34 COBBETT'S [No. 



Whence the stealing of what was another's, though 

 upon extreme necessity, passed in that state for theft 

 or rapine. But now supposing under another govern- 

 ment the like good provision is not made for persons 

 in want, supposing likewise that the covetous temper 

 of men of substance cannot be prevailed on to give 

 relief, and that the needy creature is not able, either 

 by his work or service, or by making sale of anything 

 that he possesses, to assist his present necessity, must 

 he, therefore, perish with famine ? Or can any hu- 

 man institution bind me with such a force that, in 

 case another man neglects his duty towards me, / 

 must rather die, than recede a little from the ordina- 

 ry and regular way of acting ? We conceive, there- 

 fore, that such a person doth not contract the guilt of 

 theft, who happening, not through his own fault, to be 

 in extreme want, either of necessary food, or of clothes 

 to preserve him from the violence of the weather, 

 and cannot obtain them from the voluntary gift of the 

 rich, either by urgent entreaties, or by offering some- 

 what equivalent in price, or by engaging to work it 

 out, shall either forcibly or privily relieve him self out 

 of their abundance; especially if he do it with full 

 intention to pay the value of them whenever his bet- 

 ter fortune gives him ability. Some men deny that 

 such a icase of necessity, as we speak of, can possibly 

 happen. But what if a man should wander in a for- 

 eign land, unknown, friendless, and in want, spoiled 

 of all he had by shipwreck, or by robbers, or having 

 lost by some casualty whatever he was worth in his 

 own country; should none be found willing either to 

 relieve his distress, or to hire his service, or should 

 they rather (as it commonly happens,) seeing him in 

 a good garb, suspect him to beg without reason, must 

 the poor creature starve in this miserable condition ?" 

 42. Many other great foreign authorities might be 

 referred to, and I cannot help mentioning COVARRU- 

 vius, who is spoken of by JUDGE HALE, and who ex- 

 presses himself upon the subject in these words: 

 " The reason why a man in extreme necessity may, 

 without incurring the guilt of theft or rapine, forci- 



