Mr. WINNINGTON replied:—­Sir, as I was hindered by the gentleman’s ardour and impetuosity from concluding my sentence, none but myself can know the equity or partiality of my intentions, and, therefore, as I cannot justly be condemned, I ought to be supposed innocent; nor ought he to censure a fault of which he cannot be certain that it would ever have been committed.

He has, indeed, exalted himself to a degree of authority never yet assumed by any member of this house, that of condemning others to silence.  I am henceforward, by his inviolable decree, to sit and hear his harangues without daring to oppose him.  How wide he may extend his authority, or whom he will proceed to include in the same sentence, I shall not determine; having not yet arrived at the same degree of sagacity with himself, nor being able to foreknow what another is going to pronounce.

If I had given offence by any improper sallies of passion, I ought to have been censured by the concurrent voice of the assembly, or have received a reprimand, sir, from you, to which I should have submitted without opposition; but I will not be doomed to silence by one who has no pretensions to authority, and whose arbitrary decisions can only tend to introduce uproar, discord, and confusion.

Mr. Henry PELHAM next rose up, and spoke to this effect:—­Sir, when, in the ardour of controversy upon interesting questions, the zeal of the disputants hinders them from a nice observation of decency and regularity, there is some indulgence due to the common weakness of our nature; nor ought any gentleman to affix to a negligent expression a more offensive sense than is necessarily implied by it.

To search deep, sir, for calumnies and reproaches is no laudable nor beneficial curiosity; it must always be troublesome to ourselves by alarming us with imaginary injuries, and may often be unjust to others by charging them with invectives which they never intended.  General candour and mutual tenderness will best preserve our own quiet, and support that dignity which has always been accounted essential to national debates, and seldom infringed without dangerous consequences.

Mr. LYTTLETON spoke as follows:—­Sir, no man can be more zealous for decency than myself, or more convinced of the necessity of a methodical prosecution of the question before us.  I am well convinced how near indecency and faction are to one another, and how inevitably confusion produces obscurity; but I hope it will always be remembered, that he who first infringes decency, or deviates from method, is to answer for all the consequences that may arise from the neglect of senatorial customs:  for it is not to be expected that any man will bear reproaches without reply, or that he who wanders from the question will not be followed in his digressions, and hunted through his labyrinths.

It cannot, sir, be denied, that some insinuations were uttered injurious to those whose zeal may sometimes happen to prompt them to warm declarations, or incite them to passionate emotions.  Whether I am of importance enough to be included in the censure, I despise it too much to inquire or consider, but cannot forbear to observe, that zeal for the right can never become reproachful, and that no man can fall into contempt but those who deserve it.