BILL AGAINST THOSE WHO SHOULD CORRESPOND WITH THE PRETENDER’S SONS.

The commons of England, in order to evince their loyalty, brought in a bill, denouncing the penalties of high treason against those who should maintain correspondence with the sons of the pretender. In the upper house, lord Hardwicke, the chancellor, moved, that a clause should be inserted, extending the crime of treason to the posterity of the offenders, during the lives of the pretender’s sons. The motion, which was supported by the whole strength of the ministry, produced a warm debate, in which the duke of Bedford, the earl of Chesterfield, the lords Talbot and Horvey, argued against it in the most pathetic manner, as an illiberal expedient, contrary to the dictates of humanity, the law of nature, the rules of common justice, and the precepts of religion; an expedient that would involve the innocent with the guilty, and tend to the augmentation of ministerial power, for which purpose it was undoubtedly calculated. Notwithstanding these suggestions, the clause was carried in the affirmative, and the bill sent back to the commons, where the amendment was vigorously opposed by lord Strange, lord Guernsey, Mr. W. Pitt, and other members, by whom the original bill had been countenanced; * the majority, however, declared for the amendment, and the bill obtained the royal assent. The session of parliament was closed in May, when the king told them that the French had made vast preparations on the side of the Netherlands; and that the states-general had agreed to furnish the succours stipulated by treaties.

* The opposition had sustained a heavy blow in the death of
the duke of Argyle, a nobleman of shining qualifications for
the senate and the field, whose character would have been
still more illustrious, had not some parts of his conduct
subjected him to the suspicion of selfishness and
inconstancy. He was succeeded in that title by his brother,
Archibald earl of Hay.