[Footnote 54: This seems quite irrational. Would Captain W. have thought himself bound "to his destination," in circumstances, which, to the judgment of his own mind, and in the unanimous opinion of his officers, rendered success beyond the accomplishment of human agents? Surely not--Then why judge by any other rule than that of practicability, when another person, one under his command, was concerned? Some discretionary power is obviously implied in every system of orders intended for rational and accountable beings. The use made of it is one of the data, on which the determination of the degrees of merit or demerit as to conduct, must be founded. On no other principle than one involving some liberty, nay some duty of judging, can the intelligence of mankind be availing in the execution of projects. Divine authority alone, unequivocally made known, can dispense with acquiescence to the demands of reason, or render inefficient the most glaringly insuperable difficulties. How even the _Lords_ of the Admiralty, or their delegate, Capt W. should assume such dispensing prerogatives, it is impossible to comprehend. They relied, it is probable, on the honour, as it is called, of their subject. This alters the case entirely no doubt. A mighty convenient thing this _honour_ in all well-established monarchies! One cannot help desiring, nevertheless, that _men of honour_ should have the management of it. Were they men of _humane feeling_ too, it would be so much the better. Is it possible to predicate these things of the persons who gave poor Carteret his orders? Is it possible to believe he was expected to circumnavigate the world in the Swallow? An opinion has already been hazarded on this nice point.--E.]