Reply to Mr. Piti as to resigning. ministry Rather than yield to a stretch of prerogative | orabie gentleman, I doubt not, will soon teacr thus unprecedented and alarming, withdraw your | him experience and caution; and when once he secret influence, and whatever intrenchments has known them as long, received as many of have been made on the Crown we are ready to their promises, and seen their principles as much repair: take back those numerous and tried de- tried as I have done, he may not, perhaps, be pendents who so often secured you a majority in quite so prodigal of his credulity as he now is. Parliament; we submit to all the mischief which Is he apprised of the lengths these men would even this accession of strength is likely to pro- go to serve their own selfish and private views? duce; but, for God's sake, strangle us not in the that their public spirit is all profession and hypnc. very moment we look for success and triumph by risy? and that the only tie which unites and keeps an infamous string of Bed-chamber janizaries!" them together is that they are known only to each The right honorable gentleman has told us, other, and that the moment of their discord puts with his usual consequence and tri- a period to their strength and consequence? umph, that our duty, circumstanced as If, however, a change must take place, and a we are, can be attended with no diffi- new ministry is to be formed and sup- Consequences culty whatever: the moment the Sovereign with- ported, not by the confidence of this ostry on of draws his confidence it becomes us to retire. I House, or of the public, but by the such grounds will answer him in my turn, that the whole sys-sole authority of the Crown, I, for one, shall not tem in this dishonorable business may easily be envy that right honorable gentleman his situation. traced. Aware of that glorious and independent From that moment I put in my claim for a momajority which added so much dignity and sup-nopoly of Whig principles. The glorious cause port to the measure which appears thus formida- of freedom, of independence, and of the Constituble to secret influence, they find all their efforts tion, is no longer his, but mine. In this I have to oppose it here abortive; the private cabal is lived; in this I will die. It has borne me up unconsequently convened, and an invasion of the der every aspersion to which my character has throne, as most susceptible of their operations, been subjected. The resentments of the mean proposed. It was natural to expect that I, for and the aversions of the great, the rancor of the one, would not be backward to spurn at such an vindictive and the subtlety of the base, the dereinterference. This circumstance affords all the liction of friends and the efforts of enemies, advantage they wished. I could not be easy in have not all diverted me from that line of con my situation under the discovery of such an in- duct which has always struck me as the best sult; and this critical moment is eagerly em- In the ardor of debate, I may have been, like all braced to goad me from office, to upbraid me other men, betrayed into expressions capable of with the meanness of not taking the hint, to re- misrepresentation; but the open and broad peth mind me in public of the fate which I owe to se- of the Constitution has uniformly been mine. I cret advice. When that hour comes-and it never was the tool of any junto. I accepted may not be very distant-that shall dismiss me office at the obvious inclination of this House, I from the service of the public, the right honora- shall not hold it a moment after the least hint ble gentleman's example of lingering in office from them to resume a private station. after the voice of the nation was that he should quit it, shall not be mine. I did not come in by the fiat of Majesty, though by this fiat I am not unwilling to go out. I ever stood, and wish now a and always to stand on public ground alone. have too much pride ever to owe any thing to secret influence. I trust in God this country has too much spirit not to spurn and punish the minister that does! Mr. Pitt's ea subject. I It is impossible to overlook or not to be sur prised at the extreme eagerness of the gerness on the right honorable gentleman about our places, when twenty-four hours, at most, would give him full satisfaction. Is it that some new information may be requisite to finish a system thus honorably begun? Or is the right honorable gentleman's youth the only account which can be given of that strange precipitancy and anxiety which he betrays on this occasion? It is, in my opinion, the best apology which can be urged in his behalf. Generosity and unsuspecting confidence are the usual disposition of this tender period. The friends of the right hon This refers to Mr. Pitt's continuing for a time in office the year before, when Lord Shelburne, to whose ministry he belonged, was defeated. ation if he comes The right honorable gentleman is, however, grasping at place on very different Mr. Pitt's sitngrounds. He is not called to it by in as minister or majority of this House; but, in de- such grounds. fiance of that majority, stands forth the advocate and candidate for secret influence. How will he reconcile a conduct thus preposterous to the Constitution with those principles for which he has pledged himself to the people of England? By what motives can he be thus blind to a system which so flatly and explicitly gives the lie to all his former professions? Will secret influence conciliate that confidence to which his talents, connections, and principles entitle him, but which the aspect under which he must now appear to an indignant and insulted public effectually bars his claim? Will secret influence unite this House in the adoption of measures which are no his own, and to which he only gives the sanc tion of his name to save them from contempt? Will secret influence draw along with it that af fection and cordiality from all ranks without which the movements of government inust be absolutely at a stand? Or, is he weak and vio lent enough to imagine that his Majesty's mere nomination will singly weigh against the consti tutional influence of all these considerations? For my own part, it has been always my opinion When I say in what manner and to what ends that this country can labor under no greater mis- the wisdom and experience of our an- Respect an fortune than a ministry without strength and sta-cestors have thus directed the exercise the King bility. The tone of government will never recover so as to establish either domestic harmony or foreign respect, without a permanent administration; and whoever knows any thing of the Constitution, and the present state of parties among us, must be seusible that this great blessing is only and substantially to be obtained and realized in connection with public confidence. It is undoubtedly the prerogative of the Sovereign to choose his own servants; but the Constitution provides that these servants shall not be obnoxous to his subjects by rendering all their exertions, thus circumstance, abortive and impracticable. The right beaorable gentleman had, therefore, better consider how much he risks by joining an arrangement thus hostile to the interests of the people; that they will never consent to be governed by secret influence; and that all the weight of his private character, all his eloquence and popularity, will never render the midnight and despotic mandates of an interior cabinet acceptable to Englishmen. of all the royal prerogatives, let me not be understood as meaning in any degree to detrac! from those dutiful regards which all of us owe, as good citizens and loyal subjects, to the prince who at present fills the British throne. No man venerates him more than I do, for his personal and domestic virtues. I love him as I love the Constitution, for the glorious and successful efforts of his illustrious ancestors in giving it form and permanency. The patriotism of these great and good men must endear, to every lover of his country, their latest posterity. The King of England can never lose the esteem of his people, while they remember with gratitude the many obligations which they owe to his illustrious samily. Nor can I wish him a greater blessing thar that he may reign in the hearts of his subjects, and that their confidence in his government may be as hearty and sincere as their affection for his person. The motion was carried by a majority of 73 SPEECH OF MR. FOX ON THE WESTMINSTER SCRUTINY, DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS JUNE 8, 1781. INTRODUCTION. THE leading facts respecting the Middlesex election of 1784 have already been given in the sketch o Mr. Fox's life. His contest with Sir Cecil Wray lasted forty days, and when the polls were closed there was a majority for Mr. Fox of two hundred and thirty-five votes. Great care had been taken throughout the contest to prevent false voting. At the suggestion of Lord Mahon, acting for Sir Cecil Wray, it was agreed, before opening the polls, that eleven inspectors and five friends should be constantly present on each side; and that whenever a person was challenged, his case should be reserved, and no vote allowed him until his claims were thoroughly investigated. A large part of Mr. Fox's votes were subjected to this test, and toward the close of the polls hardly one was received "witheat in appeal to the presiding officer, and a decision that such vote was good." Some of these decisions may have been hasty, but after such an arrangement Sir Cecil Wray ought to have acquiesced : to dispute the vote was unfair and uncandid in the extreme. But he did dispute it. Before the result was declared, he delivered to the presiding officer, Thomas Corbett, High Bailiff of Westminster, a list of bad votes which had been polled, as he affirmed, by Mr. Fox, and demanded a scrutiny, or re-examination of the entire poll. This was granted by Mr. Corbett on the 17th of May, 1784, when, by the writ under which he acted, he was bound to return two members for Westminster on the 18th, being the next day! Two questions, therefore, arose; first, whether a scrutiny into an election so conducted could be fairly and properly demanded; and, secondly, whether the presiding officer had a legal right to grant a scrutiny which ran beyond the time prescribed in his writ. Parliament met May 18th, 1784, and Mr. Fox, who had been returned by a friend as member for Kirk wall, in the Orkneys, took his seat for that borough. Within a few days, the subject was brought before the House. Mr. Corbett appeared at the bar, and read a long paper in defense of his conduct. Witnesses were examined, counsel were heard on both sides, and the subject was discussed in the House, from time to time, under various aspects. On the 8th of June, Mr. Wellbore Ellis offered the following resolution: "That it appearing to the House that Thomas Corbett, Esquire, bailiff of the Liberty of the City of Westminster, having received a precept from the Sheriff of Middlesex for electing two citizens to serve in Parliament for the said city; and hav ing taken and finally closed the poll on the 17th day of May last, being the day next before the day for the return of the said writ, he be now directed forthwith to make return of his precept, and the names of mem bers chosen in pursuance thereof." Daring the debate which followed Mr. Fox delivered the following speech, in which, 1 Farliamentary History, xxiv., 844. Ни I. He examines the evidence by which Mr. Corbett had endeavored to justify his granting the scrutiny. II. He discusses the question of law in respect to such a measure. III. He enters into remarks of a more general nature respecting the author of this scrutiny, the expense it involved, the alternative suggested of issuing a writ for a new election; and repels the intimation of M Pitt, that he "ought not again to disturb the peace of the city of Westminster!" A circumstance occurred at the commencement of the speech which turned greatly to the advantage of Mr. Fox. He began by complaining of a want of courtesy in the mode of carrying on the debate, and added, "But I have no reason to expect indulgence, nor do I know that I shall meet with bare justice in this House. Murmurs of disapprobation broke forth from a large part of the House, in which the minister had an overwhelming majority. Mr. Fox was at once roused to the utmost. His ordinary embarrassment and hesitation in commencing a speech instantly passed away. He repeated the words; he challenged kis opponents to make a motion for taking them down with a view to his being censured; he referred to Mr. Grenville's bill in proof that the House was considered as peculiarly liable to act unjustly in such caser; he turned upon Lord Mulgrave, Lord Mahon, and Lord Kenyon, who had just spoken, commenting in the severest terms on the treatment they had shown him, and affirming that he might reasonably object to them as judges to decide in his cause; and repeated, for the fourth time, “I have no reason to expect indulgence, nor do I know that I shall meet with bare justice in this House." Never was a great assembly more completely subdued. From that moment, he was heard with the utmost respect and attention. He had remarked, in going to the House, that this would be one of the best speeches he ever made. It proved so; and if the subject had been equal to his manner of treating it, embracing great national interests, instead of the details of a contested election, roused to the utmost as he was, he would probably have made it the greatest speech he ever delivered. SPEECH, & c. MR. SPEAKER, Before I enter upon the consideration of this question, I can not help expressing my surprise, that those who sit over against me [the ministry] should have been hitherto silent in this debate. Common candor might have taught them to urge whatever objections they have to urge against the motion of my honorable friend [Mr. Ellis] before this time; because, in that case, I should have had an opportunity of replying to their arguments; and sure it would have been fair to allow me the slight favor of being the last speaker upon such a subject. But, sir, I have no reason to expect indulgence, nor do I know that I shall meet with bare justice in this House. Sir, I say that I have no reason to expect indulgence, nor do I know that I shall meet with bare justice in this House.3 Mr. Speaker, there is a regular mode of checking any member of this House for using improper words in a debate; and that is, to move to have the improper words taken down by the Clerk, for the purpose of censuring the person who has spoke them. If I have said any thing unfit for this House to hear, or me to utter-if any gentleman is offended by any thing that fell from me, and has sense enough to point out and spirit to correct that offense, he will adopt that parliamentary and gentleman-like mode of conduct; and that he may have an opportunity of doing so, I again repeat, that I have no reason to expect INDULGENCE, nor do I know that I shall meet with BARE JUSTICE in this House. Sir, I am warranted in the use of these words, by events and authorities that leave little to be doubted and little to be questioned. The treatment this business has received within these walls, the extraordinary proceedings which have Expressions of disapprobation from the ministerial side of the House. Expressions of disapprobation repeated. sprung from it, the dispositions which have been manifested in particular classes of men, all concur to justify the terms I have adopted, and to establish the truth of what I have asserted. If the declaration I have made had happened not to have been supported by the occurrences i allude to, the very consideration of Mr. Gren ville's bill is of itself sufficient to vindicate wha: I have said. That bill, sir, originated in a be lief that this House, in the aggregate, was an unfit tribunal to decide upon contested elections. It viewed this House, as every popular assembly should be viewed, as a mass of men capable of political dislike and personal aversion; capable of too much attachment and too much animosity; capable of being biased by weak and by wicked motives; liable to be governed by ministerial influence, by caprice, and by corrup tion. Mr. Grenville's bill viewed this House as endued with these capacities; and judging it therefore incapable of determining upon controverted elections with impartiality, with justice, and with equity, it deprived it of the means of mischief, and formed a judicature as complete and ample perhaps as human skill can constitute. That I am debarred the benefits of that celebrated bill is clear beyond all doubt, and thrown entirely upon the mercy, or, if you please, upon the wisdom of this House. Unless, then, we are to suppose that human nature is totally altered within a few months-unless we can be so grossly credulous as to imagine that the pres Mr. Grenville's bill enacted that the persons to try disputed elections shall be drawn out of a glass to the number of forty-nine; that the parties in the dispute shall strike from these names alternately without assigning any reason until they reduce the number to thirteen; that these thirteen shall be gov erned by positive law, and sworn upon oath to ad minister strict justice. son who fills one of the first seats of justice in ent is purged of all the frailties of former Parlia- very respectable and learned profession, has ments-unless I am to surrender my understand-raised himself to considerable eminence; a pering, and blind myself to the extraordinary conduct of this House, in this extraordinary business, for the last fortnight-I may say, and say with truth, "that I expect no indulgence, nor do I know that I shall meet with bare justice in the House." There are in this House, sir, many persons to whom I might, upon every principle of equity, kirness, and reason, object as judges to decide pon my cause, not merely from their acknowl-son, insensible to the rank he maintains, or should edged enmity to me, to my friends, and to my maintain in this country, abandoning the gravity politics, but from their particular conduct upon of his character as a member of the Senate, and this particular occasion. To a noble Lord [Lord | losing sight of the sanctity of his station, both in Mulgrave] who spoke early in this debate, I this House and out of it, even in the very act of might rightly object as a judge to try me, who, delivering a judicial sentence, descends to minute from the fullness of his prejudice to me and pred- and mean allusions to former politics-comes ilection for my opponents, asserts things in di- here stored with the intrigues of past times, and rect defiance of the evidence which has been instead of the venerable language of a good judge given at your bar. The noble Lord repeats and a great lawyer, attempts to entertain the again that “tricks" were used at my side in the House by quoting, or by misquoting, words supelection, although he very properly omits the posed to have been spoken by me in the heat of epithet which preceded that term when he used former debates, and in the violence of contending it in a former debate. But does it appear in parties, when my noble friend [Lord North] and evidence that any tricks were practiced on my I opposed each other. This demure gentleman, part? Not a word. Against him, therefore, sir, this great lawyer, this judge of law, and equiwho, in the teeth of the depositions on your ta- ty, and constitution, also enlightens this subject, ble, is prompted by his enmity toward me to instructs and delights his hearers, by reviving maintain what the evidence (the ground this this necessary intelligence, that when I had the House is supposed to go upon) absolutely de- honor of first sitting in this House for Midhurst, I nies, I might object with infinite propriety as a was not full twenty-one years of age! And all judge in this cause. this he does for the honorable purpose of sanctifying the High Bailiff of Westminster in defrauding the electors of their representation in this House, and robbing me of the honor of asserting and confirming their right by sitting as their representative! Against him, therefore, sir, and against men like him, I might justly object as a judge or as judges to try my cause; and it is with perfect truth I once more repeat, "that I have no reason to expect indulgence, nor do I know that I shall meet with bare justice in this House." There is another judge, sir, to whom I might object with greater reason if possible than to the last. A person evidently interested in increasing the numbers of my adversaries upon the poll, but who has relinquished his right as an elector of Westminster, that his voting may not disqualify him from being a judge upon the committee to decide this contest. A person too, sir, who in the late election scrupled not to act as an agent, an avowed, and indeed an active agent, to my opponents. Is there any interruption, sir? I hope not. I am but stating a known fact, that a person who is to pronounce a judgment this night in this cause, avoided to exercise one of the most valuable franchises of a British citizen, only that he might be a nominee for my adversaries; concluding that his industry upon the committee would be of more advantage to their cause than a solitary vote at the election. This, sir, I conceive would be a sufficient objection to him as a judge to try me. A third person there is [Mr., afterward Lord Kenyon] whom I might in reason challenge upon this occasion. A person of a sober demeanor, who, with great diligence and exertion in a * Here Lord Mahon started up in much agitation, and exposed himself to the House as the person alluded to. He appeared inclined to call Mr. Fox to order, but his friends prevented him. His Lord ship, as already stated, was an avowed and active agent of Sir Cecil Wray during the election, and had been placed by his nomination on the joint committee selected by the two parties to conduct the scrutiny Sir, I understand that the learned gentleman I have just alluded to (I was not in the House during the first part of his speech) has insinuated that I have no right to be present during this discussion, and that hearing me is an indulgence. Against the principle of that assertion, sir, and against every syllable of it, I beg leave, in the most express terms, directly to protest. I maintain, that I not only have a right to speak, but a positive and clear right to vote upon this occasion; and I assure the House that nothing but the declaration I have made in the first stage of this business should prevent me from doing so. As to myself, if I were the only person to be aggrieved by this proceeding, if the mischief of it extended not beyond me, I should rest thoroughly and completely satisfied with the great and brilliant display of knowledge and abilities which have been exhibited by the learned gentlemen [Mr. Erskine and others], who appeared We have, in this enumeration of qualities, one of those side-blows so common with Mr. Fox, as he is pressing forward to his main point. for me and for my constituents at your bar. If I alone was interested in the decision of this matter, their exertions, combined with the acute and ingenious treatment this question has received from many gentlemen on this side of the House, whose arguments are, as learned as they are, evidently unanswerable, would have contented me But a sense of duty superior to all personal advantage calls on me to exert myself at this tinte. Whatever can best encourage and animate to diligence and to energy; whatever is most powerful and influencing upon a mind not callous to every sentiment of gratitude and honor, demand at this moment the exercise of every function and faculty that I am master of. This, sir, is not my cause alone; it is the cause of the English Constitution; the cause of the electors of this kingdom; and it is in particular the especial cause of the most independent, the most spirited, the most kind, and generous body of men that ever concurred upon a subject of public policy. It is the cause of the Electors of Westminster; the cause of those who, upon many trials, have supported me against hosts of enemies; of those who upon a recent occasion, when every art of malice, of calumny, and corruption; every engine of an illiberal and shameless system of government; when the most gross and monstrous fallacy [as to the East India Bill] that ever duped and deceived a credulous country have been propagated and worked with all imaginable subtlety and diligence, for the purpose of rendering me unpopular throughout the empire, have, with a steadiness, with a sagacity, with a judgment becoming men of sense and spirit, defeated all the miserable malice of my enemies; vindicated themselves from the charge of caprice, and changeableness, and fluctuation; and, with a generosity that binds me to them by every tie of affection, supported me through the late contest, and accomplished a victory against all the arts and power of the basest system of oppression that ever destined the overthrow of any individual.7 gence or ability would be but a slight recom pense for their zeal, constancy, firm attachment, and unshaken friendship to me upon all occa. sions, and under all circumstances. There are two leading points of view in which this question should be considered. The first is, whether the High Bailiff of Westminster has had sufficient evidence to warrant his granting a scrutiny, supposing that he possessed a legal dia. cretion to grant it. The second, whether any returning officer can by law grant a scrutiny even upon the completest evidence of its neces. sity, which scrutiny can not commence till after the day on which the writ is returnable. It is of little consequence in which order the question is taken up. I shall Examination of I. First proceed upon the evidence. the evidence. (1.) The great defense of the High Bailiff is built upon the circumstance of Sir Cecil Wray and his agents having furnished him with regu lar lists of bad votes on my part; and to prov that these lists were delivered they have brough a witness who knows not a syllable of the truth of the contents of the list! The witness who drew the affidavit which affirms those bad votes to have polled for me, upon cross-examination appears equally ignorant of the truth of the affidavits; and therefore the burden of the proof rested upon the evidence of Affleck, whose testimony, nevertheless, after four hours examinetion, is expunged from your books as inadmissible. Expunged, however, though it is, I wish the House to recollect the answers he gave concerning the descriptions of the bad voters which are imputed to me, and to the stated number of them. The number is said to be one hundred and forty-three; and the House will recollect that, although I repeatedly pressed the witnes to name some of them, he could not even name one. I questioned Affleck particularly whether the one hundred and forty-three were persons who did not exist where they pretended to reside; his answer was that some did reside in the streets as mentioned in the poll-books, and that others could not be found at all. Those who could not be found at all (if any such there were) might fairly be deemed bad votes, but the othe class of voters involved a question of law; and I submit to the House whether, if the evidence of this man, instead of being rejected as incom petent, had actually been admitted, the whole tenor of it, instead of exculpating, would not in the strongest sense tend to criminate the High Bailiff. Had he known his duty, or been disposed to discharge it, this he would have said to such a reporter. You may be, and most likely are, interested in deceiving me. After much argument and discussion I, as the sole judge in this court, have admitted these to be legal votes, This fiae burst of eloquence is highly character which you (of whom I know nothing) athrm to istic of the speaker; not lofty or imaginative, but be only lodgers or non-residents. My situation simple, terse, bold, and springing from those generis too solemn to be affected by such information, ous sentiments which were the master-spirit of Mr. and therefore I dismiss it as unfit for me to pro If, by speaking in this House (where many perhaps may think I speak too much), I have acquired any reputation; if I have any talents, and that attention to public business has matured or improved those talents into any capability of solid service, the present subject and the present moment, beyond any other period of my life, challenge and call them into action.8 When added to the importance of this question upon the English Constitution, combined with the immediate interest I feel personally in the fate of it, I am impelled by the nobler and more forcible incitement of being engaged in the cause of those to whom the devotion of all I have of dili Fox's oratory. The reader of Cicero will at once trace the open-ceed upon." ing of this sentence to the exordium of the oration for the poet Archias This should have been the High Bailiff's coo duct, but his conduct is the exact reverse on i |