try how far it was practicable to carry the licen-tiousness of writing under the pretext of exercifing the liberty of the prefs. A warrant was iffued under the hand and feal of Lord Halifax, directed to certain of his Majesty's messengers in the usual official form, commanding them to apprehend the authors, printers, and publishers of that feditious and treasonable paper.

On the 29th of April, 1763, late at night, the meffengers entered the house of Mr. Wilkes, and produced their warrant, with which, on account of the general terms in which it was drawn, he abfolutely refused compliance; but on their return the next morning, he was compelled to accompany them to the office of the Secretary of State, whence he was committed close prisoner to the Tower, his papers being previously seized and fealed, and all accefs to his perfon strictly prohibited. Application being made to the Court of Common Pleas for an habeas corpus, a writ was accordingly iffued, directed to the Conftable of the Tower, in confequence of which, Mr. Wilkes was brought up the next day to Weftminster Hall; and the cafe being new and important, he was, after the pleadings were finished, remanded till Friday May 6, that the Judges might have leisure to form their opinion. On that day being again brought before them, Lord Chief Justice Pratt, afterwards created Lord Camden, a firm

and

He

and invariable friend to constitutional liberty, proceeded to give the opinion of the Court. declared, as to the leading points involved in this complex question, the commitment of Mr. Wilkes to be not in itself illegal, being juftified by numerous precedents; and though in ftrict contemplation of law the warrant of the Secretary of State was not of fuperior force to that of a Justice of Peace-where a combination of circumftances gave a ftrong fufpicion of facts incompatible with the public fafety, he was fupported in the commitment even without receiving any particular information for the foundation of the charge. As to the fecond objection, the Court was of opinion, that there was no neceffity for the fpecification of thofe particular paffages in the 45th number of The North Briton, which had been deemed a libel. The paper did not, at that time, come under the cognizance of the Court, nor could it without the affiftance of a Jury. As to the third head, the Chief Juftice admitted, that the privilege of Parliament was violated in the perfon of Mr. Wilkes-for the privilege of Parliament could be forfeited only by treafon, felony, or breach of the peace; but Mr. Wilkes ftood accufed only of writing a libel, which did not come within that defcription. At moft, it had but a tendency to difturb the peace, and this was not sufficient to deftroy the privilege of a Member of Parliament.

The

The Court then discharged Mr. Wilkes, against whom nevertheless a profecution was immediately commenced by the Attorney General; and he was at the fame time, by an official notice from the Secretary of State to Lord Temple, Lord Lieutenant of the County of Bucks, difiniffed from his military command as Colonel of the Buckinghamfhire militia; and Lord Temple was himself in a fhort time difmiffed from his lieutenancy, to make room for Lord Le Despencer, late Sir Francis Dashwood.

Upon the meeting of Parliament, November 15th, 1763, his Majefty, in his fpeech from the throne, exhorted the two Houfes" to cultivate the arts of peace; to employ their utmost attention to the discharge of the heavy debts contracted in the late war :-he recommended to them the care and fupport of the fleet; and towards the clofe of the fpeech he urged them to domeftic union, and that they would difcourage that licentious fpirit which is repugnant to the true principles of liberty and of our happy Conftitution." Before the King's fpeech could be reported to the Houfe, the Minifter, Mr. Grenville, knowing the intention of Mr. Wilkes to prefer a formal complaint of the breach of privilege committed in his perfon, declared, that he had a meffage to deliver from the King. The message being read, imported, "that his Majesty having re

ceived information, that John Wilkes, Efq. a Member of that Houfe, was the author of a moft feditious and dangerous libel, he had caufed the faid John Wilkes, Efq. to be apprehended and fecured, in order to take his trial in due courfe of law. And Mr. Wilkes having been discharged out of cuftody by the Court of Common Pleas, on account of his privilege as a Member of that House, and having fince refused to answer to an information filed against him by his Majesty's AttorneyGeneral; his Majefty, defirous to fhow all poffiblè attention to the privileges of the House of Commons, and at the fame time folicitous not to fuffer the public juftice of the kingdom to be eluded, had chofen to direct the faid libel, and alfo copies of the examinations upon which Mr. Wilkes was apprehended and secured, to be laid before them :" and the Minister then delivered the papers in at the table. On this a violent debate arofe; and it was urged in extenuation of the offence of Mr. Wilkes, that no greater liberties had been taken by the author of this obnoxious paper than had been common on former occafions of the fame kind; that the speech of the King had never been confidered in any other light than as that of the Minifter, and had always been treated with equal freedom. But the House, most unwifely making itself a principal in the quarrel, and entering with violence into this vexatious

and

and perplexing business, voted by a great majo rity, "that THE NORTH BRITON, No. 45, is a falfe, fcandalous, and feditious libel, manifeftly tending to alienate the affections of the people from his Majefty, and to excite them to traitorous infurrections," and ordered it to be burnt by the common hangman. Thus was this question, fo trivial and infignificant in its origin, fwelled to vaft and national importance. No legal conviction having as yet taken place, Mr. Wilkes now made his complaint to the Houfe, of breach of privilege by the imprisonment of his perfon, the plunder of his houfe, the feizure of his papers, and the ferving him with a fubpoena upon an information in the Court of King's Bench. The complaint being confeffedly perfectly regular, it was refolved to take it into confideration on the 17th. In the interim, Mr. Wilkes in a duel fought with Mr. Martin, late Secretary of the Treasury and Member for Camelford, from whom he had received a challenge, in refentment of the freedom taken with his character in a former number of The North Briton, being dangerously wounded, was unable to appear in his place on the day appointed, and the confideration of the queftion was adjourned.

On the 23d of November, however, the deliberations on his Majefty's meffage being refumed, the House refolved, by a majority of 125, in direct

contra