The National Intelligencer And Washington Advertiser

WASHINGTON CITY,

FRIDAY, OCTOBER 2.

FOR THE NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER.

MR. SMITH,

SIR,

As the late transactions at Richmond have given rise to much serious thought and reflection on the different proceedings of courts of law—technical phrases and terms—I have thought proper to send you for insertion the following statement: It is taken from the life of that great and good man, Mr. Wesley, published by G. Dobbin and Murphy, Baltimore, and certainly merits the serious consideration of every man.

In the beginning of July, 1761, says Mr. Wesley, I was desired to call on a poor prisoner in the castle of York, (England). I had formerly occasion to take notice of an hideous monster, called a Chancery Bill—I now saw the fellow to it called a Declaration. The plain fact was this: Some time since, a man who lived near Yarm, assisted others in running some brandy; his share was worth nearly four pounds. After he had wholly left off that work, and was following his own business, that of a weaver, he was arrested, and sent to York gaol. And not long after came down a Declaration, that Jack, who had landed a vessel laden with brandy and Geneva, at the port of London, and sold them there, whereby he was indebted to his Sovereign Lord the King, in the sum of 577l and upwards. And to tell this worthy story, the lawyer takes up 13 or 14 sheets of treble stamped paper

O England! Will this reproach never be rolled away from thee! Is there any thing like this to be found, either among Turks or Heathens? In the name of justice, mercy, and common sense, I ask, 1st. Why do men lie for lying sake? Is it only to keep their hands in? What need else of saying it was the port of London? When every one knew the brandy was landed 300 miles thence.

What a monstrous contempt of truth does this shew, or rather kindred to it? 2d. Where is the justice of swelling 4l into 577l.? 3d. Where is the common sense of taking up 14 sheets to tell a story? That may be told in ten lines? 4th. Where is the mercy, of thus grinding the face of the poor beggared prisoner? Would not this be execrable villainy, if the paper and writing together, were only 6d. a sheet, when they have stript him already of his little, and has not left him 14 groats in the world?

It is certain that nothing can be said in defence of our law proceedings. They are often absurd, highly oppressive to the subject, and disgraceful to a civilised nation. In criminal cases, how often does the indictment magnify and exaggerate both the crime and every circumstance connected with it, beyond all the bounds of truth and probability. Hence it becomes extremely difficult for jurymen to discharge their duty with a good conscience. And we seldom see punishments duly proportioned to the crimes committed. What shall we say in other cases where the tautology and circumlocution peculiar to the language of our law, the delay of judgment in the courts, and the tergiversation permitted through the whole proceedings, render it almost impossible for an honest man in middling life to obtain his right against a villain, without the utmost danger of being ruined? A man who robs on the highway is hanged—but a villain who robs by means of the chicanery, delay and expense of the law, escapes with impunity, and is applauded.

E.