subject, by laying a foundation of impunity for | the greatest offenders. That all the ill consequences, which may at this time attend the delay of the supplies given by the commons, for preserving the public peace, and maintaining the balance of Europe, by supporting our allies against the power of France, are to be imputed to those, who, to procure an indemnity for their own enormous crimes, have used their utmost endeavours to make a breach between the two houses." Answer of the Lords. The lords the same day sent this Answer to the above Message: "The lords do acquaint the commons, that they might have known by the Records of the house of lords, that the lords had proceeded to the Trial of the lord Sommers on Tuesday last, being the day appointed; and the commons not appearing to maintain their Articles against the said lord, the lords had by judgment of their house acquitted him of the Articles of Impeachment against him, exhibited by the house of commons, and all things therein contained, and had dismissed the said Impeachment.And the lords had appointed Monday next for the Trial of the earl of Orford, on which day they would proceed on the said Trial.-The commons still pressing for a committee of both houses, which their lordships could never consent to for the reasons already given, their lordships could infer nothing from their persisting in this demand, but that they never designed to bring any of their Impeachments to a trial. As to the lord Haversham, his Answer was now before the house of commons, and the lords resolved to do justice in that matter." Answer of the Lord Haversham to the Complaint of the Commons.] The same day, the commons had a Copy given them of the lord Haversham's Answer to the Charge against him; viz. "The said lord Haversham, saving to himself all advantages of exception to the sail Charge, and of not being prejudiced by any want of form in this Answer; and also saving to himself all rights and privileges belonging to him as one of the peers of this realm; for Answer to the said Charge, saith, That on the 6th day of June 1701, the commons by a Message sent to the lords, desired a Conference upon their Message to the commons of the 4th of June: In which Conference they proposed to the lords, That a Committee of both houses might be nominated, to consider of the most proper ways and methods of proceeding in the Impeachments of the lords according to the usage of parliaments. That on the 10th of June, the lords desired another Conference with the commons, in which they delivered them their Reasons why they could not agree to the appointing of such a committee; viz. 1. That they could not find, that ever such a Committee was appointed on occasion of Impeachinents for Misdemeanors, and their obligation to be curious in admitting any thing new relating to judicature. 2. That although a Commitice of this nature was agreed to, upon the Impeachments of the earl of Danby, and the five Popish Lords for High-Treason; yet the success in that instance, was not such as should encourage the pursuing of the same method, though in the like case; and that, after so much time spent in the Committee, the disputes were so far from being there adjusted, that they occasioned the abrupt conclusion of a session of parliament. 3. That the methods of proceedings for Misdemeanors are so well settled by the usage of parliament, that no duhculties were likely to happen, nor none had been stated to them; and that all the preliminaries in the Case of Stephen Gaudett, and others, (which was the last instance of Impeachments for Misdemeanors) were easily settled and agreed to, without any such committee. 4. That the Proposal of the commons came so very late, that no other fruit could be expected of such a committee, but the preventing of the Trials during the session.' Whereupon the commons, on the 12th of June, desired of the lords a Free Conference, on the subject matter of the last Conference. That the lords, on the 12th of June, came to two Resolutions in relation to the lords impeached: 1. That no lord of parliament, impeached for high Crimes and Misdemeanors, and coming to his Trial, shail upon his Trial, be without the bar. 2. That no lord of parliament, impeached for high Crimes and Misdemeanors, can be precluded from voting on any occasion, except in his own Trial.' And the lords acquainted the commons with the said two Resolutions; and also that they agreed to a Free Conference with the commons, and appointed the next day. That upon the 30th of June, Mr. Harcourt, one of the managers, began the Free Conference on the part of the commons, and argued upon the four Reasons given by the lords, why they could not agree to the appointing a Committee of both houses; and principally relied upon the instance in the Case of the popish lords, and insisted upon the delay that the not agreeing to the nomination of such a committee would necessarily occasion, whereby the lords Trials, and the justice due to the nation, would be retarded. And departing from the subjectmatter of the said Conference (which was, whether it were requisite to appoint, or not appoint such a Committee) the said manager discoursed upon the latter of the Resolutions of the lords, communicated to the commons, and said, That he wished the lords had sent down their Reasons, as well as their Resolutions; which words seemed to the said lord Haversham, to carry therein an implication, as if the said Resolution could have no reason to justify it. That sir Barth. Shower, another manager for the commons, observed the same method of discourse; and having argued on the lords Reasons, departed from the subject-matter of the Free Conference, and inveighing against the manner of the lords judicature, asserted by their Resolutions, said, 'That it was abhorrent to justice which expressions being foreign (as the said lord Ilaversham apprehended) to the subject-matter of the said Free Conference, which was, whether such Committee of both houses should be appointed or not; the said lord, being appointed by the lords for one of the managers of the said Free Conference on their behalf, in vindication of the honour and justice of the house of peers, and their judicature and resolutions, in answer to what had been said by the managers for the commons, he spoke to the effect following: 6 of it. The commons themselves have made 'this precedent; for in these Impeachments 'they have allowed men, equally concerned in the same facts, to vote in their own house; ' and we have not inade the distinction in ours, 'that some should vote and some not. The lords have so high an opinion of the house of 'commons, that they believe justice shall never 'be made use of as a mask for any design. And therefore give me leave to say, though I am not to argue it, it is to me a plain demonstration, that the commons think those lords innocent; and I think the proposition is un'deniable for when there are several lords in the same circumstances, in the same facts, 'there is no distinction; and the commons 'leave some of these men at the head of af 'chief if they were inclined to it; it looks as if they thought them all innocent. This was a thing I was in hopes I should never have 'heard asserted, when the beginning of it was from the house of commons.' 'Gentlemen, I shall begin what I have to < say, as that worthy member who opened this 'conference, that there is nothing the lords more desire than to keep a good correspondence, which is so necessary to the safety of the na<tion, and the dispatch of public business; and nothing they have more carefully avoided, than what might create a misunderstandingfairs, near the king's person, to do any misbetween the two houses. A greater instance of which could not be given, than the Messages my lords returned to some the commons had sent them up; in which they took care to express themselves so cautiously, that no heat might arise from any expression of theirs. And as to what the worthy mem'bers mentioned, in relation to delay; the re'peated remembrances sent the commons, with relation to the sending up the Articles against the impeached lords, are a sufficient instance how desirous they are that these matters 'should proceed. And the lords have this sa'tisfaction, that it is not on their part that the <Trials are not in a greater forwardness; they 'cannot but look on it as a great hardship, that they should lie under long delays on Impeach'ments. Persons may be incapable; facts may be forgotten: evidences may be laid out of the way; witnesses may die; and 'many other like accidents may happen. The instance the worthy members give of the po'pish lords, as it is a crime of another nature, and not fully to the point, so it seems to make against what it was brought for: for the worthy members say, there was but one of ⚫ the lords brought to justice, though four more (as I take it) were accused. And can any " man believe, that the commons have a mind 'to bring only one of these lords to Trial? It is inconsistent with the opinion that every body must have of their justice. And as to the point of Judicature, it were very hard upon the lords, that no person should be brought to trial, till the judicature of the house be so first. The judicature of the lords is their peculiar, and hath in former ages been sacred with the commons them'selves. And this house, perhaps, hath as ' much reason to be jealous, and careful of it, as any other house ever had; especially when one single precedent is so urged and insisted upon. One thing there is which a worthy 'niember mentioned, though I cannot speak to it at large, because I think myself bound up by the resolutions of the house; yet it must have some answer; that is, as to the lords voting in their own case; it requires an answer, though I cannot enter into the debate 6 6 "The said lord being here interrupted, he desired to be heard out, and that his words might be taken down in writing. But the Managers for the commons broke up, and departed, refusing to hear any explanation. Now the said lord, as to any implicit charge of a design to reflect on, or dishonour the house of commons, denies any such design or intention; having for many years, had the honour to sit in the house of commons, and having ever had an honourable and respectful sense thereof: but the said lord was led to express himself in the manner aforesaid, for the Reasons aforesaid, and takes himself to be justified therein, by the facts and reasons following:-That the nature of that Conference was, that it' should be free; the occasion of it, because either house apprehended the other to be in an error, and the end of it, that each side might urge such facts as are true, and such Reasons as are forcible to convince. That one Article of the Impeachment against John lord Sommers, was, That the Treaty of Partition 1699, was ratified under the Greal Seal, which then was in the custody of the same lord, then lordchancellor of England; that the commons on the 1st of April 1701, Resolved, That the earl of Portland by negotiating and concluding the Treaty of Partition, was guilty of a high crime and misdemeanor; and pursuant thereto, lodged an Impeachment against him in the house of peers; which Vote and Impeachment could not have reference to any Treaty, other than the Treaty of Partition of 1699, the Treaty of 1698 not being before the house of commons, till after the time of that Vote and Impeachment: and yet the earl of Jersey, who then was Secretary of State and a Privy-Counsellor, and actually signed the said Treaty of 1699, as a Plenipotentiary with the lord Port-, land, stands unimpeached, and continues at the head of affairs, being Lord-Chamberlain, near his majesty's person, and his presence and councils, (without complaint :) that the earl of Orford, and the lords Sommers and Hallifax, a just occasion, given in answer to several ex- HAVERSHAM." The Commons refuse to appear at the Earl of Orford's Trial.] June 20. The commons ordered, "That no Member should presume to appear on Monday next, at the pretended Trial of the earl of Orford, upon pain of incurring the utmost displeasure of the house;" and then adjourned to Tuesday morning. But the lords continued sitting, and on the 21st, resolved, That unless the Commons' Charge against the lord Haversham, were presented by them with effect before the end of that session, the lords would declare and adjudge him wholly innocent of the Charge." June 23. It was resolved by the lords "That the Resolutions of the house of commons, in their Votes of the 20th instant, contained most unjust Reflections on the honour and justice of the house of peers, and were contrived to cover their affected and unreasonable delays in prosecuting the impeached lords; and did manifestly tend to the destruction of the Judicature of the lords, to the rendering Trials, and Impeachments impracticable for the future, and to the subverting the constitution of the English government; and therefore, whatever ill consequences might arise, from the so long deferring the Supplies of this year's service, were to be attributed to the fatal council of the putting off the meeting of a parliament so long, and to the unnecessary delays of the house of commons." The Earl of Orford honourably acquitted.] Then the lords adjourned to Westminster-hall, and after two Proclamations made for silence and prosecution, the Articles of Impeachment against Edward earl of Orford were read, and also his lordship's Answer to the said Articles; and after taking the same methods as in the Trial of lord Sommers, his lordship,by unanimous Votes (the lords on the other side withdrawing) was acquitted of the Articles, and the Impeach-lordships have, in a Clause, directed the comment was dismissed. The Impeachments dismissed by the Lords.] June 24, being the last day of the session of this parliament, this Order was made by the lords; "The house of commons not having presented their Charge, which they brought up against John lord Haversham, for Words spoken by him at a Free Conference the 13th instant, the said Charge is hereby dismissed. The earl of Portland being impeached by the house of commons of high Crimes and Misdemeanours, the 1st day of April last, the Impeachment is thereby dismissed, there being no Articles exhibited against him. The house of commons having impeached Charles lord Hallifax of high Crimes and Misdemeanours, on the 15th day of April last, and on the 14th day of this instant June exhibited Articles against him, to which he having answered, and no further Prosecution thereupon, the said Impeachment and Articles are hereby dismissed." same time, their lordships dismissed an old Impeachment against the duke of Leeds. At the Bill for stating the Public Accounts amended by the Lords] The affair of the impeached lords, had so much divided both houses, that the correspondence was almost broken off or interrupted with continual disagreements. Hence the commons having passed a Bill for appointing Commissioners to take, state, and examine the Public Accounts, the lords made some amendinents to it, which the commons would by no means allow; and drew up these Reasons for their disagreement, to be offered to the lords at a Conference. "The commons do disagree to the first Amendment made by the lords, because it is notorious, that many millions of money have been given to his majesty by the commons, for the service of the public, which remain yet unaccounted for, to the great dissatisfaction of the good people of England, who ehearfully contributed to those Supplies. And their lordships first Amendment prevents any account being taken of those Moneys, by the Commissioners appointed by the commons for that purpose.— The commons do disagree to the second Amendment made by the lords, because John Parkburst and John Paschall, esqrs. have for several years been Commissioners of the Prizes taken during the late War, and accountable for great sums of money arising thereby, which ought to be applied to the use of the public. That the said John Parkhurst and John Paschall were frequently pressed to account for the same, by the late Commissioners appointed by act of parliament; but by many artifices and evasions, delayed and avoided giving any such Account as was required by the said Commissioners. That the Clause to which their lordships have disagreed by their second Amendment, requires them to account before the first of Sept. next, but by their lordships Amendment they are exempted from giving any such account, which is highly unreasonable. The commons do disagree to the third Amendment, because their mons to allow and certify a pretended Debt to col. Baldwin Layton; whereas the Disposition as well as granting of money by act of parliament, hath ever been in the house of commons; and this Amendment relating to the disposal of Money, does intrench upon that Right. The commons do disagree to the fourth Amendment, because it is notorious, that Edward Whitaker, mentioned in the rider left out by their lordships, hath by colour of his Impeachment, as Solicitor to the Admiralty, received the sum of 25,000l. and upwards of Public Monies, without producing any just or reasonable Vouchers for the Expence thereof; and therefore ought to be accountable for the same.-And that by reason of their lordships disagreeing to the several parts of this Bill, the Supplies provided by the commons for paying the Arrears of the Army, must of necessity be ineffectual till another session of parliament." The Speaker's Speech to the King on presenting the Money Bills.] To interrupt these fatal Disputes between the two houses, the king without taking any notice of them, thought proper to put an end to this session; and therefore on the 24th, he came to the house of peers, and sent for the commons to attend him; when Mr. Speaker upon presenting the MoneyBills, delivered himself to his majesty in this Speech: "Sir, it is with great joy and satisfaction that I attend your majesty at this time, since your commons have complied with all your majesty was pleased to desire at their meeting. They have passed the Bill of Succession, which hath settled the Crown in a Protestant Line, and continued the liberty of England, which your majesty hath restored and preserved. They have passed a Bill for taking away those Privileges, which might have proved burthensome and oppressive to your subjects. They have given your majesty those Supplies which are more than ever were given in a time of peace, to enable your majesty when you are abroad, to support your Allies, procure either a lasting peace, or to preserve the liberties of Europe by a necessary War." The King's Speech at the close of the Session.] The King, having given his royal assent to the said Bills, made the following Speech to both houses: "My Lords and Gentlemen; The session being now come to a conclusion, I must return you my hearty thanks for the great zeal you have expressed for the public service, and your ready compliance with those things which I recommended to you at the opening of this parliament. And I must thank you, Gentlemen of the House of Commons in particular, both for your dispatch of those necessary Supplies, which you have granted for the public occasions, and for the encouragements you have given me, to enter into Alliances for the preservation of the Liberty of Europe, and the support of the Confederacy; in which, as it shall be my care, not to put the nation to any unnecessary expence, so I make no doubt, that whatsoever shall be done during your recess, for the advantage of the common cause in this matter, will have your approbation at our meeting again in the winter.-My Lords and Gentlemen; I shall conclude with recommending to you all, the discharge of your duties in your respective counties; that the peace of the kingdom may be secured, by your vigilance and care in your several stations." Then the Lord-Keeper, by his majesty's command, prorogued the Parliament until the 7th of August next. The Parliament dissolved.] Thus ended the session of parliament, which had the worst aspect of any that had sat during this reign. On the 28th of June, the king nominated, to be justices in his absence, the Archbishop of Canterbury, sir Nathan Wright, Lord-Keeper, the earl of Pembroke, first Commissioner of the Admiralty, the duke of Devonshire, the earl of Jersey, and the lord Godolphin. Three days after the gentlemen, who were imprisoned for delivering the Kentish Petition, being discharged of course, at the end of the session, were splendidly entertained at Mercers-hall, at the charge of the citizens, being accompanied by several of the nobility and gentlemen of the first rank. They were likewise very honourably received, upon their return into their own country.-On the 1st of July, the king embarked at Margate, and on the Thursday following arrived in the Maese, and went that night to the Hague.He embarked for England towards the beginning of November, and landed at Margate on the 4th of that month; and the first thing, that fell under debate, upon his return, was, whether the Parliament should be continued, or dissolved, and a new one called. The parliament being first prorogued till the 13th of November, a proclamation was published on the 11th of that month for dissolving it, and summoning another to meet at Westminster on the 30th of December. The heats in elections increased with every new summons; and this was thought so critical a conjuncture, that both sides exerted their full strength. Most of the great counties and the chief cities chose men who were zealous for the king and government; but the rotten part of our constitution, as an eminent author stiles the small boroughs, were in many places wrought on to chuse bad men. However, upon the whole, it appeared, that a clear majority was in the king's interests. Tindal. FIRST SESSION OF THE SIXTH AND LAST PAR LIAMENT OF KING WILLIAM III. List of the House of Commons.] December 30, 1701. This day the New Parliament met at Westminster. The following is a List of the Members of the House of Commons: A LIST of the House of Commons, in the Sixth and Aldborough, (Suffolk) William Johnson. Francis Shepherd. James Herbert, Arthur Campaneys, Alexander Popham, Bedford Town, Sir Mich. Wharton, Bewdley, Boroughbridge, Sir John Molesworth, Boston, Sir William York. Sir William Daines, Bridgenorth, Cambridge Town, |