fuch goods fhall be landed, fhall be brought within eighteen months from the date of fuch bond for goods entered for Great Britain or Ireland, or within fix months for goods entered for the British Weft-India iflands; or fuch bond may be difcharged by proof on oath, that fuch goods were taken or perifhed at fea, That, after fuch bond is given, the Collector, &c. fhall deliver to the Mafter of the fhip, &c. a certificate, fpecifying the quantity and fpecies of the goods, with the marks and numbers, and the port for which they are entered; and that all goods taken on board before bond given, or without fuch certificates, fhall be forfeited, with the fhips, guns,

&c.

That, after September 1, 1775, no goods (except horfes, victuals, and linen cloth, the produce, &c. of Ireland, directly from thence) fhall be imported into the Provinces, unless from Great Britain, and carried directly from thence, upon forfeiture thereof, together with the fhip in which they fhall be laden; and be liable to feizure on arriving within two leagues of any of the faid Provinces, the Mafter of the fhip, &c. not producing a clearance from the Collector, &c. that the faid goods were laden in Great Britain:

But that this Act shall not extend to goods, &c. for the ufe of his Majefty's Whips of war, forts, garrifons, &c. nor hinder the lawful importation of goods into the Provinces from the British Weft I dian iflands, being the growth, &c. thereof.

That, after July 20, 1775, all Brififh fhip &c. not belonging to Great Britain or Ireland, or the islands of Gu ernfey, Jersey, Sark, Alderney, or Man, fifhing on the banks of Newfoundland, the Coast of Labrador, in the Gulph of St. Lawrence, on the Coast of Cape Breton, or Nova Scotia, or any other part of North-America, or having on board materials for fuch fishery, fhall be forfeited, together with their guns, furniture, &c. unlet the Master shall produce a certificate from a Governor or Commander in chief of one of the Britifh American Colonies, that fuch fhip, &c. was duly cleare from fuch Colony, in order to proceed on faid fishery; and the Commanders of his Majefty's fhips are impowered to fearch all hips carrying on the faid fifheries, and to feize fuch as fhall not have fuch certificates:

That this A&t fhall not extend to ships, &c. fitted or cleared out from the faid Colonies before June 1, 1775, for the

Whale-fifhery only, and fishing within the limits aforefaid, between June 1 and November 1, 1775, not carrying, or having on board materials for any other fishery; nor to affect hips, &c. belong ing to the island of Nantucket, cleared out for the Whale-fifhery only, if cleared out before June 1, 1775; or if the Matter of fuch fhip, &c. fhall produce a certificate from the Governor, or Commander in chief of Maffachufett's-Bay, that fuch fhip, &c. is, and was before March 25, 1775, the intire property of his Majefty's fubjects of the faid ifland, and was cleared out with materials to proceed on the faid fishery; nor hips, &c. belonging to the townships of Marfhfield and Scituate, employed in the mackarel, fhad, and alewife fifheries only, the Mafters of fuch fhips producing a fimilar certificate:

That the river of St. Croix, which empties itself into Paffamaquada-Bay, fall be deemed the boundary between Maffachufett's-Bay and Nova-Scotia for the purpose of this Act

That, whenever it thall appear to the Governor or Commander in chief, and the majority of the Council of NewHampshire or Maffachufett's, Bay, that peace is fo far rettored in any Province, that trade may be carried on without interruption, he fhall notify the fame by proclamation; and all Officers, &c. are required to pay due obedience thereto :

That the Governor, or Commander in chief, with the advice of the Council of Maffachusett's-Bay, on application in behalf of Connecticut, Rhode-island, or Providence Plantation, fhall iffue the fame proclamation in regard to the Colony fo applying:

But that fuch proclamations shall not extend to discharge any proceedings upon any feizure made, or profecutions commenced, before the iffuing fuch proclamations:

That perfons giving falfe certificates, &c. or counterfeiting the fame, fhall forfeit 500l. and be rendered incapable of ferving his Majesty in any office whatfoever:

That the forfeitures, &c. of this Act fhall be profecuted and applied as thofe inflicted by any other Acts, relating to the trade and revenue of America, are directed to be by the Acts paffed in the fourth and eighth years of his prefent Majefty, refpecting the affairs of Ame

rica:

And that perfons fued for any thing done in pursuance of this act may plead the general iffue, and recover treble cofts. 002 Abfirad

Parliament, continued from Page 137.

Tuesday, Feb. 21.

commerce of

Jerfey, Pennfylvania, Maryland, Virginia, and South Carolina to Great Britain, Ireland, and the British islands in the Weft-Indies, &c. differs from that for reftraining the trade and commerce of Maffachufett's-Bay, only in the following particulars, viz,

ift. The ift of July, which is the day fixed by the Maffachufett's- Bay Act, after which no goods, enumerated in the A& 12 Car. II, are to be brought into any other British Colony, or into Great Britain, and after which no other goods of the manufacture of the Colonies mentioned are to be tranfported to any other place, is by this Act fixed to the 20th of the faid month.

2. The period for giving bond for landing goods, laden on board any veffel, either in Great Britain, or the British Weft India iflands, is by this Act fixed to the 20th of July.

3. No goods to be shipped from the counties of Newcastle, Kent, or Suffex on Delaware, in North-America, to any other place than Great Britain or Ireland, or the British Islands in the WeftIndies, till oath or affirmation be made that the faid goods are the product of one of the faid counties, and a certificate granted from the Collector or other proper Officer of the Customs, for that purpofe; on failure of complying herewith, fhip and goods to be forfeited.

4. And, laftly, all the claufes in the Maffachufett's-Bay Act, relating to the Whale and Newfoundland fisheries, are omitted in this.

Drefs of the Month, as established at St. James's and in Tavistock-fireet.

FULL

ULL DRESS.-Polonefe facques, with puckered gaufe petticoats, Ita lian flowers and taffels; deep ruffles; French tuckers; fly caps, and lappets, with feather flowers in the hair; the hair dreffed in curls very wide and high.

UNDRESS.- Polonese night gowns, with puckered Perfian petticoats fringed, and taffels; joining mignionette aprons with long double ruffles; French caps; fine chip hats, ornamented with flowers and blond; fcarf cloaks, trimmed with very deep laces, drawn up with taffels; embroidered fhauls; and Bath Bonnets.

to

his motion regarding the Middlefex election; and, after taxing the last Parliament with a flagrant abuse of their trust, and giving a narrative of the treatment he had met with from Administration, with equal fpirit and candour, he proceeded in these words:

The first motion I intend is, "that the refolution of this House of the 17th of February, 1 769," That John Wilkes, Efquire, having been, in this feflion of Parliament, expelled this House, was, and Is, incapable of being elected a Member to ferve in this present Parliament,' "be expunged from the Journals of this House, as being fubverfive of the rights of the whole body of Electors of this kingdom." This I hold of neceffity to restore the Conftitution, which that refolution tears up by the roots. I shall then, if I fucceed, proceed to the other motion, That all the declarations, orders, and refolutions of this House, refpecting the election of John Wilkes, Efquire, for the county of Middlefex as a void election, the due and legal election of Henry Lawes Luttrel, Efquire, into the laft Parliament, for the county of Middlefex, and the incapacity of Joha Wilkes, Efquire, to be elected a Member to serve in the faid Parliament, b expunged from the Journals of this Houfe, as being fubverfive of the rights of the whole body of Electors of this kingdom."

Few,'

uncontrouled, admitting of no restrictions, but the law of the land, to which King and Lords are equally fubject, and what must arise from the nature of the truft. A Peer of Parliament, for inftance, cannot be elected a Member of the House of Commons, because he already forms a part of another branch of the fame legiflative body. A lunatic has a natural incapacity. Other inftances might be mentioned, but these two are fufficient. The freedom of election is then the common right of the People, their fair and juft share of Power; and I hold it to be the most glorious inheritance of every fubject of this realm, the nobleft, and I trult, the moft folid part of that beautiful fabric, the English Conftitution.

The House of Peers, in the cafe of Afhby and White in 1704, determined, 'a man has a right to his freehold by the common law; and the law having annexed his right of voting to his freehold, it is of the nature of his freehold, and muft depend upon it.' On the fame occafion likewife they declared, it is abfurd to fay the Electors right of chufing is found ed upon the law and cuftom of Parliament. It is an original right, part of the Conftitution of the kingdom as much as a Parliament is, and from whence the Parliament do derive their authority, and can have no other but that which is given o them by thofe that have the original tight to chufe them. The greatest law luthorities, both ancient and modern, agree in opinion, that every subject of the ealm, not difqualified by law, is eligile of common right. Lord Coke, Lord Chief Juftice Holt, and Mr. Juftice Blackstone are the only authorities I fhall cite.

Lord Coke fays,' He which is eligible common right cannot be difabled by the faid ordinance in Parliament, unlefs t had been by Act of Parliament.' Lord Chief Juftice Holt declares, The election of Knights belongs to the freeholders of counties, and it is an original right, vefted in, and infeparable from the freehold, and can no more be fevered from their freehold than their freehold itfelf can be taken away. Mr. Juftice Blackstone in the first book of his Commentaries has the following words: Subject to these restrictions and difqualifications, every fubject of the realm is eligible of common right.' The common right of the fubject, Sir, was violated by the majority of the last House of Commons, and I affirm, that they, and in particular, if I am rightly informed, the

Noble Lord with the blue ribband, com→ mitted high treafon against Magna Charta. This Houfe only, without the interference of the other parts of the Legislature, took upon them to make the law. They adjudged me incapable of being elected a member to ferve in that Parliament, although I was qualified by the law of the land; and the Noble Lord declared, if any other candidate had only fix votes, he would feat him for Middlefex.' I repeat it, Sir, this violence was a direct infringement of Magna Charta, High Treason against the facred Charter of our Liberties. The words to which I allude, ought always to be written in letters of gold: No freeman fhall be diffeized of his freehold, or liberties, or free cuftoms, unless by the lawful judgment of his Peers, or by the law of the land.' By the conduct of that majority, and of the Noble Lord, they affumed to themselves the power of making the law, and at the fame moment invading the rights of the People, the King, and the Lords. The two laft tamely acquiefced in the exercise of a power, which had been in a great inftance fatal to their predeceffors, had put an end to their very existence; but the People, Sir, and in particular the fpirited freeholders of this county, whose ruling paffion is the love of liberty, have not yet forgiven the attack on their right. So dangerous a precedent of violence and injuftice, which may in future times be cited by a defpotic Minister of the Crown, ought to be expunged from the Journals of this House.

I have heard and read much of precedents to justify the proceedings of the majority in the last House of Commons. I own, Sir, I value very little the doctrine of precedents. There is scarcely any new villainy under the fun. A precedent can never juftify any action in itfelf wicked, a robbery, for instance, on the heaths of Hounslow, or Baghot, of which there are innumerable precedents. The baseft actions may be juftified by precedents drawn from bad times and bad men. The fole question is, Whether this power is not a direct ufurpation on the rights of the people? If that is proved, I care not how long the ufurpation has continued, how often practifed. It is high time to put an end to it. It was the cafe of General Warrants. One precedent, however, the most infifted upon, I must take notice of, because it is faid fully to come up to the point, but, in my opinion, in almost every part it proves the contrary of what it has been

brought

brought to fupport.. I mean the remarkable cafe of Mr. Walpole in 1711, a period in which the rankelt Tory principles were countenanced more than in any period of our hiftory, prior to 1760. The cafe has been fo partially quoted, even by a person whofe fole merit here was an af fumed accuracy which he never poffeffed, that I fhall defire it may be read to the House from our Journals. The date is March 6, 1711.

[The Clerk reads, Refolved, That Robert Walpole, Efquire, having been, this feffion of Parliament, committed a prifoner to the Tower of London, and expelled this House, for an high breach of trust in the execution of his office, and notorious corruption, when Secretary at war, was, and is, incapable of being elected a member to serve in the prefent parliament.'] Now, Sir, I muft ob ferve, that even that Parliament, at an æra fo hoftile to the liberties not only of England, but of Europe, did not venture to adjudge him incapable of being elected a Member to serve in that Parliament only because he was expelled, but in the body of the refolution itself they add another reason, which would be trifling, if one was fufficient and adequate to the point, the high breach of truft in the execution of his office, notorious corruption, when Secretary at war. As truftees for the public, they affigned a caufe which must intereft every member of the community. In the cafe of Mr. Wilkes, the late majority declared, That John Wilkes, Efquire, having been, in this feffion of Parliament, expelled this Houfe, was, and is, incapable of being elected a Member to ferve in this prefent Parliament.' The having been expelled whether juftly or unjustly, is the only reason they give to the public. I fhall not yet, Sir, difmifs the cafe of Mr. Walpole. It will prove another propofition I have maintained, the injuftice of the late majority in feating Mr. Luttrell in this House. The fact is, that the House of Commons, having expelled Mr. Walpole, ordered a new writ to iffue. At the fubfequent election Mr. Walpole was again returned. A Mr. Taylor, who had a minority of votes, petitioned, but the election was vacated. Had the doctrine propagated by the late majority, and by the Noble Lord in the blue ribband, been juft, Mr. Taylor ought to have fat, the House fhould have refolved he ought to have been returned, and the groffelt injuftice was actually done to him. But even that Parliament, whofe memory the nation execrates, dared not proceed

to fuch enormous wickedness. It was referved for the prefent æra, when thame has loft its blufh. Mr. Luttrell was for fome years declared to represent the county of Middlefex, although a great majority of the freeholders abhorred and reprobated the idea, and on every public occafion declared it.

The Lord Mayor foon after quoted Mr. Wollafton's cafe upon this occafion, and then proceeded: I am ready to admit, that, where a clear legal incapacity exifts, all votes given to a perfon incapacitated are thrown away, if they are knowingly given to him. But, Sir, F beg leave to affert that this was not the cafe in the Middlefex bufinefs. Mr. Wilkes was qualified by the law of the land, and the freeholders, who perfectly understood the clear point of law, as well as their own rights, expreffly declared in the petition prefented on the 29th of April to the House: Your Pe-' titioners beg leave to reprefent to this Honourable House, that the faid Henry Lawes Luttrel had not the majority of legal votes at the faid election, nor did the majority of the freeholders, when they voted for John Wilkes, Efquire, mean thereby to throw away their votes, or to wave their right of representation; nor could they, by any means, have chofen to be reprefented by the faid Henry Lawes Luttrel, Efquire. Your petitioners therefore apprehend he cannot fit as the Reprefentative of the faid county in Parliament, without a manifest infringement of the rights and privileges of the freeholders thereof.'

This Houfe, Sir, is created by the People, as the other is by the King. What right can the majority have to fay to any county, city, or borough, you shall not have a particular perfon your Reprefentative, only because he is obnoxious to us when he is qualified by law? Every county, city, or borough, has an equal right with all other counties, cities, and boroughs, to its particular Deputy in the great Council of the nation. Each is diftint, free, and independent. I do not mean, Sir, now to enter into the argu ment, whether it may not be fit to give this House the power of expulfion in the firft inftance for very flagrant and infamous crimes either committed, or of which the Member may be convicted, subsequent to his election. That might feem an appeal to the People, the fending of the Member back to his Constituents. If however they differ in opinion from the Houfe, and re-elect him, he ought to fit, because he claims his feat under the fame

authority