benevolent, should be received with universal disappro bation and disgust? I shall consider it as a ministerial measure, because it is an odious one, and as your measure, my lord duke, because you are the minister. As long as the trial of this chairman was depending, it was natural enough that government should give him every possible encouragement and support. The honourable service for which he was hired, and the spirit with which he performed it, made common cause between your grace and him. The minister, who by secret corruption invades the freedom of elections, and the ruffian, who by open violence destroys that freedom, are embarked in the same bottom: they have the same interests, and mutually feel for each other. To do justice to your grace's humanity, you felt for M'Quirk as you ought to do; and if you had been contented to assist him indirectly, without a notorious denial of justice, or openly insulting the sense of the nation, you might have satisfied every duty of political friendship, without committing the honour of your sovereign, or hazarding the reputation of his government. But when this unhappy man had been solemnly tried, convicted, and condemned; when it appeared that he had been frequently employed in the same services, and that no excuse for him could be drawn, either from the innocence of his former life, or the simplicity of his character; was it not hazarding too much, to interpose the strength of the prerogative between this felon and the justice of his country? You ought to have known, that an ex *Whitehall, March 11, 1769.-His majesty has been graciously pleased to extend his royal mercy to Edward M'Quirk, found guilty of the murder of George Clark, as appears by his royal warrant, to the tenor following: GEORGE R. WHEREAS a doubt has arisen in our royal breast concerning the 1 ample of this sort was never so necessary as at present; and certainly you must have known, that the lot could not have fallen upon a more guilty object. What system of government is this? You are perpetually com evidence of the death of George Clarke, from the representations of William Bromfield, Esq. surgeon, and Solomon Starling, apothecary; both of whom, as has been represented to us, attended the deceased before his death, and expressed their opinions, that he did not die of the blow he received at Brentford: And whereas it appears to us, that neither of the said persons were produced as witnesses upon the trial, though the said Solomon Starling had been examined before the coroner; and the only person called to prove that the death of the said George Clarke was occasioned by the said blow, was John Foot, surgeon, who never saw the deceased till after his death: We thought fit thereupon to refer the said representations, together with the report of the recorder of our city of London, of the evidence given by Richard and William Beale and the said John Foot, on the trial of Edward Quirk, otherwise called Edward Kirk, otherwise called Edward M'Quirk, for the murder of the said Clarke, to the master, wardens, and the rest of the court of examiners of the surgeons' company, commanding them likewise to take such farther examination of the said persons so representing, and of said John Foot, as they might think necessary, together with the premises above mentioned, to form and report to us their opinion, “Whether it did or did not appear to them, that the said George Clarke died in consequence of the blow he received in the riot at Brentford on the 8th of December last?" And the said court of examiners of the surgeons' company having thereupon reported to us their opi nion, “That it did not appear to them that he did;" we have thought proper to extend our royal mercy to him the said Edward Quirk, otherwise Edward Kirk, otherwise called Edward M'Quirk, and to grant him our free pardon for the murder of the said George Clarke, of which he has been found guilty. Our will and pleasure therefore is, That he the said Edward Quirk, otherwise called Edward Kirk, otherwise called Edward M'Quirk, be inserted, for the said murder, in our first and next general pardon that shall come out for the poor convicts of Newgate, without any condition whatsoever: and that in the mean time, you take bail for his appearance, in order to plead our said pardon. And for so doing this shall be your warrant. Given at our court at St. James's, the 10th day of March, 1769, in the ninth year of our reign. By his Majesty's command," To our trusty and well-beloved James Eyre, Esq. recorder of our city of London, the Sheriffs of our said city and county of Middlesex, and all others whom it may concern. } ROCHFORD. す plaining of the riotous disposition of the lower class of people; yet, when the laws have given you the means of making an example, in every sense unexceptionable, and by far the most likely to awe the multitude, you pardon the offence, and are not ashamed to give the sanction of government to the riots you complain of, and even to future murders. You are partial, perhaps, to the military mode of execution; and had rather see a score of these wretches butchered by the guards, than one of them suffer death by regular course of law. How does it happen, my lord, that, in your hands, even the mercy of the prerogative is cruelty and oppression to the subject? The measure, it seems, was so extraordinary, that you thought it necessary to give some reasons for it to the public. Let them be fairly examined. 1. You say, that Messrs. Bromfield and Starling were not examined at M'Quirk's trial. I will tell your grace why they were not. They must have been examined upon oath; and it was foreseen, that their evidence would either not benefit, or might be prejudicial to the prisoner. Otherwise, is it conceivable that his counsel should neglect to call in such material evidence? You say, that Mr. Foot did not see the deceased until after his death. A surgeon, my lord, must know very little of his profession, if, upon examining a wound or a contusion, he cannot determine whether it was mortal or not. While the party is alive, a surgeon will be cautious of pronouncing; whereas, by the death of a patient, he is enabled to consider both cause and effect in one view, and to speak with a certainty confirmed by experience. Yet we are to thank your grace for the establishment of a new tribunal. Your inquisitio post mortem is unknown to the laws of England, and does honour to your |