The constitutional history of England from 1760 to 1860

Preface

Mr. Hallam's "Constitutional* History " closes, as is well known, with the death of George 11. The Reformation, the great Rebellion, and the Revolution, all of which are embraced in the period of which it treats, are events of such surpassing importance, and such all-pervading and lasting influence, that no subsequent transactions can ever attract entirely equal attention. Yet the century which has elapsed since the accession of George III. has also witnessed occurrences not only full of exciting interest at the moment, but calculated to affect the policy of the kingdom and the condition of the people, for all future time, in a degree only second to the Revolution itself. Indeed, the change in some leading features and principles of the constitution wrought by the Reform Bill of 1832, exceeds any that were enacted by the Bill of Rights or the Act of Settlement. The only absolutely new principle introduced in 1688 was that establishment of Protestant ascendency which was contained in the clause which disabled any Roman Catholic from wearing the crown. In other respects, those great statutes were not so much the introduction of new principles, as a recognition of privileges of the people which had been long established, but which, in too many instances, had been disregarded and violated.

But the Reform Bill conferred political power on classes which had never before been admitted to be entitled to it ; and their enfranchisement could not fail to give a wholly new iV PREFACE.

and democratic tinge to the government, which has been visible in its effect on the policy of all subsequent administrations.

And, besides this great measure, the passing of which has often been called a new Revolution, and the other reforms, municipal and ecclesiastical, which were its immediate and almost inevitable fruits, the century which followed the accession of George III. was also marked by the Irish Union, the abolition of slavery, the establishment of the principle of universal religious toleration ; the loss of one great collection of colonies, the plantation of and grant of constitutions to others of not inferior magnitude, which had not even come into existence at its commencement; the growth of our wondrous dominion in India, with its eventual transfer of all authority in that country to the crown ; with a host of minor transactions and enactments, which must all be regarded as, more ou less, so many changes in or developments of the constitution, as it was regarded and understood by the statesmen of the seventeenth century.

It has seemed, therefore, to the compiler of this volume, that a narrative of these transactions in their historical sequence, so as to exhibit the connection which has frequently existed between them ; to show, for instance, how the repeal of Poynings' Act, and the Regency Bill of 1788, necessitated the Irish "Union; how Catholic Emancipation brought after it Parliamentary Reform, and how that led to municipal and ecclesiastical reforms, might not be without interest and use at the present time. And the modern fulness of our parliamentary reports (itself one not unimportant reform and novelty), since the accession of George III., has enabled him to give the inducements or the objections to the different enactments in the very words of the legislators who proposed them or resisted them, as often as it seemed desirable to do so.

Chapter I

Mr. Hallam's View of the Development of the Constitution.— Symptoms of approaching Constitutional Changes. — State of the Kingdom at the Accession of George III. — Improvement of the Law aflfecting the Commissions of the Judges. — Restoration of Peace. — Lord Bute becomes Minister. — The Case of Wilkes. — Mr. Luttrell is Seated for Middlesex by the House of Commons.— Growth of Parliamentary Reporting.—Mr. Grenville's Act for trying Election Petitions.— Disfranchisement of Corrupt Voters at New Shoreham Page 1

CHAPTER n.

The Regency Bill. — The Ministry of 1766 lay an Embargo on Corn. — An Act of Indemnity is Passed. — The Milium Tempus Act concerning Crown Property; it is sought to Extend it to Church Property, but the Attempt fails. — The Royal Marriage Act.— The Lords amend a Bill imposing Export Duties, etc., on Corn 36

CHAPTER IH.

Mr. Grenville imposes a Duty on Stamps in the North American Colonies.— Examination of Dr. Franklin. — Lord Rockingham's Ministry Repeals the Duty. — Lord Mansfield affirms a Virtual Representation in the Colonies. — Mr. C. Townsend imposes Import Duties in America. — After some Years, the Civil War breaks out. — Hanoverian Troops are sent to Gibraltar. — The Employment of Hanoverian Regiments at Gibraltar and Minorca. — End of the War. — Colonial Policy of the Present Reign. — Complaints of the Undue Influence of the Crown. — Motions for Parliamentary Reform. — Mr. Burke's Bill for Economical Reform. — Mr. Dunning's Resolution on the Influence of the Crown. — Rights of the Lords on Money-bills.— The Gordon Riots 57

CHAPTER IV.

Changes of Administration. — The Coalition Ministry. — The Establishment of the Prince of Wales.— Fox's India Bill.— The King Defeats it by the Agency of Lord Temple.— The Ministry is Dismissed, and Sue-

VI CONTENTS.

ceeded by Mr. Pitt's Administration. — Opposition to the New Ministry in the House of Commons. — Merits of the Contest between the Old and the New Ministry. — Power of Pitt.— Pitt's India Bill. — Bill for the Government of Canada. — The Marriage of the Prince of Wales to Mrs. Fitzherbert. — The King becomes Deranged. — Proposal of a Regency, — Opinions of Various Writers on the Course adopted. — Spread of Revolutionary Societies and Opinions. — Bills for the Repression of Sedition and Treason. — The Alien Act. — The Traitorous Correspondence Act. — Treason and Sedition Bills. — Failure of some Prosecutions under them Page 97

CHAPTER V.

The Affairs of Ireland. — Condition of the Irish Parliament. — The Octennial Bill. — The Penal Laws. — Non-residence of the Lord-lieutenant. — Influence of the American War on Ireland. — Enrolment of the Volunteers.— Concession of all the Demands of Ireland. — ^Violence of the Vol-, unteers. — Their Convention. — Violence of the Opposition in Parliament: Mr. Brownlow, Mr. Grattan, Mr. Flood. — Pitt's Propositions Fail. — Fitzgibbon's Conspiracy Bill. — Regency Question. — Recovery of the King. — Question of a Legislative Union. — Establishment of Maynooth College. — Lord Edward Fitzgerald. — Arguments for and against the Union. — It passes the Irish Parliament. — Details of the Measure. — General Character of the Union.— Circumstances which Prevented its Completeness 153

CHAPTER YI.

A Census is Ordered. — Dissolution of Pitt's Administration. — Impeachment of Lord Melville. — Introduction of Lord Ellenborough into the Cabinet. — Abolition of the Slave-trade. — Mr. Windham's Compulsory Training Bill. — Illness of the King, and Regency. — Recurrence to the Precedent of 1788-'89. — Death of Mr. Perceval,— Lord Liverpool becomes Prime-minister. — Question of Appointments in the Household. — Appointment of a Prime-minister 196

CHAPTER Vn.

The Toleration Act. — Impropriety of making Catholic Emancipation (or any other Important Matter) an Open Question.— Joint Responsibility of all the Ministers. — Detention of Napoleon at St. Helena. — Question whether the Regent could Give Evidence in a Court of Law in a Civil Action. — Agitation for Reform. — Public Meetings. — The Manchester Meeting. — The Seditious Meetings Prevention Bill. — Lord Sidmouth's Six Acts 224

CHAPTER VHL

Survey of the Reign of George III.— The Cato Street Conspiracy. — The Queen's Return to England, and the Proceedings against hsr. — The

CONTENTS. . Vii

King Visits Ireland and Scotland. — Reform of the Criminal Code, — Freedom of Trade. — Death of Lord Liverpool. — The Duke of Wellington becomes Prime-minister. — Repeal of the Test and Corporation Act. — O'Connell is Elected for Clare. — Peel Resigns his Seat for Oxford. — Catholic Emancipation. — Question of the Endowment of the Roman Catholic Clergy. — Constitutional Character of the Emancipation. —The Propriety of Mr. Peel's Resignation of his Seat for Oxford Questioned Page 245

CHAPTER IX.

Demand for Parliamentary Reform. — Death of George IV., and Accession of William IV. — French Revolution of 1830. — Growing Feeling in Favor of Reform. — Duke of Wellington's Declaration against Reform. — His Resignation : Lord Grey becomes Prime-minister. — Introduction of the Reform Bill. — Its Details. — Riots at Bristol and Nottingham. — Proposed Creation of Peers. — The King's Message to the Peers. — Character and Consequences of the Reform Bill. — Appointment of a Regency. — Re-arrangement of the Civil List 287

CHAPTER X.

Abolition of Slavery. — Abridgment of the Apprenticeship. — The East India Company's Trade is Thrown Open. — Commencement of Ecclesiastical Reforms. — The New Poor-law. — State of Ireland. — Agitation against Tithes. — Coercion Bill. — Beginning of Church Reform. — Sir Robert Peel becomes Prime-minister. — Variety of Ofl&ces held Provisionally by the Duke of Wellington. — Sir Robert Peel Retires, and Lord Melbourne Resumes the Government. — Sir Robert Peel Proposes a Measure of Church Reform. — Municipal Reform. — Measures of Ecclesiastical Reform „ 313

CHAPTER XI.

Death of William IV., and Accession of Queen Victoria. — Rise of the Chartists. — Resignation of Lord Melbourne in 1839, and his Resumption of Office. — Marriage of the Queen, and Consequent Arrangements. — The Precedence of the Prince, etc. — Post-office Reform.— War in Afghanistan.— Discontent in Jamaica. — Insurrection in Canada. — New Constitution for Canada and other Colonies. — Case of Stockdale and Hansard 349

CHAPTER XII.

Sir Robert Peel becomes Prime-minister. — Commercial Reforms. — Free-trade. — Religious Toleration. — Maynooth. — The Queen's University. — Post-office Regulations. — The Opening of Letters. — Naturalization of Aliens. — Recall of Lord Ellenborough. — Reversal of the Vote on the Sugar Duties. — Refusal of the Crown to Sanction a Bill. — The Question of Increase in the Number of Spiritual Peers. — Repeal of the Corn-

Vlll ^ CONTENTS.

laws. — Revolution in France, and Agitation on the Continent.— Death of Sir Robert Peel. — Indifference of the Country to Reform. — Repeal of the Navigation Laws. — Resolutions in Favor of Free-trade. — The Great Exhibition of 1851 rage 374

CHAPTER XIIL

Dismissal of LordPalmerston. — Theory of the Relation between the Sovereign and the Cabinet. — Correspondence of the Sovereign with French Princes. — Russian War. — Abolition of the Tax on Newspapers. — Life Peerages. — Resignation of two Bishops. — Indian Mutiny. — Abolition of the Sovereign Power of the Company. — Visit of the Prince of Wales to India. — Conspiracy Bill. — Rise of the Volunteers. — National Fortifications.— The Lords Reject the Measure for the Repeal of the Paper-duties. — Lord Palmerston's Resolutions. — Character of the Changes during the last Century 401

INDEX 449

CONSTITUTIOML HISTORY OF ENGLAND.

CHAPTER I.

Mr. Hallam's View of the Development of the Constitution. — Symptoms of approaching Constitutional Changes. — State of the Kingdom at the Accession of George III. — Improvement of the Law affecting the Commissions of the Judges. — Restoration of Peace. — Lord Bute becomes Minister.— The Case of Wilkes.— Mr. Luttrell is Seated for Middlesex by the House of Commons. — Growth of Parliamentary Reporting.— Mr. Grenville's Act for trying Election Petitions.— Disfranchisement of Corrupt Voters at New Shoreham.

The learned and judicious writer to whom is due the first idea of a " Constitutional History of England," and of whose admirable work I here venture to offer a continuation, regards "the spirit of the government" as having been "almost wholly monarchical till the Revolution of 1688," and in the four subsequent reigns, with the last of which his volumes close, as "having turned chiefly to an aristocracy."* And it may be considered as having generally preserved that character through the long and eventful reign of George HI. But, even while he was writing, a change was already preparing, of which more than one recent occurrence had given unmistakable warning. A borough had been disfranchised for inveterate corruption in the first Parliament of George IV.f Before its dissolution, the same House of Commons had sanctioned the principle of a state endowment of the Roman Catholic clergy in Ireland, and had given a third reading to a bill for the abolition of all civil

* " Constitutional History," vol. iii., p. 380; ed. 3, 1832. The first edition was published in 1827.

t Grampound. Corrupt voters had been disfranchised in New Shoreham as early as 1771, and the franchise of the borough of Cricklade had been transferred to the adjoining hundreds in 1782.

restrictions affecting members of that religion. It was impossible to avoid foreseeing that the Parliamentary Reform inaugurated by the disfranchisement of Grampound would soon be carried farther, or that the emancipation, as it was termed, of all Christian sects was at least equally certain not to be long delayed. And it will be denied by no one that those measures, which had no very obscure or doubtful connection with each other, have gradually imparted to the constitution a far more democratic tinge than would have been willingly accepted by even the most liberal statesman of the preceding century, or than, in the days of the Tudors or of the Stuarts, would have been thought compatible with the maintenance of the monarchy.

When George III. came to the throne, he found the nation engaged in a war which was occupying its arms not only on the Continent of Europe, but in India and America also, and was extending her glory and her substantial power in both hemispheres. Inter arma silent leges. And, while the contest lasted, neither legislators in Parliament nor the people outside had much attention to spare for matters of domestic policy. Yet the first year of the new reign was not suffered to pass without the introduction of one measure limiting the royal prerogative in a matter of paramount importance to the liberty of the people, the independence of the judges. The rule of making the commissions of the judges depend on their good conduct instead of on the pleasure of the crown had, indeed, been established at the Revolution ; but it was still held that these commissions expired with the life of the sovereign who had granted them ; and, at the accession of Anne, as also at that of George IL, a renewal of their commissions had been withheld from some members of the judicial bench. But now, even before the dissolution of the existing Parliament, the new King recommended to it such a change in the law as should " secure the judges in the enjoyment of their oflSces during their good behavior, notwithstanding any demise of the crown ;" giving the proposal, which was understood to have been originally suggested by himself, additional weight by the very unusual step of making it the subject of a speech to the

LOED BUTE BECOMES MINISTEE. 3

two Houses in the middle of the session. A bill to give effect to it was at once brought in, and, though the Houses sat only a fortnight longer, was carried before the dissolution.

The close of the year 1762, however, saw the restoration of peace ; and the circumstances connected with the treaty which re-established it gave birth to a degree of political and constitutional excitement such as had not agitated the kingdom for more than half a century. That treaty had not been concluded by the minister who had conducted the war. When George HI. came to the throne he found the Duke of Newcastle presiding at the Treasury, but the seals of one Secretary of State in the hands of Mr. Pitt, who was universally regarded as the guiding genius of the ministry. The other Secretary of State was Lord Holdernesse. But, in the spring of 1761, as soon as the Parliament was dissolved,* that statesman retired from office, and was succeeded by the Earl of Bute, a Scotch nobleman, who stood high in the favor of the King's mother, the Princess Dowager of Wales, but who had not till very recently been supposed to be actuated by political ambition, and who was still less suspected of any statesman-like ability to qualify him for the office to which he was thus promoted. It was presently seen, however, that he aspired to even higher dignity. He at once set himself to oppose Pitt's warlike policy ; and, on the question of declaring war against Spain, he was so successful in inducing the rest of the cabinet to reject Pitt's proposals, that that statesman resigned his office in unconcealed indignation. Having got rid of the real master of the ministry, Bute's next step was to get rid of its nominal chief, and in the spring of 1762 he managed to drive the Duke of Newcastle from the Treasury, and was himself placed by the King at the head of the administration. So rapid an elevation of a man previously unknown as a politician could hardly fail to create very widespread dissatisfaction, which was in some degree augmented by the nationality of the new minister. Lord Bute was a Scotchman, and Englishmen had not wholly forgiven or forgotten the Scotch invasion of 1745. Since that time the Scotch had been

* Parliament was dissolved March 19. Lord Bute succeeded Lord Holdernesse March 25.

regarded with general disfavor ; Scotcli poverty and Scotcli greediness for the good things of England had furnished constant topics for raillery and sarcasm ; and more than one demagogue and political writer had sought popularity by pandering to the prevailing taste for attacks on the whole nation. Foremost among these was Mr. John Wilkes, member for Aylesbury, a man of broken fortunes and still more damaged character, but of a wit and hardihood that made his society acceptable to some of high rank and lax morality, and caused his political alliance to be courted by some who desired to be regarded as leaders of a party ; many of the transactions of the late reign having, unfortunately, not been favorable to the maintenance of any high standard of either public or private virtue. On Lord Bute's accession to office, Wilkes had set up a periodical paper, whose object and character were sufficiently indicated by its title. The North Briton, and in which the diligence of Lord Bute in distributing places among his kinsmen and countrymen furnished the staple of almost every number ; while in many the Princess of Wales herself was not spared, as the cause, for motives not obscurely hinted at, of his sudden elevation. So pertinacious and virulent were the attacks thus launched at him, coinciding as they did, at least in one point, with the prejudices of the multitude, that they were commonly believed to have had some share in driving Lord Bute from office, which, in the spring of 1763, he suddenly resigned, hoping, as it might almost seem, thus to throw on his successor the burden of defending his measures. The most important of these measures had been the conclusion of the Treaty of Versailles, which, when it was first announced to Parliament, had been vehemently attacked in both Houses by Pitt and his followers, but had been approved by large majorities. Wilkes, however, not without reason, believed it to be still unpopular with the nation at large, and, flushed with his supposed victory over Lord Bute, was watching eagerly for some occasion of re-opening the question, when such an opportunity was afforded him by the King's speech at the prorogation of the Parliament, which took place a few days after Lord Bute's resignation. Lord Bute had been succeeded by Mr. George Grenville, who

JOHN WILKES AND HIS DIATRIBES. 5

had for a time been one of his colleagues as Secretary of State ; and on him, therefore, the duty devolved of framing the royal speech, the opening sentences of which referred to "the re-establishment of peace" in terms of warm self-congratulation, as having been effected "upon conditions honorable to the crown and beneficial to the people." Wilkes at once caught at this panegyric, as affording him just such an opportunity as he had been seeking of renewing his attacks on the government, which he regarded as changed in nothing but the name of the Prime - minister.* And, four days after the prorogation,f he accordingly issued a new number of The North Briton (No. 45), in which he heaped unmeasured sarcasm and invective on the peace itself, on the royal speech, and on the minister who had composed it. As if conscious that Mr, Grenville was less inclined by temper than Lord Bute to suffer such attacks without endeavoring to retaliate, he took especial pains to keep within the law in his strictures, and, ac-cordingly, carefully avoided saying a disrespectful word of the King himself, whom he described as " a prince of many great and amiable qualities," " ever renowned for truth, honor, and unsullied virtue." But he claimed a right to canvass the speech "with the utmost freedom," since " it had always been considered by the Legislature and by the public at large as the speech of the minister." And he kept this distinction carefully in view through the whole number. The speech he denounced with bitter vehemence, as " an abandoned instance of ministerial effrontery," as containing " the most unjustifiable public declarations" and "infamous fallacies." The peace he afiBrmed to be " such as had drawn down the contempt of mankind on our wretched negotiators." And he described the present minister as a mere tool of " the favorite," by whom " he still meditated to rule the kingdom with a rod of iron." But in the whole

* The greater part of Lord Bute's colleagues did, in fact, retain their offices. Lord Egremont and Lord Halifax continued to be Secretaries of State; Lord Henley (afterward Lord Northington) retained the Great Seal; Lord North and Sir John Turner remained as Lords of the Treasury ; and Mr. Yorke and Sir Fletcher Norton were still Attorney and Solicitor General.

+ Parliament was prorogued April 19, and Tfie North Briton (No. 45) was published April 33.

number there was but one sentence whicli could be represented as implying the very slightest censure on the King himself, and even that was qualified by a personal eulogy. " The King of England," it said, " is not only the first magistrate of the country, but is invested by the law with the whole executive power. He is, however, responsible to his people for the due execution of the royal functions in the choice of ministers, etc., equally with the meanest of his subjects in his particular duty. The personal character of our present amiable sovereign makes us easy and happy that so great a power is lodged in such hands ; but the favorite has given too just cause for him to escape the general odium. The prerogative of the crown is to exert the constitutional power intrusted to it in such a way, not of blind favor and partiality, but of wisdom and judgment. This is the spirit of our constitution. The people, too, have their prerogative ; and I hope the fine words of Dry den will be engraven on our hearts, ' Freedom is the English subject's prerogative.' "

These were the last sentences of No. 45. And in the present day it will hardly be thought that, however severe or even violent some of the epithets with which certain sentences of the royal speech were assailed may have been, the language exceeds the bounds of allowable political criticism. With Irespect to the King, indeed, however accompanied with personal compliments to himself those strictures may have been, it may be admitted that in asserting any responsibility whatever to the people on the part of the sovereign, even for tne choice of his ministers, as being bound to exercise that choice " with wisdom and judgment," it ^pes somewhat beyond the strict theory of the constitutionV' tThdoubtedly thaf theory is, that the minister chosen by the King is himself responsible for every circumstance or act which led to his appointment. This principle was established in the fullest manner in 1834, when, as will be seen hereafter, Sir Robert Peel admitted his entire responsibility for the dismissal of Lord Melbourne by King William IV., though it was notorious that he was in Italy at the time, and had not been consulted on the matter. But as yet such questions had not been as accurately examined as subsequent events caused them to be ; and Wilkes's assertion

THE PRINCIPLE OF MINISTERIAL RESPONSIBILITY. 7

of royal responsibility to this extent probably coincided with the general feeling on the subject.* At all events, the error

* A letter of the Prince Consort examines the principle of ministerial responsibility with so remarkable a clearness of perception and distinctness of explanation, that we may be excused for quoting it at length : "The notion that the responsibility of his advisers impairs the monarch's dignity and importance is a complete mistake. Here we have no law of ministerial responsibility, for the simple reason that we have no written constitution ; but this responsibility flows as a logical necessity from the dignity of the crown and of the sovereign. ' The King can do no wrong,' says the legal axiom, and hence it follows that somebody must be responsible for his measures, if these be contrary to law or injurious to the country's welfare. Ministers here are not responsible qiid ministers, that is, quA oflGlcials (as such they are responsible to the crown), but they are responsible to Parliament and the people, or the country, as 'advisers of the crown.' Any one of them may advise the crown, and whoever does so is responsible to the country for the advice he has given. The so-called accountability of ministers to Parliament does not arise out of an abstract principle of responsibility, but out of the practical necessity which they are under of obtaining the consent of Parliament to legislation and the voting of taxes, and, as an essential to this end, of securing its confidence. In practice, ministers are liable to account for the way and manner in which they have administered the laws which they, conjointly with the Parliament, have made, and for the way they have expended the moneys that have been voted for definite objects. They are bound to furnish explanations, to justify their proceedings, to satisfy reasonable scruples, and the answer, * We have, as dutiful subjects, obeyed the sovereign,' will not be accepted. 'Have you acted upon conviction, or have you not?' is the question. 'If you have not, then you are civil servants of the crown, who counsel and do what you consider wrong or unjust, with a view to retain your snug places or to win the favor of the sovereign.' And this being so. Parliament withdraws its confidence from them. Herein, too, lies that ministerial power of which sovereigns are so much afraid. They can say, ' We will not do this or that which the sovereign wishes, because we cannot be responsible for it.' But why should a sovereign see anything here to be afraid of? To him it is, in truth, the best of safeguards. A really loyal servant should do nothing for which he is not prepared to answer, even though his master desires it. This practical responsibility is of the utmost advantage to the sovereign. Make independence, not subservience, the essential of service, and you compel the minister to keep his soul free toward the sovereign, you ennoble his advice, you make him staunch and patriotic, while time-servers, the submissive instruments of a monarch's extreme wishes and commands, may lead, and often have led, him to destruction.

" But to revert to the law of responsibility. This ought to be in effect a safeguard for law itself As such, it is superfluous in this country, where law reigns, and where it would never occur to any one that this could be otherwise. But upon the Continent it is of the highest importance ; as, where the government is an outgrowth of a relation of supremacy and subordination between sovereign and subject, and the servant, ti'ained in ideas natural to this relation, does not know which to obey, the law or the sovereign, the existence of such a law would deprive him of the excuse which, should he offend the law, and so be guilty of a crime, is ready to his hand in the phrase, ' The sovereign ordered it so, I have merely obeyed,' while it would be a protection to the sovereign that his servants, if guilty of a crime, should not be able to saddle him with the blame of it." — Life of the Prince Consort^ v., 263.

contained in it, and the insinuation that due wisdom and judgment had not been displayed in the appointment of Mr. G. Grenville to the Treasury, were not so derogatory to the legitimate authority and dignity of the crown as to make the writer a fit subject for a criminal prosecution. But Mr. Grenville was of a bitter temper, never inclined to tolerate any strictures on his own judgment or capacity, and fully imbued with the conviction that the first duty of an English minister is to uphold the supreme authority of the Parliament, and to chastise any one who dares to call in question the wisdom of any one of its resolutions. But The North Briton had done this, and more. No. 45 had not only denounced the treaty which both Houses had approved, but had insinuated in unmistakable language that their approval had been purchased by gross corruption (a fact which was, indeed, suflSciently notorious). And, consequently, Mr. Grenville determined to treat the number which contained the denunciation as a seditious libel, the publication of which was a criminal offence ; and, by his direction, Lord Halifax, as Secretary of State, issued what was termed a general warrant — a warrant, that is, which did not name the person or persons against whom it was directed, but which commanded the apprehension of "the authors, printers, and publishers" of the offending paper, leaving the officers who were charged with its execution to decide who came under that description, or, in other words, who were guilty of the act charged, before they had been brought before any tribunal. The warrant was executed. Wilkes and some printers were apprehended ; Wilkes himself, as if the minister's design had been to make the charge ridiculous by exaggeration, being consigned to the great state-prison of the Tower, such a use of which was generally limited to those impeached of high-treason. And, indeed, the commitment did declare that No. 45 of The North Briton was " a libel tending to alienate the affections of the people from his Majesty, and to excite them to traitorous insurrections against the government." Wilkes instantly sued out a writ of habeas corpus, and was without hesitation released by the Court of Common Pleas, on the legal ground that, " as a member of the House of Commons, he was pro-