among all those who were peculiarly concerned in the circumstances. It is not unlikely, that the " Remarks on Impressed Seamen," generally attributed to him*, were written at this time, (though printed long afterwards); and the "Address to the People,” before-mentioned (p. 161), is nearly of this date+.

The following also is among his notes.

."1777, April 30.-Went with Alderman Lee to the Recorder (Serjeant Glynn) about press warrants, and left with the latter several very strong testimonies of their illegality, and some remarks on the force of the Habeas Corpus laws. Alderman Lee seemed much pleased with what was said; indeed, the Recorder himself also."

The most remarkable feature in the trial of Millachip is the following declaration, made by the Judge in Court.

"Lord Mansfield.-You will be surprised when I say, that I believe this is the first return to a writ of Habeas Corpus upon a man's being pressed, that ever existed. I never met with one........

"We are upon untrodden ground. If any gentleman of the bar meet with any precedent, I should be glad to know it. I know that great searches were made into the offices many years ago, and they were found so far back as the reign of Queen Anne.-Upon the temporary land-pressing acts, several; but I don't recollect one upon a sca-pressing. Not one...... It is a late time of day, indeed, never to have had a precedent....

"But it is a matter of great consequence to the public service to put it in a right way; that whoever ought to be pressed, may be pressed without litigation; and whoever ought not to be pressed, and are pressed, may have a speedy way of getting their liberty."

The tract is not in his own catalogue.

A marginal note written by Mr. G. S. in a copy of this work, (lent to me by the kindness of a friend), alludes to its having determined the Aldermen to resist Lord Mansfield, if he had remanded Millachip.

The Attorney-General, met the case on the open ground of an authorised right of pressing, agreeably to the warrant of the Lords of the Admiralty*; but the discussion of that right was waved by Lord Mansfield, and the result, therefore, of the proceeding was not in any degree correspondent to Mr. Sharp's ardent expectations, always comprising the largest possible scope of consequences. "His Lordship the Judge," says his Manuscript, "very carefully avoided saying any thing to justify the measure of pressing, and postponed the question, saying, 'the return to the writ of Habeas Corpus is improper,' so that the man was at liberty t.'

66

Now all," adds Mr. S., "that was afterwards argued on both sides, about the peculiar exemption of Millachip as a citizen of London, was foreign to the true purpose and intention of the City prosecution, and served the opposite party as a means of evading it. This narrow, partial ground of defence, instead of obtaining for Millachip an immediate discharge, to which as an Englishman he was entitled, served only as a handle against him to hold him still in suspense under a sort of bail; the City Solicitor engaging to produce him when called upon‡."

The affidavit, on which the writ was granted, represented that Millachip was "a freeman and liveryman of the city of London, and that he had a right to vote for members of Parliament." The return merely set forth the usual Admiralty warrant, and declared the situation of the man impressed to be that of a waterman working on the Thames, liable, in that respect, to the service.

"The present return, therefore," his Lordship said, "was not a good one, or sufficient to have the man remanded."-(Minutes of the Case of Millachip.)

It appears, by evidence in a later cause (ex parte Randall, 1791), that he was actually produced, but no consequent proceedings are found to have taken place, and Mr. Sharp, therefore, considered the conduct of the Court as evasive. The minutes of the proceedings in the case of Millachip were closed by the following memorandum:-" Cause stands over, to give the Attorney-General time to consider of his argument upon what was thrown out by the Court."

On this Mr. Sharp remarks with great severity, "Is it not manifest, from the repeated. declarations of the Chief Justice, that the cause itself is thrown out by the Court, and that the man was instanter set at liberty, when the Court declared the return not sufficient to have him remanded? The personal rights of this man are sacred and inestimable, and are not to be set up as a butt to exercise sophistry. Besides, it is a maxim in the law, that the cause of liberty is to be favoured before all other causes: 'Humana natura in libertatis causâ favorem

I know that you are returned to Town; and remain, with the greatest esteem and respect," &c. &c.

At the time proposed, Mr. Sharp waited on the General; and it is easy to conceive with what feelings he was welcomed. In the mutual advances of their benevolent intercourse, a friendship was formed which was sustained through life with the most cordial sincerity. Granville's usual zeal soon manifested itself by an "Introduction" (in a strain of strong sarcastic humour) to " The Sailor's Advocate," a work written by his veteran friend, on the subject of pressing* while some public events, connected with the same subject, and which took place about the same time, tended to confirm their union, and to strengthen in both the ardour of social liberty.

It was natural to suppose, that a man who had voluntarily stood forward as the protector of the oppressed in one description of the lower classes of life, would be again resorted to for aid by all who, in equal distress, found themselves unprovided with the means of legal defence.

Instances of this nature quickly occurred. During the eagerness of the first preparations of England against her colonies, warrants had been very freely issued from the Admiralty for impressing sailors for the purposes of the new war; and many men had been seized in the city in consequence of these warrants+. The assistance of Granville Sharp appears to have been invoked in their relief by some zealous friend to the rights of freemen. The following reply, which will at once show the diligence of his researches, and his decided sentiments on the subject of pressing, is among his manuscripts, without date or address.

* The "Sailor's Advocate" appears to have gone through numerous editions. That at present in my hands is the eighth.

"The City claimed an exemption from pressing within its jurisdiction. The Court of King's Bench held that these claims did not appear to them supported by adequate proof.......This dispute ended without any definitive decision on several of the most material points of law. However, the right of pressing seemed to grow in strength, and all ideas of local or personal exemption to lose ground considerably.”—Annual Register, 1777.

"Sir,

"You are very right in supposing that the subject of impressing seamen had already engaged my attention. I have made many memorandums from my researches concerning it; and I shall be very ready to communicate them to yourself, or any of your friends, as I have already done to several others who applied to me. The argument which you mention about the public good, or salus populi, which is used to excuse the infringement of the most sacred rights of individuals, under the plea of necessity, is fully answered (I trust) in p. 25 of the little tract which I send herewith*.

In short, the doctrine of necessity may be admitted to excuse some things of an indifferent nature, not evil in themselves, though prohibited by law, but never to justify iniquity and oppression, respect of persons, or any thing that is malum in se; because the first necessity, of all others, in a Christian community, is to do justice to all men at all times,' (see p. 40); as it is better to endure all adversities than to assent to iniquity.' (p. 44.)

"The end or purpose of all good government is liberty, with protection from personal injuries, and the security of private property. But when a very large part of the community, not only mariners, but other inferior orders that earn their bread by labour, are deprived of their liberty and protection, not for a short time only, but regularly and constantly, whenever the nation is at war (however unjust or unpopular the war may be); in such a case, I say, the end or true purpose of government is defeated and destroyed.

"This doctrine is deeply impressed in the genius of our common law, which informs us, by unquestionable maxims, that no man is worthy to hold the reins of administration in this country who cannot maintain the national justice; the chief object of which is certainly personal protection. 'Cessa regnare, says the maxim, si non vis judicare' (p. 49): Cease to reign, if you will not do justice.' And the reason is plain from another maxim; that liberty is the soul, and the laws the body, of the commonwealth† (p. 75). Our Parliament, therefore, can have no more right to make a law to enslave Englishmen, than any

"An Address to the People of England, being the Protest of a private Person against every suspension of Law that is liable to injure or endanger PERSONAL SECURITY."-Towards the close of this tract he discusses the subject of impressing seamen, warmly contending against the measure as a violation of the laws of the realm, and in particular accusing Judge Foster of having "prostituted his pen by asserting that it is not inconsistent with any statute." + Vita Reipublicæ pax, et animus libertas, et corpus leges.

Y

individual has to deprive himself of life (p. 47), because that would amount to the crime of felo de se in the state.

"I am, Sir, your most humble servant,

"G. S."

General Oglethorpe appears to have been no less active on the occasion than Mr. Sharp himself, whose letters of this date communicate to him several circumstances then passing on the subject of the impress, as matters of mutual concern.

G. S. to General Oglethorpe, &c. &c. [EXTRACT.]

"Dear Sir, "Old Jewry, Monday Evening, Dec. 16, 1776. "I think it right to acquaint you, that three lieutenants of the navy, and one midshipman, were this day taken up by Holmes, a constable and beadle of Lime-Street Ward, and some assisting constables, for pressing two men by virtue of a warrant backed by Alderman Harley. Holmes carried them to Guildhall, where they were examined by Aldermen Plumer, Lee, Lewis, and Wooldridge, and were by them committed to Wood-Street Compter; and the pressed men, as well as Holmes, were bound to prosecute. I suspect, from the behaviour of the officers, that they put themselves in the way on purpose to give some handle against the City Magistrates (and perhaps against the Charter of the City)*; but, however that may be, it is now most certainly the critical time to defend the just rights of seamen, as well as to justify to the world the endeavours of the citizens, and prove that they are strictly legal and constitutional. Mr. Harley, by signing the warrant, is certainly liable to be punished by fine and premunire; and it would be very hard, that, through ignorance he should escape the just course of the law, and the other Aldermen come into trouble." &c. &c.

"Dear Sir,

G. S. to the same. [EXTRACT.]

"Old Jewry, 24th December, 1776.

"I copied with my own hand the memorandums contained in your first

When informed by one of the Aldermen (Sir W. Lewis), that, on account of the respect claimed by his Majesty's uniform, there would be no occasion for any other security from them, than the appearance of some of their friends to answer for them; the lieutenant replied, that they did not wish to trouble any of their friends on the occasion." They were then sent to the compter.