With regard to the ships which are now in distant places, whither no knowledge of this law can possibly be conveyed, it cannot be denied that their crews ought to be secured from injury by some particular exception; for though it is evident in competitions between publick and private interest, which ought to be preferred, yet we ought to remember that no unnecessary injury is to be done to individuals, even while we are providing for the safety of the nation.

Mr. FAZAKERLY spoke to this effect:—­Sir, though I cannot be supposed to have much acquaintance with naval affairs, and, therefore, may not, perhaps, discover the full force of the arguments that have been urged in favour of the clause now under consideration, yet I cannot but think myself under an indispensable obligation to examine it as far as I am able, and to make use of the knowledge which I have acquired, however inferiour to that of others.

The argument, sir, the only real argument, which has been produced in favour of the restraint of wages now proposed, appears to me by no means conclusive; nor can I believe that the meanest and most ignorant seaman would, if it were proposed to him, hesitate a moment for an answer to it.  Let me suppose, sir, a merchant urging it as a charge against a seaman, that he raises his demand of wages in time of war, would not the sailor readily reply, that harder labour required larger pay?  Would he not ask, why the general practice of mankind is charged as a crime upon him only?  Inquire, says he, of the workmen in the docks, have they not double wages for double labour? and is not their lot safe and easy in comparison with mine, who at once encounter danger and support fatigue, carry on war and commerce at the same time, conduct the ship and oppose the enemy, and am equally exposed to captivity and shipwreck?

That this is, in reality, the state of a sailor in time of war, I think, sir, too evident to require proof; nor do I see what reply can be made to the sailor’s artless expostulation.

I know not why the sailors alone should serve their country to their disadvantage, and be expected to encounter danger without the incitement of a reward.

Nor will any part of the hardships of this clause be alleviated by the expedient suggested by an honourable member, who spoke, some time ago, of granting, or allowing, to a sailor, whose contract shall be void, what our courts of law should adjudge him to deserve, a quantum meruit:  for, according to the general interpretation of our statutes, it will be determined that he has forfeited his whole claim by illegal contract.  To instance, sir, the statute of usury.  He that stipulates for higher interest than is allowed, is not able to recover his legal demand, but irrecoverably forfeits the whole.

Thus, sir, an unhappy sailor who shall innocently transgress this law, must lose all the profit of his voyage, and have nothing to relieve him after his fatigues; but when he has by his courage repelled the enemy, and, by his skill, escaped storms and rocks, must suffer yet severer hardships, in being subject to a forfeiture where he expected applause, comfort, and recompense.