to all the people, and all the names and descriptions, that, relieved by this bill, will bless the labors of this Parliament, and the confidence which the best House of Commons has given to him who the best deserves it.  The little cavils of party will not be heard where freedom and happiness will be felt.  There is not a tongue, a nation, or religion in India, which will not bless the presiding care and manly beneficence of this House, and of him who proposes to you this great work.  Your names will never be separated before the throne of the Divine Goodness, in whatever language, or with whatever rites, pardon is asked for sin, and reward for those who imitate the Godhead in His universal bounty to His creatures.  These honors you deserve, and they will surely be paid, when all the jargon of influence and party and patronage are swept into oblivion.

I have spoken what I think, and what I feel, of the mover of this bill.  An honorable friend of mine, speaking of his merits, was charged with having made a studied panegyric.  I don’t know what his was.  Mine, I am sure, is a studied panegyric,—­the fruit of much meditation, the result of the observation of near twenty years.  For my own part, I am happy that I have lived to see this day; I feel myself overpaid for the labors of eighteen years, when, at this late period, I am able to take my share, by one humble vote, in destroying a tyranny that exists to the disgrace of this nation and the destruction of so large a part of the human species.

FOOTNOTES: 

[52] An allusion made by Mr. Powis.

[53] Mr. Pitt.

[54] Mr. Pitt.

[55] Mr. Dundas, Lord Advocate of Scotland.

[56] The paltry foundation at Calcutta is scarcely worth naming as an exception.

[57] Mr. Fox.

[58] Governor Johnstone.

A

REPRESENTATION TO HIS MAJESTY,

MOVED IN

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

BY THE RIGHT HON.  EDMUND BURKE, AND SECONDED BY WILLIAM WINDHAM, ESQ.,

ON MONDAY, JUNE 14, 1784,

AND NEGATIVED.

WITH A PREFACE AND NOTES.

PREFACE.

The representation now given to the public relates to some of the most essential privileges of the House of Commons.  It would appear of little importance, if it were to be judged by its reception in the place where it was proposed.  There it was rejected without debate.  The subject matter may, perhaps, hereafter appear to merit a more serious consideration.  Thinking men will scarcely regard the penal dissolution of a Parliament as a very trifling concern.  Such a dissolution must operate forcibly as an example; and it much imports the people of this kingdom to consider what lesson that example is to teach.