The Works of Samuel Johnson, LL.D. Volume 10: Parlimentary Debates IJohnson, Samuel
History
The Works of Samuel Johnson, LL.D. Volume 10: Parlimentary Debates I
Johnson, Samuel
Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons -- History -- 18th century
From these informations impartially collected, and diligently compared,
a man not engaged in the profession of a merchant may form general
principles, and draw consequences, more certain, and more extensive in
their relations, than those which are struck out only from the
observation of one subdivided species of commerce.
A member of this house, sir, thus enlightened by inquiry, and whose
judgment is not diverted from its natural rectitude by the impulse of
any private consideration, may judge of any commercial debate with less
danger of errour or partiality than the merchants, of whom,
nevertheless, I have the highest esteem, and whose knowledge, or
probity, I do not intend to depreciate, when I declare my fears that
they may sometimes confound general maxims of trade with the opinions of
particular branches, and sometimes mistake their own gain for the
interest of the publick.
The interest of the merchants ought, indeed, always to be considered in
this house; but then it ought to be regarded only in subordination to
that of the whole community, a subordination which the gentleman who
spoke last seems to have forgotten. He may, perhaps, not intend long to
retain his senatorial character, and, therefore, delivered his opinion
only as a merchant.
He has distinguished between the conduct of experienced and unskilful
insurers, with how much justice I shall not determine. I am afraid that
a vigorous inquiry would discover, that neither age nor youth has been
able to resist strong temptations to some practices, which neither law
nor justice can support, and that those, whose experience has made them
cautious, have not been always equally honest.
But this is a subject upon which I am not inclined to dwell, and only
mention as the reason which convinces me of the propriety of the bill
before us.
Sir William YONGE spoke to this effect:--Sir, there appears no
probability that the different opinions which have been formed of this
bill will be reconciled by this debate; nor, indeed, is there any reason
for wondering at this contrariety of sentiments.
The several clauses of the bill have relations and consequences so
different, that scarce any one man can approve them all; and in our
present deliberation, an objection to a particular clause is considered
as an argument against the whole bill.
It is, therefore, necessary, to prevent an unprofitable expense of time,
to resolve the house into a committee, in which the bill may be
considered by single clauses, and that part which cannot be defended may
be rejected, and that only retained which deserves our approbation. In
the committee, when we have considered the first clause, and heard the
objections against it, we may mend it; or, if it cannot be amended,
reject or postpone it, and so proceed through the whole bill with much
greater expedition, and at the same time, with a more diligent view of
every clause, than while we are obliged to take the whole at once into
our consideration.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account