lours of our own Gobelin's tapestry, and I wish encouragement was given by Parliament to that noble manufacture, which in France almost rivals the powers of painting. The important advantages of such a commerce, too, we may learn from our neighbours.

I am not alarmed, Sir, at the great expence which some gentlemen seem to dread, as the inevitable consequence of what I have mentioned. The treasures of a state are well employed in works of national magnificence. The power and wealth of ancient Greece were most seen and admired in the splendour of the temples, and other sublime structures of Pericles. He boasted, that every art would be exerted, every hand employed, every citizen in the pay of the state, and the city not only beautified, but maintained by itself. The sums he expended on the public buildings at Athens, in the most high and palmy state of Greece, after their brilliant victories over the Persians, diffused riches and plenty among the people at that time, and will be an eternal monument of the glory of that powerful republic. The Parthenon only, or temple of Minerva, which is said to be the most beautiful piece of antiquity now remaining in the world, and is of the purest white marble, cost, with its statues and sculptures, above 1000 talents, near 200,00ol.

One observation here, Sir, naturally occurs, which justice to the trustees of the British Museum demands. No public money has ever been more faithfully, more frugally applied to the purposes for which it has been given, than what they have received. Perhaps the trustees of the British Museum are the only body of men who have never been suspected of want either of fidelity or economy. I think, therefore, we may safely trust them farther; nor penuriously, but largely, especially when their accounts are so frequently submitted to our examination.

Learning, Sir, and the polite arts, have scarcely more than three enemies, ignorance and stupidity always, superstition often. The noble lord with the blue ribbon [Lord North] who is at the head of the finances of this country, possesses wit, genius, a great deal of true taste, and a very cultivated understanding. The most important establishment of this kingdom, in taste and literature, now supplicates his assistance and protection; and I trust the arts will find in him a generous benefactor and a powerful protector.

As soon as the House went into the committee of supply, Sir Grey Cooper moved, that the sum of 3000l. be granted to

the

the trustees of the British Museum, to enable them to perform the trusts vested in them by several acts of Parliament.

Mr. Burke observed, that the House had of late shewn a. most generous and giving disposition, both of their own and the public money; probably they remained still in the same good temper. To make a trial of that, he begged leave to amend the honourable gentleman's motion, and instead of 3000l. insert 5000l. Parliament had been liberal of late, not of single thousands, or hundreds of thousands, but millions, granted for slaying their brethren and fellow-subjects in America; and surely they would not be more backward to encourage and protect the liberal and polite arts, than to forward the destruction of their species, and effect all those horrid mischiefs which are the inevitable consequences of civil

war.

The motion was seconded by Mr. Wilkes; but the question being put on Sir Grey Cooper's motion, the committee divided. Ayes 74, noes 60.

April 29.

Mr. Wilkes made his annual motion respecting the Middlesex election, which he introduced with the following speech :

Mr. Wilkes. The important rights of election in the people are so deeply interested in the question which I think it my duty to move again to this House, that no apology can be necessary for my embracing this, and every opportunity which the forms of Parliament permit, of bringing this business again to our consideration.

Every elector in the kingdom, Sir, was injured by the resolution of the last Parliament, in the case of the Middlesex elections. A fatal precedent is thereby created, of making an incapacity by a vote of this House, whereby the law of the land, and common right, rendered the party eligible. The words of the resolution of the 17th of February, 1769, are, "That John Wilkes, Esquire, having been in this session of Parliament expelled this House, was, and is incapable of being elected a member to serve in this present Parliament."-By this arbitrary and capricious vote, the House established an incapacity unknown to the laws of the land. It is a direct assuming of the whole legislative power, and gives to the resolution of one House the virtue of an act of the entire legislature to bind the whole. The King, the Lords, the Commons of the realm, suffer alike from this usurpation, which effectually destroys both the form and essence of this

free constitution. The right of representation is taken away. It is difficult, Sir, to decide whether the despotic body of men which composed the last rotten Parliament, intended by the whole of their conduct in the Middlesex elections, to cut up by the roots our most invaluable franchises and privileges, or only to sacrifice to the rage of an incensed court one obnoxious individual. In either case, the rights of the nation were betrayed by that Parliament, and surrendered into the hands of the minister.

We are, Sir, the guardians of the laws. It is our duty to oppose all usurped power in the King, or the Lords. We are criminał when we consent to the exercise of any illegal power, much more when we either exercise or solicit it ourselves. This the late House of Commons did, in the address to his Majesty to dispense with the laws, by issuing a proclamation for the apprehending of two persons, not felons, but honest laborious printers, Wheble and Thomson, in 1771; yet that very House of Commons are spoken of here with great applause. Gentlemen, Sir, look much displeased. There is not, however, Sir, I am satisfied, one gentleman of the law who will not get up in his place, and justify that illegal proclamation, which was protested against in this House by some of the ablest lawyers among us before it issued, and has since been universally condemned. It was by me set aside judicially, and a man apprehended under that royal proclamation discharged.

I observe, Sir, on all occasions, a tenderness for the proceedings of that Parliament, which it in no respect merited. If, however, they had been guilty of no other outrage against the freedom of the subject, this alone, respecting the Middlesex election, by which the constitution is overturned, was sufficient for their full disgrace in the annals of our country. The present question has been fully debated twice in this Parliament, many times in the last House of Commons, and I believe every precedent quoted which could be produced, from times the most favourable as well as the most hostile to liberty; from the remarkable case of Wollaston, in the reign of King William, to that no less celebrated one of Walpole, in the latter end of Queen Anne. An archangel descended among us, would scarcely give a new, original idea on this subject. I shall therefore reserve myself, Sir, for the reply, if I hear any material objection to the motion which I shall have the honour of submitting to this House. I can foresee only one objection, which I shall endeavour to obviate; and

1

I hope the House will think that delicacy ought to yield to justice.

Gentlemen, I observe, have scruples of rescinding former resolutions, not knowing, they say, where such a practice may stop. It is a scruple, in my opinion, very ill-founded. The first great object is truth, and we ought to follow where that leads. If the last Parliament have acted wrong, let us reform their errors. If they have established a wicked precedent, we ought to reverse it. If we have ourselves committed injustice, let us afford all the reparation in our power. We have given the world a remarkable instance of our repentance this very session, in the case of Mr. Rumbold and Mr. Sykes." The 22d of November last, the order to the attorney-general to prosecute Thomas Rumbold Esq. and Francis Sykes, Esq. as principal promoters and suborners of corrupt and wilful perjury at the election for Shaftesbury, was discharged, on the motion of as respectable a gentleman * as ever sat in Parliament. That order, however, was made by ourselves in the very last session, on the 14th of February preceding the reversal.

I have not yet, Sir, an inclination to quit the company of Messrs. Sykes and Rumbold. Their case will serve me farther in my reasonings. It is a strong argument against expulsion, necessarily including incapacitation. I will suppose, Sir, that instead of the House having determined, in April 1775, in the first session of the present Parliament, that neither of those two gentlemen, on account of their notorious bribery and corruption at Shaftesbury, were duly elected, it had then been voted that they were guilty of being the principal promoters and suborners of wilful and corrupt perjury; a resolution the House did actually come to in February 1776; and in consequence of so black a crime, they had been expelled. Subornation of wilful and corrupt perjury, is surely a more atrocious sin, and more merits expulsion, than the writing a libel. Afterwards, let me likewise suppose the House change their opinion, and find they proceeded without sufficient evidence; a resolution the House did actually come to in November 1776. By the courtly, but unparliamentary doctrine now pretended to be established, that expulsion means incapacitation, you would not have it in your power to restore them to their seats, although you were perfectly convinced of their innocence. Justice would call aloud upon you to do it, because it appeared that no legal proof, no sufficient evidence, was given, on which you had founded so rash, so unjustifiable a judgment; but the cries of justice would little avail with a venal senate against ministerial despotism, or a royal edict, in the form of a parliamentary resolution. My first expulsion, Sir, in January 1764, was for being the author of the North Briton, No. 45. Where is, to this hour, the legal proof by the oaths of twelve of my countrymen to be found of that charge? I have never even been tried on that accusation. A court of law determined on a different charge, that of the re-publication; a charge which might have been brought against five hundred other persons.

As little delicacy, Sir, has been shewn by us to the acts of former Parliaments as to our own resolutions. Have we manifested any tenderness to the memory of the first Parliament which was called in his present Majesty's reign? That Parliament declared, and declared truly, in the civil list act, that 800,000l. was " a competent revenue for defraying the expences of his Majesty's civil government, and supporting the dignity of the Crown of Great Britain." Within, these few days we declared, that 800,000l. was not a competent sum, and " that for the better support of his Majesty's household, and of the honour and dignity of the Crown, there be granted to his Majesty, during his life, out of the aggregate fund, the clear yearly sum of 100,0001. to commence from the 5th of January 1777, over and above the yearly sum of 800,000l. granted by an act made in the first year of his Majesty's reign." If the sum of 800,000l. was competent to these great purposes, we had no right to vote more of the people's money. We were improvident, and prodigal trustees for the nation, not to use a more harsh expression. We likewise voted the last week, above 600,00ol. as the last Parliament had above 500,000l. much above a million in all, on the same pretext of paying the debts of the King, when his Majesty had enjoyed a competent revenue of 800,000l. clear of all deductions and contingencies; and those debts were of the most suspicious nature, even as to the independency of this House. Let us not therefore, Sir, affect more tenderness for the last Parliament in so flagrant an instance of injustice as the case of the Middlesex election, than we have shewn to them, and to ourselves too, in other respects. We ought, if we are men of honour and principle, to do justice to all the electors of this kingdom, and by a formal repeal, to make satisfaction to those zealous defenders of