In addition to all these arguments, will the House reflect that this scrutiny is not final in deciding the right of sitting here ?22 Will they reflect that, after all the waste of time, after all the expense, all the labor, all the fatigue, which are indispensable upon it, its termination (whenever it may happen) is but the commencement of another process before a judicature, capable and competent to administer justice, with a new series of expense, and labor, and fatigue? And who can tell us when this scrutiny shall conclude? The granting it is not more illegal and oppressive than the duration is uncertain and indefinite. Who can promise when such a conscience as Corbett's will be quieted? And who will venture to say that, after one, two, three, or ten years' investigation, the High Bailiff's conscience may not be as unsatisfied, even upon the scrutiny, as it appears at this moment, after a seven weeks' poll?

"But," say the supporters of the High Bailiff, "this House will take care that there is no vexatious delay in the business, and will from time to time call upon him for a return, or for the cause that may prevent his making one." I understand that argument perfectly well, sir; and it is of itself sufficient to show the grossness of this proceeding. When the bailiff will be called on to make a return, and when he will obey that call, can be very easily conceived, indeed. If it were possible for this man, in the course of this scrutiny, to strike off from my numbers so many as would place Sir Cecil Wray on the head of the poll, I have not the smallest doubt that all delays, subsequent to such an event, would appear just as frivolous, as vexatious and oppressive to the gentlemen on the opposite bench [the Ministry], and to the High Bailiff's conscience, as the whole proceeding now appears to me, and to the injured electors of Westminster. Upon all the considerations, therefore, that I have mentioned the inordinate expense; the inefficacy of the tribunal; the obvious necessity of afterward resorting to a more adequate and competent judicature; the certainty that this precedent will be the source of future oppressions; the dangerous example of it to other returning officers, who, under the sanction of this case, can give full scope to their partialities, their caprices, and corruptions; the circumstance of depriving so great and respectable a body of men of their representation in this House; the recognizing that dreadful doctrine, that a King may be without a Parliament, and the people without representation, at the mere will and bare discretion of any low, mean, ignorant, base, and wretched being, who may happen to be a returning officer -from all these considerations, therefore, I am convinced, and I hope I have convinced this House, that if no statute could be found upon

22 The question could be brought up again after the return was made, and tried before a committee of the House under Mr. Grenville's bill.

and that legal analogies gave no light upon the subject, even upon the grounds of common sense and expediency, the law is clear and intelligible. But when all these concur to define and to decide the law; when positive statutes, when prac tice and precedents, when the analogies of law, and the arguments of expediency, founded upon the immutable principles of wisdom, reason, and sound policy, ALL combine and unite to establish and to assert it, can I have any fear to say that this motion ought to pass, and that the High Bailiff of Westminster, instead of being permitted to proceed with this scrutiny, should instant. ly make a return of members for Westminster?

Some gentlemen have argued that this motion does not agree with the prayer of the petition [previously presented by Mr. Fox]. Let it be recollected, sir, that the petition was presented by me with a view of its being referred to a com mittee.23 Really, sir, if there is not enough o candor to admit this assertion without being explained, there seems but little chance of a fair hearing, or of a fair construction, upon points much more material. I again declare it was presented for the purpose I have described. A majority of this House decided that the petition was not cognizable by Mr. Grenville's bill; and it was upon a suggestion from the other side of the House that I presented it the same day, to save time, and prayed that counsel might be heard at the bar in favor of it. The sole object of that petition was, that this House might order such a return as would come under the jurisdiction of a committee; the motion before you goes precise ly to the same point, and to no other.

To that argument, if it deserves the name of argument, that we are inconsistent in desiring the High Bailiff to make a return, when we contend that all his authority under that writ is completely defunct, it is almost unnecessary to reply, because it evidently defeats itself. In contending that the High Bailiff was functus officio on the 18th of May, we are fortified by law; and, in de siring he would make some return, we are just’· fied by precedent.

We contend, and contend with truth, that the writ under which the High Bailiff carried on the election, being returnable on the 18th of May, or that very day deprived the bailiff of all judicia! authority, and devested him of all legal power under that writ. To proceed with a scrutiny is a great act of authority; to tell us who have, in his opinion, the majority of legal votes, is not. That this House should order a returning officer to commence a scrutiny several days after the positive day on which his writ was returnable, can not be paralleled by a single case in all the history of Parliament. That it should order a returning officer, who tells you he proceeded to an election, carried on a poll for a sufficient time, and that he then closed that poll of his own al

"Here the minister shook his head, as if to deos the fact.

24 Discharged from further duty.

the honorable gentleman, do I impute this unexampled persecution.26

I have had a variety of calculations made upon the subject of this scrutiny, and the lowest of all the estimates is £18,000. This, sir, is a serious and an alarming consideration. But I know it may be said (and with a pitiful triumph it perhaps will be said) that this is no injury to me, inasmuch as I shall bear but a small portion of the burden; but this, sir, to me, is the bitterest of all reflections!

Affluence is, on many accounts, an enviable state; but if ever my mind languished for and sought that situation, it is upon this occasion; it is to find that, when I can bear but a small part of this enormous load of wanton expenditure, the misfortune of my being obnoxious to bad men in nigh authority should extend beyond myself; it is when I find that those friends whom I respect for their generosity, whom I value for their virtues, whom I love for their attachment to me, and those spirited constituents to whom I am bound by every tie of obligation, by every feeling of gratitude, should, besides the great and important injury they receive in having no representation in the popular Legislature of this country, be forced into a wicked waste of idle and fruitless costs, only because they are too kind, too partial to me. This, sir, is their crime; and for their adherence to their political principles, and their personal predilection for me, they are to be punished with these complicated hardships.

These, sir, are sad and severe reflections; and although I am convinced they will infuse fresh courage into my enemies, and animate them the more to carry every enmity to the most vexatious and vindictive extremity, still it shows the wickedness of this scrutiny, and the fatality of its effects as an example for future ministers.

(3.) Little remains for me now to say upon this subject; and I am sure I am unwilling to trespass more upon the House than is barely necessary. I can not, however, omit to make an observation upon an argument of two learned gentlemen, who concluded two very singular speeches with this very singular position, that the House had only to choose between issuing a new writ or ordering the scrutiny; that in

26 This refers to that system of secret influence with the King, supposed to have commenced with Lord Bute, which was so much complained of at the

beginning of this reign. Here Mr. Fox alludes particularly to Lord Temple's communications with the King, respecting the East India Bill, and the events dependent thereon.

The Lord Advocate and Mr. Hardinge.

ities have been completely extinct since the 18th of May-had delivered such an opinion, there would have been nothing in it inconsistent. And I should certainly be for issuing a new writ in preference to a scrutiny, if the law, the reason of the thing, and the practice of Parliament, did not convince me that the High Bailiff, having finished the election on the 17th, might make a return as of that day. But for the learned gentlemen who contend that the old writ is still in full vigor and force; who think that the High Bailiff has acted constitutionally and legally, and that a scrutiny may go on after the return of the writ— for those gentlemen to assert that the issuing a new one would be the fitter measure, is indeed extraordinary. But, sir, against that position, that the House might order the scrutiny to proceed, as a measure of lenity, I beg leave directly to oppose myself! I beg leave tc deprecate such lenity, such oppressive, such cruel lenity!

To issue a new writ is a severe injustice, and a great hardship; but if I am forced to the alternative, if I am driven to the necessity of choosing between two evils, I do implore the House rather to issue a new writ than to order this scrutiny. Nothing can possibly be half so injurious, half so burdensome, half so vexatious to, me and to my friends, as this scrutiny; and it is evidently ineffectual, as it can not be supposed that I should finally submit to the decision of a tribunal from which I have so little justice to expect. There is nothing, I assure the House, to which I should not rather resort than to the conscience of Mr. Thomas Corbett; upon whom I do not expect that the translation of the scene from Covent Garden to St. Ann's, or proceeding upon a scrutiny instead of a poll, will operate such conversions as to give me any hope of his displaying any other character, or appearing in any other light than that in which I have seen him upon many occasions in his official capacity. Therefore, sir, if it be only the alternative, I beg that the issuing a new writ may be the alternative you will adopt. In that case, I assure the hon orable gentleman [Mr. Pitt] that I shall immedi ately apply to him for one of the Chiltern Hundreds to vacate my seat for Kirkwall, and instantly throw myself, as my only chance for the honor of sitting in this House, upon the good opinion of the electors of Westminster-who, in a season of frenzy and general delusion; who, when artifice, fallacy, and imposture prevailed but too suc cessfully in other parts of the country, discovered a sagacity, a firmness, and a steadiness superior to the effects of a vulgar and silly clamor; and who, upon the very spot, the very seene of action, manifested that they understood and despised the hypocrisy, the fraud, and falsehood which gulled and duped their fellow-subjects in other places. In the event of a new election, I do anticipate future triumphs more brilliant, more splendid, it possible, than those I had lately the aonor of en

(4.) A person of great rank in this House [Mr. Pitt] has thrown out a hint or threat, I know not which to call it, in a former debate, "that I should not again disturb the peace of the city of Westminster." Good God, sir! did any man ever hear such aggravating, such insulting insinuations? I disturb the peace of Westminster! Is that honorable gentleman not contented with breaking every law, with violating every statnte, with overturning every analogy and every precedent, to accomplish this business; but must he, at the very moment he thus makes a deep broach in the English Constitution, complete the catalogue of injury, by adding pertness and personal contumely to every species of rash and inconsiderate violence! I, I disturb the peace of this city, who have three times had the honor of representing it in this House! I, who was favored with the free suffrages of its electors, long, long before any of those who lately opposed me were ever talked of, ever thought of for such a distinction! Every man qualified to sit in Parliament has a right to offer himself wherever he thinks proper; and it is indecent, daring, and audacious in any man, to insinuate that he ought not to disturb the peace of the place. I therefore hope, sir, that a language so peculiarly false and unbecoming toward me, and so directly repugnant to the genius and spirit of the Constitution, will meet with the disapprobation it deserves in this House, as it certainly will be received with merited odium and execration out of this House.

Upon the generous protection of the electors of this city I shall certainly throw myself, in case of a new writ; and, in doing so, sir, well I am <ware what a series of various difficulties I have lo encounter. Expenses at elections, in despite of every effort to reduce them, still continue most exorbitant; and how ill matched in funds and certain inexhaustible resources I stand with my opponents, is indeed very unnecessary to explain. But, sir, it is not in the article of expenses that I should most dread the operation of that power that sustains my adversaries-that power which discovers itself in characters that can not be mistaken, through every part of this transaction. I must be blind not to see that the hand of government appears throughout this matter. When I consider the extreme care employed in preparing it for the measures which have been taken in this House in consequence of it--when I consider the evident determination not to let it rest here-when I consider the extraordinary zeal and anxiety of particular persons in this House to shelter and to sanctify this High Bailiff when I consider the situation of those who take the lead, and are most active in his vindication-when I consider the indifference

of my adversaries to the expenses which result from this scrutiny, but which expenses must be a severe stroke up the spirit and independence

sider that all that artifice could dictate and power could execute have been exerted upon this occasion, I can have no doubt that the hand of a revengeful government pervades it all. The opposition of such a government upon an election is a discouraging circumstance; and the likeli hood of renewing again those events which I have witnessed within the last two months, is indeed a formidable and terrific prospect.

When I look back, sir, to all the shameful and shocking scenes of the Westminster electionwhen I consider that my enemies practiced all that was possible of injustice, indecency, and irreverence in their efforts to overwhelm mewhen I consider the gross, the frontless prosti tution of names too sacred to be mentioned 28when I consider that all the influence of all the various branches of government was employed against me, in contempt of propriety and defiance of law-when I consider that a body of men was brought, in the appearance of constables, to the place of election, under the command of a magistrate, and against the express opinion of all the other magistrates of Westminsterthat these constables broke that peace they were bound to preserve, and created a riot which proved fatal to one of their own body-when I consider that this was made the pretense of a wanton, and indecent, and unconstitutional introduction of the military, in violation of all that has been done by our ancestors to keep sacred the freedom of election-when I consider that the lives of innocent men were deemed light and trivial impediments to the gratification of that implacable spirit of revenge, which appears through the whole of this business-when I consider that several men of the lower order of life, whose only crime was appearing in my interest, were confined for many weeks in a prison, and obliged to stand trial,29 and that others, of the higher rank, ingenious and amiable men, valuable for their qualities, respectable for their characters, distinguished for their abilities, and every way meriting the esteem of mankind, were also attacked without the show of a pretense, and obliged to undergo the ceremony of a public acquittal from the foul crime of murder-when I consider that palpable perjury, and subornation of perjury were employed to accomplish the sanguinary object of this base conspiracy—when I consider that the malignity of my enemies has stopped at nothing, however gross and wicked, to ruin me and all that appeared in my interestwhen I consider all this, sir, I can not, indeed, but look with some anxiety to the circumstance of a new election..

I am not, it is well known, sir, of a melancholy complexion, or of a desponding turn of 28 Reference is here made to the use of the King's name by Lord Temple and others, to defeat Mr. Fox.

29 They were acquitted on that trial. Mr. O'Bry. en, who is next referred to, was indicted for murder, but no evidence whatever was produced against him, and he was of course discharged.

mind; yet the idea of again combating this host | of oppressions might, in other situations, deter me from the risk. But I owe too much to the electors of Westminster ever to abandon them from any dread of any consequences; and I do assure you that I should conceive a new writ, with the hazard of all these hardships, as a great indulgence and favor, compared to that mockery, that insult upon judicature, a scrutiny under Mr. Thomas Corbett.

Sir, I have nothing more to say upon this subject. Whatever may be the fate of the question, it will be a pleasing reflection to me that I have delivered my opinions at full upon a point so important to that great and respectable body of men, to whom I am so much indebted; and I sincerely thank the House for the honor of their patience and attention through so long a speech. To the honorable gentleman over against me [Mr. Pitt] I will beg leave to offer a little advice. If he condemns this measure, let him not stoop to be the instrument of its success. Let him well weigh the consequences of what he is about, and look to the future effect of it upon the nation at large. Let him take care, that when they see all the powers of his administration employed to overwhelm an individual, men's eyes may not open sooner than they would if he conducted himself within some bounds of decent discretion, and not thus openly violate the sacred principles of the Constitution. A moderate use of his power might the longer keep people from reflecting upon the extraordinary means by which he acquired it. But if the honorable gentleman neglects his duty, I shall not forget mine. Though he may exert all the influence of his situation to harass and persecute, he shall find that we are incapable of unbecoming submissions. There is a principle of resistance in mankind which will not brook such injuries; and a good cause and a good heart will animate men to struggle in proportion to the size of their wrongs, and the grossness of their oppressors. If the House rejects this motion, and establishes the fatal precedent which follows that rejection, I confess I shall begin to

think there is little to be expected from such a House of Commons. But let the question term. inate as it may, I feel myself bound to maintain an unbroken spirit through such complicated difficulties. And I have this reflection to folace me, that this unexampled injustice could never have succeeded but by the most dangerous and desperate exertions of a government, which, rather than not wound the object of their enmi ty, scrupled not to break down all the barriers of law; to run counter to the known custom of our ancestors; to violate all that we have of practice and precedent upon this subject; and to strike a deep blow into the very vitals of the English Constitution, without any other inducement, or temptation, or necessity, except the malignant wish of gratifying an inordinate and implacable spirit of resentment.

These eloquent reasonings, and the significant appeal at the close, were lost upon Mr. Pitt He had taken his ground, and Mr. Ellis' motion was negatived by a majority of 117. Still the mind of the country was affected precisely as Mr. Fox declared it would be. The scrutiny was more and more regarded as dishonorable and unjust; especially when, at the expiration of eight months, Mr. Fox was found to have lost only eighteen votes, as compared with his antag onist. All this time had been spent upon two out of seven parishes, and how long the investigation might be continued no one could predict. On Feb. 9th, 1785, another motion was made for an immediate return. This was rejected by a greatly diminished majority. The motion was renewed at the close of the same month, when the majority against it was reduced to nine. On the third of March, 1785, it was made again, and Mr. Pitt now endeavored to stave it off by moving an adjournment; but perfectly as he was master of his majority on every other subject, they deserted him here. His motion was negatived by a vote of 162 to 124. The original motion was carried, and the next day the High Bailiff made a return of Mr. Fox.