A 
 
 LETTER 
 
 FROM A 
 
 MEMBER of PARLIAMENT 
 
 T O 
 
 ONE of his CONSTITUENTS, 
 
 ON THE 
 
 Late Proceedings of the Houfe of Commons 
 in the Middlefex Elections. 
 
 WITH A 
 
 POSTSCRIPT, 
 
 CONTAINING 
 
 Some OBSERVATIONS on a Pamphlet entitled, 
 " The Cafe of the late Eledion for the County of 
 " Middlefex ccnfidered." 
 
 Thus to repuiate Candidates and Ele&ors, and new-mo- 
 del the Way of Election, What is it but to cut up the 
 Government by the Roots, and poifon the very Foun- 
 tain of Public Security ? 
 
 Locke en Civil Government. 
 
 l *-.-;i'.T-* -t-::^~ i.r 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 Printed for M. Hingeston, in the Strand, 
 re^r Temple-Bar. 
 MDCCLXIX. ,
 
 -J \ ^ 
 
 
 LETTER, &c. 
 
 Z3 
 
 5 I R> 
 
 fT""^ H E conftitutional Manner in which I 
 received, and mean to hold, my Seat 
 in Parliament, makes me think myfelf 
 obliged to render an Account of mv Conduct 
 in every Public Meafure, which may materi- 
 ally afTecT: their Intereft, to my Conftituents. 
 However fafhionable it may be for thofe to 
 treat lightly this Duty, who either do not, 
 from the Manner in which they procured 
 their Seats, feel its Force j or are afhamed of 
 not having in their ConducT: fince, fubmitted 
 to its Influence ; I do not think I can be ac- 
 
 B cufed
 
 ( 2 ) 
 
 cufed of carrying the Idea too far when I fay, 
 Though I may think myfelf at liberty, in 
 great national Meafures, to follow my own 
 Judgment iolely, and to be influenced only 
 by thofe Arguments which are brought 
 in Parliament ; yet in Queftions of internal 
 Polity, where the Intered of the particular 
 Place I reprefent may be concerned, or in 
 Queftions affecting the fubftantid Rights or 
 Privileges of every individual Ekclor or 
 Freeman in this Kingdom, I mould think 
 myfelf bound to obey implicitly the Inftruc- 
 tions of thofe who lent me, had they given 
 me any : And if from a Confidence in my 
 Zeal for, and Attention to,- the Prefervation 
 of their Liberties, they have not thought it 
 neceffary to give me any particular Direc- 
 tions, I do not hold myfelf the lefs bound to 
 oive them an Account of the Steps I have 
 taken towards the faithful Difcharge of fo 
 honourable, fo important, lb unlimited a 
 Truft. 
 
 I think myfelf at this Time particularly 
 obliged to give you an Account of my Con- 
 duct in the late Proceedings of theHoufe of 
 
 Com-
 
 ( 3 ) 
 
 Commons upon the Middlefex Eledions ; 
 not only becaufe they are, in my Opinion, 
 Queftions which affect the fiibftantial Rights 
 and Privileges of every individual Eleclor 
 and Freeman in this Kingdom ; but becaufe, 
 fituated as you are at a Diftance remote 
 from the Capital, you may have been in- 
 duced, by News-Paper Writings, to. look 
 upon the firft Foundation of thefe Difputes 
 to be the Cafe of a turbulent and diflrejfed 
 Man of bad Character, taken up by fome 
 d'fappointed State/men and difcarded Courtiers 
 to ferve their own Purpofes, by availing 
 themfelves of the Clamour of a deluded Rab- 
 ble to difturb and dijlrefi the Councils of an 
 infulted Prince. To clear myfelf, therefore, 
 from the Sufpicion of having countenanced 
 Sedition, and promoted the Views of Fac- 
 tion, by diftreffing that Government which 
 I let out with an Intention to fupport, as 
 far as I could confidently with the Feel- 
 ings of an honed, and tne Character of an 
 independant Man, will be the Object of this 
 Letter. 
 
 B 2 Having
 
 ( 4 ) 
 
 Having had the Fortune (whether good or 
 bad you mull: determine) to differ in every 
 one of thole Meafures from the Majority of 
 thofe Members of the Houfe who were pre- 
 fent, I will candidly lay before you, as far 
 as I am able, the Hiftory of the whole 
 Tranfaclion, the Reafons urged why the 
 Houfe fhould take thofe Steps, and the Con- 
 siderations that weighed with me to oppcfe 
 them. 
 
 It was not till many Months after Mr, 
 Wilkes's Election that a Motion was made 
 for his Expulfion. The Truth is, he would 
 probably have been fuffered quietly to take 
 his Seat, at the Expiration of his Confine- 
 ment, notwithjianding bis previous Crimes, 
 had lie not given frefh Offence to the Mi- 
 niftry by a Petition prefented to the Houfe, 
 complaining of Grievances, and a libellous 
 Preface to an official Letter of Lord Wey- 
 mouth'?, pubiifhed in the News-Papers. I 
 nted in this Affertion by the Expul- 
 
 am warran 
 
 j-icn iiavm.T hc.t 
 
 'is 
 
 ;n io long delayed, though two 
 Crimes, mentioned in the Votes as 
 
 the
 
 ( 5 ) 
 
 the Foundation of that Refolution, were 
 notorious previous to his Election, and what 
 he was actually fuffering Imprifonment for 
 at the Time of the Meeting of Parliament ; 
 and the other was the very Libel I have juffc 
 mentioned, which was deemed fo a Short 
 Time before in the Houfe, probably to ferve 
 in Part this Purpofe. But, without entering 
 into this Argument, or considering the Pro- 
 priety of making the Houfe of Commons 
 the Inftruments of ministerial Refentment, 
 and a Seat in Parliament the Reward of quiet 
 Submiffion to unconstitutional Perfecutions ; 
 I will State to you the Merits of the Petition, 
 as they appeared upon the Face of the Pro- 
 ceedings. 
 
 It was urged, That a Man guilty, and con- 
 victed, of fuch Crimes was unfit to be a Re- 
 prefentative of the People : That it was in- 
 continent with the Dignity of fo great an Af r 
 fembly as the Houfe of Commons, to Suf- 
 fer fuch a Man to remain amongSt them : 
 That a cenforial Authority muft necefiarily 
 refide fomewhere 3 and could no where . be So 
 
 properly
 
 ( 6 ) 
 
 properly fituated in this Conftitution, as in 
 the Houfe of Commons. 
 
 It was urged on the other hand, That 
 the very Principles of our Government did 
 Hot admit of two Puni foments for the 
 fame Crime : That Mr. Wilkes had al- 
 ready been expelled for one of thefe Crimes : 
 That for another he was condemned by 
 the known Laws of the Land to fuffer 
 Imprifonment : That the third being a Libel 
 upon one Minifter only, it might be of 
 dangerous Confequence to make a Prece- 
 dent of Expuliion from that AfTembly for 
 having too freely cenfured the official Con- 
 duct of a fingle Minifcer ; and, above all, it 
 was infifted upon ; That a Charge of an ac- 
 cumulative Nature was new, and unjuft, as 
 it might fo happen, that though * a Majo- 
 rity might acquit him upon each of thofe 
 Crimes, yet accumulated Minorities might 
 make a Majority upon the Whole to coni 
 demn. 
 
 •• Vide Lords Froteft m Eacheverel's Cafe.
 
 ( 7 ) 
 
 As all thefe Arguments, and, indeed, all 
 the others that were ufed, feemed to depend 
 upon the Circumftances of this particular 
 Cafe, it may not be improper for me to exa- 
 mine it upon more general Principles. 
 
 The Houfe have undoubtedly a Right to 
 expel 5 but it by no means follows, that 
 they did right when tbu:y exercifed it upon 
 this Occafion. There mull: be a fupreme 
 uncontroulable Power in all Governments 
 lodged fome where ; but to fay that Power 
 cannot be abufed, and perverted to Purpofes 
 very different from thofe for which it was 
 at firit intended, would be to fay, thofe to 
 whom it was intruded were more than Men ; 
 and to deny that there has been an Abufe in 
 fome Inftancc of every Power that has ever 
 been delegated, would be to difpute the Evi- 
 dence of all Hifiory. The firft Exercife we 
 find upon Record of the Power of Expulfion 
 was in Queen Elizabeth's Reign. From that 
 Time till the prefent it has never been em- 
 ployed but .againil Perfons who have been 
 found guilty of Crimes which the Electors, 
 at the Time of their Choice, might not be 
 
 fup-
 
 ( 8 ) 
 
 fiippofed to know *j or Members who have 
 mifbehaved in the Houfe. 
 
 In the nrft Cafe, nothing can be more rea- 
 fonable or lefs dangerous to the Privileges 
 of the Electors than to fend back to them a 
 Man in whom they may have been deceived, 
 to be afTured, that, fo circumftanced, he is 
 the Man of their Choice. 
 
 The Neceffity of fuch a Power in the 
 Houfe of Commons in the fecond Cafe, pro- 
 ceeds from two Principles ; the one abfo- 
 lutely neceflary to all well-ordered Govern- 
 
 * This Is the Doctrine exprefsly laid down in the 
 Cafe of Fitzherbert in D'Ewes's Journal. Multa funt 
 qua fieri nan debent, qua t amen fad a tenentur lor.a. It had 
 been a good Exception againft his Election to fay he was 
 out-lawed, but 'tis no Difability to him being eleclei. Mr. 
 Tanfield fpeaking, held that a Perfon outlawed might be 
 a Burgefs of the Houfe, wherein be made a Difference 
 where Exceptions grew upon Matter before the Election, 
 end where after. If the Exception grew after, then a 
 Burgefs not to be one of the Houfe. Upon thefe Rea- 
 fons Mr. Fitzherbert was allowed to fit ; the Outlawry 
 being prfvious to his Election. 
 
 ment? ?
 
 ( 9 ) 
 
 ments, That there mould he no Crime for 
 which there is not a Tribunal and a Punifh- 
 ment ; the other peculiar to the Form of 
 our Conftitution, and eifential to the Free- 
 dom and Exiftence of Parliaments, That no 
 Man mould be queftioned elfewhere for 
 what he does in Parliament. 
 
 It would be taking up your Time very un- 
 neceffarily to prove, that none of the three 
 Crimes laid to Mr. Wilkes's Account came 
 within this Defcription. The two firft were 
 notorious before his Election, he having been 
 found guilty of them by Juries of the very County 
 for which he was chofen ; the third w T as cer- 
 tainly neither an Offence againft Parliament, 
 nor committed in Parliament. For thefe 
 Reafons, and many cthe.s, which it would 
 be tedious to mention, I, with many others, 
 thought Mr. Wilkes mould not have been 
 expelled. Dis aliter vijwh : The contrary 
 Reafoning prevailed with the Majority, and 
 the Expuliicn took Place. 
 
 Had Mr. Wilkes been chofen for any petty 
 or venal Borough, the Conteil would proba- 
 
 C bly
 
 ( 1° ) 
 
 bly have ended here ; the diftrefTed Circum* 
 ftances of the Perfon concerned, the Inequa- 
 lity of the Conteft between any Individual' 
 and a Board of Treafury determined to carry 
 their Point, would have made the Attempt 
 defperatej and the Defeat certain : But the 
 Miniftry had not fo advantageous a Field of 
 Battle. The Freeholders of Middlefex (whe- 
 ther actuated by a Spirit of flubborn Faction, 
 or the laudable Refolution of firmly fupport- 
 ing every Tittle of what they thought their 
 inherent indefeafible Rights, it is not to my 
 prefent Purpcfe to examine) returned Mr. 
 Wilkes with all his Imperfections on his 
 Head. lie went to them branded with a 
 contested Expuldcn ; they fent him back ho- 
 noured with an unanimous Re-electiono 
 Should he be received ? The Honour, the 
 Firmnefs, perhr ps the Pride of Administration 
 forbad it. It would have been in vain that 
 they had made an odious Exertion of a Legal 
 Power, if the End could be fo eaflly fruf- 
 tratcd by the Voice of the Middlefex Free- 
 holders. Mr. Wilkes was, at all Events, to 
 be excluded. No Price was thought too great 
 for a Victory which was to eftablifh their 
 
 Power,
 
 ( II ) 
 
 Power, and proclaim their Triumph.- . 
 
 The Way to do it effectually was the only 
 Difficulty. 
 
 And here we come to a melancholy Proof 
 •in Public, of what we often fee in Private 
 Life, that the original Crime is feldom fo 
 great as thofe which an Attempt to conceal 
 or fupport it brings on. Like thofe Women 
 who commit Murder to avoid the Shame of 
 Fornication, the Miniftry, that they might not 
 appear to point all their Proceedings to Mr. 
 Wilkes's Cafe, dared to innovate the Cuflomof 
 Parliament, and to depart from the only Pre- 
 cedent of Incapacity upon Re-election (that of 
 Sir Robert Walpole, who was declared to be 
 incapable, having been expelled for notorious 
 Corruption and Mifapplication of Public Mo- 
 ney,) by declaring limply, " That Mr. Wilkes 
 having been expelled, was and is incapable f 
 making, for the firft Time, Expuliion ex 
 Vi Termini to include Incapacity. The Free- 
 holders of Middlesex were fent once more to 
 an Election, which ended in an unanimous 
 Return of Mr. Wilkes the third Time. 
 
 C 2 Upon
 
 ( " ) 
 
 Upon the Return being called for, no Op-* 
 pofition was made to declaring the Election 
 void, every Body allowing that the Refolution 
 of the Houfe was binding upon itfelf t for the 
 Remainder of the Seffion. An unfuccefsfql 
 Attempt was, indeed, made to prevent the if- 
 fuing a New Writ by thole whom the Minif- 
 try and their Friends have called factions ; that 
 the County of Middlefex might have Time 
 to cool befcre the next Seffion, and confider 
 whether they could not fix upon lb me Perfon 
 as worthy of their Confidence as Mr. Wilkes, 
 and might not chufe to drop a Conteft with 
 the Houfe of Commons, in which a Point fo 
 eflential to the Liberties of all the Freehold- 
 ers in the Kingdom feemed to be in Danger of 
 an adverfe Decifion 5 and that the Members 
 of the Houfe might have Time to confult 
 their Conftituents during the Summer Recefs > 
 and to fee how far the late Proceedings had 
 alarmed the Fears, or met with the Approba- 
 tion of the People ; whofe Opinions are by 
 no means to be flighted in Points that ailed 
 their Liberties *. Indeed, I will go fo far a. 
 
 The Wee of the People in Things of their Know ■ 
 c h faid :o he - :■ :.hat o' God, Gomw, Apol, Ujam. I. 
 
 tc
 
 ( 13 ) 
 
 to fay, in a free Country they are entitled 
 from their Reprefentatives and Governors to 
 a Sacrifice of Speculative Opinions, even if 
 juft, to violent Prejudices in Favour of what 
 they think, tho' miftakcnly, their Liberties. 
 In this I would not be underftood to fpeak a 
 Language by any means necelTary to fupport 
 the prefent Caufe, or merely my own Senti- 
 ments, but thofe of former great Minifters,who 
 in the Inftances of the Jew and Exciie Bills, 
 did not tell the People, that they were bound 
 by, and mud fubmit to, the Decifions of the 
 .whole Legiilature j but wifely, greatly, and 
 conftitutionally made a Sacrifice of a new Law 
 to an old Prejudice j preferring the Hearts to 
 the Purfes of the People ; and thinking the 
 Satisfaction of old Subjects of more Impor- 
 tance than the Acquifiiion of new ones. If 
 the former Proceedings were approved of, the 
 Miniftry would have returned ftrengthened by 
 the Concurrence of the reft of the Kingdom 
 againft the fingle County of Middlefex. If, 
 on the other Hand, they were generally dis- 
 approved of, they would have found them- 
 felves at liberty by the Orders of the Houfe 
 to refcind their former Refolutions, and follow 
 
 the
 
 ( 14 ) 
 
 the Example of their PredecefTors, by prefer- 
 ring the Affection to the Obedience of the 
 People. 
 
 Unfortunately it appeared, upon this Occa- 
 flon, that whatever may be the Virtues and Ac- 
 quisitions of Adminiftration, Moderation and 
 Popularity are not to be reckoned amcngfl 
 them. To have flopped here, would have had 
 the Appearance of paying feme Attention to the 
 Cries of the People, which were to be ftifled, 
 not foothed ; and like the Roman Generals, 
 they thought themfelves not entitled to tri- 
 umph till the conquered People had palled 
 under the Yoke. The New Writ was iffucd $ 
 and, to prevent a Repetition of the fame 
 Scene of Free Election in the County of Mid- 
 dlefex, and Incapacity in the Houfe of Com- 
 mons, Col. Luttrell, a young Man, Member 
 for a Cornifh Borough, an Officer in the Ar- 
 my, Heir to a good Fortune in England 
 and Ireland, was induced to vacate a Seat 
 which he held by a Constitutional Election, 
 to Hand for a County, in which he had nei- 
 ther Property nor Popularity, and could by no 
 means procure a Majority. The Return was 
 
 again
 
 ( is ) 
 
 again in Favour of Mr. Wilkes ; the Ele&ioa 
 was aaain declared void. 
 
 So far the Con ten: had beer, a melancholy 
 one between a Part of the Electors, and the 
 Body of the Electej; flill if the Houfe of 
 Commons was wrong, it was only the Op- 
 preffion of one County, by depriving them for 
 a Time of a Part of their Share in the Repre- 
 fentative Body : I fay for a Time* becaufe the 
 Refolutions of an Houfe of Parliament are 
 only binding for one Seffion : But when a 
 Motion was made by a Gentleman in Admi- 
 niftration to admit Col. Luttrell, with a 
 great Minority, as the Sitting Member, a 
 new, a more fericus, and more alarming 
 Scene opened upon us. Jt was no longer a 
 fpeculative or temporary Injury to one Sett of 
 Electors, but an actual Violation of the Rights 
 of every Elector in the Kingdom, that be- 
 came the Subject of" the Debate. Such is the 
 Excellence of our Constitution,, that its 
 Strength appears to increaie in Proportion to 
 the Danger of the Attack. A fingle trivial 
 Outwo'k ma" fometimes be furpriied without 
 much Difficulty; but whenever the grand.
 
 ( i6 ) 
 
 Citadel is to be attacked, the Fortifications 
 are found fo ftrong, as to have made every 
 Attack hitherto end in the Deftruction cf the 
 AfTailants. I wifh I may be miftaken when I 
 fay, I fear they were all upon this Occafiony 
 taken by one Coup de Main. — 
 
 To juftify this Proceeding, it was necefiary that 
 the Houfe mould have a Power to create Inca- 
 pacity — That Expulfion ex Vi Termini mould 
 convey Incapacity — That the Law and Cuftom 
 of Parliament mould be equal to the Law of the 
 Land— That a fingleRefolution of one Houfe of 
 Parliament mould be that Law of Parliament — - 
 That a fin de Precedent fliould be that Cuftom 
 of Parliament — and laftly, That there mould 
 be fuch a Precedent. — A Failure in any one 
 of thefe Cafes made the voting a Man in upon 
 a Minority illegal and unjuft. What then muft 
 we think of the Attempt, if no one of thefe 
 Claims is warranted by the Law of Parliament ? 
 
 To prfcve that Expulfion ex Vi Termini 
 does not induce Incapacity, there needs but 
 a very flight Infpeclion into the Journals of 
 the Houfe of Common?, as it will be found
 
 ( *7 ) 
 
 there, that, wherever they thought a Per- 
 fon incapable, they always declared their 
 Opinion (for I think I "(hall prove it was 
 no more) in exprefs Terms ; as in the 
 Cafe of Arthur Hall, which is as follows : 
 
 cc Anrio 23 Eliz. 1580, Mr. Arthur Hall, 
 cc Burgefs for Grantham, for writing a 
 " Book derogatory to the Authority, Pow- 
 * c er, and State, of the Commons Houfe 
 <c of Parliament, had Judgment Nemine 
 cc contradicente, 1. To be imprifoned in 
 <£ the Tower for Six Months, and from 
 c< thence till he had made a Retractation 
 <£ of his Book. 2. To be fevered and cut 
 " off from being a Member of that or any 
 " future Parliament. 3. A Fine of Five 
 " Hundred Marks to the Queen. 4. His 
 " Book and flanderous Libel adjudged utr 
 " terly falfe and erroneous." 
 
 In the 27th of Eliz. Doctor Parry was 
 dlfabled to be anv longer a Member of the 
 Houie, and a Warrant directed for chufing 
 another Member in his Stead, 
 
 D Sir
 
 ( i8 ) 
 
 Sir Chriftopher Pigot was expelled the 
 Houfe for abufing the Scotch, and com- 
 mitted to the Tower. A Motion after- 
 wards was made that he fhould be reftored. 
 
 Nov. 2, 1641 s , Mr. Benfon having 
 granted Protections to feveral Perfons who 
 were not his menial Servants, and having 
 done this with corrupt Intentions, was ex^ 
 pelled, and declared unfit and incapable 
 ever to fit in Parliament, or be a Member 
 of that Houfe hereafter. 
 
 By thefe Examples it appears, that 
 where the Houfe meant to declare their 
 Opinion of the Unworthinefs of a Member, 
 they did it in exprefs Terms : That in 
 other Cafes Members expelled were ac- 
 tually re-admitted ; confequently, that they 
 never underftood the Penalty of Incapacity 
 to attend the Sentence of Expulfion. 
 
 To prove that Expulfion ex Vi termini 
 does create Incapacity, they have recourfe 
 to the Cuitom of Parliament, which is a 
 Part of the Common Law -, and to prove 
 
 this
 
 ( *9 ) 
 
 this Cuflom, they bring one Precedent. 
 1 will, therefore, examine how far Cuflom 
 is a Part of the Common Law, the Force 
 of Precedent in making that Cuflom, and 
 how far the Precedent quoted will anfwer 
 that End. 
 
 The very Word Cuflom fignifies fre- 
 quent Repetition of the fame A£t ; and it 
 derives its Authority in the Common Law 
 from a Prefumption, that whatever has 
 been repeatedly and uninterruptedly prac- 
 tifed for a long Continuance of Time, 
 muft have been jufl in its Origin, and 
 found convenient in the Exercife. Lord 
 Kale, in his Hiltory of the Common Law, 
 fpeaking of that Part of it which is found- 
 ed upon Cuflom, fays, " The Common Law 
 " gives to thole Cufloms that it adjudges 
 41 reasonable, the Force and Efficacy of 
 * c their Obligation, The Common Law 
 " determines what is that Continuance of 
 £t Time which is fufficient to make fuch a 
 <c Cuflom. The Common Law does au- 
 " thoritativcly decide the Expofition, Li- 
 ** .nuts, and Extenfion, of fuch Cufloms. 
 fl This Common Law, though the Ufage, 
 L> 2 " Practice,
 
 ( r 20 ) 
 
 * £ TM&ce, 'and Decifions of the Kind's 
 "Courts of Juftice may expound and 
 <p 'evidence it, and be of great Uie to il- 
 " luftrate and explain it ; yet it cannot 
 < f be authoritatively altered but by Act of 
 " Parliament." Hales Hift. of the Com- 
 mon LaWy Page 26. 
 
 By this it appears to be neceflary for a 
 Cuftom, before it can carry with it the 
 Force of Law, to be reafonable, and to 
 have that Continuance of Time which is fuf- 
 ficient to make fuch a Cuftom ; by which 
 it is plain, that fome Continuance is necef- 
 fary, and that a fingle Acl cannot, there- 
 fore, be called Cuftom. This is the Dec- 
 trine plainly laid down at Common Law, 
 as it is obferved in Weftminfter-Hall. It 
 remains to enquire, Whether the Cuftom 
 of Parliament is to be judged of by the 
 fame Rule ? I will, therefore, ftate to you 
 what have been the Opinions of able Men 
 in Parliament upon what is neceflary to 
 make that Cuftom of Parliament which is 
 the Law of Parliament. 
 
 In D'Ewes's Journal, Page 638, it is 
 ;aid, " Ratio Legis is Anima Leg\s, and 
 
 "he
 
 ( *1 ) 
 
 tc he that pre-fents" a Precedent without a 
 " Reafon, prefentsa Body without a Soul." 
 The great Lord Cowper, in the Cafe of 
 Afhby and White, fays, <c Law depending 
 tf on Cuftom certainly confifts not in, and 
 <£ is not to be made out by, one Act, but 
 " by often reiterated Acts. The Law and 
 " Cuftom of Parliament, as we conceive, 
 " is to be determined by fondant Courfe 
 " and Practice, and not one Precedent." 
 Lords P ret eft in Sache-verel's Cafe, 
 
 The Ufe of Precedents in Parliamentary 
 Proceedings is not to promote but check 
 Innovation, by warning the Houfe (which 
 certainly has a Right to do many Things 
 for which there are no Precedents, or elfe 
 Precedents could never have exifled) to be 
 extremely cautious, and maturely to con- 
 fider the Expediency of any Step which 
 their Anceflors have never found it necef- 
 iary to take before (if there be no Prece- 
 dent) ; or to cpnfider the Reafon and Suc- 
 cefs of the former Precedent (if there be 
 any), to fee if their Cafes are exactly fi- 
 milar, and the Event likely to be what is 
 
 defired.
 
 .( 22 ) 
 
 dcfirecL It is not till after reiterated A&s 
 and long Experience of the Advantages of 
 a particular Mode of Proceeding, that the 
 Reafons on which it is founded are to be 
 taken for granted. To fuppofe that every 
 Thing is to be done for which there is A a 
 Precedent, and Nothing for which there is 
 not one, would be to adopt an Idea in- 
 compatible with that of the Exigence of 
 a Legiflative Body; and to give to a fmgle 
 Precedent an Authority equal to that of 
 Cuftom, founded upon frequent Repetition 
 of the fame Ad', would be to deftroy the 
 Effect of that excellent Rule, calculated 
 to fecure our Conftitution from the Dan- 
 ger of hafty Innovation. A fmgle Prece- 
 dent, therefore, in the bell Times, form- 
 ed upon the mofj equitable Principles, can 
 have no Weight whatfoever but from the 
 Goodnefs of the Reafons upon which it 
 is founded, and the exacl: Similarity of the 
 Cafe from which it arifes, to that to which 
 it is to be applied. The very word: Pre- 
 cedents of the moil violent Times will do 
 to prove beyond what we ought certainly 
 not to ?o in a like Occafion ; the very re- 
 
 curring
 
 ( *3 1 
 
 earring to Precedent implying a Repug- 
 nancy to Alteration, and barring a Pofiibi- 
 lity of exceeding it ; fince the Moment 
 it is exceeded, it ceafes to be the Rule 
 which is followed and conformed to. 
 
 Having thus fairly frated the Parliamen- 
 tary Doctrine of Precedents upon general 
 Grounds,, it remains for me to try this An- 
 gle Precedent by them, and then to allow 
 it its full Force in the prefent Cafe, and 
 fee if it comes up to what is contended 
 for. The Cafe is that of Mr. Waipole. 
 
 "On, the 23d of Feb. 171 1> a Peti- 
 " tion of the Freemen and Free Burghers- 
 " of the Borough of Kings-Lynn in the 
 " County of Norfolk, was prefented to the 
 tc Houfe, and read j letting forth, that 
 * { Monday, the Eleventh of February lafr, 
 t{ being appointed for ehoofing-a Member to 
 " ferve in Parliament for this Borough, in 
 £C the Room of Robert Waipole, Efq. 
 cc expelled this Houfe, Samuel Taylor, 
 " Efq. was elected their Burgefs ; but John 
 " Bagg, prefent Mayor of the faid Bo- 
 t: rough, refujed to return the faid Samuel 
 
 " Taylor r
 
 ( H ) 
 
 u Taylor, though required fo to do j £nd re-* 
 " turned the faid Robert Walpole, though 
 " expelled this Houfe, and then a Pri- 
 £t foner in the Tower ; and praying the 
 <l Confideration of the Houfe." 
 
 " March 6th. The Order of the Day 
 • c being read for taking into Confideration 
 " the Merits of the Petition of the Free- 
 " men and free Burghers of the Borough 
 u of Kings- Lynn in the County of Nor- 
 " folk, and a Motion being made that 
 " Couniel be called in, upon a Divifion 
 " it was refolved in the negative. Tellers 
 " for the Yeas, Sir Charles Turner, Mr. 
 " Pulteney, 127. Tellers for the Noes, 
 " Sir Simeon Stuart, Mr. Forfter, 212. — A 
 « Motion being made, and the Queftion 
 " put, That Robert Walpole, Efq. hav- 
 (t ino- been, this Seffion of Parliament, 
 « c committed a Prilbner to the Tower of 
 " London, and expelled this Houfe, for 
 " an high Breach of Truft in the Execu- 
 " tion of his Office, and notorious Corrup- 
 «' tion, when Secretary at War, was, and 
 " is, incapable of being elecled a Mem- 
 
 " bcr
 
 ( *5 ) 
 
 u ber id ferve in this prefent Parliament} 
 ic it was refolved, Upon a Divifion, in the 
 xt affirmative. Then a Motion being made, 
 " and the Queftion put, That Samuel 
 <( Taylor, Efq. is duly elected a Burgefs 
 " to ferve in the prefent Parliament for 
 " the Borough of Kings-Lynn in the 
 " County of Norfolk, it palled in the ne- 
 * c gative. Refolved, That the late Eleo 
 " tion of a Burgefs to ferve in the pre- 
 " fent Parliament for the faid Borough of 
 " Kings- Lynn in the County of Norfolk, 
 <c is a void Election/ 5 
 
 This Precedent is liable to every Ob- 
 jection that can be conceived againft one. 
 It was made in violent Times, without any 
 Example ; neither juft in the Intention, 
 which was certainly to exclude a Mem- 
 ber from the Houfe who was formidable 
 to the Miniftry of the Day, from his Abi- 
 lities and Boldnefs (perhaps the only exact 
 Similarity of the Cafe from which the 
 Precedent arofe, to that to which it was 
 applied), nor honourable in the Event ; 
 fince the Perfon fo expelled was by all 
 
 E fuccef-
 
 ( 26 ) 
 
 fwccemVe Houfes fuffered to fit for thirty 
 Years, which he certainly would not have 
 been, had they thought him as culpable as 
 that Ho'ifc of Commons which expelled him, 
 and themfelves pofTefled of that cenibrial 
 Power of which we have lately heard fo 
 much. This Precedent, however, fuch as it 
 Is, was firiclly adliered to fo far as it might 
 feem to give a Sanction to the Perfecution 
 of the Party concerned, but flighted in the 
 ftngle Infhnce where it could pofllbly have 
 been of any Authority, by preventing the 
 voting in another Perfon upon a Minority, 
 and ferving as a Barrier to the Rights of 
 the Freeholders, againft the undifcerning 
 Rage of an Administration, who, in their 
 Eager nefs to make a Victim to their Re- 
 fentment, fcrgot to avail themfelves of the 
 Forms of Law, and by violating the facred 
 Sanctuary of the Confutation, made a Mar- 
 tyr to Liberty, where they pretended an 
 Example of Juftice. 
 
 It appears, therefore, that this Incapa- 
 city produced by the E^pulfion, is fo far 
 from being the invariable reiterated Ufage 
 
 of
 
 { *7 ) 
 
 of Parliament, which it mnft have been to 
 he the Lex & Gonjuetudct VarBamenti, that 
 it ffonds upon a fingle bad Precedent, incom- 
 pletely followed, not more ineligible from 
 the Motives which produced, than inapplica- 
 ble from the Circumstances that attended kj 
 ■ — contradicted by many others wherethe In- 
 capacities were declared expreily > and modi- 
 fied according to the Opinion oi the Houie. 
 Thefe Precedents have this pec oliar Advan- 
 tage, befides their Number, that they were 
 ail in the Caies of Perfons at the Time un- 
 der the Difpleafure of the Houfe, and -who 
 mad confequently he fuppofed rather to 
 have met with ftricl juilice than Favour. 
 
 Having therefore proved that Incapacity 
 by the Law and Cuftom of Parliament does 
 not follow of courfe upon Expulfion, — if I 
 were an Advocate for Mr. Wilkes, I could 
 with the greateit Safety reft my Catife here. 
 The firft Sentence not affecting him, (he not 
 having therein been declared incapable, as 
 was done in the Cafes of Mr. Hall, Sir 
 Giles MompefTon, Mr. Benfon, and others) 
 die Injuftioe and Illegality of Enforcing the 
 E 2 fubiequent
 
 ( ?8 ) 
 
 fubfequcnt Determination is obvious j fo 
 obvious, that 1 mall content myfelf with 
 following the Minifterial Mode of quoting 
 one Cafe, and that not from remote or obfcure 
 Times. — But to prove my Impartiality, 
 and Readinefsto do them Juftice where they 
 have fhewn a Tendernefs for the Liberties 
 of the Subject, and an Averfion to extendi 
 ing the Powers of the Houfe of Commons, 
 I will take it from the laft Seflion of Parlia- 
 ment. It is the Cafe of the Cumberland 
 Sheriff (a favourite one of theirs), who was 
 committed to the Cuftody of the Serjeant for 
 a Violation of the Privileges of Election. It 
 was underftood generally that this Gentle- 
 man would petition to be difcharged, and be 
 of courfe reprimanded : Indeed, it was one 
 of the Reafons urged againil the feverer Pu- 
 nishment offending him to Newgate, which 
 was propofed, that the Difgrace of the Con- 
 finement, and the Reprimand he would re- 
 ceive from the Speaker, wou'd be a fufticient 
 Warning to others not to be guilty of the 
 fame Crime. When towards the Clofe of the 
 Seflion it appeared that this Gentleman was 
 pot likelv to petition a Motion was made, 
 
 That
 
 ( 29 ) 
 
 That he fhould be brought to the Bar to re- 
 ceive a Reprimand, and be difcharged; 
 which was over-ruled, upon its being fug- 
 gefted, that, as it had been omitted to be 
 mentioned in the firft Sentence, it would be 
 an unufual and unjuftifiable Thing to inflict 
 a fecond Punifhment. This Reafoning pre- 
 vailed, tho' it had been generally under- 
 ftood that the Reprimand would accompany 
 the Difcharge, and was included ex Vi for- 
 mini in the hrfl Sentence. 
 
 But fomething more important than the 
 Wrongs or Misfortunes of a fingle Man 
 having induced me to give you the Trouble 
 of this Letter, I muft proceed firmer, and 
 fee whether the Houfe of Commons is pof- 
 fefTed by Law of a Power to incapacitate a 
 Member chofen by the People. 
 
 The Power of creating Incapacity*, did 
 it exift at all in the Houfe of Commons, 
 
 * Sir Edward Hobby (in Fitzherbert's Cafe in Queen 
 Elisabeth's Reign) faid, " The Party out-lawed is 
 H not out of his Wits, therefore capable; and then is 
 ?' a Man able to be chofen, and idoneus to be a Bar- 
 
 muft
 
 ( 30 ) 
 
 muil arife from the Law and Cuffom of 
 Parliament, founded upon Ufage from 
 Time out of Memory. If Ufage be a good 
 Law, from a Prefu-mption that the Practice 
 contir. j ;:d fo long from the approved Con- 
 venience of it, Non-ufage and Difcontinu- 
 anee will, at lead, give as good Reafon to 
 prefume it has been found inconvenient, 
 and therefore ceafed. But the Cafe is infi- 
 nitely ftronger, when it appears that a Body 
 fo laudably jealous as the Houfe of Com- 
 mons have ever been of every Thing that 
 relates to the determining the Rights of 
 Election, have found themfelves obliged to 
 call in the Aflinance of the other Branches 
 of the Legiflature, when they thought it 
 necciTary, for the Prefervation of the Free- 
 dom oi Election, and Independence of Par- 
 liament, to reilrain the natural Right of 
 the People to delegate whom they pleafed 
 to take care of their Interefts, and give their 
 Confent to ; the Abridgement of their Liber- 
 ties by Legal Refhiclions* 
 
 et gr<s ." — It if p!a : n tip Houfe of Commons in thofc 
 D*ys ha>J no Idea o f a I'ovve: in themfelves to create 
 incapacity. 
 
 That
 
 ( 3' ) 
 
 That this has everbecn the Cafe, is notorious 
 from the many Statutes made for this Purpoie, 
 not only in the Cafe of Perfons coming under 
 general Defcriptions, fuch as Minors, Per- 
 fons not poiTeiied of 600 Pounds per ami. 
 for Counties, and 300/. for Boroughs, but 
 of Perfons under particular Circumfhmces ; as, 
 by 30 Char. II. " thofe who mall wilfully 
 " prefume to fit in the Houfe without tak- 
 tl ins: the Oaths and fubfcribins: the Tefi 
 <c whenever the Houfe diall require it, ever 
 lt ry Member fo prelum ing to fit fball 
 *' be adjudged, and is declared, to be im- 
 <£ capable and di fabled in Law, to all ln~ 
 " tents and Purpofes, to fit in the faid 
 " Houfe, or give any Voice therein during 
 <c that Parliament. And in Cafe any Member 
 " of the Houfe mail by Virtue of this A<3 
 " be dilabled to fit or vote in the Houfe, 
 <s then, without any further Conviction or 
 " other Proceedings againf! fach Member. 
 * c the Place for which he was elected is de- 
 ** clared void, and a new Writ (hall ifTue 
 " cut of Chancery, by Warrant from the 
 il Speaker and Order of the faid Houfe, for 
 " the Election of a new Member in Place 
 
 of
 
 ( p ) 
 
 « of fuch Member, fo difabled to all In- 
 « tents and Purpofes, as if fuch Member 
 " or Members naturally died." 
 
 By the Statute of 4^ Ann. Cap. 8. " If 
 
 « any Perfon being chofen a Member of 
 
 « theHoufe of Commons (hall accept of an 
 
 « Office of Profit from the Crown during 
 
 « fuch Time as he fhall continue a Mem- 
 
 « ber, his Election fliall be, and is hereby 
 
 « declared to be, void, and a new Writ fhall 
 
 «< iffue for a new Eledion, as if fuch Per- 
 
 « fon fo accepting was naturally dead. 
 
 « Neverthelefs, fuch Perfon fhall be capable 
 
 « of being again elected, as if his Place had 
 
 " not become void as aforefaid." 
 
 By the Statute of 7 George I. C. 28. we 
 find the late Governor, Deputy-Governor, 
 Diredors, Cafhier, and Accomptant of the 
 South-Sea Company, and John Aiflabie, 
 Efq j difabled for ever to fit or vote in Par- 
 liament. 
 
 Here we fee the whole Legiflature, in 
 
 Cafes merely relating to the Houfe of Com- 
 mons-
 
 ( 33 ) 
 
 mens, declaring Difqualification in all the 
 different Degrees, for the Remainder of the 
 Parliament, for Life, or fubiect to an im- 
 mediate Re-election ; a Power which had 
 the Houle of Commons at that Time 
 conceived to have exiited fingly in them- 
 telves, they would never have been con- 
 tented (from their known and conflant 
 Jealoufy in whatever relates to their Privi- 
 leges) to have fhared with the other two 
 Branches: Nay, we find them in the firfr. 
 cf thefe Statutes, that ci the 30th of 
 Charles II. concurring with the King and 
 Lords, in marking out the excel Difference 
 between the Power of the whole Lesiila- 
 ture, by whom the Incapacity is declared 
 in Law ; and the Houfe of Commons, by 
 whom /"/ J hall be adjudged. 
 
 The Expreffion, « That the Writ fhall 
 " iffae for the Election cf a new Member 
 " in the Place of inch Member lb diiabled, 
 t£ to all Intents and Purpcfes, as if fuch 
 * c Member was naturally dead," thews that 
 inftead of their having an Idea that Expul- 
 fion ex Vi Termini conveyed incapacity, the 
 F Idea
 
 ( 34 ) 
 
 Idea of created Incapacity was by no 
 means familiar to them, and they thought 
 it neceflary to illuftrate it by that of a Va- 
 cancy made by Death. 
 
 So far the Statute Book (hews the other 
 Parts of the Legiflature joining with the 
 Houfe of Commons in making Laws for 
 regulating Elections of Members to that 
 Houfe : But Hiftory informs us the Lords 
 were not always fo complaifant, but more 
 than once rejected the Place-Bill, when it 
 had palled the Houfe of Commons, tho' 
 a Bill that related merely to the Seats of 
 Members in that Houfe. Had thofe Houfes 
 thought the Power of creating and de- 
 claring Incapacities as inherent in them,, 
 as they undoubtedly thought the Exertion 
 of it by the whole Legiflature expedient 
 in that Cafe, they would not have been ia- 
 tisrled with fruitlefsly enacting, fubjecl: to 
 the Controul of another Body, what they 
 might effectually, and conftitutionally have 
 ordained by a iingle independent Refolu- 
 tion. There cannot rarely be a ftronger 
 preemptive Proof that the Houfe of Com- 
 mons
 
 ( 35 ) 
 
 mons did not think themfelves at that 
 Time poileiTed of fuch a Power, than 
 their having fullered a favourite Regulation 
 to fail by not exercifing it. 
 
 I will now give you an Account of what 
 were fuppofed, till this Seffion, to be the 
 only legal Incapacities to being elected, in 
 the Words of that excellent Conftitutional 
 Writer Doctor Blackftone ; who fagacioufly 
 obferves, Page 166, Vol. I. " If any Alte- 
 <c ration mi^ht be wimed or fu^efted in the 
 cc prefent Frame of Parliaments, it fliouldbe 
 •" in Favour of a more complete Reprefetita- 
 " tion of the People'. That Author fays 
 {Page 169, Vol. I.), " Our fecond Point is 
 " the Qualification of Perfons to be elected 
 ?f { Members of the Houfe of Commons. 
 " This depends upon the Law and Cuf- 
 li torn of Parliament, and the Statutes re- 
 t( ferred to in the Margin. And from 
 " thefe it appears, 1. That they mull not 
 " be Aliens bom, or Mi; c That 
 
 " they muft not be an" :lve 
 
 *• Judges, becaufe the .-. the 
 
 " Houfe 3 nor cf the \ . •— • _ - 
 
 F o - : n
 
 ( 3& 5 
 
 in the Convocation ; nor Perfons attaint- 
 ed of Treafon or Felony, for they are 
 unfit to fit anywhere. 3. That Sheriffs 
 of Ceunties, and Mayers and Bailiffs of 
 Boroughs, are not eligible in their re- 
 fpedive Jurisdictions, as being returning 
 Officers ; but that Sheriffs of one Coun- 
 ty are eligible to be Knights of another. 
 4. That in Striclinefs all Members ought 
 to be Inhabitants of the Places for which 
 they are chofen : But this is entirely dis- 
 regarded. 5. That no Perfons concern- 
 ed in the Management of any Duties 
 or Taxes created fince 1692, except the 
 Commiffioners of the Treafury, nor any 
 of the Officers following (viz. Commif- 
 fioners of Prizes, Transports, Sick and 
 Wounded, Wine Licences, Navy, and 
 Victualling ; Secretaries or Receivers of 
 Prize?, Comptrollers of the Army Ac- 
 counts, Agents for Regiments, Governors 
 of Plantations and their Deputies, Offi- 
 cers of Minorca or Gibraltar, Offi- 
 cers of the Excife and Cuftoms, Clerks 
 or Deputies in the lev era! Offices of the 
 Treafury, Exchequer, Navy, Victualling, 
 
 " Ad mi-
 
 ( 37 ) 
 
 tc Admiralty, Pay of the Army or Navy, 
 " Secretaries of State, Salt, Stamps, Ap- 
 <f peals, Wine Licences, Hackney Coaches, 
 " Hawkers and Pedlars), nor any Perfons 
 " that hold any new Office under the 
 " Crown created fince 1705, are capable 
 t( of being elected Members. 6. That no 
 cc Perfon having a Penfion under the Crown 
 " daring Pleafure, or for any Term of 
 " Years, is capable of being elected. 7. 
 Ci That if any Member accepts an Office 
 " under the Crown, except an Officer in the 
 " Army or Navy accepting a new Commif- 
 " fion, his Seat is void ; but fuch Mem- 
 ie ber is capable of being re-elected. 8. 
 " That all Knights of the Shire ffiall be 
 <c actual Knights, or fuch notable Enquires, 
 " and Gentlemen, as have Efrates fufficient 
 ' c to be Knights, and by no Means of the 
 <c Degree of Yeomen. This is reduced to 
 u a ftill greater Certainty, by ordaining, 9. 
 " That every Knight of a Shire mall have 
 il a clear Eftate of FreehoM or Copyhold to 
 << the Value of Six Hundred Pounds per Ann. 
 *' and every Citizen and Burgefs to the Va- 
 
 " lue
 
 v y- ) 
 
 c; lue of Three Hundred Pounds j except 
 «' the elded: Sons of Peers, and of Perfons 
 " qualified to be Knights of Shires, and ex- 
 " cept the Members for the twoUniverfities ; 
 ci which fomevvhat ba: lances the Afcen- 
 " dant which the Boroughs have gained 
 tc aver the Counties, by obliging the trad- 
 " ing Intereft to make choice of landed 
 <£ Men. And of this Qualification the 
 " Member mud: make Oath, end eive in 
 <c the Particulars in Writing: at the Time of 
 " his taking his Seat. But, fubjecl to theft 
 " Reflri&iom * and Difqualif cations, every 
 11 Subject of the Realm is eligible of common 
 <c Rid'hf. It was therefore an unconftitu- 
 iC tional Prohibition, which was inferted 
 <i in the King's Writs for the Parliament 
 " holden at Coventry 6 Henry IV 7 . Thar 
 " no Apprentice or other Man of the 
 •* Law ihould be elected a Knight of the 
 " Shire therein," 
 
 * I do not find ExpuJfion f.om the H ufe amongft 
 the Author's ReJTri£lions, an J :nuch doubt whether 
 fcc won! •! f'^'.'a or wifh for fjch an Alteration 
 ji> favour of a ir.ote complete Reprefentation of the 
 
 By
 
 ( 39 ) 
 
 By Common Right, I fuppofe this Author 
 means a Right founded in the Common 
 Law, which Lord Hale fays, (Hiji. Com, 
 Law, Page 2 6. ) cannot be authoritatively 
 altered or changed^ by Act of Parliament: 
 Yet upon this Occaiion it is to be altered 
 by a Refolution of the Houfe of Commons, 
 which, we are told, is the Law of Parlia- 
 ment, and that is the Law of the Land (I 
 prefume a Part of the Common Law, for I 
 know of no Law but the Common Law 
 and Statute Law, and this is certainlv no 
 Part of the Statute Law). Here we have 
 a Specimen of that Confuiion and Contra- 
 diction which muft ever arife from the 
 fmalleft Departure from the antient fixed 
 Rules of Law ; here we have Common 
 Law in direct Contradiction to Common 
 Law j a Man at once eligible by Common 
 Law, and ineligible by Common Law. 
 
 . It is not only the Right of the Perfon 
 elected to fit that is difputed, but the Right 
 of the Electors to be reprefented by the 
 Man of their Choice, and by him only. 
 
 I will
 
 ( 40 ) 
 
 I will, therefore, briefly itate to you, from 
 the beft Authorities, what this Right is, 
 from whence derived, how confirmed, and 
 how retrained. 
 
 The Knights of the Shires reprefent all 
 the Freeholders of the Counties. Anciently, 
 every the lead: Freeholder had as much 
 Right to give his Suffrage as the greateft 
 Owner of Lands in the County. This 
 Right was a Part of his Freehold, and in- 
 herent in his Perfon by Reafon thereof; 
 and to which he had as good a Title as 
 to receive the Profits of his Soil. This 
 appears by the Statute of Hen .ML Cap. 9, 
 which recites the great Inconveniencies 
 which did arife in the Election of Knights 
 of the Shires, bv Men that were of fmall 
 Subftance, who pretended to have an equal 
 Right with Knights and Efquires, of the 
 fame County ; therefore that Right was 
 abridged, and confined only to fuch Per- 
 fons as had Forty Shillings per Annum. 
 But thereby it appears, That the Right 
 which a Freeholder hath to vote in the 
 
 Election
 
 ( 4i ) 
 
 Election for Knights of the Shire, is ah 
 original and fundamental Right belonging 
 to him as a Freeholder. 
 
 It is certainly a great Advantage for the 
 Men or Inhabitants of a Place to chufe 
 Perfons to reprefent them in Parliament, 
 who thereby will have an Opportunity, 
 and be under an Obligation to reprefent 
 their Grievances, and advance their Profit. 
 Of this Opinion have two Parliaments 
 been, as appears by two feveral Acts } the 
 one, 34th and 35th Hen. VIII. Cap. 13. 
 the other, 25th Car. II. Cap. 9. 
 
 The firft is an Act for making Knights 
 and BurgefTes within the County and City 
 of Chefter, which begins in this Manner : 
 " In humble Wife fhew to your Majefty 
 " the Inhabitants of your Grace's County 
 st Palatine of Chefter j That they being ex- 
 * c eluded and feparated from your high 
 " Court of Parliament, to have any Bur- 
 * c geil'es within the faid Court, by Reafon 
 {l whereof the Inhabitants have hitherto 
 " fuftained manifold Loffes and Damages, 
 
 G " as
 
 ( 4* ) 
 
 as well in their Lands as Goods and 
 Bodies ; therefore it was enacted. That 
 they ihould have Knights for the County, 
 and BurgefTes for the City of Chefter. 
 
 The other Acl, which conftitutes Knights 
 and BurgefTes for the County Palatine and 
 City of Durham, recites, cc That the In- 
 " habitants thereof have not hitherto had 
 " the Liberty and Privilege of electing and 
 " fending Knights and BurgeiTes to the 
 " high Court of Parliament." 
 
 The Application of thefe two Ads is 
 very plain. <* The firft faith, To be ex- 
 4i eluded from fending Knights and Bur- 
 " gefTes to Parliament, is a Damage to 
 " Lands, Goods and Body." The other 
 faith, " That it is a Liberty and Pri- 
 ec vilege to fend them." Thus the Right 
 of Election is explained, and mewed to 
 be a legal Right ; That of electing 
 Knights of the Shires belonging to, and 
 being: inherent in the Freeholder *. 
 
 c 
 
 * Lcrdi Cafe cf Afhby and White. 
 
 « It
 
 ( 43 ) 
 
 " It is abfurd to fay the Electors Right of 
 <c enuring is founded upon the Law and Cuf- 
 " torn of Parliament : It is an original Right, 
 " Part of the Conflitntion of the Kingdom, as 
 " much as a Parliament is, and from whence 
 " the Perfons elected toferve in Parliament do 
 u derive their Authority, and can have no 
 " other but that which is given them by 
 " thofe that have the original Right to chufe 
 (c tkem*r 
 
 " Your Majefty's Royal Writ commands, 
 " that the feveral Electors make Choice of 
 tc Perfons to reprefent them in Parliament, 
 " in order to do, and confent to, fuch 
 <c Things as mould be ordained there, 
 " relating to the State and Defence of 
 " the Kingdom and the Church, for which 
 " the Parliament is called : And they obey 
 <c the Command, in proceeding to chufe 
 <c Members for the Parliament then fum- 
 f£ moned ; but neither the Writ which re- 
 :c quires them to chufe, nor the Indenture 
 " by which the Return is made, import 
 
 * Lords State of the Cafe of Afhby and White. 
 G 2 " any
 
 ( 44 ) 
 
 t( any Thing whereby it may be inferred, 
 " that the Electors put into the Power of 
 " their Reprefentatives their feveral Rights 
 " of Elections, to be difpofed of at their 
 
 " Fleafare. 
 
 " It was an Intereft vetted in them by 
 <f Law before the Election, and which the 
 " Law will preferve to them to be exer- 
 *' cifed again, in the like Manner, when 
 cc your Majefty mail be pleaLd to call ano- 
 " "ther Parliament *." 
 
 cc The Righ v of the Liberties of the 
 {c Commons of England confifteth chiefly 
 *'' in three Things : Firft, that the Shires, 
 " Cities, and Boroughs of England, by Re- 
 *' prefentation to be prefent, have free 
 ec choice of fuch Perfons as they shall 
 a PUT IN trust to reprefent them §." 
 
 " In the hkh Court of Parliament, all 
 " the whole Body of the Realm, and 
 
 * lords Representation in" the Cafe of Afhby and 
 White. 
 $ Houfe of Commons Apology to James I. 
 
 ci every
 
 ( 45 ) 
 
 " every Particular Member thereof, either 
 il in Perfon or by Reprefentation, ( upon 
 <c their own free Elections ) are, by the 
 "Laws of the Realm, deemed to be per- 
 " fonally prefent *." 
 
 <c It is enacted, That Elections fhoul4 
 tc be freely and indifferently made, not- 
 " withftanding any Prayer or Command- 
 fi ment to the contrary,^/?? Prece <vel Pretio y 
 " without any Prayer or Gift, and Jine Prcz- 
 " cepto, without Commandment of the 
 " King by Writ, or otherwife, or of any 
 * c other §." 
 
 A Right fo founded can only be con- 
 trouled by the Supreme Legiflative Power, 
 or fome Power in that Cafe equal to the 
 Supreme Legiflature. The Supporters of 
 this Meafure affert, That a Refolution of 
 the Houfe of Commons is of that Force. 
 
 If this Doctrine is to prevail, That a Re- 
 folution of the Houfe of Commons is the 
 
 * i Jac. I. Cap. i. 
 § Statute 7 Hen. IV r » 
 
 Law
 
 ( 4-6 ) 
 
 Law of the Land in any, even Cafes of 
 Election, it may not be amifs to fee what 
 Sort of Law we live under ; and I believe 
 it will be found, contrary to the general 
 Opinion, to be the word: conftituted and 
 worft adminiftered Law in any civilized 
 Country. 
 
 In the Cafe of Arthur Hall, the Houfe 
 expelled him, and made him incapable in 
 that and all future Parliaments; he was 
 fined 500 Marks to the Queen, and to 
 be imprifoned fix Months. The Attorney- 
 General was declared in 1614 incapable to 
 be elected. In 1680, December 30, it was 
 refolvcd, mm. con. " That no Member of 
 " this Houfe fhall accept of any Office or 
 " Place of Profit from the Crown without 
 iC the Leave of the Houfe, nor any Promife 
 « of any fuck Place or Office during his be- 
 * c ine or continuine: a Member of the Houfe. 
 " That all Offenders herein be expelled the 
 " H .ufe." Ail thefeRefolutionsare unrepeal- 
 ed, and confequcntly,by this Doctrine, Part of 
 the Law of the Land ; fo that the Attorney - 
 General is actually fitting in Parliament un- 
 der
 
 ( 47 ) 
 
 tier a Legal Difqualifkation ; and by the 
 other Refolution there is now a Vacancy for 
 the County of Middlefex, as I believe No- 
 body doubts Col. Luttrell having been pro- 
 mifed the Chiltern Hundreds before he va- 
 cated his Seat j and confequently mud: be 
 incapable, according to thofe who main- 
 tain that Incapacity and ExpuKion are in- 
 feparable. 
 
 The Powers, of fining to the Crown, of 
 imprifoning for fix Months, and rendering 
 incapable for all future Parliaments, are no 
 where that I know of formally renounced ; 
 and yet I believe Nobody will contend, that 
 they exift at prefent in the Houfe of Com- 
 mons : Yet if any Refolution of the Houfe 
 is Law, every Refolution mufc be foj Law 
 being fixed, and certain ; and the Moment 
 its Power depends upon its Reafonable- 
 uefs, it ceafes to be Law, and becomes a 
 Counfel. 
 
 I believe it will not be difficult to con- 
 vince every impartial Man. that the late Pro- 
 ceedings
 
 ( 48 ) 
 
 ceedin^s are upon no Ground lefs entitled 
 to Authority than upon that of Reafon. 
 
 I will readily admit that the Houfe of 
 Commons have, upon many Occafions, af- 
 fumed to themfelves a Power of declaring, 
 and difpenfing with the Law : But I muft 
 add, that whenever they have done ib, their 
 Refolutions have been a Difgrace to the 
 Journals, and a melancholy Proof to what 
 criminal and abfurd ExceiTes a Popular Af- 
 fembly may proceed, when they miftake 
 Power for Right, and fubftitute Will for 
 Law. 
 
 To prove this, I will quote fome Refo- 
 lutions of the Houfe affuming this Power, 
 the Opinion of ConfHtutional Writers, with 
 that of the other Branches of the whole Le- 
 <nflaturc, upon this pretended Right of one 
 Branch, to declare or enacl: the Law without 
 the Concurrence of the reft. 
 
 " March 22d, 1641, Refolved.That when 
 " the Lords and Commons in Parliament 
 
 " mall
 
 ( 49 ) 
 
 " {hall declare what the Law of the Land is. 
 " To have this not only qaeftioned and con- 
 " trovertcd but contradicted, and a Com- 
 tl mand given that it be net obeyed, is a 
 <c high Breach of the Privilege of Parlia- 
 " ment." 
 
 "Jan. 1648. Refolved, That the Com- 
 " moiiG of England in Parliament afiemblcd 
 <£ do declare, That the People are, under 
 <£ God, the Original of ail juft Power. 
 
 £C And do alio declare, That the Com- 
 " mons of England in Parliament aflembied 
 cc being chofen by, and reprefenting the 
 " People, have the fupreme Power in this 
 11 Nation. 
 
 cC And do alfo declare, That whatfoever 
 '* is enacted or declared for Law by the 
 tc Commons in Parliament aflembied, 
 fc hath the Force of a Law ; and all the 
 " People of this Nation are concluded there- 
 ct by, although the Confent and Concur- 
 " rencc of the King or Houfe of Peers be 
 cc not had thereunto." 
 
 H « Feb,
 
 ( 50 ) 
 
 '« Feb. 9th, Refolved, That it hath been- 
 " found by Experience, and that this Houfe 
 " doth declare, That the Office of a King 
 " in this Nation, and to have the Power 
 " thereof in any fingle Perfon, is unnecef- 
 lt fary, burthejifome, and dangerous to the 
 <( Liberty, Safety, and Public Intereft of the 
 tc People of this Nation ; and therefore ought 
 " to be abolifhed." 
 
 «« In 1 68 1 the Houfe of Commons palled 
 " two Votes. One, That the Laws againftRe- 
 " cufants ought not to be executed againft 
 <: any but- thofe of the Church of Rome. 
 «' The other Vote was, That it was the Opi- 
 " nionof that H.ufe, that the Laws againft 
 " DhTenters ought not to be executed. This 
 " was thought a great Invasion of the Le- 
 " oiflature, when one Houfe pretended to 
 " fufpend the Execution of Laws; which 
 <c was to ad like Dictators in the State; 
 <£ for they meant that Courts and Juries 
 " mould govern themfelves by the Opi- 
 « c nion that they now gave; which, inftead 
 <c of being a Kindnefs to the Nonconformifts, 
 
 " railed
 
 ( 5' ) 
 
 ct raifed a new Storm againfl them ever all 
 " the Nation *. 
 
 £t There is no Act of Parliament but mud: 
 " have the Confent of the Lords, the Com- 
 " mons, and the Royal Aflent of the King. 
 " Whatfoever pafleth in Parliament by this 
 t{ Threefold Conient, hath the Force of 
 cc an Act of Parliament. 
 
 li The Difference between an Acl of 
 ** Parliament and an Ordinance of Parlia- 
 " ment is, for that the Ordinance wanteth 
 " the Threefold Confent, and is ordained 
 <c by one or two of them. 
 
 <c Ordinance in Parliament cannot take 
 " away common Right. 
 
 cc The Commons petition that the Peti- 
 <£ tion of the Commons in the fiftieth Year 
 fl of Edw. III. whereunto the King's An- 
 iC fwer was, £ The King wilieth the fame 
 ci may be made in Acts, for that fome affirm 
 
 * Burnet's Hid. of his own Times. 
 
 U 2 " them
 
 ( 5* ) 
 
 " them to be but Ordinances and not Acls * 
 " to which the Anfwer was, < It is in part 
 " done, and the reft the King will do ac- 
 
 '* coramgiy '*. 
 
 " The Law of the Realm cannot be chang- 
 «« ed but by Acl of Parliament : Merito in 
 <( Pari, conquejii funt (the Clergy upon the 
 " making the Act Articuli Clcri) quia Lex 
 *' Anglice fine Parliam. mutari nenpeteft-f" 
 
 On the Restoration of King Charles IT. 
 the Commons refolved, " That this Houfe 
 «« doth agree with the Lords, and do own 
 " and declare, That, according to the antient 
 " and fundamental Laws of this Kingdom, 
 " the Government thereof is, and ought to 
 '* be, by King, Lords, and Commons." 
 
 By the Act of i 7 Ch. II. " And becaufc 
 «< the Growth and Encreafeof the late Dif- 
 " orders did proceed (..be e all) from awil- 
 " ful Millike oi ; the Supreme and Lawful 
 " Authority, whihl .Men were forward to 
 
 i&li on ?ar. Page 31 to 34. | Ibid. Page 87. 
 
 (C cry
 
 ( 53 ) 
 
 tc cry up and maintain thofe Orders and Or- 
 
 " di nances to be A5ls legal and warrant able ^ 
 
 <c which in themfelves had not the lead 
 
 " Colour of Law or Juftice to fupport them, 
 
 " from which Kind of Diftempers as the pre- 
 
 " fent Age is not yet wholly freed, fo Poiterity 
 
 " may be apt to relapfe into them, if a timely 
 
 * c Remedy be not provided : — And that no 
 
 '< Man hereafter may be milled into any fediti- 
 
 *' ousorunquietDemeanour,outofan Opinion 
 
 *' that both Houfes of Parliament, or either 
 
 " of them, have a Legiflative Power with- 
 
 " out the King; all which Aflcrtions have 
 
 <c been feditioufly maintained by fomc 
 
 <c Pamphlets lately printed, and daily pro- 
 
 <c moted by the active Enemies of our Peace 
 
 11 and Happinefs : Be it therefore Enacted 
 
 {i by the Authority aforefaid, If any Perfon 
 
 i: or Perfons mall malicioully and advifedly, 
 
 " by Writing, Printing, Preaching, or 
 
 <c other Speaking, exprefs, publim, utter, 
 
 " declare, or affirm, That both Houfes of 
 
 * : Parliament, or either Houfeof Parliament, 
 
 " have or hath a Legislative Power without 
 
 " the King, or any other Words to the fame 
 
 »* Eff'effj that then every fuch Perfon and 
 
 " Perfons
 
 C 54 ) 
 
 " Perfons as aforefaid fo offending, fhall 
 " incur the Danger and Penalty of a Pre- 
 * c munire." 
 
 <( It was never yet heard (when there 
 " was a Houfe of Lords in being, and a 
 " King or Queen upon the Throne), that 
 te the Houfe of Commons alone claimed 
 " a Power, by any Declaration of theiis, 
 cc to alter the Law, or to reftrain the Pco- 
 <£ pie of England from taking the Bene- 
 tl fit of it ; nor have their Declarations any 
 " fuch Authority as to oblige Me,; to fub- 
 " mit to them at the Peril of their Liber'y. 
 " If they have fuch a Power in any Cafe, 
 " they may apply it to all Caies as they 
 " pleafe ; for when the Law is no longer 
 " the Meafure, Will and Plealure will be 
 « c the only Rule, 
 
 cC The Certainty of our Laws is that 
 " which makes the chief Felicity of Eng- 
 «« lifhmen : But if the Houfe of Commons 
 *' can alter the Laws by Declarations, or 
 «« (which is the fame Thing) can deprive 
 " Men of their Liberty, if they go about 
 
 " to
 
 ( 55 ) 
 
 " to take the Benefit of them, we (hall 
 " have no longer Reafon to boaft of that 
 " Part of our Conftitution. — Refolved, that 
 <c neither Houfe of Parliament have Power, 
 " by any Vote or Declaration, to create to 
 " themielves new Privileges not warranted 
 «< by known Law and Cuftom of Parlia- 
 " ment*. " 
 
 < c It is God alone who fubfifts by him- 
 " felf j the Right of Crowns and King- 
 * c doms, and all other Things exift in mu- 
 " tual Dependence and Relation. The So- 
 tl vereignty, Honours, Lives, Liberties and 
 <c Eftates of all, are under the Guard of 
 " the Law, which, when invaded by Fraud, 
 " or Wit, or deftroyed by Force, a dif- 
 " mal Confufion quickly veils the Face of 
 " Heaven, and brings with it horrid Dark- 
 " nefs, Mifery, and Defolation j Rapine, 
 cc Plunder, and Cheating, both private and 
 " public, will be allowed and protected 3 
 61 continual Rebellions, unjuft Profcrip- 
 cC tions, villainous Accufations, and Whip- 
 
 * Lords Reprefentation in the Cafe of Afliby and 
 
 White. 
 
 ei ping?,
 
 ( 5<5 ) 
 
 <c pings, illegal and lading ImprifonmentS 
 " and Confutations, difmal Dungeons, tor* 
 " menting Racks and Queftions, arbitrary 
 " and martial Law, Murders, inhuman 
 <c AfTafli nations, and bale and fervile Flat- 
 * c teries, multiplied by Revenge, Ambition, 
 " and iniatiable Avarice, will become the 
 ct Common Law of the Land. All thefe, 
 <c and Myriads more, will be enacted for 
 <£ Law, by Force or Fraud. All which 
 < c that wife King James well underftood, 
 " who faith, That not only the Royal 
 " Prerogative, but the People's Security of 
 " Lands, Livings, and Privileges, were 
 «< preferved and maintained by the ancient 
 41 fundamental Laws, Privileges, andCujioms 
 « of this Realm 5 and that by the abolifli- 
 " in<* or altering of them, it was impofiible 
 « c but that preient Confufion will fall upon 
 " the whole State and Frame of this King- 
 " dcm. And his late Majefty, of evcr- 
 " bleffed Memory, was of the fame Mind 
 « and Opinion, when he faid, The Law 
 tc is the Inheritance of every Subject, and 
 " the only Security he can have for his 
 « Life or Eftate -, and which being neg- 
 
 <■* lected
 
 ( 57 ) 
 
 »*' lected or difefteemed (under what fpe- 
 " cious Shew whatever), a great Meafure 
 " of Infelicity, if not an irreparable Con- 
 " fufion, muft, without Doubt, fall upon 
 " them *. w 
 
 Having, therefore, proved that a Refo- 
 lution of the Houfe of Commons cannot 
 jnake Law, it follows of Courfe, that a 
 Refoiution of that Houfe can be of no Force 
 which manifestly counteracts the Purpofe of 
 an Act of Parliament j as in this Cafe an 
 arbitrary Power to annihilate the Votes of 
 a Number of Freeholders, would takeaway 
 the Benefit of the Act fixing the Right of 
 Election, by the laft Determination of the 
 Houfe, to prevent Uncertainty in the Right 
 ■of voting. It follows, alfo, that the Rights 
 of the Electors and Elected, being both 
 founded on the Common, and confirmed 
 by the Statute, Law, cannot be affected by 
 a Refoiution of the Houfe of Commons, 
 merely as fuch. It remains to enquire, 
 •Whether fuch a Refoiution, under any 
 
 * Pety.t's Mif. Par!, 
 
 I particular
 
 ( S3 ) 
 
 particular Circumftances, can have that 
 
 EfTed? 
 
 The firft Circumftance in which I (hall 
 confider it is, as the Sentence of the Houfe 
 of Commons acting as a Court, and exer- 
 cifing their judicial Power over their own 
 Members. 
 
 It is aereed on all Hands, that the Houfe 
 
 • 
 
 of Commons have a Power to punifh then- 
 own Members bv imprifoning, fufpending, 
 and expelling them. The Decifions of 
 Courts only bind as a Law upon the Party, 
 as to the particular Cafe in Queftion 5 but 
 cannot make a Law, properly io call- 
 ed, for That only the King and Parlia- 
 ment can do j therefore the Intcreft of the 
 Eledors can by no Means be affected by 
 a Sentence paffed upon a particular Mem- 
 ber. 
 
 There is hardly any Power, however 
 nrepoftcrous, that has not, at feme Time 
 or other, been afiumed by the Houfe of 
 Commons acting as a Court, It is not to
 
 ( 59 ) 
 
 be wondered at, therefore, if their Pro- 
 ceedings againft their own Members, who 
 have been the Objects of momentary Re- 
 fentment, or Party Violence, have been 
 fome Times unjuftifiable. Whenever, there- 
 fore, a Power, which has been claimed 
 or exercifed upon fufpicious Occafions, has 
 been receded from in cooler Times j it is 
 but fair to look upon the Exercife rather as 
 an Ufurpation than a Precedent ; beeauie, 
 as Lord Hale* obferves, " Greater Weight 
 " is to be laid upon the Judgment or any 
 " Court when it is exclufive of its Jurif- 
 " diction, than upon a Judgment of the 
 " fame Court in Affirmance of it." 
 
 The Houfe has, at Times, claimed the 
 Power of imprifoning for a Time certain, 
 of fining, of declaring incapable for ever, 
 or during a whole Parliament. It is now 
 univerfallv admitted that Punishments in- 
 flicied by the Houfe of Commons de- 
 termine with the Sefiion, even in Cafes 
 
 '*■ Hift. of the Common Law, Page 49. 
 
 I 2 Of
 
 ( 60 ) 
 
 of Contempt of the Court (in which Cafes 
 the Power of all Courts to punifh is great- 
 eft). Upon this Occafion, however, it is 
 contended, That the Houfe have a Power 
 ox puniihing a .Member by rendering him 
 incapable of being elected during the Re- 
 mainder of that Parliament. 
 
 It appears abfurd at firft Sight, That 
 the only Cafe in which the Kouie mould- 
 have a Power beyond the prefent Sefiion s 
 ihould be in one that muft laft for the 
 whole Parliament. When fuch an Excep- 
 tion is contended for to a general Rule, it 
 is natural to expect that thole who contend 1 
 for it mould produce very flrong Reafons 
 for fuch a Deviation from the eftablimed 
 fundamental Principles. No fuch Reafons 
 have been offered, nor do any iuggefl 
 themfelves to me, which do not prove too 
 much or too little. If we are to fuppofe 
 the Houfe always right in -their Judgments, 
 one Parliament is too fhort a Duration for 
 the Sentence; fince it muft be as detrimental 
 to the Community to have an improper 
 Perfon fit in a future/ as in the fubfifting 
 
 Parlia-
 
 ( 6' y 
 
 Parliament; therefore the Sentence fhould b£ 
 for life : But this Power is difclaimed now, 
 tho' exercifed in Mr. Hall's Cafe. If, on the 
 other Hand, we are to fuppofe the Houfe 
 may be miitaken in an hafty Vote, the whole 
 Parliament is too long a Time for the Cul- 
 prit to furrer. 
 
 There is another very finking ObjecYion 
 to this Period of the Remainder of the Par- 
 liament. It is impoffible that in a well or- 
 dered Government Punifhments fhould be 
 fortuitous, tho' they may be difcretionary. 
 Can it be (Lippofed that a Crime committed 
 upon the Eve of a DifTolution of the Parlia- 
 ment fhould be fufficiently punifhed by a 
 few Days Exclufion ; which being commit- 
 ted a few Weeks later, would have deferved 
 a feven Years Punilhment? I can hardly 
 fuppofe io ahfurd an Idea, as that the Ef- 
 fect of the Sentence fhould ceafe with the 
 Exiftenee of the judges.- Till the pre- 
 fect Reign, the Twelve Judges were only 
 for the Life of the Kino; ; but I never heard 
 that it was fuppofed that the Decrees of 
 thole judges loft their Force, upon the De- 
 
 mife-'
 
 ( 62 ) 
 
 rnife cf the Crown; nor do the Judgments 
 of the Houfe, founded upon La-zv, as in the 
 Cafe of determining who have the Right of 
 voting in Elections, lofe their Force in fub- 
 fequent Parliaments. — Every Argument, 
 therefore, for a longer Punifhment than 
 during the Seiiion, holds more ftrongly 
 for a perpetual Exciufion; and every 
 Argument againfl a perpetual Exclulion, 
 proves ftrongly the Neceflity of retraining 
 this Power of depriving the Member of 
 his Seat to the. fubiifting Seiiion : I fay, de- 
 priving the Member of his Seat, becaufe the 
 Houfe have undoubtedly a Power by Com- 
 mitment or Sufpenfion to prevent his exer- 
 cifing his Privilege as a Member: but I de- 
 ny their Right to render him incapable cf 
 being elected, as that would affect the 
 Rights of the Electors to fend whom they 
 pleafe to reprefent them ; which cannot be 
 done obliquely by a Sentence of Condemna- 
 tion, to which they are not Parties. The 
 only Power the Houfe has, is to fend the 
 Perfon back to them for their Approbation 
 or Rejection. 
 
 I am
 
 ( G 3 ) 
 
 I am aware that thofe Precedents will, at 
 firft Sight, ieem to contradict this, which 
 declare a Member to be difabled either 
 from fitting in any future Parliament, or in 
 the prefent Parliament: But (without infill- 
 ing too much upon the Ambiguity of the 
 latter Phrafe, which may only mean for the 
 Remainder of the Seffion, for every Sejjion 
 of Parliament is in Law a feveral Parlia- 
 ment *, I fhall anfwer that by obferving, That 
 the Houfe only declared their Opinion of the 
 Degree cf Unworthinefs in the Member ex- 
 pelled ; and had the People never exer- 
 cifed their Right of fending back again the 
 Man fo reprobated, it would only have 
 proved, that they were in fome Instances 
 induced by the Juftice of the Sentence not 
 to exercife, and in others deterred by the 
 Violence of the Times, horn claiming their 
 Right j but it would by no means have fol- 
 lowed, that they were not poifeiTed of that 
 Kigiu. 
 
 But the Precedents of Parliament fur- 
 nifh us with Proofs of the contrary. It ap- 
 
 * Hale on Parliaments, Fa-e 38. 
 
 pears
 
 f 64 ) 
 
 ©ears by Mr. Hall's fourth Cafe, that the 
 BurgeiTes of Grantham petitioned the Houfe, 
 by Mr Markhatn, againft Mr. Hall 5 letting 
 forth, amongft other Things, ct That, not- 
 " withftanding he had mfime of the former 
 " Parliaments, in which he had been re- 
 6i turned a Burgefs for the faid Borough, 
 48 been for certain Caufes the Houfe then 
 " moving, difabled for ever afterwards to 
 *<-be any Member of this Houfe at all, 
 " hath of late brought a Writ againfr. the 
 <c faid Inhabitants for Wages, .Sec." The 
 Houfe afterwards appointed a felecl Com- 
 mittee to inquire into it, who did not declare 
 that Mr. Hall had no Right to the Wages, 
 becaufe he had been declared incapable (wh ich 
 was the Fad:) previous to one of thofe Par- 
 liaments, but they defircd him to remit thofe 
 Wages ; " and they found him very confer- 
 *' ?nable to condefcend to fuch Requefl. And 
 " he further alledged, and affirmed to them, 
 " he would have remitted the fame, had the 
 " BurgeiTes made Suit tohimfo to do; and that 
 " he was very willing to do what was agree- 
 ." able to the Houfe. Which bet)?? well liked 
 
 " of
 
 ( 65 ) 
 
 n of by the Houfe> it was ordered to be ert- 
 ct tered accordingly." 
 
 Here is no Appearance of Compulfion j 
 on the contrary, a plain Proof that he was 
 entitled to all the Privileges and Rights of 
 a Member by the Election df the People, 
 notwithstanding the Incapacity previoujly 
 declared by the Houfe. 
 
 Sir William Pennyman and Mr. Holborne 
 were both expelled Auguft 1 1 , 1642, and 
 difabled ; and yet appear both, by the Jour- 
 nals, to have fat afterwards j tho' the Re- 
 turns of the Writs do not appear. 
 
 The Cafe of Mr. Glyn appears (till 
 stronger in Favour of the Rights of the Elec- 
 tors. — <f June 7th, 1648, A Petition pre- 
 " ierred, filled the Humble Petition of the 
 *' Burgeffes, Affiftants, Gentry, and others, 
 " Inhabitants of the City of Weftminfter j 
 " the which was read ; and was to defire, 
 iC That John Glyn, Efqj whom they had 
 " elected for their Burgefs, might be ad- 
 " mitted to his former Liberty to fit and ferve 
 " as a Member of this Houfe. — Refolved, 
 K « That
 
 ( 66 ) 
 
 "That the Order 7 Sept. 1647, f° r dif- 
 lt charging John Glyn, Efq; Recorder of 
 " the Citv of London, from being a Member 
 " of this Houfe, be, and is hereby re- 
 " voked." 
 
 No Objection can lay againrt. Precedents 
 drawn from thefe Times : I quote them 
 againfl: unreafonable Claims of the Houfe 
 of Commons, as I would an Act of Hen. 
 Vlllth. or James Ift againfl: the Prerogative : 
 It is plain therefore, that Precedent does 
 not authorize this Doctrine. 
 
 The Advocates for this Meafure have re- 
 courie to an AfTertion, which, could it be 
 proved juft, would have more Weight than 
 all the Precedents, fuppofing them uncon- 
 tradicted, that Indurtry could glean, or Party 
 Violence furnifh from the Journals. They 
 aiTert, That it is impofiible the Houfe 
 mould exift, unlefs poffeffed of fuch a 
 Power. 
 
 I readily admit that the People, when 
 they chufe their Reprefentatives, by that 
 Choice invert them with everv Power over 
 
 their
 
 ( 67 ) 
 
 their Liberties that can be necelTary for the 
 Difcharge of their Truft ; but I, at the fame 
 Time, aflame, That the Reprefentative Body 
 can neither by Usurpation or Cuftom accjuire 
 any Powers over the Rights, which are not 
 abfolutely neceffary for the Welfare of the 
 People ; for whofe Ufe, and in whofe Right 
 alone, are they poffefied of any Powers or 
 Privileges. 
 
 The Privileges of the Houfe of Commons 
 are like the Shell of the Tortoife, to prevent 
 them from being cruihed by the Weight :of 
 higher Powers ; not like the Strength of the 
 Lion, to -enable them to deftroy thofe who 
 are helplefs. " That certainly can never 
 " be efteemed a Privilege of Parliament, 
 " that is incompatible with the Rights of the 
 " People." 
 
 To fee, therefore, whether the Houfe is pof- 
 fefied of a Privilege, it is neceilary to enquire 
 on the one Hand, what is the poffible Incon- 
 venience to be guarded againit, and what is 
 the Degree of legal Probability that it mould 
 happen j and on the other ITand, how far 
 the Remedy propofed will be effectual for 
 K 2 the
 
 ( 68 ) 
 
 the Purpofes intended, and what are the 
 bad Confequences to be apprehended 
 from it. 
 
 The Privilege contended for, in this Cafe, 
 is, a Power in the Koufe of Commons to 
 declare by a fingle Vote a Member, legacy 
 qualified in all other Refpects* incapable of 
 being re-elected in that Parliament. The 
 Evil complained of, and for which this is the 
 fuppofed Remedy, is the Poflibility of a Per- 
 fon unworthy of a Seat in the Houfe of 
 Commons, fitting there by the Choice of 
 the Electors; which, it is faid, would be a 
 Degradation of that AiTembly, and of dan- 
 gerous Confequence to the Conftitution, 
 This Evil feems, however, to be already 
 fufEciently guarded againft. The undoubted 
 Power of the Houfe of Commons to expel 
 a Member for any Crime notorious before 
 his Election, and thereby fend him back to 
 his Constituents for their Approbation or Re- 
 jection, fecures the Electors from thofe In- 
 conveniences which might arife from the 
 Continuance of a Member whom they may 
 in the firft Inftance have inadvertently cho- 
 fen, without being deprived of the Right of 
 
 ttgaia
 
 ( 69 ) 
 
 again employing him *, if his Crimes fhall 
 not appear to them to be fuch, as render him 
 unfit for their Service, or unworthy of their 
 Confidence. 
 
 The Laws fixing the Qualifications of 
 Electors prevent any Perfons who have not 
 an Intereft in the Conduct:, from having a 
 Voice in the Appointment of a Member. 
 The Laws preventing Minors, Idiots, and 
 Lunatics, from voting, deprive thofe of the 
 Exercife of their Right, who are not ca- 
 pable of judging of their Intereft. 
 
 The necefTary Qualifications of Perfons 
 to be elected, have, in the Eye of the Law, 
 rendered the Choice of an improper Per- 
 fon improbable. Under all thefe Precau- 
 tions it is to be preiumed, the People may 
 with Safety be trufted with the free Exer- 
 cife, upon an Expulfion, of that Right 
 which the fundamental Principles of the 
 Conftitution have vefted in them. Could 
 
 * The Cafe of Members whofe Seats are vacated 
 by the Acceptance of Place?, is fomewhat Hmilar to 
 (his. 
 
 we,
 
 ( 7° ) 
 
 we, however, for a Moment fuppofe them, 
 contrary to all Probability, wilfully to pcr- 
 fift, againft their known Intereit, in intrud- 
 ing the Care of their moil: valuable Privi- 
 leges to a Man who had proved himfelf 
 unworthy of their Confidence j it might 
 follow, that People fo infatuated ought not 
 to have a Power of fending any Reprefen- 
 tative; but no Concluficn can be drawn 
 from thence, that other People mould ap- 
 point their Delegate for them j nor any 
 Supposition formed, that if they were by 
 this new Privilege prevented from returning 
 the old Member, they would fubftitute a 
 more worthy one in his Place. 
 
 The Inconveniences that might arife 
 from an Abufe of this Power are obvious : 
 A prevailing Party might, by an halty 
 Vote, exclude the molt, worthy Member, 
 for no other Reafon than his being ob- 
 noxious to a bad Miniflry ; nay, if it once 
 came to be the eitabliihed Law of Parlia- 
 ment, that a fingle Vote of that Houfe 
 could incapacitate a Member ; Forty Mem- 
 bers might, in one Day, deprive the Peo- 
 ple irretrievably for fcwcn Years of the 
 
 Services
 
 ( 7* ) 
 
 Services of the moil: able Men. Hiftory and: 
 Experience juftify the Apprehenfion, by 
 mewing us that Fifty Members were expel- 
 led in one Day. 
 
 But, without recurring to the Suppofi- 
 tion of intended Injuftice, it is pofllble that 
 the Houfe may be miftaken in a fingle 
 Vote. This the Law prefumes may happen, 
 and has actually guarded againft, by mak- 
 ing it neceffary, that whatever is to have 
 the Force of Law mould thrice receive the 
 Approbation of each Houfe, and the Royal 
 Aflent afterwards ; the Laws of this 
 Country being, as Mr. Waller juftly ex- 
 preffes it, like Gold feven Times tried. It 
 is plain therefore, that neither Reafon nor 
 Precedent authorize the Exercife of fuch a 
 Power in the Houfe of Commons fitting 
 as Judges upon their own Members. 
 
 The only remaining Circumftance under 
 which I am to confider a Refolution of the 
 Houfe of Commons is, in the Exercife of 
 their Power to judge of Election Caufes ; 
 which brings me to the Determination of 
 the Houfe on the 8th of May. 
 
 Tl 
 
 ic
 
 ( 7* ) 
 
 The Declaration on the 14th of April, 
 I can by no Means look upon in any other 
 Light than that of an extra-judicial Refolu- 
 tion, and, as fuch, already proved of no 
 Force ; with this Difference only from 
 any Thing hitherto obferved, That Mr. 
 Wilkes's Election having been previously 
 declared void, the only Queftion was, Whe- 
 ther the Houfe mould nominate the Perfon 
 who had the Minority of Votes, or direct 
 the County of Middlefex to proceed to 
 another Election ? The Caufe was, how- 
 ever, taken up precipitately upon the Sug- 
 geftion of one of the Judges, at the Re- 
 quest of neither of the Parties, without 
 any Council being heard, and without the 
 Knowledge of one of them 3 with fuch 
 avowed Secrecy, that, though an Acci- 
 dent prevented the Motion being made 
 the Day it was intended, no IntreatieS 
 could prevail upon the Mover to com- 
 municate the Purport of it. To treat this 
 therefore as a judicial Decifion, would be 
 to offer the higher!: Affront to a free Af- 
 fembly, in which timely Notice, and a fair 
 Hearing of both Parties, have hitherto ever 
 been 3 and I truft will ever remain, eflen- 
 
 tial
 
 ( 73 ) 
 
 tial Circumstances in their judicial Proceed- 
 
 ings. 
 
 Much Pains have been taken upon this 
 Occafiun, by the Advocates for this Mea- 
 fure, to prove what never has been dif- 
 puted by its Opponents ; The Power of 
 the Houfe of Commons to determine in all 
 Cafes of Election without Appeal. It is 
 the Abufe, and not the Exercife, of this 
 Power that is complained of j not, that 
 the Confutation has vefled in them the 
 Power of judging according to Law ; but, 
 that they have aiTumed to themfelves a 
 Power incompatible with the Idea of a 
 Court of Jufticej That of making the Law 
 firft, by which they are afterwards to 
 judge, and thereby adding the Power of 
 the Legiflature, which is Jus dare, to that 
 of the Judge, which is Jus dlccrc. 
 
 The Power of the Houfe of Commons 
 is that of a Court of Appeal from the re- 
 turning Officer. All Courts of Appeal 
 ought to judge by the fame Law as the 
 Courts from which the Appeal is brought. 
 L it
 
 ( 7+ ) 
 
 It was allowed, indeed, that the Sheriffs 
 had not acted amifs upon this Occafion, by 
 keeping their Oaths, and conforming to the 
 Directions of the Ads of Parliament : But 
 it was faid, the Refolutions of the Houfe, 
 whatever they might be elfewhere, were 
 certainly Law within thofe Walls ; there- 
 fore, though the Sheriffs ought, by the 
 Law of the Land, to return Mr. Wilkes 
 upon a Majority, We, by the Lav/ of Par- 
 liament, ought to feat Mr. Luttrell upon a 
 Minoritv. 
 
 Such were the Arguments that were 
 gravely ufed by very respectable Authorities 
 of the Law, in Support of this Queftion. 
 Nobody doubts that the Law of England 
 is Law in the Houfe of Lords ; yet if that 
 Houfe were to judge a Caufe upon an Ap- 
 peal from the Court of Seffion by that 
 Law, in a Point wl^cre it differs from the 
 Law of Scotland, Everybody would, I be- 
 lieve, doubt the Equity, though Nobody 
 could the Efficacy, of the Decifion. 
 
 Inferior
 
 ( 75 ) 
 
 Inferior Courts having Judicature, and 
 abufing it, are amenable to, and may be pu- 
 nished by, Parliament. There is no Ccn- 
 troul over the Commons, if they judge 
 wrong in Cafes of Election ; as among the 
 Antients there v/as no Puniihment for Par- 
 ricide, not becaufe it was no Crime, but be- 
 caufe their Legiflators thought it impofli- 
 ble the Offspring mould deftrov the Pa- 
 rent from whom it derived its Exiftence. 
 To fuppofe an Houfe or Commons fo con- 
 ilituted as to be adverfe to the People, is to 
 fuppofe Something unnatural : which, did it 
 for a Moment exifb, fbould, like all other 
 Monfters, be ftifled at its Birth, left it 
 mould grow up a Difgrace to its Nature, 
 and a Curie to its Parent. 
 
 I have troubled you with this minute 
 Diicurlion of every pothole Pretence to this 
 Right, becaufe I thought it neccliary to let 
 this Tranfaction in its true Light, to mew 
 that the Arguments ufed in Favour of the 
 Queftion were the Language of Deceit not 
 Error, and to prove that a Claim of the 
 L 2 greateft
 
 ( 76 ) 
 
 greateft Importance, and the firit Impref- 
 iion, was not even founded upon an Abufe 
 of Right, or Perverfion of Law, and was, 
 to the Honour of our Constitution, as un- 
 exampled as unreafonable. The Houfe of 
 Commons has, 'tis true, in former Times, 
 been engaged in Difputes upon their Powers 
 in Election-Matters with the other Branches 
 of the Lci T iilature, as in the Cafe of Sir 
 Francis Goodwin, and that of Afhby and 
 White : But it remained for the Policy of 
 the prefent Times, and the Ingenuity of 
 the prefent Minifters, to create a Difpute 
 between the Collective and Reprefentative 
 Body, by fetting the Privileges in Opposi- 
 tion to the Rights of the People. 
 
 I am not to learn, that where the Peo- 
 ple have a Right to fubftantial Juftice, 
 they will not be fatisiied with the Quirks of 
 Law, or the Sophiitry of Order. However 
 fuccefsfully thefe may formerly have been 
 employed, from the Mouth of a Minider, 
 to palliate the venal Vote to the callous 
 Conference of a bribed Senator, they will 
 
 never
 
 ( 77 ) 
 
 never pcrfuade a free and enlightened Peo- 
 ple, that the Rights which they have re- 
 served, can be deflroyed by the Privileges 
 which they have granted. They will watch 
 every Invafion of the Ri (r ht of Election with 
 a jealous Eye 5 Forms and Precedents will 
 have little Weight with them,N( they will 
 inveftigate the Print noon general and ccn- 
 ilitutional Principles. There will convince 
 them, that Laws, which arc intended for 
 the Security, can never operate to the De- 
 firuclion, of their mod: valuable Rights. 
 Thev will fee that it is imnofiible a Free- 
 holder, who is but one Degree removed 
 from a Legiflator, mould lole his Rights 
 by any Thing but the Act of the whole Le- 
 gislature. 
 
 Reafon, as well as Sidney, will tell them, 
 That as the People's Delegates, or Reprc- 
 fentatives in Parliament, do not meet there 
 by a Power derived from Kings, but from 
 thofe that chufe them ; 10 they who dele- 
 gate Power do always retain to themfelvcs 
 more than they give 5 and, therefore, the 
 
 People
 
 ( 7S ) 
 
 People do not give their Delegates an abfo- 
 lute Power of doing what they pleafe, but 
 do always retain to themfelves more than 
 they confer on their Deputies, who mull, 
 therefore, be accountable to their Princi- 
 pals. 
 
 They will fee, that the very Point upon 
 which this Claim reffs, the Power of the 
 Houfe of Commons, fnrnimes the ilrongeil 
 Argument againfl it. The greater and more 
 important the Power to be delegated is, the 
 more neceffary is it that the Right of the 
 People in Delegating that Power fhould be 
 free and unrefl rained. If there is an Aflembly 
 which is to have the abfolute Difpofal of 
 the Lives, Liberties, and Fortunes of the 
 Whole ; furely it is but rcafonable that every 
 Part mould have full Power to intruft the 
 Care cf their Interests in that Aflembly to 
 Thofe, and Thole only, whom they think 
 mod likely to difcharge that Trull with In- 
 tegrity and Ability, iubjedt to no fubfequent 
 Controul. This is ablolutely necefiary to 
 form a tree Reprefentation for the Security 
 
 of
 
 ( 79 ) 
 
 of the Parts, and can by no means be at- 
 tended with any Inconvenience to the 
 Whole ; as the Reprefentative fo appointed 
 is not veiled with an independent negative 
 Power, but is bound, as well as his Condi- 
 ments, by the Determination of the Majo- 
 rity. Such a People will guard with 
 
 Temper and Firmnefs what they have 
 watched with Vigilance ; they will be care- 
 ful that Nothing unjuftifiable in the Mode 
 mall defeat the Ends, or difgrace the Mo- 
 tives of their Oppolition. 
 
 The late Determination was certainly the 
 Aft of the Houfc of Commons, becaufe 
 whatever is determined by a Majority of 
 Members prefent, above forty, is deemed fo 
 by the Constitution of Parliament ; but ma- 
 ny Circumftances lead me to doubt, whether 
 it can really be thought the Opinion of the 
 Reprefentative Body of the People. It was 
 carried thro' upon the lad: Day of a pro- 
 tracted Sefiion, after it had been determined 
 in a thin Houfe, that there mould not be a 
 full one, by the (till then, I believe, unpre- 
 cedented)
 
 ( So ) 
 
 cedented) Refufal of a Call of the Houfe, 
 upon a Diviiion of 94 to 49 : I cannot help 
 therefore lamenting, in the Style of Col. 
 Luttrell's Advertifement, " that 221 fo cir- 
 <c cumftanced, not being the Majority of 
 " 558, ihould arrogate to themfelves the 
 " Right of pronouncing the compreheniive 
 •' Senfe of the vvhole People of England." 
 
 An Houfe of Commons may indeed act 
 wrong, by conforming to the Prejudices of 
 People j and the Constitution has guarded 
 againft any Inconveniences attending fo justi- 
 fiable a U liflake, by the Negative which the 
 other Branches of the Legiflature have upon 
 the Proceedings of that Aflemblv. But 
 that Houfe of Commons miijl act wrong, 
 which ads in notorious Oppcfition to the 
 Sentiments of the People who lent them. 
 The contrary Notion, mould it prevail, 
 would be fatal to the Exigence of the De- 
 mocratical Part of cur Conftitution, by flib- 
 ftitutin? in its Place a fecond independent 
 ariftocratical Branch, not like the fi.fr, 
 founded in the Rieht of Ileredit* ry Succef- 
 
 lien.
 
 ( 8i ) 
 
 iion, or Royal Favour, but the Offspring of 
 cafual Wealth, and occafional Corruption. 
 Such a Notion fuppofes an Unpopular Po- 
 pular Affembly; a Reprefentative Body not 
 Ileprefenting.— It is in vain to attempt de- 
 scribing the Effects of this Dodrine -, the 
 Horror of the Idea is loft in the Abfurdity 
 of the Expreillon. 
 
 The prefent Situation of our Liberties is 
 truly critical - 3 they are, indeed, in imminent 
 Danger, but not irretrievably loft : A firm, 
 vigorous, and immediate Exertion of the 
 ftill unqueftioned Rights of the People, will 
 reftore the Conftitution to its priftine Vigour. 
 The voice of the Collective Body muft, and 
 ought to have the moft effectual Weight 
 with the Elected Body. Should the People 
 in general exprefs their DirTatisfaction at the 
 late Proceedings; whether their Complaints 
 mould reach the Ears of their Reprefenta- 
 tives by the old Constitutional Method of 
 Xnftructions, or by the means of Private Con- 
 vention during the Recefs*, I do not 
 
 * It is the Law and Cuftom of Parliament, That 
 
 when any new Device is moved on the King's Behalf 
 
 M in
 
 ( 82 ) 
 
 doubt that the prefent uncorrupt Houfe of 
 Commons will remember their Creator in the 
 days of their Touth ; that they will know that 
 it is their Duty to'exprefs, not controul, the 
 Sentiments of the People. 
 
 Thofe who think their Conduct in Par- 
 liament mould be fwayed by Reafon, will 
 find furficient Arguments to induce them 
 to refcind the Refolution ; nor are Precedents 
 wanting, (where the Houfe of Commons 
 have undone in Cafes affecting the Rights 
 of the People, in one Seffion, what they 
 had done before) to guide thofe who prefer 
 Example to Reafon, 
 
 Should the People prefer the Exercife of 
 that Right which the Nature of the Con- 
 in Parliament, for his Aid or the like, the Commons 
 may anfwer, " That they tender the King's Eftate, and 
 are ready to aid the fame; only in this Device they dare 
 not agree, without Conference with their Counties : 
 whereby it appcareth, that fuch Conference is war- 
 rantable by the Lav/ and Cuftom of Parliament." L?x 
 
 ftitutiors
 
 ( «3 ) 
 
 ftitution has referved to them *, of appeal- 
 ing to the Wifdom and Juftice of the Su- 
 preme Power, by refpectfully carrying their 
 Complaints to the Foot of the Throne ; it 
 is not to be doubted that they would ob- 
 tain the fulled Redrefs from Him, who is 
 truly the Father of his People. In fhort, 
 any vigorous Step warranted by the Confti- 
 t ut ion, cannot fail of rendering fuch Doc- 
 trines as, That the People*, by giving their 
 Votes at an Election for one Man, have chofen 
 another, and, 'That becaufe the Law declares 
 him to be duly elected who has the Majority of 
 legal Votes, therefore the Perfon who has the 
 Minority ought to fit, rather ridiculous in 
 the Eyes of Pofterity from their Abfurdity, 
 than odious from their Confequences. 
 
 * " Refolved, That the Houfe do agree with the 
 Committee in the faid Refolution, fo amended, That 
 it is the undoubted Right of the People of Eng- 
 land to petition or addrers to the King for the Call- 
 ing, Sitting, or Dissolving Parliaments ; and for 
 the redressing of Grievances." Journals of tit 
 Gammons, Feb. 26, 17CI. 
 
 M 2 No-
 
 ( «4 ) 
 
 Nothing can be fatal to the Liberties of 
 the People but their own Inactivity. Should 
 they in this fir ft Inftance fubmit, without 
 Complaint, to the Exercife of this new- 
 claimed Power, fuch a Silence will imply 
 their Confent, and this Refolution will be- 
 come, by fuch Confent *, the Law of the 
 Land. 
 
 The facred Right of Free Ele&ion, 
 founded in the very Principles of the Con- 
 ftitution, confirmed by the Wifdom of 
 Ages and the Blood of Thoufands, may 
 by the Negligence of a Moment be loft 
 for ever ! It behoves them to remember, 
 before it be too late, that excellent Ob- 
 fervation of a former Parliament, in their 
 Apology to one of our Kings, " The 
 " Privileges of Subjects are, for the mod 
 
 * It (the Cuftom) muft have been peaceable, and 
 acquiefced in ; not (ubjea to Conttntion and Difpute. 
 For as Cuftoms owe their Original to common Con- 
 fent, their being immemorblly difputed, either at 
 Law or ctberwife, is a Proof that fuch Confent is 
 wanting. Ela-kjlcn-fs Commentaries. 
 
 « Part,
 
 ( 85 ) 
 
 C£ Part, at •an everlafting Stand. They 
 "may, by good Providence and Care, be 
 tc preferved, but being once loft are not 
 *' recovered but with much Difquiet." 
 
 I mall make no Apology for having 
 troubled you with fo long a Letter upon 
 fo important and interesting an Occafion ; 
 which I flatter myfelf you will rather look 
 upon as a Duty than an Intrufion. I 
 think, with Doctor Blackftone, that <c Every 
 " Member's Conduct is fubject to the fu- 
 " ture Cenfure of his Constituents, and, 
 <c therefore, mould be openly fubmitted to 
 " their Infpedion." I mould have been 
 afhamed, upon any future Occafion, to 
 foliicit you for the Renewal of fo impor- 
 tant a Trull: as the Care of your Liber- 
 ties in Parliament, could there have been 
 the fmallcft Doubt of their having fuftered 
 by my Negligence or Connivance. I have 
 thought it my Duty, not only to give 
 an Amount of my own Conduit, but to 
 ftate to you, at large, the Danger your 
 Rights are expofed to, and to fuggeft to 
 
 YOU
 
 ( 86 ) 
 
 you the only conftitutional Means of Re- 
 drefs full in your Power. 
 
 I will conclude by auuring you, that 
 my Conduct in Parliament has been influ- 
 enced by no Motive but a fincere Zeal for 
 the Welfare of my Country ; and that I 
 have conftantly had in View that excellent 
 Obfervation with which Doctor Blackftone 
 concludes his Commentaries : " The Pro- 
 " tedtion of the Liberty of Britain 
 11 is a Duty which they (fuch Gentlemen 
 " of the Kingdom as are delegated by 
 <£ their Country to Parliament ) owe to 
 " themfelves, who enjoy it ; to their An- 
 " ceflors, who tranfmitted it down ; and to 
 <c their Pofterity, who will claim at their 
 " Hands this, the beft Birth-Right, and 
 * c nobl&ft Inheritance, of Mankind.'; 
 
 I am, 
 
 S I R, 
 
 Yours, Sec:
 
 POSTSCRIPT. 
 
 "S HOUGH I flatter myfelf you will find every 
 Appearance cf Argument on the Minilterial Side 
 refuted in my Letter, yet, as a Performance has ap- 
 peared, under the title of The Cafe of the Lite Elcclion for the 
 County of Middlefex confedered, on the Principles of the Confutation 
 and the Authorities of La<ve, which leems to be their grand Bat- 
 tery, and is faid to be the Work cf their chief Engineer ; I 
 could not let it pafs without fome Obfervations upon ihe moffc 
 linking Parts. The Author fets out with declaring himfelf the 
 Champion of a prudent Adminijlration, which is not inattentive to 
 popular Clamour. Whether the People will take this Gentleman's 
 bare Affertion againfl the confident Conduct of Adminillra- 
 tion, upon thofe two Points, Time mult difcover. Pie un- 
 dertakes the arduous Tafk of making the People renounce their 
 Opinions (wh:ch are, according to him, founded on tie mifguided 
 Impetuofify of public Prejudice) ; and to turn their Rrfninient againft 
 thofe avho have deceived and mfed them. " To th s End, he pro- 
 " pofes to ihew, from the Records of Parliament and the Au- 
 " thorities of" Law, that the Houfe of Commons is legally 
 " inverted with the Power which they have exercifed with Re- 
 " fpett to the late Determination of the Election for Midd.efex." 
 " Farther, that, on the general Principles of P.eafon and con- 
 " Ititutional Policy, they ought to have iuch a Power: And that, 
 Ci in the Inftance in Qoeftion, they have exercifed tlitir Power 
 " in a Jutland conftitutional Manner ; not only according to 
 " the Law and Ufage of Parliaments, but in Uriel Conformity 
 " with the Adjudications in the Courts of Weftminiter on fimilar 
 " Cccaiions." It niuft be confeffed, that he has not midaken 
 the Means ; it remains to enquire whether he is poflefTcd of the 
 Materials. 
 
 The Author (page 6.) fays, " The Law of Parliament may 
 ■f 1 be confidered as compofed of two Branches ; i. The Rules, 
 " Orders, Cufloms, and Courfe of the Houfe, with their Expo- 
 ' : fitions of and Decifions upon the Law, with Refpeft to Matters 
 tl within their Jurisdiction. The Cufloms, Courfe-, and tora- 
 " mon judicial Proceedings of a Court are the I. aw of the 
 " Court, of which, the common Law takes Notice, without 
 45 alledging or pleading any Ufage or Prefcriptio.n to v. hi rant 
 
 N " them."
 
 POSTSCRIPT. 
 
 * ( them." The Author will not, I fuppofe, deny, that the 
 Perfon having the Majority of legal Votes is, by the Cvfom 
 of Parliament, duly elefted. He contends, however, that, 
 by the Cujlom of Parliament, the Perfon who has wt the Ma- 
 jority of legal Votes ought to fit. 1 fhould be glad to know 
 how' he will reconcile this Doctrine to that formerly laid 
 down by hi: .,.-V>Dr. Blacklicne. " Cufioms mult be confident 
 cl with e?ch other: One Cuftom cannot be fet up in Oppofition 
 " to another ; for if both are really Cbftcms, then both are of 
 " equal Antiquity, and bath cftablifhed by mutual Confent ; 
 " which to fay of contradictory Cuiloms is abfurd." 
 
 The Author then proceeds to prove, what nobody doubts or 
 has difputed, " That the Houfe of Commons have the fole and 
 «' exclufive Power of punifhing their own Members, as fuch ; 
 " either by Commitment, Sufpenfion. Expulfion, or other wife"" 
 What this 'Gentleman means by this Expreflion, it is too vague 
 for me to determine; nor do I know of any other Powers than 
 thofe he fpecifies, except Reprimand. To prove this, he refers 
 the Reader to a pompous Note, full of Precedent:, with proper 
 Italics, to mark the Application of the Cafe of Mr. Steele, the 
 Champion of the Hanover Succeffion, to that of Mr. Wilkes. 
 
 In page 9. we are told, " The neeffary Confequence of 
 *' Expulfion is, that the Perfon expelled fhall be incapable 
 *.' of being elected again ta ferve in the fame Houfe of Com- 
 " mons that expelled him. This Incapacity is implied in the 
 «' very Meaning of tiie Word itfelf. Should any Man of plain 
 tc Senfe, nay, fhould any young Academician, or School-Boy, 
 " even be afked what is un'derftood by expelling a Man from 
 «' any Society, they would certainly anfwer, The Meaning is, 
 •« that he fha'll never be a Member of thai Club, or of that Col- 
 «< lege, or of that School, anymore." 1 will not difpute with 
 the Author upon the Nature of Club-Expulfions, as 1 am fenfi- 
 ble he has an Opportunity of knowing their Extent from the 
 belt Authority *. 'fie has, however, forgot one material Cir- 
 cumuance attending the Cafes which he has quoted, which is, 
 that the Perfon: who expel are thofe who have the Power of elect- 
 ing; and any young Academician (Chancellor of aUnwerfity), or 
 even School-Boy, will tell him, that they do not deprive them- 
 selves of their Right to receive again the Scholar, though it is 
 not probable they will exercife it. In the next paragraph we 
 are told, " Expulfion clearly, ex Vi Termini, (ignifics a total, 
 " and not a partial Exclufion from the Society or Parliament 
 «' from whence he is removed. If a Member is excluded during 
 ?• Pleafure, or for a certain Time only, that is, properly fpeak- 
 '• ing, a Suspension, and not an Expulsion." The Fallacy 
 of this Argument might be detected by the Author's School-Boy, 
 V/ho would certainly tell him, that a Member fufpended never 
 
 * VMc the Jockey-Club Proceedings in Brjreton's Cite, tigr.cd by the 
 
 ceafes
 
 POSTSCRIPT. 
 
 ceafes to be a Member, and is entitled to his Seat again with- 
 out a Re-election ; and that a Member expelled does ceafe to be 
 a Member, and is not entitled to any Seat without a frefh, 
 Election. 
 
 The Author tells us, " To admit the Right of expelling, 
 " and argue that the Member expelled may be re-elecled that 
 " Parliament, is to contend for the greateit Abfurdity imagin- 
 *' able: Jt would expofe the Houfe of Commons to the mod 
 " flagrant Infult and Contempt; it would render the Determi- 
 " nation of the Houfe of Commons totally nugatory, if the 
 " Member whom they expelled To-day fhould be forced upoa 
 " them again Tcmorrow." The Crown has the fame Power 
 to diffolve (or, if I may be allowed the Exprefiion, to expel) 
 the whole Houfe, that the Houfe has to expel one Member : a 
 Power lodged in the Crown, not to be wantonly exercifed, but 
 for the wifeft Purpofes, from a Prefumption of Law, that the 
 King, who can do no wrong, will only exert it to prevent " un- 
 " fit a'..d unworthy Re preventatives fitting in Parliament, to the 
 " Diigrace and Detriment of the Nation. Will this Gentleman 
 fay, that the Crown is expofed " to the mod fl?grant Infuits 
 " and Contempt," and its Power " rendered totally nugatory," 
 becaufe the Parliament it has diffolved " To-day may be forced 
 upon it again To-mOrrowr" The Fact: is, thefe Powers are 
 exactly fimilar, equally necefTary, and granted for' the fame 
 Purpofes. An imprudent Surrender of one of thefe Powers to 
 the Long Parliament coil the King his Head, and occasioned 
 the Subverfion of the Conflitution ; an unwarrantable Stretch of 
 the other may force the People to call upon the Crown for the 
 Exertion of that Prerogative, which can alone deprive thofe of 
 the Power who have forfeited the Efieem and Confidence of the 
 People. The Houfe of Commons may expel ; the King may 
 diffolve ; but in both Cafes it is the People alone that muit 
 chufe their Reprefentative, whilft the Conititucion remains upon 
 its original Foundation. 
 
 Page 1 1 the Author puts an extraordinary QuefHon : " Shall 
 " they be at Liberty to reflcre him, who had no Power to expel 
 " him ?" This Queltion is juft as applicable to the Cafe of a 
 whole Parliament upoa a Difiblution, as to that of a fingle 
 Member upon an Expulfion, the People having *s little Power 
 to diilblve as to expel. Let me afo him, however, what he 
 thinks of his own (hie 'ion nearly inverted : Shall they be at 
 Liberty to exclude him who have no Power to elect him? 
 " Certahih n>A." 
 
 tie next fnppofes, for the Sake of Argument, that the People 
 met in their Collective, a-d not Rep refer, taiive Body ; and afks 
 if they weald not have a Right to exclude any one Perfon from 
 that Society? Undoubtedly they would ; ;v d by fuch Exclu- 
 fion the origii a' Comp; .t would be diflbived as to that Perfon ; 
 who heme eiep'.ived ci the Benefits, would be difcharged from 
 the buriker.s el" the Society, li, therefore, this could prove 
 
 N z any
 
 POSTSCRIPT. 
 
 any thing- in the prefent Cafe, it would prove that the Free- 
 holders of Middlesex being, in the Perfon of their Representa- 
 tive, excluded from the Houfe of Commons, are not bound by 
 its Authority. It muit be confeffed that th ; s Author is as unfor- 
 tunate when he attempts to reafon, a« I fhall prove him to be 
 when he tntcrJi to quote. In the next Page we find the melt 
 barefaced Attempt to imrofe a falfe Quotation upon the Public, 
 in the Cafe of Mr Walpole, by emitting the Words " committed 
 "■ a Prifoner to the Tower of London," and " for a high Breach 
 " of Trull in the Execution or his Office, and notorious Corrup- 
 " ticn when Secretary at War." 1 call it a bare'aced Attempt 
 to impofe upon the Public, becaufe it is plain that this Gen- 
 tlemar., by pompoufiy putting Re/oliied in Capitals ?t the [dead 
 c: it, and marking the whole as a Quotation, without any Break 
 to fhew the Omiffions, meant that it fhould pals for a fair and 
 full Extract from the Journals. J only mention this a c a Speci- 
 men of minilkrial Candour -without Dccrs, In Fact, either Way 
 it would not be material to the mam Point; though the true 
 State of the Qecllicn would ha\ebeen fatal to thus Writer's 
 Argument, who had Senfe to d.icern, though not Ingenuity to 
 conlefs, that the Hcufe meant tcctciare that incapacity was the 
 Effect of Breach of ofiicial Trait and notorious Corruption, 
 p.r.d as fuch tne Concomitant, and not the Coniequence of 
 txpulfion. 
 
 Having fern how the Author proceeds when he wants to 
 wreff. an inapplicable Precedent to his Purpofe, we fhall next 
 fee Li: Manner of getting rid of ore that is directly agamft 
 him. He undertakes to prove, that Incapacity has been 
 the ccr.i.ant Efftcl of Expu lion ; but in his Wry, he unfer- 
 tur.atelv Humbles upon the Cale cf Mr. Wcolahon ; in which 
 tits Elf ui'e ufed thewrrd Expel L d (ph.i--jj.et ihuanrctcly* in- 
 deed, if you will beluve h;m) to exprefs a h/;:p',re.ry /ttneticu. 
 ]f the Precede! ts of Pailiament are to be the Law of the Land, 
 this Wiiter muit txcufe us if we take them as they are to be 
 iound upon the Journal?, without any Regard to cither tie 
 Corrections or fpoliaticns of an anonymous Commentator. 
 indeed, it w ill be onlv i ecefidiy to ruerhirnto the p-eceding 
 Pace of his c wn Famphic t to o i.v nee ! im, that " Nothing can 
 • 4 be more abfurd then to urge an Opinion frcm Z-..yd \,:.d;/; only, 
 " cor.trarv to that which i ccc'r.icd in f.xpe] Wuds" How- 
 ever, fcr the Sake of Aigumen:, we vviil lor a Moment admit 
 
 * Tli's Jr.-cr\rac\' v.'a3, hr.wevcr, br ri Vc?r.s crfinc! c! her to ifrjt 
 fVe, or tl-st Far.ament. W.. i'n.i another f'nrj cf C> inmoni, F'ch. ;o, 
 i-cc, icfi'IvirK, 1 li t Sm- lit- <\ Fii'Tie!!::, havir-g (incc risr-ems; eitcre.i a 
 Member of that Vm'isn l 'arccr-teHa I j| tc ■ , h rcd.ri-i ruiify of a ll-vich. 
 r.ft't ■■■ (\ r.f t! c ;'h -.-■: f,'.h C YV,».. ai.r! M. (be ;".,n c th.it ?.'■-. U c r-! 3 . 
 (tnr.'s OfTe-icc otic >'r : < - : Art! it v.-.,. f 3 r !.•■> re r oh-eo, 1 hit the fa ; d Sir 
 I-k-i i; iun cllc be. !cr :! c Cr-:. /■ i l" 'I >• \,6 Act, r. r. :• f :. - . i :> ilvsUcVi. 
 Rv v!i ; (h i" appeas, :!u; in two l'u iian.;r.'.. ; j at i'wdit, u o/.< iruar.t 
 s/r.::..-:, and net I.^J-jmjf. 
 
 that
 
 POSTSCRIPT. 
 
 that the ExpreMion was fo?r.e-zvbat inaccurate. This very Inaccuracy 
 is all that is con ended for on our Part. The Author undertakes 
 to prove, t' at" Expulfion, ex Vi Termini, fignifies a total, and 
 '* not a partial Exclusion ;" and, in the Coune of his Proof, he 
 is obliged to affert, thar the Houfe of Commons, in the Year 
 1698 (no very ignorant Time), were rot accurate in confining 
 the Word to that Signification. Will he perfhr. in contend- 
 ing, that fo important a Right as that of Election is to be 
 regulated by a Law, fubject to fo grofs an Inaccuracy as to ex- 
 prtfs the verv Reverfe of what it means ? 
 
 The Author fpends eighteen Pages in proving, that " They 
 " have the fole and excluiive Power of examining and deter- 
 «' mining the Rights and Qualifications of Electors and Elected, 
 " together with the Returns of Writs, and all Matters inci- 
 " dental to Elections." This Nobody difputes. I cannot, 
 however, agree with him, that " It is by their Refolutions, 
 " only, that perfons of various Gaffes are at this Day dif- 
 " quai-ified." To prove the contrary, it is iufhxient to remark, 
 that thole Refolutions were all judgments upon Cafes before 
 them, according to what v.- as the Law before, and not Declara- 
 tions of what fhould become, the Paw. The Houfe of Commons, 
 in thofe Davs, wotfd have been itruck with the Injuftice of au 
 ex poftfcMo Law. There is a Proof (in the Ca'e of Sir Andrew 
 Noweil, Sheriff of Rutland, in D'Ewes's Joujnal) that the 
 Houfe thought themfelves obliged to conform to the Rules of 
 the Common 1 aw. in Preference to their own Precedents where 
 they were con trad ictoiy : Sir Edward Hobby faid, The Houfe 
 might well receive Sir Ardnw Nowcl! ■ and he vouched a Pre- 
 cedent of the 5 1 it of the Queen, when a Writ was directed to 
 the Bailiffs of Souihwaik to icturn liurgefibs, and they returned 
 themfelves, and were received. It was uigeri on the other fide. 
 Thai, bv the Common Law. no Man can make an Indenture to 
 himfelf. Sir Andrew Noweil was not received. 
 
 The Author fays (Page 32. ), 'thar, upon Mr. Wilkes's being 
 returned after his Expulfion, the Houfe refo'ved, ,; That hcivas 
 " and is incapable of being elected to fe.rve in this prefent Par- 
 " liament/' i "bete/b>e, admitting that hh Incapacity was not a 
 necfjjh.vy Co?ifq:-e:ice of his Expulfion, which the Freeholder.! 
 were boi.r.d to take Notice of, yet " this e::/. >■/■/: Declaration 
 " of incapacity wa: inch as all the Freeholders of' Great Britain 
 t: were bound to take Notice of." What wou:J this Gentleman 
 think of a Couitoi luilicc, which, having iraufborted a Man 
 ior ieven Years for a Felony, fneuhl upon his Return think that 
 he - tight to have been hanged, and tier, 'Ire condemn him to be 
 hanged for the /a.vu Crime? 
 
 'I he Author then cites feme Corporatio - ! C:\ r c:, in which 
 
 Perfons having the Majority of Votes we:e k-c aiide bv (hi 
 Courts below, upon Diiqualifications proceeding from the fun- 
 damental Conflitutions of tiofe Corporations, to iu'iifv fucb a 
 Proceeding by the Houfe of Cumincns, contrary to the funda- 
 mental
 
 POSTSCRIPT. 
 
 mental Conftitution of Parliament and exprefs Statutes ; and 
 this he calls a happy Inrtance of the perfect Agreement 
 and Correfpondence between the Adjudications of the Courts 
 of Weftminfter, and the Determinations of the Houfe of 
 Commons. 
 
 The Author having fet out with faying, " Removed, as the 
 " far greater Part are, from the Source of true Intelligence, 
 " how eafy is it for thofe who have an Intereft in ynpofing on 
 «' the Public, to miflead them by falfe Reprefentations ? " is 
 determined to try how far he can impofe upon rhem by a fecond 
 flagrant Mifeprefentation of the Proceedings of the Houfe. He 
 fays (Page^;.) " Nay, indeed, it has been admitted on the 
 «' other Side, that they (the Votes) were thrown away; for on 
 •« the Queftion, Whether the foregoing Elections of Mr. Wilkes 
 «' were null and void? they were without a Divifion deter- 
 4C mined to be null and void." This did not proceed, as this 
 Writer pretends, from a general Admifiion that the Votes were 
 null and void, but from the neceffary Obfervation of that Rule 
 of Proceeding by which the Houfe of Commons is precluded 
 from refcinding a Refolution it has come to in the fame' Seffion. 
 
 In Page 38. we find the Author endeavouring to get rid of 
 that Part of Mr. Walpole's Cafe which makes direcTy again.! 
 him; Mr. Taylor's not being received when Mr. Walpole's 
 Election was declared void. For this Purpofe, he 'fays, 
 «' Inafmuch as it was the fir ft and only Inftance in which 
 " the Electors of any County or Borough 'had returned a Per- 
 «• fori expelled to ferve in the fame Parliament, ar.d the Elcdcrs 
 " might be prefumed not to have due Notice of the Effect, of 
 " Expulfion, the Houfe gave them an Opportunity to cor- 
 " reel their Error." He allows, that " It mav be faid, in- 
 «« deed, that by their voting for a Perfon ineligible, a Rioht 
 " attached, by Operation of Law, in Mr. Taylor." ' It is net 
 at ail furprifing, that it fhould coft an Author nothino- to dif- 
 pcfe of Mr. Taylor's Right by a Vote of Parliament, who 
 writes with a profeffed Intention to prove that the legal Rights 
 of ail the Electors may be difpofed of by a Vet- of the Houfe 
 of Commons. Had this Gentleman fully quoted Mr. Walpole's 
 Cafe, as I have done, it would have appeared that the Houfe 
 of Commons refufed to admit Mr. Taylor, from a Conviction 
 that they had no Right to do it, and not from a Preemption 
 that the Electors were ignorant of futh a Right .'had it cxided) ; 
 fince Mr. Taylor's Friends actually did aff'rt it in their Peti- 
 tion*; though the Houfe refufed to countenance the Claim by 
 hearing the Petition. Let us flop for a Moment here, ar.d fee 
 what the Hillrry of this Law of 'Exprdficn and Incapacity is, 
 as it is given us by the Author himfelf. Seventy Years a^o, 
 the Houfe (in the Cafe of Mr. Woolafton), from not kneiving 
 the Effect of the knewi Law of Parliament, uftd an Expreffion 
 
 * Vide Mr. Walpols'3 Cafe, fupr, Page 23. 
 
 which
 
 POSTSCRIPT. 
 
 which meant the very Reverfe of what they intended. About 
 fixty Years ago, the Houfc of Commons, from a Prefumption 
 that the Electors were ignorant of the known Law (notwith- 
 standing " * There cannot be a ftronger Inllance that, in the 
 *' general Senfe of Mankind, fuch Incapacity is the neceffary 
 " Effect of Expulfion, than that of there having never b^ta 
 " any Attempt made to reeled one in the fame Parliament, 
 " out of the very many that have been expelled, except in 
 " the fingle Jnilance of Mr. Walpole,") thought proper to 
 exeraje a Power of difper.f.Kg 'with that Lazy, which is the Birth- 
 right and Inheritance of every Englifhman, to the Prejudice of Mr. 
 Taylor and thofe Electors who had not thrown away their Votes, 
 though they actually claimed the Benefit of it. 
 
 The Author apprehends great Danger to the Constitution, if, 
 " by arbitrarily keeping Seats vacant, the Koufe may be 
 " purged, as in Oliver's Time, to any Degree a Minifter thinks 
 fe proper ;" but he thinks this Danger may b:- prevented by 
 arbitrarily fitting than up with whoever a JJinfier thinks proper. 
 lie tells us (Page 42.) " All that is contended is, that 
 *' thev (the Electors) have exerci fed their Rights ineffectu- 
 " ally." Here we are likely to agree for once; for all that 
 is comnlained cf is, that the Electors having exercifsd their 
 Right, it was not fufFered to have its Effect. He, however, 
 comforts them, by gracioufly alluring them, that " Ih or.e means 
 " to take away their Francbife ;" and that " 'J hey have fiill the 
 " Right of vo f inp, on any future Occafion, for whom they 
 (C pleafe, being duly qualified;'''' (that is, not difugreeable to the 
 Minijiry). " To remove the Apprehenficns (if ferious] of thofe 
 " who fay, at this Rate the Houfe of Commons may declare 
 " that no Freeholder under ten Pounds a Year fnall vote at an 
 <« Election for a Knight of the Shire, he allures them, that the 
 «' Statute of Hen. VI. having fixe-.i the Qualifications of the 
 " Freeholders at 40 s. per Ann. ic i? net in the Power of the 
 " Houfe of Commons, nor of any Judicature whatfoever, to 
 " alter it: I he Legiflature only can enlarge cr diminilh the 
 " Qualification," 1 add, either of the E/ca'crj or E heeled; and 
 mould be glad to know what greater Security a Freeholder of 
 40 s. has that he fh?li be admitted to chufe, than a Gentleman 
 of Cool, a Ytar that he fhall be allowed to be chofen : The 
 Rights are equally lieu red by Law" : The Power which c«n an- 
 nihila'.e the one, can violate the other. Suppofe feme mini- 
 fteriai Dependant perhaps this very Author) fliouid Hand up 
 in the IU u e, and tell them, " That there is indeed " an obfo- 
 " lets Stctutj"' of Hen. VI. that fixes the Qualification of Elec- 
 «* tors at 40 s. ptr Ann. but that when that Statute was made 
 ei 40 s. wt re equal to 20 1. now ; that they have a recent Proof 
 " in the Behaviour of the County or Middlefex, how improper 
 " it is to allow the Scum of the Earth a Share in the Choice of 
 
 * Pige ic. of the Cafe Centered. 
 
 " Members
 
 POSTSCRIPT. 
 
 *« Members to fit in that auguft Amembly." Suppofe this 
 Realoning backed by the Mini/try, and adopted by the Houfe 
 of Commons, who, in Confequence of it, declare by a Refolu- 
 tion, that no Freeholder /hall vote who has not ten or twenty 
 Pounds per Ann. How is this Vote to be prevented from taking 
 Effed ? Have they not " the fole and exclufive Power of exa- 
 " mmmg and determining the Rights and Qualifications of 
 " Ele&ors and Ele&ed, together with the Return of Writs, 
 " and all Matters incidental to Elections f' y Are not their Judg- 
 ments " the m..-;e binding becaufe rhey are without Appeal f" 
 and are they nut « the proper and fole Judicature, entrufted with 
 *' the Expojitton of tie Lazv in fitch Ca/es ' " 
 
 The Author in the fame Page: (43 ) In h ; s great Eagerncfs 
 to accufe and blacken the Opposition, makes two very un- 
 guarded Confeffions, which his Friends in Administration will 
 not be obliged to him for : The one is, " Thac they have not 
 *' employed the proper Attention to Improvements ior the public 
 " Good." This the People have long feen, and long complained 
 of. The other Con feflion, which makes their Jujiification from 
 this Crime, and the Accufation again/t the Opposition, is, " That 
 «' they be/lowed that Attention upon tne Management of this 
 " Election." it has long been felt end complained of in thisCon- 
 ititution, that Ministers did interfere in and influence Elections; 
 but never till now had any Minister or his .Dependents the 
 Effrontery to avow it, or the Folly to plead it as an Excufe for 
 their Neglect of Duty. It becomes the People to look about 
 them: vVhen Mininers difdain to fave Appearances, it is not 
 to be expected they will forbear to invade real Rights. Even 
 Hypocriiy has its Merit, when it ferves to re/train more daring 
 Vices. 
 
 I /hall conclude this with an Obfervation of this Author's 
 upon the Proceedings of the Houfe of Lords, the Application 
 of which, to thoj'c of another Affembly, 1 /hall leave to you : 
 ** An iniatiable Appetite tor Power is natural to all Bodies of 
 ** Men; and if the Judgment of that auguit A/lembly may be 
 " prefumed to have lefs Authority in one Cafe than another, it 
 t " muit certainly have lefs Weight in this, wherein their J udg- 
 " ment directly tended to enlarge their own Jurisdiction, a' d 
 " ultimately to give them a manifell Alcendancy over the third 
 *' Eltate of the Kingdom, and consequently over the Liberties 
 " of the People of Great-Britain. 1 ' 
 
 F I N
 
 SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 A A 000150 641 9 
 
 University of California 
 
 SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 405 Hilgard Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90024-1388 
 
 Return this material to the library 
 
 from which it was borrowed. 
 
 " V. -.V. . •» \i 
 
 JUL 3 
 ME 2 MS FROM D. 
 
 Itt-U 
 
 2000 
 ■ATE RECEIVED