quently every man is at liberty, in point of confcience, to use the method which the law of his country directs; to compel thofe to pay their debts, who are able, but not willing to pay them. And in truth, where this is the cafe, the creditor is fo far from being justly chargeable with cruelty or oppreffion in making ufe of any legal method to recover his own, that the charge lies strongly against the other fide. To delay poor traders, or others, in the payment of what is due to them, is always injustice, and fometimes very barbarous injuftice. A poor man may perhaps lofe his credit, which is the life of his business, or perhaps his liberty, which is the life and maintenance of himself and family, for want of that very money which you detain from him: and when this happens, is it any compenfation to pay the man at last what is owing to him? So far from it, that such a debtor, even when his debt is paid, may stand charged in confcience with the ruin of a poor family.

Another circumftance, upon which the judgment of our Saviour in this cafe depends, is, that there be a readiness and willingness in the debtor to do juftice whenever he is able, and to use his beft endeavours to enable himself to do it. Confequently all fuch debtors are out of this cafe, who deny their juft debts, or any part of them; and all fuch as may be justly fufpected to conceal their effects, in order to defraud their creditors: and fuch also as live idly and profufely, squandering the estate which ought to be applied to do justice to those to whom it is due. The reafon of these exceptions may be made plain in few words. The present inability of

a debtor is the argument for the delay and the forbearance; but this inability comes not into question where the debt itself is denied. And fince the circumstances of men change fo faft as they do, the man who wants forbearance this year, may in a few more be better able to pay the debt, than the other is to forgive it and what reafon can be given why Now he who denies the debt, declares an intention never to pay it; which certainly will justify the other, in endeavouring by a legal method to maintain and ascertain his right; and till the right is cleared, there is no room for one fide to plead, or the other fide to confider the arguments for pity and compaffion.

he should not?

The second exception relates to a case which is fo manifeftly fraudulent, that nothing can be faid in its excuse. They who conceal their effects, and plead poverty deceitfully, are mere cheats, and deserve no compaffion. To prevent fuch frauds, and to arm the creditor with power to compel a difcovery, seems to me to be the chief view and defign of the law, which puts the body of the debtor into the creditor's power and fo odious is this deceit, that the law, in fome cafes and circumftances, has annexed to it a far greater penalty.

The third exception relates to thofe, who oftentimes are free enough of their promises to do juftice, and yet by their actions declare daily, that they have nothing less at heart than to do justly by their creditors. Such are they who live idly and profufely, and are conftantly diminishing what they have, and by fo doing are rendering themselves lefs able every day to pay their juft debts. Now, what B b

reason can you imagine, that is proper to be laid before an honeft induftrious man, to perfuade him to be content that his own family fhould fuffer, and his fubftance be wafted by the folly and extravagance of a stranger? Such a man would certainly punish and restrain a fon of his own, were he idle and extravagant; and what kind of goodness or charity is it, to maintain and support the like extravagance in another? Some wife commonwealths have debarred fuch perfons from the management of their own eftates: I am fure there is more reafon to debar them from fpending the eftates of other men; and this is what every extravagant man does, whilst he confumes his fubftance, and leaves his debts unpaid.

In these cases, therefore, and in others of the like nature, every good man may, and every wife man will, make use (in a reasonable manner) of the power which the law gives him for the fecurity of his property; and in so doing he stands clear of all offence against charity and good conscience.

But when the circumstances mentioned in the text meet together; when the debtor is chargeable with no fault or fraud, but is difabled by mere poverty to fatisfy his debts; to use the extremity of the law against such a man is not only cruel and inhuman, but, as far as I can judge, contrary to the true meaning and defign of the law itself. For the law which gives power over the body of the debtor, is not a criminal law, ordained for the punishment of offenders; but is a law made to fecure men in their properties, and to guard them against the arts and contrivances of fuch as would injure them in

their just demands. To ufe the law therefore, where it cannot poffibly have any effect towards fecuring your property, but can ferve only to harass and torment a poor unfortunate man, is perverting the law, and making it fubfervient to purposes very different from those, for the fake of which it was ordained. The law does not entrust private men with the execution, or relaxation of its penalties for crimes and offences; but in the prefent cafe, every man may imprison, or release from prison, his debtor, as he pleases; a plain evidence that this law was meant as a defence of private rights, and not as a punishment for criminals.

Is it then a general rule, that the law can never with good confcience be executed against insolvent debtors? There may poffibly be exceptions, and more than I can forefee; but I think they must all be attended with this circumstance, that there be a profpect of recovering the debt, though the debtor himself be infolvent. It may fo happen, that he who has nothing of his own, may have wealthy friends and relations; and though friends are not often willing, for the fake of juftice, to pay the debts of a relation, yet, for the honour of the family, or out of perfonal regard to the relation, they will pay the money as the price of his redemption. from a gaol. Many cafes may be imagined, where a rich relation ought in reason to pay the debt, rather than the poor creditor to lofe it. In fuch cafes, there may be a reason to juftify or excuse the proceeding.

Some think that no feverity is too great to be ufed towards fuch as have spent their eftates riot

oufly, to the injury of their creditors. And indeed little is to be faid in behalf of such perfons. Yet ftill it is worth confidering, whether you would choose to be judge and executioner in your own cause. And if the cafe be really so desperate, that you can aim at nothing by the execution of the law, but the punishment of the man who has wronged you, I am fure it is the safer way to leave the punishment to him, who has faid, Vengeance is mine, and I will repay.

But the cafe, which I have principally in view, ftands clear of these exceptions. The unfortunate perfons, with whom the gaols are crowded, are, for the most part, such as have neither money nor friends to affift them; fuch as have fallen into poverty by misfortunes, by a decay in their business, or perhaps by the largeness of a family, which their utmoft diligence could not support. Were they at liberty, they might probably be of ufe to themselves, and their poor families, and also to their creditors, by following their honeft callings and employments. But now their ftrength confumes in vain, they starve in prison, and their children out of it, or are thrown upon the parish for a miferable maintenance; and no benefit or advantage accrues, or can poffibly accrue, to the person who confines them.

Men are often urged to deal thus feverely with others, by the grief and anguish which attend the disappointment they meet with in their just expectation; and being themselves fufferers, they think no treatment too bad for those to whom they impute their own diftrefs. But could men confider calmly how much mifery they bring into the world,