As for the terms of the remonftrance, I prefume it will not be affirmed, by any perfon lefs polished than a gentleman usher, that this is a feafon for compliments. Our gracious Sovereign indeed is abundantly civil to himself. Instead of an answer to a petition, his Majefty very gracefully pronounces his own panegyric; and I confefs, that, as far ás his perfonal behaviour, or the royal purity of his intentions is concerned, the truth of those declarations, which the minifter has drawn up for his master, cannot decently be difputed. In every other refpect, I affirm that they are abfolutely unfupported, either in argument or fact. I muft add too, that fuppofing the fpeech were otherwife unexceptionable, it is not a direct answer to the petition of the city. His Majefty is pleafed to fay, that he is always ready to receive the requests of his fubjects; yet the fheriffs were twice fent back with an excufe, and it was certainly debated in council whether or no the magiftrates of the city of London fhould be admitted to an audience. Whether the remonftrance be or be not injurious to parliament, is the very queftion between the parliament and the people, and fuch a queftion as cannot be decided by the a third party, however refpectable.

affertion of

That the petitioning

titioning for a diffolution of parliament is irreconcileable with the principles of the conftitution is a new doctrine. His Majefty perhaps has not been informed, that the house of commons themselves have, by a formal refolution, admitted it to be the right of the subject. His Majesty proceeds to affure us that he has made the laws the rule of his conduct. Was it in ordering or permitting his minifters to apprehend Mr. Wilkes by a general warrant ?-Was it in fuffering his ministers to revive the obfolete maxim of nullum tempus to rob the Duke of Portland of his property, and thereby give a decifive turn to a county election.! -Was it in erecting a chamber confultation of furgeons, with authority to examine into and fuperfede the legal verdict of a jury? Or did his Majefty confult the laws of this country, when he permitted his fecretary of flate to declare, that whenever the civil magiftrate is trifled with, a military force must be fent for, without the delay of a moment, and effectually employed? Or was it in the barbarous exactnefs with which this illegal, inhuman doctrine was carried into execution?If his majesty had recollected these facts, I think he would never have faid, at least with any reference to the measures or his government, that he had made the laws the rule of his conduct.

Pp

To

talk

1

talk of preferving the affections, or relying on the fupport of his fubjects, while he continues to act upon these principles, is indeed paying a compliment to their loyalty, which I hope they have too much spirit and understanding to deserve.

His Majefty, we are told, is not only punctual in the performance of his own duty, but careful not to affume any of those powers which the conftitution has placed in other hands. Admitting this laft affertion to be ftrictly true, it is no way to the purpofe. The city of London have not defired the King to affume a power placed in other hands. If they had, fhould hope to fee the perfon, who dared to prefent fuch a petition, immediately impeached. They folicit their fovereign to exert that conftitutional authority, which the laws have vefted in him for the benefit of his fubjects. They call upon him to make use of his lawful prerogative in a cafe, which our laws evidently fuppofed might happen, fince they have provided for it by trufting the Sovereign with a difcretionary power to diffolve the parliament. This requeft will, I am confident, be fupported by remonftrances from all parts of the kingdom. His Majefty will find at laft, that this is the fenfe of his people, and that it is not his intereft to fupport either ministry or parliament, at the ha

zard

zard of a breach with the collective body of his fubjects. That he is the King of a free people is indeed his greateft glory.

That he may long conpeople, is the second wish

tinue the King of a free that animates my heart. PEOPLE MAY BE FREE.*

The first iş, THAT THE

JUNIUS.

*When his Majefty had done reading his speech, the lord Mayor, &c. had the honour of kiffing his Majesty's hand; after which, as they were withdrawing, his Majefty inftant ly turned round to his courtiers, and burst out a laughing. Nere fiddled, while Rome was burning. John Horne.

LETTER XLIV.

TO THE PRINTER OF THE PUBLIC ADVER

SIR,

TISER.

April 3, 1770.

IN my laft letter I offered you my opinion of the

truth and propriety of his Majefty's answer to the city of London, confidering it merely as the speech of a minifter, drawn up in his own defence, and delivered, as ufual, by the chief magiftrate. I would feparate, as much as poffible, the King's perfonal character and behaviour from the acts of the present government. I wish it to be understood that his Majefty had in effect no more concern in the fubftance of what he said, than Sir James Hodges had in the remonftrance, and that as Sir James, in virtue of his office, was obliged to speak the fentiments of the people, his Majesty might think himself bound by the fame official obligation, to give a graceful utterance to the fentiments of his minifter. The cold formality of a well-repeated leffon is widely diftant from the animated expreffion of the heart.