as they still do among us, I
account next to a miracle.

[Footnote 18: See p. 123. [T.S.]]

[Footnote 19: See note on p. 127. [T.S.]]

As to the other paper I must confess it is a sharp censure of 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; is arbitrary, illegal, destructive to
public justice, a manifest violation of his oath, and is 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,[20] 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[21] that
hath 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 public spirit.

[Footnote 20: Sir William Scroggs (1623?-1683) was appointed Lord Chief
Justice of England on the removal of Sir Thomas Ramsford in 1678. One of
the eight articles of impeachment against Scroggs, in 1680, was for
illegally discharging the grand jury of Middlesex before the end of the
term. Although the articles of impeachment were carried to the House of
Lords in 1681, the proceedings went no farther than ordering him to find
bail and file his answer by a certain time. Scroggs was removed, on
account of his unpopularity, on April 11th, 1681. As a lawyer, Scroggs
has no great reputation; as a judge he must be classed with the
notorious Jeffreys. [T.S.]]

[Footnote 21: See Appendix No. V. [T.S.]]

I am confident your lordship will be of my sentiments in one thing, that
some short plain authentic tract might be published for the information
both of petty and grand juries, how far their power reacheth, and where
it is limited, and th