A.D. 1734. TAKES HIS SEAT IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS. 145 As a politician we read hardly anything of Lord Talbot from the time of his appointment as Chancellor. This arises from the profound tranquillity of the times-the masterly policy of Walpole having warded off foreign war, suppressed Jacobitism, and, for a season, paralysed faction. After the tremendous storm excited by the Excise scheme had subsided, the nation was pleased by the marriage of the King's eldest daughter, the Princess Anne, to the Prince of Orange; the apprehension of plots was allayed by Bolingbroke's retirement into France, and for three years nothing more memorable occurred than hopeless motions for the repeal of the Test Act and of the Septennial Act, the passing of the Gin Act, Porteous's riots in Edinburgh, and the blowing up of a little gunpowder in Westminster Hall to frighten the Judges. Lord Mahon says, "It was to stem in some degree the formidable attacks expected in the Upper House on his dismissal of Chesterfield, Clinton, Burlington, Montrose, Marchmont, and Stair, for their opposition to the Excise scheme, that Walpole determined to send there two of his most eminent commoners, the Attorney and Solicitor-General." But for a long time in that assembly hardly any show of opposition appeared. The circumstance of the Prime Minister continuing a commoner— then quite unexampled-diminished the consequence of the Lords, and they were rapidly falling from the palmy state which they had occupied in the beginning of the century, and which, without more energy, I see little prospect of their ever resuming. Lord Talbot's name is seldom mentioned in their deliberations. e A.D. 1734. He took his seat as a Peer on the 17th of January, 1734, being the first day of the seventh session of the seventh parliament of Great Britain. of this ceremony as recorded in the Journals may be amusing: "her tongue is no scandal," and her abuse may be considered a necessary addition to the commendation of others-to make out a perfect character. Pope was wrong in saying that her ruling passion was gratified, for it ever remained craving and insatiable: "From loveless youth to unrespected age, No passion gratified except her rage." Lord Talbot, soon after his appointment, pronounced a decree against her; and she scurrilously abused him to all her correspondents. Thus, in a letter to Lord Marchmont, dated VOL. VI. The account June 11, 1734, writing about election petitions f 9 Parl. Hist. 182. L "The Lord President acquainted the House that his Majesty had been pleased to create Charles Talbot, Esq., Lord Chancellor of Great Britain, a Peer of this realin. Whereupon his Lordship, taking in his hand the purse with the Great Seal, retired to the lower end of the House; and having there put on his robes was introduced between the Lord Harrington and the Lord Delawarr (also in their robes),—the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, Garter King of Arms, the Lord Great Chamberlain, and the Deputy Earl Marshal of England preceding. His Lordship laid down his patent on the Chair of State kneeling; and from thence took and delivered it to the Clerk, who read the same at the table. [The entry, having described the reading of the patent, and the writ, and the taking of the oaths, thus proceeds:] which done, he took his place on the lower end of the Barons' bench; from whence he went to the upper end of the Earls' bench, and sat there as Lord Chancellor, and then returned to the woolsack." g Lord Talbot is mentioned this year as having spoken once, and once only. In consequence of the commencement of hostilities on the continent of Europe, between the Spaniards and the House of Austria, a message was brought down from the King recommending that power should be given to augment the forces, and a motion to this effect was made by the Duke of Newcastle. This being opposed by Lord Carteret, Lord Chesterfield, and Lord Bathurst, the Lord Chancellor left the woolsack and spoke as follows: "The present situation of affairs in Europe is so well known to every noble Lord that it does not require to be detailed by me to justify the course proposed by the Government. Considering the heavy war actually begun, and the different powers already actually engaged in it, there can be no doubt that it may produce imminent dangers to this nation, for which, in prudence, and for the preservation of our own neutrality, we ought to be prepared. By his Majesty's message he asks no powers beyond those already constitutionally vested in him, and the message may be considered only as an application from his Majesty for the advice of his parliament with relation to what may be thought most proper to be done at such a critical juncture. The most dutiful and becoming return we can make, is, in my opinion, the address proposed by the noble Duke. If, without any appeal to parliament, ministers had augmented our forces by sea and land, can there be a doubt that parliament would have approved of what was necessary for our defence, and would have provided for the necessary expense thereby occasioned? If the increased force should be unnecessary, and the expense of it thrown away, there is nothing in the address to justify such mismanagement, and the next parliament will be at full liberty to animadvert on his Majesty's advisers as if no such message had been brought down, and no such ad 8 Lord Hardwicke took his seat as a Peer the same day. A.D. 1735. SPEECH IN SUPPORT OF WARLIKE PREPARATIONS. 147 dress had been voted. As between parliament and the government, the power of censure and of punishment remains untouched. I will grant, my Lords, that by the address proposed the ministers may have a little more credit among the people than otherwise they might have had. I will allow that by the address the honour of parliament will be engaged to provide for the expense to be incurred, whether inevitable or unnecessary. But this is the very reason why I support the course proposed for our adoption. Surely, in our dangerous situation from the disturbed state of Europe, we are not to be left defenceless for fear a bad use should be made of the means granted for our defence. Without confidence, neither the affairs of individuals nor of nations can be conducted. There may be a breach of trust; yet trustees must be appointed. Ministers may be guilty of delinquencies, but you must vest in them power to provide for the public safety, and that power must be increased in proportion to the perils which surround you. His Majesty tells us there is nothing he has more at heart than to see the flame of war extinguished before we are involved in it; and to strengthen his hands for this purpose, nothing can be so effectual as to show to the world the perfect harmony which is subsisting between his Majesty and his parliament. This address will prove to Europe that his Majesty has all the resources of this mighty nation completely at his command, and will enable him to arbitrate irresistibly for the general good. This parliament must very speedily be dissolved, as nearly seven years have expired since it was summoned. Let its last act be to declare that as we are free at home, we are determined to be respected abroad. 'Britons never will be slaves.' This sentiment will be repeated by all the constituent body at the coming elections, and will be the rallying cry of the new House of Commons. When his Majesty is thus seen to be warmly supported by a parliament which is to last seven years, we may rest assured that he will be able to restore tranquillity to the Continent on equitable terms, and that at all events he will effectually provide for British interests, and make the British name respected all over the world." The address was carried by a majority of 101 to 58.h A.D. 1735.. In the following session, the business which seems chiefly to have occupied the Upper House arose out of a complaint respecting intimidation and undue influence in the election of the sixteen peers for Scotland. The Lord Chancellor had to speak frequently on the subject, and to write letters by order of the House to the complainants, who were Scotch Peers; but their petition was at last dismissed, the nomination remaining with the Government, -and the subject was without permanent interest. The proper remedy was pointed out in Lord Sunderland's Peerage Bill,-by giving a certain number of hereditary seats in the House of Lords to h 9 Parl. Hist. 520-559. i Ibid. 720-796. the Scotch Peerage. The only other subject on which the Chancellor is stated to have spoken this session was the quartering of soldiers at elections, and no intelligible account of his speech is preserved. He maintained that there was no law for taking troops from places where parliamentary elections are going forward; that an express law against their being allowed to be present would destroy a useful discretion in cases of necessity; that the difficulties surrounding the subject would for ever prevent legislation upon it; and that the wise course would be to leave all to the Ministers of the Crown upon their parliamentary responsibility.* During the session of 1736, the Lord Chancellor is not mentioned as having spoken once, and the only subjects of debate recorded in the Lords were respecting the collection of Quakers' tithes, and the prevention of smuggling." On the first day of the session of 1737, the Speaker and the Commons having come to the bar, the Lord ChanA.D. 1737. cellor spoke as follows: "In pursuance of the authority given us by his Majesty's Commission under the Great Seal, amongst other things, to declare the causes of holding this parliament, we are, by his Majesty's command, to state to you that his Majesty has been graciously pleased to direct us to acquaint you that he hath seen, with the greatest satisfaction, the unwearied application of this parliament in framing good laws, for advancing the prosperity and securing the welfare of his loving subjects; and that it hath been one of his Majesty's principal cares to enforce them by a due execution, with the strictest regard to the rights and properties of the people, no invasion whereof can with any colour be suggested by the most malicious enemies of the present establishment. Whilst this hath been our condition, his Majesty cannot but observe that it must be matter of the utmost surprise and concern to every true lover of his country, to see the many contrivances and attempts carried on in various shapes, and in different parts of the nation, tumultuously to resist and obstruct the execution of the laws, and to violate the peace of this kingdom. These disturbers of the public repose, conscious that the interests of his Majesty and his people are the same, and of the good harmony which happily subsists between him and his parliament, have levelled their sedition against both, and in their late outrages have either directly opposed, or at least endeavoured to render ineffectual, some acts of the whole legislature. His Majesty, in his great wisdom, thinks it affords a melancholy prospect to consider to what height these audacious practices may rise, if not timely suppressed, and that it deserves no small attention that they may go on to affect private persons in the quiet A.D. 1737. OPPOSES THE "SMUGGLING BILL." 149 enjoyment of their property, as well as the general peace and good order of the whole. His Majesty apprehends it to be unnecessary to enlarge upon a subject of this nature, and therefore hath commanded us barely to mention it to you, who, by the constant tenour of your conduct, have shown that you consider the support of his government as inseparable from the preservation of the public tranquillity and your own safety." This speech referred to riots in London in consequence of the act to check the drinking of gin,-to an insurrection in the West against turnpike gates, to a dispersion of libels in Westminster Hall while the Judges were sitting there by means of an explosion of gunpowder,-and above all, to the murder of Captain Porteous by a general rising of the citizens of Edinburgh. It is a curious fact, that the first measure brought in by the Ministers as a cure for these evils was opposed by Lord Chancellor Talbot, as well as by Lord Chief Justice Hardwicke and several other Peers. This was a bill to prevent smuggling, which contained a clause "subjecting any three persons travelling with arms to the penalty of transportation, on proof by two witnesses that their intention was to assist in the clandestine landing or carrying away prohibited or uncustomed goods." The opposers said, "We have in our laws no such thing as a crime by implication, nor can a malicious intention ever be proved by witnesses. Facts only are admitted to be proved, and from these facts the judge and the jury are to determine with what intention they were committed; but no judge or jury can ever by our laws suppose, much less determine, that an action in itself innocent or indifferent was attended with a criminal and malicious intention. Another security for our liberties is that no subject can be imprisoned unless some felonious and high crime be sworn against him. This, with respect to private men, is the very foundation-stone of all our liberties; and if we remove it, if we but knock off a corner, we may probably overturn the whole fabric. A third guard for our liberties is that right which every subject has, not only to provide himself with arms proper for his defence, but to accustom himself to the use of those arms, and to travel with them wherever he has a mind. But this clause is repugnant to all the maxims of free government. No presumption of a crime can be drawn from the mere wearing of arms, an act not only innocent, but highly commendable, and to admit witnesses to swear that men are armed in order to assist in smuggling,' would be admitting |