good intentions will not expect him to break through."

It is recorded of Sir Matthew Hale, that, whenever he was convinced of the injustice of any cause, he would engage no farther in it than to explain to his client the grounds of that conviction. He abhorred the practice of misreciting evidences; quoting precedents or books falsely or unfairly, so as to deceive ignorant juries or inattentive judges; and that he adhered to the same scrupulous sincerity in his pleadings which he observed in the other transactions of his life. For he used to say, "it was as great a dishonour as a man was capable of, that, for a little money, he was to be hired to say or do otherwise than he thought."

This brings to mind the saying of Epaminondas, who, when great presents were sent to him, used to observe, "If the thing you desire be good, I will do it without any bribe, even because it is good: if it be not honest, I will not do it for all the goods in the world."

When he was once going his circuit, he understood that the protector had ordered a jury to be returned for a trial in which he was more than ordinarily concerned. Upon this information, he examined the sheriff about it, who knew nothing of it, for he said that he referred all such things to the under sheriff; and, having next asked the under sheriff concerning it, he found the jury had been returned by order from Cromwell upon which he shewed the statute, that all juries ought to be returned by the sheriff or his lawful officer; and this not being done according to law, he dismissed the jury, and would not try the cause. Upon which the Protector was highly displeased with him, and,

at his return from the circuit, he told him, in anger, That he was not fit to be a judge." To which all the answer he made was," That it was very true.'

1

Colonel Tatham, who practised law while in the Tenessee government, published, among others, the following rules:

"Fiat Justitia!

"Having adopted the above motto as early as I had the honour of admission to the bar, I have covenanted with myself that I will never knowingly depart from it; and on this foundation I have built a few maxims, which afford my reflections an unspeakable satisfaction.

"1st. I will practice law, because it offers me opportunities of being a more useful member of society.

66

2dly. I will not turn a deaf ear to any man because his purse is empty.

66

3dly. I will advise no man beyond my comprehension of his cause.

"4thly. I will bring none into law who my conscience tells me should be kept out of it.

"5thly. I will never be unmindful of the cause of humanity; and this comprehends the fatherless widows, and bondages.

"6thly. I will be faithful to my client, but never so unfaithful to myself as to become a party in his crime.

"7thly. I will never acknowledge the omnipotence of legislation, or consider any acts to be law beyond the spirit of the constitution.

66

8thly. No man's greatness shall elevate him above the justice due to my client.

66

9thly. I will not consent to a compromise" VOL. III.

S

where I conceive a verdict essential to my client's future reputation or protection; for of this he cannot be a complete judge.

"10thly. I will advise the turbulent with candour; and, if they will go to law against my advice, they must pardon me for volunteering it against them.

11thly. I will acknowledge every man's right to manage his own cause if he pleases.

"The above are my rules of practice; and though I will not, at this critical juncture, promise to finish my business in person, but, if the public interest should require my removal from hence, will do every thing in my power for those who like to employ me, and endeavour to leave them in proper hands if I should be absent. "WILLIAM TATHAM.

(Signed)

"Knoxville, March 21, 1793."

THE INFLEXIBLE JURYMEN.

In the trial of the famous William Pen and William Mead, at the Old Bailey, for an unlaw ful assembly in the open street, in contempt of the king's laws, &c. we find a striking instance of the inflexible justice of the jury. After the jury had withdrawn an hour and a half, the prisoners were brought to the bar to hear their verdict: eight of them came down agreed, but four remained above, to whom they used many unworthy threats, and in particular to Mr. Bushel, whom they charged with being the cause of the disagreement. At length, after withdrawing a second time, they agreed to bring them in guilty of speaking in Gracechurch-s.reet, which the court would not accept

for a verdict, but, after many menaces, told them they should be locked up, without meat, drink, fire, or tobacco; nay, they should starve, unless they brought in a proper verdict. William Pen, being at the bar, said, " My jury ought not to be thus threatened. We were by force of arms kept out of our meeting-house, and met as near it as the soldiers would give us leave. We are a peaceable people, and cannot offer violence to any man.” And, looking upon the jury, he said, "You are Englishmen: mind your privilege; give not away your right." To which some of them answered, "Nor will we ever do t." Upon this they were shut up all night, without victuals or fire, nor so much as a chamber utensil, though desired. Next morning they brought in the same verdict: upon which they were threatened with the utmost resentments. The mayor said, he would cut Bushel's throat as soon as he could. The recorder said, he never knew the benefit of an inquisition till now; and that the next sessions of parliament a law would be made, wherein those who would not conform should not have the benefit of the law. The court having obliged the jury to withdraw again, they were kept without meat and drink till next morning, when they brought in the prisoners not guilty ; for which they were fined forty marks a man, and to be imprisoned till paid. The prisoners were also remanded to Newgate, for their fines in not pulling off their hats. The jury, after some time, were discharged by baebus corpus, returnable in the Common Pleas, where their commitment was judged illegal. This was a noble stand for the liberty of the subject in very dangerous times, when neither law nor equity availed any thing.

The following will give us an idea of the inflexibility and decision of a single juryman in opposition to all the rest. Mr., being on a jury in a trial of life and death, he was completely satisfied of the innocence of the prisoner; all the other eleven were of the opposite opinion: but he was resolved that a verdict of guilty should not be brought in. In the first place, he spent several hours in trying to convince them; but found that he made no impression, and that he was fast exhausting the strength which was to be reserved for another mode of operation. He therefore calmly told them it should now be a trial who could endure confinement and famine the longest, and that they might be quite assured he would sooner die than release them at the expence of the prisoner's life. In this situation they spent about twenty-four hours, when at length they all ac ceded to his verdict of acquittal.

LIBERALITY OF SENTIMENT, &c.

KINDNESS, liberality of sentiment, candour, charity, are expressions now exceedingly perverted. They become a sanctuary, in which the unprincipled, the erroneous, and the careless, too often take refuge. But let it be remembered, that "that candour which regards all sentiments alike, and considers no error as destructive, is no virtue. It is the offspring of ignorance, of insensibility, and of cold indifference. The blind do not perceive the difference of colours; the dead never dispute: ice, as it congeals, aggregates all bodies within its reach, however heterogeneous