in fictione juris consistat equitas, feigned trespasses where none existed; and, of course, all their process was by arrest. When dispute happens between two persons it is easy to conceive that a law case or suit is the consequence; but to feign a trespass, which implies violence to be committed in such case, after such case had happened, is absolute nonsense. Yet the thing obtained, and trespass on the case, trespass in debt, are common law terms. It is true practice has assigned a kind of meaning to them, and you can guess by them whether the demand is on a note or bond, as different ingredients will sometimes produce a third something by mixture. But nothing can be more absurd than the terms so applied in their original meaning; and yet by such absurdity was the liberty of freemen lost. The feigned trespass was first set forth in the proceedings; then came the ac etiam clause, stating the debt after he was in custody for the trespass, &c. All these petty proceedings were carried on by what lawyers call the trinum in lege; and by such tricks the King's Bench obtained a superiority.

But the Common Pleas also fell to fictions, and they tried their clausum fregit-their etiams, &c., too, for they found they must gratify the vengeance of creditors as well as the King's Bench, or they would have no business. And thus imprisonment for debt became general.

Such a picture is not very pleasing, and ought certainly to be rejected unless better reasons can be adduced than arise from the origin or practice of it. But if ancient precedent is to fix the matter, let us inquire how it was in Athens while ancient Greece was in all her glory? The liberty of the citizen was so precious that its exercise could be suspended by the law alone. He could not engage it for debt on any pretext whatever.

Let us, however, endeavor to settle this question on principle, abstract from all practice and custom whatever.

Debt, then, appears to be the child of credit. What, then, are the objects which have influence upon or from which credit is generated? Not liberty and personal freedom certainly, for in that case our Indians would have more credit than any people we know. Does it flow from accomplishments, elegance of manners or personal beauty? No such thing is known in men, (female beauty excepted.) Property and personal honor will be considered as the fullest answer that can be given to the question. But honor without property is will without power. We trust a man not because we know him to be willing, but because we believe him to be able to pay. Original traffic proceeded on the principle of benevolence and accommodation. The wants of one were supplied by the superfluities of

the other, and both were obliged. But is it the case in the present mercantile system? Far from it. Commerce is now a game of abilities, and the outwitted dealer is often the best man of the two; for whether it is that the benevolent qualities of the heart impede the activity of the head, or from whatever cause, it is a common remark that the best men are generally the most unlucky in trade. Shall then the loss of liberty be added to the misfortunes of such a one? Certainly no. There is no treating a subject of this kind without bringing into view the profession of the law, and a class of men of whom all the good and all the evil that could be imagined has been said with some appearance of reason. What more amiable than the man of legal abilities, exerting his utmost powers for the protection of innocence and relief of distress? What more detestable than the wretch who glories in the miseries and preys upon the distress of his fellow citizens? You behold in one the good Samaritan with his wine and oil. In the other the Alpine wolf attacking the distressed wanderer, depriving him of life, and rending his carcass in pieces. Here we find the fabled figure realized, where the superior parts are adorned with all the charms and attractions of female beauty, but the inferior end in the fins of a filthy fish or the claws of a griping lobster.

Having said so much on the character of the bar, it will be superfluous to add that they are divided on this question. While some reprobate the measure in the strongest terms, others support it and blush not to declare that the confined client always gives the most generous fees. "Skin for skin-all that a man hath will he give for life." Liberty is the soul of life. Life without it is misery. Gaols are the man traps of the hunters of the law. Once shut up, the prisoner's property is sure game. He regards it not. Liberty is his only wish, and all his substance is generally cast at the feet of some mighty Nimrod of the bar to procure his enlargement. Thus while some chase the devoted game into the toils of the law and the pitfall of a gaol, others strip them completely in the taking out; and the spoils of their property, instead of paying their creditors or supporting their families, fall often, in great proportion, into the hands of those who have hunted them.

NOTE. In the year 1787, when a bill was depending in Parliament for the relief of insolvent debtors, the Chancellor opposed it and said: "The general idea that humanity requires the intervention of the legislature between the debtor and the creditor is a false notion, founded in error and dangerous in practice. A much greater evil than the loss of liberty is the dissipation and corruption that

prevail in our prisons. To these your Lordships had better direct your attention than to defrauding the creditor of the chance of recovering his property by letting loose his debtors, and taking from him the very hope of payment." Lord Campbell observes that so blinded was he, "the chancellor," by prejudice as not to see that the "dissipation and corruption " of which he complains were produced by the very power of imprisonment which he defended.-Lord Campbell's Lives of Lord Chancellors, vol. 7, p. 96-7.

In 1759 Dr. Johnston computed the number of imprisoned debtors in England at not less than 20,000; and asserted that one in four died every year from the treatment they underwent. He afterwards admitted that he had found reasons to question the accuracy of this calculation. But cases were proved of debtors unable to pay their fees, who were locked up with prisoners suffering from small-pox, and thus destroyed. Of others who were reduced almost to skeletons by insufficient food; of sick women who were left without beds, without attendance, and without proper nourishment until they died of neglect; of men who were tortured by thumb screws, or who lingered in slow agony under irons of intolerable weight.-Page 542-4 of the History of England in the Eighteenth Century, by Lecky.

Imprisonment for mere debt was not abolished in Pennsylvania till 1842. It still exists, we believe, against certain classes of persons in England.

The Alleged Mecklenburg Declaration of the twentieth

of May, seventeen hundred and seventy-five.

That whosoever directly or indirectly abetted, or in any way, form, or manner countenanced the unchartered and dangerous invasion of our rights, as claimed by Great Britain, is an enemy to this country, to America, and to the inherent and inalienable rights of man. That we, the citizens of Mecklenburg county, do hereby dissolve the political bands which have connected us to the mother country, and hereby absolve ourselves from all allegiance to the British crown, and abjure all political connection, contract, or association with that nation, who have wantonly trampled on our rights and liberties, and inhumanly shed the blood of American patriots at Lexington.

That we hereby declare ourselves a free and independent people; are and of right ought to be a sovereign and self-governing association, under the control of no power other than that of God, and the general government of Congress; to the maintenance of which independence, we solemnly pledge to each other our mutual coöperation, our lives, our fortunes, and our most sacred honor, &c., &c. ABRAHAM ALEXANDER, Chairman.

(Signed)

JOHN MCNITT ALEXANDER, Secretary.

Resolution submitted by Richard Henry Lee.

The resolution submitted by Mr. Lee on the 10th of June, 1776, in conformity to the resolution from Virginia, was: That these colonies are and of right ought to be free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is and ought to be totally dissolved.*

In the Declaration of Independence Mr. Jefferson wrote: When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, &c. We hold these truths to be self-evident--that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, &c.; and concluding, that these colonies solemnly publish and declare, That these united colonies" are and of right ought to be free and independent States ""that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British crown," and that “ all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is and ought to be

* The words italicized in the above are in the Mecklenburg declaration.

totally dissolved," and that as free and independent States they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and do all other acts and things which independent States may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.

The words between quotation marks are in the resolution offered by Mr. Lee. The only other expressions used by Mr. Jefferson and which are in the alleged Mecklenburg declaration, are "inalienable rights," "political bands which have connected," and "our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor."

It would seem that the Mecklenburg declarations, if they existed, had been seen in Virginia before the Virginia resolution was adopted; and they may have been also seen by Mr. Jefferson without his special recollection where he had seen them.

For the resolution adopted in Virginia on 15th of May, 1776, see antea, page 333.

NOTE. The words in italics are in the Mecklenburg declaration of 20th May, 1775, if it existed.

Declaration of Independence of the United States, adopted on the fourth of July, 1776.

[NOTE.-The words italicized in this copy of the Declaration are in the alleged Mecklenburg Declaration of 20th May, 1775, if it existed.]

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume, among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that, whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new Government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established, should not be