meant to fix the incapacity upon the punishment, and not upon the crime; but left it fhould appear in a different light to weak, uninformed perfons, it may be advifeable to gut the refolution, and give it to the public, with all poffible folemnity, in the following terms, viz." Refolved, that Robert Walpole, Efq; having been that feffion of parliament expelled the house, was and is incapable of being elected member to ferve in that present parliament." Vide Mongo, on the use of quotations, page 11.

N. B. The author of the answer to Sir William Meredith feems to have made ufe of Mongo's quotation, for in page 18, he affures us," That the "declaratory vote of the 17th of February, 1769, 66.. was indeed a literal copy of the refolution of the "houfe in Mr. Walpole's cafe."

THIRD FACT.

His opponent, Mr. Taylor, baving the fmalleft number of votes at the next election, was declared, NOT

DULY ELECTED.

ARGUMENT.

This fact we confider as directly in point to prove that Mr. Luttrell ought to be the fitting member, for the following reafons. The bur

VOL. I.

X

"geffes

"geffes of Lynn could draw no other inference "from this refolution, but this, that at a future "election, and in cafe of a fingular return, the "house would receive the fame candidate as duly "elected, whom they had before rejected."Vide Poftfcript to Junius, page 37. Or thus :"This their refolution leaves no room to doubt "what part they would have taken, if, upon a fubfequent re-election of Mr. Walpole, there "had been any other candidate in competition. "with him. For, by their vote, they could have ་་ no other intention than to admit fuch other

16

candidate." Vide Mongo's cafe confidered, p. 39. "Or take it in this light.The burgeffes of Lynn having, in defiance of the house, retorted upon them a perfon, whom they had branded with the most ignominious marks of their difpleafure, were thereby fo well intitled to 'favour and indulgence, that the houfe could do no less than rob Mr. Taylor of a right legally vefted in him, in order that the burgeffes might be apprised of the law of parliament; which the house took a very direct way of explaining to them, by refolving that the candidate with the fewest votes was not duly elected "And was not this much more

equitable, more in the spirit of that equal and “substantial justice, which is the end of all law,

"than

than if they had violently adhered to the ftrict "maxims of law?" Vide Serious confiderations, p. 33 and 34. "And if the prefent houfe of commons had chosen to follow the spirit of this re"folution, they would have received and efta"blished the candidate with the fewest votes." Vide Anfwer to Sir W. M. p. 18.

Permit me now, Sir, to fhew you that the worthy Dr. Blackstone fometimes contradicts the miniftry as well as himself. The speech without doors afferts, page 9, " that the legal effect of an

incapacity, founded on a judicial determination "of a complete court, is precifely the fame as "that of an incapacity created by act of parlia"ment." Now for the Doctor,-The law and the opinion of the judge are not always convertible terms, or one and the fame thing; fince it fometimes may happen the judge may mistake the law. Commentaries, vol. I. p. 71.

86

The answer to Sir W. M. afferts, page 23,"The returning officer is not a judicial, but a purely ministerial officer. His return is no ju"dicial act."- -At 'em again Doctor! The Sheriff, in his judicial capacity is to hear and determine caufes of 40 fbillings value and under in his county court. He has alfo a judicial power in divers other civil cafes. He is likewife to decide the elections of

X 2

knights

knights of the fire (subject to the control of the Houfe of Commons), to judge of the qualification of voters, and to return fuch as he fball DETERMINE to be duly elected. Vide Commenta. page 332. vol. I.

What conclufion fhall we draw from fuch facts, and fuch arguments, fuch contradictions? I cannot exprefs my opinion of the prefent miniftry more exactly than in the words of Sir Richard Steele," that we are governed by a set of dri"vellers, whofe folly takes away all dignity from "diftrefs, and makes even calamity rediculous."

PHILO JUNIUS.

LET

AMIDST the great number of correfpondents

who have raised your paper to a fuperiority over the reft, I don't remember to have obferved lately

any of the female sex. To a woman of spirit, the most intolerable of all grievances is a restraint on the liberty of the tongue. I can't bear to fee the men have it all to themfelves; and shall certainly burft, if I am not permitted to put in a word. Much has been said of late about grievances and apprehenfions, inftructions and petitions, elections and expulfions. Now, Sir, I want to enter the lifts with one of the moft celebrated of your political correfpondents: Here I throw down my glove, and am in hopes it will be taken up by

Junius.

Some people perhaps may blame me for meddling with politics, a science fit only for the men ; but Junius has no right to find fault; for Junius

has