66

years of his present Majesty, for the more effec"tual execution of the Criminal Laws, and more easy apprehending and bringing to trial offenders escaping from one part of the United King"dom to the other, and from one County to "another." When a Government can with impunity convert the judicature and Legislature of a country into engines of personal vengeance and oppression, then indeed is the system become so corrupt, that it must fall by its own or another hand. It has been before observed, that in the month of May 1804, Mr. Cobbett had been found guilty of having libelled Lord Hardwicke- and others of his Government in the letter signed Juverna published in his political register. After his conviction he gave up the manuscript letters he had received by the post from Ireland, to Government, who soon found persons ready to swear, that they were in the hand writing of Mr. J. Johnson. The letters not only censured Lord Hardwicke, Lord Redesdale, Mr. J. Osborne and Mr. Alexander Marsden, who were mentioned in the indictment, but they also minutely disclosed the views grounds and means of Mr. A. Marsden's having. procured the office of Attorney General for Mr. O'Grady. It was found prudential not to load the indictment with his name, lest the prosecution might be clogged in its progress, or appear on that. account more personal than official. By the scenic preparation for the intended tragedy, it appears,' that the act of state was anxiously wished to be covered by sanction of law. The censor of the

1

1805.

1805. system became the marked victim of oppressive

vengeance. The precipitancy to oppress the daring
individual betrayed the managers of the state ma-
nœuvre into open abandonment of the first principles
of Legislation by passing an er post facto law, and
into hostility to the freedom of the subject by
defeating the great safeguards of Magna Charta,
and the bill of rights against oppression. The
particular effects of high influence upon the princi-
pal actors in this state-exhibition may be traced
through every scene,
* which from the marking

of the victim led it to immolation.

How strongly state feelings operated upon the legal proceedings in this matter in the Courts of Ireland, may be collected from what fell from the Attorney General in his argument in the King's Bench in January 1805, on the legality of the arrest of Judge Johnson, of which more will be said hereafter. " I

"

cannot help complaining, that it is a little severe, that when "I am seeking to bring another man to his trial, I am suddenly put upon my own, &c. I wish to take the first occasion of disclaiming both for myself and others, the most remote idea "of any proceeding towards Mr. J. Johnson, which the necessary "attainment of justice does not indispensably require." And when Mr. Baron Smith in the first week of the ensuing February, delivered his admirable argument in the Exchequer against the opinion of his brethren on that Bench, he found it necessary, to make this important cautionary declaration. "I will not fear, "that any thing, which I may have urged to day can be mis" represented or remembered to my injury by others: I shall "have rouzed no treacherous enemy into action: and even if "I should, yet knowing how free the country is, in which I "live, I cannot suppose, that their hostile activity would be "successful. The free doctrines, which I have maintained, "I should be sorry to look on as too bold; and still sorrier to "consider, as in any manner obsolete. Therefore in promulg

Juvernas

Strong effects were produced both in England 1805. and Ireland by the publication of Juverna's letters. Effects of They were universally believed to have been written letters. by Mr. J. Johnson: and his official character doubled the point and energy, with which they were written. Proportionate resentment against the author arose in the breast of those, who were individually affected by the exposures contained in them, and they wielded uncontrouled the double edged sword of vengeance and of justice. It might be presumptuous to charge the ostensible mover in this Legislative mystery, with a reflex

"

"ing them I cannot risk incurring the displeasure of those
"constitutional minds, which have the guidance of the state."
He then also made this manly, and not redundant profession
in the presence of his brethren on that Bench.
"I am con-、
"cerned for no individual: I am an advocate exerting myself
on behalf of the constitution. Such advocatism is more than
"the privilege: it is the duty of a Judge." (Vid: his speech
published from the proceedings and notes with his permission.)
Mr. J. Day, who was the only Judge of the three in the King's
Bench, who openly made head against the courtly doctrines,
did not use quite as strong language, as Baron Smith. He
manifestly however shewed, that in differing from his brethren,
he had to labour more against prejudice and influence, than
doubt or uncertainty. After having demonstrated, that the
courtly construction of the act made an offender thrice punish-.
able, he said. "Still is it, but one crime, whatever the extent
may be of its ravages, whether it cross the channel, the
"Tweed or only the Thames. To say, that the Legislature.
"would interfere in such a case, and arm with any extraordinary
process, a vindictive prosecutor to glut his resentment by mul-
tiplied prosecutions, and multiplied punishments, would be to
"make the Legislature auxiliary to a malignant and implacable
vengeance."

"

41

1805.

Acts of Geo.
II. between
County and
County

intention, which can not be proved, and ever will be, as it ever has been denied, that the bill was brought in under any particular influence, or for any particular purpose. In May 1804, Mr. Percival then Attorney General was either induced or directed to bring in the above-mentioned bill as a matter of necessary regulation created by the Union. It passed as a matter of course through both houses without opposition or even discussion: and no wonder: for it purported on the face of it no more, than to prevent fugitive malefactors from eluding the arm of justice, by escaping into Ireland out of the process of legal writs, after having offended in Great Britain, or vice versa, as the law had already provided for cases of such escapes as between county and county in England, and between the several legal jurisdictions of England and North Britain. Mr. Percival repeatedly ac. knowledged he was not aware of the difficulties, which were afterwards raised against it, either at the time of its introduction, or of its passing into a law. He may have been the unconscious engine' of its intended malice. The enacting and use made of that act of the 44th Geo. III. form too important an arcanum of the system, not to be minutely developed.

* In the 23d of Geo. II, an English act was

* The reader will excuse the length of detail, which is necessary to dissect the mechanism of the state engine so artfully, constructed to delude the public and scourge the individual, Many things can be conclusively proved a posteriori, of which a presumption can be hardly raised by argument a priori. The

passed for the apprehending of persons in any
county or place upon warrants granted by. Justices.
of the Peace in any other county or place. That
act sets forth the reasons of its enactments in these
plain words.
"Whereas it frequently happens,
"that persons, against whom warrants are granted
"by Justices of the Peace for the several counties
"within this kingdom, escape into other counties:
"or places out of the jurisdiction of the Justices
"of the Peace granting such warrants, and there-

by avoid being punished for the offences, with "which they are charged." For remedy thereof it enacted, that from the 24th day of June 1750, if any person, against whom a warrant should have been issued by any Justice, should escape or go

secret views, disavowed intentions and premeditated schemes of any set of confederates can only be brought to light, counter. acted or remedied by narrowly watching their several actions, In tracing and reflecting upon the several stages of introducing, passing and making use of this Act of Parliament, the reader is requested to bear in mind some of the leading principles of our Criminal or Crown Law. 1° That no one is to be twice tried' and punished for the same offence. 2o That every offender shall be tried in the place, where the crime was committed. 3 That a party arrested upon any charge may be instantly bailed, if the offence be bailable. 49 That the charge,

warrant, indictment, judgment and punishment, there be certainty and uniformity. He will also awaken his attention to the facility, with which 48 freeholders can be collected for a Special Jury, out of whom 12 cannot be selected impervious to the feelings or dictates of the Bench or higher powers. Thus these acts operated prospectively upon fugitives or permanent or temporary residents out of the jurisdiction, in which their charged offences had been committed, and where they were to be tried.

1805.

L