.

.
Multiplying oaths injures the revenue, by increasing incalculably the means of evading the very laws and penalties by which it is attempted to bind the subject.

Experience proves that this is a danger of no small account to the revenue; though trifling when compared with the importance of the general effect on national morality, and on the safety and tranquillity of the State, all which must ultimately rest, at all times and in all countries, upon religious sanctions.

"It was not," my father observed, "by increasing pains and penalties, or by any severity of punishment, that the observance of laws can be secured; on the contrary, small but certain punishments, and few but punctually executed laws, are most likely to secure obedience, and to effect public prosperity."' He writes to Darwin in March 1800: 'The fatigue of the session was enormous.

I am a Unionist, but I vote and speak against the union now proposed to us--as to my reasons, are they not published in the reports of our debates?
It is intended to force this measure down the throats of the Irish, though five-sixths of the nation are against it.