Here it may be observed, that that respectful obedience which the County have always paid to
the Order of the Old Bailey Session, is what the Citizens mean, when they complain that the County
Prisoners are crowded into their Gaol.

The County of Middlesex have two Prisons, besides Tothill-Fields Bridewell , which they built, and
do maintain: and in these, though, except about Sessions Time. they are generally full no malig-
nant Disease hath ever yet appeared, and had the same Care been taken to prevent the Accumula-
tion of Filth in Newgate , as hath been exercised in the County Prisons, that malignant Disease, of
which the Citizens si loudly complain, had very likely never appeared among them.

The great Stress which is laid on the Circumstance of a Malignant Disease, makes it necessay to
revert to a Fact that it is extremely fitting the public should be acquainted with. On the 27 of April
1750, a great Number of Persons, attending the old Bailey Sessions, in a crowded Court, and un-
commonly warm Weather, were seized with a Fever, communicated, as is generally supposed, by
the infection of the Newgate Prisoners. of which Disease to the Number of about Forty Persons,
among whom were two of the King's Judges, and the Mayor of London , lost their Lives. The late
Sir Michael Foster< no role > , one of the Judges of the Court of King's Bench , has thought fit to perpetuate this
disastrous Event, in a Volume of Reports, published by himself; and enquiring into the Causes of
it, assigns for one the Fithiness of the Gaol, and the Avenues to it.

These Misfortunes did indeed awaken the Attention of the City, and led the Magistrates into &
Survey of the Prison, in which the Seeds of this Infection had been long treasured up. The Con-
sequence of this Survey was a Discovery of a vast Quantity of Filth, which had been many Years
accumulating in the several Apartments of the Prison, of such various Kinds as left very little Room
to doubt of the Causes of that Contagion to which the above Calamity was owing.

Upon this the City set about a Work which it would have been happy if they had thought of
sooner: viz. the Cleansing the Prison; the Filth was collected together, and, for very obvious Rea-
sons, the Night was chosen as the Properest Time for its Removal to some Distance from the Town;
and to some or other of the adjacent Fields it was carried by Cart Loads, and buried; and, through
the Providence of God. since that Time. no such Misfortune has happened.

The City affect to consider their Connexion with the County as a Burthen on them; whether it is
so, or not, let their own Charters speak. By these it appears that they are possessed of many valuable
Priviledges, in Consequence of this Connexion.

In some of the most antient of these Charters the Citizens are declared to hold the Shrievalty of
Middlesex together with that of London , in Farm; and, to adopt the Metaphor, a most profitable
Farm it has proved to them; for, to go no farther back than the Year 1672. it appears by Accounts
produced by themselves, that the Sums received by the City to excuse persons nominated by the
Mayor, from serving the Office of Sheriffs of London and Middlesex , amount to upwards of 148,750l.

The Connexion between the Office of Sheriff, and a Place of Security for the Persons of those
whose Escape from Justice he is at Law answerable for, does very naturally point out a method of
applying the Sums above raised, which, had it been attended to, would have rendered the present
Attempt unnecessary: The Citizens might have reasoned in this Way.Money has been raised by
Sheriffs' Fines; the Strength of the Prison is the Sheriffs Security; let therefore the Person who
serves the Office avail himself of the Default of him who has declined it; and let the Money so
raised be a Fund for the Maintenance of that Prison, without which no Man could serve it all.
But whether the City ever reasoned thus, or not, can only be guessed from the Methods which of late
Years have been practised, as well in the raising, as the disposing of Fines for the Office.

But why, say the City, must we take upon ourselves the Charge of any of the County Prisoners?
The Anser is, Because upon your own repeated Sollicitations, ye have obtained what no other
City in the Kingdon possesses, the Power of nominating;not barely your own Sheriffs, but
a Sheriff for your Neighbours; and through this Power is no Injury to the County, it is evident that
the Burthen of which ye so much complain, is no oother than the necessary Consequence of your
uniting those two distinct Offices, and the several Jurisdictions attendant thereon, in the same Per-
son: The Prison of London is situate in, and is one of the Gates of the City: the Sessions of Gaol
Delivery for Middlesex are held in London, for the Convenience of the City, the Middlesex Prisoners
can therefore be tried no where but in London; The Court sends for such of them as are triable at
the Old Bailey (and they, as has been shewn, are but a small proportion of the whose Number of
County Prisoners) in order for Trial, and the Sheriff, for his own Security, keeps them in Newgate ,
the City Prison , as a Place of the greatest Strength and Safety. is not all this the Act of the City;
are not the County in this Respect absolutely passive; or with what Face of Truth can it be venti-
lated abroad, that the County crowd their Prisoners in on the City, or can any rational Conclusion be
deduced from these Premisses to charge the County with the Expences attending the Prison of New-
gate , in any Proportion whatever?

And it seems that, at some Times, that Citizens themselves entertain the same Opinion of the Mat-
ter, viz, that the County has nothing to do with Newgate; for they dispose of the Places of the
Keeper and Ordinary, and in two Instances have they assumed the Right of nominating a Clerk of
Arraigns,