That the right honourable gentleman is the only disposer of honours, has never yet appeared; it is not pretended, my lords, that he distributes them without the consent of his majesty, nor even that his recommendation is absolutely necessary to the success of any man's applications. If he has gained more of his majesty's confidence and esteem than any other of his servants, he has done only what every man endeavours, and what, therefore, is not to be imputed to him as a crime. It is impossible, my lords, that kings, like other men, should not have particular motions of inclination or dislike; it is possible that they may fix their affection upon objects not in the highest degree worthy of their regard, and overlook others that may boast of greater excellencies and more shining merit; but this is not to be supposed without proof, and the regard of the king, as of any other man, is one argument of desert more than he can produce, who has endeavoured after it without effect. This imputed usurpation must be proved upon him either by his own confession, or by the evidence of others; and it has not been yet pretended that he assumes the title of _prime minister_, or indeed, that it is applied to him by any but his enemies; and it may easily be conceived how weakly the most uncorrupted innocence would be supported, if all the aspersions of its enemies were to be received as proofs against it. Nor does it appear, my lords, that any other evidence can be brought against him on this head, or that any man will stand forth and affirm that either he has been injured himself by this gentleman, or known any injury done by him to another by the exertion of authority with which he was not lawfully invested; such evidence, my lords, the laws of our country require to be produced before any man can be punished, censured, or disgraced. No man is obliged to prove his innocence, but may call upon his prosecutors to support their accusation; and why this honourable gentleman, whatever may have been his conduct, should be treated in a different manner than any other criminal, I am by no means able to discover. Though there has been no evidence offered of his guilt, your lordships have heard an attestation of his innocence, from the noble duke who spoke first against the motion, of whom it cannot be suspected that he would, voluntarily, engage to answer for measures which he pursued in blind compliance with the direction of another. The same testimony, my lords, can I produce, and affirm with equal truth, that in the administration of my province, I am independent, and left entirely to the decisions of my own judgment.