, and adopted half-way, the policy
On the next day, Conway
, and more than one hundred and fifty members of the House of Commons, carried the bill up to the House of Lords, where Temple and Lyttelton
did not suffer it to receive its first reading without debate.
On Friday, the seventh of March, the declaratory bill was to have its second reading.
It was moved, though no division took place, to postpone it to the bill for the repeal, for if the latter should miscarry, the former would be unnecessary; and if the latter passed, the former would be but ‘a ridiculous farce after deep tragedy.’1
‘My lords, when I spoke last on this subject,’ said Camden
, opposing the bill altogether,
I thought I had delivered my sentiments so fully, and supported them with such reasons and such authorities, that I should be under no necessity of troubling your lordships again.
But I find I have been considered as the broacher of new-fangled doctrines, contrary to the laws of this kingdom, and subversive of the rights of parliament.
My lords, this is a heavy charge, but more so, when made against one, stationed as I am, in both capacities as peer and judge, the defender of the law and the constitution.
When I spoke last, I was, indeed, replied to, but not answered.
As the affair is of the utmost importance, and its consequences may involve the fate of kingdoms, I took the strictest review of my arguments; I re-examined all my authorities, fully determined, if I found my self mistaken, publicly to own my mistake, and give up my opinion; but my searches have more and more