It may be urged, indeed, that there is a universal discontent over the
whole nation; that the clamour against the person mentioned in the bill,
has been continued for many years; that the influence of the nation is
impaired in foreign countries; that our treasury is exhausted; that our
liberties have been attacked, our properties invaded, and our morals
corrupted; but these are yet only rumours, without proof, and without
legal certainty; which may, indeed, with great propriety give occasion
to an inquiry, and, perhaps, by that inquiry some facts may be
ascertained which may afford sufficient reasons for farther procedure.

But such, my lords, is the form of the bill now before us, that if it
should pass into a statute, it would, in my opinion, put a stop to all
future inquiry, by making those incapable of giving evidence, who have
had most opportunities of knowing those transactions, which have given
the chief occasion of suspicion, and from whom, therefore, the most
important information must naturally be expected.

The first requisite qualification of a witness, whether we consult
natural equity and reason, or the common law of our own country, is
disinterestedness; an indifference, with regard to all outward
circumstances, about the event of the trial at which his testimony is
required. For he that is called as a witness where he is interested, is
in reality giving evidence in his own cause.

But this qualification, my lords, the bill now before us manifestly
takes away; for every man who shall appear against the person into whose
conduct the commons are inquiring, evidently promotes, in the highest
degree, his own interest by his evidence, as he may preclude all
examination of his own behaviour, and secure the possession of that
wealth which he has accumulated by fraud and oppression, or, perhaps,