f pains and penalties may be attempted, to terrify those who are
too wise to be ensnared by specious promises; for what may not be
expected from those who have already sent their fellow-subjects to
prison, only for refusing to accuse themselves?

Nor can I discover, my lords, how the most abandoned villains will be
hindered from procuring indemnity by perjury, or what shall exclude a
conspirator against the life and government of his majesty from pardon,
if he swears, that in a plot for setting the pretender on the throne, he
was assisted by the counsels of the earl of ORFORD.

It has, indeed, been in some degree granted, that the bill requires some
amendment, by proposing that the necessary alterations may be made to
such parts of it as shall appear defective to the committee, which
would, indeed, be highly expedient, if only some particular clauses were
exceptionable; but, my lords, the intention of the bill is cruel and
oppressive; the measures by which that intention is promoted are
contrary to law, and without precedent; and the original principle is
false, as it supposes a criminal previous to the crime.

It is urged as the most pressing argument by the advocates for the bill,
that it ought to be passed to gratify the people. I know not, my lords,
upon what principles those who plead so earnestly for rigid justice, can
endeavour to influence our decisions by any other motives; or why they
think it more equitable to sacrifice any man to the resentment of the
people, than to the malice of any single person; nor can conceive why it
should be thought less criminal to sell our voices for popularity than
for preferment.

As this is, therefore, my lords, a bill contrary to all former laws, and
inconsistent with itself; as it only tends to produce a bad end by bad
means, and violates the constitution not to relieve, but to oppress; as
the parts, singly considered, are defective, and the whole grounded upon
a false principle; it neither requires any longer debate, nor deserves
any farther consideration; it is rather to be detested than criticised,
and to be rejected without any superfluous attempt for its amendment.

[The aforementioned lords were all who spoke in this debate. The
question being then put, Whether the bill should be committed? It passed
in the negative.

Content 47, Proxies 10.--57.
Not content 92, Proxies 17.--109.

But a protest was entered on this occasion, signed by twenty-eight
lords; the f