nd violence, but by the allurements of a pecuniary reward, or
the obligation of some ancient tenure.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, MARCH 9, 1740-1.

On the sixty-sixth day, the consideration of the bill for raising seamen
was resumed, and a clause read, by which every constable, headborough,
tithingman, or other person, was liable to be examined upon oath by the
justices of peace, who were empowered to lay a fine upon them for any
neglect, offence, or connivance.

Sir John BARNARD rose up, and spoke to the following effect:--Mr.
Chairman, it is the peculiar happiness of the Britons, that no law can
be made without the consent of their representatives, and I hope no such
infatuation can ever fall upon them as may influence them to choose a
representative capable of concurring in absurdities like this.

The folly, the iniquity, the stupidity of this clause, can only be
conceived by hearing it repeated; it is too flagrant to be extenuated,
and too gross to admit exaggerations: to oblige a man to make oath
against himself, to subject himself by his own voice to penalties and
hardships, is at once cruel and ridiculous, a wild complication of
tyranny and folly.

To call upon any man to accuse himself, is only to call upon him to
commit perjury, and has therefore been always accounted irrational and
wicked: in those countries where it is practised, the confession is
extorted by the rack, which indeed is so necessary on such occasions,
that I should not wonder to hear the promoters of this clause openly
declaring for the expediency of tortures.

Nothing is more evident than that this bill, however the importance of
the occasion may be magnified, was drawn up without reflection, and that
the clauses were never understood by those that offered them: errours
like these must arise only from precipitation and neglect, for they are
too gross to be committed either by ignorance or design.

To expose such absurdities is, indeed, easy, but not pleasing; for what
end is answered by pointing at folly, or how is the publick service
advanced by showing that the methods proposed are totally to be
rejected? Where a proposition is of a mixed kind, and only erroneous in
part, it is an useful and no disagreeable task to separate truth from
errour, and disentangle from ill consequences such measures as may be
pursued with advantage to the publick; but mere stupidity can only
produce compassion, and afford no opportunities for inquiry or dispute.