"Are these the terms, which men, who are in “earnest, wake ufe of, when the falus reipublica "is at stake I expected other language from "Mr. Wilkes.-Befides my objection in point of "form, I difapprove highly of the meaning of the "fourth article as it ftands. Whenever the queftion fhall be seriously agitated, I will endeavour (and if I live will affuredly attempt it) to con vince the English nation, by arguments to my "understanding unanswerable, that they ought to "infift upon a triennial, and banish the idea of an "annual parliament.

I am con

"vinced that, if fhortening the duration of par"liaments (which in effect is keeping the repre«fentative under the rod of the constituent) be "not made the bafis of our new parliamentary ju"rifprudence, other checks or improvements fig.

nify nothing. On the contrary, if this be made "the foundation, other measures may come in "aid, and, as auxiliaries, be of confiderable ad

vantage. Lord Chatham's project, for instance, "of increafing the number of knights of shires, appears to me admirable. As to cut

ting away the rotten boroughs, I am as much "offended as any man at feeing fo many of them "under the direct influence of the crown, or at "the difpofal of private perfons. Yet I own, "I have both doubts and apprehenfions, in regard

* to

to the remedy you propofe. I shall be charged "perhaps with an unusual want of political intre

pidity, when I honestly confess to you, that I am "ftartled at the idea of fo extensive an amputa"tion. In the first place, I question the power, "de jure, of the legiflature to disfranchise a num"ber of boroughs, upon the general ground of improving the conftitution: There cannot be a doctrine more fatal to the liberty and property

66

we are contending for, than that, which con"founds the idea of a fupreme and an arbitrary "legiflature. I need not point out to you the fa"tal purposes, to which it has been, and may be

applied. If we are fincere in the political creed "we profefs, there are many things, which we "ought to affirm, cannot be done by King, Lords "and Commons. Among thefe I reckon the dif

66

franchising of boroughs with a general view of improvement. I confider it as equivalent to robbing the parties concerned of their freehold, of "their birth-right. I fay, that, although this birth-right may be forfeited, or the exercise of "it fufpended in particular cafes, it cannot be taken away, by a general law, for any real or pretended purpose of improving the conftitution. Suppofing the attempt made, I am perfuaded

་

་

66

you cannot mean that either King, or Lords "should take an active part in it. A bill, which

"only

In

"only touches the reprefentation of the people, "muft originate in the house of commons. "the formation and mode of paffing it, the exclu"five right of the commons must be afferted as fcrupulously as in the cafe of a money-bill. "Now, Sir, I fhould be glad to know by what "kind of reasoning it can be proved, that there is "a power vested in the reprefentative to destroy "his immediate conftituent. From whence could "he poffibly derive it? A courtier, I know, will "be ready to maintain the affirmative. The doc"trine fuits him exactly, because it gives an un"limited operation to the influence of the crown. "But we, Mr. Wilkes, ought to hold a different

language. It is no answer to me to say, that the bill, when it paffes the house of commons, is "the act of the majority, and not the reprefenta"tives of the particular boroughs concerned. If "the majority can disfranchife ten boroughs, why "not twenty, why not the whole kingdom? Why "fhould they not make their own seats in parlia"ment for life? When the feptennial act "paffed, the legislature did what, apparently and palpably, they had no power to do; but they "did more than people in general were aware of: 66 they, in effect, disfranchised the whole kingdom

for four years.

"For

"For argument's fake, I will now fuppofe, "that the expediency of the meafure, and the "power of parliament are unquestionable. Still

you will find an unfurmountable difficulty in the "execution. When all your inftruments of am"putation are prepared, when the unhappy pa"tient lies bound at your feet, without the possi"bility of refiftance, by what infallible rule will "you direct the operation ?-When you propofe "to cut away the rotten parts, can you tell us "what parts are perfectly found?—Are there any "certain limits, in fact or theory, to inform you "at what point you must stop, at what point the "mortification ends. To a man fo capable of ob

fervation and reflection as you are, it is unne"ceffary to fay all that might be faid upon the "fubject. Befides that I approve highly of Lord "Chatham's idea of infusing a portion of new health "into the conftitution to enable it to bear its infir"mities, (a brilliant expreffion, and full of intrin"fic wifdom) other reasons concur in perfuading

me to adopt it. I have no objection, &c."

The man who fairly and completely answers this argument, shall have my thanks and my applaufe. My heart is already with him. I am ready to be converted. I admire his morality, and would gladly fubfcribe to the articles of his faith.Grateful, as I am, to the GOOD BEING, whofe

bounty

bounty has imparted to me this reafoning intellect,. whatever it is, I hold myself proportionably indebted to him, from whofe enlightened understanding another ray of knowledge communicates to mine. But neither thould I think the most exalted faculties of the human mind, a gift worthy of the divinity; nor any affiftance, in the improvement of them, a fubject of gratitude to my fellow creature, if I were not fatisfied, that really to inform the understanding corrects and enlarges the heart.

JUNIUS.

LET