[
406]
and he would readily expound the most
mysterious intricacies of law, or analyze the longest series of reasonings and evidence, with an intelligent smile on his features that spoke plainly the perfect ease with which he did it. In subtlety he had no equal; ornament seemed to flow so naturally from his subject, that while none could speak with more elegance, it seemed impossible for him to speak with less.
His countenance was beautiful, inspiring reverence and regard; his eye gleaming with light; his voice acutely clear, yet varied and musical; his manner graceful and engaging.
He had been a member of the cabinet when the plan of the Stamp Act was adopted; his legal opinion lay at its foundation; and now he came forward to vindicate its rightfulness, of which he saw clearly that the denial not merely invited
America to independence, but also invoked changes in the British constitution.
‘My Lords,’ said he, speaking for two hours and a half, in reply to
Camden, as he himself says, without special premeditation, and showing by his superior familiarity with the subject, as well as his taking the lead in the discussion, how intimately he was connected with the policy he defended:
My Lords, I shall speak to the question strictly as a matter of right.
I shall also speak to the distinctions which have been taken, without any real difference, as to the nature of the tax; and I shall point out lastly the necessity there will be of exerting the force of the superior authority of government, if opposed by the subordinate part of it.
I am extremly sorry that the question has ever become necessary to be agitated, and that there should be a decision upon it. No one in this house
