I will show that in those days, just as there have been in our own, there were executions and scaffold-scenes which evoked popular horror and resentment—­though they were all “according to law,” and not be questioned unless by “seditionists.”  The scaffold streamed with the blood of those whom the people loved and revered—­how could they love and revere the scaffold?  Yet, ’twas all “according to law.”  The sanctuary was profaned and rifled; the priest was slain or banished—­’twas all “according to law,” no doubt, and to hold law in “disesteem” is “sedition.”  Men were convicted and executed “according to law;” yet the people demonstrated sympathy for them, and resentment against their executioners—­most perversely, as a solicitor-general, doubtless, would say.  And, indeed, the State Papers contain accounts of those demonstrations written by crown officials which sound very like the solicitor-general’s speech to-day.  Take, for instance, the execution—­“according to law”—­of the “Popish bishop” O’Hurley.  Here is the letter of a state functionary on the subject:—­

“I could not before now so impart to her Majesty as to know her mind touching the same for your lordship’s direction.  Wherefore, she having at length resolved, I have accordingly, by her commandment, to signify her Majesty’s pleasure unto you touching Hurley, which is this:—­That the man being so notorious and ill a subject, as appeareth by all the circumstances of his cause he is, you proceed, if it may be, to his execution by ordinary trial of him for it.  How be it, in case you shall find the effect of his course DOUBTFUL by reason of the affection of such as shall be on his jury, and by reason of the supposal conceived by the lawyers of that country, that he can hardly be found guilty for his treason committed in foreign parts against her Majesty.  Then her pleasure is you take A SHORTER WAY WITH HIM, by martial law.  So, as you may see, it is referred to your discretion, whether of those two ways your lordship will take with him, and the man being so resolute to reveal no more matter, it is thought best to have no FURTHER TORTURES used against him, but that you proceed FORTHWITH TO HIS EXECUTION in manner aforesaid.  As for her Majesty’s good acceptation of your careful travail in this matter of Hurley, you need nothing to doubt, and for your better assurance thereof she has commanded me to let your lordship understand that, as well as in all others the like, as in the case of Hurley, she cannot but greatly allow and commend YOUR DOINGS.”

Well, they put his feet into tin boots filled with oil, and then placed him standing in the fire.  Eventually they cut off his head, tore out his bowels, and cut the limbs from his body.  Gentlemen, ’twas all “according to law;” and to demonstrate sympathy for him and “disesteem” of that law was “sedition.”  But do you wonder greatly that law of that complexion failed to secure popular sympathy and respect?