d imprisoned all the jurors because they convicted of _manslaughter_
a man whom he wanted to hang. But for this conduct he was accused in
the House of Commons, and brought to answer for it at their bar.[172]

[Footnote 167: Forsyth, 241, 243.]

[Footnote 168: Thomas Smith, Commonwealth, (London, 1589,) b. iii. c.
1. Hargrave, in 6 St. Tr. 1019.]

[Footnote 169: See above, p. 95. 1 St. Tr. 901; 6 St. Tr. 967, 969,
999; 21 St. Tr. 925.]

[Footnote 170: 1 St. Tr. 445.]

[Footnote 171: 6 St. Tr. 967, note; Bushell's Case, Ibid. 999, and
Hargrave's note, 1013.]

[Footnote 172: 2 Campbell, Justices, 405; 6 St. Tr. 910; Kelyng, 50; 3
Hallam, 6, note; Commons Journals, 16 Oct. 1667.]

In 1680 Chief Justice Scroggs was brought up before the House of
Commons for discharging "a refractory grand-jury"--such an one as was
discharged in Boston last July: Sir Francis Winnington said, "If the
judges instead of acting by law shall be acted by their own ambition,
and endeavor to get promotion rather by worshipping the rising sun
than doing justice, this nation will soon be reduced to a miserable
condition." "As faults committed by judges are of more dangerous
consequence than others to the public, so there do not want precedents
of severer chastisements for them than for others."[173]

[Footnote 173: 4 Parl. Hist. 1224.]

But spite of the continual attempt to destroy the value of the trial
by jury, and take from the People their ancient, sevenfold shield, the
progress of liberty is perpetual. Now and then there arose lawyers and
judges like Sir Matthew Hale, Holt, Vaughan, Somers, Camden, and
Erskine, who reached out a helping hand. Nay, politicians came up to
its defence. But the great power which has sustained and developed it
is the sturdy and unconquerable Love of individual Liberty which is
one of the most marked characteristics of the Anglo-Saxon, whether
Briton or American. The Common People of England sent Juries, as well
as regiments of Ironsides, to do battle for the Right. Gentlemen, let
us devoutly thank God for this Safeguard of Freedom, and take heed
that it suffers no detriment in our day, but serves always the Higher
Law of the Infinite God.

Now, Gentlemen of the Jury, I come to the end.

IV. OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS SPECIAL CASE, UNITED STATES VERSUS
THEODORE PARKER.

Here, Gentlemen, I shall speak of three things.

(I.) Of the Fugitive Slave Bill.

At the close of the Revolution there was a cont