A scandalous libel, reflecting on the character of the Speaker, Sir Fletcher Norton, having appeared in the "Public Advertiser," a motion had been made that the printer, Mr. Woodfall, be taken into the custody of the Serjeant-at-arms. Mr. Fox, thinking this punishment insufficient, without consulting Lord North, moved an amendment to the effect that Mr. Woodfall be committed to Newgate. But, although Lord North substituted the Gatehouse, which was the then Westminster prison, for Newgate, as a less objectionable place of confinement, he was left in a minority on the division, the original motion having been carried by a majority of more than two to one. There had previously been some coolness between Fox and the Premier. The defeat, which Lord North attributed to the temerity of his colleague, did not, of course, tend to diminish it; and a day or two after, while Fox was sitting on the Treasury bench, engaged in conversation with the Premier, he received from the hands of one of the door-keepers the following laconic note: "Sir,-His Majesty has thought proper to order a new commission of the Treasury to be made out, in which I do not perceive your name.-North." Fox now entered the lists of opposition: and, throughout the whole of the American war, proved a most powerful antagonist to the ministers of that period.

On the resignation of the ministry of Lord North, a result which the exertions of Fox, in opposition, had contributed greatly to bring about, a new administration was formed under the Marquis of Rockingham, in which Fox was appointed Secretary for Foreign Affairs. This administration, however, was but short-lived; for the death of the Premier, three months after his acceptance of office, overthrew all the arrangements that had been made. Lord Shelburne having succeeded to the office of First Lord of the Treasury, Fox soon afterwards tendered his resignation; and he and Lord North, who for the last eight years had been violent antagonists, were found by one another's side in opposition. After a time, they united their strength, and procured a vote of censure on the terms of peace proposed by the Ministers. Upon this, which took place in February, 1783, Lord Shelburne resigned. After some difficulty, and a lapse of several weeks, during which the country was left without any responsible government, the coalition administration was formed; the Duke of Portland being Premier, and Lord North and Fox Secretaries of State. The principal measure which tattempted was Fox's East India Bill, which was rendered unpopular by being represented as a violation of chartered rights, and as tending to aggrandize the influence of Ministers to the detriment of the Crown. The bill, having passed through all its stages in the Commons with large majorities, was sent up to the Lords, where it was read the first time without a division. Previously, however, to its second reading, the King sent a message, through Lord Temple, to all peers to whom his personal influence extended, that he should deem those who voted for the bill not only not his friends, but his enemies. Ministers were consequently left in a minority; and on the following day, the King, amidst the all but universal joy of the country, dismissed them. Mr. Pitt then

succeeded to office as First Lord of the Treasury and Chancellor of the Exchequer.

From 1784 to 1792, Fox was leader of a powerful party in the Commons, in opposition to Mr. Pitt. His most remarkable exertions during that period were against the Westminster scrutiny-on the Regency-against the abatement of impeachments by a dissolution of Parliament-on the Libel bill-and on the Russian armament. From the latter part of 1792 to 1797 his efforts were unceasing, first to prevent a war with France, and subsequently to restore peace. At length, finding his exertions in Parliament fruitless, he determined, in the year 1797, no longer to attend in his place in the House, unless called upon to do so by his constituents; and passed his time, from that period down to 1802, at St. Anne's Hill, in the pursuits of literature, and the society and conversation of his friends. In 1802 he returned to public life. The death of Mr. Pitt, on the 23rd of January, 1806, dissolved the Administration of which he was at the head; and in the new Ministry formed under Lord Grenville, Fox was appointed Secretary for Foreign Affairs. He expired on the 13th September, 1806, in the fifty-eighth year of his age.

"To speak of him justly as an orator," says Sir James Mackintosh, in his masterly character of Fox,*" would require a long essay. Everywhere natural, he carried into public something of that simple and negligent exterior which belonged to him in private. When he began to speak, a common observer might have thought him awkward; and even a consummate judge could only have been struck with the exquisite justness of his ideas, and the transparent simplicity of his manners. But no sooner had he spoken for some time, than he was changed into another being. He forgot himself and everything around him. He thought only of his subject. His genius. warmed and kindled as he went on. He darted fire into his audience. Torrents of impetuous and irresistible eloquence swept along their feelings and conviction. He certainly possessed, above all moderns, that union of reason, simplicity, and vehemence, which formed the prince of orators. He was the most Demosthenean speaker since the days of Demosthenes."

December 6, 1770. Mr. Serjeant Glynn moved, "That a Committee be appointed to inquire into the Administration of Criminal Justice, and the Proceedings of the Judges in Westminster Hall, particularly in Cases relating to the Liberty of the Press, and the Constitutional Power and Duties of Juries." Mr. Alderman Oliver seconded the motion, and expressed his desire that the Committee should have for a particular object of its inquiry, the conduct of the chief delinquent, whom he believed to be Lord Chief Justice Mansfield. Mr. Serjeant Glynn affirmed, that a general belief prevailed of

• Published in Dr. Parr's Collection, entitled, "Characters of Mr. Fox, by Philo. patris Varvicensis."

.

the judges being unfriendly to juries, encroaching on their constitutional power, and laying down false law, in order to mislead them in their verdicts. Sir George Savile defended the motion warmly. 'If you reject it," said he, "it will render you not only odious, but despicable. You will be thought possessed of no faith, no honour, no conscience. Your name will become the ridicule and laughing-stock of the rabble. The House will be exposed in songs, and ballads, and ditties, in every street: Flebit et insignis tota cantabitur urbe.' The authorlings, and printers, and printers' devils will be all in motion. The press will labour and groan. Newspapers, pamphlets, puns, and pasquinades, will increase and multiply. Grub-street will pour out its thousands, and Paternoster-row its tens of thousands; and the land will be one scene of anarchy and confusion." The arguments in favour of the motion were combated by Mr. Attorney-general De Grey, and Sir Gilbert Elliot; and Lord Mansfield's character was strenuously defended by Lord Clare and Mr. Jenkinson. Mr. Burke and Mr. Wedderburn, while they supported the motion, disclaimed and reprobated all those asperities of diction which had been used in speaking of the Lord Chief Justice, and paid a tribute of applause to his extraordinary talents and conspicuous integrity.

"We are told by the abettors of this motion, that jealousies, murmurs, and discontents increase and multiply throughout the nation; that the people are under terrible apprehensions that the law is perverted; that juries are deprived of their constitutional powers; that the courts of justice are not sound and untainted; in a word, that the Judges have, like a dozen* of monstrous Patagonian giants, either swallowed, or are going to swallow up, both law and gospel. And how do they prove the truth of these allegations? The manner, Sir, is pleasant enough. They refer us to their own libellous remonstrances, and to those infamous lampoons and satires which they have taken care to write and circulate. They modestly substitute themselves in the place of the nation, and call their own complaints and grievances the complaints and grievances of England. Their meaning is plain enough, and we understand perfectly how all their grievances might be redressed.

"For my part, Sir, I am not disposed to take the voice of a miserable faction for the voice of my country. Were the people really dissatisfied, I should be glad to know how I am to ascertain the reality of that dissatisfaction? I must freely confess that I know no other way but that of consulting this House. Here the people are represented, and here is their voice expressed. There is no other criterion but the majority of this assembly, by which we can judge of their sentiments. This man, in order to answer one purpose, and that man, in order to answer another, will tell you, that a general cry has gone abroad against certain men and certain measures: but will you be so credulous as to take him upon his • At the time in question, the number of the Judges of the three Superior Courts of common law at Westminster was twelve. The number is now fifteen.

word, when you can easily penetrate his interested views, and find him the original and prime mover of all the clamour?

"Sir, I could easily trace the authors of the outcry raised against the Judges; and I would point them out, had not they, as well as their selfish ends, been already exposed in all their deformity. Why, then, should we hesitate to put a negative upon a question, which sprang from such a low source? From dirt it came, and to dirt let it return. As to myself, I certainly shall vote against the motion, as I can never acknowledge for the voice of the nation what is not echoed by the majority of this House; and I do not find that the majority of us entertain any suspicions, much less terrible apprehensions, of the Judges; though, if there were any just foundation for complaint, we must certainly have been better informed of it than the people.

“Indeed, Sir, if the adoption of this inquiry would answer any good purpose, I should not be such a violent opposer of it, convinced as I am that the Judges are blameless. But I am fully persuaded that would not be the case. For, as I have shown, it would be an attempt to remove discontents which do not exist but among those who have generated, fostered, and reared them up to their present magnitude, and who would not, therefore, be satisfied, though Justice, though Astrea herself, should descend naked from heaven to exculpate our Judges. And, what is more, it would, on their own principles, prove fruitless and nugatory, even if we suppose the people to be really discontented. For what have they been doing for these two last years, but ringing constantly in our ears the contempt in which we are held by the people? Have not they made these walls incessantly echo with the terms of reproach, which they alleged were cast upon us by men of every degree, by high and low, rich and poor, learned and unlearned? Were we not, and are we not still, according to their account, held in universal detestation and abhorrence? Does not the whole empire, from one end to the other, reckon us equally weak and wicked? In a word, are we not become an abomination in the land? Such is the language of the minority. How then can they, with a serious face, desire us to undertake this inquiry, in order to satisfy the people? The people, if their former assertions are to be credited, will receive no good at our hands. They will regard what we say no more than the prattle of a knot of coffee-house politicians. We are too ridiculous as well as odious to do anything that will appear gracious in their eyes.

"What, Sir, is the conclusion to be drawn? Why, this. Let us satisfy ourselves. Let us act according to the dictates of honour and conscience, and be at peace with our own minds. It is thus that we shall sooner or later regain the confidence of our constituents, if we have lost it; and not by humouring, as foolish nurses humour great lubberly boys, the wayward whims of a misled multitude. The characteristic of this House should be a firm and manly steadiness, an unshaken perseverance in the pursuit of great and noble plans of general utility, and not a wavering inconstant fluctuation of councils, regulated by the shifting of the popular breeze. If we are not

to judge for ourselves, but to be ever at the command of the vulgar and their capricious shouts and hisses, I cannot see what advantage the nation will reap from a representative body, which they might not have reaped from a tumultuous assembly of themselves, collected at random on Salisbury Plain or Runnymede. And it is very well known, Sir, that such an irregular and riotous crowd are but ill-qualified to judge truly of their own interest, or to pursue it, even when they form a right judgment. They are but very unsteady guardians of liberty and property. Do you want proofs? Consult the English history, and you will find them in every page."

Mr. Serjeant Glynn's motion was negatived upon a division: Ayes, 76; Noes, 184.

March 25, 1771. On the 8th of February, Colonel George Onslow made a complaint to the House, of Thompson and Wheble, two printers of newspapers, for misrepresenting the speeches, and reflecting on several of the members. The obnoxious passages being read, Colonel Onslow moved, that the printers should be called to justice for infringing the standing order. After some debate, the printers were ordered to attend. When the Serjeantat-Arms went to the houses of the printers, they were constantly denied; which being reported to the House, Colonel Onslow moved an address to the King to issue a proclamation for the apprehension of the offenders. In consequence of which proclamation, Wheble was taken and carried before Alderman Wilkes, who not only discharged him, but took recognizances for prosecuting the person by whom he was apprehended. Thompson was similarly arrested, and discharged by Alderman Oliver.

On the 12th of March, Colonel Onslow preferred a fresh complaint against six other printers for the same offence. They were ordered to attend the House four presented themselves; a fifth could not attend, being in custody in Newgate, by order of the House of Lords; the other, whose name was Miller, refused to obey the summons, and an order was issued for taking him into custody by the Serjeant-at-Arms. When the messenger appeared, Miller refused to submit to the arrest, and violence being used, a constable, prepared for the purpose, took charge of the officer, and carried him to Guildhall, to answer for the assault. Mr. Wilkes, the sitting alderman, having finished the business of the day, refused to take cognizance of the affair, and the parties were conducted to the Mansion-house. The Lord Mayor (Alderman Brass Crosby), attended by Aldermen Wilkes and Oliver, admitted the parties; Mr. Miller made his complaint, and the Lord Mayor asked the messenger what offence the printer had committed, and by what authority he presumed to assault him? The messenger pleaded, that he acted under the direction of the Speaker, and produced his warrant. The Deputy-Serjeant now announced himself, and said he came there by the Speaker's command, to demand not only the messenger, but Miller, his prisoner. His