Notwithstanding this, the judiciary had extended this to include constructive treason. Erskine was successful in showing that Gordon's motives had only been to defend his nation, not to harm it, and that without the intention to commit treason, no treason could be committed. The original law required the act to be treasonous in nature, not in consequence, and Gordon's crimes fell into the second category. Erskine's speech was replied to by the Solicitor General, James Mansfield, and the summing-up by Lord Mansfield was not favorable to Gordon. However, Erskine's reasoning carried the day with the jury, who found Lord George not guilty. The verdict was received with pleasure by the majority of the populace, with the principle of constructive treason "widely regarded as highly threatening and injurious to public freedoms"; as a result, juries became far less willing to convict people for constructive treason, and the government resorted to amending the Treason Act to incorporate the judicially invented concept of constructive treason into statute law. Erskine's speech, more than anything else, is considered to be the source of this acquittal; Lloyd Paul Stryker in his biography of Erskine notes that he "had held his jury spellbound-not the jury only, but the whole courtroom also. His logic, his sincerity, and his fire had driven in his close-knit arguments with hammer blows". Erskine later became Lord Chancellor in the Ministry of All the Talents and was renowned as an excellent, albeit unorthodox, advocate. Kenyon, on the other hand, became Lord Chief Justice. Gordon, the defendant in the case, had a less successful subsequent career; he was later excommunicated and sent to prison, where he died of typhoid in 1793.