In confequence of the ill fuccess of the recent attempt at reconciliation, the rage of party seemed more inflamed than ever, and the press teemed with political pamphlets on each fide, couched in terms of the extremest virulence and abuse. These the ministry seemed totally and wifely to disregard, till on the appearance of the 45th number of a periodical publication styled the North Briton, containing a personal and very indecent attack upon the king, charging him with affirming a direct falsehood in his speech from the throne, it was in an evil hour judged expedient, for the vindication of his majesty's honor, to exert every effort of government to rescue the Sovereign from an imputation, the impression made by which, had it been regarded with the dignity of filent contempt, would probably have lasted only till the 46th number had promulgated some new abuse, as impudent, as 'malignant, and as futile as the former*. The well known and almost avowed author of the publication in question was Mr. Wilkes, member of parliament for the borough of Aylesbury, a man of ruined fortune and profligate morals, who had made repeated applications to the ministry for some poft that might repair his shattered circumstances; but failing of success, probably through his total want of character, he resolved in revenge, and it is faid that he fcrupled not openly to declare his resolution, to try how far it was practicable to carry the licentiousness of writing under the pretext of exercising the liberty of the press. A warrant was issued under the hand and feal of lord Halifax, directed to certain of his majefty's messengers in in the usual official form, commanding them to apprehend the authors, printers, and publishers of that feditious and treasonable paper.

On the 29th of April, 1763, late at night, the messen-⚫ gers entered the house of Mr. Wilkes, and produced their warrant, with which, on account of the general terms in which it was drawn, he absolutely refused compliance; but on their return the next morning, he was compelled to accompany them to the office of the secretary of state, whence he was committed close prisoner to the tower, his papers being previously seized and fealed, and all access to his person strictly prohibited. Application being made to the court of common pleas for an habeas corpus, a writ was accordingly issued, directed to the conftable of the tower, in consequence of which, Mr. Wilkes was brought up the next day to Westminster Hall; and the cafe being new and important, he was, after the pleadings were finished, remanded till Friday May 6, that the Judges might have leifure to form their opinion. On that day being again brought before them, lord chief justice Pratt, afterwards created lord Camden, a firm and invariable friend to constitutional liberty, proceeded to give the opinion of the

court.

He declared, as to the leading points, involved in this complex question, the commitment of Mr. Wilkes to be not in itself illegal, being justified by numerous precedents; and though in strict contemplation of law the warrant of the fecretary of state was not of fuperior force to that of a justice of peace where a combination of circumstances gave a strong fufpicion of facts incompatible with the public safety, he was supported in the commitment even without receiving any particular information for the foundation of the charge. As to the second objection, the court was of opinion, that there was no neceffity for the specification of those particular passages in the 45th number of The North Briton, which had been deemed a libel. The paper did not, at that time, come under the cognizance

of

of the court, nor could it without the assistance of a jury. As to the third head, the chief justice admitted, that the privilege of parliament was violated in the person of Mr. Wilkes;-for the privilege of parliament could be forfeited only by treason, felony, or breach of the peace; but Mr. Wilkes stood accused only of writing a libel, which did not come within that description. At most, it had but a tendency to disturb the peace, and this was not sufficient to destroy the privilege of a member of parliament. The court then discharged Mr. Wilkes, against whom neverthelefs a prosecution was immediately commenced by the attorney general; and he was at the fame time, by an official notice from the secretary of state to lord Temple, lord lieutenant of the county of Bucks, dismissed from his military command as colonel of the Buckinghamshire militia, and lord Temple was himself in a short time dismissed from his lieutenancy, to make room for lord le Despencer, late Sir Francis Dashwood.

Upon the meeting of Parliament, November 15, 1763, his majesty, in his speech from the throne, exhorted the two houses " to cultivate the arts of peace; to employ their utmost attention to the discharge of the heavy debts contracted in the late war: -he recommended to them the care and support of the fleet; and towards the close of the speech he urged them to domeftic union, and that they would discourage that licentious spirit which is repugnant to the true principles of liberty, and of our happy constitution." Before the King's speech could be reported to the house, the minifter, Mr. Grenville, knowing the intention of Mr. Wilkes to prefer a formal complaint of the breach of pri vilege committed in his person, declared, that he had a mefsage to deliver from the king. The message being read, imported, " that his majesty having received information, that John Wilkes, Esq. a member of that house, was the author of a most seditious and dangerous libel, he had cauf ed the said John Wilkes, Esq. to be apprehended and secured,

cured, in order to take his trial in due course of law. And Mr. Wilkes having been discharged out of custody by the court of common Pleas, on account of his privilege as a member of that house, and having fince refused to answer to an information filed against him by his majesty's attorney-general; his majesty, defirous to show all poffible attention to the privileges of the house of commons, and at the same time folicitous not to suffer the public justice of the kingdom to be eluded, had chosen to direct the said libel, and also copies of the examinations upon which Mr. Wilkes was apprehended and secured, to be laid before them:" and the minister then delivered the papers in at the table. On this a violent debate arose, and it was argued in extenuation of the offence of Mr. Wilkes, that no greater liberties had been taken by the author of this obnoxious paper than had been common on former occafions of the fame kind; - that the speech of the king had never. been confidered in any other light than as that of the minifter, and had always been treated with equal freedom. But the house, most unwifely inaking itself a principal in the quarrel, and entering with violence into this vexatious and perplexing business, voted by a great majority, "that THE NORTH BRITON, No. 45, is a false, scandalous, and seditious libel, manifestly tending to alienate the affections of the people from his majesty, and to excite them to traitorous infurrections;" and ordered it to be burnt by the common hangman. Thus was this question, so trivial and infignificant in its origin, swelled to vast and national importance. No legal conviction having as yet taken place, Mr. Wilkes now made his complaint to the house, of breach of privilege by the imprisonment of his person, the plunder of his house, the feizure of his papers, and the ferving him with a fubpoena upon an information in the court of king's bench. The complaint being confefsedly regular, it was refolved to take it into confideration on the 17th. In the interim, Mr. Wilkes in a duel fought with

Mr.

Mr. Martin, late secretary of the treasury and member for Camelford, from whom he had received a challenge, in resentment of the freedom taken with his character in a former number of The North Briton, being dangerously wounded, was unable to appear in his place on the day appointed, and the confideration of the question was adjourned.

On the 23d of November, however, the deliberations on his majesty's message being refumed, the house resolved, by a majority of 125, in direct contradiction of the late decifion of the court of common pleas, and the precedents upon record in their own journals, " that privilege of parliament does not extend to the case of a libel;" and an address was presented to his majesty, in which the peers concurred, fignifying their deteftation of these seditious practices, and their warın affection for his majesty's person and government. Mr. Pitt, who attended the house on this occafion, though obliged by illness to be supported to his feat, declared himself with warmth against the resolution now passed. No man, he said, could condemn the paper or libel more than he did; but he would come at the author fairly, not by a facrifice of their constitutional privileges, and by subjecting every member who did not vote with the minister to the dread and danger of imprifonment. Under such circumstances, how can a parliament be free, or bold, or honest? To talk of the abuse of privilege, was to attack the very being and life of parliament; it was an arraignment of the justice and honor of parliament to suppose that they would protect any criminal whatever. The dignity of parliament called upon them doubtless to support and protect the purity of his majesty's character: this they had done by a strong and decisive condemnation of the libel in question; the rest belonged to the courts below.

In pursuance of the former vote, the sheriffs of London

attempting to execute the order of the house of commons

for