Star.
London, England, 1805-06-26 00:00:00

cor • 1 ea ta -
1 a• of fcreening the Noble Lord from any
a.
iaaree of pimithnient ? If the Houle were induced
to abandon their own decition, to adopt the mode
raw propoled, another occurrence might take place
which would effeetually he a bar to Janice, in the
wile of impeachment, but which would not be likely
to have filch effeal on proceedings in a Court of Cri-
!liana plaice. He, therefore, earnestly conjured the
Wale not to rebind its own folenin decifion, to
adrat a momilition thus attempted by furprife, of
which the Hyde not only had not any timely intl.
meows, but was completely thrown off its guard
Our days fince by the Right Hint. and Learned Gen-
lawn oppolite to him (the Attorney-General) com-
ics: (town to the Houfe, and claiming intimations
how to proceed—a queßion rather extraordinary, as
(await, from that Learned Gentleman to the Houfe
hi; Clients—as it muff be pt efumed his profellional
Ltiowledge was fufficient to aired him in Ihaping an
information upon the merits of the cafe laid before
Lan. No inttance of fuch conduit was to be found
on the Journals of Parliament. The propofition,
:lord:ore, as it now came forward, was obvioufly a
trick upon the Houfe. In the abfence of above half
the Members who voted for the meafure, it was now
propofei to refcind it; and no doubt thole Members
would have attended in their place, had they any
idea of fuch a propofition coming forward. If the
Houfe was to countenance fuch a procedure, and
create filch a precedent, it was impoffible to lay what
sef,)lotions might not be refcinded in a finalar way.
Mr. LEvr:tsTER laid, be had intimated his in-
tention of bringing forward fuch a motion feveral
dais ago.
Mr. BANKES replied, that he did not under ftand
any fuels intimation had been given ; neither did the
Houfe : and if the Hon. and Learned Member had
given loch an intimation, what occafion had he to
tem,' it yesterday ?
Lord HENRY PETTY laid, that having been
prefent when the meafure of impeachment was for-
merly ditanifed, and voted in the minority for it, he
fell it his duty now to Rate his grounds for his vote
this night. If could affent for one moment that
the queilion now before the Houk was, whether a
criminal prosecution or impeachment fhould be
adopted, he Ihould certainly vote for impeachment.
But conceiving, on the cootravy, the quettion to be,
whether the lioufe would be induced, upon the Ihort
notice, which was entered on the Journals but yet.-
terday, to retain(' a decision, formed, after a long
feries of difeuflions, in one of she fullest affemblies
of that Houle that ever met, upon a proposition to
which the attention of the Houfe had been fo par icu•
larly drawn, be fhould vote :spina fuch a 'realms..
The Hon. Member who introduced the motion had,
neverthelefa faia, that the decition was hasty, and
not mimed after a full dileutlion, and a great num-
ber of thole who voted for it did not understand the
quellion. He would, however, fay, that young and
unexperienced as he was in Parliament, he under-
flood the nuellion ; tbat to the belt of his bumble
abilities he had fully difculfed it ; and on all tides
of the Houle it had been moll amply debated ; he
therefore could not admit the allertion, that the
1-loufe had voted in Ignorance or milunderliand-
big. He would appeal to the recollettion of the
Houle, whether an Hon. Member, not now in his
glace, on that He of the Houle (Mr. Sheridan),
bad not, on the night when the queltion was dia
cuffed, emphatically called upon the Right Hon Gen-
tleman oppolite to him ( alt. Pitt) to paufe and deli.
berate beftne he voted on that qtreltion, as his vote
would have the rife& of leading many into a diffi-
culty out of which they would not be eafily extri-
cated. That Right Hon. Gentleman had not then.
(poke ; he did not afterwards fpeak, but he could not
plead that his attention, and that of thofe around
him, had noi. been called emphatically to the fubjea.
There was a lefolution propofed to proceed by im
yeachment, and another to proceed by criminal profe-
cution ; thole who wifbed the one, would vote againft
the other, ani this was really the nueflion. 'Thus at
the end of a tot tnight, at the latter end of a &Rion,
when half the members who voted upon the former
night had left town, the Houfe is called on, at twenty-
Jour hours notice, to refcind a decition fo folemnly
adopted ; he did not exiled to hear from Honourable
and Learned Gentlemen hitch condemnation of the
jurildiation ot the Court of King's Bench. He did
not expert to hear Inch an argument as a flaw in the
proceedings upon a former trial direaled by the
Emile, urged to induce the Houfe now to rcfcind
its decifion : by this argument, all profecution by an
Attorney-General mull be bad ; and a flaw mutt be
found in the proceedings on all trials fo direfled.
For his own part, be fhould give tab vote now for the
criminal proceeding, not as a mode in preference, but
as the retirlt of a decifion fo folemnly, fo fully, and fo
deliberately adopted.
Sir WILLIAM BURROUGHS fupported the
motion principally on the fame grounds as Mr. Ley-
ceder and the Solicitor General.
Mr. CHARLES WYNNE was decidedly for
prncee !Mg by impeachment, as the proper and con-
ltiturional mode ; but thought the notice of the pre-
fent motion extremely abrupt, and that it ought to
shave been at leafs for a week. He did not think that
a poaecutien, to be conducted by his Majesty's At-
torney General, who 11.1,1 delivered his opinion on
the folaia% n as the mode molt proper for the ends
of jullice. He though: the prefent debate fhould be
adjourned till Monday next, and moved accordingly,
Iva his motion was not feconded.
Mr. AVINDHAM fpoke at Jaime length in favour.l
ar the refhtution of the Houfe fur the criminal pro. I
Itcution of Lord - He reviewed the argu.
tnents on both fides, and empreffeti his opinion in fa-
vour of the impeachment, on the grounds which he
had originally limed as a Matter of preference, until
fire Houfe had decided by its vote in favour of the
other mode of criminal proceeding. No perfon
would deny politively the law, or the propriety of
the criminal proceeding againft the Noble Lora in
the courts of law. The precedents for the prolaeu.
lion of Peers were not, in a general view of the Inh-
jeat, very numerous in our hitiory ; and he could
fee no argument that could be made out against the
preterit mole fuceetsfully grounded on the objealion
of there being but a tingle cafe in precedent. He
did not fee that it was atnisluttly necelfary to have a
pea: many precedents ; nor was there any Itrong
oajenion to the mode agreed upon, unlefs it were
'freinsie I on a hslpicion of mala fidu in the party
s'llich was to carry on the
.profecution. If it were
laid, that in an impeachment there was lets of tech-

• •
nical law regnifite for carrying forward the ends of
joftice, it might, on the qther hand, be objefled, that
there was, and would always he, no common (hare
of technical law employed in the defence : In that a
fort of balance might bt (truck in that way. With
refpett to other matters fuch as the competency of
the Tribunal, he rather inclined to think, that the
Learned Gentleman (Mr. Bond) pufhed hi, appro-
bation rather too far. He did not think that i• was

eligible for almoll all cafes, quite to the fame extent
as the Learned Gentletnan—Rill, it might be, fur
much of what was connected with the prefent
nets, fuflicient. In fail, the defcription of the of-
fence of which Lord Melville was fuppofed guilty,
W:tS one which might rather be defined to be the crime
of a Statelnran, than a (tate crime. He Ibould p-efer
the tribunal of the Houfe of Peers to a common Jury,
bur yet there might be nothing but what a Jury might
underhand and decide upon. Yet he could not but
think, that a tribunal which was not compelled to
decide upon the whole bufinefs at one fitting would
be, upon the confederation of the whole of the cit.-
cumaances, the belt to try the cafe of the Noble
Lord. In this view of the cafe his opinion was de-
cidedly for the Houfe of Lords. There was more
dignity in that mode for all parties—and betides,
though he meant no diftefpea to the Attorney Ge-
neral, yet, individually confidered, he could not think
him the molt proper perfon to conduit fuch a tranfic-
Win. He was very ready to adroit all that had been
Laid in praife of that Learned Gentleman ; bur when
it was laid ofhim that notwithftandinghis own opii. ion
he would conduit thebulinefsprecifely in the mode and
for the objects direited by the Houle, and that he
would da it as well as if Isis opinion leaned the other
way ; he could not help thinking that it was rather
equivocal praife. That was a fort of praile in which
he could fcarcely concur. If it were true that the
force of profeflional habits was Inch, as that whether
it was jutlice or injuflice, a particular caufe would be
equally well managed and futlained ; he thought it
was an unfortunate defect in the profeflion, and he
could not but feel fume objections to it. Parties were
allowed to challenge Jurors who had delivered opi
nions of loch a defcription as to proclaim their fend-
merits, and almoft to anticipate their decifions upon
queltions ultimately to be brought before them ; and
really he thought it would be, at lean, equally jug '1
to challenge and difqualify a profecutor who had
fhewn a difpnfition adverfe to the profecution he was
officially to conduit. The qneltion teemed to be re-
duced to this point : Is the Houle now at liberty to
make the change in their proceedings which was pro.
pored by the motion of to-night ? It had been con-
tended, that in doing In, there would be no contra-
vention of the judgment of the Houfe. An Hon.
Gentleman had contended. that the change now pro-
poled was in conformity with the fettle of a majority
of the Houfe. He did not think it neceflary to de•
ny this; but he would afk how the Hon. Gentleman
knew it ? Was it from the proceedings of the Houfe ?
What folid parliamentary ground had the Hanour
able Gentleman for Paying fo ? It might be col-
'card or inferred from matter thrown out in de-
bate, from converfation, or from koowledge of par-
ties ; bnr certainly not from the proceedings of the
Houle of Commons. Ali queitions could not be de-
cided by the mere deciflosi of Yes and No. Sometimes.
there were matters of choice fubmitted between al-
ternatives. Some have laid, 6, You &fluid have
hated, in the firft inflance, the general queftion—
Shall there be a criminal punilbment or not ? In
fuch a cafe, many would neither fay yes or no.—
They mull anfwer hypothetically ; they mull know
firlt what the fpecies it criminal punifhment is to
he before they voted. Had the quellion been put
on impeachment limply, fotne would have faid Yes,
and others No; becaufe they might have thought
fume other mode preferable for punifhment. As fo
much had been laid about the fentiments of diffe-
rent parties in the Hortfe, he thought he might di-
vide them into four clalfes ; the fill would be thofe
who would fay, as they had already laid, " No far-
ther ponithment whatever ;" the kennel might vote
fur impeachment limply ; the third would fay, cri-
minal profecution by the Attorney General ; and the
fourth would be for criminal proceedings at all
events, and take the profecution in failure of the im-
peachment—they would fay any thing is better than
nothing. Ile &dd, therefore, protelt agaiaa all
that fort of refinement of reatiming, founded upon
the fuppofed or alledged difference of opinion with
refired to the p7ecife defcription of punithment.—
He would not allow Gentlemen on the oppofite fide
to play faft and look with the Houfe. The courfe
was plain. The Houfe had faid, there (hall be a cri-
minal proceeding, and that by the Attorney General.
He had originally voted for the impeachment, and
for two reafons: firft, that there might be fome cri-
ininal proceeding ; and fecondly, becaufe he thought
•iropca,thment the belt mode. But after fo much
• deliberation, and a iemarkably full attendance, the
Houfe had come to a decia n, directing the proceed-
ings in a particular mode ; and a refinement was
now attempted, founded upon a fort of comparifon
of the votes different Gentlemen. All that could
be inferred from the voter, for the purpofes of the
Hon. Gentleman, was, that the mode adopted was
confidered to be better than no profectitinn at all.—
A I:A-might had now paired (ince the decifrou WAS
taken, and the Houfe was now called upon, at a
lbort notice, with the attendance of lirch Members
as were upon the fpot, to reverfe its proceedings.—
From the locale and vague idea of reviliun thrown
out, it could not be inferred that the Learned Gen.
tleman's own mind was made up on the lubjea. No
proper and timely notice had been given of the
intention to reverfe the proceedings. Gentlemen
had now left town in great r,umbers, and it was only
neceffary to let the Seflion run down a little longer,
and upon this principle of change, the whole pro-
ceedings might be reverfed that had been already
taken, when there were ju(t Members enough to make
up a Houfe. The force of Inch a precedent would be
an extreme fcandal to the country. Gentlemen mutt
think of the. character of that Houle. His complaint
againit Lord Melville was not merely that he had
mifapplied public money, but that he had put all
public men, and that Hook too, into fufpicion, and
that public fulpicion ought to be fatisfied. He had
put himfelf upon his trial, and he had alfo put the
character of the Houle upon its trial. They mnit
clear their charaaer ; they mutt do jultice to them.
laves, without doing any injuttice to Lord Melville,
whofe isprudent and Tameable conduit, to ufe no
harfacr terms, bad prodamil filch coatiquencm The

RefTat'ione- of the nee he eonadete. d it to be Ise.
eeff.try for the Houfe to adhere to.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
tinted that the principal ground of oppefition to the
motion before the Houfe appeared to reft on trte
tice which, according to their affertion, was not fairly
given, and to which, therefore, they conceived that
Itrong circumfiances of furpicion attached. But he
begged the Houfe would refer to dates upon this part
of the queilion. The motion for the profecution of
L.lrd Melville paffed on the 13th infiarit ; on the
Thurfday following the Hotife did not fit, en the
Friday it was occnpied with a difeuflian which con-

cernea him perfonaliy. In the nest week only three
fitting days had elapfed when his Learned Friend
(the Attorney General) came forward and Rated,
that from the peculiar difficulties of the cafe it was
neceffary that the Houfe &mid furnifh him with

fume fpecific indruetions. Upon that application a
difcuilionarnfe, and he fubmi►ted to the recolleeiqn

of the Houle, whether, in the courfe of that dif-
cation, he did not diflinCtly Rate that before the
queltion referred to by the Attorney General Ihould
be gone into, the Houle ought to confider the pro-
priety of reviling the vote refpeding the criminal pro-
fecution, and of fttbaituting an order for impeach-
ment. This he perfeelly remembered, that when on
that nccafion his Right Honourable Friend (Mr.
Bond) gave notice of his intention to move that the
cafe relative to Jellicoe Ihould not be introduced into

the criminal profecution, that notice was, in the fira
ia(lance, for the following day; but, at his &lire, his
Right Hon. Friend deferred until this day, for the
purpofe, as exprefsly dated, of taking this opportu-
nity to re-confider the whole proceeding. And the
converfation went into fuch particularity that it was
argued that, if the Houle lhould concur in preferring
the Impeachment, there could he no neceflity to deli-
berate upon the expediency of modifying the vote of
Criminal Profecution, which would, in the event of
Inch preference, be altogether abandoned. After an
intimation fo clear and decided, if Gentlemen were
not aware of the proceeding before the Houle, he. fub-
mitted that it was no fault of his, for they had re-
ceived a notice as full and as timely as circumttances
would permit, or words could convey. How then,
he would elk, did the cafe Rand ? Oo this, the flitch ,
day after the converfation he alluded to, the motion
was brought forward. And as to the time, he begged
to fuggelt to the confideration of Gentlemen, that
this notice was not given when bufinefs was over—
! when the Members were out of town, and nothing of
importance was expected. On the contrary, a dif
cation was announced which was expetied to take
place in a few days, and which concerned nothing
let's than a revision of the whole ftate of our military
defence. This was a queftion, upon which a good
deal had been already faid by the Gentlemen on
the other fide—much expeaation had been excited,
and thofe Gentlemen had pronounced it a matter
of fuch moment, that the Houfe ought to conti-
nue fitting throughout the fummer fully to confider
it. With Inch a ciliation then in their contemplation,
how could it be toppled that the Gentlemen on the
other fide would be abfent from town, or could any
realimable man timpofe. that they were not at this
particular time able to give as full an attendance as
they thought proper. Sure he was, that taking all
the circuinttances into view ; combining the infor-
mation he gave fume time fince, with the diainCt no-
tice of yellerday, the Houfe would feel that there
was no ground to complain of furprife. A notice it-
felf was, the Houfe mutt be aware, but a mere point
of form, and, he walled it particularly to be coo-
Bdered, that in this inftance the motion was to re-
fcind a vote of'the intention to propofe which no pre.
viOusnotice.whatever had been given (a cry of hear !
bear!) Far from any fpecific notice having been men-
tioned, as was utual in fuch cafes, the motion for a
criminal profecution was never heard of until the
very day on which the propolition for an impeach.
ment was fubmitted to the Houfe. Upon that day,
without the flighteft intimation to any individual—
without even a notice from courtefy to the party ac•
cured, or any of his friends, the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman brought forward his motion fro.• criminal pro
fecution. The right of Gentlemen fo to proceed he
did not mean to difpute • but he did feel himfelf war-
ranted in hating, that after having fo proceeded they
were not entitled to complain of the courfe adopted
with refpea to the motion before the Houfe, as at all
unfair or unparliamentary (very of hear ! hear! from
the Oppofaion Benches.) With regard to the opinions
infinuated, that if the vote under diffitillion were ref-
einded, it would excite injurious fufpicions abroad os
to the views of the Hoare, he did not think it necef-
fary to dwell upon fuch an infinuation. But as to the
affertion, that it would be unbecoming in Parlia-
ment to refcind any refolution within the fefton in
which it had palled, he would appeal to the candour
and good fenfe of the Houfe, whether in any care
fuch as the prefent, it would Inffer itfelf to be re-
trained by a point of form, or even precept olculloos,
from repealing any vote calculated to lead to incurs.
ble difficulties. The faCt, however. was, that in this '
very felon, and in a cafe peculiarly pertinent to this
motion, a precedent direelly in point had been ellah-
lifhed. For the vote under conlideration was itfelf
lubtlituted for a civil aCtion, which had been previ•
oufly refolved upon, as preferable to a Criminal Pro.
fecution. He did not mean to fay that there, was any
thing criminal in fuch a fuhflinition ; he nwtioned it
I only to (hew, that the vote itfelf, which, it was pro.
pofed to refcind, furniffied an argument againa that
furprife o hid) Gentlemen profetfed to feel, in conk-
gutnee, as they alletird, of the angularity of the
proposition before tlie Houle.
Having animadverted with his dilal force on the
objeftions drawn from the notice and the precedent,
the Right Hcin. Gentleman proceeded to confider the
other grounds of oppofiton to the motion. Some
Gentlemen had, heobferved, argued as if this motion
were meant as a fort of firatagem to defeat the Re.
folutions of the Houfe, and to prevent the profecu-
tion tsii Lord Melville. Nothing could, in his opinion,
be more unfounded than fuch a fuppofition. The
motion was not to do away thelorder for criminal pro-
fecution. and to leave the ref to chance ; no : but to
rubflitine for that order a courfe of profecution cal-
culated much better to anfwer the ends of fubtiantial
inslice—more confiitutional, and more fuitabte to the.
dignity of Parliament. So it was twiformly hated
by thofe Gentlemen who flood forward and promi.
sent from the commencement of thofe proceed iigs ;
and fo no doubt thofe Gentlemen thought Ilia. Lon
whit ground then could they object to a mown

which wag meant to he 114)11 it uteri for the vote of whivh
they difapprored ; a cou,fe of proceedi:•.; for which
they Ilrentwolly -r,:rired. If their opiniort
the fame ; ii r. e mode of profeetrtion which his Hon.
Frizmd's m lion recomm-nded was not lets cffergual
for the en of innice, he hoped that the on. Gen-
tlemen would nr:t impute improper m .tiv.s to thole
who brought forward a motion which Afforded them
an opportunity of giving cilia to their own virginal
views. But the Hon. Gentlemen fermed 'hank, that

hecaufe this m tion originated with tho': w'.. oppof-
ed any criminal prof:mixt from the Ingol,,ing, they
ought to oppore it. This was really ilr ino.e ! i d•f
reafoning, btu he illotthi not dwAl tip.," it. • . h
him and others who thoo-411t •Ivir Oleoe were not .41.
ficient grounds for any, climinal profecution; Jon
therefore refitted it by their votes, the quelli.,n, now
that the Houle had decided otherwife, was to mike an

option as to the bell mode of profecution. Ifts., was
a queftion which they were not called upon to confi-
der until the 1-I.)ufe had formed the determination

alluded to. Although they oppofed the profecution
altogether, it did not follow that they could be in-
different to the tribunal before which the accufed
fhould be tried. On the contrary, they would natu.
rally feek that tribunal which lhould be leaft rem..
nant to his feelings, and would of cootie prefer the
impeachment; and he was certain thete was no Gen.
demon on the other fide of the Houfe who would not
rather recommend that mode of profecutionowhien
thould be leaft dilagreeable to the feelings of the ac-
cufed, if fuch recommendation thould nut he incon-
fiflent with the purpofes of jullice. The vote under
difctiflion mull be peculiarly dilagreeable in the ac.
cufed, he had no doubt that it was, although it was
originally propofed with a profeffed view to obtain
for him the lets fevere mode of profecution.
As to the way in which the opinion of the majority
of the Houfe inclined, the Right Hon. Gentleman
difclaimed any intention of following the Right Hon.
Gentleman (Mr. Windham) who, under the cloak
of deprecating refinement, entered into a good deal
of that fpecies of dirquifition, the relish of which
was completely delufive. That Right Hon. Gentle-
man had alked how the opinion of the Houfe could
be colleted, but by its vote ? He would tell the
Right Hon. Gentleman, without meddling with his
nice diffietions, that opinion was to be learned by
applying to the plain common lento of the fethjeet.....
If any candid man would take the trcuble of c..nfi.
deting the particular circumftances of the debate on
this quettion on a former evening, he had not the
!call doubt that fuch a man would concur with him in
thinking, that if the Houle were polled, a very de-
cided majority indeed would be found in favour of an
impeachment. Why then thould the fi-itife hefitate
to adopt it in the prefent itittance ? A N ble Lord,
on the oppofite bench (Lord H. Petty), who always
fpoke in luch a manner as entitled him to peculiar at-
tention, had, in the c"urfe of the debate, hated that
an impeachment was the more ciiniii:utiunal mode of
proceeding in this cafe. Could the Howe, then, al-
low that which was confliturional to be oppofed by a
confideration of expediency? Could they all ,w a !rerf,
queltion of firm to ItanO in the way of an ril;el of
fuch importance ? l'ne Nable Lord, and thole who
a6ted with him, having before relied theii preforence
of an impeachment upon grounds fo broad ood con-
flitutional, he could not conceive them now ready to
tetrad upon fuch confiderati MS a. the Houle had
herd. The Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Windham)
'had profelfed to think that a jury was very competent
Itoinveitigate and decide on the cafe of Lord Melville,
becaufe in that Right 11,11. Gentleman's opinion, the
Noble Lord had not been guilty of a " flak crime."
I The oftenfible charge againd L.lrd Melville no doubt
was a breach of law, by tout: icing at the mifapplica-
tion of the public money, and pr..fi;ing by fetch mif-
application ; but was not the Noble Lord a lfo charged
with applying the public money to purpofes which he
refuted to difclole ? and was not he would ap-
peal to the Right Honourable Gentleman, within the
delcription of a (late crime ? Was it not either with
rcfpea to the magnitude of the offense, or the de-
gree of punithment applicable, a fitter [tablet for
impeachment, than fur the ct :arrderaiion of a jury ?
—Some Gentlemen had argued, the Right Honour-
able Gentleman obferved, en at the criminal profecu-
lion would be a great favi.tig of time, hut if they
would lock to the only pi ec edent on the journals of a
fimilar profecution, they would find that two years
and a half elapfed ofte the in der of the H ode, be-
, fore Lord Halifax *rots brought to trial. Sa much
and as to the arguments again&
ion% tpocaectpine
ednit.'.iodrawn from the trial of Mr. Hattings,
he lbould, only fay that the prefent cafe was materially
different from that, which was let eXtenrlVC in its corn.
pars, and which required fuch voluminous evidence,
both written and parole, from the other fide of the
globe. If, however, the delay in that cafe were to i•:
admitted as an ohjeCion againit impeachment, it
I might be pufhed to the extent of overturnits„; the prin.
ciple of impeachments altogether, wh;cli was a cit.-
! curnitance that he had 1:0 doubt the Gentlemen on
the other fide would be among the inoq forward to
deprecate. One Honourable Gen;kman ( Mr. &tribes)
had, Ire perceived. argued as it all State offences
I might lent to a fury, but in that opinion he fancied
the Honourable Gentleman would stand alone.—
' There were many offences to complicated in their
circumllances, and to peculiar in their is am:. as to
be quite told: for inch a tribunal. Of loch a Om-
; rafter is the charge rtainii the accufed 'n this in-
dance. It mutt iieceifoily require an iuvclligaticn
1 of fuels length to decide upon thi, charge, as the oi-
-1 dinary fitting of a jury mull he incompetent A
number of the papers laid before that Houle fhould
be examined, with mush parole evidence relarin t to
them, before a decifion could be come to on the cafe
of Lord Melville, or the ends of justice mutt I.e t.'e.
Gated. Confidering a Jury incompetent to afford .o
the fobjet the ample iiiveitigation it required, he
was induced to oppofe criminal prale,nition.—
After recapiiul..ting his fzveral arguments, the Right
Honourable Gentleman concluded with Wei sing.
that he th"ulf fupport the impeachment, as the mode
of profecution belt calculated to proincte the purpc-
fes of justice, as more confident with tie char.' rt f
Parliament, as lefs repugnant t • the feelings of the
accufed, and as more fineable even to tire .. tore of
the crime.
WHITBREADMr. tore and fpoke at lame length'
and with extraordinary ability in reply. He let out
by alluding to a circumnance it. the lite of one of the
greatcfi orators of antiquity (Cicero) who was ern-
ploycd to &find a Roman Citizen, gm a quettion