from control. If they are exempt they may do injury which cannot be redreffed, if they are controlled they are no longer legislative.

If the poffibility of abuse be an argument against authority, no authority ever can be established; if the actual abuse deftroys its legality, there is no legal government now in the world.

This power, which the Commons have fo long exercised, they ventured to ufe once more against Mr. Wilkes, and on the 3d of February, 1769, expelled him the Houfe, for having printed and publifbed a feditious libel, and three obfcene and impious libels.

If these imputations were juft, the expulfion was furely feasonable, and that they were juft, the House had reafon to determine, as he had confeffed himself, at the bar, the author of the libel which they term feditious, and was convicted in the King's Bench of both the publications.

But the freeholders of Middlesex were of another opinion. They either thought him innocent, or were not offended by his guilt. When a writ was iffued for the election of a knight for Middlefex, in the room of John Wilkes Efq; expelled the House, his friends on the fixteenth of February chofe him again.

On the 17th, it was refolved, that John Wilkes, Efq; having been in this feffion of parliament expelled the Houfe, was, and is, incapable of being elected a member to ferve in this prefent parliament.

As there was no other candidate, it was refolved, at the fame time, that the election of the fixteenth was a void election.

The

The freeholders ftill continued to think that no

other man was fit to reprefent them, and on the fixteenth of March elected him once more. Their refolution was now fo well known, that no opponent ventured to appear.

The Commons began to find, that power without materials for operation can produce no effect. They might make the election void for ever, but if no other candidate could be found, their determination could only be negative. They, however, made void the laft election, and ordered a new writ.

On the thirteenth of April was a new election, at which Mr. Lutterel, and others, offered themselves candidates. Every method of intimidation was used, and fome acts of violence were done to hinder Mr. Lutterel from appearing. He was not deterred, and the poll was taken, which exhibited for

Mr. Wilkes,

Mr. Lutterel,

1143

296

The fheriff returned Mr. Wilkes; but the House, on April the fifteenth, determined that Mr. Lutterel was lawfully elected.

From this day begun the clamour, which has continued till now. Thofe who had undertaken to oppose the miniftry, having no grievance of greater magnitude, endeavoured to fwell this decifion into bulk, and diftort it into deformity, and then held it out to terrify the nation.

Every artifice of fedition has been since practised to awaken difcontent and inflame indignation. The papers of every day have been filled with exhortations and menaces of faction. The madness has spread

6

spread through all ranks and through both fexes; women and children have clamoured for Mr. Wilkes, honeft fimplicity has been cheated into fury, and only the wife have escaped infection.

The greater part may justly be fufpected of not believing their own pofition, and with them it is not neceffary to difpute. They cannot be convinced who are convinced already, and it is well known that they will not be afhamed.

The decifion, however, by which the fmaller number of votes was preferred to the greater, has perplexed the minds of fome, whofe opinions it were indecent to defpife, and who by their integrity well deferve to have their doubts appeased.

Every diffuse and complicated question may be examined by different methods, upon different principles; and that truth, which is eafily found by one investigator, may be miffed by another, equally honeft and equally diligent.

Those who inquire, whether a fmaller number of legal votes can elect a representative in oppofition to a greater, must receive from every tongue the fame answer.

The question, therefore, must be, whether a fmaller number of legal votes, fhall not prevail against a greater number of votes not legal?

It must be confidered, that thofe votes only are legal which are legally given, and that those only are legally given, which are given for a legal candidate.

It remains then to be difcuffed, whether a man. expelled, can be fo difqualified by a vote of the

House,

Houfe, as that he fhall be no longer eligible by lawful electors?

Here we must again recur, not to pofitive inftitutions, but to the unwritten law of focial nature, to the great and pregnant principle of political neceffity. All government fuppofes fubjects, all authority implies obedience. To fuppose in one the right to command what another has the right to refufe, is abfurd and contradictory. A ftate fo conftituted muft reft for ever in motionlefs equipoife, with equal attractions of contrary tendency, with equal weights of power balancing each other.

Laws which cannot be enforced, can neither prevent nor rectify diforders. A fentence which cannot be executed can have no power to warn or to reform. If the Commons have only the power of difiniffing for a few days the man whom his conftituents can immediately fend back, if they can expel but cannot exclude, they have nothing more than nominal authority, to which perhaps obedience never may be paid.

The reprefentatives of our ancestors had an opinion very different: they fined and imprifoned their members; on great provocation they difabled them. for ever; and this power of pronouncing perpetual difability is maintained by Selden himself.

Thefe claims feem to have been made and allowed, when the conftitution of our government had not yet been fufficiently studied. Such powers are not legal, because they are not neceffary; and of that power which only neceffity juftifies, no more is to be admitted than neceffity obtrudes.

The

The Commons cannot make laws, they can only pafs refolutions, which, like all refolutions, are of force only to those that make them, and to those only while they are willing to obferve them.

The vote of the Houfe of Commons has therefore, only fo far the force of a law, as that force is neceffary to preserve the vote from lofing its efficacy, it must begin by operating upon themselves, and extends its influence to others, only by confequences arifing from the first intention. He that starts game on his own manor, may purfue it into another.

They can properly make laws only for themfelves: a member, while he keeps his feat, is fubject to these laws; but when he is expelled, the jurisdiction. ceases, for he is now no longer within their dominion.

The difability, which a vote can fuperinduce to expulfion, is no more than was included in expulfion itself; it is only a declaration of the Commons, that they will permit no longer him whom they thus cenfure to fit with them in parliament; a declaration made by that right which they neceffarily poffefs, of regulating their own House, and of inflicting punishment on their own delinquents.

They have therefore no other way to enforce the fentence of incapacity, than that of adhering to it. They cannot otherwife punish the candidate fo difqualified for offering himself, nor the electors for accepting him. But if he has any competitor, that competitor muft prevail, and if he has none, his election will be void; for the right of the Houfe to reject, annihilates with regard to the man fo rejected the right of electing.