■'M
 
 I
 
 REFLECTIONS 
 
 UPON THE 
 
 PRESENT DISPUTE 
 
 BETWEEN THE 
 
 . HOUSE of COMMONS 
 
 AND THE 
 
 MAGISTRATES of LONDON, 
 
 [Price One Shilling.]
 
 REFLECTIONS 
 
 UPON THE 
 
 PRESENT DISPUTE 
 
 BETWEEN THE 
 
 HOUSE of COMMONS 
 
 AND THE 
 
 M^giftrates of London. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 ftintcd for S. Bl AD ON in Pater-nofter-Rpw. 
 MDCQLXXU
 
 
 
 
 \11l 
 
 
 ( , ^ Kir 
 
 \ 
 
 > ■/ 
 
 
 
 IR E 
 
 FLECTIONS 
 
 '■.> 
 
 UPON THE 
 
 Z PRESENT DISPUTE 
 
 DC 
 
 BETWEEN THE 
 
 HOUSE of COMMONS 
 
 AND THE 
 
 gMAGISTRATES of LONDON, 
 
 ^rr^HE fafefl and fhortefl way to 
 •< Jl get at truth upon any confli- 
 tutional queftion, is to recur to firft 
 principles ; becaufe tliefe are generally 
 fimple, and the experience of centu- 
 ries has put the jullice of them to the 
 g teft. Perhaps the following Reflect 
 § tions upbn the merits of the prcfent 
 ^ difpute between the Houfe of Com- 
 
 B mon$
 
 ( 2 ) 
 
 mons and the Maglflrates of London 
 may fhew the truth of this obferva- 
 tion. 
 
 The various civil orders of the flate 
 in England are, the King, the Houfe 
 of Lords, the Houfe of Commons, the 
 Courts of Juflice, Corporations, and 
 Individuals. The four firfl of thefe 
 orders make or apply the laws ; the 
 two laft are the objedls of the laws. 
 
 Each of thefe orders has its rights. 
 
 The power of the King and of the 
 two Houfes afTembled in Parliament 
 is, not only in parliamentary lan- 
 guage, but in the language of all the 
 law-books from the origin of the Mo- 
 narchy, tranfcendent and unbounded. 
 In the nature of things it muft be fo. 
 tn every government abfolute power 
 mufl be lodged fomewhere. For go- 
 vernment cannot fubfift without obe- 
 dience ; and no obedience is to be ex- 
 pelled
 
 ( 3 ) 
 pedled without a power to enforce it. 
 In a democracy abfolute power is 
 lodged with the people, in an oHgar- 
 chy with the nobles, in a monarchy 
 with the King: In Britain it is lodged 
 with the Commons, Nobles, and King, 
 in Parliament affembled ; and its voice 
 is known by the acT:s it promulgates. 
 
 The rights of the King are defcribed 
 by many great inllruments of govern- 
 ment, which have been framed at dif- 
 ferent times, and during a long revo- 
 lution of ages, from Magna Charta 
 dow^n to the Ad of Settlement. Thefe 
 rights, fi far as they go, are fixed, are 
 not fubje(ft to controul, and are un- 
 changeable, except by that fovereign 
 parliamentary power to which all or- 
 ders of the itate in England mufl 
 fubmit. 
 
 The Houfe of Lords and the Houfe 
 
 of Commons have alfo their rights and 
 
 powers, like all other political alTem- 
 
 B 2 blies,
 
 • ( 4 ) 
 
 blies, and to which they are more 
 particularly intitled from the great* 
 nefs of the individuals who compofe 
 the one Houfe, and the majefty of that 
 body of Commons who are reprefcnt^ 
 ed in the other. Among other powers 
 they haye that, common to all great 
 political affemblies and courts, of 
 making orders concerning their own 
 forms of proceeding ; and confcquently 
 of puniiliing all who infringe thefe 
 orders, and among others, their own 
 members, if, by infringing the orders 
 of the body to which they belong, 
 which is adding contempt and infult 
 to difobedicnce, they aggravate the 
 oflence. This power makes a part of 
 the law of the land. In common lan- 
 gUHge it is cMcd privi/ege of Parliament : 
 In legal language it is called, by Lor4 
 Coke, Lex et confuettido Parliamcnti : 
 And the extent of it, he fays, is to be 
 gathered from " the rolls of Parliament, 
 ** and other records, from precedents, 
 " and continual experience." Charles 
 
 the
 
 ( s ) 
 
 the Second, in his appeal to his people 
 againfl the proceedings of two Houfes 
 of Commons, acknowledged that they 
 had this power where their privileges 
 were infringed. Sir William Jones, at 
 the head of the Whigs, in his anfwer 
 to that appeal, maintained that they 
 had a power of committing even in 
 cafes where their privileges were not 
 concerned. When the Houfe of Lords 
 framed a refolution againft the powers 
 of the Commons in tlic cafe of Afhby 
 and White, in the reign of Queen 
 Acne, they only objected to the crea- 
 tion of new privileges, but acknow- 
 ledged the validity of thofe which 
 were " warranted by known culloms 
 *' and law of Parliament." As one 
 of the great branches of the law 
 of the land, this power in the Com- 
 mons is, /o far as it goes, fubjed: to 
 
 no controul, except from that Parlia- 
 ment which, binding the King and 
 the people, holds the Houies of 
 Lords and of Commons in the fame 
 Hate of fubjedlion. But though this 
 power is fubjec^c to no other controul 
 
 within
 
 ( 6 ) 
 
 within its line; like other great 
 branches of the law it has its line. 
 It is bounded by record, precedent, con- 
 iirmal experience, in fhort, by the accu- 
 mulated wifdom of ages ; the fureil 
 bounds of law, and much better fecu- 
 rities for the fubje6t, than the hu- 
 mours and fancies of that part of the 
 Common Council of London, which 
 now fets itfelf up in oppofition to one 
 of the Houfes of Parliament. 
 
 Courts of jufticc, tho' invefled with 
 great powers, have in this country in 
 the fame manner their limits. They 
 are bound to yield to the common and 
 the flatute law ; both of which derive 
 their authority from the great council 
 of the nation, with this only diflbr- 
 encc, that the one is beyond record, 
 and the other within it ; to the Lex 
 Parliamenti as fettled by precedent; 
 and to certain rules of interpretation, 
 determined by their own dccifions, 
 and not inconfiftent with the other 
 three. Where the common law, the 
 
 ilatute
 
 ( 7 ) 
 
 flatute law, or the Lex Parliamenti are 
 clear, courts of juRicc give way to 
 them ; where they are obfolete, courts 
 negleft them ; where they are doubt- 
 ful, courts interpret them. 
 
 Individuals and corporations have, 
 in this fyftem of univerfal dependance, 
 and yet of freedom, likewifc their 
 rights founded in the four fources of 
 law I have mentioned j nor is there 
 any difference in this refpecl between 
 an individual and a corporation. Both 
 are equally the objects of impartial 
 laws, and equally fubjed: to them. 
 When Engliflimen claim a freedom 
 independent of the laws, and derived 
 from ideas of natural independency, 
 they renounce their allegiance to the 
 conltitution of England, which is the 
 abfolute dominion of free laws over 
 free men, and recur to a ftate of na- 
 ture in which all men are equal; a 
 ilate in which the powers of Parha- 
 ment, with all the laws they have 
 made, mult pafs for mere ufurpations 
 
 and
 
 ( 8 ) 
 
 and in which the property of iadivi- 
 duals will be accounted no more than 
 fraudulent abftradions from the ilock 
 of the commvmity at large. 
 
 The c-ly difficulty in afcertaining 
 the rights of thefe different orders of 
 the ftate, arifes from the peculiar fitu- 
 ation of the Houfe of Commons ; fot 
 two reafons. The one is, that the 
 Houfe of Commons being the grand 
 inqued of the nation, and as fuch 
 intitled, and indeed bound to enquire 
 into all political malverfations, over 
 all.pcrfons, in all places, and with 
 power to call for witnefles, papers, 
 and records, its power may appear, 
 upon extraordinary occafions, as ex- 
 tenfivc and as undcfinable as its ob- 
 je(5ls. The other is, that the Houfe 
 of Commons being the barrier of the 
 people againft the encroachments of 
 the crown, the crown may have nar- 
 rowed their powers too much at fome 
 particular periods, and the people fup- 
 T^orted them too far at others. But 
 
 whatever
 
 ( 9 ) 
 
 •HVhatever doubt may arife concerning; 
 the extent of their powers upon extra- 
 ordinary occafions, or from the Hmi- 
 tation or exteniion of them during 
 particular fhort periods, there can be 
 lio doubt that, fo far as the Commons 
 prote6l their own rules, made concern- 
 ing their own forms of proceeding, 
 and fo far as in doing fo they follow 
 "uninterrupted precedents, they ac51: 
 -Within their powers ; becaufe the 
 King, the Parlianient, the courts of 
 juftice, the people, all, except a part 
 of the Common Council of London 
 within thefe few days, have acknow- 
 ledged, for ages pafl, that fuch pow- 
 ers belong to their branch of the le- 
 giflature. 
 
 Such are the various civil orders 
 and rights of this kingdom; andy 
 would to God, that, with all their im- 
 perfections, they were as immortal as 
 the feas which roll around it. 
 
 € in
 
 ( 10 1 
 
 tn the exadb prefervatipn of thefe, 
 the harmony of the EngHfh conftitu^f 
 tion confifts. In the times of the wars 
 of the Barons this harmony was dif- 
 turbed, becaufe the Barons ufurped 
 Upon the rights of the crown. In the 
 reigns of the Princes of the Tudor 
 race it was difturbed, becaufe thefe 
 Princes invaded the rights of all the 
 other orders of the ftate. In the eud of 
 the reign of Charles the Firft it was 
 diilurbed^ becaufe the Houfe of Com- 
 mons trampled upon the monarchy ancj 
 the Peerage. Perhaps in the reign of 
 Charles the Second it was, for one fef- 
 fion, difturbed, when the Houfe of 
 Comiftons punifhed individuals and 
 members of corporations, in a manner 
 not warranted by the Lex Parliament iy. 
 and. without precedent^ record^ continual 
 experience on their fide. It was dif- 
 turbed in the middle of the laft cen- 
 tury, when the people deflroyed the 
 King and the Parhament. And it 
 will run a rifk of being difturbed 
 
 again^
 
 1 ^« ) 
 
 again, when individuals fliall fancy 
 that they have rights independent of 
 the laws, complain of thofe laws 
 which other nations envy, Ind curfe 
 thofe judges whd tovet them with 
 blefTmgs. But this rifk will be dou- 
 ble, if, at the very lame period, cor- 
 porations fhali refufe obedience to the 
 Lex Parliamefiti, fliail pretend to mea:- 
 fure themfelves with the Houfe of 
 Commons, and fhall attempt to pull 
 down thofe privileges which are the 
 foundation of their o\Vri, 
 
 If the queilion between the Houfe 
 of Commons and the Magiftrates of 
 London be tried by thefe principles, 
 it will not be of difficult difcuflion. 
 
 The Houfe on different occafions 
 have made various orders againft print- 
 ing the fpeechcs of their members: 
 A printer difobeyed thefe orders. The 
 Houfe ordered him to attend them- 
 He paid no regard to their order. 
 C a They
 
 ( '? ) 
 
 They fent their officer into the city 
 p feize and bring him to their bar. 
 The officer did his duty, by taking 
 him into cuftocjy : But the Cipy Magi- 
 ilrates, two of whom were at the fame 
 time members of the Houfe, granted 
 a warrant of commitment againfl him ; 
 and the Commons have puniflicjl 
 them for fo doing. 
 
 Two apologies are made for the 
 printer and the magiftrates : One, 
 that the Hovife of Commons had np 
 authority to take the printer into cu- 
 ftody at all ; the other, that they had 
 no authority to feize him in the City^ 
 without the interpofition of the City 
 Magiftrates, in aid of the warrant. 
 
 V/ith regard to the firfl of thefe apo- 
 logies; the Houfe of Commons, in 
 what they did, have kept flriclly wiih^ 
 in their powers : They have done only 
 syhat every court in the nation has a
 
 ( '3 ) 
 
 light to do. A power in a political 
 aflembly or a court to make rules 
 concerning the condu61: of their pro-? 
 ccedings, implies a power to make 
 thofe anfwerable who tranfgrefs them; 
 and the right to do fo, becomes dou-? 
 ble in ftrength, when the tranfgreflbrs 
 are themfeves rnembers of the body 
 which they affront. The Commons 
 are warranted too by record^ precedent^ 
 continual experience : For the inflances in 
 the Journals are * innumerable, in 
 which they have, with the fame fpirit, 
 vindicated their authority. Twice 
 only in the courfe of five centuries, to 
 wit, in the years 1680 and 1701, has 
 the power of the Houfe of Commons, 
 to commit others than their own 
 members, been difputed. But the 
 Houfe then refplved, '' TJiat to aflert 
 " the Houfe of Commons have no pow- 
 *' er of commitment but of their own 
 ^' members, tends to the fubverfion of 
 '' the Houfe of Commons." Journals, 
 ^6 February 1701. 
 
 The
 
 ( H ) 
 The refolution of the Houfe of 
 Lords in the cafe of Afhby and White 
 contradu^s none of the principles t 
 have mentioned. A vote of the Houfe 
 Of Commons had declared, that the 
 right of eledlion in the borough of 
 Aylefbury wsls in the inhabitants not 
 receiving alms. The conftables re- 
 jedled the votes of fome electors who 
 did not receive alms. Thefe elec%rs 
 brought an a(5tion of damages at com- 
 mon law againft the conftables. The 
 majority of the Houfe of Corrimons 
 accounted this a breach of privilege. 
 But many great names held it to be 
 Jione. Sir Jofeph Jekyll, in the de- 
 bate, declared, that the action, inftead 
 of being in oppofition to the privi- 
 leges of the Houfe, was in direcfl pur- 
 fuance of them ; for that it was 
 meant to afk the afTiftance of the com- 
 mon lav/, not to contradicft, but to 
 fupport a vote of the Houfe of Com- 
 mons. The Houfe of Lords thought 
 ^s thefe laft thought, whether rightly 
 
 or
 
 ( 15 ) 
 Or not, is of no importance to the pre- 
 fent queflion; for it is plain, the dif- 
 pute was concerning the application of 
 the right to a particular queflion, not 
 concerning the right itfelf. The ma- 
 jority and the minority of the Houfe of 
 Commons, and the Houfe of Lords, all 
 equally acknowledged the right of the 
 Commons to afTert the privileges 
 which belonged to them. 
 
 With regard to the other apology, 
 the Commons a(5led ivithin their pouuersi 
 for the law of England knows no 
 fan6tuariesfor thofe who withftandthe 
 authority of Parliament. They adl- 
 ed by recordy precedent^ continual experi- 
 ence: For the inftances are numerous 
 in the Journals, in which the Com- 
 mons have fent their officer into the 
 city for delinquents j have fent their 
 committees to exercife jurifdidlion in 
 it ; and have brought the flieriiFs and 
 other officers of the city to their bar, 
 for offisnces againfl the Commons of 
 England. 
 
 2 The
 
 ( i6 ) 
 
 The decency of this apology, in the' 
 mouths of the Common Council, may 
 perhaps be called in queftion. *' 27th 
 " Elizabeth, 1584, the Houfe of Com- 
 " mons ordered that the ferjeant of 
 " this Houfe do forthwith go to the 
 •* Common I^leas bar, and charge the 
 *' recorder then pleading there, to 
 " make his prefent repair into this 
 " Houfe.'* Sir Simon D*Ewes' Journ. 
 347. Col. 2. — Judge Berkley was feized 
 by order of one of the Houfcs of Parli* 
 ament, while he was fitting on his tri^ 
 bunal. Hume 6rh, 413. — " Anno 31, 
 «' Hen. VI. When the Commons re- 
 " quefled the King and Lords to reftore 
 " their fpeaker to them, &c. the judges 
 •* being demanded of their counfel 
 *' therein, after mature deliberation, 
 " they anfwered, It ivas not their part to 
 ** judge of the Parliament^ ijuhichmayjudo-eof 
 *' the laiv,'' Seldcn's Judicature, p. 55-. 
 Upon thcvrevival of liberty at the re- 
 volution, the Houfe of Commons com- 
 mitted Sir Francis Pcmberton and Sir 
 
 Thoriias
 
 ( 17 ) 
 Thomas Jones to cuflody, becatife, ^s 
 jxLclges of the King's Bench, they had 
 given judgment to over-rule the plea 
 of the ferjeant of the Houfe, in an 
 a(fl:ion brought againft him for execut- 
 ing the orders of the Hoilfe. Magna 
 -Charta is above five centuries old ; 
 one claufe of it is, That no freeman 
 ihall be imprifoned but by confent of 
 his peers ; aut per legem terr^ : But as 
 the Lex Parliamenti is part of the Le>i 
 Tirre^ the experience of thefe cen- 
 turies has fhewn, that this claufe, 
 conttivjed againft the power of the 
 King and of individuals, was ne- 
 ver meant to afiedl the Lex Parlid- 
 mmtiy when the Houfes aded w^ithin 
 their powers, and quitted not prece- 
 dent. The charters of the City are as 
 old as the time of the Conqueror, and 
 in one of them in the time of Ed- 
 ward the Third, the King declared. 
 That ** no fummons, attachment, or 
 *' executions, be made by any of the 
 "' officers of us or our heh'S, by writ 
 D ** or
 
 ( i8 ) 
 
 «* or without writ, within the Hberty 
 «* of the faid City, but only by Minif- 
 «* ters of the faid City." But in all 
 this time, no lawyer hath ever dream- 
 ed that the King's confent to limit the 
 operation of his own writ, which 
 without fuch limitation muft have 
 been executed in the City by his own 
 officers, could flop the procefs of the 
 the Courts of Parliament, upon which 
 the King has no power to impofe 
 limitations.-^ — Strange, that the Com- 
 mon Council of London fhould have 
 that courage which the firft courts 
 on earth, one of which once ordered 
 the heir apparent of the crown into 
 cuilody, never pofleffed ; and that 
 know lege of law, which the ex- 
 pounders of the law have not : 
 Strange, that the Common Council 
 Ihould find out in the year 1771, 
 what all their predeceiTors, learned 
 as they were, have been ignorant 
 of lincc the beginning of the mo- 
 narchy. 
 
 The
 
 ( 19 ) 
 The apology is furely not gracious 
 from men who pretend zeal for li- 
 berty. The exclufion of the power 
 of the Commons is not founded in 
 common law, or llatute law, or law 
 of Parliament, or indecifion of courts; 
 but it is founded upon royal charters, 
 which, it is pretended, give an ex- 
 emption from the jurifdi6lion of the 
 Commons. What is this, but to exalt 
 the power of the crown at the expence 
 of the law of the land ? What but to 
 maintain that the prerogative of the 
 King can Hop the exercife of the un- 
 queftionable rights of a Houfe of Par- 
 liament ? The tendency of the argu- 
 ment is to withdraw three-fourths of 
 the people of England from the jurif- 
 didion of the Houfe of Commons, 
 and to enable the crown to withdraw 
 the reft. For the fame pretended ex- 
 emption by charter which the city of 
 London has, almoft every other cor- 
 poration in the kingdom poffeffea; 
 and the crown may create new cor- 
 P 2 porations
 
 porations, with the fame exemp-r 
 rions. 
 
 But it is fortunate for the people of 
 England, that the dodtrinc is as weak 
 as it is wicked. It has been agreed 
 by all lawyers fince the revolution^ 
 I had almoft faid iince the conqueft, 
 that all charters of the crown are un.- 
 availing againll the law of the land, 
 and its jurifdid:ions. The charter of 
 the city, rellored by Parliament at the 
 revolution, reftored the city exa(5lly to 
 the condition it was in before its char- 
 ter was forfeited; that is, it reftored 
 it to the higheft of all Hates, its former 
 flatc of fubje<5tion to the rules of the 
 law of England, and to the jurifdic- 
 tions of England. 
 
 The Houfe of Commons is the grand 
 inqueft of the nation : 5y the extent 
 of the field of its inquiry, and the 
 fuddcnnefs of its movements, it has 
 hitherto kept in awe the minifters of 
 the crown. Thefe well knew that not 
 2t even
 
 even within the arms of their Sove 
 telgn, and much Icfs in the walls of 4 
 corporation, could he found fanc^ua- 
 ries againft the juflice of an irritate^ 
 Houfe of Commons. But the prefent 
 claim would make the juftice of the 
 Commons depend for the future upon 
 the delays, the indolence, the timidity, 
 or the factions of the mechanics of 
 London. To impair the privileges of 
 the Houfe of Commons, is to weaken 
 their hands ; and to weaken their 
 hands, is to fap the democratical 
 part of the government, and to re- 
 move the great and perhaps only bar- 
 rier remaining to the people againU 
 the power of the crown. If the peo- 
 ple give the firil blows to the Bafe, the 
 Crown will foon follow with others 
 until, by the repeated efforts of both' 
 the glorious fabric of the conllitution 
 fhall be tumbled to the ground. 
 
 Who afks the introduction of this 
 novelty? Is it the crown which might 
 rejoice at its fuccefs, if the crown 
 
 wilhed
 
 t S2 ) 
 
 wiftied to humble the people by hum- 
 bling their reprefentatives ? Is it the 
 Houfe of Peers which might triumph 
 over the misfortunes of a rival ? Is it 
 the great landed intereft? Is it the 
 grent body of the merchants of Eng- 
 land, equal in dignity to the nobility 
 of other countries ? Is it the other cor- 
 porations of the kingdom, who all 
 have the iame intereft with the city of 
 London in the prctenfion ? Is it the unit- 
 ed clamours of the populace, drunk 
 with the cries of liberty as they are, 
 while they thank not Heaven for the 
 daily enjoyment of it ? No ! It is fome 
 dozens of the Common Council of 
 London ; a body into which the men 
 of great property and high charadler 
 in the city avoid to enter, becaufe 
 they like not to allbciate with mean 
 men, got up by mean arts. Thefe are 
 the pcrfons who w^ould arrogate to 
 themfelves the power of controuling 
 one of the great wheels of the ma- 
 chine of the Englifli government ; men 
 low in birth, education, degree, for- 
 tune,
 
 ( 23 ) 
 
 tune, talents, and virtue. The words 
 I ufe may feem hard: But perfonswhQ 
 are accuilomed in publications tp 
 throw out falfehoods againft other?, 
 muft fubmit fometimes to hear truth 
 againft themfelves ; and giving no 
 quarter, they muft not cxpe6l that they 
 are continually to meet with it. 
 
 While the court of Aldermen, whofe 
 offices were for life, had a negative 
 upon the refolutions of the Common 
 Council, men faw fome chance of re- 
 lief againft their follies. But after > 
 perfon, whom the populace of. Lon- 
 don at one time ftiled their father, and 
 whofe ftatue at anotner time they threa- 
 tened to pull down, had, by his intereft 
 in Parliament, got this negative abo- 
 "lifhed, the fituation of the Common 
 Council became alarming indeed. It 
 is very true, that the firft liberties of 
 modern Europe took their rife from 
 the cities of Europe ; but it is as true, 
 that the liberties of moft nations have 
 found their graves in great cities. 
 
 Athens, Carthage, Rome, are fad mo- 
 numents
 
 (=4 3 
 
 iiuments of the laft of tbefc tnitbg.' 
 Great cities are the natural feats of 
 diforder in the lower orders of man- 
 kind. Even the fons of induftry, 
 though enemies to the vices of the 
 others, contribute to diforder; be- 
 caufe, being continually occupied 
 ■with the objects of induflry, they are 
 blind to all others ; and incapable of 
 deceit, they are eafily deceived. Search 
 all Europe round, and there is no 
 where to be found fo much mean pro- 
 fligacy in fome, and fo much gene- 
 rous credulity in otiiers, as within the 
 bills of mortality ; circumflan^es 
 which enable defigning, unquiet, am- 
 bitious fpirits to turn to t;heir own ad- 
 vantage the crimes, the weakneiles, 
 and even the virtues of their fell^;v«f- 
 citizens. 
 
 That in the Common Council there 
 are fuchmen,. who, with their friends, 
 take fuch advantages, the experienced 
 of feveral years pail has teftified. 
 Becaufe they rofc into power by im- 
 
 polition
 
 ( 25 ) 
 pofition and confufion, they know 
 they can keep it only by the conr 
 tiniiance of them : Full of envy 
 againii the men of ancient fami^ 
 lies and great property of this conn* 
 try, they wifh to bring all man* 
 kind down to their own mean level; 
 if they do not rather wifli to be 
 above all, becaufe they are beneath 
 all. Ignorant of the fublime ideas of 
 conftitutional liberty, they fee not 
 that it confifts in the fiibordin^tion of 
 free men to free laws; but, confoundr 
 ing the principles of equality with 
 thofe of liberty, they pave the way 
 to the very worlt fort of tyranny, the 
 tyranny of the populace, Yet the in- 
 rereils of that populace they confider 
 not, they regard not. To their ima-f 
 ginations alone they pay attention, 
 and would flatter their paffion^ 
 though it ended in their ruin. Hav-? 
 ing much reafon themfelves to fear 
 the laws, they wifh to weaken 
 them, For after fquandering the 
 fuods of the city, in imprudence
 
 ( ^6 ) 
 
 and extravagance, they truft, in .cla- 
 mours againil others, to drown thofe 
 which they expert againft them- 
 fclves ; and can hope only,* in the 
 difgraces of the public, to make their 
 own be overlooked. They began, 
 with the help of their emiilaries, by 
 attempting to light up a civil war be- 
 tween two lifter nations. They next 
 endeavoured to break the bonds which 
 tie the parent and the child, England 
 and America together. .They then 
 raifed the people againft the Parlia-^ 
 ment, by promoting addrefles to dif- 
 folve it. And in the end, they held up 
 the dagger to every Englilhman, to 
 plunge it in another Englifbman*s 
 breaft, by alTerting that the Parlia- 
 ment w^as difTolved, and that the 
 people had a right to diibbey the laws 
 which \t made. Every dilorder accom- 
 panied and followed fuch attempts. 
 One of their number declared, in full 
 Parliament, that he would not pay 
 the King's taxes ; although willing to 
 draw others into danger, he after- 
 wards
 
 ( ^7 ) 
 wards fhrunk from it himfelf. Ano- 
 ther fchoolcd his Sovereign in pubHc, 
 though his attendants, hke owls 
 brought into the hght of tlie fun, 
 fliewed modefty, for once,^ in the pre- 
 fence of a King of England. With 
 art affeaed decency, when their re- 
 monllrance was prefented, they cauf- 
 cd a mob of only a few hundreds to 
 follow it to the gates of the Palace ; 
 but with an infolent difplay of their 
 power, they, a fcAV days after, brought 
 out a hundred thoufand people to 
 fliout at their feaft; a contrivance, 
 intended, by the contraft, to mark the 
 more llrongly to all, that the mob 
 which they could raife they could 
 command. When the great merchants 
 of this great city went in proceffion 
 with the fplendour of Princes, to pour 
 out their fentiments of loyalty and 
 confidence at the foot of the throne, 
 their coaches were broken, their per- 
 fons infulted, and fome of their lives 
 brought into danger. To diftrefs a 
 miniiler, the men 1 complain of 
 £ 2 fcrupled
 
 ( ^8 ) 
 
 ilrlipicd not to diflrefs their coUfI* 
 try : For they urged her to a naVat 
 \vari and yet took from her the 
 means of defence, by checking the 
 power of nreiiing feamen ; betraying 
 thus the government and the nation, 
 under the pretence of befriending the 
 people. They oppofed in ParUament 
 an undertaking calculated for the 
 convenicncy and embellilhment of 
 that ciry they reprefent, the einp^rium 
 tot ins Europte, merely becaufe the pro^ 
 prieiors happened to be Scotchmen. 
 Thefe men have now finifhed their 
 career* by refufmg obedience to the 
 orders of one of the Houfes of Par- 
 liamert, and ordering the mefTen-^ 
 ger who bi*ought them, to be fent to 
 a gaol. 
 
 Yet even they have the afliirance to 
 arrogate to themfelves the facred 
 name of Whigs. That generous party 
 difclaims the alliance. The Whigs, 
 in the reign of Charles the Second, 
 inllcad of fctting England and Scot- 
 I land
 
 ( 29 ) 
 land at variance, endeavoured to iinitd 
 both in the caufe of Liberty. They 
 avoided to draw America even into 
 this generous confederacy, left, under 
 pretence of entering into the parties 
 of England, ilie might throw off her 
 dependance upon it. They petitioned 
 the King to call Parliaments, not to 
 dilFolve them. They taught the peo- 
 ple to revere Parliament, not to infult 
 it 5 to fupport the Houfe of Commons, 
 not to difobey it ; and to maintain 
 that its powers were fuperior to thofe 
 of the crown, not that the powers of 
 the crown were fuperior to its pow- 
 ers. They alTerted the rights of the 
 Commons to punifti political offences, 
 even beyond the bounds of their pri- 
 vileges, inftead of queftioning their 
 power to punifh them within thofe 
 iounds : And they forced their Sove- 
 reign, in his appeal to his people, to 
 acknowledge thofe rights in their re- 
 prefentatives, which the pretended fuc- 
 celTors of that party now refufe them. 
 They afked the protedion of the 
 
 Houfe
 
 ( 30 ) 
 
 Houfe of Commons for the City, not 
 of the City againit the Houfe of Com^ 
 mons ; and little dreamed that the day 
 could come, when a part, and the worll 
 part, of theCommon Council of London, 
 would meafure themfelves againft all 
 the Commons of England. In fome 
 inflances they preferved the faith of 
 Parliament, to a Prince who obferved 
 none to them ; and, inftead of weak^ 
 ening the nation, they fecured its ho- 
 nour, even in wars which they dif- 
 approved. 
 
 The late mcafures of a part of the Com- 
 mon Council of London are the exa6t coun- 
 terparts of thofe of the Privy Council of 
 Charles the Second \ both affaulted that 
 Houfe of Commons which is the bul- 
 wark of the Commons. Unhappy 
 Hate of freedom, where its pretended 
 friends tread in the very fame paths 
 with the open abettors of tyranny! 
 
 But Providence, which for a thcu- 
 land years lias watched ov^r !his 
 
 glorious
 
 ( 3> ) 
 
 glorious conftitution, againft both the 
 great and the mean, has turned thefe 
 efforts of defpair againft their own 
 authors, or to the pubhc good of 
 Britain. The attempt to divide one 
 part of the ifland from another, has 
 bound that other only the fafter to it. 
 The blow aimed through America has 
 been turned afide. The petitions to 
 diflblve Parliament, united Parlia- 
 ment. Thedo<5lrine that it was already 
 diflblved, united the nation. The in- 
 fult upon the perfon of the King, 
 gave an opportunity to thofe who 
 had been reprefented as ill-affedled to 
 it, to fhow how unjuft and unge- 
 nerous was the fufpicion. The mobs 
 who patroled the flreets, brought 
 all who had property to refled, that 
 the perfons who could break the win- 
 dows of their houfes at one time, 
 might break into them at another. 
 That part of the city members which 
 courts a low popularity, divided the 
 Houfe againfl the aggiandifement of 
 the city, with only ten members at 
 
 their
 
 ( 3^ ) 
 iheir backs. And the Magiftrates, in 
 in their infolence to the Commons of 
 England, have been deferted by many 
 of their own party in the parliament, 
 by moft in the city, and by all in the 
 nation. 
 
 It is true, thefe men have been join- 
 ed in fome of their projects of oppo- 
 fition by perfons whofe charadlers 
 almoft fandified the wrong. But, un- 
 like to them, fome of thofe perfons 
 acted from principle, as far as they 
 went : Others were obliged to yield to 
 principles they difliked, by party-ties, 
 which they knew not how to get rid 
 of: Some thought themfelves vindi- 
 cated in making ufe of means they 
 difapprovcd, to get at ends they 
 thought good. And all paid a com- 
 pliment to the power they oppofed, 
 by file wing they were not afraid to 
 offend it. Offend it they could notj 
 becaufe it was known, that the fame 
 honour which attaclied them at one 
 time to a party, would at another, 
 
 make
 
 ( 33 ) 
 
 make them repent the momentary 
 
 defcrtion of a caufe which was theiir 
 
 own. One of them, who is now no 
 
 more, once the Miniller, once the op- 
 
 pofer of the royal meafures, but in all 
 
 Situations refpec^ed by Padiament, be- 
 
 caufe he refpe6ted it, even from the 
 
 phrenfy of party, derived advantage 
 
 to his country; for he turned the 
 
 popular current to obtain popular 
 
 laws, and was met half-way by the 
 
 Miniller he oppofed, in the generous 
 
 Ilruggle who fhould do moll good to 
 
 the people of England. 
 
 l^erhaps it has not been one of the 
 imallell demerits of thofe who afTume 
 the name of the city, while their ac- 
 tions are condemned by the greatefl 
 and belt part of the citizens, that their 
 ralhnefs prefented cruel advantages 
 to power againll the people, if power 
 had been inclined to feize upon them. 
 But though they may make their So- 
 vereign unhappy, they cannot make 
 him unjult. If his fubjeas will not, 
 F by
 
 ( 34 ) 
 by his example, become virtuous, "he 
 ,will at leaft continue to be fo. 'Me 
 knows that the fall of the people will 
 be his fall; that he muft be great, 
 juft in .proportion as they are free; 
 and that when they ceafe to be fq, he 
 will he only the firft flave, not the 
 lirft freeman of his kingdom. I pre- 
 tend not to flatter a prefent"Minifter at 
 the expence of his predeceflbrs, or to 
 raife altars to the living upon the mo- 
 numents of the dead. Almofl all the 
 fucceflive Minifters of the prefent 
 reign, have had opportunities offered 
 them, by the ralhnefs of the mobs, 
 and of fome of the Common Council 
 of London, to wound the liberties 
 of their country, through the fides 
 of the meaneft of its members ; 
 and all, traduced and abufed as they 
 have been, have fcorned to make ufe 
 of them ; being more tender of the 
 liberties of thepeaple, than the peo- 
 .ple are themfelves. When 40,000 of the 
 populace infultcd the metropolis from 
 lead to end of it, and fliook the palace 
 
 with
 
 with their claanoursv the law herfcl£ 
 pTefented that fword of juftice which- 
 the- Minifters rejeaed-. The Hberty^ of 
 the prefs, which thofe who abuf<Sd ic 
 had laid at the feet of the Minifters, 
 they fpared, ev£n amidft all its 
 errors ; confcious that it is the pal-- 
 ladiiini of Englilh liberty^ and that, ^ 
 although it is eafy to diflinguifh the 
 adioBS of liberty from thofe of fe-^ 
 dition, it isalmofll impofTible todiftin- 
 guifh theiir^ voices. The political, 
 crimes of -the peopk they pardoned, 
 becaufe many of ^ thefe flowed from a 
 generous fource. And they refpeded- 
 the oppoficion which kept the flsame- 
 of liberty alive, though they knew) 
 that its intereftswere in. no danger. 
 Yet one danger they cannot preventi 
 The day may come, when men may 
 think all the reparation they can make 
 will be too little for the wrongrthey 
 have committed, and when in a ge- 
 terous repentance they may offer 
 P2 con-
 
 ( s« ) 
 
 concefllons to the crown, which its 
 friends will blame him who wears it 
 if he fhall not accept, and his own 
 fenfibility if he fhall. 
 
 The Common Council complain 
 that the Houfe of Commons is pror 
 iligate; and becaufe they cannot 
 trufl it, they will not fubmit to it. It 
 is hoped that Houfe is not what thefe 
 common railers call it ; but if it is, 
 v/c mull fit down in an honeft defpair j 
 for where is virtue to be found, if 
 the people cannot find it among them- 
 felves ? And how are men to be truft- 
 ed who cannot trufl one another ? Has 
 innocence fled from the country, her . 
 common abode, and fixed her feat in 
 the metropolis, where flie feldom 
 comes ? Has fhe left the breafls of all 
 the Commons of England, and confined 
 hcrfelf to thofe of the Common Couur 
 cil of London? Is England to trufl her 
 liberty to Parliament, which has prisr 
 fcrved her conflitution for above a 
 
 thoufand
 
 ( 37 ) 
 
 thoufand years; or to a populace, 
 which overturned it in one year ? 
 
 Governments, like all other things, 
 have their periods. The period of a 
 free government is either the tyranny 
 of a Prince, or the anarchy of the 
 people. The laft is the moil common, 
 or rather is almoll always the middle 
 flep to the other. Polybius obferves, 
 that the encroachments of the people 
 upon the Senate brought anarchy and 
 ruin upon Carthage ; and while Rome 
 was Hill in her glory, he foretold that 
 the infolence of the people would 
 produce anarchy ; and that from the 
 anarchy of all, the tyranny of one 
 would arife. His words are thefe: 
 " During fome time after liberty is 
 ** recovered, and while any of thofe 
 *' are alive who had beheld the nciife- 
 ** ries which flowed from the former 
 unequal government, the people 
 are well pleafed to maintain the po- 
 pular flate, ^nd think that nothing 
 2 " is 
 
 ic 
 
 a 

 
 C 38 ) 
 
 " is* more valuable than equality. 
 ** But after the courfe of one or two 
 *' fucceflions, as new men fprung up, 
 "' even thefe enjoyments, being now 
 " become familiar to them, began, 
 ** through long ufe and habit, to be 
 " leflened in their efteem, and to give 
 " place to the*defire of pre-eminence 
 ** and power. The rich, not content- 
 " ed with their wealth, but delirous 
 " to gain power; befidcs, when they 
 "arc not' able to obtain it by their 
 " own ftrength and virtue^ endea- 
 " vour- to draw the people to their 
 " lide ; and thus the frame of the de«- 
 '* mocracy is diflblved, and gives" 
 ** place to the rule of* violence and 
 " force. If at this time fome bold 
 ** and emerprifing leader fhall arife, 
 " whofe poverty has fhut him out 
 " from all the honours of the flate, 
 " then will commence the govern- 
 ** ment' of' the multitude, who run 
 " together in tumultuous aflemblies, 
 *' and arc hurried into every kind of 
 
 " violence;
 
 i "39 D 
 
 *^ molence ; till Tcdueed :at laft to a 
 " 'ftate of anarchy, they once more 
 " find a raaftcr and a monarch, arid 
 ♦* fubmit:to arbitrary fway. 
 
 ^*' All things are fubjefl 'to d^cay 
 *' and change. This is a truthlfo .€vi- 
 *' dent, and fo demonftrated by the 
 •' perpetual and the necefTary courfe 
 " of nature, that it needs no other 
 " proof. Now there are two ways by 
 *' which every kind of government 
 " is deftroyed: either by fome acci^ 
 ** dent that happens from without, 
 ** or fome evil that arifes within it- 
 "ifelf. What the firfl will be, it is 
 *' not always eafy to forefee : But the 
 ** latter is certain and determinate. 
 " Whoever therefore is able to con- 
 ** nedt the beginning with the end in 
 *' this inquiry, will be able alfo to 
 " declare with fome afliirance, what 
 " will be the future fortune of the 
 ** Roman government. At lead, in 
 " my judgment, nothing is more edfy. 
 " ^or when a Hate, after having pafF- 
 
 " ed
 
 C 4^ ) 
 
 •* ed with fafety through many and 
 ** great dangers, arrives at the high-* 
 " eft degree of power, and poiTefles 
 ** an intire and undifputed fovereign- 
 " tyj it is manifeft, that the long 
 *' continuance of profperity muft give 
 *' birth to coftly and luxurious man* 
 " ners, and that the minds of men 
 *' will be heated with ambitious con- 
 " tefts, and become too eager and 
 *' afpiring in the purfuit of dignities. 
 <* And as thefe evils are continually 
 " increafed, the defire of power and 
 " rule, and the imagined ignominy 
 " of remaining in a fubje(5t ftate, will 
 " firft begin to work the ruin of the 
 *' republic: Arrogance and luxury 
 *' will afterwards advance it: And in 
 " the end, the change will be com- 
 " pleted by the people: When the 
 *' avarice of fome is found to injure 
 ** and opprefs them; and the ambi- 
 •' tion of others fwells their vanity, 
 " and poifons them with flattering 
 " hopes. For then, being inflamed 
 
 ** with
 
 (41 ) 
 
 ^* with rage, and following only the 
 *' dictates of their paillons, they no 
 " longer will fubmit to any controul ; 
 " or be contented with an equal fliare 
 ** of the adminiflration, in conjunc- 
 " tion w^ith their rulers -, but v/ill 
 *' draw to themfelves the intirc fove- 
 " reignty, and fuprcme dircdtion of 
 " all affairs. When this is done, the 
 *' p;overnmcnt will aiTume indeed the 
 *' fairefl of all names, that of a free 
 " and popular Rate ; but w^ill in truth 
 " be the grcateil of all evils, a govern^ 
 " ment adminiftered by a blind and 
 ^' unfl;ilful multitude." 
 
 Perhaps an Englifli reader, who 
 looks back upon many occurrences in 
 the prefent reign, and who looks for- 
 ward to their confequences, may read 
 this pafTage with fome anxiety. When 
 an engine, dangerous and unmanage- 
 able, like the populace, is made ufe 
 of in the attempts of private ambi- 
 tion, it is full time for the orders of 
 
 G the
 
 ( 4^ 3 
 the flate to look to their own interefts^ 
 and thofe of the conllitution ; the 
 Crown to its rights, the Peers to their 
 dignities, and the Gentry to that dif- 
 tin(5tion of ranks, in the confufion of 
 which, though they may gain fome- 
 thing, they mufl lofe more. The con- 
 llitution of England has coped with 
 Kings; it has been bent by Barons; 
 to neither it yielded ; by the mob 
 alone it was overturned: Yet in Eng- 
 land there is flill a defence left to 
 ward off, for fome time at leafl, a re- 
 petition of the difgrace ; thejundlion 
 of the great body of men of high 
 rank and large property in the nation, 
 who know well that it is they who 
 niufl pay for the follies which others 
 who have nothing to lofe fhall com- 
 mit. I confefs 1 have often wifhed, 
 that amongft the many parties of this 
 country, one great intermediate one 
 would arife, which fhould combine 
 upon the declared principle, that as 
 the members of it believe the confti- 
 
 tutioG
 
 ( 43 ) 
 
 tution can hardly become better, fb 
 they will not bear to fee it made 
 worfe, but will prcferve it in the con- 
 tentions between monarchy and fac- 
 tion, untouched as it ftands. The 
 great body of men, to whom I al- 
 lude, remember, that by thofe who 
 fpoke the language, and fet the 
 example of the meafures of the pre- 
 fent Common Council of London, 
 who fpurned at the fubordination of 
 Liberty, and held up the ftandard 
 of equality to the licentious, their an- 
 ceilors were brought to the fcafFold, 
 their palaces burnt, their families at- 
 tainted ; the Hierarchy, the Peerage, 
 the Parliament, even the Law, laid in 
 the dufl ; their Sovereign murdered, 
 and his children fent to beg in coun- 
 tries tliroUgh which their anceflors had 
 carried glory and conquefl. Thefe 
 men are too great to depend on 
 Kings, too proud to Hand in awe of 
 mobs ; and it is their interelt to keep 
 equally within bounds the ufurpa- 
 i tions
 
 ( 44 ) 
 
 tions of the crown, and the infolcn- 
 cics of the rabble: While they exifl, 
 a King of England who intends no 
 evil, needs fear none ; and v^rhen they 
 perifli, the fooner a King of England 
 peri flies with them, it will be j lift io 
 mikli the better. 
 
 FINIS,
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LlBRARY^FAClLin^ 
 
 AA 000 150 598 1
 
 tB