Court broke up. The controversy respecting the rights of juries was not settled till the passing of Mr. Fox's Libel Bill in 1792; but, after this expression of public feeling, the practice of requiring persons summoned to the bar for breach of privilege to fall down on their knees was discontinued by both Houses of Parliament.*

For several years Pratt went on steadily in the ordinary progress of a rising lawyer. Without a silk gown, he was now one of the leaders of the Western Circuit, and, being considered peculiarly well read in parliamentary law, he was the favourite in all cases of a political aspect. He had a great share of election business before the House of Commons, which for the present he preferred to a seat in that assembly.

A.D. 1755.

From some cause not explained (some uncharitably said from the apprehension that he might rival the Honourable C. Yorke, now making a distinguished figure at the bar) he was not a favourite with the Chancellor, but he was at last made a King's Counsel, upon a report which he never authorised, that he intended permanently to practise in the Court of King's Bench. When with his silk gown he went over to the Court of Chancery, as eminent counsel then sometimes did, and he was actually beginning to interfere with Charles Yorke, he was treated with much civility, but with marked disregard, by Lord Hardwicke, who plainly, though not tangibly, showed that he never listened to any thing which Pratt said.m

I do not find that he attached himself to any particular section in politics, but he was on a footing of familiar intimacy with the great Whig chiefs, particularly with his old schoolfellow Pitt, who was in the habit of consulting him respecting questions of a legal or constitutional nature which from time to time arose.

He was likewise in the constant habit of associating with artists and men of letters. Although he did not yet enjoy the sweets of domestic life, this must have been an agreeable portion of his existence, for, free from the anxieties of office, he had achieved an enviable station in society, the pleasures of which were enhanced by recollecting the despair into which he had formerly been plunged; he was courted by friends, and

i 18 St. Tr. 1203-1230.

k On the trial of a peer for felony it is still put down in the programme, that is, to kneel when arraigned:" but this ceremony is not insisted on in practice.

m On the authority of Sir James Mansfield, from the relation of Lord Camden himself. He added, that "Lord Mansfield so enlarged the practice of K. B. that counsel did not leave his Court."

A.D. 1757.

ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND M.P. FOR DOWNTON.

361

respected by opponents; highly satisfied with the present, he had brilliant prospects before him. The disgrace brought upon the country by the imbecility of the Government might disquiet him; but his solicitude was mitigated by the consideration that this Government was becoming daily more unpopular, and that it might be replaced by one patriotic and powerful, in which he himself might be called to take a part.

At last Mr. Pitt was at the head of affairs with dictatorial

authority. Resolved, both on public and private July, 1757. grounds, that his old Etonian friend should now be provided for, he thought it might be too strong a measure at once to give the Great Seal to a man at the bar, who had never been a law officer of the Crown, nor had sat in parliament; but he declared that Pratt should be Attorney-General in the place of Sir Robert Henley, who was to be made Lord Keeper. Against this arrangement Charles Yorke, who had been appointed Solicitor-General the November preceding, and whose father was mainly instrumental in constructing the new ministry, strongly protested, as derogatory to his rights and his dignity; but Pitt was firm, maintaining that, from standing at the bar and merit, Pratt ought long ago to have been raised to the honours of the profession. Yorke, although in a manner very ungracious, and although still retaining a grudge against Pratt for this supposed slight, agreed to serve under him as Solicitor.-Mr. Attorney received the honour of knighthood.

In those days the law officers of the Crown had no anxiety about a seat in parliament; they were not driven to canvass popular constituencies, with the danger of being thrown out, and the certainty of a large hole being made in their official earnings. Sir Charles Pratt was put in for the close borough of Downton, which he continued to represent without trouble or expense till he was made Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas.

He now flourished in the Court of Chancery, and he was an overmatch for the heavy Equity pleaders who for twenty years had been sleeping over Exceptions" and "Bills of Revival."

To share his prosperity and to solace his private hours, being too much occupied to go into gay company, he, though on

n During the four years that he afterwards practised in this Court, there is hardly a reported case in which his name is not mention

66

ed as counsel.-See Eden's Rep., temp. Northington.

the shady side of forty," resolved to take a wife. The courtships of some of my Chancellors have been amusing; but, having to relate, not to invent, I can only say of this union (which I believe to have been highly prudent and respectable, but quite unromantic), that the lady of his choice was Elizabeth, daughter and coheir of Nicholas Jefferys, Esq., of Brecknock Priory, who brought considerable wealth into the family, and in compliment to whom one of its titles was afterwards selected. They are said to have lived together in harmony and happiness; but throughout the whole of Lord Camden's career we have to regret that very few personal or private anecdotes of him have been handed down to us. We inust be contented with viewing him on the stage of public life.

It is a curious fact that, although he was afterwards such a distinguished orator in the House of Lords, during the whole time that he sat in the House of Commons his name is not once mentioned in the printed parliamentary debates. This arises partly from the very imperfect record we have of the proceedings of the legislature during this period of our history, there being only one octavo volume for the twelve years from 1753 to 1765,-partly from the cessation of factious strife during Mr. Pitt's brilliant administration, and partly from Pratt's style of speaking being rather too calm and ratiocinative for the taste of the Lower House, so that while he remained there he was merely considered "par negotiis, neque supra,"-equal to carrying through the law business of the Government, and fit for nothing more,-no one dreaming that hereafter he was to rival Chatham, and that Mansfield was to quail under him.

1761.

The only occasion when he seems to have attracted much A.D. 1757 notice as a representative of the people was in bringing forward the excellent bill-which unfortunately proved abortive-for amending the "Habeas Corpus Act," in consequence of a decision that it did not apply, unless where there was a charge of crime-so that in many instances persons illegally deprived of their liberty by an agent of the Crown could not have the benefit of it. Horace Walpole tells us, that "the Attorney-General declared himself for the utmost latitude of the habeas corpus," and adds, that "it reflected no small honour on him, that the first advocate of the Crown should appear as the first champion against prerogative." The bill having easily passed the Commons, where it was warmly

A.D. 1758.

supported by Pitt, was (as I have had occasion to mention elsewhere) rejected by the Lords, in deference to the opinion of the "law Lords," who then opposed all improvement, and likewise to gratify the strong prejudices of the King, who had openly declared against it, and who, throughout the whole course of his reign, most conscientiously and zealously opposed every measure, domestic or colonial, that had in it the slightest tincture of liberality."

A.D. 1758.

Pratt, while Attorney-General, conducted two government prosecutions, still professing and acting upon the great principles of justice for which he had so boldly struggled when defending those who had been prosecuted by his predecessors. The first was against Dr. Hensey for high treason, in corresponding with the King's enemies and inviting them to invade the kingdom. The trial took place at the bar of the Court of King's Bench, before Lord Mansfield and the other Judges of that Court. Mr. Attorney, in opening the case to the jury, having read several letters which had been written by the prisoner to the French Government during the war, and which he contended were treasonable, said

"These letters, and translations of them, being laid before you, you, gentlemen, will be proper judges of their destructive tendency; indeed (under the sufferance of the Court) you are the only judges of this fact. Proof being given that they are in the handwriting of the prisoner, and were sent off by him, if you are of opinion, from a fair construction of their contents, that his object was to solicit

° Ante, p. 278.

P It is a curious fact, that, with regard to law reform, the two Houses have recently changed characters. I will not presume to praise the assembly to which I have now the honour to belong, as far as politics may be concerned; but in jurisprudential legislation, I say boldly, they are greatly in advance of the other House—which has become the great obstacle to improvement. I will give a few instances.

The late Libel Bill (generally called in Westminster Hall "Lord Campbell's Libel Bill"), which originated in the House of Lords, was deprived in the House of Commons of some of its most important clauses for the protection of private character and the liberty of the press. In the session of 1845 the House of Commons threw out bills which, being approved of by the Lord Chancellor and all the law Lords, had passed the House

of Lords unanimously-1. To abolish "Deodands," that disgraceful remnant of superstition and barbarism; 2. To allow a compensation to be obtained by action where a pecuniary loss is sustained from death caused by the negligence of another, so that a railway company might be compelled to make some provision for orphans whose father has been killed by their default; and, 3. To permit actions to be commenced against persons who, having contracted debts in England or Ireland, have gone abroad to defraud their creditors, and there spend the funds remitted to them from home,-which at present the law cannot touch.-(1846.) In the Session of 1847 I was able to carry Bills 1 and 2; but Bill 3, chiefly meant for the benefit of Ireland, is considered by Irish Members derogatory to the diguity of that country.-(1849.)

and to encourage the landing of a French army on our shore, then he is guilty of the crime laid to his charge by this indictment; but otherwise it will be your duty to acquit him, whatever opinion you may form of his character, and whatever suspicions you may entertain of his conduct."

The jury having found a verdict of "guilty," the AttorneyGeneral consented that the day for the execution should be appointed at the distance of one month. The prisoner, after being several times respited, was finally pardoned-a striking instance of the clemency of the Government, and a strong contrast with the execution of Byng under the late administration."

The only ex officio information which he filed was against Dr. Shebbeare for a most seditious and dangerous publication, entitled "A Letter to the People of England," containing direct incentives to insurrection. Horne Tooke, no enemy to the liberty of the press, approves of the prosecution, saying, that "if ever there was an infamous libel against the Government, surely it was that." The trial came on in Westminster Hall before Lord Mansfield. In opening the case to the jury, the Attorney, although using rather quieter language, adhered to the doctrine for which he had struggled with such brilliant success in his first great speech in the King v. Owen, and expressly told the jury that he desired them, besides the evidence of publication, and the innuendoes, to consider the language of the libel, and not to find a verdict for the Crown unless they were convinced that it had a direct tendency to a subversion of the public tranquillity-from which they might fairly infer that the defendant published it "maliciously and seditiously," as charged in the information; but he added, that " he did not wish for a conviction if any man in the world could entertain a doubt of the defendant's guilt." At the distance of many years, he stated with pride, in his speech in the House of Lords on Fox's Libel Bill, the marked manner in which he had intimated his opinion to all the world, "that the criminality of the alleged libel was a question of fact with which the Court had no concern."

Pratt conducted with the same propriety the prosecution of Lord Ferrers for murder before the House of Lords.

A.D. 1760. Thus he opened, with touching simplicity and candour:-" My Lords, as I never thought it my duty in any

4 19 St. Tr. 1342-1389.

20 St. Tr. 708.

Annual Register, 1758.