He accordingly appeared at the bar, and sir J.Powis proceeded on his defence.

He observed that the bill under consideration affected the lives of the subjects; and such precedents were dangerous; that sir John Fenwick was forthcoming in order to be tried by the ordinary methods of justice; that he was actually under process, had pleaded, and was ready to stand trial; that if there was sufficient clear evidence against him, as the king's sergeant had declared, there was no reason for his being deprived of the benefit of such a trial as was the birthright of every British subject; and if there was a deficiency of legal evidence, he thought this was a very odd reason for the bill.

He took notice that even the regicides had the benefit of such a trial; that the last act for regulating trials in cases of treason proved the great tenderness of the laws which affected the life of the subject; and he expressed his surprise that the very parliament which had passed that law should enact another for putting a person to death without any trial at all.

He admitted that there had been many bills of attainder, but they were generally levelled at outlaws and fugitives; and some of them had been reversed in the sequel as arbitrary and unjust.

He urged that this bill of attainder did not allege or say that sir John Fenwick was guilty of the treason for which he had been indicted; a circumstance which prevented him from producing witnesses to that and several matters upon which the king's counsel had expatiated.