:

H

AVING, in our Magazine for July laft, given an account of this able and upright Judge, whose abilities and integrity contributed to fupport the Law, and to render the feats of Justice respected in times of great difficulty, we shall on the present occafion afford our readers an opportunity of perusing his manly and spirited defence, on the 27th September 1770, of his conduct in refusing, as Recorder, to attend the Lord Mayor (Beckford), Aldermen and Commons, with their famous "humble Address, Remonftrance, and Petition," to his Majesty, on 23d May 1770. The events of that period now become histo. ry, and most of the actors in the busy buftling scene no longer disturb the repofe of mankind, by frivolous alarms or groundless apprehenfions. Of those whom time has not swept away, that all powerful disposer of events has taught to cultivate moderation and quiet, to suspect the pretences of pseudo patriots, and no longer to fuffer themfelves to be the dupes of selfish clamour or interested opposition. The Speech was as follows:

MY LORD MAYOR,

I THOUGHT it a Duty I owed to myself, and to the rank which I have the honour to hold in this Assembly, not to fubmit to be called upon by any ONE or Two individual Members of this Court, to answer to any thing, which they, in the Wantonness of their

imagination, shall think fit to throw out as a Charge upon the first LAW OFFICER, and ONE OF THE PRINCIPAL

MAGISTRATES of the CORPORATION. - If the Court is pleased to give so much countenance to what the Gentlemen call a Charge, as to think that I ought to enter into an Explanation of my Conduct, my Respect for the Court will lead me to give them an Answer, and I hope it will be a fatisfactory

one.

I am required to give my Reason for REFUSING to attend on the presenting of your ADDRESS, PETITION, and REMONSTRANCE to HIS MAJESTY.

My Reafons were these. I was of opinion that your Address, Petition, and Remonftrance, in the manner in which it was penned, was a LIBEL UPON HIS MAJESTY, to which it would have been contrary to the Duty of my Office to have given the least coun tenance: and I could not officially present a Libel to His Majesty without making myfelf a principal in the Guilt of that Act.

I cannot conceive that this Court can want to be informed of the Reasons of my Conduct on this occafion, as it cannot be forgot, that I openly declared my opinion of the Language of the Address, both in the COMMITTEE and in THIS COURT; for though I might be miftaken in that opinion (having no pretenfions to infallibility), yet having that opinion, and having, as it was my duty,

Ba

duty, declared it to you, it was impoffible for me to take any part in the farther prosecution of the measure.

As a LAWYER, as a MORAL MAN, and a MAN OF HONOUR, could I, against my judgment, and against the conviction of my own mind, concur in an act which appeared to me to be

CRIMINAL?

And can any man conceive, that it should be the DUTY of my OFFICE to join in such an act?-Corporate Capacities and Relations, and the Duties which arise out of them, respect LAWFUL ACTS only; and such lawful acts only as are of a CORPORATE NATURE, and are strictly within the powers vested in the Corporation. To these purposes you are a Court of Common-Council, and I am your Recorder: if you exceed your powers, the relation between us is diffolved; we become that instant mere individuals; we act as such, and must answer criminally for our conduct with out any distinction of Character Office. It would be extravagantly abfurd to suppose, that you could impose a Duty upon me as an Officer; which you could not protect me in the discharge of. It will not be less absurd to suppose, that you could protect me as an Officer, for the share I should take in your Offence, OFFENDERS.

or

BEING YOURSELVES

It is with astonishment I find, that any man can wish to prefs SUCH A DUTY upon me.

What effects may not party rage produce, when it can reconcile a Love OF LIBERTY, and a generous Concern for the Rights of the Subject, which this Court has always expressed, and I am perfuaded has always felt, with so SLAVISH and so TYRANNICAL A PRIN CIPLE, as that which attempts to fubdue a liberal mind? which endeavours

to drive a man, by the exertion of authority, into an alive fubmiflion to measures against his JUDGMENT and his CONSCIENCE, and would fain oblige him to INSULT HIS PRINCE, and to violate the LAWS OF HIS COUNTRY?

But I ought not, it seems, to set up my private opinion against the judgment and determination of the Court. When you judge of matters within your province, and of which you are competent judges, your determination shall conclude my private opinion. - Upon questions of prudence and difcretion the decifion of a majority ought to bind the whole-there

is no other standard; BUT CAN YOU

PUT THE LAW OF THE LAND TO THE VOTE? and will a LIBEL cease to be a libel because you vote it an HUMBLE PETITION? With the strongest difpofition to defer, upon all occafions, to the better judgment of the Common Council, I cannot bring myself to think, that s majority, upon a question of mere LEGAL CONSIDERATION (of which, with fu mission, they are not quite so competent judges as I am, though they may be very honest and very wife men): Isay, I can. not bring myself to think, that a majo rity ought to over-rule my judgment, much less determine my conduct againft my opinion :-nor can I believe, that the Conftitution of the City placed a Law Officer so near to this chair, and bound him by the OBLIGATION OF AN OATH to give you GOOD and WISE COUNSEL, without intending, that you should pay some attention to his advice, inftead of out-voting him. There was more colour for a complaint on my fide, that you had hastily COMMITTED the HONOUR OF THE CITY OF LONDON, in a rash meafure, against the advice of a sworn Officer, whofe opinion ought to have fome weight, than for an Accufation, charging that I refused to act a DOUBLE, an INCONSISTENT, and an UNWORTHY PART, by concurring in such a meafure against my declared opinion.

No man could have conducted himself, in a NECESSARY opposition to your wishes, with more moderation, or with more caution, to avoid giving offence. I have always endeavoured to cultivate a good understanding with the Court of Common Council; I respect the character with which the members of it are in. vested; and I have great personal regard for many, to whom I have the honour to be known. I have always laboured to facilitate their business, and to make myself useful to them. I was heartily concerned, that I could not concur with the Court: but it always has been, and it ALWAYS SHALL BE, my first object, to do what I THINK MY DUTY. tented myself, however, with declaring to you, as was my duty, my opinion of your Address; and with apprizing your late Mayor of the necessary consequence of that Opinion, that I could not attend him to the Foot of the Throne.

I con

I fubmitted to all the abuse which I was loaded with upon these accounts:I took no pains to justify my Opinion to the World, because, in justifying myself,

I must have ACCUSED YOU; and that, without a necessary call, like the present, I wished not to do. It was of importance that you should have been right, both for the HONOUR OF THE CITY, which, as I have already observed, was committed, and for the Success of the Cause in which you were engaged, which, in my opinion, has fuffered exceedingly from the late violent measures.

When the People set themselves to oppose IRREGULARITIES in Government, they ought to be strictly, REGULAR THEMSELVES; otherwise they strengthen the hands of those whom they with to oppose, and fix upon themselves the grievances which they wish to remove. You think differently upon this subject, but I believe I am right. Every moderate man, who wishes to preserve some Government among us, rather than throw every thing into confufion, has felt and acknowledged the necessity of detaching himself from a party who are capable of proceeding to such extremities.

The Policy of your Conduct, however, was not my concern: I was concerned for the HONOUR OF THE CITY OF LONDON, and of THIS COURT, which appeared to me to be precipitated, by the intemperate Zeal of its Leaders, into very rash and reprehenfible measures.

I wish I could now (after having had time to think upon this subject) see reason to fay that my Opinion was ill-found ed: I would most cheerfully acknowledge it; I should rejoice in the opportunity it afforded me of vindicating the Honour of this Court-but upon the fullest confideration of the matter, and judging of it by those Rules of Law, which (from the Year 1696 down to the introduction of the modern Theory of Libels within these laft twenty years) have established the measure of Obedience, Respect, and Re. verence due to Government, and more especially to the PERSON OF THE KING, as the FIRST MAGISTRATE, I remain of opinion, that your ADDRESS, PETITION, and REMONSTRANCE, in the manner in which it was penned, was libellous, unconstitutional, and criminal.

It has been suggested, and I have no doubt but that, after I am in obedience to the Wishes of the honourable Aldermen withdrawn, it will be again imputed to me, that this Opinion of mine is political; that I have indirect views in maintaining it; and, in the part which I found myself obliged to take upon it. While I was speaking the word CHANCELLOR reached my ear. I will take this opportunity to explain myself upon that head. Were I disposed to sacrifice my Opinions to views of Ambition or Interest, I have lived long enough in the world to know the nearest way to Honours and Preferment:-I would take the high-road of Opposition;-I would have been one of the most active Men at the LONDON TAVERN; I would have bought Freeholds, to entitle me to SIGN PETITIONS; and, to crown all, I would PAY NO LAND-TAX: then, I have no doubt, I might have worn fome of those Honours which other Gentlemen are graced with. But I am not disposed to make fuch a facrifice-I have been many years in this Office, and a very laborious one I have found it. Hitherto there are no appearances of any undue influence upon my mind: I am content to remain a private man: all I defire is to have LIBERTY to retain my OPINIONS, and not to be FORCED to THINK with the Court of Common Council, upon great and essential POINTS OF LAW and the CONSTITUTION.

To shew that it was my DuUTY to have attended your Address, the Oath, which was administered to me when I entered upon my Office, has been read; though it should now fail of that end, it has, however, already answered the purpose intended to be effected, by an uncandid circulation of it two months after the transaction, at the eve of a recefs, when nothing could be done upon it for fix weeks or two months to come, during all which time the curious world were to busy themselves with conjectures touching the nature of the PERJURY, which the RECORDER had been guilty of.

According to the Oath, I am to be

3

Y

ready

ready " to come at the WARNING OF "THE MAYOR AND THE SHERIFFS, "to give good and wife Counsel, and to ride and go with them upon all occacafions, when need shall be, to main "tain the STATE of the City."

The last branch of the sentence plainly refers to the proceffions upon folemn days, when the STATE of the City, that is, the Lord Mayor, the Aldermen, the City Olicers, and the Companies, are called out.

The Oath of the RECORDER is of a much older date than the present eftablithment of the Common Council. The Common Council was, I believe, esta blished fome hundred years before they began to present Addresses: their Addreffes were, ORIGINALLY, fent by Deputations, or Committees, when, I prefume, the Recorder was DESIRED, not COMMANDED, to give his assistance, as it is the practice at this day with regard 'to all other Committees.

I have no idea that there is any authority any where to exact the attendance of any Officer or Member of the Court upon voluntary PilgrimagestoSt. James's, when the intereft of the BODY CORPO'RATE is not immediately and directly concerned.

But fuppofe the attendance upon the Common Courcil to be within the Oath, what fort of caluiftry must that be, which extends the obligation of the Oath (an obligation to give good and wife Counsel, and to ride and go when need shall be to maintain the STATE of the City) to a cafe, in which the GOOD and WISE COUNSEL which I have given was not to ride and go? That there was NO NEED-that it would not maintain the STATE of the City, but DISGRACE it.

But further: When I was of opinion that fuch RIDING AND GOING was not only unadvised, but UNLAWFUL and CRIMINAL, is the Oath to be extended to fuch a cafe? Is it not one of the first principles of ETHICKS, that an OATH cannot impose an obligation to do an unlawful Act?

Suppole the Court were gravely to refolve to present their next Remontrance AT THE HEAD of the SIX REGI •MENTS: after I had humbly advised you not to RIDE AND GO upon that bulinefs, would my Oath oblige me to make one of fuch a party, and to co AND BE HANGED with your Lordship and the rest of the Court?

I am fworn to be faithful to his MAJESTY, and to the CITY OF LONDON,

in the Office of RECORDER: if thete duties should clash, the first is the fuperior, and must be obeyed.

Little as the Oath of Office has to do with the Question now before the Court, I am not forry that I have been reminded of it, even in the insidious way which has been taken to refresh my memory: I hope I shall be the better for it: I hope a more general benefit will arife, and that it will put other Gentlemen upon looking back to THEIR Oaths; Oaths of ALLEGIANCE, Oaths OF OFFICE! - Aldermen, SHERIFFSCommon Council Men, are all fworn to attend their Duty, as well as the RECORDER.

If a much more trivial Excuse than that which I have urged for my Refufal to attend, ought not to be received, what a load of Guilt will be thrown upon the Conscience of almoft every Man who hears me. I have known Aldermen abfent from all Duty for years together: - I have known a Common Council Man not come within these Walls, in quiet Times, from one St. Thomas's Day to another. I have known Sheriffs absent themselves from their Duty, when it was convenient to them to be in the Country. - If I am to be censured for a Breach of my Oath, I hope I may prevail that HE who is INNOCENT may cast the first Stone.

I shall trouble your Lordship and the Court with very little more, I repeat that I am truly concerned, that a Cafe should have arifen in which it became my Duty to refuse to concur officially with the Court of Common Council: I wish to co operate cordially with you in all your Meafures: For seven Years and a half I have given you Proof of this Difpofition; after which it ought not to be lightly fufpected. But I cannot submit to act against my Judgment and Conscience: I have no Conception, that you have a Right to exact so fevere a fervice from YOUR RECORDER: If you have, all I can say further, is, that you never fhall exact it from me: I will be the Servant of the City, but I will be the Slave of no Man, nor of any Set of Men; I came into this Office an independent Man, and fo I will leave it. I should be glad to be upon good Terms with the COURT of COMMON COUNCIL: but I will never purchafe their Favour upon Conditions which, upon Reflection, I should be ashamed of.

ACCOUNT

L

ONDONDERRY is one of the cleaneft, best-built, and most beautitully fituated of any town in Ireland, and, excepting Cork, as conveniently as any for commerce. It is feated on a gentle eminence, of an oval form, and almost a peninfula at the bottom, and in a narrow part of Lough or Lake Foyle, which furrounds, for a quarter of a mile broad, two thirds or more of the eminence, and might easily be brought entirely round the city. Through this Lough it communicates with the fea on the very North of Ireland.

The city of Derry is far from being what some have called it, a place or even a city of modern erection, fince it has been a Bishop's See near fix hundred years. It was in the last long rebellion against Queen Elizabeth, that the Lord Deputy Mountjoy faw the importance of making fettlements and garrifons on the fide of Lough Foyle, which was often, though without fuccess, attempted, till it was at length effected by Sir Henry Dockra, at the very beginning of the feventeenth century, who built a fort at Culmore, and put an English garrifon into Derry. Upon the Earls of Tyronne and Tyrconnel breaking out into rebellion, and retiring into Spain, fome of their accomplices surprised Derry, A. D. 1606, of which Sir George Powlet was Governor, murdered him with all the garrifon, and committed many other cruel and detestable actions. Upon the fuppreffing of this infurrection, upwards of half a million of acres, plantation meature, in fix contiguous counties, were forfeited to the Crown; and feveral projects were formed to enable King James the First to fettle them. Amongst others, near two hundred and ten thousand acres were granted to the city of London, and the great companies, in consequence of an agreement figned with the Crown, January 38, 1609, by which they undertook to plant there lands, and to build and fortify Colerain and Derry. These pre. parations fo alarmed the Irish, that, to keep them in awe, and to put Ulster imKeep mediately into a fafe condition, the hereditary order of Knighthood, called BARONETS, was devised, who purchased their respective patents by the payment of a large fum, to fupport troops, and to defray other expences incident to the

civilizing this part of Ireland. Hence these knights bear in their coats of arms, either in a canton or in an escutcheon, the armorial ensign of the province of ULSTER, viz, argent, a hand tinifter, coupied at the wrist, extended in pale gules.

The grant of this tract of country to the citizens of London, was quickly at tended with fome difputes, on pretence that they had not fulfilled their agreement; but these being pacified, and the place found exceedingly commodious in point of fituation, being a peninfula, having a river or lake rather on three fides, and the fourth easily fortified, they began to build and ftrengthen it with much dili gence; and a new charter being fent over to the Corporation, and a gilt fword to the Mayor, in 1615, this city affumed the name of LONDONDERRY. Dr. John Tanner was then Bishop, and the first buried in the new Cathedral. In fucceeding times, as the value of their grant more clearly appeared, new complaints were raised against the Managers for the city of London, and the Companies, which produced several royal commiffions of inquiry in it and the fucceeding reign, particularly one to Sir Thomas. Philips, whose report thereon is extant. (See Harris's Hibernica). At length, on a fuit commenced in the Star Chamber, judgment was given, in 1636, againft the Londoners, and their eftates thereupon sequestered. In 1637, Sir Thomas Fotherlay and Sir Ralph Whitfield were impowered by the Crown to let leases of these lands. In 1640, the Parliament by their refolutions declared all these proceedings illegal, null and void. The City, however, did not recover possession till 1655, and held it, as all property was then held, in a very precarious manner, But foon after the Restoration $662, his Majesty King Charles the Second granted a new charter, under which this noble colony quickly began to raise its head again, and has ever since most profper outly proceeded.

This small city is neat and beautiful, built for the most part of free stone, with a large church, spacious market place, and a beautiful stone quay, to which come up vessels of confiderable burthen. It is famous for having refifted the collected strength of the Irish in the