You will say, no doubt, that you do not desire the proprietors should divide 6l. 1-4th at Christmas, which they would, if this construction was allowed; they are not in cash, they have not paid their debts, is certainly a good argument, but not insuperable, against dividing; you opposed the dividend of 5l. _per cent._ in September, upon the same principles. That you should not be in cash, that you had not paid your debts, was your only objection at that time; and we now find you straining the law, makeing an act of parliament say it meant July, when it said June; and intended to insert the figure 5, when it made use of 24, in order that you may now make this dividend, which you opposed when it was declared in September last. You would now make the legislature say, it was not their meaning to rescind this dividend of 5l. _per cent._ when they have rescinded it in direct terms, because you proved you should not be in cash, and should not have paid your debts at the time it would be payable. I will venture to affirm too, that you would not be half so inconsistent, in using the same industry, and following the same method of interpretation, to divide after the rate of 12l. 1-half _per cent._ at Christmas; for the legislature, as we have proved, have not shewn their intention of rescinding absolutely, this 12l. 1-half, while the 10l. _per cent._ is restrained as matters stand, beyond all dispute, and can never be made, but in defiance of the power of parliament, and without such a defiance, as, if it is to be justified, will justify the violation of all law, divine and human. A law of England says, you shall _not_ divide up to the 5th of July, being after the 24th of June; you substitute the 5th of July in the place of the 24th of June, and then say, you may divide up to the 5th of July. The law of Moses says, Thou shalt _not_ steal; you strike out the word _not_, by a less violent alteration, and then theft becomes as little a crime in England, as it was at Sparta. But I would beg leave to ask, if the mistake contended for should be admitted on all hands, would you take upon yourselves to correct it, or wait till it was rectified by parliament? If when a deed is executed, a mistake is discovered, it cannot be corrected without the privity, and consent, of all parties; if blunders are made in law pleadings, that are upon record, they cannot be amended without the leave of the court, which has the custody of such records: a trustee in such deed would not pay a sum of money contrary to the express words of the deed, but would wait till the matter was set right; nor would a party in any cause presume upon a mistake in a record, to disobey the orders of a court of justice; and will you, Gentlemen, give less authority to an act of the legislature, than to a private deed, or the record of any petty court of law?