The consideration of the corn bill was resumed; and it was particularly
debated from what time it should commence, which some of the members
were inclined to fix on the 9th day of the session, on which occasion
Mr. CAMPBELL spoke as follows:
Sir, that the laws may be observed by the nation without daily violence
and perpetual compulsion, that our determinations may be received with
reverence, and the regulations which we establish confirmed by the
concurrence of our constituents, it is necessary that we endeavour to
preserve their esteem, and convince them that the publick prosperity may
be safely trusted in our hands.
This confidence is to be gained as well in high stations, as in lower
conditions, by large assemblies, as by individuals, only by a constant
practice of justice, and frequent exertion of superiour wisdom. When any
man finds his friend oppressive and malicious, he naturally withdraws
his affections from him; when he observes him advancing absurd opinions,
and adhering to them with obstinacy incapable of conviction, he falls
unavoidably into a distrust of his understanding, and no longer pays any
deference to his advice, or considers his conduct as worthy of
imitation.
In the same manner, sir, if the legislative powers shall, in making
laws, discover that they regard any motives before the advantage of
their country, or that they pursue the publick good by measures
inadequate and ill-concerted, what can be expected from the people, but
that they should set up their own judgment in opposition to that of
their governours, make themselves the arbiters in all doubtful
questions, and obey or disregard the laws at discretion?
If this danger may arise from laws injudiciously drawn up, it may surely
be apprehended from a compliance with this proposal; a proposal that the
operation of the law should commence eleven days before the law itself
is in being.
I have, hitherto, sir, regarded it as a principle equally true in
politicks as in philosophy, that nothing _can act_ when it does _not
exist_; and I did not suspect that a position so evident would ever
stand in need of a proof or illustration.
We live, indeed, in an age of paradoxes, and have heard several notions
seriously defended, of which some would, not many years ago, have
condemned their abetter to a prison or a madhouse, and would have been
heard by the wisest of our ancestors with laughter or detestation; but I
did not expect that the most hardy innovator would have shocked my
understanding with a position like this, or have asserted that a law may
operate before it is made, or before it is projected.
That where there is no law there is no transgression, is a maxim not
only established by universal consent, but in itself evident and
undeniable; and it is, sir, surely no less certain, that where there is
no transgression there can be no punishment.
If a man may be punished, sir, by a law made after the fact, how can any
man conclude himself secure from the jail or the gibbet? A man may
easily find means of being certain that he has offended no law in being,
but that will afford no great satisfaction to a mind naturally timorous;
since a law hereafter to be made, may, if this motion be supposed
reasonable, take cognizance of his actions, and how he can know whether
he has been equally scrupulous to observe the future statutes of future
senates, he will find it very difficult to determine.
Mr. PELHAM rose, and spoke thus:--Sir, notwithstanding the absurdity
which the honourable gentleman imagines himself to have discovered in
this proposal, and which he must be confessed to have placed in a very
strong light, I am of opinion, that it may, with very little
consideration, be reconciled to reason and to justice, and that the wit
and satire that have been so liberally employed, will appear to have
been lost in the air, without use and without injury.
The operation of the law may, very properly, commence from the day on
which the embargo was laid by his majesty's proclamation, which surely
was not issued to no purpose, and which ought not to be disobeyed
without punishment.
Sir John BARNARD spoke next, to this effect:--Sir, I cannot but be
somewhat surprised, that a gentleman so long conversant in national
affairs, should not yet have heard or known the difference between a
proclamation and a penal law.
By a proclamation, his majesty may prevent, in some cases, what he
cannot punish; he may hinder the exportation of our corn by ordering
ships to be stationed at the entrance of our harbours; but if any should
escape with prohibited cargoes, he can inflict no penalties upon them at
their return.
To enforce this prohibition by the sanction of punishments is the
intention of the present bill, but a proclamation can make nothing
criminal, and it is unjust and absurd to punish an action which was
legal when it was done.
The law ought, sir, in my opinion, not to commence till time is allowed
for dispersing it to the utmost limits of this island; for as it is
unreasonable to punish without law, it is not more equitable to punish
by a law, of which, they who have unhappily broken it, could have no
intelligence.
A future day was agreed to.