y no means a hard life of it, for family interest, together
with eminent talents, procured him one appointment after another, till
he reached the bench at the age of fifty-one, in the reign of Anne. He
had already distinguished himself in several ways, most, perhaps, by
controversies with Hoadly, and by sundry high-church motions. But after
his elevation, he displayed his principles more boldly, refused to sign
the Declaration of the Bishops, which was somewhat servilely made to
assure George the First of the fidelity of the Established Church,
suspended the curate of Gravesend for three years because he allowed the
Dutch to have a service performed in his church, and even, it is said,
on the death of Anne, offered to proclaim King James III., and head a
procession himself in his lawn sleeves. The end of this and other
vagaries was, that in 1722, the Government sent him to the Tower, on
suspicion of being connected with a plot in favour of the Old Chevalier.
The case excited no little attention, for it was long since a bishop had
been charged with high treason; it was added that his gaolers used him
rudely; and, in short, public sympathy rather went along with him for a
time. In March, 1723, a bill was presented to the Commons, for
'inflicting certain pains and penalties' on Francis, Lord Bishop of
Rochester, and it passed that House in April; but when carried up to the
Lords, a defence was resolved on. The bill was read a third time on May
15th, and on that occasion the Duke of Wharton, then only twenty-four
years old, rose and delivered a speech in favour of the bishop. This
oration far more resembled that of a lawyer summing up the evidence than
of a parliamentary orator enlarging on the general issue. It was
remarkable for the clearness of its argument, the wonderful memory of
facts it displayed, and the ease and rapidity with which it annihilated
the testimony of various witnesses examined before the House. It was
mild and moderate, able and sufficient, but seems to have lacked all the
enthusiasm we might expect from one who was afterwards so active a
partisan of the Chevalier's cause. In short, striking as it was, it
cannot be said to give the duke any claim to the title of a great
orator; it would rather prove that he might have made a first-rate
lawyer. It shows, however, that had he chosen to apply himself
diligently to politics, he might have turned out a great leader of the
Opposition.

Neither this speech no