But what resemblance can imagination conceive between one man vacating his feat, by a mark of favour from the crown, and another driven from it for fedition and obfcenity. The acceptance of a place contaminates no character; the crown that gives it, intends to give with it always dignity, fometimes authority. The commons, it is well known, think not worse of themselves or others for their offices of profit; yet profit implies temptation, and may expose a reprefentative to the fufpicion of his conftituents; though, if they ftill think him worthy of their confidence, they may again elect him.

Such is the confequence. When a man is difmiffed by law to his conftituents, with new truft and new dignity, they may, if they think him incorruptible, reftore him to his feat; what can follow, therefore, but that when the Houfe drives out a varlet with publick infamy, he goes away with the like permiffion to return.

If infatuation be, as the proverb tells us, the forerunner of deftruction, how near muft be the ruin of a nation that can be incited against it's governors, by fophiftry like this. I may be excufed if I catch the panick, and join my groans at this alarming crifis, with the general lamentation of weeping patriots.

Another objection is, that the Commons, by pronouncing the fentence of difqualification, make a law, and take upon themselves the power of the whole legiflature. Many quotations are then produced to prove that the Houfe of Commons can make no laws.

Three

Three acts have been cited, difabling members for different terms on different occafions, and it is profoundly remarked, that if the Commons could by their own privilege have made a difqualification, their jealoufy of their privileges would never have admitted the concurrent fanction of the other powers.

I must for ever remind thefe puny controvertists, that thofe acts are laws of permanent obligation: that two of them are now in force, and that the other expired only when it had fulfilled its end. Such laws the Commons cannot make; they could, perhaps, have determined for themselves, that they would expel all who fhould not take the teft, but they could leave no authority behind them, that fhould oblige the next parliament to expel them. They could refuse the South Sea directors, but they could not entail the refufal. They can difqualify by vote, but not by law; they cannot know that the fentence of difqualification pronounced to-day may not become void to-morrow, by the diffolution of their own Houfe. Yet while the fame parliament fits, the difqualification continues unless the vote be refcinded, and while it fo continues, makes the votes, which freeholders may give to the interdicted candidate, useless and dead, fince there cannot exist, with refpect to the fame fubject at the fame time, an abfolute power to chufe and an abfolute power to reject.

In 1614, the attorney-general was voted incapable of a feat in the House of Commons, and the nation is triumphantly told, that though the vote never was revoked, the attorney-general is now a member.

C 2

member. He certainly may now be a member without revocation of the vote. A law is of perpetual obligation, but a vote is nothing when the voters are gone. A law is a compact reciprocally made by the legislative powers, and therefore not to be abrogated but by all the parties. A vote is fimply a refolution, which binds only him that is willing to be bound.

I have thus punctiliously and minutely perfued this difquifition, because I fufpect that these reafoners, whose business is to deceive others, have fometimes deceived themselves, and I am willing to free them from their embarraffment, though I do not expect much gratitude for my kindness.

Other objections are yet remaining, for of political objections there cannot eafily be an end. It has been obferved, that vice is no proper cause of expulfion, for if the worft man in the House were always to be expelled, in time none would be left. But no man is expelled for being worft, he is expelled for being enormously bad; his conduct is compared, not with that of others, but with the rule of action.

The punishment of expulfion being in its own nature uncertain, may be too great or too little for the fault.

This must be the cafe of many punishments. Forfeiture of chattels is nothing to him that has no poffeffions. Exile itself may be accidentally a good; and indeed any punishment less than death is very different to different men.

But if this precedent be admitted and established, no man can hereafter be fure that he shall be re

presented

prefented by him whom he would choofe. One, half of the Houfe may meet early in the morning, and snatch an opportunity to expel the other, and the greater part of the nation may by this ftratagem be without its lawful reprefentatives.

He that fees all this, fees very far, But I can tell him of greater evils yet behind. There is one poffibility of wickedness, which, at this alarming crifis, has not yet been mentioned. Every one knows the malice, the fubtilty, the induftry, the vigilance, and the greedinefs of the Scots. The Scotch members are about the number fufficient to make a house. I propofe it to the confideration of the supporters of the Bill of Rights, whether there is not reason to suspect, that these hungry intruders from the North, are now contriving to expel all the English. We may then curfe the hour in which it was determined, that expulfion and exclufion are the fame. For who can guess what may be done when the Scots have the whole Houfe to themfelves?

Thus agreeable to custom and reafon, notwithftanding all objections, real or imaginary; thus confiftent with the practice of former times, and thus confequential to the original principles of government, is that decifion by which fo much violence of difcontent has been excited, which has been fo dolorously bewailed, and fo outrageously refented.

Let us however not be feduced to put too much confidence in justice or in truth, they have often been found inactive in their own defence, and give more confidence than help to their friends and their advocates.

C 3

advocates. It may perhaps be prudent to make one momentary conceffion to falfehood, by fuppofing the vote in Mr. Lutterel's favour to be wrong.

All wrong ought to be rectified. If Mr. Wilkes is deprived of a lawful feat, both he and his electors have reason to complain; but it will not be easily found, why, among the innumerable wrongs of which a great part of mankind are hourly complaining, the whole care of the publick fhould be transferred to Mr. Wilkes and the freeholders of Middlefex, who might all fink into non-existence, without any other effect, than that there would be room made for a new rabble, and a new retailer of fedition and obfcenity. The caufe of our country would fuffer little; the rabble, whencefoever they come, will be always patriots, and always fupporters of the Bill of Rights.

The House of Commons decides the difputes arifing from elections. Was it ever fuppofed, that in all cafes their decifions were right? Every man whofe lawful election is defeated, is equally wronged with Mr. Wilkes, and his conftituents feel their difappointment with no lefs anguish than the freeholders of Middlefex. Thefe decifions have often been apparently partial, and fometimes tyrannically oppreffive. A majority has been given to a favourite candidate, by expunging votes which had always been allowed, and which therefore had the authority by which all votes are given, that of custom uninterrupted. When the Commons determine who fhall be constituents, they may, with fome propriety, be faid to make law, because those determinations have hitherto, for the fake of quiet, been

adopted