it opened; nor could Mr. Thomas Paine himself venture to express the slightest disapprobation of the measures of government, without hazarding his freedom, and, in the end, perhaps, his life.  Even these papers, which I reserve only for your amusement, which contain only the opinions of an individual, and which never have been communicated, I am obliged to conceal with the utmost circumspection; for should they happen to fall into the hands of our domiciliary inquisitors, I should not, like your English liberties, escape with the gentle correction of imprisonment, or the pillory.—­A man, who had murdered his wife, was lately condemned to twenty years imprisonment only; but people are guillotined every day for a simple discourse, or an inadvertent expression.—­Yours.

Amiens, July 5, 1793.

It will be some consolation to the French, if, from the wreck of their civil liberty, they be able to preserve the mode of administering justice as established by the constitution of 1789.  Were I not warranted by the best information, I should not venture an opinion on the subject without much diffidence, but chance has afforded me opportunities that do not often occur to a stranger, and the new code appears to me, in many parts, singularly excellent, both as to principle and practice.—­Justice is here gratuitous—­those who administer it are elected by the people—­they depend only on their salaries, and have no fees whatever.  Reasonable allowances are made to witnesses both for time and expences at the public charge—­a loss is not doubled by the costs of a prosecution to recover it.  In cases of robbery, where property found is detained for the sake of proof, it does not become the prey of official rapacity, but an absolute restitution takes place.—­The legislature has, in many respects, copied the laws of England, but it has simplified the forms, and rectified those abuses which make our proceedings in some cases almost as formidable to the prosecutor as to the culprit.  Having to compose an entire new system, and being unshackled by professional reverence for precedents, they were at liberty to benefit by example, to reject those errors which have been long sanctioned by their antiquity, and are still permitted to exist, through our dread of innovation.  The French, however, made an attempt to improve on the trial by jury, which I think only evinces that the institution as adopted in England is not to be excelled.  The decision is here given by ballot—­unanimity is not required—­and three white balls are sufficient to acquit the prisoner.  This deviation from our mode seems to give the rich an advantage over the poor.  I fear, that, in the number of twelve men taken from any country, it may sometimes happen that three may be found corruptible:  now the wealthy delinquent can avail himself of this human failing; but, “through tatter’d robes small vices do appear,” and the indigent sinner has less chance of escaping than another.