T THE JUDICIAL HISTORY OF INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY. IV. BY VAN VECHTEN VEEDER, Of the New York Bar. O the frightful excesses of the Stuart reign the Revolution put an end. James' chancellor was safely lodged in the Tower and his chief justice in Newgate. With Lord Chief Justice Holt at the head of the criminal bench, and a body of associates selected for their eminent qualifications alone, the administration of justice was to receive a new significance in the minds of the people. Parliament soon removed the anomalous and disgraceful conditions under which judicial murder had been accomplished with expedition and without resistance. It was enacted that every person indicted for treason should have the assistance of counsel; that he should be furnished with a copy of the indictment and a list of the freeholders from among whom the jury was to be taken; that witnesses for the defendant should be sworn, and their attendance enforced, if necessary, by process. Even before the concession of these decent privileges, we have an admirable illustration of what was possible without them under a humane administration. The spirit of the new time is shown by the trial of Lord Preston and his fellow Jacobite conspirators for treason in 1691 (12 St. Tr. 646). John Somers, the solicitor general, prosecuted with marked moderation. "I never did think," he said, "that it was the part of any who were of counsel for the king to aggrave the crime of the prisoners, or to put false colors on the evidence." Chief Justice Holt's conduct was faultless. Lord Preston constantly interrupted the charge to the jury. "Interrupt me as much as you please," said Lord Holt to the prisoner, "if I do not observe right. I will assure you I will do you no wrong willingly." At the conclusion of the summing up Lord Preston sought to address the jury again. The chief justice explained to him that he should have completed his remarks before the charge, and the proceedings closed with the following dialogue: "Lord Preston: My Lord, I beg your lordship's pardon if I give any offense." L. C. J. Holt: "No, my lord, you give me no offense at all; but your lordship is not right in the course of proceedings. I acquaint you with it, not by way of reproof, but by way of information." "Lord Preston: Then I hope the gentlemen of the jury will consider that all that is alleged against me is but presumption. My life and fortune, my posterity and reputation, are all at stake. I leave all to the jury's consideration; and the God of Heaven direct them!" “L. C. J. Holt: If you go on thus to reflect upon the court, you will make the court to reflect upon you. The jury hear how the evidence has been stated; I think it has been done very impartially, and without any severity to you. Why should you think we would press the evidence further than it ought to go against you? You are a stranger to most of us, and I am sure we do not desire your life; but still we must take care that justice be done to the government and the kingdom, as well as to any particular person, and evidence that is given must have its due weight and consideration." The prisoners themselves were impressed by the fairness of the prosecution. "I would not mislead the jury, I'll assure you," said Lord Holt to Preston. "No, my lord," re RICHARD GRAHAM, VISCOUNT PRESTON. propose to your lordship in respect of the trial this day; but before I offer it, we beg your favor for a word in behalf of ourselves. My lord, we are assigned of counsel in pursuance of an act of Parliament, and we hope that nothing which we shall say in defense of our clients shall be imputed to ourselves. I thought it would have been a reflection upon the government and your bar especially, that there was never a reign |