"Much dust has been raised about civil and criminal actions. But to what purpose? Is not reparation to be made to the public for any injury which it may have sustained, as much as to an individual? Is the welfare of the nation in general, of less consequence than that of a single person? Where then is the propriety of making such a bustle about the malice or innocence of the intention? The injury done is the only proper measure of the punishment to be inflicted, as well as of the damage to be assessed. Since you cannot plead the intention as a mitigation in the latter case, neither can you in the former."[19] [Footnote 19: 16 Parl. Hist. 1291, 1292, 1293.] What followed? On the 23d of July, 1771, he was made Attorney-General. His subsequent history did not disappoint the prophecy uttered above by his former conduct and his notorious character. "In truth his success was certain, with the respectable share he possessed of real talents and of valuable requirements--strongly marked features, piercing eyes, bushy eyebrows, and a sonorous voice, all worked to the best effect by an immeasurable share of self-confidence--he could not fail."[20] He hated America with the intense malignity of a low but strong and despotic nature, and "took a most zealous part and uttered very violent language against the colonists. He scorned the very notion of concession or conciliation; he considered 'sedition' and 'treason,' (like _tobacco_ and _potatoes_,) the peculiar plants of the American soil. The natives of these regions he thought were born to be taxed."[21] He favored the Stamp Act, the Coercion Bill,--quartering soldiers upon us, sending Americans beyond seas for trial,--the Boston Port Bill, and all the measures against the colonies. "To say that we have a right to tax America and never exercise that right, is ridiculous, and a man must abuse his understanding very much not to allow of that right;" "the right of taxing was never in the least given up to the Americans."[22] On another occasion he said, that "as attorney-general he had a right to set aside every charter in America."[23] What followed? Notwithstanding his youthful profligacy, the open profanity of his public and private speech, and his living in public and notorious contempt of matrimony,--he was made Lord Chancellor and elevated to the peerage in 1778! Him also we shall meet again. [Footnote 20: 5 Campbell, 398.] [Footnote 21: 5 Campbell, 410.] [Footnote 22: 17 Parl. Hist. 1313.] [Footnote 23: 18 St. Tr. 999.] Gentlemen of the Jury, I might as well try to bale all the salt water out of the sea as to mention every glaring and notorious instance where an oppressive government has appointed some discarder of all Higher Law for its servant in crushing the People. Come therefore to the next point. * * * * *