nons. It is for their own sakes that I would | Parliament. We have a code in which every bonprevent their assuming a power which the Con- est man may find it. We have Magna Charta. stitution has denied them, lest, by grasping at We have the Statute Book, and the Bill of Rights. an authority they have no right to, they should If a case should arise unknown to these great forfeit that which they legally possess. My authorities, we have still that plain English reaLords, I affirm that they have betrayed their son left, which is the foundation of all our Enconstituents, and violated the Constitution. Un-glish jurisprudence. That reason tells us, that der pretense of declaring the law, they have made a law, and united in the same persons the office of legislator and of judge!

every judicial court, and every political society, must be vested with those powers and privileges which are necessary for performing the office to I shall endeavor to adhere strictly to the no- which they are appointed. It tells us, also, that ble Lord's doctrine, which is, indeed, impossible no court of justice can have a power inconsistent to mistake, so far as my memory will permit me with, or paramount to the known laws of the to preserve his expressions. He seems fond of land; that the people, when they choose their the word jurisdiction; and I confess, with the representatives, never mean to convey to them force and effect which he has given it, it is a a power of invading the rights, or trampling on word of copious meaning and wonderful extent. the liberties of those whom they represent. If his Lordship's doctrine be well founded, we What security would they have for their rights, must renounce all those political maxims by if once they admitted that a court of judicature which our understandings have hitherto been might determine every question that came bedirected, and even the first elements of learning fore it, not by any known positive law, but by taught in our schools when we were schoolboys. the vague, indeterminate, arbitrary rule of what My Lords, we knew that jurisdiction was noth- the noble Lord is pleased to call the wisdom of ing more than "jus dicere." We knew that "le- the court? With respect to the decision of the gem facere” and “legem dicere” [to make law courts of justice, I am far from denying them and to declare it] were powers clearly distin- their due weight and authority; yet, placing them guished from each other in the nature of things, in the most respectable view, I still consider and wisely separated by the wisdom of the En- them, not as law, but as an evidence of the law. glish Constitution. But now, it seems, we must And before they can arrive even at that degree adopt a new system of thinking! The House of authority, it must appear that they are foundof Commons, we are told, have a supreme juris- ed in and confirmed by reason; that they are diction, and there is no appeal from their sen- supported by precedents taken from good and tence; and that wherever they are competent moderate times; that they do not contradict any judges, their decision must be received and sub-positive law; that they are submitted to withmitted to, as ipso facto, the law of the land. My out reluctance by the people; that they are unLords, I am a plain man, and have been brought questioned by the Legislature (which is equivaup in a religious reverence for the original sim-lent to a tacit confirmation); and what, in my plicity of the laws of England. By what sophistry they have been perverted, by what artifices they have been involved in obscurity, is not for me to explain. The principles, however, of the English laws are still sufficiently clear; they are founded in reason, and are the masterpiece of the human understanding; but it is in the text that I would look for a direction to my judgment, not in the commentaries of modern professors. The noble Lord assures us that he knows not in what code the law of Parliament is to be found; that the House of Commons, when they act as judges, have no law to direct them but their own wisdom; that their decision is law; and if they determine wrong, the subject has no appeal but to Heaven. What then, my Lords? Are all the generous efforts of our ancestors, are all those glorious contentions, by which they meant to secure to themselves, and to transmit to their posterity, a known law, a certain rule of living, reduced to this conclusion, that instead of the arbitrary power of a King, we must submit to the arbitrary power of a House of Commons?ity was indeed declared, but his crimes are stated If this be true, what benefit do we derive from the exchange? Tyranny, my Lords, is detestable in every shape, but in none so formidable as when it is assumed and exercised by a number of tyrants. But, my Lords, this is not the fact; this is not the Constitution. We have a law of

judgment, is by far the most important, that they do not violate the spirit of the Constitution. My Lords, this is not a vague or loose expression. We all know what the Constitution is. We all know that the first principle of it is, that the subject shall not be governed by the arbitrium of any one man or body of men (less than the whole Legislature), but by certain laws, to which he has virtually given his consent, which are open to him to examine, and not beyond his ability to understand. Now, my Lords, I affirm, and am ready to maintain, that the late decision of the House of Commons upon the Middlesex election is destitute of every one of those properties and conditions which I hold to be essential to the legality of such a decision. (1.) It is not founded in reason; for it carries with it a contradiction, that the representative should perform the office of the constituent body. (2.) It is not supported by a single precedent; for the case of Sir Robert Walpole is but a half precedent, and even that half is imperfect. Incapac

as the ground of the resolution, and his opponent was declared to be not duly elected, even after his incapacity was established. (3.) It contradicts Magna Charta and the Bill of Rights, by which it is provided, that no subject shall be de prived of his freehold, unless by the judgment of

My

As

his peers, or the law of the land; and that elec-| give us for attempting to save the state. tions of members to serve in Parliament shall be Lords, I am sensible of the importance and diffifree. (4.) So far is this decision from being culty of this great crisis: at a moment such as submitted to by the people, that they have taken this, we are called upon to do our duty, without the strongest measures, and adopted the most dreading the resentment of any man. But if appositive language, to express their discontent. prehensions of this kind are to affect us, let us Whether it will be questioned by the Legisla- consider which we ought to respect most, the ture, will depend upon your Lordships' resolu- representative or the collective body of the peotion; but that it violates the spirit of the Con- ple. My Lords, five hundred gentlemen are not stitution, will, I think, be disputed by no man ten millions; and if we must have a contention, who has heard this day's debate, and who wishes let us take care to have the English nation on well to the freedom of his country. Yet, if we our side. If this question be given up, the freeare to believe the noble Lord, this great griev- holders of England are reduced to a condition ance, this manifest violation of the first princi- baser than the peasantry of Poland. If they deples of the Constitution, will not admit of a rem- sert their own cause, they deserve to be slaves! edy. It is not even capable of redress, unless My Lords, this is not merely the cold opinion of we appeal at once to Heaven! My Lords, I my understanding, but the glowing expression have better hopes of the Constitution, and a of what I feel. It is my heart that speaks. I firmer confidence in the wisdom and constitu- know I speak warmly, my Lords; but this tional authority of this House. It is to your anwarmth shall neither betray my argument nor cestors, my Lords, it is to the English barons, my temper. The kingdom is in a flame. that we are indebted for the laws and Constitu- mediators between the King and people, it is our tion we possess. Their virtues were rude and duty to represent to him the true condition and uncultivated, but they were great and sincere. temper of his subjects. It is a duty which no Their understandings were as little polished as particular respects should hinder us from pertheir manners, but they had hearts to distinguish forming; and whenever his Majesty shall deright from wrong; they had heads to distinguish mand our advice, it will then be our duty to intruth from falsehood; they understood the rights quire more minutely into the causes of the presof humanity, and they had spirit to maintain them. ent discontents. Whenever that inquiry shall My Lords, I think that history has not done come on, I pledge myself to the House to prove justice to their conduct, when they obtained from that, since the first institution of the House of their sovereign that great acknowledgment of na- Commons, not a single precedent can be protional rights contained in Magna Charta: they duced to justify their late proceedings. My nodid not confine it to themselves alone, but deliv- ble and learned friend (the Lord Chancellor ered it as a common blessing to the whole people. Camden) has pledged himself to the House that They did not say, these are the rights of the he will support that assertion. great barons, or these are the rights of the great My Lords, the character and circumstances prelates. No, my Lords, they said, in the simple of Mr. Wilkes have been very improperly introLatin of the times, "nullus liber homo" [no free duced into this question, not only here, but in man], and provided as carefully for the meanest that court of judicature where his cause was subject as for the greatest. These are uncouth tried-I mean the House of Commons. With words, and sound but poorly in the ears of schol- one party he was a patriot of the first magniars; neither are they addressed to the criticism tude; with the other, the vilest incendiary. For of scholars, but to the hearts of free men. These my own part, I consider him merely and indif three words, "nullus liber homo," have a mean-ferently as an English subject, possessed of cering which interests us all. They deserve to be tain rights which the laws have given him, and remembered they deserve to be inculcated in which the laws alone can take from him. I am our minds they are worth all the classics. Let neither moved by his private vices nor by his us not, then, degenerate from the glorious exam- public merits. In his person, though he were ple of our ancestors. Those iron barons (for so the worst of men, I contend for the safety and seI may call them when compared with the silken curity of the best. God forbid, my Lords, that barons of modern days) were the guardians of there should be a power in this country of measthe people; yet their virtues, my Lords, were uring the civil rights of the subject by his moral never engaged in a question of such importance character, or by any other rule but the fixed as the present. A breach has been made in the laws of the land! I believe, my Lords, I shall Constitution-the battlements are dismantled- not be suspected of any personal partiality to the citadel is open to the first invader-the walls this unhappy man. I am not very conversant totter-the Constitution is not tenable. What in pamphlets or newspapers; but, from what I remains, then, but for us to stand foremost in the have heard, and from the little I have read, I breach, and repair it, or perish in it? may venture to affirm, that I have had my share in the compliments which have come from that quarter.3 As for motives of ambition (for I must

Great pains have been taken to alarm us with the consequences of a difference between the two houses of Parliament; that the House of Commons will resent our presuming to take notice of their proceedings; that they will resent our daring to advise the Crown, and never for

3 Lord Chatham here refers, among others, to Junius, who had attacked him about a year before in his first letter. At a later period Junius changed

take to myself a part of the noble Duke's insin- | beg pardon, by his n.inisters-but I have sufuation), I believe, my Lords, there have been fered myself to be so too long. For some time times in which I have had the honor of standing I have beheld with silent indignation the arbiin such favor in the closet, that there must have trary measures of the minister. I have often been something extravagantly unreasonable in drooped and hung down my head in council, and my wishes if they might not all have been grat- disapproved by my looks those steps which I ified. After neglecting those opportunities, I am knew my avowed opposition could not prevent. now suspected of coming forward, in the decline I will do so no longer, but openly and boldly of life, in the anxious pursuit of wealth and pow- speak my sentiments. I now proclaim to the er which it is impossible for me to enjoy. Be it world that I entirely coincide in the opinion exso! There is one ambition, at least, which I ever pressed by my noble friend-whose presence will acknowledge, which I will not renounce but again reanimates us-respecting this unconstiwith my life. It is the ambition of delivering to tutional vote of the House of Commons. If, in my posterity those rights of freedom which I giving my opinion as a judge, I were to pay any have received from my ancestors. I am not now respect to that vote, I should look upon myself pleading the cause of an individual, but of every as a traitor to my trust, and an enemy to my freeholder in England. In what manner this country. By their violent and tyrannical conHouse may constitutionally interpose in their de- duct, ministers have alienated the minds of the fense, and what kind of redress this case will re- people from his Majesty's government—I had quire and admit of, is not at present the subject almost said from his Majesty's person-insoof our consideration. The amendment, if agreed much, that if some measures are not devised to to, will naturally lead us to such an inquiry. appease the clamors so universally prevalent, I That inquiry may, perhaps, point out the neces- know not, my Lords, whether the people, in desity of an act of the Legislature, or it may lead spair, may not become their own avengers, and us, perhaps, to desire a conference with the other take the redress of grievances into their own House; which one noble Lord affirms is the only hands." After such a speech, Lord Camden parliamentary way of proceeding, and which an- could not, of course, expect to hold office. He other noble Lord assures us the House of Com- was instantly dismissed. It was a moment of mons would either not come to, or would break extreme excitement. Lord Shelburne went so off with indignation. Leaving their Lordships far as to say in the House, "After the dismisto reconcile that matter between themselves, I sion of the present worthy Lord Chancellor, the shall only say, that before we have inquired, we seals will go begging; but I hope there will not can not be provided with materials; consequent- be found in this kingdom a wretch so base and ly, we are not at present prepared for a confer-mean-spirited as to accept them on the condi

ence.

It is not impossible, my Lords, that the inquiry I speak of may lead us to advise his Majesty to dissolve the present Parliament; nor have I any doubt of our right to give that advice, if we should think it necessary. His Majesty will then determine whether he will yield to the united petitions of the people of England, or maintain the House of Commons in the exercise of a legislative power, which heretofore abolished the House of Lords, and overturned the monarchy. I willingly acquit the present House of Commons of having actually formed so detestable a design; but they can not themselves foresee to what excesses they may be carried hereafter; and, for my own part, I should be sorry to trust to their future moderation. Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it; and this I know, my Lords, that where law ends, - tyranny begins!

tions on which they must be offered." This speech of Lord Chatham decided the fate of the Duke of Grafton. The moment a leader was found to unite the different sections of the Opposition, the attack was too severe for him to resist. The next speech will show the manner in which he was driven from power.

Lord Mansfield had a difficult part to act on this occasion. He could not but have known that the expulsion of Wilkes was illegal; and this is obvious from the fact that he did not attempt to defend it. He declared that, on this point, "he had never given his opinion, he would not now give it, and he did not know but he might carry it to the grave with him." All he contended was, that "if the Commons had passed an unjustifiable vote, it was a matter between God and their own consciences, and that nobody else had any thing to do with it." Lord Chatham rose a second time, and replied, "It plainly appears, from what the noble Lord has said, Lord Chatham's motion was rejected; but he that he concurs in sentiment with the Opposi was sustained in his views by Lord Camden, tion; for, if he had concurred with the ministry. who was still Lord Chancellor, and of course a he would no doubt have avowed his opinionleading member of the Grafton ministry. He that it now equally behooves him to avow it in came down from the woolsack, and broke forth behalf of the people. He ought to do so as an in the following indignant terms: "I accepted honest man, an independent man, as a man of the great seal without conditions; I meant not, been more fully known, that the King dictated the therefore, to be trammeled by his Majestymeasures against Wilkes. He entered with all the his ground, and published his celebrated eulogium feelings of a personal enemy into the plan of expelon Lord Chatham. ling him from the House, and was at last beaten by This hasty expression shows, what has since the determination of his own subjects.

H

courage and resolution. To say, that if the House of Commons has passed an unjustifiable vote, it is a matter between God and their own consciences, and that nobody else has any thing to do with it, is such a strange assertion as I have never before heard, and involves a doctrine subversive of the Constitution. What! If the House of Commons should pass a vote abolishing this House, and surrendering to the Crown all the rights and interests of the people, would it be only a matter between them and their conscience, and would nobody have any thing to do with it? You would have to do with

it! I should have to do with it! Every man in the kingdom would have to do with it! Every man would have a right to insist on the repeal of such a treasonable vote, and to bring the authors of it to condign punishment. I would. therefore, call on the noble Lord to declare his opinion, unless he would lie under the imputation of being conscious of the illegality of the vote, and yet of being restrained by some unworthy motive from avowing it to the world." Lord Mansfield replied not."-Gentleman's Magazine for January, 1770.

SPEECH

OF LORD CHATHAM ON A MOTION OF LORD ROCKINGHAM TO INQUIRE INTO THE STATE OF THE NATION, DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS, JANUARY 22, 1770.

INTRODUCTION.

THE preceding speech of Lord Chatham, in connection with the decisive step taken by Lord Camden, threw the Duke of Grafton and his ministry into the utmost confusion; and an adjournment of a week was resorted to, for the purpose of making new arrangements. During this time, the Marquess of Granby deserted the administration, apologizing for the vote he had given for seating Colonel Luttrell in the House. and deploring it as the greatest misfortune of his life. He resigned all his places, except his commission as Colonel. Mr. Grenville, Mr. Dunning, the Dukes of Beaufort and Manchester, the Earls of Coventry and Huntington, and a number of others, followed his example. A reconciliation took place between Lord Chatham and Lord Rockingham, and the Opposition was completely organized under their guidance. It was decided to follow up the blow at once, by a motion from Lord Rockingham for an "inquiry into the state of the nation," which allows the utmost latitude for examining into the conduct of a minister. Ac cordingly, Lord Rockingham moved such an inquiry, almost immediately after the Lords again met. In supporting this motion, he maintained, that the existing discontents did not spring from any immediate temporary cause, but from a maxim which had grown up by degrees from the accession of George III., viz., "that the royal prerogative was sufficient to support the government, whatever might be the hands to which the administration was committed." He exposed this Tory principle as fatal to the liberties of the people. The Duke of Grafton followed in a few explanatory remarks; and Lord Chatham then delivered the following speech, which contains some passages of remarkable boldness and even vehemence.

SPEECH, &c.'

MY LORDS, I meant to have arisen immediately to second the motion made by the noble Lord [Rockingham]. The charge which the noble Duke [Grafton] seemed to think affected himself particularly, did undoubtedly demand an early answer. It was proper he should speak before me, and I am as ready as any man to applaud the decency and propriety with which he has expressed himself.

I entirely agree with the noble Lord, both in the necessity of your Lordships' concurring with the motion, and in the principles and arguments by which he has very judiciously supported it. I see clearly that the complexion of our government has been materially altered; and I can trace the origin of the alteration up to a period

This is the topic so powerfully discussed in Mr. Burke's pamphlet, entitled, "Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontents," one of the most ingenious and able productions of that great writer.

2 This speech, like the last, was reported at the time by a gentleman, who is now ascertained to have been Sir Philip Francis.

which ought to have been an era of happiness and prosperity to this country.3

My Lords, I shall give you my reasons for concurring with the motion, not methodically. but as they occur to my mind. I may wander, perhaps, from the exact parliamentary debate, but I hope I shall say nothing but what may deserve your attention, and what, if not strictly proper at present, would be fit to be said when the state of the nation shall come to be considered. My uncertain state of health must plead my excuse. I am now in some pain, and very probably may not be able to attend to my duty when I desire it most, in this House. I thank

3 When George III. came to the throne, England was in the midst of that splendid career of victories by which Lord Chatham humbled the enemies of his country, and established her power in every quarter of the globe. The peace which was made two years after, under the influence of Lord Bute, was generally considered a disgrace to the nation, and from that time dissatisfaction began to prevail in all classes of society.

God, my Lords, for having thus long preserved so inconsiderable a being as I am, to take a part upon this great occasion, and to contribute my endeavors, such as they are, to restore, to save, to confirm the Constitution.

ances.

|

My Lords, I can not agree with the noble Duke, that nothing less than an immediate attack upon the honor or interest of this nation can authorize us to interpose in defense of weaker states, and in stopping the enterprises of an ambitious neighbor. Whenever that narrow, selfish policy has prevailed in our councils, we have constantly experienced the fatal effects of it. By suffering our natural enemies to oppress the powers less able than we are to make resistance, we have permitted them to increase their strength, we have lost the most favorable oppor

My Lords, I need not look abroad for grievThe grand capital mischief is fixed at home. It corrupts the very foundation of our political existence, and preys upon the vitals of the state. The Constitution has been grossly violated. The Constitution at this moment stands violated. Until that wound be healed, until the grievance be redressed, it is in vain to recom-tunities of opposing them with success, and found mend union to Parliament, in vain to promote ourselves at last obliged to run every hazard in concord among the people. If we mean seri- making that cause our own, in which we were ously to unite the nation within itself, we must not wise enough to take part while the expense convince them that their complaints are regard- and danger might have been supported by othed, that their injuries shall be redressed. On ers. With respect to Corsica, I shall only say, that foundation I would take the lead in recom- that France has obtained a more useful and immending peace and harmony to the people. On portant acquisition in one pacific campaign than any other, I would never wish to see them united in any of her belligerent campaigns-at least again. If the breach in the Constitution be effect- while I had the honor of administering war ually repaired, the people will of themselves re- against her. The word may, perhaps, be thought turn to a state of tranquillity; if not, may dis- singular. I mean only while I was the miniscord prevail forever. I know to what point this ter chiefly intrusted with the conduct of the war. doctrine and this language will appear directed. I remember, my Lords, the time when Lorraine But I feel the principles of an Englishman, and was united to the crown of France. That, too, I utter them without apprehension or reserve. was in some measure a pacific conquest; and The crisis is indeed alarming. So much the there were people who talked of it as the noble more does it require a prudent relaxation on the Duke now speaks of Corsica. France was perpart of government. If the King's servants will mitted to take and keep possession of a noble not permit a constitutional question to be decided province; and, according to his grace's ideas, on according to the forms and on the principles we did right in not opposing it. The effect of of the Constitution, it must then be decided in these acquisitions is, I confess, not immediate ; some other manner; and, rather than it should but they unite with the main body by degrees, be given up, rather than the nation should sur- and, in time, make a part of the national strength. render their birthright to a despotic minister, II fear, my Lords, it is too much the temper of hope, my Lords, old as I am, I shall see the question brought to issue, and fairly tried between the people and the government. My Lord, this is not the language of faction. Let it be tried by that criterion by which alone we can distinguish what is factious from what is not-by the principles of the English Constitution. I have been bred up in these principles, and know, that when the liberty of the subject is invaded, and all redress denied him, resistance is justified. If I had a doubt upon the matter, I should follow the example set us by the most reverend bench, with whom I believe it is a maxim, when any doubt in point of faith arises, or any question of controversy is started, to appeal at once to the greatest source and evidence of our religion-I mean the Holy Bible. The Constitution has its Political Bible, by which, if it be fairly consulted, every political question may, and ought to be determined. Magna Charta, the Petition of Rights, and the Bill of Rights, form that code which I call the Bible of the English Constitution. Had some of his Majesty's unhappy predecessors trusted less to the comments of their ministers; had they been better read in the text itself, the glorious revolution would have remained only possible in theory, and would not now have existed upon record a formidable example to their successors.

this country to be insensible of the approach of danger, until it comes with accumulated terror upon us.

My Lords, the condition of his Majesty's affairs in Ireland, and the state of that kingdom within itself, will undoubtedly make a very material part of your Lordship's inquiry. I am not sufficiently informed to enter into the subject so fully as I could wish; but by what appears to the public, and from my own observation, I confess I can not give the ministry much credit for the spirit or prudence of their conduct. I see that even where their measures are well chosen, they are incapable of carrying them through without some unhappy mixture of weakness or imprudence. They are incapable of doing entirely right. My Lords, I do, from my conscience, and from the best weighed principles of my understanding, applaud the augmentation of the army. As a military plan, I believe it has been judiciously arranged. In a political

In the year 1768, France, under pretense of a transfer from the Genoese (who claimed the island), had seized upon Corsica. General Paoli made a brave resistance, but was overpowered, and fled to England, where his presence excited a lively interest in the oppressed Corsicans. Lord Chatham maintained that France ought to have been resisted in this shameful act of aggression.