Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

A curious POCKET TABLE for ready Calculations, and a PLAN of PORTSOKEN

Ward.

LONDON: Printed for R. BALDWIN, at No. 47. in Pater-nofter Row; Of whom may be had complete Sets, from the Year 1732, to the prefent Time; ready bound or flitched, or any fingle Month to complete Sets.

[ocr errors][merged small]

Stock

Stock

Ann.

Ann.

reduced

confol.

India (Sou. Sea. folds S. New S. S. 3 per C. 3 per C. 34 per C. 34 per C. 4 per C. 14 per C.in. Bond. 4 per C. Long.

PRICES OF STOCKS, &c. in MAY 1771.

Lottery

1756.

1758.

confol.

1729

87

904

Prem.

47

Navy.

Ann.

Ticket

[blocks in formation]

13 17 6 S. W.

Fair

N. E.

Rain

27

152

N. E.

Rain

28

Sunday

S. S. E.

Rain

291

13 17

301 153

228

854

87 급

95

N. E.

Rain

W.

Rain

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

86 31

87

95

47

13 17

N. E.

Rain

2

1534

228

85

86

88

90

[blocks in formation]

13 16 6

N. E.

Rain

N. E.

Rain

E.

Rain

[blocks in formation]

952

50

13 15

E.

Rain

E.

Warm

1534

225

85

86

88 1/10

91

95 $

48

26 급

13 14 6

S.

Rain

N. E.

Rain

10

1534

864

88

91

95 즐

48

13 14

S. by E.

Rain

S. W.

Rain

224

N. E.

Cloudy

[blocks in formation]

50

13 14 6

NE.

Rain

N. E.

Fair

13

85

35

225/

85

86

88

91

95

50

264

13 15 6 S. S. W.

Fair

N. E

Fair

[blocks in formation]
[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

49

1

26 13 14

N. E.

Fair

N. E.

Fair

S. E.

Fair

18 Sunday

'S.

Fair

19

S.

Fair

20

26 1

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

13 13 6

S. W.

Fair

N. E.

Fair

91

95

49

13 14 6

S. by W.

Fair

AVERAGE PRICES of GRAIN, by the Standard WINCHESTER

Bufhel.

Wheat. Rye.

Barley. Oats.

Beans.

Wheat Rye. Barley. Oats. | Barley.

Wheat

Rye. | Barley.

Oats.

Beans.

s. d.

Counties Inland

Counties on the Coast

6

s. d. 2 4 3 9 5 10

3

s. d. s. d. s. d. 6 2 53 9 3 4 2 2 3 7

s. d.

s. d.

s. d. s. d.

s. d.

s. d.

s. d.

s. d.

s. d. s. d.

North Wales 6

I 4

6

39

I

9

4 9

Scotland 4 II

29

6

2

13 7

South Wales

5

8 4

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

6

1

THE

LONDON MAGAZINE:

For MAY, 1771.

DEBATES OF A POLITICAL CLUB.

Mr. Serjeant G's Speech on the Commitment of the City Magiftrates to the Tower, concluded from our laft.

T

HE difcretionary powers of prerogative and privilege, Mr. Prefident, were first granted by the people for purposes of public good, and become conftitutionally annihilated in the moment of their perverfion. To abufe, is to deftroy them, and nothing but neceffity could make the punishment of contempts, even in courts of law, warrantable; contempts in court ftrike the immediate existence of juftice: Hence the courts of law are invefted with a power of punishing them with inftant feverity, though making the offended party judge and executioner was manifeftly repugnant to the fpirit of our conftitution: but the neceffity which operates for an authority of this kind in the law courts, does not operate for lodging it with us. Our existence is not endangered by a contempt, nor the administration of justice rendered precarious by a delay of the punishment: no, fir, the punishment gains weight by the delay; the laws become doubly tremendous when appealed to by a branch of the legislature, and we become doubly refpectable in the eyes of our conftituents, when our refentments are regulated by the acknowledged principles of legality.

It is urged with great plaufibility, Mr. Prefident, that without the power of imprisoning at difcretion, all parliamentary privilege muft neceffarily be loft: But, in answer to this, give me leave to obferve, that the crown poffelles no power of this kind, and yet there is no fear of any diminution in May, 1771,

the royal perogative; the greatest corporations in the kingdom claim no fuch jurifdiction, and yet their authority is never impeached: whenever they have a reasonable caufe of complaint, the laws of their country are open to grant redrefs, and few are weak enough, or wicked enough, to expofe themfelves voluntarily to judicial profecutions.

I am fenfible, Mr. Prefident, that great weight is laid upon the power of a House of Commons, because it is the grand inqueft of the kingdom, yet here, fir, the cafuifts for parliamentary omnipotence are as indefenfible as in any other arguments; for the bufinefs of an inqueft is to prefent not to punish; to complain, not to decide; and we ceafe to be an inqueft the moment we claim a right of judicial determination. Upon the whole, fir, if the prerogative of the crown is not equal to the privileges of parliament, there is an end of our conftitution, which makes it the head of the legif lature; now the crown poffeffes no power of difcretionary imprisonment, and this houfe, in exercifing an authority fuperior to the royal, deftroys that equality of the three eftates upon which our ancestors have founded the liberties of England.

Mr. Serjeant G- having ended here- Lucillus Lena, (alderman T--d) expreffed himself in the following manner.

Mr. Prefident, Sir,

I have attended with great patience to the arguments advanced in favour of the prefent motion for fending the Lord Mayor and Mr. Oliver to the Tower, but they have roufed my indignation, inftead of convincing my judgement; and I fancy, iffomething more perfuafive than words

Hh 2

had

had not been used, even to the friends
of the measure propofed, they would
have as little to beat of their political
rectitude. If fomething more than
words had not been used with these
gentlemen, Mr. President, is it to be
fuppofed, that they would have ever
juitified the violation of the city char-
ters, or contended for the propriety of
erating the records judicially inferted
in the mayor's book by which they
have not only impeded, but entirely
prevented the operation of the laws?
It is indeed faid, fir, that the Houfe of
Commons upon former occafions has
exercifed an equal degree of defpotifm;
yet for my own part I cannot think the
precedent of one tyranny, a fufficient
vindication of another. No prece-
dents fhould ever be mentioned as
authorised, that are not evidently good,
evidently for the intercit of the peo-
ple. In Charles the Second's time the
gentlemen pretend, that the venality of
the then, is to fanctify the corruption
of the prefent house. To the difgrace
of our Journals, Mr. Prefident, they
contain many precedents highly in-
jurious to the principles of freedom,
highly injurious to the established
conftitution of the kingdom. In fact
our Journals are fo difcordant, and to
contradictory, that embrace, which
fide you pleafe of any question, pre-
cedents will not be wanting to fup-
port it.
Men of principle how
ever will not fuppofe, that the cobwebs
of antiquity can poffibly annihilate the
criminality of a pernicious example:
What is in its nature wrong, as a cele-
brated writer very properly obferves,
no words can palliate, no plea can
alter. Let us then hear no more of
precedents in defence of injustice.
General warrants had innumerable
precedents to plead, if the length of
their exilience was to be urged in
fupport of their legality; yet we all
know their fate; appearing contrary
to law, they were witely abolished,
and the minifer by whom they were
laft iffued, was punished in an exem-
plary manner for his temerity.

The gentlemen who infift fo much upon the fanctity of precedents, fir, argue with a very bad grace in defence of prefcriptive ulage, when they themfelves have concurred in abolithing mány antient cuftoms, particularly parilamentar privilege in cafes of debt, in

cafes of libels, and when they know that
pofitive acts of parliament are repealed,
if found repugnant to the welfare of the
kingdom. Salus populi juprema_lex eft,
was long the motto of the Roman
republic, and thould be the grand
principle of government in every fen-
fible nation. Unhappily, however,
we cannot fay that it is the grand
principle of our own, tho' few king-
doms, with pride I affirm it, can boat
a greater thare of public informa-
tion.. -Many, who fupport the
motion now before the chair, are more
affiduous to please the wantonness of
female caprice, than to answer the
expectations of their conftituents: In-
ftead of gaining the esteem of their
country, they are only folicitous to
gratify the ambitious views of one a-
fpiring woman; who, to the difho-
nour of the British name, is well
known to direct the operations of our
defpicable minifters. Does any gen-
tleman with to know what woman
I allude to, if he does, I will tell
him-It is to the p-d— of W—.
I am not afraid to fpeak out nor
defirous of facrificing my honest opi-
nion at the altar of a ridiculous de-
licacy: This is not a time for courtly
harangues, or polite palliations-
The happiness of the ftate is at stake,
and filence in fuch a fituation would be
treafon. I therefore aver, that we
have been governed ten years by a
woman.

"Tis not the fex, Mr. Prefident, I object to, but the govern ment: were we well ruled, the ruler would be an object of little fignification. Common fenfe therefore points out an initant, and a total reformation of public abufes. 'Tis not the greatnefs of the criminal's rank, which fhould prevent you from punishing the criminality. But this is a period in which virtue alone is to undergo profcription; it is not a violation, but a defence of thelaws, which is to route the refentment of this affembly; 'tis not an attack upon the conftitution, but a folicitude for its fafety, which is to excite your indignation. If this was not apparently the cafe, Mr Prefident, your table would never have been di graced by the prefent motion: But remember, fir, the flame which the imprisonment of the feven bishops fpread thro' the nation in the reign of James the Second; recollect this,

fir, and tremble for the confequences of imprisoning the city magiftrates, merely on a charge of having done their duty confcientiouily. The whole kingdom will inevitably confider them as martyrs in the great caufe of liberty, and believe me the kingdom is not fo dead to the fentiments of honour, as the panders of a corrupt adminiftration may be inclined to imagine. The British lion till maintains all his native courage, and whether defpotifm thews its head under a Brunfwick or a stuart, in a court of Star Chamber, or a Houfe of Commons, he will ftill confider it defpotifm; he will awake every true friend to the people with his roar, and never fuffer your privileges to fwallow up all the fundamentals of our freedom. The people will refift you, as they refifted the crown in Charles the Second's time, and in Queen Ann's, when royal proclamations were attempted to be made fuperior to pofitive acts of parliament, and make you fenfible, fatally sensible, that nothing but the law of the land can potfibly lay a claim to the obedience of a free born Englishman.

To the foregoing fpeeches against the commitment of the city magiftrates, Flaminius Fabius (Mr. Atty. Gen. Th-e) replied: Mr. Prefident, Sir,

It is not a little to be lamented, when gentleman take upon them to talk about the violation of our laws, or the perverfion of our conftitution, that they are fo very indifferently qualified to reafon upon the fubject, and fo apt to make the wantonnefs of their wishes the criterion of their conviction. Tho' this, fir, is the firft cafe of the kind that ever claimed the cognizance of the houfe, though it is the first time a magiftrate of any corporation ever prefumed to fet his municipal authority in oppofition to our orders, you hear a number of young gentlemen, wholly unacquainted with the laws, deciding peremptorily on the question, and with a very peculiar modefty, deciding individually on a point where they expreffly deny the power of decifiou in the whole reprefentation of the British people.

For my own part, fir, I fuppofed this house, and I know my fuppofition is conftitutionally founded, to be. fuperior in power to all charter jurifditions, and to act upon principles common not only to itfelf, but to all other courts.-Every court, Mr. President, has its peculiar regulation, and the law

of parliament is the rule of our proceedings. Thefe uninformed declaimers on the nature of our jurifprudence, fir, fhould recollect, that we have feveral laws in this country, befides common law. We have, for inftance, the admiralty, the civil and the ecclefiaftical law; we have, befides, the law of parliament, which is as much a part of the conftitution, as any other law, and would be acknowleged fuch, even by the learned ferjeant who lately fpoke, was he feated on any one of our benches. The upper houfe has a jurifdiction in common law, but all queftions muft come before it by appeal; it can agitate no judicial point originally, and on that account the judges attend to give their advice in matters of legal determination. The upper house has moreover its law of parliament, as well as this, but in that the judges never interfere. They leave it entirely to its only arbiters, and poflibly did they ever meddle, they would have a fpeedy reafon to repent of their temerity.

Having thus proved the law of parliament to be as much a part of the conftitution as any other law of the land, I now come to fay, that Miller the printer was apprehended by this law, and that of confequence his commitment was perfectly legal; what could be more prepofterous, or more daring in the city magiftrates therefore, than to fay a legal commitment was illegal, and to difcharge by courfe of common law, a man apprehended by the courfe of parliamentary law? Lord Coke fays, that is not within the province even of the judges folemnly affembled in their judicial character upon the bench, to define the privileges of parliament. How then can it come within the province of an ignorant mayor, or a turbulent alderman?- Is the

chief magiftrate of London to ufurp a power which the king himself does not afpire to, or are the charters of the citizens to be put in competition with the united majefty of the British people? I fhould be aftonished how we were able to reftrain our indignation, Mr. Prefident, if the folly of our reformers was not equal to their arrogance! Here, fir, it is allowed by the law, that we fhall be the only judges of our own privilege, yet a corporationjuftice is daring enough to limit the line of our authority, is daring enough to pronounce this to be no breach of pri

vilege,

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »