we do with this prerogative, according to the notion of Mr. Steele? It must not be trusted with the queen, because Providence has given her will, pleasure, and passion. Her ministers must not act by the authority of it; for then Mr. Steele will cry out, "What? Are majesty and ministry consolidated? and must there be no distinction between the one and the other?" p. 46. He tells you, p. 48, "The prerogative attends the crown;" and therefore, I suppose, must lie in the Tower, to be shown for twelvepence; but never produced, except at a coronation, or passing an act. "Well, but," says he, "a whole ministry may be impeached and condemned by the house of commons, without the prince's suffering by it." And what follows? Why, therefore, a single burgess of Stockbridge, before he gets into the house, may at any time revile a whole ministry in print, before he knows whether they are guilty of any one neglect of duty, or breach of trust!
I am willing to join issue with Mr. Steele in one particular; which perhaps may give you some diversion. He is taxed, by the Examiner and others, for an insolent expression, that the British nation expects the immediate demolition of Dunkirk. He says, the word expect was meant to the ministry, and not to the queen; "but that, however, for argument sake, he will suppose those words were addressed immediately to the queen." Let me then likewise, for argument sake, suppose a very ridiculous thing, that Mr. Steele were admitted to her majesty's sacred person, to tell his own story, with his letter to you, Mr. Bailiff, in his hand, to
