740 
E N G L A N D. 
court of exchequer, the chancellor, lord North, affixed 
the feal, in purfuance of a pofitive order from the lords 
of the treafury. 
When this bufinefs came tinder parliamentary difcu'ffion, 
the minifter maintained, “ that the premifes in queftion 
were no part of the honour of Penrith, and that the re- 
fumption was therefore juftifiable; that the family of 
Portland was fufficiently paid for any fervices which it 
might have rendered the nation ; and, after enjoying for 
feventy years an eftate to which it had no right, it was 
faid they might now be contented to refign it into the 
hands of the true owner:” The oppofition replied, “ that 
the revival of the obfolete and dormant prerogative of 
refumption, in theface of a long and uninterrupted pre- 
fcription, was in the higheft degree alarming; that re- 
fumptions had been praftifed even in the worft of times 
with great caution, from the general abhorrence which 
every aft of that kind mud excite. The maxim on which 
they were founded, was affected to be the difgrace of the 
government, and the fcandal of the law ; and it could 
Tcarcely have been imagined, that the mod enlightened 
*ages would revive a practice which tiie darkeft times had 
held in deteftation. All the lands of the kingdom have 
been at different times in the hands of the fovereigns, and 
-a large proportion of them, from the lofs of authentic 
-deeds, may be liable to fimilar claims; and thus the fub- 
4eft may be haraffed and ruined by frivolous and vexa¬ 
tious fuits, without the means of redrefs. To ground a 
-■proceeding of this nature upon the mere report of the 
furveyor-general of the crown, unfupported by any au¬ 
thority of law, was reprobated as a mockery and infult, 
amounting to an evident abandonment of every principle 
of equity and juftice. When the royal revenue arofe 
-only frGm demefne lands, refumptions might be more 
eafily pardonable; but when a vail permanent revenue 
-was fettled by parliament on the crown, the plea of ne- 
ceffity is wholly precluded ; not to mention that the re- 
ferved rent was too contemptible a confideration to be 
fuppofed in the remoteft degree to have influenced the 
refumption.” The miniffry contended, that further time 
■was neceffary for the full inveftigation of the fubjeft ; 
however, the nullum tempus bill paffed into a law ; and thus 
the oppreffion of an individual, agreeably to the happy 
genius of the Englifh conftitution, became the means of 
extending and fecuring the rights and liberties ofthe com¬ 
munity at large. When this great caufe was argued be¬ 
fore the barons of the exchequer, the late grant was 
judged invalid, as contrary to the ftatute of queen Anne, 
which enafts, that, upon every grant, leafe. oraffurance, 
from the crown, the referved rent be not lefs than one- 
third of the clear yearly value of fuch lands, manors, or 
meffuages, as (hall be contained in fuch leafe or grant; 
and, to the infinite fatisfaftion of every impartial perfon, 
fir James Lowther was finally nbnfuited, after having 
thrown the whole county of Cumberland into the utmoft 
confufion: above four hundred ejeftments being, as it is 
affirmed, ferved by the agents of fir James Lowther upon 
the fub-tenants and aftual occupants of thofe extenlive 
demefnes, in one day. 
The Britifh parliament, having nearly completed the 
legal term of its exiftence, wasdiffolved ; and the enfuing 
general eleftion was fignalized above all others, by the 
iinmenfe fums expended iii eleftioneering contefts. The 
current price of boroughs was enormouily raifed by the 
rival plunderers of the eaft and of the weft, who, by a 
new i'pecies of alchemy, had tranfmuted into Engliffi gold 
the blood of Africa and the tears of Hindooftan. Many 
private fortunes were ruined, or materially impaired, by 
contefts .carried on with the utmoft political depravity. 
The circutnftances attending the eleftion for Middlefex 
alone, however, demand, from their fuperior conneftion 
with general politics,-the fpecific notice of hiftory. 
It is neceffary to cali to mind that Mr. Wilkes, by his 
contumacious contempt of the proceedings inftituted 
againft him in.the courts at Weftminfter, fullered a fen- 
tence of outlawry to be paffed upon him ; and for fevera'l 
years preceding this period he had refided in different- 
parts of the continent. But at the eve of the prefent 
elebtion he had the temerity to appear publicly at Guild¬ 
hall, and offer himfelf as a candidate for the city of Lon¬ 
don. On the firft advancement of the duke of Grafton 
to the premierffiip, Mr. Wilkes had written to that no. 
bleman in a (train fufficiently refpeftful, and even flatter¬ 
ing, “ congratulating.his country on that event, and en¬ 
treating his grace to mediate his pardon from the king; 
declaring, that he had never in any moment of his life 
fwerved from the duty and allegiance he owed his fove- 
reign, and profeffing in every thing to fubmit to his ma- 
jefty’s clemency. Your grace’s noble manner of thinking, 
(fays he,) and the obligations I have formerly feceived, 
which are (till frefli in my mind, will, l hope, give a full 
propriety to this addrefs; and I am lure, a heart glowing 
with the facred zeal of liberty mu ft have a favourable 
reception from the duke of Grafton.” This application 
was treated with negleft and difdain ; and Mr. Wilkes’s 
hopes of pardon being extinguiftied, he refolved to make 
his enemies feel, if poffible, the effects of his refentment. 
It is remarkable, that although he was received by the 
populace with loud acclamations, and a great majority 
of hands appeared in his favour at Guildhall, he was on 
the poll contemptuoufly rejefted. Far from being difpi- 
rited by this defeat, he- immediately declared himfelf a 
candidate for Middlefex ; and the electors for this county 
confifting chiefly of freeholders of the lowed clafs, he 
was returned by a decifive majority. Such was the ex- 
ultation of the populace at this event, that they paraded 
the ftreets of the metropolis, and compelled the inhabi¬ 
tants to illuminate their houfes, as if fome fignai victory 
had been gained; and the chief magiftrate, Harley, was 
openly and grofsly infulted by a violent aflault upon the 
manfion-houfe. The miniftry, who had remained unac¬ 
countably palfive at his firft appearance, now feemed to 
awaken from their lethargy. Mr. Wilkes, having with 
much difcretion furrendered himfelf to the jurifdiftion 
of the king’s bench, obtained a reverfal of his outlawry; 
buj the verdifts given againft him on both trials were 
now affirmed by lord Mansfield, and he was in confe- 
quence condemned to fuffer two years imprifonment; to 
pay a fine of one thoufand pounds ; and to find fecurity 
for his good behaviour during the fpace of feven years. 
On the ioth of May, 1768, the new parliament was 
convened, and vaft multitudes were collefted about the 
king’s bench, and the fields adjacent, under the idea of 
feeing Mr. Wilkes go the houfe of commons; when the 
unfortunate riot took place, in which young Allen was 
killed. After a very ftiort feftion, and merely palling one 
or two bills pro forma, the parliament was prorogued till 
November. During the recefs., a letter from lord Wey¬ 
mouth, fecretary of ftate, addreffed to the chairman of 
the bench of juftices for the county of Surry, and ex- 
preffive of the higheft approbation of the late proceedings 
of the magiftrates, fell into the hands of Mr. Wilkes, who 
immediately publiflied it, with a preface fufficiently daring 
and indignant. When the parliament met, lord Wey¬ 
mouth made a formal complaint of breach of privilege, 
and the houfe of commons with little hefitation relolved 
this prefatory introduftion to be “an infolent, fcandalous, 
and feditious, libel.” And it being alfo urged that Mr. 
Wilkes was fentenced to a long imprifonment for former 
offences of a fimilar nature, and incapable of attending 
his duty in parliament, it was moved by lord Barrington, 
fecretary at war, that he be expelled the houfe. His 
lordffiip’s motion was feconded by Mr. Rigby, paymafter 
of the forces, and carried by a great majority. It was 
however affirmed, “ that the iibel with which Mr. 
Wilkes now flood charged, did not come properly under 
the cognizance of the houfe. If the privileges of the 
peers were violated, or their proceedings arraigned, they 
were competent to the vindication of their own honour. 
For the other libels he has been already expelled. Shall 
