17. Having now seen _the origin_ of the present poor-laws, and the justice of their due execution, let us return to those authorities of which I was speaking but now, and an examination into which will show the extreme danger of listening to those projectors who would abolish the poor-laws; that is to say, who would sweep away that provision which was established in the reign of QUEEN ELIZABETH, from a conviction that it was absolutely necessary to preserve the peace of the country and the lives of the people. I observed before that there has been some difference of opinion amongst lawyers as to the question, whether it be, or be not, _theft_, to take without his consent and against his will, the victuals of another, in order to prevent the taker from starving. SIR MATTHEW HALE and SIR WILLIAM BLACKSTONE say that it _is theft_. I am now going to quote the several authorities on both sides, and it will be necessary for me to indicate the works which I quote from by the words, letters, and figures which are usually made use of in quoting from these works. Some part of what I shall quote will be in Latin: but I shall put nothing in that language of which I will not give you the translation. I beg you to read these quotations with the greatest attention; for you will find, at the end of your reading, that you have obtained great knowledge upon the subject, and knowledge, too, which will not soon depart from your minds.

18. I begin with SIR MATTHEW HALE, (a Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench in the reign of Charles the Second,) who, in his PLEAS OF THE CROWN, CHAP. IX., has the following passage, which I put in distinct paragraphs, and mark A, B, and C.

Cottage Economy — Part 115

19. A. "Some of the casuists, and particularly COVARRUVIUS, Tom. I. _De furti et rapinæ restitutione_, § 3, 4, p. 473; and GROTIUS, _de jure belli, ac pacis_; lib. II. cap. 2. § 6, tell us, that in case of extreme necessity, either of hunger or clothing, the _civil distributions of property cease_, and by a kind of tacit condition the _first community doth return_, and upon this those common assertions are grounded: '_Quicquid necessitas cogit, defendit._' [Whatever necessity calls for, it justifies.] '_Necessitas est lex temporis et loci._' [Necessity is the law of time and place.] '_In casu extremæ necessitatis omnia sunt communia._' [In case of extreme necessity, all things are _in common_;] and, therefore, in such case _theft is no theft_, or at least not punishable as theft; and some even of our own lawyers have asserted the same; and very bad use hath been made of this concession by some of the _Jesuitical_ casuists of _France_, who have thereupon advised apprentices and servants to rob their masters, where they have been indeed themselves in want of necessaries, of clothes or victuals; whereof, they tell them, they themselves are the competent judges; and by this means let loose, as much as they can, by their doctrine of probability, all the ligaments of property and civil society."

Cottage Economy — Part 115