in all Cafes from the ordinary Course of Trial by the common Law? I think I have fhewn that this would be a direct Innovation on the Conftitution. Is there any Neceffity for fuch a Preference in the prefent cafe? certainly not; for no Inftance can be given where a Soldier had not as fair a Trial in any of the Courts of Law, as any other Subject; fo that if he is condemned there, the prefumption is, that he would have been condemned in the fame cafe by a Court Martial: If the Soldier is acquitted by the Court of Law, he is notwithstanding that Acquittal, liable to be cafhiered by a Court Martial. And I will fay further, that it would occafion great Difquiet to the Officers, and great Prejudice to his Majefty's Service, if the Officers of Garrifons were obliged to give up much of their Time to Court Martials, in cafes of Difficulty and Confequence, and muft interfere with their ordinary Bufinefs. On the other Hand, where a Soldier had committed an Offence againft the public Peace, and was tried for it by a Court Martial, the Subject could not be prevailed upon to fuppofe the Judges of a Court Martial Lawyers by Infpiration, or fkilful in a Matter which takes up another Set of Men their whole Lives to comprehend; neither is it any Difcredit to the Officers of the Army, that they have not that Knowledge. Befides, this would create a Government within a Government, the greatest Solecifm in Politics. The Clergy long tried for an Exemption from the Courts of Law, and gave many Kings of England a great deal of Trouble; but they have at last fubmitted to be on the fame Footing with other Subjects, If the Soldiers once thought they had a Right to an Exemption of this Kind, I fear it would be difficult

B

difficult where a Soldier was condemned in a Court of Law for Robbery on the High Way, or for Murder, to have the Sentence executed. It is very fit that the Gentlemen of the Sword fhould know the Conftitution they live under, and have no Doubt as to their Jurifdiction of Trial. They are from Neceflity, and from Neceffity alone, armed with Powers to try and punifh, or acquit, their own People for Matters arifing among themfelves, but not in Matters blended with the Concerns of other Subjects, or which refpect the public Peace. It would not anfwer the Ends of the military Service to oblige the Officers to have Recourfe to the ordinary Forms of Law; where a Soldier ftrikes his Officer, the Punishment at Law is not adequate to the Offence, as among fo large a Body of People, in whom Obedience is the principal Requifite, a due Subordination ought to be moft ftrictly kept up. I know, where a Soldier fteals his Comrade's Shirt, they try him by a Court Martial; but I apprehend this not to be juftifiable, if it happen in a Place, where the Order of the common Law is obferved; but this is connived at, being a Matter arifing among themfelves, fince they choofe to give themselves fo much Trouble.

But the Peace of Society would be exceedingly endangered, if Soldiers might offend against a Subject, or the public Peace, and be amenable only to the Military Tribunal. Suppofe any of his Majefty's Officers was weak enough to encourage the Attempt: A Soldier never doubts but the Commands of his Officer are lawful, and that he fhall be protected if he executes

them.

them. He will certainly think himself more fure of that Protection, if he knows that he can only be tried by his own People. The Public, ufed in all Cafes, to open and public Trials, to which People of every Degree have access, will never fubmit to the more reserved and fecret Trial, by a Court Martial. The Confequence will be Diftruft and Jealousy of the laft mentioned Mode of Trial, and univerfal Discontent among all his Majefty's Subjects, who are not in the military Service. For if this Mode of Trial is acquiefced in, in one Instance, why not in every other? and upon what Pretence? Why may not the Body of Porters, Chairmen, Hackney Coach-men, or any Body of Men, following one, Occupation, or any Corporation in the City, infift upon having their Members tried by the Chiefs of their Fraternity

As to the common Laws of the Land, they exempt no Member of any Body of Men from their Authority. They are extremely well calculated. to punish all Breaches of the Peace, according to the feveral Degrees of the Offence. A Proceeding conducted in fuch a Manner, that it is almost impoffible for an innocent Man to fuffer by it; for firft, the Bill must be found by a Grand Jury, and after that, the Party accused undergoes a legal Trial by another Jury, where he is heard in the most folemn Manner, to make his Defence, and in the End, if he is condemned, the Foundation and Reasons for fuch Condemnation are manifeft to all By-ftanders, and on one Hand leave no Room for the Perfon ac

cufed, or his Friends, to complain, or to the Public on the other.

The Offence now immediately under our Confideration, if the Facts fhould be proved as here ftated, would amount to High Treafon, in every Perfon, who in fact aided or ufed any Force, to open the Jail of Newgate, and turn loofe the Prifoners. This is conftructive Treafon, within the Claufe of the Statute of Treafons, of levying War against the King. For though it is no immediate Attempt against the King's Perfon, it is a very High one against his Authority; a daring Invafion of the Royal Prerogative, of the executive Power, vefted in the King, to do that by private Authority, which only belongs to him. Infurrections generally to level all Inclosures, or to pull down BawdyHouses, or Meeting-Houfes, or to break open Prisons, or to raise the Wages of all Labourers, have always been deemed High Treason, for thefe Acts have a direct Tendency to downright Rebellion, by overturning the Courfe of Justice, and the Syftem of established Government, by Numbers and Force, without Authority. Indeed the Law diftinguishes where the Rifing is of a private Nature; fuch as to deftroy a particular Inclosure, where the Parties have an Intereft, or a particular House, where the Parties pretend to own the Ground, or to take a particular Perfon out of Jail, but to let none of the reft out; this is only a Riot. Under which of thefe Denominations the Cafe now before us deferves to be claffed, requires very little Confideration, admitting the Facts to be true, as ftated.

As

As to the Privileges of the City of Dublin, they are very noble, and their Poffeffions of great Value, the Grants of different Princes to the Corporations, on condition that they should preferve Peace among his Majefty's Subjects, resident in their City, and take care to fee the Laws of the Land duly put in Execution, according to the Courfe and Order of the common Law. The Patrons of the Acquiefcence will please to confider, how ill that Acquiefcence fulfills the condition upon which the City hold their Privileges, Immunities, and valuable Poffeffions. Let it alfo be confidered, that the Jail of Newgate is the Jail of the Corporation of Dublin, under the immediate care of the Sheriffs of Dublin; the whole Corporation are answerable to the Crown for fuffering their Jail to be broke open with Impunity. But say the Patrons of the Acquiefcence, the Soldiers in the prefent cafe are likely to be more feverely punithed by a Court Martial, than by any common Law Court. I deny it. The Offence is capital at Law, and the Pu-nishment that of High Treafon. But admitting the Affertion of the Patrons of the Acquiefcence, would that be any Reason to excufe the Magiftracy of Dublin, for giving up the most valuable of their Privileges, the Trial by the common Law, and for establishing in all cafes hereafter, whether Felony, Murder, or Treafon, a Submiffion to the Trial by a Court Martial, where a Soldier is the Offender? That would be to fay, in other Words, that the Public is to fe at the Mercy of the Soldiery, and that where a Soldier robs or murders a Citizen, he is to be exempted