Wilkes was no sooner expelled, than he again presented himself as candidate for the county of Middlesex, and in the _North Briton_, published a very bold address to the freeholders, in which, under the title of _the Administration_, he severely lashed the House of Commons. There was at this time an avowed, though very small republican party, the chiefs of which were Mrs. Macaulay, the historian, her brother Sawbridge, his brother-in-law, Stephenson, a rich merchant,[196] and Thomas Hollis, a gentleman of strict honour and good fortune, a virtuoso, and so bigoted to his principles, that, though a humane and good man, he would scarce converse with any man who did not entirely agree with his opinions. He had no parts, but spent large sums in publishing prints and editions of all the heroes and works on his own side of the question: but he was formed to adorn a pure republic, not to shine in a depraved monarchy.[197]
On the 10th, Mr. Seymour[198] moved a question, that condemnation for accumulated libels should not be made a precedent. Lord North proposed to alter the word _accumulated_ into _many_, which being adopted, and the favourers of the motion then abandoning it, it was thrown out.[199]
The same day the liverymen of London met, and drew up instructions to their members against the proceedings of the House of Commons. Alderman Beckford attended that meeting, and told them, he should think it his duty to obey his constituents, even in points against his opinion; and whereas they enjoined an attempt for triennial Parliaments, he wished they were to be annual. He declared too that he never would accept place or pension.
At the India House the Ministers were now successful, and prevailed by 290 voices against 250, to obtain the Company’s agreement to pay to the public 410,000_l._ annually, for five years, out of their newly-acquired territories.
Allen might have had his liberty, but refusing to ask pardon of Sir William Meredith, as the House enjoined, was continued in Newgate.
Mr. Grenville, though dipped with them in opposition, had never forgiven Lord Rockingham and his friends for succeeding him in power, and for repealing the Stamp Act, nor had ceased pelting them in pamphlets. Just before the Parliament met, he had written, or assisted in writing, a tract called _the State of the Nation_, in which they had been bitterly treated.[200] Hoping union with him, at least, willing to act with him in opposition, they had borne all former provocations. They now at last replied, in a large quarto called _Observations on the State of the Nation_. It was drawn up by Edmund Burke, and did more honour to his talents as a writer than as a politician. The book solidly confuted Grenville, exposed him, and exploded his pretensions to skill in finance; but then it made all approach to him impossible, notwithstanding Lord Temple’s endeavours to unite them. It almost as explicitly abjured Lord Bute,--a step the party two years after tried as injudiciously to recover, when it was too late. If the work did honour to the author and to his party’s principles, yet it showed that that party was composed of impracticable men; and, what was worse for their cause, it declared inviolable attachment to the Marquis of Rockingham, a weak, childish, and ignorant man, by no means fit for the head of Administration. Burke had far more shining abilities than solid conduct, and, being dazzled by his own wit and eloquence, expected that those talents would have the same effect on others. His ambition built airy castles, and would not attend to those parts of policy that make no immediate show. One quotation in his book was singularly happy, and in one line drew the portrait of Grenville,--_Vixque tenet lachrymas quia nil lachrymabile cernit_. It was, in truth, Grenville’s character to weep over woes that he wished to exterminate by rigour.[201]