fued for their release upon a Habeas Corpus, the judges una nimously decided the point against them.

In the affair of tonnage and poundage, the barons of the Exchequer proceeded as well against law as the fenfe and declarations of parliament: and in their folutions of the famous questions put to the judges, in the beginning of the year 1629, their principles were made apparent, as they likewife fubfequently were, by the enormous fines which they laid on merchants, imprifoned members, and others.

In the iniquitous affair of fhip-money, which was invented by a lawyer, (the turncoat, prostitute Noy, who fold his confcience and country for the office of attorney-general) the whole body of judges figned an opinion for which fimple hanging would, in juftice, have been too flight a punishment. It is true, indeed, we are told, that two out of the twelve, Hutton and Crooke, did not really agree in opinion with the reft, but were prevailed on to fign with them, as the opinion of the body; fo that it may be faid they were villains through cowardice, but the others were fuch from principle. Great, however, we must acknowledge the merits of Mrs. Crooke to have been at that time, to the reproach of her husband, from the honourable part fhe acted, in fpiriting him up to a manly discharge of conscience, in the cafe of Mr. Hampden; though pity it was, the good old lady could not be put in his place, as the certainly would have made the best judge of the whole fet. But the true fenfe of the nation in general concerning the affair of hip-money, was expreffed in the famous fpeech which the great lord Falkland made in the House of Commons upon that fubject, in the year 1640: and it occa fioned fuch proceedings, as, in the end, caufed an abolition of the tax by act of parliament, and alfo a profecution of the judges and others, who had been concerned in establishing it.

Thus did the great lawyers of thofe times endeavour to fubvert the conftitution in favour of regal defpotifm. But their aim was fo widely miffed, that their endeavours ferved, in the iffue, to produce the oppofite effect, by the introduction of anarchy, which led to democratic confufion, military violence, a mockery of justice, and a reproach to the nation.

Yet when monarchy and the laws became happily restored again, fuch fatal examples of the effects of corrupt practices in the courts failed to preferve long the awful feats therein undefiled. The reign of Charles the Second proved alike fruitful in violences and oppreffions from the administration of justice day, the iniquities of courts of judicature then foared above all examples of former times; for murders and

mifchiefs

mifchiefs of every kind became abundant, from evident corrupt influence, and the moft partial determinations. Sham plots, malicious profecutions, illegal fines and condemnations, cruel executions, nay imputed murders, perpetrated in fecret, as well as with the mockery of open juftice, by means of packed juries, may be faid to have aftonifhed and terrified the whole nation. The chief corporations of the kingdom were intimidated into a furrender of their charters; nay, that of London was forcibly t ken away by an unjust sentence of the judges of the King's Bench; and though afterwards agree to be reftored, on difhonourable conditions, yet the king repented of that favour, and entirely abolished the privileges of the chief city in his dominions.

When the nation had become more than half enslaved by the wickedness of his counfels, James the Second mounted the throne, with fair profeffions in his mouth, but a fixed determination in his mind, with all poffible expedition, to accomplish his wicked project, for deftroying the liberties, laws, and religion of the kingdom. Some of the firft acts of his adminiftration were thofe of collecting cuftoms, duties, and an excise by proclamations, which could not conftitutionally be his due till granted by parliament: and yet how very favourably fome lawyers thought of such proceedings will presently be shewn.

In this reign the corrupt judges and lawyers moft confpicuously figured. It was almoft begun with the perfecution (we can call it no better) of Oates, Dangerfield, and Baxter; the former of whom, we may, at leaft, fay, was inhumanly tortured; the fecond, cruelly treated by the law, and afterwards murdered by a lawyer; and the latter, though a man of a most respectable character, was, on his trial, treated by lord chief-justice Jefferies with the utmoft infolence and brutality, who even extorted from the jury the penalties inflicted on him,

After the defeat of the infatuated duke of Monmouth, and his few followers, what a campaign (as the king himself called it) did the bloody-minded Jefferies, and his military colleague, Kirk, make in the western counties! where, fome hiftorians fay, above fix hundred perfons were hanged. Never before that barbarous expedition was there heard of executions being made fubftitutes to the ufual methods of fąluting with artillery: but thefe men were turned off upon gibbets, ten at a health, by the favage Kirk; and he probably would have been pledged as loyally by Jefferies, had the latter been apprifed of the frolic; for his difpofition to barbarity can in no point be doubted, Nor indeed was the fpirit

K 2

of

of tyrannical executions confined to the weft; for at London, about the fame time, there were examples bad enough of such violent measures.

Thefe ftrange proceedings were followed by a rapid advance of Popery and prerogative in Ireland, and in Scotland a total fubmiffion to abfolute power; while, in England, by. the difplacing of but four judges, in order to make room for a like number, with more pliable confciences, he got the following points fettled for general rules of law by that venerable body. ft. That all the laws of England are the king's laws. 2dly. That therefore it is an incident, infeparable prerogative of the kings of England, as of all other fovereign princes, to difpenfe with all penal laws in particular cafes, and upon particular receffary reafons. 3dly. That of these reafons and neceffities the king is the fole judge; confequently, 4thly. That this is not a truft invefted in, and granted to the king, but the ancient remains of the fovereign power of the kings of England, which was never yet taken from them, nor can be."

From fuch a body of judges better determinations were not rationally to be expected. Nay, they even fubmitted to receive orders from the chancellor, to ufe their authority, on their circuits, for confirming the right, affumed by the king, of difpenfing with the laws, and for difcouraging all whom they found of incompliant tempers; which.orders, we read, they executed with extreme rigour and infolence.

But fuch a difpofition in lawyers was by no means confined to the order of judges; for the following very extraordinary addrefs was prefented to the king on the 11th of June, 1687, by the fociety of the Middle Temple:

"WE your majefty's most dutiful and loyal fubjects, to our great joy, have received a happy occafion of making this "declaration of our gratitude: and as we know that your "majefty's goodnefs is the greateft that ever was fhewn by

66 a

prince to his fubjects, fo we with the voice of men and "angels, to return fufficient thanks for your majefty's conde "fcenfion and clemency to all your fubjects in your gracious "declaration for toleration. And as for this compaffion and "goodness, thanks ought to be paid to your majefty by all your fubjects, fo we efpecially of the profeffion of the law, "have reafon to be thankful for the honour you have done us, by afferting your royal prerogative, which is the very life of the "law and our profeffion. Which prerogatives, AS THEY ARE

66

66

GIVEN BY GOD HIMSELF, fo we declare, that no power on carth can diminish them, but they must always remain entire

" and

"and infeparable to your royal perfox. Which prerogatives, $6 as we have ftudied to know them, fo are we refolved to de-. "fend them, by afferting with our lives and fortunes, that "divine maximă A Deo rex, a rege lex. And now as a tefti66 mony of our perfect fatisfaction in this our addrefs and "acknowledgment, we have fubfcribed our names, that “ your majefty may know us to he YOURS; and that the "reft of our profeffion may follow our example: and there"fore we beg your majefty will accept of this addrefs from

us, who, in conclufion, make bold to offer our best "wishes, and hearty defires, that your majefty's councils may profper in wifdom, your kingdom flourish in peace, "and your royal perfon enjoy a long, happy, and glorious ❝ reign over us, &c,'

These must be pronounced to have made an extraordinary gang of law-mongers indeed! fuch as might fay, like the thieves in the Beggars Opera," Shew us a gang of courtiers who will fay more." They muft furely have been all in a most wonderful hurry to get made chancellors, chief-juftices, &c. They fhewed themselves no fneakers, kat fwingers in their profeffions and their principles were undebtedly of a piece. Yet we hear of no fuitable rewards beftowed on their extreme loyalty after the revolution, farther than that their address was burnt by the hands of the common hangman; for their perfons remained unmolefted, and their dwellings unrazed. But we muft, in juftice, acknowledge, that there were then fome few lawyers of another ftamp: men whose honour would not permit them to difguife their true fentiments, and whofe confciences obliged them to refign, or refuse. high offices, in order to avoid being made inftrumental in the overthrow of the religion, liberty, and laws of their country.

It is, however, melancholy to reflect, that no prince, who has fought to fubvert the conftitution of this kingdom, ever found himself in want of affiftance therein from that order of men, whofe more peculiar duty it is always to defend it. But, thank heaven, fuch can no longer be the cafe, as the Revolution provided for the independency of judges; and therefore we should hope, that no dangerous fubferviency, or treachery, can ever in them be fufpected or apprehended again; more efpecially as under a government established on the principles of refiftance, in fupport of rights inherent in the people, prerogative-judges and lawyers must ever be confidered as alike dangerous to the fovereign, and pernicious to the state.

Τα

To the EDITOR of the POLITICAL REGISTER.

The following Narrative is fubmitted to the Public in general; and particularly to the Members of the Hon. ARTILLERY COMPANY.

Ne quid falfi dicere audeat, ne quid veri non audeat, Cicero.

N the 19th of April, 1768, being the day before Mr. Wilkes went up to the Court of King's-Bench, a meffage was fent in the evening to the houfe of Mr. North, armourer to, and one of the court of affiftants of, the ho nourable Artillery Company, purporting, That the right honourable the L- M wanted to fpeak with him immediately at the Manfion-house. Upon which Mr. North, who was spending the evening in company at fome distance from home, was fent to; and he directly went to the Manfion-house, where he was informed, that the L was gone out, and that the business he was wanted upon was about fecug the arms belonging to the Artillery Company; but Mr. Crocker, the meffenger of that company, being prefent, told Mr. North, that (as he fhould be at the Manfionhouse the next morning) he would bring word to him of the particulars of the bufiness that his Lordship had fent for him

upon.

M

Agreeably to this Mr. Crocker called the next day, and left a verbal meffage from the LM, with Mr. North's fervant, to this effect, That Mr. North muft go or fend immediately up to the armoury, to take off the locks from the guns, and to give the locks into the cuftody of Mr. Crocker the meffenger, for him to fecure them where he fhould think proper,

This meffage was accordingly delivered to Mr. North; but as he had never known that the L-——— M- either had, or claimed, any authority over the Artillery Company, or over the officers, members, or fervants thereof, he therefore declined putting this order in execution.

About three weeks after this, Mr. Crocker called upon Mr. North, with a meffage for him to attend the LM, which he immediately did; when his Lp demanded the reason why his orders were not complied with by taking off the locks of the militia guns, as his Lp was pleased to term them. Mr. North then acquainted his Lp, That the firelocks at the armoury did not belong to the militia, but were the property of the Hon. Artillery Company; and as

they