The house of lords, to demonstrate their abhorrence of all who should engage in conspiracies against their sovereign, rejected with indignation a petition presented to them in behalf of Blackburne, Casils, Barnarde, Meldrum, and Chambers, who had hitherto continued prisoners, for having conspired against the life of king William. On the ninth day of June, Mr. Walpole, as chairman of the secret committee, declared to the house of commons that the report was ready; and in the meantime moved, that a warrant might be issued by Mr. Speaker, for apprehending several persons, particularly Mr. Matthew Prior and Mr. Thomas Harley, who being in the house, were immediately taken into custody. Then he recited the report, ranged under these different heads: the clandestine negotiation with monsieur Ménager; the extraordinary measures pursued to form the congress at Utrecht; the trifling of the French plenipotentiaries, by the connivance of the British ministers; the negotiation about the renunciation of the Spanish monarchy; the fatal suspension of arms; the seizure of Ghent and Bruges, in order to distress the allies and favour the French; the duke of Ormond’s acting in concert with the French general; the lord Bolingbroke’s journey to France to negotiate a separate peace; Mr. Prior’s and the duke of Shrewsbury’s negotiation in France; the precipitate conclusion of the peace at Utrecht. The report being read, sir Thomas Hanmer moved that the consideration of it should be adjourned to a certain day; and that in the meantime the report should be printed for the perusal of the members: he was seconded by the tories: a debate ensued; and the motion was rejected by a great majority.
This point being gained, Mr. Walpole impeached Henry lord viscount Bolingbroke of high treason, and other high crimes and misdemeanors. Mr. Hungerford declared his opinion, that nothing mentioned in the report, in relation to lord Bolingbroke, amounted to high treason; and general Eoss expressed the same sentiment. Then lord Coningsby standing up, “The worthy chairman,” said he, “has impeached the hand, but I impeach the head: he has impeached the clerk, and I the justice; he has impeached the scholar, and I the master. I impeach Eobert earl of Oxford and earl Mortimer of high treason, and other high crimes and misdemeanors.” Mr. Auditor Harley, the earl’s brother, spoke in vindication of that minister. He affirmed he had done nothing but by the immediate command of his sovereign; that the peace was a good peace, and approved as such by two parliaments; and that the facts charged to him in the report amounted only to misdemeanors; if the sanction of a parliament, which is the representative and legislature of the nation, be not sufficient to protect a minister from the vengeance of his enemies, he can have no security. Mr. Atiditor Foley, the earl’s brother-in-law, made a speech to the same purpose; sir Joseph Jekyll, a staunch whig, and member of the secret committee, expressed his doubt whether they had sufficient matter or evidence to impeach the earl of high treason. Nevertheless the house resolved to impeach him without a division. When he appeared in the house of lords next day, he found himself deserted by his brother peers as infectious; and retired with signs of confusion. Prior and Harley having been examined by such of the committee as were justices of the peace for Middlesex, Mr. Walpole informed the house that matters of such importance appeared in Prior’s examination, that he was directed to move them for that member’s being closely confined. Prior was accordingly imprisoned, and cut off from all communication. On the twenty-first day of June, Mr. Secretary Stanhope impeached James duke of Ormond of high treason, and other high crimes and misdemeanors. Mr. Archibald Hutchinson, one of the commissioners of trade, spoke in favour of the duke. He expatiated on his noble birth and qualifications; he enumerated the great services performed to the crown and nation by his grace and his ancestors; he observed, that in the whole course of his late conduct, he had only obeyed the queen’s commands; and he affirmed that all allegations against him could not in the rigour of the law be construed into high treason. Mr. Hutchinson was seconded by general Lumley, who urged that the duke of Ormond had on all occasions given signal proofs of his affection for his country, as well as of personal courage; and that he had generously expended the best part of his estate, by living abroad in a most noble and splendid manner, for the honour of his sovereign. Sir Joseph Jekyll said, if there was room for mercy, he hoped it would be shown to that noble, generous, and courageous peer, who had in a course of many years exerted those great accomplishments for the good and honour of his country; that, as the statute of Edward III., on which the charge of high treason against him was to be grounded, had been mitigated by subsequent acts, the house ought not, in his opinion, to take advantage of that act against the duke, but only impeach him of high crimes and misdemeanors. General Ross, sir William Wyndham, and the speakers of that party, did not abandon the duke in this emergency; but all their arguments and eloquence were lost upon the other faction, by which they were greatly out-numbered The question being put, was carried for the impeachment of the duke of Ormond, who perceiving every thing conducted by a furious spirit of revenge, and that he could not expect the benefit of an impartial trial, consulted his own safety by withdrawing himself from the kingdom. On the twenty-second day of June, the earl of Strafford 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.