upon this objection, but they do not appear to have brought forward any evil results, which may not with equal plausibility be inferred from the exercise of the right and duty in the other cases. Before those arguments are considered, it is desirable to draw the reader's attention to the strong presumption, that the Association did not exercise its power in such a manner as to preclude Government from exercising a similar function: that it did not violate the just subordination of powers. This presumption is involved in the foregoing argument, the object of which has been to prove, that the people have an interest in the due execution of every class of laws; and that they have means of aiding that due execution which Government does not possess. According to the division of the laws assumed for this view of the subject, in the two first classes, those positions are unequivocally recognized by the constitution, and there seems no sound reason for denying the propriety of extending them to the third class. The Association acted upon this analogy. Unless it be proved that none such exists, a strong presumption arises, that, in pursuing a constitutional analogy, the Association could not have impeded the due exercise of any function of Government.

So many vague forms of expression, such large and indefinite denunciations of the various mischiefs created, or necessarily resulting from the interference with justice, have been employed, that it becomes difficult to reduce those mischiefs to a definite statement; and to give the passages at full length, would needlessly extend this work. It would be unfair to dwell on particular words or expressions, unless the general context afforded a strong ground for believing that they are accurately reported. The scope of the different speakers' views, has therefore been sought for, and arranged under the heads of overawing and perplexing the judicial body; polluting the sources of justice; and making the courts an arena for harsh disputation and angry feelings, -for the display and contest of party animosities.

The dangers contained under the first head are to be found chiefly in Mr. Goulburn's speech, where they are announced in very ample terms, but seem to amount only to this, that many useful Magistrates would, and that some had retired from the Bench, being disgusted with the conduct of the agents of the Association, and perplexed by the subtlety and intricacy of their arguments.

To drive from the Bench men qualified for the performance of magisterial duties, is certainly an evil, if considered in this

G

abstract form, and if it be also admitted that persons, who could be scared from a public duty by their fears of such vexations as the Association could inflict, are in every respect qualified for the office of Magistrate, in such a disturbed and agitated country as Ireland. To a conscientious person, the exercise of judicial power must always be a painful and difficult task; it requires caution, acuteness, knowledge, patience, and courage. It may, however, be doubted, whether persons whose delicacy, timidity, or retiring dispositions were alarmed and offended at coming in contact with the legal agents of the Association, were really such a loss to the Bench as they are described to have been. The extent of the mischief depends upon the number and individual characters of the Magistrates thus driven from office; it clearly cannot exceed that limit. But the indirect benefits, resulting from the same measures of the Association, cannot be ascertained by any means, though a strong presumption exists that such benefits must have accrued. When the Association excited the alarm of some, it must also have excited the attention of all. As no man could fortell to which tribunal an appeal would be made, it became matter of prudence in all to prepare themselves generally in point of knowledge, and to act with great circumspection in administering justice, lest they might incur the animadversion of that jealous body. Publicity has always been deemed a great security for pure judicial conduct. The measure of holding petty sessions is founded on that doctrine, and the animadversion of the Association, whether just or unjust, certainly had the effect of directing an increased degree of public attention to the general administration of justice. That the subtleness and intricacy of legal arguments may have been perplexing, admits of no dispute. The nature of men's rights is so often perplexing, that were judges to be deterred by such difficulties, or by the greater perplexities of legal disquisition, the judicial power would be destroyed altogether. The affairs of mankind are full of intricacy and subtlety; the laws by which those affairs are regulated partake of these qualities, and often in excess; therefore, there can be no way of excluding refined and subtle arguments, except excluding the occasions for them, and limiting the jurisdiction of Magistrates to the simplest cases; but it is impossible to declare beforehand what are the simplest cases, or to arrange rights and offences under any such head. Those, whom the apprehension of these difficulties induced to retire from the Bench, cannot therefore have taken a just view of their

official duties; and there can be little reason to regard their secession as a public loss, however estimable their private characters may have been.*

There are several passages in Mr. Plunkett's speech that appear to refer to the same mischief, but their weight is not. in proportion to their eloquence.

"The prosecutor from the Association comes down vested with extraordinary powers; with all the delegated authority of six millions; he prosecutes in the name of the people of Ireland. What prisoner can stand unabashed, or not tremble before such a fearful tribunal? How can he have any hopes when the grand interests of the people are his accusers, and when he is to be prosecuted by the majesty of six millions? In such cases the juries and public will yield to the special lawyers, or they will array themselves against them; and it is of little consequence which of these takes place; the evil effects are equal; and I know not which of them is more to be regretted-either is most deplorable."

Upon a close examination of this passage, the mischief it announces will be found to amount to this, that the members of the tribunal will be in danger of deciding rather from the impulse of their party feelings, than according to the evidence. Does not that danger exist at present, in a country where parties and factions are in a state of bitter hostility? The influence of those party passions on the tribunals of justice, is one of the very grievances of which the Catholics complained, and is the ground on which they justified their interference, because it operated in favour of one side only. It will perhaps be asked, "Did they then hope to correct the evil by infusing more of this party spirit?" The answer is, They hoped to excite public attention and direct it towards the conduct of the tribunals, believing, that in the keen encounter of party feelings, employing the law as a weapon and before the nation a spectators, substantial justice would be done. If they were wrong in this opinion, ander what circumstances is justice to be expected, in a suntry divided by factions must to speak of the people of Ireland as being the trinn, Mary wave just been tated to be the prosecutors Lordinary one, baar germat anderete of the peo

ointed by the law.

and the majesty oʻke a de persou of the speckia kipunar juries, and so audri ku e, for tuas is tuc unge

concentrated go to influence ice will not be 4 iniquity must

the records of the criminal proceedings of the three kingdoms contain ! What a wide basis have the laws laid for the corruption of future juries and the despair of future prisoners! The doctrine is then broadly recognized, that the dignity and power of the prosecutor must influence the tribunals. Where is the prisoner, whom the Bank prosecutes for forgery, the Government, for frauds upon the Revenue, or for blasphemous and seditious libels, to look for justice? What hope is there for him, against whom the House of Commons orders a prosecution? He who commits a contempt of Courts of Justice, or violates the privileges of Parliament, must then despair; for, in the persons of his powerful prosecutors he beholds also his judges, whom he dares not challenge, and from whose sentence he cannot appeal. In the crimes of rebellion and treason, does not the majesty of a king, sustained by the feelings, the interests, and the majesty of twenty millions, appear against the prisoner? Can he stand unabashed before such prosecutors? Is the tribunal on which his fate depends, so lofty in its station, so confident in its strength, so firm in its integrity, so mature in its wisdom, as neither to be awed by the dignity, nor alarmed by the power, nor seduced by the influence, nor deluded by the solemnity of such an accusing body? Alas! it consists of twelve men taken at hazard from the ordinary ranks of life, without station, power, worth, or intellect to distinguish them above their fellows, and not even wholly disinterested, unless they "stand indifferent" to the just authority and the life of their sovereign, and to the welfare of their nation. They have a counteracting interest, it will be said, to maintain the purity of justice, lest injustice should hereafter become their own portion. True :-and so had the juries to whom the Association appealed.

Whether the public and the juries yielded to, or arrayed themselves against, the special counsel, equal evil, it is said, would result. Either would be most deplorable. Surely not. If the prisoner were guilty and convicted, or innocent and acquitted, whether the juries and public yielded to, or opposed the special lawyers, justice would be done; and the evil would not be equal to that of convicting an innocent, or acquitting a guilty person. Passion and prejudice are unsafe guides, but still, it is better they should lead to truth than to falsehood. In the curious instances, stated by Mr. Goulburn, of the mischievous interference of the Association, it must be presumed that the jury and the Magistrates opposed the special lawyers for the prosecution, since both prisoners were fully acquitted. Was this result as much to be de

plored, as if they had yielded to the special lawyers, and convicted the innocent men?

The mischiefs of polluting the sources of Justice, are urged principally in the speech of Mr. Peel, who adopts the arguments used by various Opposition members against the "Constitutional Association," and directs them against the Catholic Association. One argument is, that it contravenes the laws against maintenance. If these arose, as it is said, from jealousy lest the law should be made an instrument of oppression, it is plain that could not happen, unless the law were defectively constructed or feebly administered. The evil was probably in the administration, because, whatever injustice might result from an ill-constructed law, it would, if equally administered, have affected all parties alike, whether poor or rich, few or numerous, and no man more than another could make the law an instrument of oppression. But, if feebly or corruptly administered, it was the rich and powerful, not the poor and weak, who could pervert and silence it, and it would therefore seem, that the laws against maintenance were originally intended to prevent great men taking up the suits of inferior persons, and by force or influence controlling the tribunals of justice. Their policy seems to have been, to remove, from the retainers of those persons, the temptations to commit offences supplied by the hope that their lords would protect them from punishment; and to take, from those lords themselves, every facility of setting up the pretence of a just claim, when their real object was one of gross oppression and iniquity; for so indestructible is the sense of justice, that the most flagitious tyrants, in their worst designs and acts, always gladly seize any wretched pretext that affords a semblance of a just claim. The wolf would not kill the lamb without a pretext, and in this sense, "Cæsar did never wrong, but with just cause." Upon this sentiment, which makes even those men dread the imputation of injustice, who never dread the commission of it, the policy of these laws seems partly founded, endeavouring to take from the oppressor even the pretext of justice, and to compel him to exhibit the deformity of his designs without disguise. They were, in fact, devices for preventing suits which the Courts could not determine impartially-for avoiding a doubtful strife with a powerful and tyrannous nobility, who, as a legislative body, would have disclaimed those per

* This appellation is employed, partly to avoid incurring the charge of want of courtesy, and partly because it affords a proof, that in the opinions of all the eminent persons who subscribed to it, an Association for the purpose of interfering with the administration of Justice, was not unconstitutional.