, it ought to be considered what consequence the finding the bill,
may have upon a poor man perfectly innocent, I mean the printer. A
lawyer may pick out expressions and make them liable to exception, where
no other man is able to find any. But how can it be supposed, that an
ignorant printer can be such a critic? He knew the author's design was
honest, and approved by the whole kingdom, he advised with friends, who
told him there was no harm in the book, and he could see none himself.
It was sent him in an unknown hand, but the same in which he received
the three former. He and his wife have offered to take their oaths that
they knew not the author; and therefore to find a bill, that may bring a
punishment upon the innocent, will appear very hard, to say no worse.
For it will be impossible to find the author, unless he will please to
discover himself, although I wonder he ever concealed his name. But I
suppose what he did at first out of modesty, he now continues to do out
of prudence. God protect us and him!
I will conclude all with a fable, ascribed to Demosthenes. He had served
the people of Athens with great fidelity in the station of an orator,
when upon a certain occasion, apprehending to be delivered over to his
enemies, he told the Athenians, his countrymen, the following story.
Once upon a time the wolves desired a league with the shepherds, upon
this condition; that the cause of strife might be taken away, which was
the shepherds and the mastiffs; this being granted, the wolves without
all fear made havoc of the sheep.[2]
Novem. 11th, 1724.
[Footnote 2: The advice had the desired effect. The jury returned a
verdict of "Ignoramus" on the bill, which so aroused Whitshed, the Chief
Justice, that he discharged them. As a comment on Whitshed's illegal
procedure, the following extract was circulated:
EXTRACT FROM A BOOK ENTITLED, "AN EXACT COLLECTION OF THE DEBATES OF THE
HOUSE OF COMMONS HELD AT WESTMINSTER, OCTOBER 21, 1680," page 150.
_Resolutions of the House of Commons, in England, November 13, 1680._
"Several persons being examined about the dismissing a grand jury in
Middlesex, the House came to the following resolutions:--
"_Resolved_, That the discharging of a grand-jury by any judge, before
the end of the term, assizes, or sessions, while matters are under their
consideration, and not presented, is arbitrary, illegal, destructive to
public justice, a manifest violation of his oath, and is a m
|