PRIVATE

7 June 1807

Superseded?

Scotch Reform 2

Letter V

II. Litigation Prevent. & Promot.

2. Plff. malâ fide

In the station in which they are placed it is impossible for them to avoid checking oppressors in a considerable degree. But the check they apply to it is of course on every occasion as weak and inefficient as they can succeed in rendering it.

The principal distinction is that which respects the shape in which the advantage is reaped by the wrongdoer, the wrongdoer whose station is on the plaintiff's side. I speak of the distinction between oppression in the way of extortion, and simple oppression.

Oppression in the way of extortion demands the first consideration, as being the original and basis of the other. The intended victim - the intended defendant - the Naboth - is in possession of some estate, or other article of value - some vinyard which is become an object of concupiscence to the oppressor - the David in this history. In every such David Judge and C o behold the man after their own heart. Costs to be advanced for the purpose of defence, so much; costs of suit to be advanced on the plaintiff's side, so much: if Naboth is either unable, or through terror unwilling to make the advances necessary on his side, while David is both able and willing to make those which are necessary on his, the conquest of the vinyard is assured.

If Naboth be to such a degree destitute of all support, from without as well as from within, as to stand disabled or deterred from taking so much as the first steps in the track of defence, the destroying Angels - Judge and C o - get nothing for their share.

To a man whose intrinsic means of defence are deficient or inadequate, it will sometimes happen to obtain support from without - that support will be either mercenary or gratuitous.

In either case the expectation of David is pro tanto disappointed: in either case the work of destruction is entered upon, and the destroying Angels get their share.