The Lord Chief-Justice Whitshed had no sooner shewn the impotent violence of his resentment, by discharging the Grand Jury that refused to find the bill against Harding, the printer, than he received diverse broad hints of the illegality of his proceedings. Amongst others, the following exatrct was generally distributed through the city of Dublin. 66 EXTRACT FROM A BOOK ENTITLED, AN EXACT COLLECTION OF THE DEBATE OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS HELD AT WEST MINSTER, 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 : 66 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 means to subvert the fundamental laws of this kingdom. "Resolved, that a committee be appointed to examine the proceedings of the judges in Westminsterhall; and report the same, with their opinion herein, to this House." The two following severe letters are directly addressed to Lord Chief-Justice Whitshed, and were generally circulated. They probably underwent Swift's correction, though they have too much of a legal cast to have been written by the Dean himself. They are here inserted from two rare broad-side sheets, making a material part of this celebrated controversy. They were perhaps composed by Mr Robert Lindsay, distinguished by Swift in his letter to Lord Middleton as an eminent lawyer, as well as a man of virtue and learning, whose legal advice he used during the whole controversy. A Letter from a Friend to the Right Hon. ...... Ceteri, quanto quis servitio promptior, opibus et honoribus extollerentur: Invalido legum auxilio, quae vi, ambitu, postremo pecunia turbabantur.—Tacit An. TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE I FEAR your lordship, in your wonted zeal for the interest of your country, will think this paper very unseasonable; but I am very confident not more than one man of this kingdom will be of your lordship's judg ment. In matters of law, your opinion has, from our first acquaintance, entirely guided me, and the things you have assured me I might depend upon as law have few of them escaped my memory, though I have had but little conversation with you since you first appeared in Parliament, and moved the House to resolve, that it is the indispensable duty of the judges of this kingdom to go The Lord Chief-Justice Whitshed had no sooner shewn the impotent violence of his resentment, by discharging the Grand Jury that refused to find the bill against Harding, the printer, than he received diverse broad hints of the illegality of his proceedings. Amongst others, the following exatrct was generally distributed through the city of Dublin. 66 EXTRACT FROM A BOOK ENTITLED, AN EXACT COLLECTION OF THE DEBATE OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS HELD AT WEST150. MINSTER, OCTOBER 21, 1680," page "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 means to subvert the fundamental laws of this kingdom. 66 Resolved, that a committee be appointed to examine the proceedings of the judges in Westminsterhall; and report the same, with their opinion herein, to this House." The two following severe letters are directly addressed to Lord Chief-Justice Whitshed, and were generally circulated. They probably underwent Swift's correction, though they have too much of a legal cast to have been written by the Dean himself. They are here inserted from two rare broad-side sheets, making a material part of this celebrated controversy. They were perhaps composed by Mr Robert Lindsay, distinguished by Swift in his letter to Lord Middleton as an eminent lawyer, as well as a man of virtue and learning, whose legal advice he used during the whole controversy. A Letter from a Friend to the Right Hon. ...... ...... Ceteri, quanto quis servitio promptior, opibus et honoribus extollerentur: Invalido legum auxilio, quae vi, ambitu, postremo pecunia turbabantur.-Tacit An. TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE I FEAR your lordship, in your wonted zeal for the interest of your country, will think this paper very unseasonable; but I am very confident not more than one man of this kingdom will be of your lordship's judg ment. In matters of law, your opinion has, from our first acquaintance, entirely guided me, and the things you have assured me I might depend upon as law have few of them escaped my memory, though I have had but little conversation with you since you first appeared in Parliament, and moved the House to resolve, that it is the indispensable duty of the judges of this kingdom to go through their circuits; nor have I had any since you fell sick, and was made solicitor-general. I have often heard your lordship affirm, and therefore I do affirm it, that the great ends for which grand juries were instituted, were the support of the government, the safety of every man's life and fortune; it being necessary some should be trusted to inquire after all disturbers of the peace, that they might be prosecuted and brought to condign punishment; and it is no less needful for every man's quiet and safety, that the trust of such inquisitions should be put into the hands of persons of understanding and integrity, that will suffer no man to be falsely accused or defamed; nor the lives of any to be put in jeopardy, by the malicious conspiracies of great or small, or the perjuries of any profligate wretches. So material a part of our constitution are grand juries, so much does the security of every subject depend upon them, that though anciently the sheriff was, by express law, chosen annually by the people of the county, and trusted with the power of the county, yet the law left not the election of grand juries to the will of the sheriff, but has described their qualifications, which if they have, and the sheriff return them, no man, nay no judge, can object to their being sworn, much less may they to their serving when sworn; and to prevent the discretionary power (a new-fashioned term) of these judges over juries, you used to say was made the statute of the 11th of Henry IV. Pardon me, my lord, if I venture to affirm, that a dissolving power is a breach of that law, or at least an evasion, as every citizen in Dublin, in Sir Constantine Phip's time, perfectly understood, that disapproving the |