4 o HISTORY OF GREAT BRITAIN

C H A I'LXIX.

there remained a difficulty, and that of an import-ant nature.

The English laws of treason, both in themanner of defining that crime, and in the proofrequired, are the mildest and most indulgent,and consequently the most equitable, that areany where to be found. The two chief speciesof treason, contained in the statute of Edward III,are the compassing and intending of the king’sdeath, and the actually levying of war againsthim ; and by the law of Alary, the crime mustbe proved by the concurring testimony of twowitnesses, to some overt act, tending to thesepurposes. But the lawyers, partly desirous ofpaymg court to the sovereign, partly convincedof ill consequences, which might attend suchnarrow limitations, had introduced a greater la-titude, both in the proof and definition of thecrime. It was not required , that the two wit-nesses should testily the same precise overt act :It was sufficient, that they both testified someovert act of the same treason ; and though thisevasion may seem a fubtilty , it had long pre-vailed in the courts of judicature, and had atlast been solemnly fixed by parliament at the trialof lord Stafford. The lawyers had used the samefreedom with the law of Edward III. They hadobserved, that, by that statute, if a man shouldenter into a conspiracy for a rebellion , shouldeven fix a correspondence with foreign powersfor that purpose, should provide arms and money,yet, if he were detected and no rebellion ensued,