w into your own hands; and if
you called him an assassin, he would tell you that he was no assassin as
he attacked you openly and gave you a free choice. Nay, he is generous,
for he might kill you and take your money as well. You might, indeed,
tell him he has an evil trade, and he would tell you that you were right,
and that he would try to avoid the gallows as long as possible. He would
then thank you and advise you never to drive out of London without being
accompanied by a mounted servant, as then no robber would dare to attack
you. We English always carry two purses on our journeys; a small one for
the robbers and a large one for ourselves."

What answer could I make to such arguments, based as they were on the
national manners? England is a rich sea, but strewn with reefs, and those
who voyage there would do well to take precautions. Sir Augustus Hervey's
discourse gave me great pleasure.

Going from one topic to another, as is always the way with a desultory
conversation, Sir Augustus deplored the fate of an unhappy Englishman who
had absconded to France with seventy thousand pounds, and had been
brought back to London, and was to be hanged.

"How could that be?" I asked.

"The Crown asked the Duc de Nivernois to extradite him, and Louis XV.
granted the request to make England assent to some articles of the peace.
It was an act unworthy of a king, for it violates the right of nations.
It is true that the man is a wretch, but that has nothing to do with the
principle of the thing."

"Of course they have got back the seventy thousand pounds?"

"Not a shilling of it."

"How was that?"

"Because no money was found on him. He has most likely left his little
fortune to his wife, who can marry again as she is still young and
pretty."

"I wonder the police have not been after her."

"Such a thing is never thought of. What could they do? It's not likely
that she would confess that her husband left her the stolen money. The
law says robbers shall be hanged, but it says nothing about what they
have stolen, as they are supposed to have made away with it. Then if we
had to take into account the thieves who had kept their theft and thieves
who had spent it, we should have to make two sets of laws, and make all
manner of allowances; the end of it would be inextricable confusion. It
seems to us Englishmen that it would not be just to ordain two
punishments for theft. The robber becomes the owner of what he has
stole