. In general the juries take their tone from the judge's charge. When they have given in their decision, they are discharged, and disperse, and are never after accountable for what they have done, unless in cases of manifest corruption. It is with them, as with all popular bodies—the individuals never think themselves responsible for what the whole have done.

[Page 217]IN causes which do not so much depend upon expositions of law, such as an equitable adjustment of long and intricate accounts, or satisfaction for injuries which cannot so well be ascertained by le­gal testimony, it is customary for the contend­ing parties to consent in open court to a reference. Whereupon the judges nominate three or more in­different persons to hear and arbitrate the matters in variance. These arbitrators are not compelled to be unanimous, neither are they subjected to the other restrictions of a jury. They meet when and where they please, they investigate the busi­ness in their own manner, and in their own time, and finally send their award in writing to the court. And this award, when received and re­corded, becomes the judgment of the court.

ARBITRATIONS are liable to this imperfection. The arbitrators not having the opinion of the judge to rest upon, not being restrained by rigid rules, being few in number, and moving in an enlarged sphere of investigation, are more pointed­ly and personally answerable, in reputation at least, for the rectitude and propriety of their de­termination. In this situation, the general aim, in difficult cases is, if possible, to satisfy both the contending parties, and so avoid the complaints or censures of either; and this they frequently ac­complish [Page 218] by halving the value in dispute between them, when it can be done; and thus substantial justice is done to neither.

ALTHOUGH the English law leans so strongly in favour of the accused in criminal cases, giving every reasonable advantage to the party who is put up­on his defence, yet the form of process is so decid­ed, and so well understood, that unnecessary delays seldom occur; but this is far from being the case in civil actions, which are attended with so many complex circumstances, forms, and delays, all which incur a considerable expence, that the plaintiff, unless in very plain cases, such as an un­disputed bond, or note of hand, had better put up with a small injury or loss, than to prosecute his suit, although in the end he should prove successful. For here the the law is so unreasonably in favour of the defendant, and allows him so many dilatory pleas, causes of adjournment, and removals from court to court, that a wealthy wrong-doer, with the help of able council, may weary out the most equitable claimant by exhausting his patience and his purse.

WHEN an action is brought, the right or wrong of the case, or what is called the me­rits of the cause, never come into view till to­wards [Page 219] the close of the business. The only ques­tion is, whether the plaintiff hath brought, and conducted his claim, according to the strict forms of law, which forms are not settled by any code or determinate system; but must be gathered from the authorities, that is, from the reports of former determinations when like points of process have been contested. The intention of throwing these obstacles in the way of justice is to prevent the plaintiff from over-reaching the defendant in any stage of the process. But the evils attending this extreme caution are more than a balance to the dangers it is designed to obviate.

IT would be in vain for me to give you the hi­story of the many causes of delay that may legal­ly occur in the pursuit of a manifestly equitable title to a tract of land, whole volumes would be insufficient to the purpose; my present object on­ly respects the mode of trial by jury, not the ge­neral practice of the law in this country.

THE result of my observations amounts to this, that perfection is not to be looked for in human institutions. The British form of govern­ment, as well as British jurisprudence, exhibits a specious appearance of perfect security to the sub­ject; but this perfect security exists only in the [Page 220] theory; the proposed object of the system is to ensure to the people all the good effects of wisdom and integrity in their rulers and officers of justice; but wisdom and integrity are absolutely necessary to the due execution of the plan. So that the effects promised must in fact precede the opera­tion; which is a political petitio principii.

IN England, all laws are supposed to be made by the free consent of the people, by means of their representatives; and judical decisions to be the verdict of twelve impartial men, unanimous in their opinions. Neither of these positions are strictly true in fact. It is most notorious, that, in the first case, the members of parliament fre­quently purchase the voices of the people, and af­terwards sell their own and votes to the king or his minister; so that the king can almost al­ways command a majority of parliamentary voices. And, in the second case, the authority of the judge most commonly influences the verdict of a jury; so that in truth, the king makes the laws, and the judges execute them, whilst the people only seem to do both;—and they remain content with this seeming, until administration becomes too manifestly oppressive and corrupt. When this happens they struggle for original rights, by [Page 221] insurrections and revolutions; which is the po­pular remedy common to every government, when that government is so exercised as to become in­supportable.

THESE remarks may perhaps appear too se­vere, but they are founded in truth. A candid Englishman would acknowledge, that the imper­fections I have pointed at, may, and sometimes do, occur in their political system; but he would urge, and with some reason too, that, all circum­stances considered, all evils balanced, and all in­conveniences averaged, the constitution of his country is the safest and best yet devised for uni­ting these two difficult problems—The security of the people's rights, with the dignity and vigour of government.

I will readily acknowledge, that, upon the whole, justice is well admininistred in this country; but I believe this is more owing to the abilities and integrity of their judges, than to the infallibility of their system. A bad judge might be a curse to the people, without directly violating the legal rules of his official conduct.

FOR my own part, I am of opinion, that the happiness of a people depends more upon their [Page 222] national character than their form of government. A truly enlightened people cannot be enslaved real despotism cannot be exercised, unless the mass of the people are either stupidly ignorant, grossly licentious and immoral, or extremely begotted. In the first case, they submit to every imposition, because they know nothing of the rights of na­ture, or the origin of delegated power; in the second, they become enervated by luxury, and indifferent to those rights and privileges, of which they have rendered themselves unworthy; and, in the third, their tyrant will take care to have the priesthood on his side, and make the consciences of his subjects the chains by which he will hold them in the most abject servitude; or, which is not improbable, the priesthood will be themselves the tyrants, and keep both the so­v [...]ign and his people under a most rigid con­troul.

OF all the means by which a nation may be made miserable, this last is the most wicked and most effectual. Freed from this servitude, a peo­ple cannot, in this age of the world, long remain either stupidly ignorant, or grossly immoral; but inexorable bigotry and rooted superstition lock up the doors of knowledge and preclude reformation. [Page 223] No nation was ever famous for advancements in arts and sciences, for discoveries in the truths of nature which enlarge the mind, or the inventions of improvements, which add to the happiness or convenience of mankind, whilst they were compel­led by the prejudices of education, or the rigour of the laws, to yield implicit faith and obedience to the priesthood—Quere—Which was the most beneficial character to the world—the man who invented the Spinning wheel, or he who compo­sed the Athanasian Creed?

BUT I am wandering far from my subject, and have unexpectedly made my letter of an unrea­sonable length. Had I foreseen how far my disser­tation on jury trials would have led me, I should probably not have undertaken it.

BUT what business have you or I with British jurisprudence? this question never occured to me till now. If it had—I might have saved my­self a deal of writing, and you much dull read­ing.

I shall leave this city in four or five weeks and pass over to France. You may expect to hear from me, in a more entertaining style when I get [Page 224] to paris. Till then—Adieu! And believe me when I assure you that I am,

THE REMARKS OF UNCOMMON SENSE ON A LATE PAMPHLET ENTITLED DISSERTATIONS ON GOVERNMENT, THE AFFAIRS OF THE BANK, &c. BY THE AUTHOR OF COMMON SENSE. 1785.

IT is said of Archimedes, that he would have un­dertaken to move the globe of the earth, provided a place could be had whereon he might erect his machine. So it is with speculative authors in every [Page 226] science. Grant them only a few first principles or data, so called, because they must depend upon the reader's benevolence for admission, being either not true in fact, or incapable of proof; I say, grant but these, and the subsequent reasoning cannot ea­sily be controverted. Give an ingenious author a point whereon to rest the fulcrum of his argument, and he will move whole systems, physical, moral, or political.

THE manifest purpose of the pamphlet before me is to justify the Bank of North-America as a use­ful institution, notwithstanding that it hath been declared by act of assembly to be a pernicious cor­poration, and incompatible with the public safety; and to shew that the legislature had no legal right to deprive it of its charter; and also to censure and ridicule a respectable committee of the house, upon whose report the act for disfranchising the bank was founded.

IN order to prove that the assembly had no right to retract a charter once granted, without some legal forfeiture or breach of conditions on the part of the grantees, he rests the fulcrum of his argu­ments on certain first principles of government. Now, if these first principles should be found on ex­amination to be laid on hollow ground; that is, that [Page 227] however true they may be in reason, they are not true in fact, it will follow, that the author, the pam­phlet, the argument, and the bank of North-Ame­rica, must all sink together—Let us then take a short view of this writer's ground work.

COMMON-SENSE tells us, that in all governments there must be a sovereign power somewhere, and that the repository where this sovereignty is placed is the first criterion of distinction between a despo­tic form of government and a free country: that in the first, it is possessed by an individual in here­ditary right; in the second, it is held by the peo­ple at large, and by them periodically assigned to their delegates or representatives.

THE fallacy of this supposed axiom consists in his considering sovereign power as a simple elemen­tary principle; whereas it is manifestly divisible in­to at least two component parts: viz. power, con­sidered only in reference to the act or thing done, or to be done; and will, considered as influencing and dictating the exercise of that power. For in­stance, in a mill, the power of grinding corn is in the stones, wheels, and movements of the machine; but the will is in the miller, who superintends and go­verns its operations.

[Page 228]A mere act of power may be exercised without the concurrence of the will: and that there may be a will, without a power to carry it into effect, will not be denied. Now the true criterion of distincti­on between a despotic rule and the free govern­ment of Pennsylvania consists in this; that in the former case, the will and power are both inherent in an individual and his successors; whereas in Pennsylvania, the power of making laws is in the house of assembly; but the will that suggests, dictates to, and influences this power, is lodg­ed with certain learned and worthy persons, who are not members of that house, and who are not vested with the power of actually making laws.

I begin to perceive that I have involved myself in a very difficult and subtle argument—I wish I may be able to make myself understood.

A majority of voices in the house of assembly have an undoubted right to order the seals of the commonwealth to be affixed to a bill which hath previously passed the forms of legislation. The seals being thus affixed, that bill becomes a law, binding on all whom it may concern, being citizens of the state. Now this is a mere naked act of power, the authenticity of which does not at all depend on a [Page 229] genuine concurrence of will in those who exercise it; for the will is either directly or remotely the offspring of the understanding; yet the law would be valid, although the majority that voted it into existence, should be totally ignorant of its principles and operation.

I will put a case, which I confess, is a very ab­surd one; but it will serve to illustrate my argu­ment.

SUPPOSE a contest should arise respecting the true translation of a passage in the original Hebrew bible; and that this difference of opinion should occasion such hot disputes and angry parties in the state as to make it necessary for the legislature to interfere and determine the point. Suppose innumerable petitions pro and con to be laid before the house, and that at last a committee should be appointed to enquire and report upon the merits of the question. This committee having no know­ledge of the Hebrew tongue will naturally apply to some learned men—heads of one of the parties, but not members of the house, who will tell them— ‘This is a business you do not understand—as­semblymen never read Hebrew, they only read newspapers—but we will draw up a report for you.’ The report is accordingly drawn up by [Page 230] these learned men—the committee adopt it—they lay it before the house—a bill is drawn conforma­bly thereto, and passed into a law, and so the ques­tion is decided. Now, in this transaction there is a manifest separation of the will from the power. The committee had the power of presenting the report, and the house of passing it into a law; but neither the committee nor the house could possibly exercise any will on a subject of which they had not the least knowledge or understanding. Their will might, indeed, be exercised in the service of the party they wished to favour, but not in the decision of the question.

On these principles I venture to assert in vindi­cation of a late committee on the affairs of the bank, against the aspersions of Common Sense, that, let their report be proper or improper, let the law passed thereupon be just or unjust, no censure can possibly lie against the committee, because, some few instances excepted, no man is responsible for an act in which his will did not concur.

BUT the committee does not stand in need of this or any other defence: their report was per­fectly just and proper, and exhibited an intimate knowledge of the constitution and tendency of the bank of North-America: as I shall fully shew [Page 231] when I come to enumerate the high crimes of the president, directors, and stockholders of our national bank.

SOVEREIGNTY being thus divisible into will and power, the advantage of our free government con­sists in this, that let who will exercise the power in the house of legislation, the will of government may be possessed by worthy and enterprising men out of the house, by which the labour of law-mak­ing is divided and becomes easy and advantageous.

ON this singularity in our political system is founded a doctrine, not long since advanced by learned men, which, if established, must fully answer the purposes of those who discovered it, viz. that assemblies, juries, and such confidential appoint­ments are nothing more than LEGAL MACHINES, ^* designed to give legal sanction to the views of those, who from superior abilities and official greatness, are best qualified to influence and direct them. It would be a strange thing indeed if the mill should grind what sort of grain it pleased, and go, or stop, according to its own caprices.

THAT Common Sense has taken a wrong ground of argument is plain from this. He gives a copy [Page 232] our bill of rights, and from thence deduces his system of reasoning. It had been more to the purpose, if, instead of a bill of rights, he had given us a bill of facts. A bill of rights is a very useful thing in the commencement of a common­wealth; like leading strings for a child it assists it in walking before it has strength to go alone. But when the government is established, what occasion can there be for a bill of rights? When the house is built, the scaffolding should be taken away. When the Ship is launched, she leaves her former supports behind.

IT may be asked if the bill of rights and our frame of government are no longer to be regar­ded, where shall we look for a rule of conduct?

I answer, precedent will always furnish sufficient rules of conduct. In the commencement of a republic, it is plain there can be no precedents: all things are then new; and a bill of rights, and a designated constitution, must be the standards of authority. As the republic advances in strength and stability, precedents sprout spontaneously, kill the roots of original rights, and in time occupy the whole ground. The only difficulty is to create and establish the first precedent. This done, it [Page 233] will soon become a powerful engine. Like an anchor to windward, it will enable the skilful pilot to warp the ship against wind and tide. It will also prove very prolific; for a good precedent, like a good potatoe, contains within itself the eyes or germs of many future precedents or potatoes.

FOR example—In an early period of our politi­cal existence it seemed no great impropriety that committees of the house of assembly should take the opinions of the judges on questions respecting mere law-points. But this soon grew to a custom of sending not questions only, but the bills them­selves, to the judges for consideration. Thus en­couraged, their honours soon undertook to recom­mend, and even draw petitions to the assembly for or against measures which they wished to promote or oppose; to frame reports for committees; and originated bills for the legislature; and to esta­blish, by precedent, an out-of-doors influence, so strong as virtually to possess the will of govern­ment; leaving to the house of assembly the more mechanical power of enacting laws.

THUS hath a total change, in effect, taken place in our constitution. We began with a sin­gle branch of legislation, and it is manifest that we [Page 234] have now three distinct branches, viz. an upper house, a lower house, and a legislative council. Our upper house, it is well known, meet at the state house in Chesnut Street; the lower house assemble at the Indian Queen in Market Street^*, and the judges from the supreme court form the legislative council. This council, in conjunction with the lower house, is the repository of the will of our sovereignty, having a direct influence upon the acts of government whilst under deliberation. And the council have, by precedent, acquired a separate and exclusive right of revising, altering, and amending, the laws after they have been enacted and published. And thus hath our bill of facts introduced a form of government very different from that designated in our bill of rights and ori­ginal constitution.

HAVING shewn, to satisfaction I hope, that common Sense hath entirely mistaken the present constitution of Pennsylvania, it follows, that all [Page 235] his arguments, founded on what our system of government was, instead of what it is, must fall to the ground. Amongst these, the first in rank is a subtile distinction between an act and a law. The design of which is to shew that there are not two sorts of justice in nature. That the same justice which binds individuals in a bargain, should bind the public in contracts. That the assembly, as the representative body of the people, have a right to make contracts with individuals, and that the party or parties contracted with, have an interest in the bargain, which they cannot justly be deprived of by a mere arbitrary change of opinion in the grantor. Because, such a con­tract is an act, and not a law, subject to repeal at pleasure. And so applying this doctrine to the case of the bank, he infers that the assembly had no right to deprive that corporation of its character.

BUT the fallacy of this reasoning will appear, by considering the facts and principles just stated; I mean the separation of the will from the power, in the sovereignty of Pennsylvania.

SUPPOSE a remonstrance to be made to the house of assembly, representing, in strong and plausible terms, the injustice in thus depriving the [Page 236] bank of its charter, without any legal conviction of its offence, or forfeiture on the part of that insti­tion; the natural answer would be, ‘the bu­siness of this house is determined by a majority of voices; that majority is secured by the lower house, and influenced and directed by the legislative council. All the power we have is to enact laws, but what those laws shall be, depends upon those wise men who are in possession of the sovereignty of will. If any thing should be wrong, we are not responsible, being nothing more than legal machines. Go to those who direct our proceedings, and perhaps they may give you satisfaction.’

SHOULD application then be made to the lower house, and legislative council, they would say, ‘We have not the power to make laws, or to re­peal them; we can neither give charters, nor take them away; the seals of the commonwealth are not in our possession; the house of assem­bly is alone competent to your purpose.’

AND herein consists the excellency of our go­vernment, that let things go a [...] they will, there is nobody to blame.

[Page 237]THE distinction between an act and a law made by Common Sense has no real foundation; because he places what he calls an act of assembly upon the footing of a grant or contract not revocable at pleasure. But the binding force of all con­tracts depends upon a concurrence of the will and the act. And, therefore, a grant, bond, or bar­gain, executed under compulsions, restraint, or un­due influence, is of no validity. Now, the will being severed from the power, in our system of le­gislation, it is impossible that acts of government should be no more than contracts. All acts of assembly are in fact laws, and as such, liable to be revised, amended, or totally repealed, let Common Sense say what he will.

IN the case of a grant or charter under speci­fied conditions, there can be no doubt, but that the grantees are strictly bound by the terms men­mentioned; but, it would be beneath the dignity of government, that it should be bound by any conditions whatever: sovereign power scorns restraint.

I well recollect, that, in an argument held before a la [...]e house of assembly, respecting the bank, the advocate for those who wished to overturn that in­stitution, proceeded on the grounds and principles [Page 238] I have above stated. Much was urged in favour of the power of the house. The same power, he said, that creates, can annihilate: it would be ab­surd to say, that the legislature can do, but cannot undo; and so on. But, not a word of the justice or injustice, the morality, or immorality, of the trans­action; for these concern the will and not the power, and were points on which the orator knew the house was not responsible, for the reasons I have given above. I remember also, that I ask­ed a certain great lawyer ^*, at that time, whether he thought that house could repeal the law for emancipating negroes, and so make them slaves again? He answered, that it had a legal power so to do.

SINCE then all acts of the legislature are laws, and as such may be altered or repealed at pleasure, to what purpose has this author taken so much pains? Can a pamphlet invalidate a law of the land? Will our assembly-men be ruled by the dic­tates of Common Sense? Will they suffer the sove­reignty of the state to be bound in shackles? God forbid, that they should so far forget themselves their friends, and adherents.

[Page 239]LET us now take a short view of the present si­tuation of the bank. A learned and enlightened committee of the house of assembly, after a fair and impartial enquiry, have found and reported— ‘That the bank, as at present established, is in every view incompatible with the public safety’ —and a law founded on this report, hath been du­ly enacted, taking from that institution the charter which the imprudence of a former assembly had granted and confirmed to it. To what purpose then, I again ask, has Common Sense taken so much pains? This corporation, so far as it depends for existence on the charter in question, exists no more. This cannot be denied. Does this author expect that our present assembly should work miracles, and raise the dead? He cries out against the ille­gality of the proceedings that disfranchised the bank; what good can this do? After a criminal has been executed, what purpose can it answer to to discover insufficiencies in the court that convict­ed him, or irregularities in his trial? Will these discoveries bring the man to life, and give him the chance of a new and fairer trial? Surely not.

A corporation can have but one life, viz. a legal or political life; but an individual may have two lives, and may exist in one, though deprived of the other—that is, an individual may be alive and in [Page 240] health in fact, and at the same time absolutely dead in law. An instance of this happened some time since in the county of York. At a court of common pleas there, an ingenious lawyer contrived to have a report brought into court, that the plaintiff, in a certain action then depending, had suddenly died. This report was circulated with such probable circumstances that nobody doubted but that the poor man was dead. The action of course abated by the death of the plaintiff, and it was so entered upon the docket. At the next court the plaintiff appeared in propria persona, and complained loud­ly of the injury that had been done him by this false report: but the ingenious lawyer aforesaid, rose up and assured the court that the man was dead, notwithstanding his impertinent intrusion there: and for the truth of this, he appealed to the entry on the docket; hoping that the court would not allow any testimony to be given in con­tradiction to a record, which, he observed, is the highest standard of truth known in law.

NOW, although an individual may enjoy a dou­ble or two-fold life—as is clear from this man's being capable of a double death, for the plaintiff certainly died over again—yet corporations having no real, but only a political existence, can die but once. Well! then, the annulling the charter of [Page 241] the bank, having deprived that institution of its political life, so far at least as it depended there­upon, ^* it necessarily follows that this bank is de­funct, demised, deceased, and departed. And there is but one way left, that I know of, in which it can make its appearance amongst us; and that is, by the walking of its discontented ghost.

SOME have thought that the bank may still be considered as politically existing, by virtue of the charter it holds under the Congress of the United States: but as this is a very nice question, and re­plete with law learning, I shall reserve it for future discussion in a chapter by itself. It only remains now to shew, that the bank has justly deserved the fate it has found, by enumerating some of the ma­nifold crimes and misdemeanors it has committed, and the horrible dangers and evils to the state with which that institution was pregnant.

I cannot do this better than by following the steps of that enlightened committee, who may be said to have been the jury which passed between the commonwealth and the bank on its life and death, under the sacred sanction of an oath of of­fice. [Page 242] They have found facts, which, after verdict, ought not to be disputed; that is to say—

^* THAT the bank, as established, is incompatible with the public safety. That, in the present state of trade, it had a direct tendency to banish specie from the country, and thereby accumulate it in the hands of the stock-holders. That this accu­mulation of enormous wealth in the hands of [Page 243] those very citizens who are instrumental in ba­nishing wealth from the country, will necessarily produce a degree of influence and power which cannot be trusted in the hands of a set of men, not attached to the party whose interests the commit­tee wish to promote, without endangering the very existence of that party. That government had not received, nor was likely to receive, any advan­tage from this institution; because it could only [Page 244] borrow from the bank for public use, and not seize upon the st [...]ck whenever exigence, convenience, or the views of those in power, require it. That, the profits of the bank being in money, must dai­ly encrease, as money grows scarcer; and has al­ready so far exceeded the profits of European banks, as to tempt foreigners to encrease this scarcity of money, by vesting large sums in the bank, for which they only draw interest. That, foreigner after foreigner, may be thus tempted by our encreasing scarcity of money, until all the specie of Europe shall be accumulated in the bank; and then princes and states will hold annual meetings for the election of a president and direc­tors to manage this enormous engine of power: and so our country will be again agitated by Eu­ropean politics, and the good people of America, by possessing the wealth of foreign nations, will become dependant upon them. That even sup­posing no interference of foreigners, yet our own citizens being stockholders might in time, by banishing all the specie from the country, become so enormously rich and powerful as to seize on the government of the state, subvert the constitution, and give legislative authority to the president and directors of the bank.

AFTER this black catalogue of offences and [Page 245] possible evils, who will say that the bank hath not justly merited political death? But besides these pernicious effects, these fears and apprehensions, other evil designs and abominable practices have been suggested against this institution—such as, that Mr. F—, once in every week, rises at mid­night, and with a dark lanthorn in his hand, enters the vaults of the bank through the subterraneous passage leading from the cellars of his own house into those vaults; that he there meets Belzebub and Blackbeard the pirate; and that these three, sitting upon boxes of money, hold consultations, and conspire against the peace and safety of the common­wealth. That one of the schemes of this infernal triumvirate is to bribe the Algerines with the mo­ney of the bank to seize upon all American vessels, except those in which R— M—, esq. is inter­ested: and another is to change our republican form of government to a monarchy. In which case R— M— is to be king of Pennsylvania; T— W—, esq. viceroy; Mr. F—, chief justice, and all the clerks of the bank justices of the peace.

BUT as the committee, notwithstanding the strict enquiry they have made, have not sound or report­ed these facts, I am inclined, to th [...]k they may not be true. It would not be amiss, however, that the [Page 246] assembly should order Mr. F—'s cellars to be examined, and if the subterraneous passage should be found, it will give probability to the suggestion; and then further enquiries might lead to a disco­very of the whole plot.

A SPECIMEN OF A MODERN LAW-SUIT. OR THE CONDUCT OF A COURT OF JUSTICE DISPLAYED; INTENDED AS A MODEL FOR A NEW BOOK OF MODERN REPORTS: IN THE STYLE OF THE YEAR 1786. IN SPECULO.

☞ IN December 1778 the convention of Pennsylvania assem­bled to consider the constitution or frame of government for the United States, drawn up by the late general convention of the states, and by them recommended to the consideration of the people at large. After three weeks deliberation, the proposed constitution was adopted by the convention of Pennsylvania, by a majority of two thirds of that body. The following allegory contains in substance the principal arguments used in that important debate.

OBJECTIONS TO THE PROPOSED PLAN OF A FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR THE UNITED STATES, ON GENUINE PRINCIPLES.

AT a Meeting of the Wheel-barrow Society^* in the prison yard, Philadelphia, Febuary 8th. 1788.

Present fifty eight members.

Jem. Doran in the chair.

AFTER mature discussion, the society unanimous­ly agreed in the following FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES.

1st Pure natural liberty, is the right of every man to do whatever he pleases without controul, [Page 330] and to possess, without retribution, whatever he can acquire by his valour or address.

2^d STATES or sovereign powers are as indivi­duals in a state of nature; and therefore true political liberty, or the liberty of a state as a body politic, is the right of that state, or of those who are in possession of the sovereignty thereof, to do such things, and enact such laws, as may be thought conducive to the advancement of the powers and interests of that state, or of the government thereof, uncontrouled by the artificial system of restraints, known by the name of the law of nations.

3^d ALL systems of government, whether ope­rating on states, or on individuals, although os­tensibly formed, and speciously declared to be for the establishment of general justice and of general good, ought to be abhorred by the true sons of freedom as invasions on, and abridgments of their natural rights.

4th WHEREAS in the present imperfect state of things, true natural liberty, as defined in our first fundamental principle, cannot be universally enjoyed, necessity enforces a submission to what is called government, under some form or other.

[Page 331]5^th ACCORDING to the foregoing principles, that form of government is the best which con­tains the fewest restraints, and leaves in the hand of the governed the greatest portion of natural liberty, and the fullest scope for the exercise of personal prowess and native ingenuity, it being demonstrable, that if the component parts of any society are left free, and become, by any means, rich and happy, the whole of that society will be free, rich and happy.

6th THE worst of all possible governments is that in which the vigorous operation of general laws, and a complication of internal checks, re­straints and regulations, prevent individual states or persons from pursuing their separate interest in their own way; most wickedly sacrificing the real emolument of individuals to the visionary good and prosperity of the whole.

THESE fundamental principles being established, the plan of government proposed by the late gene­ral convention for the United States was taken up; considered by paragraphs, and compared with the doctrines laid down; and after some debate the following resolutions were unanimously adop­ted. viz.

[Page 332]1^st RESOLVED, That the constitution proposed for the United States, is a consolidated government, pregnant with the seeds of coercion and re­straint, and therefore a system of tyranny and oppression.

2^d RESOLVED, That under such a government, neither states nor individuals can do, or refuse to do, whatever they please in all cases; which is a direct infringement on the natural liberty of both, as defined in our first fundamental principle.

3^d RESOLVED, That under such a government, men of education, abilities, and property, common­ly called the well-born, will be most likely to get into places of power and trust, to the exclusion of a large majority of citizens of a contrary description.

4^th RESOLVED, That as this constitution most arbitrarily and inhumanly prohibits the emission of Paper-Money, and other resources by which the unfortunate debtor may throw off the dis­couraging burthen of his obligations, it ought to to be considered, as in fact it is, a system of tyran­ny and oppression, compelling citizens, in many instances, to do things extremely disagreeable and contrary to their present interest.

[Page 333]5^th RESOLVED, That under such a government, the industrious and wealthy may enjoy their pro­perty in security, to the great injury of those who have no property at all.

6^th RESOLVED, That under such a government, there will be no encouragement for gentlemen of adventure and address, to procure subsistence and wealth by extraordinary modes of acquirement; because what is called the vigour of government will pervade the whole union.

7^th RESOLVED, That the system proposed, is consonant with our 6^th fundamental principle, and the worst of all possible governments; and therefore,

8^th RESOLVED, That the members of the late general convention, who framed, voted for, and recommended this plan of government, and all state conventions which have, or hereafter shall adopt and ratify the same; and all those indivi­duals, who by word of mouth, by writing and publishing, or by any other means, shall express their approbation of the said infamous constitu­tion are, and ought to be, considered by all the true sons of liberty, as demagogues, aristocraties, [Page 334] conspirators, traitors, tyrants, and enemies of the natural rights of mankind.

9^th RESOLVED, That as we are the most nu­merous and respectable body that hath as yet combined formally to avow and publish a disap­probation of this new constitution, it is fit and proper that we should be regularly organised, that other worthy mal-contents in this and the other states may, by association or election, be annexed to our community, and so form a union of strength to oppose the establishment of this tyrannical go­vernment; therefore,

10^th RESOLVED, That we will now proceed to the election of a president, vice-president, and secretary.

WHEREUPON the ballots, being fairly taken and counted, stood as follows.

FOR the author of the pieces signed Centinel,

Votes. 51

For Jem Doran,

Votes. 5

For Arthur M'Garrity,

Votes. 2

FOR L— M—, Esquire of Maryland,

Votes. 47

For Daniel Cronan,

Votes. 8

For Pat Dalton,

Votes. 3

FOR the author of the papers signed Philadelphiensis,

Votes. 30

For Kit Carbery

Votes. 28

THE following members were then appointed a committee of correspondence, viz. Jem. Doran, Arthur M'Garrity, John Doughty, Pat. Dalton, Daniel Cronan, James Bulger, and Kit Carberry, to hold communication with the adherents of Ge­neral Shays in the state of Massachusetts, and with other worthy opposers in the several states.

AFTER ordering that these their proceedings should be published, the society resumed their daily occupation of cleaning the streets and com­mon sewers.

SOME THOUGHTS ON THE DISEASES OF THE MIND; WITH A SCHEME FOR PURGING THE MORAL FACULTIES OF THE GOOD PEOPLE OF PENNSYLVANIA. QUITE NEW AND VERY PHILOSOPHICAL.

THAT there is an intimate connection between the soul and the body, and that the one is apt to be affected by the disorders and irregularities of the other, is a truth too manifest to be controverted. How this connection is formed, to what extent it ex­ists, and what are the visible organs of the body which compose the intermediate links of union, with [Page 337] the invisible faculties of the mind, are problems which have been often in vain attempted. I neither pretend to have found out the secret, nor have I, at present, any plausible hypothesis to propose on this delicate subject.

THIS mutual influence, however, which plainly exists between spirit and matter in all animals, and more especially in man, hath produced many pro­mising devices for remedying the disorders of the mind, which seem to be beyond our reach, by at­tacking the organs of the body, which are within our power. A late ingenious author ^* has gone great lengths in this hypothesis, in his "Dissertation on the effect of physical causes on the moral faculty."

FOR my own part, I believe there is some truth in the doctrine; and that, in particular cases, if applied with great judgment, a partial and tempo­rary effect may be obtained. But if the seat of the disease should really be in the mind, it will be in vain to expect a radical cure, by medical attacks on the body, which can do no more than for the pre­sent deprive the mind of the instruments by which she exhibits her distempered faculties.

FOR instance: suppose a person to be of an iras­cible, [Page 338] captious disposition, subject to violent and ungovernable gusts of passion. To reduce his body by phlebotomy, emetics, cathartics, a slender regi­men, &c. would probably produce a dejection of spirits, and an apparent calmness of temper. But must this man be kept all his life time in a state of debility? For there is no doubt but that as soon as health and vigour are allowed to return, the angry dispositions will return too, and perhaps with en­creased inveteracy, on account of the restriction. So, also, if I should be infected with a troublesome itch for scribbling—which heaven forbid! and my friends, with a view to a cure, should deprive me of pen, ink, and paper. For the present, to be sure, I could not scribble: but would the itch be removed?—Far from it—the scribbling matter being refused a discharge, would accumulate, and become more virulent: and so soon as the necessary instruments or organs of exhibition could be pro­cured, I should scribble worse than ever.

THIS scheme of whipping the mind over the bo­dy's shoulders will not, I apprehend, answer any permanent purpose: and I know of no well au­thenticated cases in support of the doctrine. Hath government ever cured a propensity to theft by the administration of the whipping-post or the wheel-barrow? Amongst the innumerable experi­ments [Page 339] that have been made, I never heard of one successful instance—No; it seems more natural, that mental remedies should be prescribed for mental disorders; and corporeal physic for bodily diseases. Let there be physicians and metaphysicians as two distinct professions. I do not mean by metaphysicians, such as are now professors in universities and col­leges; but practising metaphysicians, who shall stu­dy the disorders and irregularities of the human mind, and prescribe for their cure.

I have considered this matter very attentively, and am confident that many of the cares and evils of life might be removed or alleviated by a judici­ous metaphysical treatment. The first difficulty would be to gain the confidence of the patient in a new science; for this confidence would be as ne­cessary to the metaphysical as it is to the physical cure of diseases—and even more so—for the imagi­nation would have a great share in the business, and must indeed serve as apothecary to the meta­physician. Wherein does the virtue of pills, po­tions, and plaisters principally consist? Surely not so much in the ingredients of which they are com­posed, as in the implicit faith of those to whom they are administered: a proof of which is, that no sooner is the composition generally known but it sinks into general contempt; nobody will take a [Page 340] detected nostrum. If, then, this confidence, this im­plicit faith of the patient, is so useful in the opera­tion of material medicine, much more should it be cultivated and depended upon in a metaphysical case. Possessed of this, I would undertake, with flattering hopes of success, to heal the maladies of the mind by the use of discreet and obviously ratio­nal means.

FOR instance: should I find my patient disposed to melancholy, and his mind clouded with imagi­nary doubts, difficulties, and fears, by poring over polemical divinity, and wading deep in inscrutable mysteries; I would prescribe a round of amuse­ments, much company, and frequent changes of companions. I would by every artifice provoke him to frequent laughter, and plunge him deep in the vanities of this wicked world: but they should be vanities only; for I would on no account violate the bounds of strict morality.

TO a patient of a contrary cast: vain, fickle, loquacious, and full of levity, I would forbid the most innocent recreations. I would prescribe a chapter in the history of the martyrs every morning before breakfast: he should study algebra till din­ner time; in the evening he should hear a long dull sermon delivered with an unbroken monotony; [Page 341] and should himself read one of our acts of assembly before going to bed: and I would continue my regimen and remedies until I saw an entire change of disposition take place, and a radical cure ob­tained.

BUT I am preparing a full account of the diseases of the mind, with the proper mode of treatment in each, illustrated by a variety of cases. This work hath cost me much study and deep searches into human nature, and the subtile springs and move­ments of the moral faculty. Although my book is almost ready for publication, yet the evils of the present time call so loudly for redress, that I can­not delay giving an extract from my chapter on the epidemic diseases of the mind, in hopes it may be of immediate use.

‘CACOETHES maledictionis, or an insatiable rage for slander and abuse. This disease is peculiar to free governments. The proximate causes are envy, discontent, and an over-weening ambition. The diagnostic symptoms are an inveterate ha­tred of men of wealth or abilities, and particu­larly of those in public offices, and an unusual predominance of party spirit: and the crisis of the distemper is an acrimonious eruption, dis­charging a deal of prurient matter in private com­panies, or in the public papers. The curative [Page 342] indication is manifest, for this, like many other mental diseases, is best managed by allowing a free emission of the peccant humours, and permitting the moral faculty to purge itself by natural dis­charges of the malevolent ichor.’

THIS quotation suggests an observation or two which will lead directly to my present purpose. It is recommended, that the moral faculty should be permitted to purge itself by natural discharges. Now, there are but two possible ways by which the mind can discharge her contents in the cacoethes maledictionis; viz. by actions, and by words; either by speaking, scolding, storming, swearing, writing, or publishing. When these means are forbid, or not conveniently obtained, the disease breaks out into actions; viz. beating, bruising, mawling, cuf­fing, kicking, and even murdering, killing, and so forth: and, therefore, a free scope should be given to words, as the most salutary and safe issue of the malignant matter.

THE art of printing has been a great blessing to mankind, inasmuch as it affords a most convenient opportunity for the people to discharge their minds of indigested crudities and rankling spleen. Before this invention, murders, assassinations, rebellions, and revolutions, were much more frequent than [Page 343] since. The poisoned cup, and the bloody dagger, are not known in countries where the press, and and the free use of it, are allowed. As this is a new and a very deep remark, I hope it will be attend­ed to. I know that the less sanguinary character of modern times is generally attributed to the pro­gress of civilization. But how has this civilization been advanced? Certainly by the vent which the press affords for the morbid minds of the people to get rid of their impurities, and by keeping up a free circulation of ideas, so necessary to the men­tal health of man. As a proof, we see that, in countries where a free access to the press is not permitted, the stilletto is, even at this day, in use.

I come now to make the proposal which I had in view when I sat down to write this paper; a proposal which, I flatter myself, will correct and mollify, if not totally remove, the virulence of party spirit and personal animosity in this state, and especially in the city; and sweeten and pu­rify the political atmosphere of our common­wealth. The preface to this my project is, I con­fess, rather long; but it was necessary to shew the metaphysical grounds on which it is founded.

LET there be two public papers instituted. The one a weekly and the other a daily paper. [Page 344] Let the printers be commissioned by government, and allowed competent salaries for their time and trouble. They should be commissioned, because all other printers should be prohibited from interfer­ing in their department. One of these papers may be entitled The Freeman's Convenience, and the other The Chronicle of Scandal. Let these offices be always open as places where the good people of Pennsylvania may ease their minds without restraint, rebuke, or any hindrance what­ever. And whereas some men are naturally bash­ful, and do not like to be seen doing their occa­sions, there shall not only be a number of fictitious signatures provided for their concealment, but the printer shall, for the purpose of decency, have a tin plate fixed in his window, fronting on a little alley, if his situation will permit, otherwise on the street; in which, there shall be a slit, or opening large enough to receive, secretly, any ex­crementitious matter; and it shall, for distinction's sake, be thus inscribed—"Wha' wants me? Last­ly, the printers, their papers, and their authors should all be outlawed. That is, they should be considered as beyond the reach of any censure or penalty of common or statute law, or restrictions by any ordinance, proclamation, or regulation whatever.

[Page 345]BY this institution all our other public papers would be kept free from impurities, and occupied, as they ought to be, with interesting or amusing articles of intelligence, grave or humourous essays, advertisements, &c. and all the filth of the city would be carried off by the two commissioned papers. So that after a little time, it would be­come as shocking to good manners for a man to vent his spleen in one of the public news-papers, properly so called, as it would be to commit an in­decent evacuation in a private parlour, or a pub­lic assembly. And thus also would the minds of the people be kept sweet and healthy. For we may refine as we will, but the mind certainly has her indecencies as well as the body, and, when overloaded with indigested matter, must find a vent somewhere. For nature will be obeyed, and surely good policy requires that a suitable place should be provided for the purpose, rather than that the public sense should be continually offend­ed by the evacuations of every distempered mind, which, though necessary, are neither decked with roses nor perfumed with amber.

YET I would not exclude from the common pa­pers of the city attempts at wit and satire, or lit­tle effusions in verse, in the poet's corner. A sarcasm is nothing more than spitting; and so it is usual [Page 346] to say—"He has spit his spite"—A crude attempt at humour is parallel with blowing one's nose, for such humours are apt to collect in cold constitu­tions; and a young poetaster may be put into a considerable perspiration by the scorching flames of love—These may all happen in the best com­pany without offence, provide they are conducted with decency; and they are certainly necessary to health.

I shall conclude with an account of two cases, in proof of my general system.

I knew a young man, about 32 years of age, who, from losses in trade and crosses in love, began to grow melancholy, retired and discontented. He came to me for advice. I asked him if he had ever tried to write verses. He told me that he had upon two or three occasions, and found that he could tack rhymes together pretty well; but had no thoughts of cultivating the ta­lent. But I advised by all means to try what he could do in that way. He followed my prescrip­tion; and employed himself for a year or two in writing sonnets to Mira, Odes to Liberty, and Elegies to birds, and dead lap-dogs, with a variety of other subjects, according to the course of the humours that infected his mind. He is now of a calm, con­templative [Page 347] habit, but far from melancholy; on the contrary, he is delighted with his own per­formances, and enjoys the comfort of self-applause, which, after all, is the most substantial comfort of life.

MY second instance is that of a German Doc­tor, who has had, or thinks he has had, a vision, in which the mysteries and oeconomy of the spiritual world was manifested to him. He has told me the story of this vision, and a very long story it is—but I heard it all with patient attention. Some time after, he wanted to tell me the same story over again, but I begged to be excused. Upon which he candidly assured me, that he found it absolutely necessary to relate the history of his vi­sion, at least once a week, otherwise he grew rest­less and uneasy in his mind. He came indeed full up to my present system, and said, and in direct terms, that it was a necessary evacuation of his mind.

THE practice of the law affords, I confess, a convenient out-let for much mental virulence. Not only what are called spite-actions, but many suits of a more sober aspect, are only extravasations of mental bile. But this process is to expensive and too tedious for general use. My proposal [Page 348] is, I think, much better in every respect. It is a scheme by which envy and revenge may be gra­tified without danger and without cost, and abuse, slander, and invective spend themselves, like rock­ets, in harmless explosions. For no man, in his senses, will ever think of giving credit to any thing contained in the Freeman's Convenience or Chronicle of Scandal.