persons who import or export prohibited goods without paying the duties appointed by the law.

The duties of customs, it is said, were originally instituted, in order to enable the king to afford protection to trade against pirates: they have since been continued as a branch of the public revenue. As duties imposed upon the importation of goods necessarily raise their price above what they might otherwise have been sold for, a temptation is presented to import the commodity clandestinely and to evade the duty. Many persons, prompted by the hopes of gain, and considering the violation of a positive law of this nature as in no respect criminal (an idea in which they have been encouraged by a great part of the community, who make no scruple to purchase smuggled goods), have engaged in this illicit trade. It was impossible that government could permit this practice, which is highly injurious to the fair trader, as the smuggler is enabled to underfell him, while at the same time he impairs the national revenue, and thus wholly destroys the end for which these duties were appointed. Such penalties are therefore inflicted as it was thought would prevent smuggling.

Many laws have been made with this view. If any goods be shipped or landed without warrant and presence of an officer, the vessel shall be forfeited, and the wharfinger shall forfeit 100l. and the master or mariner of any ship inward bound shall forfeit the value of the goods: and any carman, porter, or other affilting, shall be committed to gaol, till he find surety of his good behaviour, or until he shall be discharged by the court of exchequer (13 and 14 C. II. c. 11.). If goods be relanded after drawback, the vessel and goods shall be forfeited; and every person concerned therein shall forfeit double the value of the drawback (8 An. c. 13.). Goods taken in at sea shall be forfeited, and also the vessel into which they are taken; and every person concerned therein shall forfeit treble value (9 G. II. c. 35.). A vessel hovering near the coast shall be forfeited, if under 50 tons burden; and the goods shall also be forfeited, or the value thereof (5 G. III. c. 43.). Persons receiving or buying run goods shall forfeit 20l. (8 G. c. 18.). A concealer of run goods shall forfeit treble value (8 G. c. 18.). Offering run goods to sale, the fame shall be forfeited, and the person to whom they are offered may seize them; and the person offering them to sale shall forfeit treble value (11 G. c. 30.). A porter or other person carrying run goods shall forfeit treble value (9 G. II. c. 35.). Persons armed or disguised carrying run goods shall be guilty of felony, and transported for seven years (8 G. c. 18. 9 G. II. c. 35.).

But the last statute, 19 G. II. c. 34. is for this purpose insofar omnium; for it makes all forcible acts of smuggling, carried on in defiance of the laws, or even in disguise to evade them, felony without benefit of clergy: enacting, that if three or more persons shall assemble, with fire-arms or other offensive weapon, to assist in the illegal exportation or importation of goods, or in refusing the same after seizure, or in refusing offenders in custody for such offences; or shall pass with such goods in disguise; or shall wound, shoot at, or assault, any officers of the revenue when in the execution of their duty; such persons shall be felons, without the benefit of clergy.

When we consider the nature, and still more the history of mankind, we must allow that the enacting of severe penal laws is not the way to prevent crimes. It were indeed much to be wished that there were no such thing as a political crime; for the generality of men, but especially the lower orders, not discerning the propriety or utility of such laws, consider them as oppreotive and tyrannical, and never hesitate to violate them when they can do it with impunity. Instead therefore of punishing smugglers, it would be much better to remove the temptation. But the high duties which have been imposed upon the importation of many different sorts of foreign goods, in order to discourage their consumption in Great Britain, have in many cases served only to encourage smuggling; and in all cases have reduced the revenue of the customs below what more moderate duties would have afforded. The saying of Dr Swift, that in the arithmetic of the customs two and two, instead of making four, make sometimes only one, holds perfectly true with regard to such heavy duties, which never could have been imposed, had not the mercantile system taught us, in many cases, to employ taxation as an instrument, not of revenue, but of monopoly.

The bounties which are sometimes given upon the exportation of home produce and manufactures, and the drawbacks which are paid upon the re-exportation of the greater part of foreign goods, have given occasion to many frauds, and to a species of smuggling more destructive of the public revenue than any other. In order to obtain the bounty or drawback, the goods, it is well known, are sometimes shipped and sent to sea, but Heavy duties being imposed upon almost all goods imported, our merchant importers smuggle as much, and make entry of as little as they can. Our merchant exporters, on the contrary, make entry of more than they export; sometimes out of vanity, and to pass for great dealers in goods which pay no duty; and sometimes to gain a bounty or a drawback. Our exports, in consequence of these different frauds, appear upon the customhouse books greatly to overbalance our imports; to the unspeakable comfort of those politicians who measure the national prosperity by what they call the balance of trade.