previous to the passing of that act. The permission to make the lodgment in bank no es is entirely referable to the bank restriction act, and any loss which may arise on that account, must be registered amongst the number of good things which that act has occasioned. But, in truth, no evil can arise to a plaintiff from the lodgment being made in bank notes, for he is certainly not bound to accept from the sheriff any thing but specie, and, therefore, should any loss be sustained by the depreciation of bank paper, it must be borne by that officer.-In a practical point of view, perhaps, nothing can be more embarrassing and dangerous than the ambiguous and deceitful way in which bank notes are now considered as a payment. It is true, that a man who tenders the amount of a debt in bank paper cannot be afterwards arrested for that debt, but such tender does not at all prevent the creditor from commencing an action against him; and thus, by this half measure of the Jegislature, a debtor may be put to an immense expense, at the option, and merely to gratify the revenge of an obdurate creditor. He cannot procure specie from the Bank, and his creditor will accept of nothing else. He is perfectly remediless, and has not even the privilege of going to jail; for the creditor will issue his execution against his goods, and not against his person. The creditor will be justified in selling property worth, I will say, £300 in paper money, for £200, or even £100, in order to procure specie: and, indeed, I know not that any extent of loss would make him liable to punishment; and, thus a man might be absoJutely ruined, without any possibility of redress or prevention. Every man who contracts a debt tacitly promises to pay it in legal coin, and if the creditor insist upon such payment, he is strictly right in so doing. It is no fault of his that the government has given any corporate body a right of issuing. paper, without being bound to repay it in specie, and yet have declined to make such paper a legal payment. Should the Bank Paper ever be refused payment, (which no man can tell how soon may be the case) the public iujury would for a time, be incalculable. Each man would then insist upon payment in a coin liable to no depreciation, and no man would be abre so to pay. The trading part of the community must inevitably be rumed, It is true, that upon a representation of these eflects to the legislature, some new regula. tion would be made: but, who does not know, what immense loss and injury might be sustained, before such a measure could pe agreed upon and passed into a law. For

my part, I know of no other measures that are passed quicker than the ordinary forms of practice allow, except acts for the suspenSpion of the habeas corpus act, for the pro-claiming of martial law, and such like popas lar measures. It is now alone, however, that there is an opportunity, in some degree, to avert these alarming consequences. The evils I have described are yet in embryo, and with attention may be crushed in the bed: let them attain a little more strength, and nothing will be able to prevent their grow ing to their full extent. As a trifling flake of snow which, when it first begins to move, might be stopped with a feather, in its progress down the Alps, increases to a size so as to overpower all resistance, and cause the most horrible destruction; so will this system increase, unul it absolutely overwhelms the kingdom in ruin. It must be concluded, that these things are not unknown to minis. ters; and yet, if they are known, why are they not placed beyond the possibility of happening? Is it want of boldness or of sense that induces them to be so indolent and inattentive? God knows, that in some cases they display no want of boldness. How far they may be in want of sense, it is not, perhaps, prudent to say. Time will, however, show, and it seems that to time we must look for all remedy.With regard to the act" for the more effectual preven "tion of frivolous and vexatious arrests and "suits," instead of objecting to it, those who are in any wise acquainted with the evils which it was intended to remedy, will think the original framers and promoters of it entitled to no small share of public praise and approbation.--I am, Sir, &c.

CRITO.

SUMMARY OF POLITICS. MIDDLESEX ELECTION.---The Com mittee of the House of Commons, appointed to examine into, and report upon, the grounds of the petition of certain freeholders of the county of Middlesex, made their report to the House, on the 5th instant, which report places Sir Francis Burdett in that seat, out of which, to the great injury and disgrace of the county, he has been kept during the former part of the session.→→It will be remembered, that there were, upon this subject, two petitions presented to the House of Commons, by the freeholders in the interest of Sir Francis Burdett; but, the petition which produced the report we are now speaking of, was presented by Lord William Russel, on the 25th of January; and, as it should now be read through with attention, it may be useful to remind the

reader, that it is inserted in the present volume, p. 161. That petition states, that Sir Francis Burdett ought to have been returned to serve in this present parliament, and that the Sheriffs did, illegally, wrongfully, wilfully, and falsely declare the majority of numbers to be in favour of Mr. Mainwaring, and illegally, wrongfully, wilfully, and falsely returned Mr. Mainwaring to serve for the said county in the present parliament. This was denied by Mr Mainwaring; and, thereon the parties were at issue before the committee, who were appointed to try the merits of the petition, and whose report thereon was in substance as follows: "That

George Boulton Mainwaring was not duly "elected, and ought not to have been re"turned; that Sir Francis Burdett was

duly elected, and ought to have been re"turned; and, of course, that the petition

against the said return was not frivolous "and vexatious." Thus, then, the House of Commons have decided in favour of the petitioners; and, in that decision, the House has given its sanction to the statement of the petitioners relative to the conduct of the Sheriffs. Nevertheless, as if with a view of censuring and setting at defiance the House of Commons, the writers on the side of the Sheriffs (which writers, be it observed, are all ministerial ones) have most impudently put forward assertion upon assertion, that no blame whatever is imputable to the Sheriffs, for having made a return exactly the contrary of that which they ought to have made. The tone of these writers; the broad hints they throw out against the decision of the committee of the House of Commons; the reluctance with which they acknowledge that Sir Francis Burdett has a majority (for "such we must call it," say they, "the committee has declared in his favour;)" are well worthy of obs: rvation, particularly as they are descr ptive of the dispositions of that mild and obedient race of beings, who have so long been representing their opponents as restless and turbulent men.--In order to form a true judgment relative to the conduct of the Sheriffs, we must look back to what passed during the election, and particularly at and towards the close of the poll

not be entered on the poll books till another day. Thus all those freeholders, who were unable to go to Brentford a second time, and who were put aside in this manner, were entirely deprived of their rights, and Sir Francis Burdett of their suftrages. As he poll drew towards a close, however, this postponing practice became the more dangerous to the interests of Sir Francis Bordett; for, it was evident, that, if the Sheriffs possessed the power and the right to postpone the admitting of as many as they pleased of the votes rendered for Sir Francis on the last day of the election, they did, in reality, pos sess the power and the right of preventing him from being elected, upon that occasion, as a member of parliament for the county of Middlesex. To guard against this, therefore, the counsel of Sir Francis Burdett demanded, on the last day of the poll a categorical answer from the Sheriffs as to the conduct they would ultimately pursue with regard to the postponed votes. Mr. Erskine was written to by these counsel for his opinion upon the subject; and his opinion was, that, if, at the hour appointed by law for the final close of the poll, there should be any votes tendered and not decided upon by the Sheriffs, the Sheriffs would be bound to decide upon them, and to include them (if fit to be included at all) in their counting up, previous to the making of their return to parliament. * In this stage of the proceedings the Sheriffs were formally appealed to by several freeholders in the interest of Sir Francis Burdett; whereupon the Sheriffs declared, "that the votes actually tendered 66 upon the poll-books for the one or the "other candidate should be examined and "decided on, before the declaration of the

It was, during the whole of the election, the constant practice of the committee of Mr. Mainwaring, to object indiscriminately to all votes tendered for Sir Francis Burdett in the afternoon of each day's poll. By this means the examination of these votes, by the Sheriffs, was frequently postponed till it was too late to decide on them that day, or till, by one means or other, the decision upon them was so long deferred, that they could

final numbers, provided the persons making "such tenders came, round to the Sheriff's "box to substantiate their claims." Upon this assurance several freeholders acquiesced, and went round from the poll-books to the Sheriffs' box; and this declaration also satisfied the counsel of Sir Francis Burdett; and, at the close of the poll, supposed, of course, to include the good votes tendered and deferred upon the above declaration of the Sheriffs, there was a majority of ten for Sir Francis Burdett. The universal joy felt. and expressed at this moment will be long remembered by all those who witnessed it. The next day, however (Thursday the 9th of August) a request in writing was made to the Sheriffs, signed by Mr. Mainwaring, Sir W. Gibbons, Mr. Rae, Mr. Mellish, and'

* See this correspondence in the SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS, p. 786.

Mr. John Bowles, demanding that they should declare the numbers as they stood on the poll at three o'clock on Wednesday, and that they should make their return accord ingly; and, to this demand the Sheriffs, notwithstanding their declaration of the day before, yielded, making, accordingly the return which has now been set aside by the House of Commons.--A remark made in the Morning Post at the time is so entirely, to the purpose, that I cannot help transcribing it here. "Without taking up the cause of "either party we cannot help regarding this "decision as extremely irregular. It amounts "to this that the mere objection, however,

66

groundless, precludes the right of vote; "for, if an objection be made, and the de "cision of its force reserved till a period "when there is no authority to decide, then "the objection alone, however groundless, "is decidedly fatal. Tho e persons who "tendered their votes, and who, having a "legal right to vote, were not allowed to give their suffrages, have legal remedies of course; but, speaking in the plain language of the constitution, we would ask, "who can remedy the county for the priva"tion of the representative it would have "preferred?" Indeed this was so plain, that none except those who were eager to procure a false return affected not to perceive it. That wrong was done to Sir Francis Burdett and to the county of Middlesex is a truth that even the writers in the SUN and the TIMES do not now attempt to deny. To whom, then, was this wrong to be ascribed? Where are the injured parties to look for redress? And what are the means, by which such injuries are, in future, to be prevented?'——" The Sheriffs," say the SUN and the TIMES," are perfectly blameless. "The committee of the House of Commons

have passed no censure upon their con"duct." For argument's sake, allow this statement and the intended inference to be correct; allow, that the Sheriffs were so perfectly ignorant of the duties of their office, that they cannot fairly be made to answer for the wrong of which they were the instruments; allow that the counting of the hob-nails before the Cursitor Baron of the Exchequer, was not, with respect to these two Sheriffs, a ceremony entirely useless; allow all this; but, is there, then, no responsibility any where?" The

+ See SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS for 1804, p. 807. All the principal writings, on both sides, relative to the Middlesex Election, will be found in that werk, between p. 648 and p. 846.

"Sheriffs acted by the advice of their assessor." Be it so but this assessor is, surely, the responsible officer, then? "No: he was not Sheriff. He had no power. "He merely gave his opinion." Was bis, opinion binding on the Sheriffs, or was it not? If it was, he was the real possessor-of the power, and, of course, is responsible for the wrong; if it was not, the Sheriffs acted from their own free-will, and therefore theirs is the responsibility.--If, by having recourse to the advice of their assessor, or any other counsellor, the returning officers at elections get rid of all the responsibility attached to a false return; and if, by such a course of proceeding, responsibily is nowhere to be found, what remedy can either. the electors or the elected have against the wrongs that such officers may do? What security has the parliament against the intrusion of persons having no right to sit ? "The House, by hearing and trying pet"tions will set false returns aside, as it has "done in the present instance." But, is this enough? To say nothing about the probable conduct of a committee which should be in whole, or in part, composed of mem bers seated by false returns, which sort of composition would frequently be met with, were the House once to adopt the monstrous doctrine of the irresponsibility of returning officers; to say nothing about this, is it a sufficient remedy to the wronged `member and his constituents, that he is, after several months, perhaps after a whole session of two, at last seated where he ought to have been seated from the moment the election was ended? Can any one discover a remedy here? Can he discover that redress, which the law invariably supposes to be provided for wrong done, either to the community, to bodies of men, or individuals? Besides, can the enjoyment of the right, even for the remaining part of the session, be obtained for nothing for-merely petitioning? Is not every application of this sort unavoidably attend ed with great uneasiness, trouble, and cost? Must not false returns, therefore, remain unimpeached, whenever the wronged party is destitute of great pecuniary means? And, if there be, at last, no responsibility; nothing effectually to deter retorning officers from making false returns; if the law has, in such cases, no power to protect injured indigence against oppressive.opulence; is it not evident, that the real question at an election is, not whether a candidate has a majority of votes, but whether he has a purse sufficient, either to gain the friendship or to defeat the enmity of the officer empowered to make the return?The Sheriffs of

Middlesex have escaped upon the ground of an error in judgment; that is to say, profound ignorance of their duty. But, was the assessor equally ignorant? And, there is this awkward circumstance besides, that the Sheriffs finally did that which, the day before, they had declared their intention not to do. Far be it from me, however, to attempt to weaken the plea which has been made in their favour. I sincerely believe it to be well-founded; nor do I think, with some persons, that it can fairly be brought forward as an objection to Mr. Sheriff SHAW's pretensions to the offices of Lord Mayor and of East India Director, offices for which that gentleman appears to be, both by talents and disposition, eminently qualified. May London, while it pursues its present conduct, always have such magistrates; and may "our "Empire in the East" always have such directors!I should now make some remarks upon several of the publications that were made against the claims of Sir Francis Burdett, at and since the close of the election; and I should also state, more at large than I have hitherto found an opportunity for, the reasons on which I found the sincere desire which i entertain always to see Sir Francis Burdett a member of Parliament. This, however, shall be done the first op portunity that offers; and, in the mean time, it is not too much to ask of those hirelings who abused every one that attempted to assert the claims of Sir Francis Burdett; it is not, I think, now too much to ask them to confess that, thus far, at least, they were base calumniators.--Before I dismiss this subject, even for the present, I cannot help reminding the reader, that there is another petition from the freeholders in the interest of Sir Francis Burdett; and, that this petition rests upon grounds somewhat singular. The petitioners assert that Mr. Mainwaring, the sitting member, is not duly qualified; for that, he has not, they say, the qualification in point of property required by the law; and, that, as eldest son or heir apparent of a person duly qualified, be himself is not duly qualified, because, say they, he is "not the eldest son or heir apparent of any person so qualified as aforesaid to serve as "knight of the shire."* Now, whether this allegation be well-founded, is more than would be proper here to say, in the present state of the proceedings; but, it is by no means unfair to presume, that, as the House of Commons have proved one of the petitions of these freeholders to be well-founded, the

"

* See the petition in p. 164 of the present volume.

other is not entirely unfounded. What the petitioners mean, when they say, that Mr. George Boulton Mainwaring is "not the "eldest son or heir apparent of any person" duly qualified to be a knight of the shire; what they mean here one cannot very clearly perceive. Do they mean, that Mr. Wil liam Mainwaring, who has, till lately, been a knight of the shire ever since the auspicious dawn of the Pitt administration: do they mean that this gentleman, who, dislodged the father of Mr. Byng, is not, in point of property, duly qualified to be a knight of the shire? Or, do they mean to assert, that Mr. George Boulton Mainwaring is not the son of Mr. William Mainwaring? Or, do they mean to say that there is a son of Mr. William Mainwaring older than Mr. George Boulton Mainwaring? Be their meaning what it may, however, their words have thrown the Saints" into the utmost consternation. The whole congregation are running about squalling like scalded cats, biting themselves and each other. They have the prudence, indeed, to confine their clamours to their holes. In public they say nothing. They take special care never event to mention this second petition in public. All their prints are as mute as fishes upon the subject. They will, I imagine, do very well to continue mute; or they will make some of their good credulous friends appear consummately ridiculous. They may rail against the petitioners as long as they please; they may cry out indelicacy and cruelty; but, they will cry to no purpose; for, it will occur to every one to ask: "who threw the first stone?" Their preter sion is, that they have a right to rip up every thing against their opponents, private as well as public, and that those opponents have no right to retaliate, no, not even for the purpose of obtaining justice; but, the friends of Sir Francis Burdett do not admit of this insolent pretension, and they have acted and are acting accordingly.

SUBSIDIES. If the appearance of things upon the continent is not deceptious, Mr. Pitt's 5 millions, voted for the purpose of foreign subsidies, will not be wanted. To answer any good purpose, Austria or Prussia must take a part of it; but, if we may judge from the present apparent disposition of those powers, they will not take it from us. The remarks, upon this subject, contained in the Moniteur of the 1st instant will not in

form us what the French government think; but, they will inform us what they wish the world to think; they will inform us what are the representations that the French di plomatic agents are making upon this head,

and will enable us, in some degree, to determine what our conduct ought to be, in order to counteract those representations. "Mr. Pitt had no occasion," says the Moniteur, "for the vote of five millions. It has <been well known for these two years, that "if there be a prince so much the enemy of "his house, his throne, and his people, to "wish to sell his repose, the future destinies "of his family, and the blood of his subjects,

England is ready to pay him for them, with that gold acquired by monopoly, at "the expense of all the people of Europe. "The English government presents to the "world the odious spectacle of the most "profound immorality. Its agents, with "their purses in their hands, pervade every

cabinet, and the powers on every side reject with horror the money and the cor"ruption which can produce nothing but misfortune and remorse. That Eugland "is disposed to furnish several hundreds of millions to the powers that would renew "the struggle, is a known truth, which it was not necessary to proclaim anew. But what Mr. Pitt's vote manifests with equal clearness, is that state of blindness which does not permit him to see that Europe "wishes for repose; and that if those who "seek to plunge her again into a sea of doubt "and uncertainty, should be overthrown in "their turn, they would fall amidst the ac"clamations of all nations.--Money is "useful to coalitions-we are not ignorant "of it; but it is not with money that coalitions are made. Which is there of the great powers of Europe that does not spend "in an active campaign double or treble "what you can offer it? It spends besides "the blood of its subjects; but that element "never enters into your calculations.---It

26

advantage, that we produce allies. That "is not your custom, your only policy, the great Frederick said so long since, is to "knock, purse in hand, at every door. But "the fatal effects of that policy have been "demonstrated by experience; keep your "gold then; and if you be animated "by the interest of your country, make <6 peace, and assume, in peace, moderate principles. You will have time to pay your debt, and to insure yourselves in the possession of those immense riches you are accumulating, of those immense In"dies which groan under your dominion.

66

The first steps and advances towards peace were made to you, and how did

you reply to them? Ey placing at the "opening of Parliament, invectives in the

mouth of your Sovereign, by violating "the secret of negotiations; which has "clearly proved that you intended they "should be ineffectual."-As for “in"vectives," one would think, that the French might be silent. But, this is their way; and they well know, that, upon the continent, we cannot reply to them. The violation of the "secrets of neutrality," of which they complain, they have no right to complain of; nor, at the bottom of their hearts, do they complain; for, it was the very thing they wanted our ministers to do, in order to afford them a plau. sible pretext for publishing Napoleon's letter to the King, and for making all those showy professions, which they have since made, in their several addresses and answers to one another, which have, doubtless, produced a most powerful prejudice in their favour. This it was easy to foresee; and, therefore, the pretext should not have been afforded them.It is, indeed, true, that more money will never purchase sincere and efficient allies. Allies are to be gained, as this writer says, by succour ing our friends in distress, and by making sacrifices for them. Just the contrary of this conduct we fully exhibited at Amiens, of which the King of Sardinia and the Royalists of La Vendee will long be remembered as a melancholy proof, ———— Mr. Johnstone objected, the other day, to the additional duty upon salt; because its produce was destined to defray the interest of the loan made for subsidies, which subsidies, he said, would be of no service to the country. A very good objection to the tax, or to any other tax to the same amount; but, I think, a better would have been, that the produce of this tax went towards making up the six millions a year which are paid out of the taxes to the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund, which fund might stop during the war; for, it must be allowed to be perfectly ridiculous, to raise six millions in the year to enable commissioners to lessen the quantity of stock, and, in that same year, to augment that stock by a loan of six millions. Why not, all the time we are borrowing with one hand, hold the other hand still? What is the use of buying up a million's worth of stock in the morning, and creating another million's worth in the afternoon? I can see no end that it can answer, except that of making a good job for those persons, who are employed in the buying and selling. This, therefore, would be the ground of