66

'Probably no man ever commenced practice as an advocate in England with such high and varied qualifications. He was consummately skilled as a lawyer-from the practice of commencing an action, which he had learned when a lad in his father's office, to the most abstruse doctrines of real property, which he had imbibed from Winnington, and the most enlarged views of general jurisprudence, with which he had become familiar from his civil law studies at Oxford. He was moreover deeply versed in all constitutional learning, and besides being a fine classical scholar, he was familiarly acquainted with the languages and the literature of all the polished nations on the continent of Europe. Above all, he had steady habits of application, and he could not only make the necessary active exertion, but undergo the necessary drudgery, and submit to the necessary sacrifices, to ensure success at the English bar."

Success he immediately obtained, and success so complete, that his professional income in the reign of James II. amounted to £700 per annum, an exceptionally large sum at that period. He had scarcely been a year at the bar when he was employed as one of the counsel in the then famous case of Pilkington and Shute, the sheriffs of London, who with others were indicted for a riot on Midsummer Day, 1681, caused by the attempt of the Crown to influence the election. But it was in a far more important trial that his reputation as a constitutional lawyer was solidly established. When James II. asserted the "dispensing power" of the Crown, and, in April, 1688, published a Declaration of Indulgence which suspended the operation of the penal laws against both Nonconformists and Roman Catholics, and of all acts imposing a test as a qualification for office in Church or State, he ordered that every clergyman should read it during divine service on two successive Sundays. "Little time," says says Mr. Green, "was given for deliberation; but

little time was needed. The clergy refused almost to a man to be the instruments of their own humiliation. The declaration was read in only four of the London churches, and in these the congregation flocked out of church at the first words of it. Nearly all the country parsons refused to obey the royal orders, and the bishops went with the rest of the clergy." The Archbishop of Canterbury, with six of his suffragans, humbly petitioned the king to be absolved from it. When their protest was laid before James, he exclaimed, "It is a standard of rebellion!" and, impelled by the fate which was driving him on to destruction, directed an information to be filed against them for publishing a seditious libel against the king and his government.

On the 15th of June, 1688, they were brought to trial in the Court of King's Bench. Their counsel were Sir Robert Sawyer, Mr. Finch, Mr. Pollexfen, Sir George Treby, Mr. Pemberton, Sergeant Levaig, and Mr. Somers. To the last the bishops had at first objected on the ostensible grounds of his youth and want of practice; more probably, because he was a Whig in politics, and a known opponent of the doctrines of "divine right" and "passive obedience," which they had so zealously and unwisely advocated; but Pollexfen, insisting on his profound constitutional learning, and his thorough knowledge of "precedents and records," declared that unless he was retained he himself would abandon the defence. His services proved to be invaluable. He supplied his brother-counsel with the facts gleaned by his wide and laborious research; while his own speeches were distinguished by the force and clearness of their arguments. His closing address was remarkably impressive, and, assisted as it was by the popular feeling, led to the

acquittal of the Seven Bishops-an event which may justly be regarded as the first stage of the Revolution. In its subsequent stages he played a not less weighty part. The Whig leaders, in their bold effort to establish a constitutional system of government, were guided by his sound and sage advice. He was admitted into "the most secret councils of the Prince of Orange ;" and was certainly concerned in drawing up the celebrated "Invitation to him to intervene by force of arms for the restoration of English liberty and the protection of the Protestant religion.

James fled from England on the 23rd of December, and a month afterwards a convention of both Houses of Parliament was summoned by the Prince to settle the government of the country. In this convention Somers represented the city of Worcester. In the debates of the Lower House he seems at once to have taken the lead; his "luminous eloquence" and "varied stores of knowledge” making a deep impression upon his fellowmembers. He drew up the famous Resolution with which the debate terminated-"That King James II., having endeavoured to subvert the constitution of the kingdom by breaking the original contract between king and people, and by the advice of Jesuits and other wicked persons having violated the fundamental laws, and having withdrawn himself out of this kingdom, has abdicated the government, and that the throne is thereby become vacant." The House of Lords having adopted certain amendments, Somers was one of the committee which the Commons appointed to confer with them upon the subject. The principal objection made by the peers was to the word "abdicate," for which they proposed to substitute" deserted," and at the same time to omit the

concluding clause. Somers supported the resolution with ingenuity and learning, quoting Grotius and Brissonius, Spilevius and Bartolus, and referring to the precedent of 1399. Eventually the Lords yielded, and having adopted the resolution, immediately afterwards proposed and carried another, that the Prince and Princess of Orange should be declared King and Queen of England.

This resolution was, of course, affirmed by the Commons, and the theme being thus supplied, the convention applied their energies to the great subject of constitutional reform. A committee was appointed, which, under the guidance of Somers, set forth the necessary conditions for "the better securing our religion, liberty, and laws," and embodied them in the famous "Declaration of Rights," which, with some amendments, was accepted by both Houses. The Declaration recited the misgovernment of James, his abdication, and the firm purpose of the Lords and Commons to maintain the ancient rights and liberties of Englishmen. It condemned as illegal his establishment of an ecclesiastical commission, and his levying an army without the sanction of Parliament. It denied the right of any king to suspend or dispense with laws, as they had been suspended or dispensed with of late, or to exact money save by consent of Parliament. It asserted the right of the subject to petition, to a free choice of representatives in Parliament, and to a pure and merciful administration of justice. It maintained the right of both Houses to liberty of debate. It demanded securities for the free exercise of the Protestant religion, while it bound the new sovereign to maintain together the laws and liberties of the people. All these things it claimed as the undoubted inheritance of Englishmen.

Having thus vindicated the principles of the constitution, the Lords and Commons, in full confidence that his Highness the Prince would perfect the deliverance he had begun, and preserve their rights against all further injury, resolved that William and Mary, Prince and Princess of Orange, should be declared King of England for their joint and separate lives, and that during their joint lives the administration of the government should be in the Prince alone.

The Declaration was presented to William and Mary on the 13th of February by the two Houses, and accepted by William in his own name, and in that of his wife. It was in a large measure through the sagacity, skill, and moderation of Somers, that this settlement of the nation was effected, and the foundation laid deep and strong of the constitutional government of Great Britain.

It was impossible that services such as his should go without reward, and William III. hastened to appoint him Solicitor-General and to confer on him the honour of knighthood (May, 1691). His first official speech was made in defence of the Bill for declaring the Convention a Parliament. To those who disputed its legality, because it was not summoned by royal writ, he replied *

"If this were not a legal Parliament, they who had taken the oaths which it had prescribed were guilty of high treason; the laws repealed by it were still in force; all concerned in levying, collecting, or paying taxes under its statutes were highly criminal, and the whole nation must presently return to King James.' He spoke with much zeal, and such an ascendant of authority, that none was prepared to answer; so the bill

* Bishop Burnet, "History of Our Own Times," iii. 57.