cannot but esteem and admire him, even when
conviction obliges me to oppose him, has proposed a case in which he
seems to imagine that a murderer might secure himself from punishment,
by connecting his crime with some transaction in which the earl of
ORFORD should be interested. This case, my lords, is sufficiently
improbable, nor is it easy to mention any method of trial in which some
inconvenience may not be produced, in the indefinite complications of
circumstances, and unforeseen relations of events. It is known to have
happened once, and cannot be known not to have happened often, that a
person accused of murder, was tried by a jury of which the real murderer
was one. Will not this then be an argument against the great privilege
of the natives of this empire, _a trial by their equals?_

But, my lords, I am of opinion that the murderer would not be
indemnified by this bill, since he did not commit the crime by the
direction of the person whom he is supposed to accuse; nor would it have
any necessary connexion with his conduct, but might be suppressed in the
accusation, without any diminution of the force of the evidence. A man
will not be suffered to introduce his accusation with an account of all
the villanies of his whole life, but will be required to confine his
testimony to the affair upon which he is examined.

The committee, my lords, will distinguish between the crimes perpetrated
by the direction of the earl of ORFORD, and those of another kind. And
should an enormous criminal give such evidence, as the noble lord was
pleased to suppose, he may be indemnified for the bribery, but will be
hanged for the murder, notwithstanding any thing in this bill to the
contrary.

It has been insisted on by the noble lords, who have spoke against the
bill, that no crime is proved, and, therefore, there is no foundation
for it. But, my lords, I have always thought that the profusion of the
publick money was a crime, and there is evidently a very large sum
expended, of which no account has been given; and, what more nearly
relates to the present question, of which no account has ever been
demanded.

On this occasion, my lords, an assertion has been alleged, which no
personal regard shall ever prevail upon me to hear without disputing it,
since I think it is of the most dangerous tendency, and unsupported by
reason or by law. It is alleged, my lords, that the civil list is not to
be considered as publick money, and that t