There Is Nothing Absurd Or Impracticable In

As You Sometimes Swear By Him That Made You, I Conclude Your Sentiments Do Not Correspond With His, In That Which Is The Basis Of The Doctrine You Both Agree In: And This Makes It Impossible To Imagine Whence This Congruity Between You Arises. "to Grant That There Is A Supreme Intelligence Who Rules The World And Has Established Laws To Regulate The Actions Of His Creatures; And Still To Assert That Man, In A State Of Nature, May Be Considered As Perfectly Free From All Restraints Of Law And Government, Appears To A Common Understanding Altogether Irreconcilable.

Our Countrymen Have All The Folly Of The Ass And All The Passiveness Of The Sheep.

It Equally Proves, That Though Individual Oppression May Now And Then Proceed From The Courts Of Justice, The General Liberty Of The People Can Never Be Endangered From That Quarter; I Mean So Long As The Judiciary Remains Truly Distinct From Both The Legislature And The Executive. For I Agree, That "there Is No Liberty, If The Power Of Judging Be Not Separated From The Legislative And Executive Powers." And It Proves, In The Last Place, That As Liberty Can Have Nothing To Fear From The Judiciary Alone, But Would Have Every Thing To Fear From Its Union With Either Of The Other Departments.

It Is A General Principle Of Human Nature, That A Man Will Be Interested In Whatever He Possesses, In Proportion To The Firmness Or Precariousness Of The Tenure By Which He Holds It; Will Be Less Attached To What He Holds By A Momentary Or Uncertain Title, Than To What He Enjoys By A Durable Or Certain Title; And, Of Course, Will Be Willing To Risk More For The Sake Of The One, Than For The Sake Of The Other.

The Awful Discretion, Which A Court Of Impeachments Must Necessarily Have, To Doom To Honor Or To Infamy The Most Confidential And The Most Distinguished Characters Of The Community, Forbids The Commitment Of The Trust To A Small Number Of Persons.