eaker's business, what he
performs in the House, at least if he be in with the court, when it is
hard to say how many converts may be made in a circle of dinners, or
private cabals. And you and I can easily call to mind a gentleman in
that station, in England, who, by his own arts and personal credit, was
able to draw over a majority, and change the whole power of a prevailing
side in a nice juncture of affairs, and made a Parliament expire in one
party who had lived in another.

I am far from an inclination to multiply party causes, but surely the
best of us can with very ill grace make that an objection, who have not
been so nice in matters of much less importance. Yet I have heard some
persons of both sides gravely deliver themselves in this manner; "Why
should we make the choosing a Speaker a party cause? Let us fix upon one
who is well versed in the practices and methods of parliament." And I
believe there are too many who would talk at the same rate, if the
question were not only about abolishing the sacramental test, but the
sacrament itself.

But suppose the principles of the most artful Speaker could have no
influence either to obtain or obstruct any point in Parliament, who can
answer what effects such a choice may produce without doors? 'Tis
obvious how small a matter serves to raise the spirits and hopes of the
Dissenters and their high-flying advocates, what lengths they run, what
conclusions they form, and what hopes they entertain. Do they hear of a
new friend in office? That is encouragement enough to practise the
city, against the opinion of a majority into an address to the Queen for
repealing the sacramental test; or issue out their orders to the next
fanatic parson to furbish up his old sermons, and preach and print new
ones directly against Episcopacy. I would lay a good wager, that, if the
choice of a new Speaker succeeds exactly to their liking, we shall see
it soon followed by many new attempts, either in the form of pamphlet,
sermon, or address, to the same, or perhaps more dangerous purposes.

Supposing the Speaker's office to be only an employment of profit and
honour, and a step to a better; since it is in your own gift, will you
not choose to bestow it upon some person whose principles the majority
of you pretends to approve, if it were only to be sure of a worthy man
hereafter in a high station, on the bench or at the bar?

I confess, if it were a thing possible to be compassed, it would