reign of Henry the Fourth, when the first penal statutes were enacted, down to the Revolution in these kingdoms, by laws made to force conscience. There is nothing certainly more unreasonable, more inconsistent with the rights of human nature, more contrary to the spirit and precepts of the Christian religion, more iniquitous and unjust, more impolitic, than persecution: my lords, it is against natural religion, revealed religion, and sound policy.

As to the great impolicy of it, any man, who peruses the admirable things which the president de Thou, then a papist, hath advanced (and which I never read without rapture) in the dedication of his History to Henry the Fourth of France, will meet with the fullest conviction. I am only sorry, my lords, that his countrymen, the French, have so far profitted by the sentiments he hath there delivered, as now to see their errour. I profess I am one of those who should not have broke my heart, (I hope I shall not be thought uncharitable in saying it) if they had banished the Hugonots and kept the Jesuits; in a political view, I had much rather they had retained the Jesuits and banished the Hugonots. And, my lords, to ruin the Hugonots, a more jesuitical advice could not have been given than what hath been followed in the present case; make a law to render them incapable of office, make another law for not serving. If they accept, punish them (for it is admitted on all hands that the defendant is prosecutable for taking the office upon him ;) if they accept, punish them; if they refuse, punish them; if they say yes, punish them; if they say

no, punish them. My lords, this is a most exquisite dilemma, from which there is no escaping; it is a trap a man cannot get out of, it is as bad a persecution as that of Procrustes-if they are too short, stretch them; if they are too long, lop them: and, my lords, this bye-law, by which the dissenters are to be reduced to this wretched dilemma, is a bye-law of the city, a local corporation, contrary to an act of parliament, which is the law of the land; a modern bye-law, of very modern date, made long since the corporation act, long since the toleration act, in the face of them, and in direct opposition to them, for they knew these laws were in being. It was made in some year of the reign of the late king. forget which; but my lords, it was made about the time of building the mansion-house. Now, my lords, if it could be supposed the city have a power of making such a bye-law, it would entirely subvert the toleration act, the design of which was to exempt the dissenters from all penalties. For by such a bye-law they have it in their power to make every dissenter pay a fine of six hundred pounds, or any sum they please; for it amounts to that.

The professed design of making this bye-law, was to get fit and able persons to serve the office; and the plaintiff sets forth in his declaration, that if the dissenters are excluded, they shall want fit and able persons. to serve the office. But, my lords, were I to deliver my own suspicion, it would be that they did not so much wish for their services as their fines.

My lords, dissenters have been appointed to this

office; one who was blind, another who was bedridden, not I suppose on account of their being fit and able to serve the office; no, they were disabled both by nature and by law. My lords, we had a case lately in the courts below, of a person chosen mayor of a corporation while he was beyond the seas with his majesty's troops in America, and they knew him to be so. Did they want him to serve the office? No, it was impossible; but they had a mind to continue the former mayor a year longer, and to have a pretence for setting aside him who was now chosen on all future elections, as having been elected before; and, my lords, in the cause before your lordships, the defendant was by law incapable at the time of his election, and it is my firm opinion that he was chosen because he was incapable. If he had been capable he had not been chosen, for they did not want him to serve the office; they chose him, because, without a breach of the law, and a usurpation upon the crown, he could not serve the office. They chose him, that he might fall under the penalty of their bye-law, made to serve a particular purpose; in opposition to which, and to avoid the fine thereby imposed, he hath pleaded a legal disability, grounded on two acts of parliament. And as I am of opinion that his plea is good, I conclude with moving your lordships, that the judgment be affirmed.

SPEECH OF SIR W. MEREDITH, ON THE LORD MAYOR AND ALDERMAN OLIVER BEING COMMITTED TO THE TOWER.

1771.

I FIND myself under a great difficulty, either to agree to this amendment, or to differ from it: for, by agreeing to a censure, I may seem to adopt an opinion of the worthy alderman's guilt, which I have no right to entertain. Did I even think him guilty, I durst not condemn him unheard. As a judge, I am bound to think the man whom I try innocent, till he has been fairly heard, and till his guilt results out of conviction. It is speaking too well of this proceeding to say, that this magistrate was not allowed counsel. He was allowed counsel, so far as to let us see the faces of counsel at the bar; but clogged with a condition, that gagged their mouths from speaking what was necessary for their client's defence. It is an aggravation of injustice, to commit it under a false colour and insidious affectation of justice. honourable gentleman must therefore pardon me, if I cannot vote for his amendment as a measure of kindness to Mr. Oliver; for if you, Mr. Speaker, are ordered to reprimand that gentleman, we all know your ability to do it to some purpose; nor can human nature be exposed to a more humiliating state, or to sharper feelings, than by submitting to such a reprimand as you will give. But in going to the Tower, there is nothing to afflict him; on the contrary, he will carry in his own bosom the blessings of a good conscience, and be followed by the general applause of his fellow citi

The

zens, whilst his judges and prosecutors will be pursued by the curses of the people, scorned by those who hate, and pitied by those who think moderately of them. But if there was no reason for this amendment, I should think, sir, the feelings of gentlemen would incline them to adopt it, merely to get rid of a matter, of which we are all so sick and weary. I consent to it for the sake of peace, even at the expense of justice. With this view to peace, I have opposed every part of this wretched business, in every stage. They who now differ, may live to applaud me for it. I see that many gentlemen of the highest rank and character, some of whom, by their doubts, gave a sanction, and others who added vigour and impulse to this prosecution, are now withdrawn. Several gentlemen, who uniformly opposed this motion, have turned their backs upon the house, with many bitter expressions of the indignation which they felt. With what temper and opinion I may ever return to this unpleasant seat, 1 know not; but I will not leave it, as long as there is a twig to catch at, by which I can hope to keep the peace of this unfortunate country. Mr. Speaker, it is natural for men to complain of what they hear from the report of others; but it is what they see and feel that provokes them to action. Here then lies the difference betwixt commitment and reprimand. The people without doors will only hear the one-they will see the other; and every hour of his imprisonment will add fresh discontent to their minds, and raise some new spirit of commotion. We have now sat many hours past mid