CHAP. report of a speech that lasted above two hours, and we are lucky in having a little inkling of the points which he made; A. D. 1770. for sometimes we have only such general notices as the following of his most brilliant efforts. "Mr. Wedderburn was excessively great this evening;" or, "the Solicitor General Wedderburn, in answer to Mr. Fox, defended the administration in a fine vein of oratory." Lord North's amendment was carried by a majority of 224 to 180. At the risk of commitment to Newgate for breach of privilege, a list of the minority was printed and circulated, with Wedderburn's name in it, along with those of Barré, Burke, George Grenville, Lord George Sackville, and Lord John Cavendish.* Jan. 31. 1770. March 15. 1770. Wedderburn's speech on the motion On a subsequent day, in the debate on Mr. Dowdswell's motion, "That by the law of the land, and the known law and usage of Parliament, no person eligible by common right can be incapacitated by vote or resolution of this House, but by Act of Parliament only," Wedderburn again spoke immediately after Lord North, attacking him very vehemently, and saying, "When this committee sat last, the conclusion that it came to concerning this question was in every respect strange and unnatural. The resolution now moved for will put all right. The noble Lord asks, Will the House of Commons censure and disgrace itself?' Let me ask, in my turn, Will the House of Commons compose the minds of the people? will they recover the good opinion and confidence of those whom some gentlemen have been pleased to call the rabble, the base-born, the scum of the earth?""† The report of his speech in the next debate on this subject I suspect was prepared by himself, and it is certainly calculated to give us a high opinion of his powers. The city of London had presented to the King an address, framed in 16 Parl. Hist. 797. This is all that is set down for him in the report, and he is lucky in being so noticed; for the wearied reporter goes on to say, Sir W. Blackstone opposed the resolution, and was answered by Mr. Edmund Burke. Mr. Charles Fox spoke in answer to Mr. Burke; but the topic has been so exhausted, that their speeches would neither contain any thing new, nor exhibit any thing in a new light."-16 Parl. Hist. 803. CHAP. CLXV. A.D. 1770. of the His panegyrie on the liberty of the press. very violent language, complaining of the proceedings of the House of Commons against Mr. Wilkes, and had received in answer a very sharp rebuke from his Majesty. A motion was now made by a supporter of the government for a copy for a copy of the address, with a view to institute proceedings against London the citizens of London for a breach of privilege. This was petition. strongly resisted by the Opposition leaders, who severely animadverted on the answer which the King had been advised to return to the address. Lord North having thereupon avowed that he was the adviser of the answer, and responsible for it, and declared that nothing should deter him from inquiry into the conduct of others where, as in this case, inquiry appeared of utility to the public, Mr. Wedderburn is said to have spoken as follows: "Sir, if the issue of this debate regarded the responsibility* of the minister only, and was not of infinite importance to the kingdom at large, I should be one of the first to approve the candour of the noble lord who spoke last, and to own, that if he does not possess more wisdom than his predecessor, he at least shows more manliness and more probity in publicly acknowledging himself the adviser of the answer to the City remonstrance. But, Sir, it is not the responsibility of a minister which is now under consideration, but the inexpediency, the injustice, of censuring any part of the people for the exercise of a right which is warranted by the Constitution, which is supported by the dictates of reason, the authority of precedents, and the positive declaration of our laws. Our sole consideration is, simply, whether the people have, or have not, a right to petition; whether they are, or are not, legally authorised to lay their grievances before the throne, whenever they imagine themselves oppressed; and whether all prosecution for the exercise of that right is not prohibited by the Bill of Rights? Sir, the loudest advocate for the motion before the House will not pretend to deny the right of the people to petition, nor pretend to deny that they are wholly exempted from judicial censure on that account. Among the Among the many bless Wedderburn had not revised the "proof," for this word is misprinted " ostensibility." CLXV. A.D. 1770. CHAP. ings arising to the kingdom from the glorious Revolution, the privilege of complaining to the throne without the danger of punishment, is one of the noblest. The people, in this respect, are the sole judges of the necessity for petitioning: it is as much a part of their prerogative, if I may so express myself, as it is a part of the royal prerogative to assemble parliaments, or to exercise any other power warranted by the Constitution. I must ask, then, with what shadow of propriety, with what colour of reason, we arrogate a liberty of examining their proceedings? How do we presume to fly in the face of the law, and confidently assert that they shall be punished for what the law says we shall not examine? If this is our idea of reason, our conception of justice, let us, for the future, be distinguished for inconsistency and violence. Even admitting, Sir, that on the present occasion the people have been mistaken, that they have erred, that they have, in reality, no grievances to complain of, and that the manner of their remonstrance is as disrespectful as the matter of it is unjust; still, Sir, as the law positively pronounces on their right of petitioning, and their consequent exemption from prosecution, we are precluded from every inquiry into their conduct. They may be indiscreet, they may be warm, they may be turbulent: but let not us be rash, violent, and arbitrary. Let us not, while we are so nicely attentive to the errors of others, rush into palpable illegalities ourselves. Our power is great, but the power of the law is much greater. When you have got a copy of the petition, the petitioners may defy you. -For this reason I oppose the motion. I cannot consent that our love for equity should make us inequitable, that our regard for peace should lead us to spread the flames of discord through the land, or that our solicitude for the safety of the constitution shall vindicate our stabbing that constitution to the heart. Remember, Sir, that one of the capital blemishes of James II.'s reign was punishing the seven bishops for petitioning. Similar causes must always be productive of similar effects. We are yet safe; it is yet in possibility to retrieve all; whereas, if we proceed from violence to vio CLXV. A. D. 1770. lence, if we go on exercising our power against the sense of CHAP. our conviction, and sacrifice our honesty to gratify the malignity of our resentment, the consequences must be dreadful in the end. The people may be injured for a time, but they will prefer annihilation to chains: universal anarchy must ensue, and, as the poet forcibly expresses, "Darkness be the burier of the dead!" † 1770. He takes part with the Ameri cans. On Lord North's motion for a partial repeal of the Ame- March 5. rican Revenue Act of 1767, imposing the tea duty, Wedderburn made a violent harangue against the Colonial policy of the Government:-"If," said he, "this is considered as a measure calculated to pacify America, it is an extremely weak and idle one: it is one step further in that system of contradiction which has obtained with regard to the colonies from 1766 to the present day. After all the time that has elapsed no plan has been adopted, no system thought of; and the session is to pass over with only a further instance of contradiction. I heard with infinite concern the observation of the gallant general (Conway), that to tax America is impolitic and unjust, but that it was one of the latent powers vested in the government. What, Sir, declare that you have a right, and at the same time declare that the exercise of it would be impolitic and unjust!"† Wedderburn was equally truculent in supporting Mr. Burke's motion for an inquiry into the causes of the late disturbances in America. He said, "It is the continued system of contradiction and absurdity in government that has produced the melancholy situation in which we now stand. But, says the noble lord, Look forward and see what we shall next do for America.' This House must interfere and provide for the future government of America, or America is lost for ever. How long are we to wait? When nothing offers itself but despair; when nothing is offered to us but professions, both in the speech from the throne and in the language, or rather in the significant silence, of Ministers, Parliament must trace the * 16 Parl. Hist. 881. † Cavendish Deb. 498. СНАР. A.D. 1770. March 22. 1770. His lucky quotation in answering the Attorney General De Grey. evil to its source, and if you find matter for punishment, you must punish." Lord North in answer said," This speech might raise the reputation of the learned gentleman as an orator, but would not add to his character for veracity."* When Wedderburn next addressed the House he acquired applause by showing his familiarity with Shakespeare. Indeed, in all my reading and hearing of parliamentary debates, I do not recollect a more felicitous quotation. George Grenville, now leader of the Opposition, having brought forward his famous bill for the trial of controverted elections †, it was opposed by Lord North and the Government,― and De Grey, the Attorney General, made a long speech against its dangerous innovations, thus concluding:-"In short, Sir, although there no doubt have hitherto been irregularities and even abuses while the House retained to itself its constitutional power of deciding election petitions, it is better to endure the evils of which we know the extent, than in a sudden start of disgust and humoursome passion, fly to others which we know not of."" Wedderburn, rising immediately after, continued Hamlet's soliloquy : "And thus the native hue of resolution Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought; "The opposition to this bill by the Government," he added, "I consider most disgraceful. They do not deny the evils of the existing system to be as great as we have described them, and they offer no other remedy. In resisting it they make no distinct objection to it; their only resource is blindly to address themselves to our fears. They acknowledge the danger, they admit that we approach the brink of the precipice, and they would rather see us dashed to pieces among *2 Cavendish Deb. 28. † Wedderburn had been directed by the House, along with George Grenville, "to prepare and bring in the same" (32 Com. Journ. 760.); but he had only revised it, and corrected some of the legal phraseology. |