24

HISTORY OP ENGLAND.

CHAP.

XXI.

1695 .

The flight of this man made it impossible for the Commonsto proceed. They vehemently accused Leeds of having sentaway the witness who alone could furnish legal proof of thatwhich was already established by moral proof. Leeds, now atease as to the event of the impeachment, gave himself the airsof an injured man. “My Lords,” he said, “the conduct of theCommons is without precedent. They impeach me of a highcrime: they promise to prove it: then they find that they havenot the means of proving it; and they revile me fornot supplyingthem with the means. Surely they ought not to have brought acharge like this, without well considering whether they had orhad not evidence sufficient to support it. If Hobart’s testimonybe, as they now say, indispensable, why did they not send forhim and hear his story before they made up their minds? Theymay thank their own intemperance, their own precipitancy, forhis disappearance. He is a foreigner: he is timid: he hearsthat a transaction in which he has been concerned has been pro-nounced by the House of Commons to be highly criminal, thathis master is impeached, that his friend Bates is in prison, thathis own turn is coming. He naturally takes fright: he escapesto his own country; and, from what I know of him, I will ven-ture to predict that it will be long before he trusts himself againwithin reach of the Speaker’s warrant. But what is that to me?Ami to lie all my life under the stigma of an accusation like this,merely because the violence of my accusers has scared their ownwitness out of England? I demand an immediate trial. I moveyour Lordships to resolve that, unless the Commons shall pro-ceed before the end of the session, the impeachment shall bedismissed.” A few friendly voices cried out “ Well moved.” Butthe Peers were generally unwilling to take a step which wouldhave been in the highest degree offensive to the Lower House,and to the great body of those whom that House represented.