The History, Debates, and Proceedings of Both Houses of Parliament of Great Britain from the Year 1743 to the Year 1774

mon law, or any precedent Act. Now the Prefs Act, Sir, has no negative words, which defeat or abridge the right of appeal which the fubject claims at common law, or on the footing of any prior statute. There can be no doubt, therefore, that the perfons in queftion have a right to their Habeas Corpus at common law; and no valid reasons have yet been urged, or can, I prefume, be offered to fhew why they fhould not be entitled to it in the fpeedy manner as prefcribed by the Habras Corpus

Act.

It is true, that the gentlemen's fertile imaginations have suppofed a cafe, where an expedition may be retarded, and the ftate receive irreparable injury, while perfons impreffed are fupporting their claim to exemption in a courfe of tedious litigation upon a Habeas Corpus. But this objection, however fubtle, is by no means folid; for the real objects of the Act, that is," idle and diforderly perfons, who have not fufficient for their fupport," will not be able to bear the expence of fuing a Habeas Corpus; neither will perfons in fuch a mean and indigent condition, find it poffible to get fecurity for their not efcaping (if remanded) as required by the Habeas Corpus Act.

And they have thought proper to enumerate many terrible inconveniences which they apprehend will follow the free iffuing the writ of Habeas Corpus. Wives, they fay, under reafonable confinement, for the fake of family government, may be fet at large, and cast themselves into the arms of an adulterer: daughters, they obferve, under the fame circumstances, may obtain their liberty, and throw themselves away in marriage, or fall victims to prostitution; apprentices, likewife, they tell us, may gain their freedom, and run away from their

mafters.

To be fure, Sir, these would be dreadful accidents! but, in the name of common fenfe, am I, as a member of the publick, to be deprived of my right to liberty, because my neighbour may chance to have a fallacious wife, a rampant daughter, or an unruly apprentice? Suppofe the writ of Habeas Corpus fhould now and then be iffued in frivolous cafes, and where family government is not carried beyond the bounds of justice and difcretion; I fay, fuppofe it fhould fometimes be fubject to this abuse, is not every remedial procefs in all, even in civil cafes, liable to the like, if not much greater abuse? And was it ever held a fufficient reafon against granting a general power or right of redress, that the exercise of that right might in particular cafes be abused, and be accidentally productive of an inconvenience to individuals?

But, in fact, Sir, these horrid inconveniences can never arife; and they exift only in the gentlemen's terrified imagi

nations:

495

nations: for should the benefit of the Habeas Corpus be extended
in the manner proposed by the Bill, yet wives, daughters, and
apprentices, or any others claiming the benefit of it, will not
be fet at large to purfue their own corrupt inclinations, but
must give fecurity that they will return, in case they are re-
manded.

As to the fuppofition, that the penalty of the Act may be
incurred by difobeying a writ directed for bringing up a person
infected out of a ship performing quarantine, or the infection
propagated by obeying it, it is too jocular to require ferious re-
futation; for all access to such ship, in order to the service of
the writ, is impracticable.

In few words, Sir, unlefs fubjects, reftrained of their liberty,
have the benefit of the Habeas Corpus Act, all provifions of
the law in their favour are nugatory and void; they remain
without that speedy relief to which every freeman is entitled;
and have no redrefs for the injury done them by illegal con-
finement, but by action of falfe imprisonment, which in fome
cafes will not lie. It cannot be brought by a wife against her
husband; and in the cafe of an impreffed man, he may be
knocked in the head before he can profecute it. Indeed, in
moft cafes, the poverty or fubjection of the parties confined,
in comparison with the wealth or power of the perfons by
whom they are confined, renders it impracticable or imprudent
to commence this action, which, at last, can only procure da-
mages, and not a release from confinement.

Did no other reafons influence my judgment, I fhould think
thefe fufficient, Sir, to justify my concurrence with the friends
of the Bill: and I agree with them that the Habeas Corpus Act
fhould be extended to every commitment or restraint of liberty
whatever, but in thofe cafes which they have properly ex-
cepted.

This extenfion, Sir, feems abfolutely neceffary to secure
us against the tyranny of our fellow fubjects, which is, of all
others, moft to be apprehended: for the mild fyftem of go-
vernment purfued fince the Revolution, affords less appearance
of any infringement of liberty, by the Crown, or any superior
judicatory, than by private perfons, and fubordinate jurisdictions.
I therefore freely give my affent to the Bill.

Notwithstanding the arguments urged in fupport of this Bill,
it was nevertheless rejected by a great majority.

INDE X.

N. B. The Volume is in Roman Numerals, and the Page in Figures.

ADDRESS to the King not to go abroad, iii. 232
Addreffes to George II. and debates on the fame, i. 2, 241,
364, 368, 409.-ii. 2, 19, 25, 71, 80, 100, 131, 152,
211, 242, 342, 345, 373.-iii. 3, 5, 40, 95, 100, 136,
139, 181, 183, 211, 233, 260, 270, 288, 394, 429,
438, 444

to George III. and debates on the fame, iii. 447,
450-iv. 11, 17, 101, 116, 146, 245, 278, 508-v. 7,
13, 66, 207, 288, 339, 401.-vi. 155, 293-vii. 19
African Bill, ii. 216, 309, 385

Trade, iii. 396

Albemarle, Lord, thanks to, iv. 104

Aldermen. See London

Alehouses, Licenfes of, regulated, iii. 143

Almon, Mr. his cafe, v. 407, 408, 416, 437, 443-vi. 83

America, Paper-currency Bill, ii. 308

Affairs of, debates on, iv. 288-v. 21, 55, 329

Regulations, iv. 207

Stamp Act, iv. 251, 288, 345

Papers, iv. 301

Refolutions on, iv. 351

Duties repealed, and regulated, iv. 354

Declaratory Act, iv. 351, 364

Refolutions on, v. 64

America

nations: for should the benefit of the Habeas Corpus be extended
in the manner proposed by the Bill, yet wives, daughters, and
apprentices, or any others claiming the benefit of it, will not
be fet at large to pursue their own corrupt inclinations, but
muft give fecurity that they will return, in case they are re-
manded.

As to the fuppofition, that the penalty of the Act may be
incurred by disobeying a writ directed for bringing up a person
infected out of a ship performing quarantine, or the infection
propagated by obeying it, it is too jocular to require serious re-
futation; for all access to such ship, in order to the service of
the writ, is impracticable.

In few words, Sir, unlefs fubjects, reftrained of their liberty,
have the benefit of the Habeas Corpus Act, all provisions of
the law in their favour are nugatory and void; they remain
without that fpeedy relief to which every freeman is entitled;
and have no redrefs for the injury done them by illegal con-
finement, but by action of false imprisonment, which in fome
cafes will not lie. It cannot be brought by a wife against her
husband; and in the cafe of an impreffed man, he may be
knocked in the head before he can profecute it. Indeed, in
moft cafes, the poverty or fubjection of the parties confined,
in comparison with the wealth or power of the perfons by
whom they are confined, renders it impracticable or imprudent
to commence this action, which, at last, can only procure da-
mages, and not a release from confinement.

This extenfion, Sir, feems abfolutely neceffary to secure
us against the tyranny of our fellow fubjects, which is, of all
others, moft to be apprehended: for the mild fystem of go-
vernment pursued fince the Revolution, affords less appearance
of any infringement of liberty, by the Crown, or any superior
judicatory, than by private perfons, and fubordinate jurifdictions.
I therefore freely give my affent to the Bill.