strong
resolutions, expressing their discontent. The blame was chiefly imputed
to the Rockingham party; and the Rev. Mr. Home--better known at a later
date by the name of Home Tooke--who had begun to rule the democracy at
the Mile-end and Brentford meetings, announced his intention of exposing
that party; but this was prevented chiefly through the influence of the
Earl of Chatham. Instead of this, indeed, the reverend orator employed
his talents in getting up a strong petition and remonstrance to the king
from the freeholders of Middlesex, and which was presented on the 31st
of March; the Earl of Chatham having previously thanked him for his able
exertions in the cause of freedom, and for abstaining from his proposed
attack on the Rockingham party.
THE QUESTION OF CONTROVERTED ELECTIONS, ETC.
Ever since the famous Aylesbury case, in 1704, the house of commons
had been sole judge of the qualification of electors, and of all other
matters regarding the election of their own members. All controverted
elections were tried before a committee of the whole house, the members
not being bound to impartiality, either by oath, promise, or pledge. On
the 2nd of April, Mr. George Grenville brought in a bill for regulating
the trial of controverted elections, which provided that, in every case,
the judicature should be transferred from the house to a sworn committee
of fifteen members, whereof thirteen were to be chosen by the contesting
claimants for the seat, out of a list of forty-five chosen by ballot
by the whole house, and the other two named by the contesting parties
themselves; one for each. The committee were to have full power to
examine witnesses, papers, and records, and their oath bound them to
a strict impartiality. This bill met with stern opposition from the
ministers, and at one stage it was moved by Mr. Welbore Ellis, that it
should be rejected, which was seconded by Mr. Charles Fox; but the
bill was eloquently defended by Burke, and it passed into a law. It was
carried up to the lords by Mr. Grenville on the 5th of April, where,
as Lord Mansfield had expressed his approbation of it, and promised its
support, no opposition was feared. It passed unanimously, and it seems
to have had a very beneficial effect on the legislature.
Previously to the passing of this act, a bill was proposed by Mr.
Dowdeswell to disqualify officers of the excise and customs from
voting at elections The mover stated, that both cl
|