1716.

6

Anno 2. Geo. 1. long continued, or the Meetings of Parliaments long difcontinued, they gave great Uneafinefs. In the unfortunate Reign of King Charles I, there had been an Intermiffion of Parliaments twelve Years, which produc'd an Act in the fixteenth Year of that King, For the preventing the Inconveniences happening by long Intermiffion of Parliaments. That Act, in the Preamble, recites the Law made in the Reign of Edward the III, 'That Parliaments ought to be held every Year once; ⚫ but that the Appointment of Time and Place belong'd to his Majefty and his Royal Progenitors: And that it had been * found by Experience, great Inconveniences and Mischiefs had ⚫ happen'd to the King, and to the Commonwealth, by not holding Parliaments accordingly.' And for the Prevention of the like for the future, it enacts, That the faid Laws fhall be ftrictly obferv'd; and that in cafe there be an Intermiffion of the fitting of Parliament for three Years together, • if there is a Parliament in being, that Parliament shall be diffolv'd,' and very extravagant Powers were given for the Calling and Affembling of another; And every fuch Parliament was not to be diffolv'd of fifty Days, without their own Confent.' This extraordinary Step was foon follow'd, by an Act intituled That the Parliament should not be diffolv'd, prorogu'd, or adjourn'd, but by Act of Parliament; nor the Houfes of Parliament adjourn'd but by themselves refpectively. I need not be particular in recounting the Confequences of this Act of Parliament; for every one knows, that Set of Men, when they had thus continued themselves, never stopp'd 'till they had murder'd the best of Princes, and entirely fubverted our Conftitution both in Church and State.

6

Soon after the Restoration of King Charles II, the A&t for the preventing the Inconveniences happening by the long Intermiffion of Parliaments was repeal'd, becaufe derogatory to the Prerogative, and because it might be an Occafion of many Mischiefs and Inconveniences, and endanger the publick Peace and Safety; but at the fame Time it is declar'd and enacted, That because, by the ancient Laws and Statutes, Parliaments are to be held very often, the fitting ⚫ and holding of Parliaments fhall not be intermitted above three Years at the moft.' This Law not having been fo well obferv'd, as it ought to have been at the Revolution in the Convention-Parliament, when it was thought neceffary to declare the Rights and Liberties of the Subject, after many Breaches had been made upon them, it was, among other Things, declar'd, That Parliaments ought to be held frequently.' And what follows in that Act is very strong, for it declares and enacts, That all and fingular the Rights ⚫ and Liberties afferted and claim'd in the faid Declaration, are the indubitable Rights and Liberties of the People of

'this Kingdom, and so shall be esteem'd, allow'd, adjudg'd, Anno 2. Geo. E

' and taken to be; and all the Particulars thereof fhall be

6

firmly and ftrictly holden and obferv'd, as they are exprefs'd in the faid Declaration.' The Right claim'd and afferted, is, "That Parliaments ought to be held frequently; And foon after a new Parliament was call'd, which fate annually: But this was not look'd upon to be a complying with the Right claim'd, and therefore, after that Parliament had fat three Times, in the fourth Seffion it was thought neceffary to come to a farther Explication, and a Bill pafs'd both Houfes, but was rejected by the Throne, For the frequent Meeting and Calling of Parliaments. Others were attempted in the next Seffion, and it is well known how they came to miscarry in this House; but in the fucceeding Seffion, a Bill pafs'd both Houses, and had the Royal Affent. That is the Act this Bill is to alter: But before it is alter'd, I hope it will be fhewn, that what is afferted in the Preamble, is mistaken, and has prov'd otherwise. In the Preamble two Things are afferted, That by the ancient Laws ⚫ and Statutes of the Kingdom, frequent Parliaments ought to ⚫ be held ; and that frequent new Parliaments tend very much 'to the happy Union and good Agreement of the King and 'his People. The first Propofition is inconteftable; and the latter, I think, will not be deny'd; for frequent and new Parliaments create a Confidence between the King and his People, a very neceffary Step towards an Union and good Agreement. If the King would be acquainted with his People, and have more the Hearts of them, this is the fureft Way; and I am perfwaded this House will never confent to any Thing that may prevent the one, and intercept the other.

6

I cannot entertain fo unworthy a Thought of this Houfe, that any Gentleman in it would at this Time, in direct Terms, be for perpetuating themselves; yet if they confent to this Bill, I fhall reckon they are doing it; for tho' it only prolongs this Parliament for feven Years, I cannot doubt but hereafter there will be another for continuing it longer; because, before the End of this Term, the Rea fons will probably be ftronger for it, than they are now > Neither can I imagine that Gentlemen are afraid to truft the Peoples Choice again: Do they think that the great and memorable Things this Parliament has done for the Service and Benefit of their Country, will make them lefs acceptable to the People? No one will fay fo; and then I fee no Reason why they fhould be for making this Alteration in our Laws and Conftitution, which will certainly have a very ill Effect upon the Minds of the People: For they will be ready to fay, and with Reason, that after the Expiration of the three Years, you are no longer their Reprefentatives,

N 2

becaufe

1716.

1716.

Anno 2. Geo.I. because they chofe you to ferve them no longer. With great Submiffion I speak it, in my poor Opinion, King, Lords, and Commons, can no more continue a Parliament beyond its natural Duration, than they can make a Parliament. I know at extraordinary Junctures, Conventions have been turn'd into Parliaments; but it has been thought adviseable foon to determine them, and to pass Acts in the fubfequent legal Parliaments, to confirm what they have done. And I make no doubt, but if this Bill paffes into a Law, and this Parliament is continued more than three Years, there will be an Act in the fucceeding Parliament to confirm whatever shall be done after the three Years. There is an Instance in your Statute-Book, where all the Acts of a Parliament were declar'd void, and repeal'd, because the Parliament was unlawfully funimon'd, and the Members not duly chofen.

Petitions prefented

the

I need not urge farther, that the wifest Governments that have preferved a Face of Liberty, have never continu'd those long, with whom they have intrusted the supreme Power.

That by this Bill, you have all the Mischief of a long Parliament, without any of the Good of a short one.

That a standing Parliament and a standing Army are convertible, and only neceffary to fupport one another.

And that there can be no Occafion for this Bill at this Time, because this Parliament may have two more Seffions, if the King pleases.

But as I have already taken up fo much of your Time, I fhall only add, that for the Reasons I have given, I am against committing this Bill.

These were the chief Arguments that were urg'd on either Side, for and against the Bill; and upon the whole Matter it was refolv'd, by a Majority of 284 against 162, that the Bill be committed to a Committee of the whole House.

April 25. Two Petitions againft the faid Bill, one of agat repealing the Borough of Horfham, the other of Weftbury, were prefented to the Houfe and read: The laft of them was order'd to lie on the Table; but the House taking Offence at an Expreffion in that from Horfham, viz. That they 'look'd upon it as an Overturning of the Conftitution, and as an Infringement of their Liberties,' rejected their PeDebate concerning tition. After this Mr Lechmere moved, and the Question venting Penfioners was propofed, That it be an Inftruction to the Committee from fitting in Parliament. of the whole Houfe, to whom the faid Bill was committed,

a Claufe for pre

that they have Leave to receive a Claufe, to difable Perfons from being chofe Members of either Houfes of Parlia

ment,

1716.

ment, who have Penfions during Pleasure, or any Number Anno 2. Geo. I. of Years: But General Stanhope having reprefented, that fuch a Claufe would but clog the Bill, and endanger its Mifcarriage, Part of it being derogatory to the Privileges of the House of Lords; and that if any Jealoufy were entertain'd of the Members of the Houfe of Commons having Penfions from the Crown, a Bill might be brought in to exclude them; the previous Queftion being put, that the Question be now put, it paffed in the Negative. Then the Houfe, in a Grand Committee, of which Mr Hampden was Chairman, went thro' the Bill, and directed it to be reported without any Amendment; which being done, the House order'd it to be read the third Time the next Day. After this General Stanhope moved, and it was order'd accordingly, That Leave be given to bring in a Bill to disable any Perfon from being chofe a Member of, or fitting and voting in, the Houfe of Commons who has any Penfion during Pleasure, or for any Number of Years, from the Crown; and that General Stanhope, Mr Craggs, and Mr Boscawen, do prepare and bring in the same.

More Petitions

against repealing

the Triennial Act.

April 26. Two Petitions against the faid Bill, one of the Borough of Caerdiffe, the other of Petersfield, being prefented to the House, and read, were order'd to lie upon the Table. After which, the Bill was read a third Time, and upon Mr Hampden's Motion, the Queftion was put, That the Bill do pafs, which occafion'd a Debate that lafted Debate on the third about two Hours. Those who spoke against the Bill, were Septennial Bill. Mr Freeman, Mr Hungerford, Mr Wykes, and Lord Finch, Mr Freeman. who were severally answer'd by Sir Richard Steele, Mr Mr Hungerford. Boscawen, Sir William Thompson, Mr Erle, Mr Tufnell, and Sir John Brownlow.

Mr Freeman and Mr Hungerford having, among other Things, infifted, That no fatisfactory Answer had yet been made, either as to the Truft repos'd in the Commons by their Principals, or as to the repealing the Triennial Act Now, Mr Tufnell, Member for Malden, made thereupon the following Speech.

6

Mr Speaker,

Reading of the

Mr Hampden.

Mr Wykes.

Lord Finch.

Sir Richard Steele.
Mr Bofcawen.
Sir Wil, Thompson.

Mr Erle.

Sir John Brownlow.

I think the only Question before us is, Whether the Mr Tufnell's Triennial Act, as it now ftands, or as it is propos'd to be Speech for the Bill. alter'd by this Bill, is likely to conduce moft to the Benefit of the Publick? However, fince in this Debate there has been a good deal faid of the Conftitution of Parliaments, I muft beg Leave to mention a Word or two on that Subject.

That Parliaments were anciently to be held annually, appears by two Acts made, the one in the 4th, the other in the 36th of Edward III. But tho' they were to be held annually,

1716.

6

Anno 2. Gco. I. annually, or oftner if Occafion fhould be, in order to reme dy the Grievances of the People, yet I can't find that there ever was any Time limited for Elections: But as the Crown had always the Power of diffolving, fo likewise of calling a Parliament whenever they thought fit. There was indeed a Triennial A&t made in the 16th of Charles I, To prevent the Inconveniences which may arife by the long Intermiffion of Parliaments; and therefore it provided, That there fhould be a Seffion once in three Years;' but by no Means limited any Time for the Duration of Parliaments. This Act was repeal'd in the 16th of Charles II, because there were fome Provifions made in it, which were look'd upon as a Derogation to the Rights of the Crown. I believe I may venture to say, the first Restriction which ever the Crown lay under, as to the Continuance of Parliaments, was in the 6th of William and Mary. Then fprang up the Triennial Law, which is the Subject of our present Debate; and which, however well defign'd, was certainly an Innovation, 'till then unheard of. So that what is now offer'd in this Bill, is only, in fome Measure, to reinftate the Crown in that Power which it had always enjoy'd. And I can't but be furpriz'd, that thofe Gentlemen who have hitherto boafted themselves to be the zealous Affertors of the Prerogative of the Crown, fhould of a fudden be fo fond of a Law which undoubtedly is a very great Diminution of it, I hope I shall not be misunderstood, as if this were the only Reason which induces me to approve of the present Bill: No, though I fhall always have a due Regard to the Prerogative, yet if I could imagine that this Bill would prove the leaft Detriment to the Publick, the leaft Infringement of the Liberties of my Fellow-Subjects, my Vote fhould never flatter any Crown, fo far, as to revive fuch a Prerogative,

The Defign of this Bill is only to enlarge the Time for the Continuance of Parliaments, by making them Septennial inftead of Triennial. Of the Law, as it now ftands, we have already had the Experience about two and twenty Years; and what Advantage have we gain'd? Has it ever anfwer'd one fingle End for which it was intended? On the contrary, has it not produc'd the most mischievous Effects? What endless Divifions has it created among Neighbours, Friends, nay, the nearest Relations? How has it ruin'd Gentlemen's Estates, Made them not only Beggars, but Slaves to the very meaneft of the People? What a Scene of Corruption has it every where introduced? How has it debauch'd the Morals of the Nation Even the Adminiftration of Provincial Justice, which has always been esteem'd the Glory of our Conftitution, has been infected: And I wish the Infection may have reach'd