"Let us now suppose Mr. Longworth's principles brought to the test of experiment. Let us suppose his language addressed to all mankind--We close the temples of justice as useless; we burn our codes of laws as worthless; and we substitute in their places, the more valuable restraints of _internal suggestions_. Thieves, invade not your neighbor's property: if you do, you will be arraigned before the august tribunal of _conscience_. Robbers, stay your lawless hand; or you will be visited with the tremendous penalties of _psychology_. Murderers, spare the blood of your fellow creatures; you will be exposed to the excruciating tortures of _innate maxims_--_when it shall be discovered that there are any_. Mr. President, could there be a broader license to crime than this? Could a better plan be devised for dissolving the bands of civil society? It requires not the gift of prophecy, to foresee the consequences of these novel and monstrous principles. The strong would tyrannize over the weak; the poor would plunder the rich; the servant would rise above the master; the drones of society would fatten upon the hard earnings of the industrious. Indeed, sir, industry would soon desert the land; for it would have neither reward nor encouragement. Commerce would cease; the arts and sciences would languish; all the sacred relations would be dissolved, and scenes of havoc, dissolution and death ensue, such as never before visited the world, and such as never will visit it, until mankind learn to repose their destinies upon 'those suggestions, _emphatically termed internal_.' From all these evils there is a secure retreat behind the brazen wall of the 'bias of jurisprudence.'" The gentleman who was next called on to engage in the debate, was John Craig; a gentleman of good hard sense, but who was utterly incompetent to say a word upon a subject which he did not understand. He proceeded thus: