Mr. LITTLETON spoke as follows: — Sir, all the arguments which have been offered in support of this bill, are reduced at last to one constant assertion of the necessity of passing it.
We have been told, sir, with great acuteness, that a war cannot be carried on without men, and that ships are useless without sailors; and from thence it is inferred that the bill is necessary.
That forces are by some means necessary to be raised, the warmest opponents of the bill will not deny, but they cannot, therefore, allow the inference, that the methods now proposed are necessary.
They are of opinion, sir, that cruel and oppressive measures can never be justified, till all others have been tried without effect; they think that the law, when it was formerly passed, was unjust, and are convinced, by observing that it never was revived, and that it was by experience discovered to be useless.
Necessity, absolute necessity, is a formidable sound, and may terrify the weak and timorous into silence and compliance; but it will be found, upon reflection, to be often nothing but an idle feint, to amuse and to delude us, and that what is represented as necessary to the publick, is only something convenient to men in power.
Necessity, sir, has, heretofore, been produced as a plea for that which could be no otherwise defended. In the days of Charles the first, ship-money was declared to be legal, because it was necessary. Such was the reasoning of the lawyers, and the determination of the judges; but the senate, a senate of patriots! without fear, and without corruption, and influenced only by a sincere regard for the publick, were of a different opinion, and neither admitted the lawfulness nor necessity.
It will become us, on this occasion, to act with equal vigour, and convince our countrymen, that we proceed upon the same principles, and that the liberties of the people are our chief care.
I hope we shall unite in defeating any attempts that may impair the rights which every Briton boasts as his birthright, and reject a law which will be equally dreaded and detested with the inquisition of Spain.
Sir William YONGE spoke next, to this effect: — Sir, though many particular clauses of this bill have been disapproved and opposed, some with more, and some with less reason, yet the committee has hitherto agreed that a bill for this purpose is necessary in the present state of our affairs; upon this principle we have proceeded thus far, several gentlemen have proposed their opinions, contributed their observations, and laboured as in an affair universally admitted to be of high importance to the general prosperity.
But now, sir, when some of the difficulties are surmounted, some expedients luckily struck out, some objections removed, and the great design brought nearer to execution, we are on a sudden informed, that all our labour is superfluous, that we are amusing ourselves with useless consultations, providing against calamities that can never happen, and raising bulwarks without an enemy; that, therefore, the question before us is of no importance, and the bill ought, without farther examination, to be totally rejected.
I suppose, sir, I shall be readily believed, when I declare that I shall willingly admit any arguments that may evince our safety; but, in proportion as real freedom from danger is to be desired, a supine and indolent neglect of it is to be dreaded and avoided; and I cannot but fear that our enemies are more formidable, and more malicious, than the gentlemen that oppose this bill have represented them.
This bill can only be opposed upon the supposition that it gives a sanction to severities, more rigorous than our present circumstances require; for nothing can be more fallacious or invidious than a comparison of this law with the demand of ship-money, a demand contrary to all law, and enforced by the manifest exertion of arbitrary power.
How has the conduct of his present majesty any resemblance with that of Charles the first? Is any money levied by order of the council? Are the determinations of the judges set in opposition to the decrees of the senate? Is any man injured in his property by an unlimited extension of the prerogative? or any tribunal established superiour to the laws of the nation?
To draw parallels, sir, where there is no resemblance; and to accuse, by insinuations, where there is no shadow of a crime; to raise outcries when no injury is attempted; and to deny a real necessity because it was once pretended for a bad purpose; is surely not to advance the publick service, which can be promoted only by just reasonings, and calm reflections, not by sophistry and satire, by insinuations without ground, and by instances beside the purpose.
Mr. LITTLETON answered: — Sir, true zeal for the service of the publick is never discovered by collusive subterfuges and malicious representations; a mind, attentive to the common good, would hardly, on an occasion like this, have been at leisure to pervert an harmless illustration, and extract disaffection from a casual remark.
It is, indeed, not impossible, sir, that I might express myself obscurely; and it may be, therefore, necessary to declare that I intended no disrespectful reflection on the conduct of his majesty; but must observe, at the same time, that obscure or inaccurate expressions ought always to be interpreted in the most inoffensive meaning, and that to be too sagacious in discovering concealed insinuations, is no great proof of superiour integrity.
Wisdom, sir, is seldom captious, and honesty seldom suspicious; a man capable of comprehending the whole extent of a question, disdains to divert his attention by trifling observations; and he that is above the practice of little arts, or the motions of petty malice, does not easily imagine them incident to another.
That in the question of ship-money necessity was pretended, cannot be denied; and, therefore, all that I asserted, which was only that the nation had been once terrified without reason, by the formidable sound of necessity, is evident and uncontested.
When a fraud has once been practised, it is of use to remember it, that we may not twice be deceived by the same artifice; and, therefore, I mentioned the plea of necessity, that it may be inquired whether it is now more true than before.
That the senate, sir, and not the judges, is now applied to, is no proof of the validity of the arguments which have been produced; for in the days of ship-money, the consent of the senate had been asked, had there been any prospect of obtaining it; but the court had been convinced, by frequent experiments, of the inflexibility of the senate, and despaired of influencing them by prospects of advantage, or intimidating them by frowns or menaces.
May this and every future senate imitate their conduct, and, like them, distinguish between real and pretended necessity; and let not us be terrified, by idle clamours, into the establishment of a law at once useless and oppressive.
Sir William YONGE replied: — Sir, that I did not intend to misrepresent the meaning of the honourable gentleman, I hope it is not necessary to declare; and that I have, in reality, been guilty of any misrepresentation, I am not yet convinced. If he did not intend a parallel between ship-money and the present bill, to what purpose was his observation? and if he did intend it, was it not proper to show there was no resemblance, and that all which could be inferred from it was, therefore, fallacious and inconclusive?
Nor do I only differ, sir, in opinion with the honourable gentleman with relation to his comparison of measures, which have nothing in common with each other; but will venture to declare, that he is not more accurate in his citations from history. The king did not apply to the judges, because the senate would not have granted him the money that he demanded, but because his chief ambition was to govern the nation by the prerogative alone, and to free himself and his descendants from senatorial inquiries.
That this account, sir, is just, I am confident the histories of those times will discover; and, therefore, any invidious comparison between that senate and any other, is without foundation in reason or in truth.
Mr. BATHURST spoke as follows: — Sir, that this law will easily admit, in the execution of it, such abuses as will overbalance the benefits, may readily be proved; and it will not be consistent with that regard to the publick, expected from us by those whom we represent, to
enact a law which may probably become an instrument of oppression.
The servant by whom I am now attended, may be termed, according to the determination of the vindicators of this bill, a seafaring man, having been once in the West Indies; and he may, therefore, be forced from my service, and dragged into a ship, by the authority of a justice of the peace, perhaps of some abandoned prostitute, dignified with a commission only to influence elections, and awe those whom excises and riot-acts cannot subdue.
I think it, sir, not improper to declare, that I would by force oppose the execution of a law like this; that I would bar my doors and defend them; that I would call my neighbours to my assistance; and treat those who should attempt to enter without my consent, as thieves, ruffians, and murderers.
Lord GAGE spoke to this effect: — Sir, it is well known that by the laws of this nation, poverty is, in some degree, considered as a crime, and that the debtor has only this advantage over the felon, that he cannot be pursued into his dwelling, nor be forced from the shelter of his own house.
I think it is universally agreed, that the condition of a man in debt is already sufficiently miserable, and that it would be more worthy of the legislative power to contrive alleviations of his hardships, than additions to them; and it seems, therefore, no inconsiderable objection to this bill, that, by conferring the power of entering houses by force, it may give the harpies of the law an opportunity of entering, in the tumult of an impress, and of dragging a debtor to a noisome prison, under pretence of forcing sailors into the service of the crown.
Mr. TRACEY then said: — Sir, that some law for the ends proposed by the bill before us, is necessary, I do not see how we can doubt, after the declarations of the admirals, who are fully acquainted with the service for which provision is to be made; and of the ministry, whose knowledge of the present state of our own strength, and the designs of our enemies, is, doubtless, more exact than they can acquire who are not engaged in publick employments.
If, therefore, the measures now proposed are necessary, though they may not be agreeable to the present dispositions of the people, for whose preservation they are intended, I shall think it my duty to concur in them, that the publick service may not be retarded, nor the safety of a whole nation hazarded, by a scrupulous attention to minute objections.
Mr. CAMPBELL spoke as follows: — Sir, I have often, amidst my elogies on British liberty, and my declarations of the excellence of our constitution, the impartiality of our government, and the efficacy of our laws, been reproached by foreigners with the practice of impresses, as a hardship which would raise a rebellion in absolute monarchies, and kindle those nations into madness, that have, for many ages, known no other law than the will of their princes. A hardship which includes imprisonment and slavery, and to which, therefore, no aggravations ought to be added.
But if justice and reason, sir, are to be overborne by necessity; if necessity is to stop our ears against the complaints of the oppressed, and harden our hearts at the sight of their misery, let it, at least, not destroy our memories, nor deprive us of the advantages of experience.
Let us inquire, sir, what were the effects of this hateful authority when it was formerly consigned to the magistrates. Were our fleets manned in an instant? were our harbours immediately crowded with sailors? did we surprise our enemies by our expedition, and make conquests before an invasion could be suspected? I have heard, sir, of no such consequences, nor of any advantages which deserved to be purchased by tyranny and oppression. We have found that very few were procured by the magistrates, and the charge of seizing and conveying was very considerable; and, therefore, cannot but conclude that illegal measures, which have been once tried without success, should, for a double reason, never be revived.
Sir John BARNARD spoke to this effect: — Sir, it is not without regret that I rise so often on this occasion: for to dispute with those whose determinations are not influenced by reason, is a ridiculous task, a tiresome labour, without prospect of reward.
But, as an honourable gentleman has lately remarked, that by denying the necessity of the bill, instead of making objections to particular clauses, the whole design of finding expedients to supply the sea service is at once defeated; I think it necessary to remind him, that I have made many objections to this bill, and supported them by reasons which have not yet been answered. But I shall now no longer confine my remarks to single errours, but observe that there is one general defect, by which the whole bill is made absurd and useless.
For the foundation of a law like this, sir, the description of a seaman ought to be accurately laid down, it ought to be declared what acts shall subject him to that denomination, and by what means, after having once enlisted himself in this unhappy class of men, he may withdraw into a more secure and happy state of life.
Is a man, who has once only lost sight of the shore, to be for ever hunted as a seaman? Is a man, who, by traffick, has enriched a family, to be forced from his possessions by the authority of an impress? Is a man, who has purchased an estate, and built a seat, to solicit the admiralty for a protection from the neighbouring constable? Such questions as these, sir, may be asked, which the bill before us will enable no man to answer.
If a bill for this purpose be truly necessary, let it, at least, be freed from such offensive absurdities; let it be drawn up in a form as different as is possible from that of the bill before us; and, at last, I am far from imagining that a law will be contrived not injurious to individuals, nor detrimental to the publick; not contrary to the first principles of our establishment, and not loaded with folly and absurdities.
Mr. VYNER then spoke: — Sir, a definition of a seaman is so necessary in a bill for this purpose, that the omission of it will defeat all the methods that can be suggested. How shall a law be executed, or a penalty inflicted, when the magistrate has no certain marks whereby he may distinguish a criminal? and when even the man that is prosecuted may not be conscious of guilt, or know that the law extended to him, which he is charged with having offended.
If, in defining a seaman on the present occasion, it be thought proper to have any regard to the example of our predecessors, whose wisdom has, in this debate, been so much magnified; it may be observed, that a seaman has been formerly defined, a man who haunts the seas; a definition which seems to imply habit and continuance, and not to comprehend a man who has, perhaps, never gone more than a single voyage.
But though this definition, sir, should be added to the amendments already proposed, and the bill thereby be brought somewhat nearer to the constitutional principles of our government; I cannot yet think it so much rectified, as that the hardships will not outweigh the benefits, and, therefore, shall continue to oppose the bill, though to some particular clauses I have no objection.
[The term seafaring man was left out, and the several amendments were admitted in the committee, but the clauses themselves, to the number of eleven, were given up on the report.]
HOUSE OF COMMONS, MARCH 10, 1740-1.
The commons resolved their house into a committee, to consider the bill for the encouragement of sailors, when admiral WAGER offered a clause, by which it was to be enacted, “That no merchants, or bodies corporate or politick, shall hire sailors at higher wages than thirty-five shillings for the month, on pain of forfeiting the treble value of the sum so agreed for;” which law was to commence after fifteen days, and continue for a time to be agreed on by the house: and then spoke to the following purpose: —
Sir, the necessity of this clause must be so apparent to every gentleman acquainted with naval and commercial affairs, that as no opposition can be apprehended, very few arguments will be requisite to introduce it.
How much the publick calamities of war are improved by the sailors to their own private advantage; how generally they shun the publick service, in hopes of receiving exorbitant wages from the merchants; and how much they extort from the merchants, by threatening to leave their service for that of the crown, is universally known to every
officer of the navy, and every commander of a trading vessel.
A law, therefore, sir, to restrain them in time of war from such exorbitant demands; to deprive them of those prospects which have often no other effect than to lull them in idleness, while they skulk about in expectation of higher wages; and to hinder them from deceiving themselves, embarrassing the merchants, and neglecting the general interest of their country, is undoubtedly just. It is just, sir, because in regard to the publick it is necessary to prevent the greatest calamity that can fall upon a people, to preserve us from receiving laws from the most implacable of our enemies; and it is just, because with respect to particular men it has no tendency but to suppress idleness, fraud, and extortion.
Mr. Henby FOX spoke next: — Sir, I have no objection to any part of this clause, except the day proposed for the commencement: to make a law against any pernicious practice, to which there are strong temptations, and to give those whose interest may incite them to it, time to effect their schemes, before the law shall begin to operate, seems not very consistent with wisdom or vigilance.
It is not denied, sir, that the merchants are betrayed by that regard to private interest which prevails too frequently over nobler views, to bribe away from the service of the crown, by large rewards, those sailors whose assistance is now so necessary to the publick; and, therefore, it is not to be imagined that they will not employ their utmost diligence to improve the interval which the bill allows in making contracts for the ensuing, year, and that the sailors will not eagerly engage themselves before this law shall preclude their prospects of advantage.
As, therefore, to make no law, and to make a law that will not be observed, is in consequence the same; and the time allowed by the clause, as it now stands, may make the whole provision ineffectual; it is my opinion, that either it ought to begin to operate to-morrow, or that we ought to leave the whole affair in its present state.
Complete Works of Samuel Johnson Page 232
