176 
A Pip? EB NOD! TAM. Nea 
Ar this period I was moved with compaffion at tc complaint 
and diftrefies of the poor. This induced me to write my circu- 
lar letter to the feveral grand juries of England and Wales, in 
order to induce them to unite in a common caufe. I blufh at 
my want of fucceis, refulting from either ignorance of, or indif- 
ference to, the firft principles of fecurity of property. I was 
fimple enough to think that the juftice of the caufe would have 
infured an approbation of my plan. Inftead of that, I am told; 
that in fome places it was even treated with rudenefs and con- 
tempt. I ventured even to write to two gentlemen with whom 
I was not perfonally acquainted: they never paid the left atten- 
tion to my letter: they forgot my character, and. they forgot 
their own. 
I roox the liberty of getting my circular letter conveyed to 
a third gentleman high in office, with whom I was acquainted. 
Tt was returned with (written on a corner of it) ‘* Mr. Pennant 
is in the wrong, and I will have no concern in the affair.” The 
gentleman may be politically right; but I am confident that 
Mr. Pennant is not morally wrong. 
Tuere has certainly been a {trong mifapprehenfion of my 
meaning. I did not intend the abolition of mail-coaches: they 
have their objections; whether we confider the barbarity with 
which the poor horfes are treated, or the very frequent deftrue- 
tion of the paffengers—our old Yebvs may have flain their thou- 
fands; our modern, their tens of thoufands. I only wifhed 
that they might not prove oppreffive to many of our counties, 
by caufes I have before mentioned. True it is, that, in my 
frft circular letter, I did moft rafhly and unadvifedly hint, that 
they might, without injury, be converted into the mail-cart. 
The: 
