could not prosper, and from which their violence | ation as to deem it wise and salutary upon slight and injustice could not exclude me.

Sir, I do really believe that the supporters of this extraordinary business look but a short way, and do not at all calculate or count upon its probable effects. If there had not been an act of Parliament expressly to regulate scrutinies in the city of London, who can say that at this moment, when laws are to be made as serious and interesting as any that ever passed in this country-when great and weighty impositions must be laid upon the subjects-when new and important regulations are to be entered upon concerning the commerce, the credit, and revenues of the nation-who can say that at this time the capital of the country, so deeply and supremely interested in all these objects, might not be deprived of representation as well as the city of Westminster? But, sir, I beg pardon. I am doing injustice. The sheriffs of London are too well acquainted with their duty, and too zealous for the honorable discharge of it, to have been guilty of so gross an outrage upon the laws of the land, or lent themselves to be the vile and sordid instruments of so base a business.

occasions, or upon any occasion, to lessen that which is already much too little. The whole tide of reasoning has, on the contrary, run in the other channel; and the great argument for a parliamentary reform has been founded upon this very defect of real representation, which the noble Lord over against me is so zealous to diminish. As the honorable gentleman near him, however [Mr. Pitt], is the professed friend of that reform, in the representation of the people of this country, which I have in common with him, so long labored in vain to accomplish, I shall hope to see him stating this very case of Westminster, to induce the House to adopt the motion which will be made upon that subject by my honorable friend [Mr. Sawbridge] in a few days. Of the prosperity of that motion I now entertain real confidence. The boasted power in this House of the right honorable gentleman insures success to any measure he abets. question, therefore, can be entertained of attaining it, if the honorable gentleman is serious upon the subject; for surely the people of England can never be persuaded that the majority, which supported the minister in vindicating a direct violation of the law of the land, in the person of Mr. Corbett, could have failed him in endeavor

No

But the character of an officer is a weak security against the abuse of an office. Under men less informed, and less tenacious of their official reputation, who can say (if an express acting to effect an object so long looked for, so had not rendered it impossible) that the patrons loudly called for, and so essentially necessary to of Sir Cecil Wray, who are also patrons of Mr. the security of the Constitution and the good of Atkinson,19 might not practice the same strata- the nation, as a reform in the palpably defective gem in the city of London, and by that maneu-representation of the people in this House. ver prevent the wishes and the sentiments of the capital from being declared in this House, through the constitutional organ of their representatives? They, sir, I affirm, are weak and foolish men, rash and giddy politicians, who, by supporting a measure of this kind, become parties in a precedent, capable of producing consequences which strike at the source and root of all legislation; for it is the fundamental maxim of our Constitution, that the consent of the people by their representatives is essential and indispensable to those laws that are to govern them.

Upon this, however, a curious sort of reasoning is adopted, and a noble Lord [Lord Mulgrave] sees no evil in a defect of representatives for Westminster, as it is virtually represented by those who sit here for other places. In the principle that every member is bound to the common interest of all, I certainly do agree; but I beg leave to set myself wholly against the general argument of virtual representation. We have too much of virtual, and too little of real representation in this House. And to the present hour I never heard that the most determined enemy to a parliamentary reform ever urged that the virtual representation of the country was so complete a substitute for real represent

19 This would seem to be Mr. Richard Atkinson, the agent of Paul Benfield, spoken of by Mr. Burke in his speech on the Nabob of Arcot's debts, who had just been defeated in London at the general election.

The same noble Lord attempts to strengthen his cause with a species of argument still more extraordinary, if possible, than the former, although of nearly the same nature. He tells you, that representing Westminster has been a mere naval honor; and after stating the choice of Lord Rodney when on foreign service, leads you to this inference, that the electors of Westminster are wholly unsolicitous whether they are represented or not. This is rating the electors of Westminster at a low estimate indeed; but I, sir, who know them better than the noble Lord, deny that they are so insensible to the blessings of the British Constitution as his argument pretends. The electors of Westminster have rescued themselves from this imputation. Sir, they are seriously anxious to be represented, and they tell you so. But I remember when absence was deemed a disqualification for naval officers upon a Westminster election. I remember when Lord Hood was in the zenith of his fame, that persons now in my eye [looking at Lord Mahon] urged his absence to the electors as a ground of rejection; and advised them to prefer Sir Cecil Wray, who was present and able to represent them, to Lord Hood, who was absent and unable. This, though not my argument (whose opinion is uniformly that all electors of all places should elect

20 This kind of home thrust, by referring to some past incident, is one of Mr. Fox's most striking pe culiarities. So, likewise, is the turn given in the next sentence, respecting the coalition of one who

so hated Coalitions.

the men of their choice), was the exact argu- | ever been insulted with this mockery of his ment of the present supporters of Lord Hood in scruples ?21 favor of that of Sir Cecil Wray, who then opposed him, but who now-in his enmity to any junetion after past opposition, in his utter abhorrence of all coalitions-is linked with that very Lord Hood in ties of friendship and good faith, which he certainly never will violate.

To show, in another striking point of view, that this scrutiny is against the law, let the House reflect for a moment upon its utter inefficacy to enable the High Bailiff to form a judg ment, as that is the pretended cause of it. What means has he of exploring those things which he Efforts, sir, have been made to explain the act now affects to entertain doubts upon? He can of George II. to the exculpation of this High command no witness; he can compel no appearBailiff; and his supporters affect to justify him ance. He has no legal authority for penetrating upon his declared difficulty in making up his the obscurity of any fact like other judges; he "conscience." Why, sir, the very act they at- can administer no oath; he can impart no remtempt to shield him under is his strongest con- edy to the party aggrieved by so tedious and demnation. The oath imposed in that act only vexatious a process; he can award no costs; he binds him to decide to "the best of his judg- can try no offense that occurs in the execution ment" by a limited time. Lives there one man of this important duty; he is governed by no who shall say, "this man would have incurred precedents; he is bound by no decisions: what the penalties of perjury if he had returned the he affirms to-day he may deny to-morrow; he majority upon the poll ?" Lives there one man has, in a word, all the means of doing injustice, who thinks the disquietude of his conscience and no one power or competent faculty to do alone prompted him to make the return he has justice. Yet to this species of tribunal is this made, when they must see a thousand instances House going (in violation of law and practice) every day of decisions of conscience, in cases a to send me and my cause, on purpose to evade thousand times more ambiguous and solemn ? one which is full, adequate, effective, and vigorI will ask the House whether this High Bailiff ous-I mean, a committee under Grenville's bill. has appeared to them, in the course of this busi- A noble Lord expresses his suspicions of the ness, so spotless, so immaculate, so consistent, sincerity of my praises of Grenville's bill, and as to induce them to give him credit for a deli- says he imagines there is "a snake in the grass." cacy of nerve, and a tenderness of scruple be-It is most true, that I had my doubts upon the yond any other man living? Every person in effects of that bill, when it first passed into a the exercise of a judicial function stands pre-law. But, sir, it is exerting the worst tyranny cisely in his predicament. What would become of us if a judge were forever to delay justice, until he could make up his conscience to the minutest point of precise accuracy upon every doubt ? There are few cases upon which a man can not form some opinion. All that is required here is to form the best opinion he can; and if seven weeks did not afford the High Bailiff time enough to determine, it is surely hard with those who are obliged to decide almost immediately in the most important interests of humanity. My honorable friend who made this motion, with that weight and wisdom that accompany all his observations, has adverted to the case of jurors. Have you, then, patience at this man's pretense of conscience, when you reflect that twelve men must all concur before they go out of court, in a judgment which perhaps consigns a fellow-creature to an ignominious death? The case may be doubtful too, and yet they must all concur in a few hours, at most. It is unnecessary to push this point farther. I appeal to the House. There are feelings which even party prejudices can not dispossess us of. We owe to each other a certain candor; and I am sure I should be thoroughly satisfied to put this matter to the private answer of any man who hears me; if I were only to ask him, upon his honor as a gentleman, whether he really believes the return of this High Bailiff is an act of conscience? And whether he thinks, if I stood in Sir Cecil Wray's place, and he had my majority, we should ever have heard of this man's difficulty in giving judgment; or

upon the understanding of men, if they are to be forever condemned for having entertained doubts upon a subject purely theoretical. Extinct is every idea of freedom, and lost is the boasted liberty of debate, and the spirit of free thinking in this country, if men are to be debarred from profiting by practice, and changing opinion upon the conviction of experiment. All I can say, sir, is, that the many salutary effects of that bill have long since completely converted me; and I do assure you, in great sincerity, that no man living reveres and loves it more than I do. There can be no stronger proof of its superior excellence, than that the evasion of it is the only possible means by which his Majesty's ministers could perpetrate this gross act of injustice. The most infallible of all tests, the test of repeated practice, asserts its virtues; and my attachment to it is not a little increased, for that it resembles that inestimable right-one of the few that Englishmen have yet to boast-the trial by jury. Oh that it were possible to mold this House into the size and character of a jury!—of twelve men acting indeed upon conscience, and sworn upon oath to give a true verdict according to evidence!

21 There can hardly be found any where a pas paragraph about Mr. Corbett's conscience. There sage which is a more complete "settler" than this is a sort of power in it which no speaker but Demosthenes ever so fully possessed-strong common sense, brief but irresistible reasoning, keen sarcasm, manly appeal, all wrought together in the tersest language, and vivified by the warmest emotion.

How easy should I feel concerning the issue of the subject; that if the common law were silent, this discussion!

thority, to make a return, has happened again | facility of a collusion in a case of this sort, to keep and again. We do not desire him to exercise a candidate from his seat, whose right to it is any jurisdiction under that writ now; we only clear, unquestioned, and unquestionable. Supdesire him to acquaint us with the fruits of the pose that not one single bad vote had been givjurisdiction which he has exercised under it. en for Lord Hood in the late election, and that I have done so and so, says the High Bailiff. the noble Lord were not (he best knows why) "Tell us what you mean," is all we say. "I resigned and easy under this proceeding, what have, on such a day, proceeded to an election," could be more hard and cruel than his situation? says he; "I have carried on a poll for forty Does not the House see that ministers will be endays; I have, on the day before the return of abled by this precedent to exclude an obnoxious the writ, closed that poll, of my own author- candidate for an indefinite space of time, even ity." All this we understand. In all this you though his majority be the most undoubted posdid your duty. Only tell us who are the candi-sible, and his election the fairest in the world? dates chosen upon this long poll? We do not mean to say you have at present any authority to do any thing under that writ; all we want to know is, what you did when you had authority under it? Let the House reflect upon this fair and reasonable distinction, and they will see the paltriness of those quibbles, the misery of those low subterfuges, which imply that we would bring "a dead man to life;" and which imply an inconsistency between the motion and the arguments advanced in support of it.

It is only for the losing candidate to demand, and for the returning officer to grant, a scrutiny. These are some of the evils that present themselves upon the recognition of this practice as right and legal. For my part, I see nothing in the late election for Westminster peculiar and distinct from many other elections, but this singly, that I was one of the candidates. In that light it is already seen by every cool, dispassionate, and sensible man; and that the whole nation will contemplate and construe the business of this night as an act of personal oppression, I am thor

when they learn that in all the law books of this country, in all your journals, in all the histories of Parliament, in all the annals of elections, in this great land of elections, where, from time to time, all that power, all that ingenuity, all that opulence could devise or execute, has been tried in elections-where, in the vast mass of cases that have happened, in all the multiplied variety of singular and curious contests we read and hear of, nothing is found that assimilates with, or authorizes this scrutiny, under these circumstances— not even by the worst of men, in the worst of times.

nature.

What, I beg leave to ask, has appeared to the House extraordinary or uncommon in the elec-oughly convinced; nor can they think otherwise, tion for Westminster, that justifies this matchless violence? In all the variety of evidence they have heard at the bar, has there been a proof of one single bad vote of my side? Not one. But there was much hearsay that I had bad votes. Sir Cecil Wray and his agents told the High Bailiff they heard I had. Good God, sir, am I addressing men of common sense? Did any of you ever yet hear of an election wherein the losing candidate did not charge bad votes and bad practices upon the fortunate candidate? Peevishness upon miscarriage is perhaps an error, but it is the habit of human nature; and was the High Bailiff of Westminster so unhackneyed in the ways of men, as to be unapprized of this frailty; or are the discontents of Sir Cecil Wray, and the loose accusations of his agents, the extraordinary things which the House sees in the Westminster election, to justify this proceeding? Is the length of the election one of these uncommon incidents? By no means. The same thing happened at Bristol, where, without doubt, a scrutiny would have been granted, if the returning officer had thought the law would bear him out in it. The same thing happened at Lancaster, where a scrutiny was demanded and refused, and where, when the connections of one of the candidates25 are considered, no doubt can be entertained that every stratagem to procrastinate, every scheme to perplex, every expedient to harass, all that a disposition not the mildest when victorious, nor the most patient when vanquished, all that wealth, all that the wantonness of wealth could do, would have been exerted; and where a plan so admirably calculated for litigation, for vexation, for expense, for oppression, as a scrutiny, would not have been admitted, were it found legal or practicable.

Let the House reflect for a moment upon the

25 Mr. Lowther, the nephew of Sir James Lowther.

III. (1.) I will acquit the honorable gentleman over against me [Mr. Pitt] of be- Remarks of a ing the author, or being a voluntary more general instrument in this vile affair; and in that concession, sir, I do not give him much. It is but crediting him for a little common sense, indeed, when I suppose that, from a regard to that government of which he is the nominal leader, from a regard to his own character with the world at this time, and his reputation with posterity, he acts his part in this business not without concern. That he may be accusable of too servile a compliance is probable enough; but of a free agency in it I believe he is guiltless. Not to him, sir, but to its true cause, do I attribute this shameful attack-to that black, that obstinate, that stupid spirit which, by some strange infatuation, pervades, and has pervaded the councils of this country throughout the whole course of this unfortunate and calamitous reign-to that weak, that fatal, that damnable system, which has been the cause of all our disgraces and all our miseries-to those secret advisers, who hate with rancor and revenge with cruelty-to those malignant men, whose character it is to harass the object of their enmity with a relentless and insatiate spirit of revenge; to those, sir, and not to

the honorable gentleman, do I impute this unexampled persecution.36

(2.) Having said so much as to the real authors of this measure, there remains another consideration with which I am desirous to impressities have been completely extinct since the 18th the House. It is a consideration, however, which in policy I ought to conceal, because it will be an additional incitement to my enemies to proceed in their career with vigor; but it will nevertheless show the extreme oppression and glaring impolicy of this scrutiny-I mean the consideration of expense.