what a number of upright judges there have been in both kingdoms, for above sixty years past; which, considering how long they held their offices during pleasure, as they still do among us, I account next to a miracle.
As to the other paper, I must confess it is a sharp censure from an English house of commons against dissolving grand juries, by any judge before the end of the term, assizes, or sessions, while matters are under their consideration, and not presented; as arbitrary, illegal, destructive to publick justice, a manifest violation of his oath, and as a means to subvert the fundamental laws of the kingdom.
However, the publisher seems to have been mistaken in what he aimed at. For whatever dependence there may be of Ireland upon England, I hope he would not insinuate, that the proceedings of a lord chief justice in Ireland, must depend upon a resolution of an English house of commons. Besides, that resolution, although it were levelled against a particular lord chief justice, sir William Scroggs, yet the occasion was directly contrary. For Scroggs dissolved the grand jury of London for fear they should present; but ours in Dublin was dissolved, because they would not present; which wonderfully alters the case. And therefore a second grand jury supplied that defect, by making a presentment[1] that pleased the whole kingdom. However, I think it is agreed by all parties, that both the one and the other jury, behaved themselves in such a manner, as ought to be remembered to their honour, while there shall be any regard left among us for virtue or publick spirit.
- ↑ See the presentment immediately preceding this letter.
