| OCR Text |
Show .. ; ".Qea-o "W'- 4‘, [I40] [ 14'! ] and therefore, as it would be firtrtz'al‘to. admit an droitmry precedent as an evi- dence on one fide of the quefiion, (2'. e. againf't Ire'cmd,) without weighing, at the fame time, the flmz'lar precedent: in the, fame unfortunate reign, which e- qually admit the other tide of the queftion, (I mean the Privileges of the Englifh decifionsand hafiy rigour of martial Law! Any man whatever might be my'ufllj charged as a dMfl/ute per/[211, &c. and the arm/align a/om, whether true or faZfl», was fufficien t to divefi the perfon accufed of all the privileges ofan Englifltfubjeét, at the very time when he flood molt in need of them! So that, if the King's Commiflioners Ihould happen to difli ke any part icular perfon, within the county, or limits ofthe jurifdiflion, expreffed in their Commiflion, it was pofiible for them to prom ote jar/2 an arcufiztiwz, and thereby render themf'elves judge: in Maire-w» am e ; fince the King's Commiflion (contrary to his Maje fty' 5 molt folemn engagewent, before God, at his coronation) deprived the arm/Ed {ubjeét of a le gal Tria l and the due Procefs of the Law , the only defence of 1/2: innot mt, by {ubflituting an illegal Prmf; in lieu ofit ! And the horror of this monttrous ufurpation of power was much increafed by the following circumfiance, that the Commiflioners were exprefsly authorized, by their Commiflions, to " creét Gal/ aqua or Gibétm, and m fire/ a [t/urw at 2/qu " [ball t/JI'M‘fi/I" iifh Legiflature,) we muft necefl‘arily ex;- clude, from the prefcnt enquiry, the moi'c dif'tant idea that Mr. Barrington's 2d Precedent, for faxing Ireland by Pre; ragatz'oe, can poflibly afl‘brd the leati evidence againfl- the ju/l Rights of the: Subjeéts in Ireland; for,.iffltcb'Pr€cedetzt5 are admitted to prove any thing at all, they prove too much ; for they equally " fhew that it was then imagined the King could tax" and opprefs even Eng/(212d it- fi/f, as well as " Ireland, by his Prero: " gative, Without the intervention of " Par/1'11""!!! {i and I am Very fure that the worthy writer, who unguardedly cited from Rymer the above-mentioned Precedent againl't Ireland, would be as zealous t0 oppofe any inch doétrine as myfelli. His 3d Precedent is t'till more deftie tute, if poflible, of legal evidence. -~‘ ‘ What Would have been the anfwer of f the |
