f ready utterance,
and of resolute spirit, can scarcely fail to possess, [398] When he rose
to call the attention of the Commons to the case of Oates, some Tories,
animated by the same passions which had prevailed in the other House,
received him with loud hisses. In spite of this most unparliamentary
insult, he persevered; and it soon appeared that the majority was with
him. Some orators extolled the patriotism and courage of Oates: others
dwelt much on a prevailing rumour, that the solicitors who were employed
against him on behalf of the Crown had distributed large sums of money
among the jurymen. These were topics on which there was much difference
of opinion. But that the sentence was illegal was a proposition which
admitted of no dispute. The most eminent lawyers in the House of Commons
declared that, on this point, they entirely concurred in the opinion
given by the judges in the House of Lords. Those who had hissed when
the subject was introduced, were so effectually cowed that they did
not venture to demand a division; and a bill annulling the sentence was
brought in, without any opposition, [399]

The Lords were in an embarrassing situation. To retract was not
pleasant. To engage in a contest with the Lower House, on a question on
which that House was clearly in the right, and was backed at once by the
opinions of the sages of the law, and by the passions of the populace,
might be dangerous. It was thought expedient to take a middle course. An
address was presented to the King, requesting him to pardon Oates, [400]
But this concession only made bad worse. Titus had, like every other
human being, a right to justice: but he was not a proper object of
mercy. If the judgment against him was illegal, it ought to have been
reversed. If it was legal, there was no ground for remitting any part of
it. The Commons, very properly, persisted, passed their bill, and sent
it up to the Peers. Of this bill the only objectionable part was the
preamble, which asserted, not only that the judgment was illegal, a
proposition which appeared on the face of the record to be true, but
also that the verdict was corrupt, a proposition which, whether true or
false, was not proved by any evidence at all.

The Lords were in a great strait. They knew that they were in the wrong.
Yet they were determined not to proclaim, in their legislative capacity,
that they had, in their judicial capacity, been guilty of injustice.
They again tried a mi