8 July 1807

(2) 13

Letter V

III. Litigat. prevented

Insolvent

Here you have a real remedy, and that without which all others are inadequate.

In the operation of bailing, the bail examinable, their principal unexamined and unexaminable, behold a sham remedy, having for its effect and its object the aggravation of the disease.

The defendant is he in a state of solvency? The consequence is (if two being the number of these sureties) vexation and that needless, imposed on three persons instead of one: on the defendant himself an additional and needless burthen imposed either upon his independence, or upon his purse. And by way of indispensable introduction to this needless burthen, comes in the first place the severer burthen of imprisonment.

If though solvent, he is unable to procure bail, then instead of that needless burthen, comes the severer and again needless burthen of a long and indefinite continuation of the needless imprisonment.

The Defendant insolvent is he in a state of insolvency? The Bail themselves are either solvent or insolvent. If solvent, these [...?] persons are led, commonly by notions of humanity to take upon themselves a risk, the magnitude of which they have had no sufficient means of estimating. Were the state of the Defendants circumstances previously ascertained and made known to them, then if they chose to subject themselves to the eventual responsibility, there would at any rate be no deceit.

If from one innocent person, the Plaintiff, the burthen is shifted off upon another insolvent person, the Bail, where is the gain to justice?