56

HISTORY OF ENGLAND.

CTTAP.

XIV.

1 ( 18 !).

The Lords were in an embarrassing situation. To retractwas not pleasant. To engage in a contest with theLowerHouse,on a question on which that House was clearly in the right, andwas hacked at once by the opinions of the sages of the law, andby the passions of the populace, might be dangerous. It wasthought expedient to take a middle course. An address waspresented to the King, requesting him to pardon Oates. * Butthis concession only made bad worse. Titus had, likeevery other human being, a right to justice: but he was not aproper object of mercy. If the judgment against him was illegal,it ought to have been reversed. If it was legal, there was noground for remitting any part of it. The Commons, very pro-perly, persisted, passed then-bill, and sent it up to the Peers.Of this bill the only objectionable part was the preamble, whichasserted, not only that the judgment was illegal, a propositionwhich appeared on the face of the record to he true, but alsothat the verdict was corrupt, a proposition which, whether trueor false, was not proved by any evidence at all.

The Lords were in a great strait. They knew that they werein the wrong. Yet they were determined not to proclaim, intheir legislative capacity, that they had, in their judicial capa-city , been guilty of injustice. They again tried a middle course.The preamble was softened down: a clause was added whichprovided that Oates should still remain incapable of being awitness; and the bill thus altered was returned to the Commons.

The Commons were not satisfied. They rejected the amend-ments, and demanded a free conference. Two eminent Tories,Rochester and Nottingham, took their seats in the PaintedChamber as managers for the Lords. With them was joinedBurnet, whose well knowm hatred of Popery was likely to giveW'eight to what he might say on such an occasion. Somers was

* Lords’Journals, June G. 1689.