Wesley Corpus

“Indeed, as for a precedent of one House interfering with the rules, orders, or business of another, my memory does not serve me at present with the recollection of a single one. As to the case of Titus Oates, as mentioned by the noble Lord in my eye, (Lord Chatham,) he is very much mistaken in regard to the mode; his was a trial in the King's Bench, which, on a writ of error, the House of Commons interfered in, and they had an authority for so doing. A Judge certainly may be mistaken in points of law; the wisest and the best of us may be so at times; and it reflects no discredit, on the contrary, it does particular honour, when he finds himself so mistaken, to reverse his own decree. But for one House of Parliament interfering with the business, and reversing the resolutions, of another, it is not only unprecedented, but unconstitutional to the last degree. “But suppose, my Lords, that this House coincided with this motion; suppose we all agreed, nem. con., to repeal and rescind the Resolutions of the House of Commons, in regard to the expulsion and incapacitation of Mr. Wilkes;-Good God ! what may be the consequence 1 The people are violent enough already; and to have the superior branch of legisla tion join them, would be giving such a public encouragement to their proceedings, that I almost tremble while I even suppose such a scene of anarchy and confusion.” What then can we think of the violent outcry, that the nation is oppressed, deprived of that liberty which their ancestors bought with so much treasure and blood, and delivered down through so many generations? Do those who raise this cry believe what they say? If so, are they not under the highest infatuation? seeing that England, from the time of William the Conqueror, yea, of Julius Caesar, never enjoyed such liberty, civil and religious, as it does at this day. Nor do we know of any other kingdom or state in Europe or in the world, which enjoys the like. I do not defend the measures which have been taken with regard to America: I doubt whether any man can defend them, either on the foot of law, equity, or prudence. But whose measures were these? If I do not mistake, Mr. George Grenville's.