was likewise impeached by Mr. Aislaby, for having advised the fatal
suspension of arms, and the seizing of Ghent and Bruges; as well as
for having treated the most serene house of Hanover with insolence and
contempt. He was also defended by his friends, but overpowered by his
enemies.

EARL OF OXFORD SENT TO THE TOWER.

When the articles against the earl of Oxford were read in the house, a
warm debate arose upon the eleventh, by which he was charged with having
advised the French king in what manner Tournay might be gained from the
states-general. The question being put, whether this article amounted to
high-treason; sir Robert Raymond, formerly solicitor-general, maintained
the negative, and was supported not only by sir William Wyndham and the
tories, but also by sir Joseph Jekyll. This honest patriot said it was
ever his principle to do justice to every body, from the highest to
the lowest; and that it was the duty of an honest man never to act by a
spirit of party; that he hoped he might pretend to have some knowledge
of the laws of the kingdom; and would not scruple to declare, that in
his judgment the charge in question did not amount to high-treason. Mr.
Walpole answered with great warmth, that there were several persons
both in and out of the committee, who did not in the least yield to
that member in point of honesty, and who were superior to him in the
knowledge of the laws, yet were satisfied that the charge specified in
the eleventh article amounted to high-treason. This point being decided
against the earl, and the other articles approved by the house, lord
Conningsby, attended by the whig members, impeached the earl of Oxford
at the bar of the house of lords, demanding at the same time that he
might be sequestered from parliament, and committed to safe custody.
A motion was made, that the consideration of the articles might be
adjourned. After a short debate the articles were read; then the
tory lords moved that the judges might be consulted. The motion being
rejected, another was made, that the earl should be committed to safe
custody. This occasioned another debate, in which he himself spoke to
the following purpose: that the whole charge might be reduced to the
negotiations and conclusions of the peace; that the nation wanted a
peace, he said, nobody would deny; that the conditions of the peace
were as good as could be expected, considering the backwardness and
reluctancy which some of the alli