XV.

parliament, with a view to offer himself as a Book candidate for Middlesex; being previously assured that he should, at all events, and whatever 1769. might be the disparity of numbers upon the poll, be the sitting member. At the fourth election Mr. Wilkes was again returned by the sheriffs, the votes in his favor being 1243 to 296; but, on a petition from colonel Luttrell, he was, after a vehement debate continued to a very late hour (March 3, 1769), declared DULY ELECTED!

By this decision the nation was thrown into a paroxysm of rage and consternation, which the occasion certainly could not justify, and which only served to shew how a comparatively trivial question may be magnified into artificial importance, by making it the object of political and personal contention. It could not be denied that the house of commons had ever exercised a judicial authority, which could in no other hands be so properly placed, in determining upon tne validity of returns, and the qualifications of their own members. This authority might undoubtedly be abused, or indiscreetly exercised. But all power is in its own nature liable to abuse; and if so vague an objection be admitted, the powers vested in all political bodies, however constituted, must be annihilated, and the bands of civil society are

BOOK at once dissolved. The power of expulsion for XV. such offences as appear to the house to render 1769. any of its members unworthy of the trust reposed in them, had been exercised in numerous instances from time immemorial; and though no case precisely similar to the present, in all its circumstances, could be adduced, the house of commons now existing had certainly as valid a right to make a precedent in a new case within the limits of their own peculiar jurisdiction, as any former house of commons, or as the courts sitting in Westminster-hall: and had the expulsion of Mr. Wilkes been itself a popular measure, the subsequent steps taken by the house would, no doubt, have been deemed perfectly regular, as analogous to the spirit of former decisions, conformable to the general powers of adjudication vested in the house, and necessarily flowing from the original and established parliamentary right of expulsion.

In the famous case of sir Robert Walpole, expelled the house, A. D. 1711, for "breach of trust and corruption," and re-elected for the borough of Lynn Regis, the house resolved, that he was incapable of sitting in that parliament, though they did not, on that occasion, venture to declare Mr. Taylor, the candidate next upon the poll, duly elected. But in the case of serjeant Comyns, who, being returned for the borough

of Malden in the year 1715, had refused to BOOK

XV.

take the qualification oath, the house more con- 1769. sistently determined, that the votes given to Comyns were lost, and that Mr. Tuffnell, next upon the poll, was duly elected. And in the case of Bedford, 1727, the house, in conformity to the former decision, declared Mr. Orlebar duly elected, though inferior by no less than two hundred and twenty-five votes on the face of the poll to Mr. Ongley, who was previously disqualified by holding the office of commissioner of the customs. From these authorities combined, a complete precedent might therefore be formed; the first affirming, that a member once expelled could not sit in the same parliament; the two latter, that votes given to a disqualified person, were absolutely, and to every elective purpose, null and void. But if no precedents could have been adduced, the reason of the thing would evidently have dictated to thể house such a decision as was essential to the dignity and consistency of their own jurisdiction, and to the avoidance of an absurdity so palpable and ridiculous as would be the doctrine now, for the first time, promulgated, that parliament had a right to expel in infinitum, and the electors a right to re-elect in infinitum.

To charge, therefore, as many scrupled not to do, in consequence of their determined conduct

BOOK in this ill-fated contest, the ministers of the XV. crown with a premeditated design to subvert the 1769. constitution, would be very unjust; though it may

fairly be considered as displaying a most dangerous excess of complaisance to the crown, on the part of the commons, precipitately to involve themselves in a quarrel with their constituents, in order to gratify the intemperate resentment of the court against an obscure and unprotected individual, and as a cogent proof of the alarming influence of the executive power over the legislative body. The worst ministers of the crown, during the present reign, cannot indeed be reasonably suspected of a design so extravagant as that which hath been sometimes seriously ascribed to them, of raising the prerogative above all control; but it is the characteristic of the present reign, that a wise government has been most unwisely administered; that high and arbitrary principles have been revived and acted upon; that the spirit of toryism, i. e. the spirit of pride, of violence, and domination, has, with very short intervals, prevailed; and that the mild, the moderate, the conciliatory maxims of genuine whiggism, have been discountenanced and discarded.

The house of commons proceeded, after the question of the Middlesex election was thus determined, to the usual business of the session, and thirty-three thousand men were voted for the sea BOOK

and land service of the year 1769. The charter

of the East India company was prolonged for

XV.

1769.

Charter of

dia com

the farther term of five years, on conditions simi. the East Inlar to the last agreement; but the company were pany renow allowed to increase their dividend to twelve

and a half per cent. during this term, provided they did not in any one year raise it above one per cent. On the other hand, should the dividend be reduced below the present standard of ten per cent. the stipulated payment of 400,000/. per annum to the public, should be proportionally diminished; and if the dividend should sink to six per cent. the payment to the public should wholly cease.

newed.

A message from the king was, on the last day of February (1769), delivered to the house by the chancellor of the exchequer, acquainting them that the arrears of the civil list amounted to the sum of 513,000l. and desiring the assistance of his faithful commons to discharge this heavy incumbrance. Such was the zeal and loyalty of The arrears the house, and such their unlimited confidence vil list discharged. in his majesty's prudence and economy of expenditure, that, on the 2d of March, the sum required was granted, without any formality of investigation.

On the 9th of May parliament was prorogued; his majesty delivering upon the occasion a speech

of the ci