(368) The question was, “That Privilege of Parliament does not extend to the case of writing and publishing seditious libels, nor ought to be allowed to obstruct the ordinary course of the laws in the speedy and effectual prosecution of so heinous and dangerous an offence."-C.

(369) Richard Hussey, member for St. Mawes.  He was counsel to the navy, as well as solicitor to the Queen, not, as Mr. Walpole says, to the Princess.  He was afterwards her majesty’s attorney-general.-C.

(370) Charles Yorke, second son of Lord Chancellor Hardwicke.  He had been attorney-general, but resigned on the 31st of October.  He agreed with the ministry on the question of privilege, but differed from them on general warrants.  This last difference may have accelerated his resignation; but the event itself had been determined on, ever since the failure of a negotiation which took place towards the end of the preceding August, through Mr. Pitt and Lord Hardwicke, to form a new administration on a Whig basis.-C.

(371) Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, afterwards Lord Camden.  He had discharged Wilkes out of confinement on the ground of privilege.-E.

(372) Sir John Rushout, of Northwick, the fourth baronet.  He had sat in ten Parliaments; in the three first for Malmsbury, and in the rest for Evesham.  He had been a violent politician in Sir Robert Walpole’s administration.  See vol. i. p. 222, letter 53.-E.

(373) The Right Hon. Richard Rigby, master of the rolls in Ireland, afterwards paymaster of the forces; a statesman of the second class, and a bon vivant of the first.  Mr. Rigby was at one time a chief friend and favourite of Mr. Walpole’s, but became involved in Mr. Walpole’s dislike to the Duke of Bedford, to whom Mr. Rigby was sincerely and constantly attached, and over whom he was supposed to have great influence.-C.

(374) Fourth brother of Lord Temple and Mr. George Grenville; father of Lord Glastonbury.-E.

(375) Lady Suffolk, in a letter to the Earl of Buckingham, of the 29th of November, says, “Jemmy Grenville and Mr. Rigby were so violent against each other, one in his manner of treating Lord Temple, who was in the House, and the brother in his justification of his brother, that the House was obliged to interfere to prevent mischief.  Lord Temple comes to me; but politics is the bane of friendship, and when personal resentments join, the man becomes another creature."-E.

(376) As Mr. Walpole seems to impute Mr. Charles Townshend’s silence on the question of privilege to fickleness, or some worse cause, it is but just to state that he never quite approved that question.  This will be seen from the following extract from some of his confidential letters to Dr. Brocklesby, written two months before Parliament met:—­“You know I never approved of No. 45, or engaged in any of the consequential measures.  As to the question of privilege, it is an intricate matter; The authorities are contradictory, and the distinctions to be reasonably made on the precedents are plausible and endless.”  Mr. Townshend gave a good deal of further consideration to the subject, and his silence in the debate only proves that his first impressions were confirmed.  Mr. Burke’s beautiful, but, perhaps, too favourable character of Charles Townshend will immortalize the writer and the subject.-C.