To him, at least, they will do substantial justice. Whereas, if the whole charge laid in the information be fairly and honestly submitted to the jury, there is no reason whatsoever to presume that twelve men, upon their oaths, will not decide impartially between the King and the defendant. The numerous instances, in our state trials, of verdicts recovered for the King, sufficiently refute the false and scandalous -imputations thrown out by the abettors of Lord Mansfield, upon the integrity of juries. But, even admitting the supposition, that, in times of universal discontent, arising from the notorious mal-administration of public affairs, a seditious writer should escape punishment, it makes nothing against my general argument. If juries are fallible, to what other tribunal shall we appeal? If juries cannot safely be trusted, shall we unite the offices of judge and jury, so wisely divided by the constitution, and trust implicitly to Lord Mansfield? Are the Judges of the Court of King's Bench more likely to be unbiassed and impartial than twelve yeomen, burgesses, or gentlemen, taken indifferently from the county at large? Or, in short, shall there be no decision, until we have instituted a tribunal from which no possible abuse or inconvenience whatsoever can arise? If I am not grossly mistaken, these questions carry a decisive answer along with them. Having cleared the freedom of the press from a restraint equally unnecessary and illegal, I return to the use which has been made of it in the present publication. National reflections, I confess, are not justified in theory, nor upon any general principles. To know how well they are deserved, and how justly they have been applied, we must have the evidence of facts before us. We must be conversant with the Scots in private life, and observe their principles of acting to us, and to each other; the characteristic prudence, the selfish nationality, the indefatigable smile, the persevering assiduity, the everlasting profession of a discreet and moderate resentment. If the instance were not too important for an experiment, it might not be amiss to confide a little in their integrity. Without any abstract reasoning upon causes and effects, we shall soon be convinced, by experience, that the Scots transplanted from their own country, are always a distinct and separate body from the people who receive them. In other settlements, they only love themselves: in England, they cordially love themselves, and as cordially hate their neighbours. For the remainder of their good qualities I must appeal to the reader's observation, unless he will accept of my Lord Barrington's authority in a letter to the late Lord Melcombe, published by Mr. Lee: he expresses himself with a truth and accuracy not very common in his Lordship's lucubrations. "And "Cockburn, like most of his countrymen, is as abject "to those above him, as he is insolent to those be "low him." I am far from meaning to impeach the articles of the union. If the true spirit of those articles were religiously adhered to, we should not see such a multitude of Scotch commoners in the lowerhouse, as representatives of English boroughs, while not a single Scotch borough is ever represented by an Englishman. We should not see English peerages given to Scotch ladies, or to the elder sons of Scotch peers, and the number of sixteen doubled and trebled by a scandalous evasion of the act of union. If it should ever be thought adviseable to dissolve an act, the violation or observance of which is invariably directed by the advantage and interest of the Scots, I shall say very sincerely with Sir Edward Coke*, "When poor England stood alone, and had not the "access of another kingdom, and yet had more and as potent enemies as it now hath, yet the King of England prevailed." 46 Some opinion may now be expected from me, upon a point of equal delicacy to the writer, and hazard to the printer. When the character of the Chief Magistrate is in question, more must be understood than may be safely expressed. If it be really a part of our constitution, and not a mere dictum of the law, that the king can do no wrong, it is not the only instance, in the wisest of human institutions, where theory is at variance with practice. That the Sove * Parliamentary History, vol. vii. p. 460. |