when reflection has had ample time to operate, the offence seems great as at first, or the insult appears unmitigated by any circumstances on which memory can dwell,—if it is then brought forward, the immediate answer is, The affair is out of date—the thing is gone by—it is too late to call in question a transaction so long past. Thus, if a man is interested personally, he is unfit to question an abuse; if he is not, is it probable that he will question it? and if, notwithstanding this, he do so, then he is to be accounted a meddler. If he is insulted, and complain, he is told to wait until he is cool; and when that period arrives, he is then told he is too late. If his remonstrance relates to the alteration of laws which are never referred to, or only known by their repeated breach, he is told that any alteration is useless; it is perfectly well known that they are never adhered to. If it relate to the impolicy of any regulations attaching to an office, he is immediately answered, that that is a personal question, in which it is impossible to interfere—the officer, it seems, is considered to have not merely a vested right to the continuance of every abuse, but an interest in transmitting it unimpaired to his successors.
In the same spirit I have heard errors of
