right of resistance is in
the people, as the people have a power superior to the prerogative of
the prince, though no written or express law for it; so of necessity
though no statute directs it, and it may seem to overturn the greatest
security men have for their liberties, yet the court has a power of
dissolving grand juries, if they refuse to find or present as the court
shall direct."

Pray let us consider how well this concludes.

The people may do anything in defence of their lives, their religion and
liberties, and consequently resistance is lawful, therefore an inferior
court a _bene placito_ judge may----Monstrous absurdity.

Another, I am sorry I can't say more modest argument to support it is
this.--

"Considering," say they, "grand juries, it is but reasonable a
discretionary power of dissolving them should be lodged in the judges."

By the words "considering grand juries," I must understand considering
their understandings, their fortunes or their integrity, for from a want
of one or more of those qualifications must arise the reason of such a
discretionary power in the judges.

Though I shall not urge it as far as I could, I will venture to say the
argument is at least as strong the other way--considering the judges.--

First as to their understandings, it must be confessed the benches are
infinitely superior to the lower professors of the law: Yet surely it
can't give offence to say the gentlemen of the several counties have
understandings sufficient to discharge the duty of grand jurymen--If
want of fortune be an objection to grand jurymen, _a pari ratione_, it
is an objection to some other men.--Besides, that the fact is not true,
for in their circuits, no judge goes into any county where he does not
meet at least a dozen gentlemen returned upon every grand jury, every
one of whom have better estates than he himself has--And these not
during pleasure, which last consideration, saves me the trouble of
shewing the weakness of the objection in the third qualification.

"Ay. But it was a necessary expedient to keep out Wood's brass."

Are the properties of the commons of this kingdom better secured by the
knight-errantry of that day? In the name of common sense, what are we to
believe? Has the undaunted spirit, the tremendous voice of ------
frightened Wood and his accomplices from any further attempts? Or rather
has not the ready compliance of ------ encouraged them to further
trials? The officer