VI. 1785. upon that subject into common sense and plain CHAP. English, and I would then ask any man in the house, whether the sum and substance of all his declamations on this head, be more or less than this-that when he first discovered the right honorable gentleman's rising abilities in this house, he was earnestly desirous of connecting him with his party; he was anxious to take him under his protection and tuition: But as soon as ever he found the right honorable, gentleman unwilling to submit to his trammels, and determined to think for himself, from that time he had resolved to set him down, for the most haughty, corrupt, unconstitutional, and dangerous man and minister that ever this country had produced. It is just thus, indeed, that the right honorable gentleman over the way, has at all times thought proper to monopolize all patriotism, all public principles, all love of liberty, to his own single self."I am the palladium of the liberties of the country, I am the champion of the constitution, I am the only man of the people, I am the single Atlas of this free state." -This, sir, is the language, and these are the precise arguments, which the right honorable gentleman applies now, and always has applied, to all debates, at all times, upon all subjects, against all ministers, in all the exigencies VI. 1785. CHAP. of his case. He accuses my right honorable friend of presumption; but I appeal to any man, whether the panegyric which the right honorable gentleman has this day made on himself, did not consist of praises so profuse and extravagant, and of flattery so gross, that I am sure there is not one of his friends, who would have had the indecency to load him, before his face, with half the praises, which, in this moment of boasted modesty, he has thought it so becoming to heap upon himself. If, therefore, I should feel a little insensible, both to the praises which the right honorable gentleman heaps upon himself, and to the abuse which he pours upon us, (of which certainly I have the honor to receive no small share) I hope, sir, I have explained what it is that has rendered me thus callous. The time was, when his invectives fell, with some sensible force and efficacy, on the ministerial band, whom he was opposing; but when I see him pouring forth alternate praises and execrations on the same men, according as they are his political friends or foes, he must excuse my telling him, that all his violence, all his sarcasms, and all his insults, are not capable of irritating any one single passion in my breast; and I may hope even, that in the vicissitudes of political affairs, the time, perhaps, may come, VI. 1785. when I may be recompensed for all the gross- CHAP. ness of these declamations, by the most unbounded panegyrics on my virtues, my talents, and my political character. In the mean time, my mind is at perfect ease, because I know, and all the world knows with me, that the right honorable gentleman considers the actions and characters of public men as things entirely subservient to his own political views, nay, and to his views at the mere moment when he is speaking. 66 Having said thus much on the subject of the India bill, and on the respective characters of the two right honorable gentlemen, which I have been so necessarily led to do, I shall confine myself now to the true question before the house; and, in the first place, since the right honorable gentleman is for ever exclaiming, how the constitution is violated, I must beg and insist on a plain answer to this plain question-Whether, in the election of Vandeput and Trentham, the constitution was not just as much broken as now? that scrutiny, sir, lasted for fifteen months, and this has lasted eight months. Where were then the violated rights of the electors of Westminster? Where was then this ruin to the constitution? Was not Westminster just as much unrepresented as now? Were not taxes laid on the VI. CHAP. inhabitants of Westminster, without their consent, just as now? Was not every evil, every 1785. inconvenience, every outrage on the constitution, as flagrant in that case as in the present? And yet, sir, if we look into the debates in those times, we find not one syllable was ever uttered about the danger to the constitution, not one syllable of all that language, which is so familiar in the mouth of the right honorable gentleman on this and on every question. It is said always, that that was an election in the case of a vacancy by death, and this on a general election; but what difference does that make to the constitution? Sir, I do maintain, therefore, that the constitution is likely to go on as well after this scrutiny in the city of Westminster, as it did after that of Vandeput and Trentham; and when the right honorable gentleman tells us, that in his capacity of champion of the constitution, he cannot sit silent, he cannot rest, he cannot sleep, until the vote of the house is rescinded, and the outrage is repaired, I shall ask him, how he has slept since the year 1750; for it is ridiculous. to contend, that the circumstance of its having been then a vacancy by death, and not by general election, can be any salvo to the rights of the Westminster electors, or any safeguard to the constitution. VI. 1785. Why, sir, suppose this election had hap- CHAP. pened in either of those two cases, when Westminster became vacant by the right honorable gentleman's becoming a secretary of state, Westminster might then have suffered precisely the same disfranchisement, and the constitution have had the same wound which it has now received, and yet all would have been exactly according to law, and according to precedent; and in truth, sir, if we examine the respective histories of the times, we shall find a great resemblance in the two cases, and in the two elections. There were then the same exertions, the same contentions of the aristocracy, the same intrigues as now. Both the great men and the great women of the country were seen to use the same condescension in both cases; and I will add, that there were the same affected delays in both cases: in point of delay, however, there has been this difference; that in the year 1750, above 1,400 votes were scrutinized in five months; and in the present case, not 200 have been gone through, even in the enormous time of eight months. Will any man then deny, what one of the resolutions in the amendment takes notice of? that this house is not satisfied that there has been no unnecessary delay in the scrutiny? and, sir, I appeal to any man, whether |