Suppose a man says what is true, not knowing it to be true, though it be
logically a truth as it is distinguished, yet it is morally false; and
so, suppose a judge give judgment according to law, not knowing it to be
so, as if he did not know the reason of it at that time, but bethought
himself of a reason or precedent for it afterwards, though the judgment
be legal and according to precedent, yet the pronouncing of it is
unjust; and the judge shall be condemned in the opinions of all men: As
happened to the Lord Chief Justice Popham a person of great learning and
parts, who upon the trial of Sir Walter Raleigh; when Sir Walter
objected to reading or giving in evidence, Lord Cobham's affidavit,
taken in his absence, without producing the lord face to face, the lord
being then forthcoming: The chief justice overruled the objection, and
was of opinion it should be given in evidence against Sir Walter, and
summing up the evidence to the jury the chief justice said, "Just then
it came into his mind why the accuser should not come face to face to
the prisoner, because, &c." Now if any judge has since found precedents,
or has since picked up the opinion of lawyers, I fear he will come
within the case I have put.
I foresee, if ever this question happens to be debated, _you know
where_, gentlemen will be divided; Some will be desirous to do their
country justice and free us from all future danger of this kind; Others
upon motives not quite so laudable, will strive to screen, and with
others private friendship will prevail: But I would recommend to your
friends, who really love their country, to consider the several
circumstances concurring in your lordship which probably may not in your
successor: Let them suppose a person were to fill your place, from whose
manifest ignorance in the law, we may reasonably conclude, his only
merit is an inveteracy and hatred to this country. I say how could your
best friends excuse themselves, if in regard to your lordship they
should suffer such a precedent to be handed down to such a man
unobserved or uncensured?
_Invenit etiam aemulos infaelix nequitia_--Ambitious men have not always
been deterred by the unhappy fate of their predecessors, _Quid si
floreat vigeatque?_ But what lengths will they run if injustice and
corruption shall ride triumphant?
Had somebody received a reprimand upon his knees in a proper place, for
treating a printer's jury like men convict of perjury, forcing them to
find a special verdict, I dare to say he had not been quite so hardy as
to have discharged the grand jury or treated them in the manner he did,
because they had not an implicit faith in the court; nor had he dared
not to receive a presentment made by the second grand jury against
Wood's farthings upon pretence it was informal, which I mention because
the worthy Drapier has mistaken the fact.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account