THE WORKS OF SAMUEL JOHNSON, LL. D, VOLUME THE TENTH. 

MDCCCXXV. 

CONTENTS

Debate on the bill for prohibiting the exportation of corn. 

Debate on a seditious paper. 

Debate on incorporating the new-raised men into the standing regiments. 

Debate on taking the state of the army into consideration. 

Debate respecting officers on half-pay. 

Debate on an address for papers relating to admiral Haddock. 

Debate regarding the departure of the French and Spanish squadrons. 

Debate on addressing his majesty for the removal of sir R. Walpole. 

Debate on cleansing the city of Westminster. 

Debate on the bill to prevent inconveniencies arising from the insuranceof ships. 

Debate on the bill for the encouragement and increase of seamen. 

Debate on the bill for the punishment of mutiny and desertion. 

Debate on addressing the king. 

Debate on supporting the queen of Hungary. 

Debate on choosing a speaker. 

Debate on the address. 

PREFATORY OBSERVATIONS TO THE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES. 

The government of this country has long and justly been considered thebest among the nations of Europe; and the English people have everevinced a proportionate desire for information in its proceedings. Butin the earlier days of our constitution, we shall find that muchjealousy on the part of our rulers debarred the people from access tothe national deliberations. Queen Elizabeth, with a sagacity thatderived no assurance from the precedents of former times, foresaw themighty power of the press, as an engine applied to state purposes, andaccordingly aroused the spirit of her subjects, by causing the firstgazettes to be published in the year of the armada [Footnote: See sir J. Mackintosh's Defence in the Peltier case. ]: and D'Ewes's journals of herparliaments contain the earliest reports of parliamentary debates. 

The first volume of the commons' journals comprises the debates from theaccession of James the first, to the cessation of parliaments underCharles the first. The publication, in 1766, of a member's notes, furnished authentic debates of the session in 1621. Rushworth, in hisvoluminous collections, presents us with many of the debates during thecivil wars. Gray's more regular debates succeeded. From these, until thetimes that followed the glorious revolution in 1688, we have no reportsof parliamentary proceedings, interesting as they must have been, onwhich we can place any more reliance, than on those of Dr. Johnson, which, we shall presently see, cannot pretend to the character offaithful reports, however deservedly eminent they are as eloquent andenergetic compositions. But the revolution was not immediately followedby a liberal diffusion of parliamentary intelligence, for the newspapersof William's reign only give occasionally a detached speech. Thatsovereign scarcely allowed liberty of speech to the members ofparliament themselves, and was fully as tyrannical in disposition as hispredecessor on the throne; but, happily for the English nation, he wastied and bound by the strong fetters of law. 

The stormy period that ensued on William's death, is somewhatillustrated by Boyer's POLITICAL STATE. The HISTORICAL REGISTERS whichappeared on the accession of George the first, may be considered as morefaithful depositories of political information than Boyer's partialpublication. The spirited opposition to sir Robert Walpole excited anunprecedented anxiety in the nation to learn the internal proceedings ofparliament. This wish on the part of constituents to know and scrutinizethe conduct of their representatives, which to us appears so reasonablea claim, was regarded in a different light by our ancestors. But thefrown of authority in the reign of George the second began to have lesspower to alarm a people whose minds were undergoing progressiveillumination. A general desire was then loudly expressed forparliamentary information, which Cave sought to gratify by the insertionof the debates in the GENTLEMAN'S MAGAZINE. The jealousy of the houses, however, subjected that indefatigable man to the practices of stratagemfor the accomplishment of his design. He held the office of inspector offranks in the postoffice, which brought him into contact with theofficers of both houses of parliament, and afforded him frequent andready access to many of the members. Cave, availing himself of thisadvantage, frequented the houses when any debate of public interest wasexpected, and, along with a friend, posted himself in the gallery of thehouse of commons, and in some retired station in that of the lords, where, unobserved, they took notes of the several speeches. These noteswere afterwards arranged and expanded by Guthrie, the historian, then inthe employment of Cave, and presented to the public, monthly, in theGentleman's Magazine. They first appeared in July, 1736 [Footnote: Gent. Mag. Vol. Vi. ], and were perused with the greatest eagerness. But it wassoon intimated to Cave, that the speaker was offended with this freedom, which he regarded in the light of a breach of privilege, and wouldsubject Cave, unless he desisted, to parliamentary censure, or perhapspunishment. To escape this, and likewise to avoid an abridgment of hismagazine, Cave had recourse to the following artifice. He opened hismagazine for June, 1738, with an article entitled, "Debates in thesenate of Magna Lilliputia;" in which he artfully deplores theprohibition that forbids him to present his readers with theconsultations of their own representatives, and expresses a hope thatthey will accept, as a substitute, those of that country which Gulliverhad so lately rendered illustrious, and which untimely death hadprevented that enterprising traveller from publishing himself. Underthis fiction he continued to publish the debates of the Britishparliament, hiding the names of persons and places by the transpositionof letters, in the way of anagram. These he contrived to explain to hisreaders, by annexing to his volume for 1738, feigned proposals forprinting a work, to be called Anagrammata Rediviva. This list, andothers from different years, we give in the present edition, though wehave rejected the barbarous jargon from the speeches themselves. Acontemporary publication, the LONDON MAGAZINE, feigned to give thedebates of the Roman senate, and adapted Roman titles to the severalspeakers. This expedient, as well as Cave's contrivance, sufficed toprotect its ingenious authors from parliamentary resentment; as theresolution of the commons was never enforced. 

The debates contained in the following volumes, commence with the 19thNovember, 1740, and terminate with the 23d February, 1742-3. Theanimated attempts that were made to remove sir Robert Walpole fromadministration, seemed, in Cave's opinion, to call for an abler reporterthan Guthrie. Johnson was selected for the task; and his execution of itmay well justify the admiration which we have so often avowed for thosewonderful powers of mind, which, apparently, bade defiance to allimpediments of external fortune. 

He was only thirty-two years of age, little acquainted with the world;had never, perhaps, been in either house, and certainly had neverconversed with the men whose style and sentiments he took upon himselfto imitate. But so well and skilfully did he assume, not merely thesedate and stately dignity of the lords, and the undaunted freedom ofthe commons, but also the tone of the respective parties, that thepublic imagined they recognised the individual manner of the differentspeakers. Voltaire, and other foreigners of distinction, comparedBritish with Greek and Roman eloquence; and ludicrous instances aredetailed by Johnson's biographers, of praises awarded to Pulteney or toPitt, in the presence of the unsuspected author of the orations whichhad excited such regard [Footnote: See Boswell, and sir John Hawkins. ]!For Johnson confessed, that he composed many of the speeches entirelyfrom his own imagination, and all of them from very scanty materials. 

This confession he undoubtedly made from his love of truth, and not forthe gratification of vanity. When he heard that Smollett was preparinghis History of England, he warned him against relying on the debates asauthentic; and, on his death-bed, he professed that the recollection ofhaving been engaged in an imposture was painful to him. That this was arefined scrupulosity the most rigid moralist must allow; but, nevertheless, it is matter for congratulation, that the liberality ofparliament no longer subjects its reporters to the subterfuges which wehave thus briefly attempted to describe. And a comparison of this ageand its privileges with the restrictions of former times, may not bewithout its use, if, by reminding us that we were not always free, itteaches us political contentment, suggests to us the policy ofmoderation, and enables us to love liberty, and yet be wise. 

OXFORD, NOVEMBER, 1825. 

_The List of fictitious Terms used by Cave to disguise the real Namesthat occur in his Debates. _

 Abingdon, Ld. . . . Adonbing or Plefdrahn Ambrose, Captain . . . Ambreso Archer . . . Arech Argyle, Duke of . . . Agryl Arthur . . . Aruth Anne . . . Nuna Aston . . . Anots Aylesford, Lord . . . Alysfrop Baltimore, Lord . . . Blatirome Barnard, Sir John . . . Branard Barrington . . . Birrongtan Bath, Earl of . . . Baht Bathurst, Lord . . . Brustath Bedford, Duke of . . . Befdort Berkeley, Lord . . . Berelky Bishop . . . Flamen Bladen, Mr. . . . Bledna Bootle, Mr. . . . Butul Bowles, Mr. . . . Bewlos Bristol, Lord . . . Broslit Bromley, Mr. . . . Bormlye Brown, Mr. . . . Brewon or Buron Burleigh . . . Bruleigh Burrell, Mr. . . . Berrull Campbell . . . Campobell Carew, Mr. . . . Cawar Carlisle, Earl of . . . Carsilel Carteret, Lord . . . Quadrert Castres, Mons . . . Cahstrehs Cavendish . . . Candevish Charles . . . Chorlo Chesterfield, Earl of . . . Castroflet Cholmondeley, Earl of . . . Sholmlug Churchill . . . Chillchurch Clutterbuck, Mr. . . . Cluckerbutt Cocks . . . Cosck Coke, Mr. . . . Quoke Cooke . . . Coeko Cooper, Mr. . . . Quepur Corbet, Mr. . . . Croteb Cornwall, Mr. . . . Carnwoll Cromwell . . . Clewmro Danes . . . Danians Danvers . . . Dranevs Delawarr, Lord . . . Devarlar Devonshire, Duke of . . . Dovenshire Digby . . . Dibgy Drake, Mr. . . . Dekra Earle, Mr. . . . Eral Edmund . . . Emdond Edward . . . Eddraw Elizabeth . . . Ezila Erskine, Mr. . . . Eserkin Eugene, Prince . . . Eunege Falconberg, Lord . . . Flacnobrug Falkland . . . Flakland Fanshaw, Mr. . . . Fashnaw Fazakerly . . . Fakazerly Fenwick, Mr. . . . Finweck Ferrol . . . Ferlor Fox, Mr. . . . Feaux Francis . . . Farncis or Friscan Gage, Lord . . . Gega George . . . Gorgenti Gibbon, Mr. . . . Gibnob Gloucester, Duke of . . . Glustre Godolphin, Lord . . . Golphindo Gore . . . Gero Gower, Lord . . . Gewor Grenville, Mr. . . . Grevillen Gybbon, Mr. . . . Gybnob Halifax, Lord . . . Haxilaf Haddock, Admiral . . . Hockadd Handasyd, Mr. . . . Hasandyd Harding, Mr. . . . Hadringe Hardwick, Lord . . . Hickrad Harrington . . . Hargrinton Hay, Mr. . . . Heagh Heathcote . . . Whethtoc Henry . . . Hynrec Herbert . . . Hertreb Hervey, Lord . . . Heryef Hessian . . . Hyessean Hind Cotton . . . Whind Cotnot Hindford . . . Honfryd Hinton . . . Hwenton Hobart . . . Hobrat Holdernesse, Lord . . . Hodrelness Hooper . . . Horeop Hosier, Admiral . . . Hozeri Howe . . . Hewo Islay, Lord . . . Yasli Isham . . . Ishma Ilchester . . . Itchletser James . . . Jacomo Jekyl . . . Jelyco Jenkins . . . Jenkino John . . . Juan Joseph . . . Josippo Keene, Mr. . . . Knee Ledbury, Mr. . . . Lebdury Lindsay . . . Lisnayd Litchneld . . . Liftchield Lockwood . . . Lodowock Lombe . . . Lebom Lonsdale, Lord . . . Lodsneal Lovel . . . Levol Lymerick, Lord . . . Lyromick Lyttleton . . . Lettyltno Marlborough, Duke of . . . Maurolburgh Malton, Lord . . . Matlon Manley . . . Manly Mary . . . Marya Montrose, Duke of . . . Morontosse Mordaunt . . . Madrount Morton . . . Motron Newcastle, Duke of . . . Nardac secretary Noel . . . Neol Norris, Admiral . . . Nisror Nugent . . . Netgun Ogle, Admiral . . . Oleg Onslow . . . Olswon Orange . . . Organe Ord, Mr. . . . Whord Orford, Earl of . . . Orfrod Orleans . . . Olreans Ormond, Duke of . . . Omrond Oxford, Earl of . . . Odfrox Oxenden . . . Odnexen Paxton . . . Pantox Pelham, Mr. . . . Plemahm Perry . . . Peerur Peterborough . . . Petraborauch Pitt, Mr. . . . Ptit Plumer, Mr. . . . Plurom Polwarth . . . Polgarth Portland, Duke of . . . Poldrand Powlett . . . Powltet or Pletow Pretender . . . Rednetrep Puffendorf . . . Pudenfforf Pulteney . . . Pulnub Quarendon . . . Quenardon Rainsford . . . Rainsfrod Ramelies . . . Ramles Raymond . . . Ramonyd Robert . . . Retrob Rochester . . . Roffen Saint Aubyn . . . St. Aybun Salisbury . . . Sumra Samuel . . . Salvem Sandwich, Earl of . . . Swandich Sandys, Mr. . . . Snadsy Scarborough, Lord . . . Sarkbrugh Scroop, Mr. . . . Screop Sidney, Lord . . . Sedyin Selwin, Mr. . . . Slenwy Shaftsbury, Lord . . . Shyftasbrug Shippen, Mr. . . . Skeiphen Sloper . . . Slerop Somers . . . Sosrem Somerset . . . Sosermet Southwell . . . Suthewoll Strafford . . . Stordraff Stair . . . Stari Stanislaus . . . Stasinlaus Sundon . . . Snodun Talbot . . . Toblat Thomas . . . Tsahom Thomson, Mr. . . . Thosmon Tracey . . . Tryace Trenchard . . . Trachnerd Trevor, Mr. . . . Tervor Turner . . . Truron Tweedale, Marquis of . . . Tewelade Tyrconnel, Lord . . . Trinocleng Vernon, Admiral . . . Venron Vyner, Mr. . . . Vynre or Venry Wade . . . Weda Wager, Admiral . . . Werga Wakefield . . . Wafekeild Waller, Mr. . . . Welral Walpole, Sir Robert . . . Walelop Walpole, Mr. . . . Walelop Walter, Mr. . . . Gusbret Watkins, Mr. . . . Waknits Wendover . . . Wednevro Westmoreland . . . Westromland William . . . Wimgul Willimot, Mr. . . . Guillitom Winchelsea, Lord . . . Wichensale Winnington, Mr. . . . Wintinnong Wortley, Mr. . . . Wolresyt or Werotyl Wyndham . . . Gumdahm Wynn . . . Ooyn Yonge . . . Yegon

_The List of fictitious Characters used by Cave to disguise the Placesthat occur in his Debates. _

 Almanza . . . Almanaz America . . . Columbia Amsterdam . . . Amstredam Aschaffenburg . . . Aschafnefburg Austria . . . Aurista Barbadoes . . . Bardosba Barcelona . . . Bracolena Brittany . . . Brateney Bavaria . . . Baravia Blenheim . . . Blehneim or Blenhem Bourbon . . . Buorbon Brandenburg . . . Brangburden Bristol . . . Broslit Britain . . . Lilliput Cadiz . . . Cazid Cambridge . . . Guntar Campechy . . . Capemchy Carolina . . . Carolana Carthagena . . . Carthanega Cologne . . . Colgone Commons . . . Clinabs Connecticut . . . Contecticnu Cressy . . . Cerlsy Cuba . . . Cabu Denmark . . . Dancram Dettingen . . . Detteneg Dunkirk . . . Donkirk Dutch . . . Belgians Edinburgh . . . Edina Europe . . . Degulia Flanders . . . Flandria France . . . Blefuscu Georgia . . . Gorgentia Germany . . . Allemanu Gibraltar . . . Grablitra Guastalla . . . Gua Stalla Guernsey . . . Guensrey Hanover . . . Hanevro Haversham . . . Havremarsh Hesse Cassel . . . Hyesse Clessa Hispaniola . . . Iberionola Holland . . . Belgia Hungary . . . Hungruland India . . . Idnia Ireland . . . Ierne Italy . . . Itlascu Jamaica . . . Zamengol Jucatan . . . Jutacan Leghorn . . . Lehgron London . . . Mildendo Madrid . . . Mardit Malplaquet . . . Malpalquet Mardyke . . . Mardryke Martinico . . . Marnitico Mediterranean . . . Middle Sea Minorca . . . Minocra Munster . . . Munstru Muscovy . . . Mausqueeta New York . . . Noveborac Orkney . . . Orkyen Orleans . . . Olreans Ostend . . . Odsten Parma . . . Par Ma Pennsylvania . . . Pennvasilia Poland . . . Poldrand Portugal . . . Lusitania Port Mahon . . . Port Mohan Prussia . . . Parushy Prague . . . Praga Sardinia . . . Sadrinia Schellembourg . . . Schemelbourg Seville . . . Sebfule Sicily . . . Cilisy South Sea . . . Pacific Ocean Spain . . . Iberia Straits . . . Narrow Seas Sweden . . . Swecte Turkey . . . Korambec Utrecht . . . Ultralt Vienna . . . Vinena Virginia . . . Vegrinia Westminster . . . Belfaborac Wolfenbuttle . . . Wobentuffle

_The List of fictitious Characters used by Cave to disguise the Names ofThings that occur in his Debates. _

 Admiral . . . Galbet Baronet . . . Hurgolen Commons . . . Clinabs Duke . . . Nardac Earl . . . Cosern Esquire . . . Urg Gentleman . . . Urgolen High Heels or Tory . . . Tramecsan Knight . . . Hurgolet Legal . . . Snilpal Lord . . . Hurgo Penny . . . A Grull Popery . . . Missalsm Prophet . . . Lustrug Sprug . . . A Pound Squire . . . Urg Viscount . . . Comvic Years . . . Moons

REFERENCES TO THE SPEAKERS

 Abingdon, Lord, Archer, Mr. Hy. Argyle, Duke of, Attorney General, Bathurst, Mr. Baltimore, Lord, Barnard, Sir John, Barrington, Mr. Bedford, Duke of, Bladen, Mr. Bowles, Mr. Brown, Mr. Burrel, Mr. Campbell, Mr. Carew, Mr. Carlisle, Lord, Carteret, Lord, Cholmondeley, Lord, Clutterbuck, Mr. Cocks, Mr. Cornwall, Capt. Cornwall, Mr. Cotton, Sir Hind, Devonshire, Duke of, Digby, Mr. Earle, Mr. Fazakerly, Mr. Fox, Mr. Gage, Lord, Gore, Mr. Gore, Mr. Gower, Lord, Gybbon, Mr. Halifax, Lord, Hardwick, Lord, Harrington, Lord, Hay, Mr. Hervey, Lord, Howe, Mr. Littleton, Mr. Lockwood, Mr. Lord Chancellor, Lovel, Lord, Marlborough, Duke of, Mordaunt, Col. Newcastle, Duke of, Norris, Admiral, Onslow, Mr. Ord, Mr. Pelham, Mr. Pitt, Mr. Pulteney, Mr. Quarendon, Lord, Salisbury, Bishop of, Sandys, Mr. Shippen, Mr. Sloper, Mr. Southwell, Mr. Talbot, Lord, Thompson, Lord, Tracey, Mr. Tyrconnel, Vyner, Mr. Wade, General, Wager, Sir Charles, Waller, Mr. Walpole, Sir Robert, Walpole, Mr. Westmoreland, Lord, Willimot, Mr. Winnington, Mr. Yonge, Sir Wm. 

DEBATES IN PARLIAMENT. 

HOUSE OF COMMONS, NOVEMBER 19, 1740. 

PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATE, WITH REGARD TO THE BILL FOR PROHIBITING THEEXPORTATION OF CORN, ETC. 

On the first day of the session, his majesty, in his speech from thethrone, recommended to parliament to consider of some good law toprevent the growing mischief of the exportation of corn to foreigncountries. 

On the fourth day, a bill for preventing, for a limited time, theexportation, etc, was read a first time in the house of commons, and thequestion put, whether it should be printed, which passed in thenegative. 

This day the agent for the colonies of Pennsylvania and New Jersey, presented a petition against the said corn bill, which was referred tothe committee. 

Another petition was also presented by the agent for the colony ofConnecticut, in New England, setting forth that the chief trade of thatcolony arose from supplying other British colonies with corn, so thatunless that colony be excepted from the restraints intended by thisbill, both that and those which are supplied by it will be reduced togreat distress, and praying, therefore, that such exception may beallowed. 

The allegations in this petition were confirmed by another, from one ofthe provinces supplied by the colony of Connecticut. 

Another petition was presented by the agent for South Carolina, settingforth, that unless the rice produced in that province were allowed to beexported, the colony must be ruined by the irretrievable loss of theirwhole trade, as the countries now supplied from thence might easilyprocure rice from the French settlements, already too much their rivalsin trade. 

This petition was supported by another, offered at the same time by themerchants of Bristol. 

A petition was likewise presented by the agent for the sugar islands, inwhich it was alleged, that if no provisions be imported thither fromBritain, they must, in one month, suffer the extremities of famine. 

All these petitions were referred to the committee for the bill. 

A printed paper was also delivered to the members, entitled, 'considerations on the embargo, ' which enumerated many dangerousconsequences likely to be produced by an embargo on provisions, andsuggested that it was no better than a wicked scheme for private profit, with other reflections, for which the paper was deemed a libel, and theauthor committed to prison. 

The bill being read in the committee, produced the following memorabledebate. 

Mr. PULTNEY spoke to this effect:--Sir, after all the attention whichhas been bestowed upon the bill now before us, I cannot yet conceive itsuch as can benefit the nation, or such as will not produce far greaterinconveniencies than those which it is intended to obviate, andtherefore, as those inconveniencies may be prevented by other means, Icannot but declare that I am far from approving it. 

Our ancestors, sir, have always thought it the great business of thishouse to watch against the encroachments of the prerogative, and toprevent an increase of the power of the minister; and the commons havealways been considered as more faithful to their trust, and moreproperly the representatives of the people, in proportion as they haveconsidered this great end with more attention, and prosecuted it withmore invariable resolution. If we inquire into the different degrees ofreputation, which the several assemblies of commons have obtained, andconsider why some are remembered with reverence and gratitude, andothers never mentioned but with detestation and contempt, we shallalways find that their conduct, with regard to this single point, hasproduced their renown or their infamy. Those are always, by the generalsuffrage of mankind, applauded as the patterns of their country, whohave struggled with the influence of the crown, and those condemned astraitors, who have either promoted it by unreasonable grants, or seen itincrease by slow degrees, without resistance. 

It has not, indeed, sir, been always the practice of ministers to makeopen demands of larger powers, and avow, without disguise, their designsof extending their authority; such proposals would, in former times, have produced no consequences but that of awakening the vigilance of thesenate, of raising suspicions against all their proceedings, and ofembarrassing the crown with petitions, addresses, and impeachments. 

They were under a necessity, in those times, of promoting their schemes;those schemes which scarcely any ministry has forborne to adopt, by moresecret and artful and silent methods, by methods of diverting theattention of the publick to other objects, and of making invisibleapproaches to the point in view, while they seemed to direct all theirendeavours to different purposes. 

But such, sir, have been the proofs of implicit confidence, which theadministration has received from this assembly, that it is now common todemand unlimited powers, and to expect confidence without restriction, to require an immediate possession of our estates by a vote of credit, or the sole direction of our trade by an act for prohibiting, duringtheir pleasure, the exportation of the produce of our lands. 

Upon what instances of uncommon merit, of regard to the pnblickprosperity, unknown in former times, or of discernment superior to thatof their most celebrated predecessors, the present ministers found theirnew claims to submission and to trust, I am, indeed, at a loss todiscover; for, however mankind may have determined concerning theintegrity of those by whom the late memorable convention was transacted, defended, and confirmed, I know not that their wisdom has yet appearedby any incontestable or manifest evidence, which may set their abilitiesabove question, and fix their reputation for policy out of the reach ofcensure and inquiries. 

The only act, sir, by which it can be discovered that they have anydegree of penetration proportionate to their employments, is the embargolately laid upon provisions in Ireland, by which our enemies have beentimely hindered from furnishing themselves, from our dominions, withnecessaries for their armies and their navies, and our fellow-subjectshave been restrained from exposing themselves to the miseries of famine, by yielding to the temptation of present profit; a temptation generallyso powerful as to prevail over any distant interest. 

But as nothing is more contrary to my natural disposition, or moreunworthy of a member of this house, than flattery, I cannot affirm thatI ascribe this useful expedient wholly to the sagacity or the caution ofthe ministry, nor can I attribute all the happy effects produced by itto their benign solicitude for the publick welfare. 

I am inclined to believe that this step was advised by those who wereprompted to consider its importance by motives more prevalent than thatof publick spirit, and that the desire of profit which has so oftendictated pernicious measures, has, for once, produced, in return, anexpedient just and beneficial; and it has, for once, luckily fallen out, that some of the friends of the administration have discovered that thepublick interest was combined with their own. 

It is highly probable, sir, that the contractors for supplying the navywith provisions, considering, with that acuteness which a quick sense ofloss and gain always produces, how much the price of victuals would beraised by exportation, and, by consequence, how much of the advantage oftheir contracts would be diminished, suggested to the ministry thenecessity of an embargo, and laid before them those arguments whichtheir own observation and wisdom would never have discovered. 

Thus, sir, the ministers, in that instance of their conduct, on whichtheir political reputation must be founded, can claim, perhaps, nohigher merit, than that of attending to superiour knowledge, ofcomplying with good advice when it was offered, and of not resistingdemonstration when it was laid before them. 

But as I would never ascribe to one man the merit of another, I shouldbe equally unwilling to detract from due commendations, and shalltherefore freely admit, that not to reject good counsel, is a degree ofwisdom, at which I could not expect that they by whom the convention wasconcluded would ever have arrived. 

But whatever proficiency they may have made in the art of governmentsince that celebrated period, however they may have increased theirmaxims of domestick policy, or improved their knowledge of foreignaffairs, I cannot but confess myself still inclined to some degree ofsuspicion, nor can prevail upon myself to shut my eyes, and deliver upthe publick and myself implicitly to their direction. 

Their sagacity, sir, may, perhaps, of late, have received someimprovements from longer experience, and with regard to their integrity, I believe, at least, that it is not much diminished; and yet I cannotforbear asserting the right of judging for myself, and of determiningaccording to the evidence that shall be brought before me. 

I have, hitherto, entertained an opinion that for this purpose only weare deputed by our constituents, who, if they had reposed no confidencein our care or abilities, would have given up, long since, the vexatiousright of contesting for the choice of representatives. They would havefurnished the ministry with general powers to act for them, and sat atease with no other regard to publick measures, than might incite them toanimate, with their applauses, the laudable endeavours of theirprofound, their diligent, and their magnanimous governours. 

As I do not, therefore, check any suspicions in my own mind, I shall noteasily be restrained from uttering them, because I know not how I shallbenefit my country, or assist her counsels by silent meditations. Icannot, sir, but observe that the powers conferred by this bill upon theadministration are larger than the nation can safely repose in any bodyof men, and with which no man who considers to what purposes they may beemployed will think it convenient to invest the negotiators of theconvention. 

Nor do my objections to this act, arise wholly from my apprehensions oftheir conduct, who are intrusted with the execution of it, but from myreflections on the nature of trade, and the conduct of those nations whoare most celebrated for commercial wisdom. 

It is well known, sir, how difficult it is to turn trade back into itsancient channel, when it has by any means been diverted from it, and howoften a profitable traffick has been lost for ever, by a shortinterruption, or temporary prohibition. The resentment of disappointedexpectations inclines the buyer to seek another market, and the civilityto which his new correspondents are incited by their own interest, detains him, till those by whom he was formerly supplied, having nolonger any vent for their products or their wares, employ their labourson other manufactures, or cultivate their lands for other purposes. 

Thus, sir, if those nations who have hitherto been supplied with cornfrom Britain, should find a method of purchasing it from Denmark, or anyother of the northern regions, we may hereafter see our grain rotting inour storehouses, and be burdened with provisions which we can neitherconsume ourselves, nor sell to our neighbours. 

The Hollanders, whose knowledge of the importance or skill in the artsof commerce will not be questioned, are so careful to preserve theinlets of gain from obstruction, that they make no scruple of supplyingtheir enemies with their commodities, and have been known to sell atnight those bullets which were next day to be discharged against them. 

Whether their example, sir, deserves our imitation I am not able todetermine, but it ought at least to be considered, whether their conductwas rational or not, and whether they did not, by a present evil, ensurean advantage which overbalanced it. 

There are, doubtless, sir, sometimes such exigencies as require to becomplied with at the hazard of future profit, but I am not certain thatthe scarcity which is feared or felt at present, is to be numberedamongst them; but, however formidable it may be thought, there is surelyno need of a new law to provide against it: for it is one of thoseextraordinary incidents, on which the king has the right of exertingextraordinary powers. On occasions like this the prerogative hasheretofore operated very effectually, and I know not that the law hasever restrained it. 

It is, therefore, sir, in my opinion, most prudent to determine nothingin so dubious a question, and rather to act as the immediate occasionshall require, than prosecute any certain method of proceeding, orestablish any precedent by an act of the senate. 

To restrain that commerce by which the necessaries of life aredistributed is a very bold experiment, and such as once produced aninsurrection in the empire of the Turks, that terminated in thedeposition of one of their monarchs. 

I therefore willingly confess, sir, that I know not how to conclude: Iam unwilling to deprive the nation of bread, or to supply our enemieswith strength to be exerted against ourselves; but I am, on the otherhand, afraid to restrain commerce, and to trust the authors of theconvention. 

Mr. PELHAM spoke next, to the following purport:--Sir, I am always inexpectation of improvement and instruction when that gentleman engagesin any discussion of national questions, on which he is equallyqualified to judge by his great abilities and long experience, by thatpopularity which enables him to sound the sentiments of men of differentinterests, and that intelligence which extends his views to distantparts of the world; but, on this occasion, I have found my expectationsfrustrated, for he has inquired without making any discovery, andharangued without illustrating the question before us. 

He has satisfied himself, sir, with declaring his suspicions, withoutcondescending to tell us what designs or what dangers he apprehends. Tofear, without being able to show the object of our terrours, is thelast, the most despicable degree of cowardice; and to suspect, withoutknowing the foundation of our own suspicions, is surely a proof of astate of mind, which would not be applauded on common occasions, andsuch as no man but a patriot would venture to confess. 

He has, indeed, sir, uttered some very ingenious conceits upon the lateconvention, has alluded to it with great luxuriancy of fancy, andelegance of diction, and must, at least, confess that whatever may beits effects upon the interest of the nation, it has to him been verybeneficial, as it has supplied him with a subject of raillery when othertopics began to fail him, and given opportunity for the exercise of thatwit which began to languish, for want of employment. 

What connexion his wonderful sagacity has discovered between theconvention and the corn bill, I cannot yet fully comprehend, but havetoo high an opinion of his abilities to imagine that so manyinsinuations are wholly without any reason to support them. I doubt not, therefore, sir, but that when some fitter opportunity shall presentitself he will clear their resemblance, and branch out the parallelbetween them into a thousand particulars. 

In the mean time, sir, it may be proper for the house to expedite thebill, against which no argument has yet been produced, and which is oftoo much importance to be delayed by raillery or invectives. 

Mr. SANDYS spoke next, in substance as follows:--Sir, the bill beforeus, as it is of too great importance to be negligently delayed, islikewise too dangerous to be precipitately hurried into a law. 

It has been always the practice of this house to consider money billswith particular attention, because money is power in almost the highestdegree, and ought not, therefore, to be given but upon strong assurancesthat it will be employed for the purposes for which it is demanded, andthat those purposes are in themselves just. 

But if we consider, sir, the bill now before us, it will appear yet morethan a money bill, it will be found a bill for regulating the disposalof that, which it is the great use of money to procure, and is, therefore, not to be passed into a law without a close attention toevery circumstance that may be combined with it, and an accurateexamination of all the consequences that may be produced by it. 

Some of these circumstances or consequences, it is the duty of everymember to lay before the house, and I shall, therefore, propose that theinducements to the discovery of any provisions illegally exported, andthe manner of levying the forfeiture, may be particularly discussed; forby a defect in this part, the regulation lately established by theregency, however seasonable, produced tumults and distractions, whichevery good government ought studiously to obviate. 

By their proclamation, sir, half the corn that should be found designedfor exportation was to be given to those who should discover and seizeit. The populace, alarmed at once with the danger of a famine, andanimated by a proclamation that put into their own hands the means ofpreventing it, and the punishment of those from whose avarice theyapprehended it, rose in throngs to execute so grateful a law. Everyman, sir, whose distress had exasperated him, was incited to gratify hisresentment; every man, whose idleness prompted him to maintain hisfamily by methods more easy than that of daily labour, was delightedwith the prospect of growing rich on a sudden by a lucky seizure. Allthe seditious and the profligate combined together in the welcomeemployment of violence and rapine, and when they had once raised theirexpectations, there was no small danger lest their impatience ofdisappointment should determine them to conclude, that corn, whereverfound, was designed for exportation, and to seize it as a lawful prize. 

Thus, sir, by an imprudent regulation, was every man's property broughtinto hazard, and his person exposed to the insults of a hungry, arapacious, and ungovernable rabble, let loose by a publick proclamation, and encouraged to search houses and carriages by an imaginary law. 

That we may not give occasion to violence and injustice of the samekind, let us carefully consider the measures which are proposed, beforewe determine upon their propriety, and pass no bill on this importantoccasion without such deliberation as may leave us nothing to change orto repent. 

Mr. EARLE spoke next to this effect:--Sir, notwithstanding the dangerswhich have been represented as likely to arise from any errour in theprosecution of this great affair, I cannot but declare my opinion, thatno delay ought to be admitted, and that not even the specious pretenceof more exact inquiries, and minute considerations, ought to retard ourproceedings for a day. 

My imagination, sir, is, perhaps, not so fruitful as that of some othermembers of this house, and, therefore, they may discover manyinconveniencies which I am not able to conceive. But, as every man oughtto act from his own conviction, it is my duty to urge the necessity ofpassing this bill, till it can be proved to me, that it will producecalamities equally to be dreaded with the consequences of protractingour debates upon it, equal to the miseries of a famine, or the danger ofenabling our enemies to store their magazines, to equip their fleets, and victual their garrisons. 

If it could be imagined, that there was in this assembly a subject ofFrance or Spain, zealous for the service of his prince, and theprosperity of his country, I should expect that he would summon all hisfaculties to retard the progress of this bill, that he would employ allhis sophistry to show its inconveniency and imperfections, and exhausthis invention to suggest the dangers of haste; and certainly he could donothing that would more effectually promote the interest of hiscountrymen, or tend more to enfeeble and depress the power of theBritish nation. 

If this would naturally be the conduct of an enemy, it is unnecessary toprove that we can only be safe by acting in opposition to it, and Ithink it superfluous to vindicate my ardour for promoting this bill, when it is evident that its delay would be pleasing to the Spaniards. 

Mr. BURREL then spoke as follows:--Sir, if this law be necessary at anytime, it cannot now be delayed, for a few days spent in deliberation, may make it ineffectual, and that evil may be past of which we sit herecontriving the prevention. 

That many contracts, sir, for the exportation of provisions are alreadymade in all the maritime parts of the empire, is generally known; and itrequires no great sagacity to discover that those by whom they are made, and made with a view of immense profit, are desirous that they may beexecuted; and that they will soon complete the execution of them, whenthey are alarmed with the apprehension of a bill, which, in a few days, may take from them the power of exporting what they have alreadycollected, and snatch their gain from them when it is almost in theirhands. 

A bill for these purposes, sir, ought to fall upon the contractors likea sudden blow, of which they have no warning or dread; against whichthey, therefore, cannot provide any security, and which they can neitherelude nor resist. 

If we allow them a short time, our expedients will be of little benefitto the nation, which is every day impoverished by the exportation of thenecessaries of life, in such quantities, that in a few weeks the law, ifit be passed, may be without penalties, for there will be no possibilityof disobeying it. 

Sir John BARNARD spoke next, to the following purpose:--Sir, I cannotdiscover the necessity of pressing the bill with such precipitation, asmust necessarily exclude many useful considerations, and may produceerrours extremely dangerous; for I am not able to conceive whatinconveniencies can arise from a short delay. 

The exportation of provisions from Ireland is at present stopped by theproclamation; and the beef which was designed for other nations, hasbeen prudently bought up by the contractors, by which those murmurs havebeen in a great measure obviated which naturally arise fromdisappointments and losses. 

There is, therefore, sir, no danger of exportations from that part ofour dominions, which is the chief market for provisions, and from whenceour enemies have been generally supplied: in Britain there is lessdanger of any such pernicious traffick, both because the scarcity herehas raised all provisions to a high price, and because merchants do notimmediately come to a new market. 

The bill, at least, ought not to be passed without regard to the generalwelfare of our fellow-subjects, nor without an attentive considerationof those petitions which have been presented to us; petitions notproduced by panic apprehensions of imaginary dangers, or distantprospects of inconveniencies barely possible, but by the certainforesight of immediate calamities, the total destruction of trade, andthe sudden desolation of flourishing provinces. 

By prohibiting the exportation of rice, we shall, sir, in one year, reduce the colony of South Carolina below the possibility of subsisting;the chief product of that country, the product which induced usoriginally to plant it, and with which all its trade is carried on, isrice. With rice the inhabitants of that province purchase all the othernecessaries of life, and among them the manufactures of our own country. This rice is carried by our merchants to other parts of Europe, and soldagain for large profit. 

That this trade is very important appears from the number of ships whichit employs, and which, without lading, must rot in the harbours, if ricebe not excepted from the general prohibition. Without this exception, sir, it is not easy to say what numbers, whose stations appear verydifferent, and whose employments have no visible relation to each other, will be at once involved in calamity, reduced to sudden distress, andobliged to seek new methods of supporting their families. The sailor, the merchant, the shipwright, the manufacturer, with all thesubordinations of employment that depend upon them, all that supply themwith materials, or receive advantage from their labours, almost all thesubjects of the British crown, must suffer, at least, in some degree, bythe ruin of Carolina. 

Nor ought the danger of the sugar islands, and other provinces, less toalarm our apprehensions, excite our compassion, or employ ourconsideration, since nothing is more evident than that by passing thisbill without the exceptions which their petitions propose, we shallreduce one part of our colonies to the want of bread, and confine theother to live on nothing else; for they subsist by the exchange of thoseproducts to which the soil of each country is peculiarly adapted: oneprovince affords no corn, and the other supplies its inhabitants withcorn only. 

The necessity of expediting this bill, however it has been exaggerated, is not so urgent but that we may be allowed time sufficient to considerfor what purpose it is to be passed, and to recollect that nothing isdesigned by it, but to hinder our enemies from being supplied from theBritish dominions with provisions, by which they might be enabled morepowerfully to carry on the war against us. 

To this design no objection has been made, but it is well known, that agood end may be defeated by an absurd choice of means, and I am not ableto discover how we shall increase our own strength, or diminish that ofour enemies, by compelling one part of our fellow-subjects to starve theother. 

It is necessary, sir, to prohibit the exportation of corn to the portsof our enemies, and of those nations by which our enemies will besupplied, but surely it is of no use to exclude any part of our owndominions from the privilege of being supplied from another. Nor can anyargument be alleged in defence of such a law, that will not prove withequal force, that corn ought to remain in the same granaries where it isnow laid, that all the markets in this kingdom should be suspended, andthat no man should be allowed to sell bread to another. 

There is, indeed, sir, a possibility that the liberty for which Icontend, may be used to wicked purposes, and that some men may beincited by poverty or avarice to carry the enemy those provisions, whichthey pretend to export to British provinces. But if we are to refuseevery power that may be employed to bad purposes, we must lay allmankind in dungeons, and divest human nature of all its rights; forevery man that has the power of action, may sometimes act ill. 

It is, however, prudent to obstruct criminal attempts even when wecannot hope entirely to defeat them, and, therefore, I am of opinion, that no provisions ought to be exported without some method of security, by which the governours of every place may be assured that they will beconveyed to our own colonies. Such securities will easily be contrived, and may be regulated in a manner that they shall not be defeated withoutsuch hazard, as the profit that can be expected from illegal commerce, will not be able to compensate. 

It is, therefore, sir, proper to delay the bill so long, at least, asthat we may produce by it the ends intended, and distress our enemiesmore than ourselves; that we may secure plenty at home, without thedestruction of our distant colonies, and without obliging part of ourfellow-subjects to desert to the Spaniards for want of bread. 

Mr. BOWLES spoke in this manner:--Sir, the necessity of excepting ricefrom the general prohibition, is not only sufficiently evinced by theagent of South Carolina, but confirmed beyond controversy or doubt, bythe petition of the merchants of Bristol, of which the justice andreasonableness appears at the first view, to every man acquainted withthe nature of commerce. 

How much the province of South Carolina will be distressed by thisprohibition, how suddenly the whole trade of that country will be at astand, and how immediately the want of many of the necessaries of lifewill be felt over a very considerable part of the British dominions, hasalready, sir, been very pathetically represented, and very clearlyexplained; nor does there need any other argument to persuade us toallow the exportation of rice. 

But, from the petition of the merchants of Bristol, it appears thatthere are other reasons of equal force for this indulgence, and that ourregard for the inhabitants of that particular province, howevernecessary and just, is not the only motive for complying with theirrequest. 

It is shown, sir, in this petition, that the prohibition of rice willvery little incommode our enemies, or retard their preparations; forthey are not accustomed to be supplied with it from our plantations. Weought, therefore, not to load our fellow-subjects with embarrassmentsand inconveniencies, which will not in any degree extend to our enemies. 

It appears, sir, not only that a very important part of our commercewill be obstructed, but that it will, probably, be lost beyond recovery;for, as only a small quantity of the rice of Carolina is consumed athome, and the rest is carried to other countries, it is easy to conceivethat those who shall be disappointed by our merchants will procure sonecessary a commodity from other places, as there are many from which itmay be easily purchased; and it is well known that trade, if it be oncediverted, is not to be recalled, and, therefore, that trade which may bewithout difficulty transferred, ought never to be interrupted withoutthe most urgent necessity. 

To prove, sir, that there is now no such necessity, by a long train ofarguments, would be superfluous, for it has been shown already, that ourenemies will not suffer by the prohibition, and the miseries thatinevitably arise from a state of war, are too numerous and oppressive, to admit of any increase or aggravation upon trivial motives. 

The province of Carolina, sir, has already suffered the inconvenienciesof this war beyond any other part of his majesty's dominions, as it issituate upon the borders of the Spanish dominions, and as it is weak bythe paucity of the inhabitants in proportion to its extent; let us, therefore, pay a particular regard to this petition, lest we aggravatethe terrour which the neighbourhood of a powerful enemy naturallyproduces, by the severer miseries of poverty and famine. 

Sir Robert WALPOLE spoke next, in substance as follows:--Sir, nothing ismore absurd than for those who declare, on all occasions, with greatsolemnity, their sincere zeal for the service of the publick, toprotract the debates of this house by personal invectives, and delay theprosecution of the business of the nation, by trivial objections, repeated after confutation, and, perhaps, after conviction of theirinvalidity. 

I need not observe how much time would be spared, and how much thedespatch of affairs would be facilitated by the suppression of thispractice, a practice by which truth is levelled with falsehood, andknowledge with ignorance; since, if scurrility and merriment are todetermine us, it is not necessary either to be honest or wise to obtainthe superiority in any debate, it will only be necessary to rail and tolaugh, which one man may generally perform with as much success asanother. 

The embargo in Ireland was an expedient so necessary and timely, thatthe reputation of it is thought too great to be allowed to theadministration, of whom it has been for many years the hard fate, tohear their actions censured only because they were not the actions ofothers, and to be represented as traitors to their country for doingalways what they thought best themselves, and perhaps sometimes what wasin reality approved by those who opposed them. 

This, sir, they have borne without much uneasiness, and have contentedthemselves with the consciousness of doing right, in expectation thattruth and integrity must at last prevail, and that the prudence of theirconduct and success of their measures would at last evince the justiceof their intentions. 

They hoped, sir, that there would be some occasions on which theirenemies would not deny the expedience of their counsels, and did notexpect that after having been so long accused of engrossing exorbitantpower, of rejecting advice, and pursuing their own schemes with the mostinvincible obstinacy, they should be supposed on a sudden to have laidaside their arrogance, to have descended to adopt the opinions, and givethemselves up to the direction of others, only because no objectioncould be made to this instance of their conduct. 

How unhappy, sir, must be the state of that man who is only allowed tobe a free agent, when he acts wrong, and whose motions, whenever theytend to the proper point, are supposed to be regulated by another!

Whether such capricious censurers expect that any regard should be paidby the publick to their invectives, I am not able to determine, but I aminclined to think so well of their understandings, as to believe thatthey intend only to amuse themselves, and perplex those whom theyprofess to oppose. In one part of their scheme I know not but they mayhave succeeded, but in the other it is evident how generally they havefailed. It must, at least, sir, be observed of these great patrons ofthe people, that if they expect to gain them by artifices like this, they have no high opinion of their discernment, however they maysometimes magnify it as the last appeal, and highest tribunal. 

With regard, sir, to the manner in which the embargo was laid, and theexpedients made use of to enforce the observation of it, they were notthe effects of a sudden resolution, but of long and deliberatereflection, assisted by the counsels of the most experienced andjudicious persons of both nations; so that if any mistake was committed, it proceeded not from arrogance or carelessness, but a compliance withreasons, that if laid before the house, would, whether just or not, beallowed to be specious. 

But, sir, it has not appeared that any improper measures have beenpursued, or that any inconveniencies have arisen from them which it waspossible to have avoided by a different conduct; for when any expedientfails of producing the end for which it was proposed, or gives occasionto inconveniencies which were neither expected nor designed, it is notimmediately to be condemned; for it might fail from such obstacles asnothing could surmount, and the inconveniencies which are complained ofmight be the consequences of other causes acting at the same time, orcooperating, not by the nature of things, but by the practices of thosewho prefer their own interest to that of their country. 

But though it is, in my opinion, easy to defend the conduct of theministry, I am far from thinking this a proper time to engage in theirvindication. The important business before us, must now wholly engageus, nor ought we to employ our attention upon the past, but the future. Whatever has been the ignorance or knowledge, whatever the corruption orintegrity of the ministry, this bill is equally useful, equallynecessary. The question is now concerning an act of the senate, not ofthe ministry, and the bill may proceed without obstructing futureexaminations. 

If the bill, sir, now before us be so far approved as to be conceived ofany real benefit to the nation, if it can at all contribute to thedistress or disappointment of our enemies, or the prevention of thosedomestic disturbances which are naturally produced by scarcity andmisery, there is no need of arguments to evince the necessity ofdespatch in passing it. For if these effects are to be produced bypreventing the exportation of provisions, and a law is necessary forthat purpose, it is certain that the law must be enacted, while ourprovisions are yet in our own hands, and before time has been given forthe execution of those contracts which are already made. 

That contracts, sir, are entered into for quantities that justly claimthe care of the legislative power, I have been informed by suchintelligence as I cannot suspect of deceiving me. In one small town inthe western part of this kingdom, fifty thousand barrels of corn aresold by contract, and will be exported, if time be allowed forcollecting and for shipping them. 

A few contracts like this will be sufficient to store an army withbread, or to furnish garrisons against the danger of a siege; a fewcontracts like this will produce a considerable change in the price ofprovisions, and plunge innumerable families into distress, who mightstruggle through the present difficulties, which unsuccessful harvestshave brought upon the nation, had we not sold the gifts of providencefor petty gain, and supported our enemies with those provisions whichwere barely sufficient for our own consumption. 

I have not heard many objections made against the intention of the bill, and those which were offered, were mentioned with such diffidence anduncertainty, as plainly showed, that even in the opinion of him thatproposed them, they were of little weight; and I believe they had nogreater effect upon those that heard them. It may, therefore, bereasonably supposed that the propriety of a law to prevent theexportation of victuals is admitted, and surely it can be no question, whether it ought to be pressed forward, or to be delayed till it will beof no effect. 

Mr. FAZAKERLY spoke next, to this effect:--Sir, as the bill now underour consideration is entangled with a multitude of circumstances tooimportant to be passed by without consideration, and too numerous to bespeedily examined; as its effects, whether salutary or pernicious, mustextend to many nations, and be felt in a few weeks to the remotest partsof the dominions of Britain, I cannot but think, that they who so muchpress for expedition on this occasion, consult rather their passionsthan their reason, that they discover rather enthusiasm than zeal, andthat by imagining that they have already traced the effects of a lawlike this to their utmost extent, they discover rather an immoderateconfidence in their own capacity than give any proofs of that anxiouscaution, and deliberate prudence, which true patriotism generallyproduces. 

There is another method, sir, of proceeding, more proper on thisoccasion, which has been already pointed out in this debate; a method ofexerting the prerogative in a manner allowed by law, and established byimmemorial precedents, and which may, therefore, be revived withoutaffording any room for jealousy or complaints. 

An embargo imposed only by the prerogative may be relaxed or enforced asoccasion may require, or regulated according to the necessity arisingfrom particular circumstances; circumstances in themselves variable, andsubject to the influence of a thousand accidents, and which, therefore, cannot be always foreseen, or provided against by a law positive andfixed. 

Let us not subject the commonwealth to a hazardous and uncertainsecurity, while we have in our hands the means of producing the sameend, with less danger and inconveniency; and since we may obviate theexportation of our corn by methods more speedily efficacious than theforms of making laws can allow, let us not oppress our fellow-subjectsby hasty or imprudent measures, but make use of temporary expedients, while we deliberate upon the establishment of a more lasting regulation. 

Mr. CAMPBELL spoke to the following purpose;--Sir, that an embargo onmerchandise or provisions may, upon sudden emergencies, or importantoccasions, be imposed by the prerogative, cannot be doubted by any manwhose studies have made him acquainted with the extent of the regalpower, and the manner in which it has been exerted in all ages. Thechief use of the prerogative is to supply the defects of the laws, incases which do not admit of long consultations, which do not allow timeto convoke senates or inquire into the sentiments of the people. 

For this reason, in times of war the imperial power is much enlarged, and has still a greater extent as exigencies are more pressing. If thenation is invaded by a foreign force, the authority of the crown isalmost without limits, the whole nation is considered as an army ofwhich the king is general, and which he then governs by martial laws, byoccasional judicature, and extemporary decrees. 

Such, sir, is the power of the king on particular emergencies, and suchpower the nature of human affairs must, sometimes, require; for allforms of government are intended for common good, and calculated for theestablished condition of mankind, but must be suspended when they canonly obstruct the purposes for which they were contrived, and must varywith the circumstances to which they were adapted. To expect that thepeople shall be consulted in questions on which their happiness depends, supposes there is an opportunity of consulting them without hazardingtheir lives, their freedom, or their possessions, by the forms ofdeliberation. 

The necessity of extending the prerogative to the extremities of power, is, I hope, at a very great distance from us; but if the danger of theexportation of victuals be so urgent as some gentlemen have representedit, and so formidable as it appears to the whole nation, it is surelyrequisite that the latent powers of the crown should be called forth forour protection, that plenty be secured within the nation, by barring upour ports, and the people hindered from betraying themselves to theirenemies, and squandering those blessings which the fertility of our soilhas bestowed upon them. 

Sir Robert WALPOLE replied in the following manner:--Sir, it is sounusual among the gentlemen who have opposed my opinion to recommend anexertion of the regal authority, or willingly to intrust any power tothe administration, that, though they have on this occasion expressedtheir sentiments without any ambiguity of language, or perplexity ofideas, I am in doubt whether I do not mistake their meaning, and cannot, without hesitation and uncertainty, propose the motion to which alltheir arguments seem necessarily to conduct me; arguments of which I donot deny the force, and which I shall not attempt to invalidate byslight objections, when I am convinced, in general, of theirreasonableness and truth. 

The necessity of that despatch which I have endeavoured to recommend, isnot only universally admitted, but affirmed to be so pressing, that itcannot wait for the solemnity of debates, or the common forms of passinglaws. The danger which is every moment increasing, requires, in theopinion of these gentlemen, to be obviated by extraordinary measures, and that pernicious commerce, which threatens the distress of thecommunity, is to be restrained by an immediate act of the prerogative. 

If this be the opinion of the house, it will be necessary to lay itbefore his majesty, by a regular address, that the nation may beconvinced of the necessity of such extraordinary precautions, and thatthe embargo may be imposed, at once, with the expedition peculiar todespotick power, and the authority which can be conferred only bysenatorial sanctions. 

Whether this is the intention of the members, from whose declarations Ihave deduced it, can only be discovered by themselves, who, if they haveany other scheme in view, must explain it in clearer terms, that thehouse may deliberate upon it, and reject or adopt it, according to itsconformity to the laws of our country, and to the present state of ouraffairs. 

Mr. PULTENEY spoke thus:--Sir, whatever may be the meaning of othergentlemen, who must undoubtedly be left at full liberty to explain theirown expressions, I will freely declare, that I am sufficientlyunderstood by the right honourable gentleman, and that, in my opinion, no remedy can be applied to the present distemper of the nation, adistemper by which it is hourly pining away, by which its vitals areimpaired, and the necessary nourishment withdrawn from it, that willoperate with sufficient efficacy and speed, except an embargo be imposedby the prerogative. 

That this opinion, if received by the house, must be the subject of anaddress, is in itself manifest, and the reason for which an embargo isrequired, proves that an address ought not to be delayed. 

I cannot omit this opportunity of remarking, how plainly it must nowappear that many of us have been unjustly charged with obstructing theprogress of the bill for pernicious purposes, with views of raisingdiscontents in the nation, of exposing the administration to publickhatred, of obstructing the measures of the government, or hindering thesuccess of the war, when we have receded from our general principles, and suspended the influence of our established maxims, for the sake offacilitating an expedient which may promote the general advantage, byrecommending his majesty to the affections of his people. 

Mr. PELHAM here replied, to this effect:--Sir, I am far from blaming anygentleman for asserting, on all occasions, the integrity of his designs, or displaying the reasonableness of his conduct; and of what I do notdisapprove I shall not decline the imitation. 

It is not uncommon, in the heat of opposition, while each man isconvinced of his own honesty, and strongly persuaded of the truth of hisown positions, to hear each party accused by the other of designsdetrimental to the publick interest, of protracting debates by artfuldelays, of struggling against their own conviction, and of obscuringknown truth by objections which discover themselves to be without force. 

These accusations, which are on both sides frequent, are, I hope, onboth sides generally false; at least, it must appear on this occasion, that those who press the bill had no views of strengthening their partyby a victory, of wearying their opponents by obstinacy, or of promotingany private purposes by a new law; since an expedient, by which time maybe gained, and the avowed end of hastening this necessary bill secured, is no sooner proposed on one part, than received on the other. 

At the close of the debate, a form of an address was proposed by Mr. CLUTTERBUCK; which, being approved by the house, was presented to hismajesty: and an embargo was laid on all provisions accordingly. 

On the 17th day of sitting the house proceeded on the bill forpreventing exportation; and ordered an account of the corn which hadbeen exported for six years last past to be laid before the committee. 

The house also addressed his majesty to take off the embargo on shipsladen with fish or rice, which his majesty had before ordered to bedone. 

On the 21st the corn bill was again the subject of deliberation, andsome amendments were offered by Mr. SANDYS, containing not onlyexceptions of rice and fish, which had been before admitted, butlikewise of butter, as a perishable commodity, which, if it were notallowed to be exported, would corrupt and become useless in a shorttime. 

He proposed, likewise, that the two islands of Jersey and Guernsey mightcontinue to be supplied, with certain restrictions, from the port ofSouthampton. 

It was proposed, likewise, in favour of some other colonies, that theymight receive provisions from Britain, lest there should be a necessityfor the inhabitants of those provinces to abandon their settlements. 

The penalties of this law, and the manner in which they should berecovered and applied, were likewise settled on this day. 

NOVEMBER 25, 1740. 

The consideration of the corn bill was resumed; and it was particularlydebated from what time it should commence, which some of the memberswere inclined to fix on the 9th day of the session, on which occasionMr. CAMPBELL spoke as follows:

Sir, that the laws may be observed by the nation without daily violenceand perpetual compulsion, that our determinations may be received withreverence, and the regulations which we establish confirmed by theconcurrence of our constituents, it is necessary that we endeavour topreserve their esteem, and convince them that the publick prosperity maybe safely trusted in our hands. 

This confidence is to be gained as well in high stations, as in lowerconditions, by large assemblies, as by individuals, only by a constantpractice of justice, and frequent exertion of superiour wisdom. When anyman finds his friend oppressive and malicious, he naturally withdrawshis affections from him; when he observes him advancing absurd opinions, and adhering to them with obstinacy incapable of conviction, he fallsunavoidably into a distrust of his understanding, and no longer pays anydeference to his advice, or considers his conduct as worthy ofimitation. 

In the same manner, sir, if the legislative powers shall, in makinglaws, discover that they regard any motives before the advantage oftheir country, or that they pursue the publick good by measuresinadequate and ill-concerted, what can be expected from the people, butthat they should set up their own judgment in opposition to that oftheir governours, make themselves the arbiters in all doubtfulquestions, and obey or disregard the laws at discretion?

If this danger may arise from laws injudiciously drawn up, it may surelybe apprehended from a compliance with this proposal; a proposal that theoperation of the law should commence eleven days before the law itselfis in being. 

I have, hitherto, sir, regarded it as a principle equally true inpoliticks as in philosophy, that nothing _can act_ when it does _notexist_; and I did not suspect that a position so evident would everstand in need of a proof or illustration. 

We live, indeed, in an age of paradoxes, and have heard several notionsseriously defended, of which some would, not many years ago, havecondemned their abetter to a prison or a madhouse, and would have beenheard by the wisest of our ancestors with laughter or detestation; but Idid not expect that the most hardy innovator would have shocked myunderstanding with a position like this, or have asserted that a law mayoperate before it is made, or before it is projected. 

That where there is no law there is no transgression, is a maxim notonly established by universal consent, but in itself evident andundeniable; and it is, sir, surely no less certain, that where there isno transgression there can be no punishment. 

If a man may be punished, sir, by a law made after the fact, how can anyman conclude himself secure from the jail or the gibbet? A man mayeasily find means of being certain that he has offended no law in being, but that will afford no great satisfaction to a mind naturally timorous;since a law hereafter to be made, may, if this motion be supposedreasonable, take cognizance of his actions, and how he can know whetherhe has been equally scrupulous to observe the future statutes of futuresenates, he will find it very difficult to determine. 

Mr. PELHAM rose, and spoke thus:--Sir, notwithstanding the absurditywhich the honourable gentleman imagines himself to have discovered inthis proposal, and which he must be confessed to have placed in a verystrong light, I am of opinion, that it may, with very littleconsideration, be reconciled to reason and to justice, and that the witand satire that have been so liberally employed, will appear to havebeen lost in the air, without use and without injury. 

The operation of the law may, very properly, commence from the day onwhich the embargo was laid by his majesty's proclamation, which surelywas not issued to no purpose, and which ought not to be disobeyedwithout punishment. 

Sir John BARNARD spoke next, to this effect:--Sir, I cannot but besomewhat surprised, that a gentleman so long conversant in nationalaffairs, should not yet have heard or known the difference between aproclamation and a penal law. 

By a proclamation, his majesty may prevent, in some cases, what hecannot punish; he may hinder the exportation of our corn by orderingships to be stationed at the entrance of our harbours; but if any shouldescape with prohibited cargoes, he can inflict no penalties upon them attheir return. 

To enforce this prohibition by the sanction of punishments is theintention of the present bill, but a proclamation can make nothingcriminal, and it is unjust and absurd to punish an action which waslegal when it was done. 

The law ought, sir, in my opinion, not to commence till time is allowedfor dispersing it to the utmost limits of this island; for as it isunreasonable to punish without law, it is not more equitable to punishby a law, of which, they who have unhappily broken it, could have nointelligence. 

A future day was agreed to. 

HOUSE OF COMMONS, DEC. 2, 1740. 

DEBATE RELATING TO A SEDITIOUS PAPER OF THE SAME KIND WITH THECONSIDERATIONS ON THE EMBARGO ON PROVISIONS. 

Lord THOMSON took notice of a paper which he had in his hand, and saidhe received it at the door, where it was given to the members as theycame in, and, complaining of it as an indignity offered to the house, desired that it might be read. Which being done, he rose up, and spokein substance as follows:

Sir, the crime of exasperating the people against their governours, ofraising discontent, and exciting murmurs in a time of general danger, and of attempting to represent wise and salutary measures, which havereceived the approbation of the whole legislature, as mean artifices, contrived only to raise the fortunes of some favourites of the minister, and aggrandize the officers of state, by the miseries of the people, isa crime too enormous to require or admit any aggravation from rhetorick, and too dangerous to hope for any excuse from candour and lenity. 

To read or hear this paper is sufficient for a full conviction of itspernicious tendency, and of the malice of its author; a charge not fixedupon particular expressions capable of a doubtful meaning, and whichheat or inadvertency might casually have produced, but supported by thegeneral design of the whole paper, and the continued tenour of theargument, which is evidently intended to show, that an act ofgovernment, which cannot but appear necessary and seasonable in thepresent state of our affairs, an act ratified by the concurrence of allthe powers of the legislature, is nothing but a scheme of avarice togrow rich by oppression. 

Nor is this scandalous libel written with more confidence and insolencethan it is dispersed. Not content, sir, with vilifying the proceedingsof the state, the author has industriously published his calumny at ourdoor: the time has been when defamation skulked in secret, and calumniesagainst the government were dispersed by whispers or privatecommunication; but this writer adds insults to his injuries, and at oncereproaches and defies us. 

I beg leave to move, therefore, that the house do censure this paper as"a malicious and scandalous libel, highly and injuriously reflectingupon a just and wise act of his majesty's government, and also upon theproceedings of both houses of senate; and tending to create jealousiesin the minds of the people. " I also move, "that the author may beordered to attend, to be examined at our bar. "

[This was unanimously agreed to by the house. The doorkeeper was calledin, and, being shown the paper, was asked from whom he received it? whoanswered, that he believed the person who delivered it to him, was thendetained in one of the committee rooms, upon which he was ordered tolook for, and fetch him to the bar. ]

Mr. SANDYS, taking notice that the person was already in custody, said, that he should be glad to know by what authority. It was not reasonableto punish first, and judge afterwards. 

Upon which sir William YONGE replied, that he had caused him to bedetained, in order to know the pleasure of the house; and that hethought it his duty to secure so enormous an offender from escaping. 

Soon after, the doorkeeper brought the man in, when he declared, uponexamination, his name and his profession, which was that of a scrivener, and owned with great openness, that he was the author of the paper. Hewas then asked who was the printer, and answered that he printed ithimself. Which he explained afterwards, by saying, that as he hadcarried it to the printer's, he might be said, in the generalacceptation of the term, as applied to an author, to be the printer. Hethen discovered the printer, and was asked, where was the originalmanuscript, which he said he had destroyed, as he did any other uselesspaper. 

It having been observed by some of the members, that it was printed inone of the daily papers, he was asked, who carried it thither? andanswered, that he carried it himself. It was then demanded, what he gavefor having it inserted, and he answered that he gave nothing. 

[After many questions, Mr. Henry ARCHER desired that he might be asked, whether on the Friday before he was in the gallery; at which some of themembers expressed their disapprobation, and the man being ordered towithdraw, the following debate ensued upon the propriety of thequestion. ]

Mr. SANDYS spoke first, in substance as follows:--Sir, those who areintrusted by their country with the authority of making laws, ought, undoubtedly, to observe them with the utmost circumspection, lest theyshould defeat their own endeavours, and invalidate, by their example, their own decrees. 

There is no part, sir, of our civil constitution more sacred, none thathas been more revered by those that have trampled upon other forms ofjustice, and wantoned in oppression without restraint, than thatprivilege by which every Briton is exempted from the necessity ofaccusing himself, and by which he is entitled to refuse an answer to anyquestion which may be asked, with a view to draw from him a confessionof an offence which cannot be proved. 

Whether this great privilege, sir, is not violated; whether theunalienable right of a free subject is not infringed, by the questionput to the person at our bar, the house must decide. The punishment towhich intruders are subject by the orders of this house, proves that hispresence in the house is considered as a crime, of which, as we have noproof of it, a confession ought not to be extorted by an artful andinsidious question, of which he may not discover the intention or theconsequence. Such treatment, sir, is rather to be expected by slaves inthe inquisition of Spain, than a Briton at the bar of this house; ahouse instituted to preserve liberty, and to restrain injustice andoppression. 

Mr. CAMPBELL spoke next, to this effect:--Sir, I cannot but concur withthe opinion of the honourable gentleman, that, in requiring an answer tothis question, we shall expose a man to a punishment against whom wehave no evidence, but what is extorted from himself; and, consequently, no knowledge of his crime upon which we can proceed to inflict censuresor penalties, without the manifest infraction of our constitution. 

It cannot be imagined, sir, that he intends to confess himself guilty ofa crime of which no proof has been brought, or that he will voluntarilysubject himself to punishments. It must, therefore, follow, that he isentrapped in his examination, by an artifice, which, I hope, will neverfind any countenance in this house. 

Mr. WINNINGTON answered to the following purpose:--Sir, it is notimpossible that the honourable gentlemen, having not lately looked intothe orders of the house, may mistake the tendency of the question; I, therefore, move that the order may be read. 

[The order being read by the clerk, he proceeded. ]

It is evident, sir, that by the order now read, the serjeant at armsattending on this house, may take into custody all strangers that shallbe found in the house or gallery while we are assembled; and that thisorder is not always put in practice, must be attributed to the lenity ofthe house. But that this order extends to past offences, and subjectsany man to imprisonment for having been present in some former day, cannot be conceived. For how far may such a retrospect be extended? orat what time, after having intruded into the house, can any man presumeto consider himself as exempt from the danger of imprisonment?

Our order, sir, only decrees present punishment for present offences, and, therefore, the question asked by the honourable gentleman, may beinsisted on without scruple, and answered without hazard. Let then thehonourable gentlemen reserve their laudable zeal for our constitutiontill it shall be invaded by more important occasions. 

Mr. SANDYS replied:--Sir, what victory the honourable gentleman imagineshimself to have gained, or whence proceeds all his wantonness ofexultation, I am not able to discover. The question only relates to theinterpretation of one of our own orders, and is, therefore, not of thehighest importance; nor can his success, in so trivial a debate, entitlehim to great applause from others, or produce, in a person of hisabilities, any uncommon satisfaction to himself. 

But, whatever may be the pleasure of the victory, it must, at least, begained before it can be celebrated; and it is by no means evident, thathe has yet any reason to assure himself of conquest. 

His interpretation, sir, of the order, which he has so confidently laidbefore the house, seems to me to have no foundation in reason orjustice; for if it be an offence against the house to be present at ourconsultations, and that offence be justly punishable, why should any manbe exempt from a just censure by an accidental escape? or what makes thedifference between this crime and any other, that this alone must beimmediately punished, or immediately obliterated, and that a luckyflight is equivalent to innocence?

It is surely, sir, more rational to believe, that the house may punishany breach of its orders at a distant time, that if our censure is onceeluded, it may be afterwards enforced; and, therefore, that the questionput to the person at the bar ought not to be asked, because it cannotsafely be answered. 

Mr. PULTENEY spoke next, in words to this effect:--Sir, I cannot butconceive that our order may extend its influence beyond the presentmoment, and that intrusions may be punished by the house on another daythan that on which they were committed. 

I am so far, sir, from being of opinion, that, to make the execution ofthis order valid, the house must sit, without interruption, from thetime of the offence to that of the punishment, that if the gentlemen inthe gallery were to be taken into custody, I should advise the serjeantto wait till the house should break up, and seize them as they shouldcome out. 

Sir William YONGE spoke next, in the manner following:--Sir, if any suchpunishment were now intended, I should advise the gentlemen in thegallery to retire, indeed, but not to hide themselves like felons, ormen proscribed by proclamation; for as the power of seizing any man inthe house is sufficient to secure us from intrusion, there is no reasonto extend it farther; and penalties are not, without reason, to beinflicted, neither has the house ever coveted the power of oppressing;and what else is unnecessary punishment?

If, therefore, an intruder is not seized in the act of intrusion, hecannot legally be imprisoned for it. And any of the strangers, who nowhear this debate, may retire to a very small distance from the house, and set the serjeant at arms at defiance. 

Sir Robert WALPOLE then spoke to this effect:--Sir, whether the questionbe proper or not, it seems very unnecessary to debate; because, howeverit be answered, it cannot be of great importance: the man has alreadyconfessed himself the author of the libel, and may, therefore, bepunished without farther examination. 

That he is the real author, sir, I am not, indeed, convinced by hisassertion, with whatever confidence it was made; for so far as hisappearance enables me to judge of his education and sphere of life, itis not probable that he should be much versed in political inquiries, orthat he should engage in the discussion of questions like this. 

There appears, sir, in the paper before us, a more extensive knowledgeof facts, a more accurate attention to commerce, more artful reasoning, and a more elevated style, than it is reasonable to expect from thisman, whom, without pretending to determine the limits of his capacity, or the compass of his knowledge, I am, for my part, inclined to lookupon as an agent to some other person of higher station, and greateraccomplishments. 

It is not uncommon, sir, for gentlemen to exercise their abilities, andemploy their pens, upon political questions, and when they have producedany thing, which their complaisance for themselves equally hinders themfrom owning and suppressing, they are known to procure some person ofinferiour rank, to take upon him, in publick, the character of theauthor, and to stand the danger of the prosecution, contentingthemselves with the applause and admiration of their chosen friends, whom they trust with the important secret, and with whom they sit andlaugh at the conjectures of the publick, and the ignorance of theministry. 

This, sir, is a frequent practice, not only with those who have no otheremployment, but, as I have sufficient reasons to believe, among somegentlemen who have seats in this house; gentlemen, whose abilities andknowledge qualify them to serve the publick in characters much superiourto that of lampooners of the government. 

Mr. PULTENEY answered in terms to the following purpose:--Sir, whetherthe man who confessed himself the author of the paper, has accusedhimself of what he did not commit, or has ingenuously and openlydiscovered the truth, it is beyond my penetration absolutely to decide;the frankness and unconcern with which he made the declaration, gave it, at least, the appearance of truth, nor do I discover any reason fordoubting his sincerity. Is there any improbability in the nature of thefact, that should incline us to suspect his veracity? Is there anyapparent advantage to be gained by assuming a false character? Neitherof those circumstances can be produced against him, and an assertion isto be admitted for its own sake, when there is nothing to invalidate it. 

But the honourable gentleman, sir, appears to have a very particularreason for his doubts; a reason, which will, I hope, have no weight withany but himself. By denying the paper to this man, he gives room forconjecture and suspicion to range far and wide, and wanton with whatevercharacters he shall think proper subjects for his amusement. An authoris now to be sought, and many diverting arguments may be brought by thedullest inquirer for fixing it upon one man, or denying it to another. 

The honourable gentleman, sir, has given us a bold specimen of this kindof wit, by insinuating that it is the production of some one of themembers of this house; a conjecture of which I am not able to find thefoundation, and therefore imagine, that raillery rather than argumentwas intended. But let the honourable gentleman recollect, that the chiefexcellence of raillery is politeness, to which he has surely paid littleregard, in supposing that what has been unanimously condemned as alibel, has one of those who censured it for its author. 

If I am particularly hinted at in this sagacious conjecture, I take thisopportunity of declaring that I am equally ignorant of the whole affairwith any other gentleman in this house; that I never saw the paper tillit was delivered to me at the door, nor the author till he appeared atthe bar. Having thus cleared myself, sir, from this aspersion, I declareit as my opinion, that every gentleman in the house can safely purgehimself in the same manner; for I cannot conceive that any of them canhave written a libel like this. There are, indeed, some passages whichwould not disgrace the greatest abilities, and some maxims true inthemselves, though perhaps fallaciously applied, and at least such anappearance of reasoning and knowledge, as sets the writer far above thelevel of the contemptible scribblers of the ministerial vindications: aherd of wretches whom neither information can enlighten, nor affluenceelevate; low drudges of scurrility, whose scandal is harmless for wantof wit, and whose opposition is only troublesome from thepertinaciousness of stupidity. 

Why such immense sums are distributed amongst these reptiles, it isscarce possible not to inquire; for it cannot be imagined that those whopay them expect any support from their abilities. If their patrons wouldread their writings, their salaries would quickly be withdrawn; for afew pages would convince them, that they can neither attack nor defend, neither raise any man's reputation by their panegyrick, nor destroy itby their defamation. 

Sir Robert WALPOLE then spoke in the following manner:--I hope it is notexpected, that the heat with which one class of our political writershave been attacked by the honourable gentleman, should engage me toundertake their defence with the same earnestness. I have neitherinterest enough in the question to awaken my passions, nor curiosity orleisure sufficient for such an examination of the writings on each side, as is necessary, before the superiority of any author above his brethrencan he justly asserted. 

It is no part, sir, of my employment or amusement to compare theirarguments, or to balance their abilities; nor do I often read the papersof either party, except when I am informed by some that have moreinclination to such studies than myself, that they have risen by someaccident above their common level. 

Yet that I may not appear entirely to desert the question, I cannotforbear to say, that I have never, from these accidental inspections oftheir performances, discovered any reason to exalt the authors who writeagainst the administration, to a higher degree of reputation than theiropponents. That any of them deserve loud applauses, I cannot assert, andam afraid that all, which deserves to be preserved of the writings oneither side, may be contracted to a very few volumes. 

The writers for the opposition appear to me to be nothing more than theechoes of their predecessors, or, what is still more despicable, ofthemselves, and to have produced nothing in the last seven years, whichhad not been said seven years before. 

I may, perhaps, be thought by some gentlemen of each class to speakcontemptuously of their advocates, nor shall I think my own opinion lessjust for such a censure; for the reputation of controversial writersarises, generally, from the prepossession of their readers in favour ofthe opinions which they endeavour to defend. Men easily admit the forceof an argument which tends to support notions, that it is their interestto diffuse, and readily find wit and spirit in a satire pointed atcharacters which they desire to depress: but to the opposite party, andeven to themselves, when their passions have subsided, and theirinterest is disunited from the question, those arguments appear onlyloud assertions, or empty sophistry; and that which was clamorouslypraised, discovers itself to be only impudence or low conceits; thespirit evaporates, and the malignity only remains. 

If we consider, sir, what opposition of character is necessary toconstitute a political writer, it will not be wondered that so few excelin that undertaking. He that will write well in politicks, must at thesame time have a complete knowledge of the question, and time to digesthis thoughts into method, and polish his style into elegance; which islittle less than to say, he must be at once a man of business, and a manof leisure; for political transactions are not easily understood, but bythose who are engaged in them, and the art of writing is not attainablewithout long practice, and sedentary application. 

Thus it happens that political writings are generally defective: forthey are drawn up by men unacquainted with publick business, and whocan, therefore, only amuse their readers with fallacious recitals, specious sophistries, or an agreeable style; or they are the hastyproductions of busy negotiators, who, though they cannot but excel theother class of writers in that which is of most importance, theknowledge of their subject, are yet rarely at leisure to display thatknowledge to advantage, or add grace to solidity. 

Writers of the latter sort appear but seldom, and most of our politicalpapers are the amusements of leisure, or the expedients of want. 

Whether the paper now before us is the produce of ease, or of necessity, I shall not determine; I have already offered my opinion, that the manwho claims it is not the author, nor do I discover any reason forchanging my sentiment: the question is a question merely of conjecture, since neither I nor the honourable gentleman attempt to offer anydemonstrative proofs of our opinion. If he has any to produce in favourof his own notions, let him lay them before you, but let him alwaysforbear to impute to me assertions which I never uttered, and beware ofrepresenting me as declaring that I believe this paper the compositionof some member of this house. 

[It was then debated, whether this offence should be punished by theauthority of the house, or referred to the cognizance of some of thecourts of judicature in Westminster hall, on which occasion Mr. HOWEspoke as follows:]

Sir, it is the duty of every part of the legislature, not only topreserve the whole system of our government unaltered and unimpaired, but to attend particularly to the support of their own privileges, privileges not conferred upon them by our ancestors, but for wisepurposes. 

It is the privilege of this house that we, and we only, are the judgesof our own rights, and we only, therefore, can assign the properpunishment when they shall be presumptuously invaded. 

If we remit this offender, who has attempted to debase the house in theopinion of the nation, to any inferiour court, we allow that court todetermine, by the punishment that shall be inflicted, the importance ofthis assembly, and the value of the collective character of this house. 

It therefore concerns us, in regard to our own dignity, and to theprivileges of our successours, that we retain the cognizance of thiscrime in our own hands, in which it is placed by perpetual prescriptionand the nature of our constitution. 

[The house agreed to this, and the libeller was sent to the common jailof Middlesex, by warrant from the speaker. ]

Sir William YONGE then spoke to this effect:--Sir, I am pleased withfinding that the malice and indecency of this libel, has raised in thehouse a just resentment, and that the wretch, who, with a confidence sosteady, and such appearance of satisfaction in his countenance, confesses, or rather proclaims himself the author, is treated as hedeserves. But let us not forget that the same degree of guilt alwaysrequires the same punishment, and that when the author of scandal is inprison, the printer and propagator of it ought not to be at liberty. 

The printer of the daily news is surely the proper object of yourindignation, who inserted this libel in his paper, without the fondnessof an author, and without the temptation of a bribe; a bribe, by thehelp of which it is usual to circulate scurrility. To this man theexpense or labour of aspersing the government was recompensed by thepleasure, and he could not prevail on himself to omit any opportunity ofincensing the people, and exposing at once the whole legislature tocensure and contempt. 

Those, therefore, that have concurred in the imprisonment of the author, will doubtless join with me in requiring the attendance of his officiousaccomplice, and I cannot forbear expressing my hopes, that he will notmeet with kinder treatment. 

It is far from being the first offence of his licentious press; and thelenity of the government, by which he has been so long spared, has hadno other effect upon him, than to add confidence to his malice, andincite him to advance from one degree of impudence to another. 

He has for several weeks persisted in misrepresenting the intention ofthe embargo, by letters pretended to be written by friends of thegovernment who are injured by it. He has vented his insinuationshitherto, as without punishment, so, as it appears, without fear. It istime, therefore, to disturb his security, and restrain him from addingone calumny to another. 

Sir John BARNARD rose up hereupon, and opposed this motion in terms tothe following effect:--Sir, the end of punishment is to prevent arepetition of the same crime, both in the offender, and in those who mayhave the same inclinations; and when that end is accomplished, allfarther severities have an appearance rather of cruelty than justice. 

By punishing the author of this libel, we have, in my opinion, sufficiently secured our dignity from any future attacks, we havecrushed the head of the confederacy, and prevented the subordinateagents from exerting their malice. Printers can do no injury withoutauthors; and if no man shall dare to write a libel, it is not worthy ofour inquiry how many may be inclined to publish it. 

But if the printer must necessarily be punished before the resentment ofthe house can be satisfied; if it shall not be thought sufficient topunish him without whose assistance the other could not have offended;let us, at least, confine our animadversion to the present fault, without tracing back his life for past misdemeanours, and charging himwith accumulated wickedness; for if a man's whole life is to be thesubject of judicial inquiries, when he shall appear at the bar of thishouse, the most innocent will have reason to tremble when they approachit. 

Even with regard, sir, to the offence of which he is now accused, somewhat may, perhaps, be said in extenuation of his guilt, which I donot offer to gratify any personal affection or regard for him, to whom Iam equally a stranger with any other gentleman in this house, but toprevent a punishment which may be hereafter thought disproportioned tothe crime. 

It is, sir, to be remembered, that he was not the original printer ofthe libel, which he only reprinted from a paper, of which he knew thatit was to be dispersed at our door, and in which he could not naturallysuspect any seditious or dangerous assertions to be contained. It is, therefore, probable that he fell into the offence by ignorance, or, atworst, by inadvertency; and, as his intention was not criminal, he mayproperly be spared. 

Mr. WINNINGTON spoke, in answer, to this effect:--Sir, I cannot butthink the honourable gentleman betrayed, by his zeal for the defence ofthis man, into some assertions not to be supported by law or reason. Ifit be innocent to print a paper once printed, will it not inevitablyfollow, that the most flagitious falsehoods, and the most enormousinsults on the crown itself, the most seditious invectives, and mostdangerous positions, may be dispersed through the whole empire, withoutany danger but to the original printer? And what reason, sir, can beassigned, why that which is criminal in one man, should be innocent inanother?

Nor is this the only position which has been advanced contrary to thelaws of our country; for it has been asserted, that the generalcharacter of an offender is a consideration foreign from that of hisimmediate crime; and that whatever any man's past life has been, he isonly to be judged according to the evidence for the offence which isthen the subject of examination. 

How much this opinion is consistent with the practice of our courts, avery slight knowledge of their methods of proceeding will readilydiscover. Is any villain there convicted but by the influence of hischaracter? And is not the chief question at a trial the past conduct ofthe person at the bar?

Sir John BARNARD rose here, and spoke thus:--Sir, I rise up only toanswer a question, which is, whether properly or not, put to me, andhope the irregularity will not be imputed to me, by the house, but tothe occasion which produces it. 

I am asked, whether it is not the chief question at the bar of ourcourts of justice, what is the character of the prisoner? and cannot butfeel some amazement that any man should be so ignorant of commonproceedings, and so much unacquainted with the execution of our laws, asto have admitted a notion so chimerical. 

The character of the prisoner is never examined, except when it ispleaded by himself, and witnesses are produced to offer testimony in hisfavour; that plea, like all others, is then to be examined, and issometimes confuted by contrary evidence. But, the character of acriminal, though it may be urged by himself as a proof of his innocence, is never to be mentioned by his prosecutor as an aggravation or proof ofhis guilt. It is not required by the law, that the general character ofa criminal, but that the particular evidence of the crime with which hestands charged, should be examined; nor is his character ever mentionedbut by his own choice. 

Sir William YONGE spoke next, to the effect following:--Sir, to provethe malignity of the intention with which this libel was inserted in thedaily paper, it cannot be improper to observe, that the embargo has beenfor many days past the favourite topic of this printer, and that, therefore, it was not by accident that he admitted so zealous anadvocate for his opinions to be seasonably assisted by the circulationof his paper, but that he, doubtless, was delighted with an opportunityof dispersing sedition by means of greater abilities than his own. 

Nor can it be justly pleaded, sir, in his favour, that he was encouragedto publish it by the confidence with which he saw it dispersed; for itwas printed by him in the morning, and not brought hither till theafternoon. I cannot, therefore, but conclude, that his intentions wereagreeable to his practice, and that he deserves to accompany the authorin his present confinement. 

The advocate, CAMPBELL, spoke next, to this purpose:--Sir, I hope itwill not be imputed to me as disregard of the government, or neglect ofthe honour of this house, that I declare myself, on all occasions likethis, inclined to lenity, and think it necessary always to proceed byregular methods, and known forms of justice, not by capriciousdeterminations, and orders variable at pleasure. 

I opposed the imprisonment of the man who just now appeared at the barof our house, and am still more unwilling to proceed to severitiesagainst another, who is criminal only in a subordinate degree. Theloudest declaimers against these men cannot have stronger detestation offalsehood and sedition than myself; but however flagrant may be thecrimes, they may be punished with unjustifiable rigour, and, in myopinion, we have already proceeded with severity sufficient todiscourage any other attempts of the same kind. 

Whether it will promote the advantage of the publick, and the efficacyof our deliberations, to deter any man from the common practice ofgiving us information by delivering papers at our door, must beconsidered by the house. 

Nor is it less worthy of our most attentive inquiry, whether it is notmore reasonable to prosecute this offender in the common forms ofjustice, than to punish him by any act of uncontroulable, unaccountableauthority? Whether it is not more reasonable to have him prosecutedbefore a judge unprejudiced, and a disinterested jury, than to act atonce as party, evidence, and judge? I have no desire, sir, ofdiminishing the privileges of this house; and yet less would Icontribute to establish any precedents of unlimited power or arbitrarypunishments. 

The ATTORNEY GENERAL then spoke to the following effect:--Sir, whence somuch tenderness can arise for an offender of this kind, I am at a lossto discover, nor am I able to conceive any argument that can be producedfor exempting from punishment the printer of a paper, which has beenalready determined, by the vote of the house, to be a scandalous libel, tending to promote sedition. 

It has been, indeed, agreed, that there are contained in the paper sometrue positions, and some passages innocent, at least, and perhapsrational and seasonable. But this, sir, is nothing more than to say, that the paper, flagitious as it is, might have been swelled to agreater degree of impudence and scurrility; that what is already tooheinous to be borne, might, by greater virulence, become more enormous. 

If no wickedness, sir, is to be checked till it has attained thegreatest height at which it can possibly arrive, our courts of criminaljudicature may be shut up as useless; and if a few innocent paragraphswill palliate a libel, treason may be written and dispersed withoutdanger or restraint; for what libel was ever so crowded with sedition, that a few periods might not have been selected, which, upon thisprinciple, might have secured it from censure. 

The danger of discouraging intelligence from being offered at the doorof our house, does not alarm me with any apprehensions of disadvantageto the nation; for I have not so mean an opinion of the wisdom of thisassembly, as to imagine that they can receive any assistance from theinformations of their officious instructors, who ought, in my opinion, sir, rather to be taught by some senatorial censure to know their ownstation, than to be encouraged to neglect their proper employments, forthe sake of directing their governours. 

When bills, sir, are depending, by which either the interest of thenation, or of particular men, may be thought to be endangered, it is, indeed, the incontestable right of every Briton to offer his petition atthe bar of the house, and to deliver the reasons upon which it isfounded. This is a privilege of an unalienable kind, and which is neverto be infringed or denied; and this may always be supported withoutcountenancing anonymous intelligence, or receiving such papers as theauthors of them are afraid or ashamed to own, and which they, therefore, employ meaner hands to distribute. 

Of this kind, sir, undoubtedly, is the paper now under ourconsideration, of which I am far from imagining that it was drawn up bythe man who declares himself the writer, and am, therefore, convinced ofthe necessity of calling the printer to the bar, that whatever thelenity or justice of this assembly may determine with regard to hispunishment, he may be examined with respect to the real authors of thelibel; and that our resentment may fall upon him, who has endeavoured toshelter himself by exposing another. 

Counsellor ORD spoke to this effect:--Sir, I am inclined to believe, that the persons associated in writing and dispersing this paper, whosoever they may be, are of no high rank, or considerable influence;as it is not likely that any man who had much to hazard, would exposehimself to the resentment of the whole legislature; but let us not forthat reason exert our superiority in wanton punishments, or tyrannisemerely because we cannot be resisted. Let us remember that the samejustice and the same humanity is due to the meanest, as the highest ofour fellow-subjects; and that there is even less necessity of rigorousmeasures, as the attack is less formidable. 

But, sir, there is one motive to moderation that has seldom been foundless efficacious than the consideration of the laws of justice orhumanity. We ought to be withheld by regard to our posterity, and evento ourselves, from any exorbitant extension of our privileges. We know, that authority once exerted, is claimed afterwards by prescription. Andwho knows by what sudden rotation of power he may himself suffer by aprecedent which he has concurred to establish, and feel the weight ofthat oppressive power which he first granted for the punishment ofanother?

Mr. HOWE spoke thus:--Sir, I am always unwilling to oppose any proposalof lenity and forbearance, nor have now any intention of heightening theguilt of this man by cruel exaggerations, or inciting the house torigour and persecution. 

But let us remember, sir, that justice and mercy are equally to beregarded, and while we pity the folly of a misguided, or, perhaps, athoughtless offender, let us not suffer ourselves to be betrayed, by ourcompassion, to injure ourselves and our posterity. 

This house, sir, has always claimed and exerted the privilege of judgingof every offence against itself, a privilege so long established, and soconstantly exercised, that I doubt whether the inferiour courts ofjudicature will take cognizance of an attack upon us; for how can theyventure to decide upon a question of such importance without any form orprecedent for their proceedings. 

There seems also to be at this time, sir, an uncommon necessity fortenaciousness of our privileges, when, as some whispers, which have beenwafted from the other house, inform us, a motion has been made in termswhich might imply the subordination of this assembly, an assertionwithout foundation either in reason or justice, and which I shall alwaysoppose as destructive to our rights, and dangerous to our constitution. 

Let us, therefore, sir, retain in our hands the cognizance of thisaffair, and let the criminal either suffer his punishment from _our_sentence, or owe his pardon to _our_ mercy. 

[It was agreed that the printer of the daily paper should attend nextday, when, being called in, it was proposed that he should be asked, whether he printed the paper complained of. It was objected to, for thesame reason as the question about the author's being in the gallery, because the answer might tend to accuse himself; and he being withdrawn, a debate of the same nature ensued, and the question being put whetherhe should be asked, if he be the person that printed the daily papershown to him, which paper the house the day before resolved to contain amalicious and scandalous libel, etc. It was, on a division, carried inthe affirmative, by two hundred and twenty-two against one hundred andsixty-three: accordingly he was called in again, and being asked thequestion, he owned that he printed the said paper from a printed copywhich was left for him with one of his servants; and being asked what hehad to allege in his justification or excuse for printing the saidlibel, he said that as he had before printed several other things whichhe had received from the said person, which had not given offence, heinserted part of the paper in his news, and which he should not haveinserted, if he had thought it would have given offence to the house, and that he forbore to print the remainder, having heard that it hadgiven offence. Upon which he withdrew, and the house, after some debate, on a division, one hundred and eighty-eight to one hundred andforty-five, not only ordered him into the custody of the serjeant, butresolved to present an address to his majesty, that he would be pleasedto give directions to his attorney general to prosecute him at law. 

The first printer of the libel was also ordered into custody. This wason the 3d of December, but the next day presenting his petition, expressing his sorrow for the offence, whereby he had justly incurredthe displeasure of the house, and praying to be discharged, he wasbrought to the bar on the following day, received a reprimand on hisknees, and was ordered to be discharged, paying his fees. ]

On the 12th, lord BARRINGTON presented a petition from the printer ofthe daily paper, expressing his sorrow, promising all possible care notto offend for the future, and praying to be discharged. 

This petition being read, a motion was made, that the serjeant at armsdo carry the petitioner to some court of law, to give security for hisappearance to the prosecution to be carried on against him by theattorney general; which done, that he be discharged, paying his fees. 

Sir William YONGE spoke to this effect:--Sir, I know not for what reasonthis enormous offender is entitled to so much regard, or by whatinterest he has engaged so many, who, I doubt not, abhor his crimes, topity his sufferings. 

Had he been young and unexperienced, and seduced into the commission ofthis offence by artifice or persuasion, his act might have beenreasonably considered rather as an errour than a crime, and it mighthave been proper to treat with lenity a delinquent neither obstinate normalicious. 

But how, sir, can this plea be urged in favour of a man, whose dailyemployment it has been, for these two years past, to misrepresent thepublic measures, to disperse scandal, and excite rebellion, who hasindustriously propagated every murmur of discontent, and preserved everywhisper of malevolence from perishing in the birth. 

The proper judge, sir, of this affair, is his majesty's attorneygeneral, who is not now in the house. I am, therefore, for detaining himin custody, and for referring the consideration of farther proceedingsagainst him to that gentleman, whose proper province it is to prosecutefor the crown. 

Mr. WALLER spoke next, to the following purpose:--Sir, it isundoubtedly the duty of every man to oppose the introduction of newlaws, and methods of oppression and severity, which our constitutiondoes not admit; and what else is the mention of a prisoner's characteras an aggravation of his present offence?

It is well known, and has been already asserted, upon this occasion, that in the lower courts of justice, though the prisoner may plead hischaracter, in his own defence, his prosecutor is not at liberty toproduce it to his disadvantage. Even those who are cited to the bar formurder or for treason, are tried only by the evidence of that crime forwhich they are indicted. 

That this house is not bound to strict forms, and is not accountable forthe exercise of its power, is easily granted; but authority cannotchange the nature of things, and what is unjust in a lower court, wouldbe in us not less unjust, though it may not be punishable. 

 * * * * *

It was replied that this question had been before sufficientlydiscussed. 

The attorney general not being present, the debate was adjourned to thenext sitting. 

On the next day of the session, the lord BARRINGTON proposed, that theadjourned debate might be resumed, and several members interceded forthe petitioner, that he might be released; to which it was objected, that it was not proper to release him, unless an information was lodgedagainst him, without which he could not be held to bail; and thequestion being put, whether he should be released, was determined in thenegative. 

At the sixth sitting, the author of the libel, who was committed to thecommon prison of Middlesex, petitioned the house to permit him toimplore pardon on his knees, and promising, by the strongest and mostsolemn assurances, not to offend again, was ordered to be discharged thenext day, paying his fees. 

On the forty-seventh sitting, the printer of the daily paper againpetitioned the house, representing, that he most heartily bewailed hisoffence, that he was miserably reduced by his confinement, havingborrowed money of all his friends to support himself, his wife, andchildren, and praying the mercy of the house. He was then ordered to bedischarged, paying his fees, and giving security for his appearance toanswer the prosecution. 

On the eighty-fifth day, Mr. George Heathcote offered another petitionfor the said printer, and represented, that the fees amounting to onehundred and twenty-one pounds, he was not able to pay them, that, therefore, he hoped the house would consider his case; but the petitionwas not allowed to be brought up. On which he remained in custodyfourteen days longer, till the end of the session, and, the authority ofthe senate ceasing, had his liberty without paying any fees. 

HOUSE OF COMMONS, DEC. 4-11, 1740. 

ON INCORPORATING THE NEW-RAISED MEN INTO THE STANDING REGIMENTS. 

On the 4th of December, sir William YONGE, secretary at war, havingpresented to the house of commons an estimate of the expense of raisingten thousand men, the same was taken into consideration in a committeeon the supply, and after debate agreed to. At the report of thisproceeding, on the 11th, another debate happened on a motion that thenew-raised men should be incorporated into the standing regiments, etc. 

As in these two debates the arguments were the same, they are throwninto one, to prevent unnecessary repetitions. 

Sir William YONGE opened the debate with respect to what he haddelivered in the estimate, after the manner following:--Sir, as thisestimate has been drawn up after very accurate calculations and carefulinquiries, I hope that no objections will be raised against it, and thatthe sum necessary for raising the new regiments will be very readilygranted by that house, which voted the war necessary for which they aredesigned. 

I hope it will be admitted as some proof of frugality, that thisestimate requires less money than one that was laid before the senate inthe reign of king William; for if it be considered, that since thattime, the necessaries of life are become dearer, and that, therefore, all expenses are increased, it will appear to be the effect of theexactest economy, that the sum required for the same service is less. 

I have heard, indeed, sir, that in conversation, the method of raisingtroops on this occasion has been censured as improper, and that in theopinion of some, whose judgment cannot be entirely disregarded, it wouldbe more reasonable to add more men to our regiments already established, than to raise new regiments with new officers. 

The chief argument, sir, produced in support of their method ofaugmentation, is drawn from the necessity of publick frugality, a verypopular topick, which never fails to produce favour and attention; forevery man is naturally inclined to hear his friend, and to consider thatman as performing the office of friendship, who proposes methods ofalleviating his taxes. 

Frugality is undoubtedly a virtue very necessary to the happiness of thenation, and such as there occur frequent occasions of inculcating tothose who are intrusted with the superintendence of publickdisbursements, but I am far from thinking that this estimate affords anyopportunity for declamations of this kind, and am of opinion that theaddition of new soldiers to each regiment, would, in reality, be moreexpensive. 

It cannot be denied, sir, that by augmenting the regiments, there wouldbe immediately saved to the publick the expense of the officers whichare necessary in the method now proposed; but it is to be considered howmuch the number of officers contributes to the regularity and disciplineof the troops, and how much discipline and order promote their success. It is to be considered, sir, that the most successful method of makingwar is undoubtedly the cheapest, and that nothing is more expensive thandefeats. 

If by raising the same number of men under fewer officers, we shouldgive our enemies any advantage, if a single party should be cut off, agarrison forced, an expedition rendered fruitless, or the war protractedbut a few months, where will be the advantage of this admired frugality?What would be the consequence, but the same or a greater expense, not togain advantages, but to repair losses, and obviate the effects of ourformer parsimony?

In private life, sir, it is common for men to involve themselves inexpense, only by avoiding it; to repair houses at greater charges thannew ones might be built, and to pay interest, rather than the debt. Weakminds are frighted at the mention of extraordinary efforts, and declinelarge expenses, though security and future affluence may be purchased bythem; as tender bodies shrink from severe operations, though they arethe certain methods of restoring health and vigour. The effects of thistimidity are the same in both cases, the estate is impaired insensibly, and the body languishes by degrees, till no remedy can be applied. 

Such examples, sir, are frequent, and the folly of imitating them istherefore greater, for who would pursue that track by which he has seenothers led to destruction? Nor need we search for remote illustrationsto discover the destructive tendency of unseasonable tenderness for thepublick, for I believe the whole history of the wars of king Williamwill prove, that too close an attention to parsimony is inconsistentwith great achievements. 

It may be expected that I, who cannot claim any regard in thisdisquisition, from my own experience, should produce some decisiveevidence in favour of the method which I have taken upon me to defend;this expectation I shall endeavour to satisfy, by alleging the authorityof the greatest commander of later ages, whom neither his friends norhis enemies will deny to have been well versed in these subjects, andwhose success is a sufficient proof of the soundness of his principles. 

The illustrious duke of MARLBOROUGH was of opinion, that the whole forceof the French armies consisted in the number of the officers, and thatto be always equal to them in the field, it was necessary to form ourtroops nearly upon the same plan; to this scheme he conformed in hispractice of war, and how much his practice confirmed his opinion, letBlenheim and Ramillies attest. 

As I pretend not to have determined myself on this question, otherwisethan by authority, and, as I know not any authority equal to that of theduke of MARLBOROUGH, I cannot discharge the trust reposed in me by mycountry, any otherwise, than by proposing, that, on this occasion, weagree to grant his majesty the sum calculated for raising the newregiments, as I believe that method of augmentation most likely toproduce success in our undertakings, and consequently to procure aspeedy conclusion of the war. 

Mr. PULTENEY spoke next, to the following effect:--Sir, I have been solong accustomed to the debates of this house, and have so often attendedto the eloquence of the right honourable gentleman, that I am neverstartled at paradoxes, nor shocked at absurdities; I can now hear withgreat tranquillity an harangue upon the necessity of placemen in thishouse, upon the usefulness of standing armies, and the happiness of ageneral excise. 

I am no longer offended with facts quoted in opposition to history, norwith calculations drawn up without regard to the rules of arithmetick; Iknow that there are persons in this house, who think themselves obligedto speak, even when in their own opinion nothing can be said with weightor with propriety; who come hither prepared against the shame ofconfutation, and determined not to be convinced. 

To reason with such men, sir, is, indeed, no pleasing task; it is tofight with enchanted heroes, upon whom the common weapons of argumenthave no effect, and who must be softened by a countercharm, before theycan be attacked with any prospect of success. 

There are some, however, of whom I am willing to believe that theydispute only for truth, and inquire with the view of attaining asolution of their doubts. For the sake of these, sir, I think itnecessary to declare my sentiments, as I shall be desirous, in my turn, to hear their sentiments; but with regard to those whose opinion I knowalready by their posts, I should think it of great advantage to thedespatch of publick affairs, if they would content themselves withvoting for their pay, without any ambition of other service, or addingthe praise of volubility to that of steadiness. 

Having this opportunity, sir, of declaring my opinion of the measurespursued in regulating our military preparations, I shall not confinemyself entirely to the present question, but lay before the house mythoughts upon some parts of the establishment, which may, perhaps, require a reform, and which are at least proper objects ofconsideration, though not absolutely necessary to the determination ofour opinion upon the present motion. 

I have long ago, sir, declared, what, therefore, it is scarcely of anyuse to repeat, that I know not any advantage to be hoped from a standingarmy, nor can discover why the ablest and most vigorous of theinhabitants of this kingdom should be seduced from the loom, the anviland the plough, only to live at ease upon the labour of industry, onlyto insult their landlords, and rob the farmers. I never could find whyany body of men should be exempt from the common labour of socialduties, or why they should be supported by a community, who contributeneither to its honour nor its defence. 

I doubt not, sir, but I shall hear, on this occasion, of the service ofour troops in the suppression of riots; we shall be told, by the nextpompous orator who shall rise up in defence of the army, that they haveoften dispersed the smugglers; that the colliers have been driven downby the terrour of their appearance to their subterraneousfortifications; that the weavers, in the midst of that rage which hungerand oppression excited, fled at their approach; that they have at ourmarkets bravely regulated the price of butter, and, sometimes, in theutmost exertion of heroick fury, broken those eggs which they were notsuffered to purchase on their own terms. 

Some one, perhaps, of more penetration, may inform us of the use whichhas been made of them at elections, where the surly burgesses have beensometimes blind to the merit of those worthy gentlemen, whom thesoldiers have known how to esteem according to their desert; nor, indeed, do I see how those can refuse their votes in favour of ourtroops, who are indebted for the power of giving them, to their kindinterposition. 

To these arguments, sir, I shall content myself with answering, thatthose who are versed in the history of Britain, know that we have hadcolliers and weavers for many years before a standing army was heard ofamong us, and that it is, nevertheless, nowhere recorded that any of ourkings were deposed by those formidable bodies of men, or that anyremarkable changes were made by them in the form of our government; and, therefore, till some reason shall be alleged, why such insurrections arenow more dangerous, and our civil magistrates more impotent than informer ages, I humbly conceive, that even without the protection of astanding army, we might yet sleep in security, notwithstanding the plotsof the colliers, and the combinations of the weavers. 

But I must own, sir, these are not our only enemies, for there issomewhere, yet in existence, a person that lays claim to the dominion ofthese kingdoms, and pleads an hereditary title to dispose of our wealth, to subvert our liberties, and destroy our religion. 

If any foreigner, sir, unacquainted with our affairs, were to be presentat our debates, and to hear with what ardour we animate each other to anobstinate resistance of this pretender to the throne, how often he isrepresented as hovering over us, and how often we have caught a generalpanick, and imagined ourselves upon the verge of destruction, how oftenour most zealous patriots take opportunities of declaring theirresolution to die in defence of their liberties; and how patheticallyour most elegant declaimers have expatiated on the misery of thatunhappy race, whom they should leave behind to groan under theoppression of absolute power, what would be his opinion of thispretender, whom he saw so perpetually dreaded, against whom so manyalliances were formed, so many armies were levied, and so many naviesequipped?

Would he not believe him to be some formidable tyrant in a neighbouringcountry, the lord of wide dominions, and the master of numerous armiesand powerful fleets? Would he not imagine that he could assemble halfthe continent at his call, that he was supported by powerful alliances, and that nothing but a fair wind was required to land him on our coastsat the head of millions? And would he not, even on that supposition, beinclined to censure us as timorous, as somewhat regardless of the honourof our nation, and condemn us for giving way to such suspicions andexclamations, as have a natural tendency to heighten the apprehension ofdanger, and depress the spirits of the people?

But what would be his conclusion, sir, when he should be told, what inreality is true, that this dreadful pretender is an unhappy fugitive, driven in his infancy from this country, and by consequence without anypersonal interest; that he is supported by the charity of a prince whosename is hated almost by every inhabitant of the kingdom; that he hasneither sovereignty, nor money, nor alliances, nor reputation in war, nor skill in policy; that all his actions are watched by British spies;and that the few friends that remain to support the farce of a court, are such only as dare not return to their native country, and are, therefore, without fortune, and without dependants?

What could a wise man conceive of a nation held in continual alarms byan enemy like this; of a nation always watchful against an invasion froma man who has neither dominions to supply, nor money to hire a singleregiment; from a man whose title all the neighbouring princes disown, and who is at such a distance from them, that he cannot be assisted bythem without open preparations, of which we cannot fail of havingintelligence, and which may be defeated, without danger, by the vesselsregularly stationed on our coasts?

Would not any stranger imagine, sir, that we were a nation infected witha general phrensy, that cowardice had perverted our imaginations, filledus with apprehensions of impossible invasions, raised phantoms beforeour eyes, and distracted us with wild ideas of slavery and tyranny, oppression and persecution?

I have dwelt thus long on this point, because I know the pretender isthe last refuge of those who defend a standing army; not that I proposeto convince any man of the folly of such apprehensions, or to fortifyhim against such terrours for the time to come; for if any man, inreality, now dreads the pretender, fear must be his distemper; he isdoomed to live in terrours, and it is of no importance whether he dreadsan invasion or a goblin, whether he is afraid to disband the army, or toput out his candle in the night; his imagination is tainted, and he mustbe cured, not by argument, but by physick. 

But the greatest part of those who disturb our consultations with themention of the pretender, are men of a very different character, menequally unconcerned about his designs, or his motions, with those whoare most desirous of setting the nation free from the burden of an army, and very often such as we may discover, from their conduct, to bedetermined to comply with every government; and such as have, therefore, nothing to fear from a change of masters. 

The men, for whose sake I am now speaking, sir, laugh equally withmyself at the apprehensions of those whom they contribute to terrify;they know too well the impotence of the pretender to dread an invasionfrom him, and affect only to continue their outcries, that they may notbe deprived of a topick, on which, by long practice, they have attainedan uncommon facility of haranguing, which they know how to diversifywith various combinations of circumstances, and how to accommodate toany emergent occasion, without the pain of torturing their inventions. 

It may be useful, sir, to inform these men, that their disguise ought atlast to be thrown off, because it deceives no longer, and that thenation cannot be cheated but at the expense of more cunning than theyare willing, or perhaps able, to display. A mask must necessarily bethrown aside, when, instead of concealing, it discovers him by whom itis used. 

Those who are attempting, sir, to deceive others, and whose character isexalted, in their own opinion, in proportion to the success of theirendeavours, have surely a sense of shame, though they have none ofvirtue, and cannot, without pain, find their artifices detected, andthemselves made the objects of ridicule, by those stratagems which theyemploy for the deception of others. 

I hope, therefore, sir, that, for their own sakes, these declaimers onthe exploded story of the pretender, will change their bugbear, that ifit be necessary to frighten those whom they want art or eloquence topersuade, they will find out some other object of terrour, which, aftera little practice in private meetings, they may first produce in thecourt, and then turn loose in the senate. 

The world, methinks, allows them a sufficient choice of tyrants moreformidable than the pretender. Suppose they should revive the history ofthe Mohocks. The Mohocks are a dreadful race, not to be mentionedwithout horrour, by a true lover of his country, and a steady adherentto the house of Hanover; they might then very easily increase our army, or enhance our taxes; for who would not be urged by his wife anddaughter to agree to any measures that might secure them from theMohocks?

But as an army is, at present, likely to be kept up for our defence, against an enemy less formidable, it may be more seasonable to proposethe regulation than the dismission of our troops, and to mention thoseevils which arise from the present establishment, rather than thosewhich are inseparable from the expense of a standing force. 

If it be necessary, sir, to support soldiers, I suppose that it will notbe denied by the advocates for an army, that we ought to levy suchtroops as may be of use; yet in their practice they seem to have paidvery little regard to this principle. Our troopers are mounted uponhorses which can serve no purpose but that of show, which may, indeed, wheel about in the park with a formidable air, but can neither advanceupon an enemy with impetuosity, nor retreat from him with expedition;and which, therefore, though purchased by the nation at a very highprice, and supported at a large expense, can only grace a review, butare of very little use in an enemy's country, and must perish in themarch, or stand unactive in the battle. 

Nor is much more service to be expected, sir, from their riders, thanfrom the horses, for there are very few of them acquainted with thefirst elements of their profession, or who have ever learned more than afew postures of exercise, and the meaning of a few words of command, buthave a number of officers with large appointments. 

The French troops, sir, if they are doubly officered, are officered andmaintained at a less expense, and to greater effect; for the soldiersare better instructed, and the same number of men cost not, perhaps, much more than half the charge of a British regiment. 

The guards, sir, that are maintained about this metropolis, for no otherpurpose than to keep up the splendour of a modern court, cost thenation, yearly, such a sum as would be sufficient to support an army ofFrenchmen, for the protection of their frontier towns, or the invasionof neighbouring countries. 

For my part, I cannot see what injury would be done to the nation byabolishing an establishment, at the same time useless and expensive, andemploying that money which is at present squandered upon idlers withouteffect, upon levies of useful soldiers for marching regiments, who mightbe employed, when occasion should require them, in the service of theircountry. 

It will, doubtless, be objected, that the officers of this body of men, many of whom are persons of the highest merit, and who have, generally, purchased their commissions, might very justly complain of beingdeprived, without a crime, of that which they have bought at its fullvalue, and to which, therefore, they imagine themselves entitled, tillthey shall forfeit their right by some offence against the laws, or someneglect of their duty. 

I shall not, sir, at present, inquire into the justness of this plea, nor examine, whether he who purchases an employment, which he knows tobe useless, and therefore burdensome to the publick, deserves that thepublick should be solicitous to support him in the enjoyment of it; butI shall declare, on this occasion, with confidence, that I know many ofthe officers of the guards to be men of honour, who would gladlyexchange their posts, so chargeable to the nation, for an opportunity ofserving it, and who are not very anxious for the increase of their pay, so they may not be degraded from their present rank. 

If these gentlemen, sir, might, in the regiments that should be raisedby disbanding the guards, be advanced to higher commissions, though withsome diminution of their pay, they would imagine themselves abundantlycompensated by the happiness of becoming useful subjects, and servingthat nation by which they have been, hitherto, supported only to fill upthe pomp of levees, and add to the magnificence of drawing-rooms, toloiter in antechambers, and to quarrel at gaming tables. 

If this scheme should not be approved, the method eligible, in the nextdegree, seems to be that of incorporating our new levies into theregiments already raised, that being associated with men alreadyacquainted with discipline, they may learn their duty much moreexpeditiously than in separate bodies, where one officer will be obligedto attend to the instruction of great numbers, and where no man will beexcited to application, because no man will see any degree of excellencewhich he may be ambitious of attaining. 

I have, indeed, heard no reason alleged for the necessity of new levies, which appeared likely to convince even those by whom it was produced. Itappears to me that our present army is more than sufficient for thepublick service, without an augmentation, and that some of our regimentsmight immediately embark, not only without danger to the nation, butwith far greater hopes of success, as our enemies would have less timeto strengthen their fortifications, and collect their troops, and asdisciplined forces are more formidable than troops newly levied; fordiscipline must be of great efficacy to the success of militaryundertakings, or all arguments which have been used in the defence of astanding army fall to the ground. 

In answer to this proposal, we shall probably be once again intimidatedwith an invasion, whether from the pretender, the Spaniards, the French, or any other power, it is of no great importance. An invasion is aformidable sound; the sack of towns, the destruction of villages, thecaptivity of our children, the ruin of our fortunes, and the desolationof our country, are frightful images, and may, therefore, besuccessfully produced, on this occasion, to perplex our thoughts, andembarrass our inquiries. 

To remove, therefore, this panick, and to dissipate, for ever, thephantoms of invasion, I will lay before the house the opinion of thegreat commander whose name has already been introduced in this debate. In the late reign, on a day when the great officers of the crown, andmany of the council, were at a publick feast in the city, a report wassuddenly spread that the duke of Ormond had landed in the west, with twothousand men. This account was, in appearance, well attested, anduniversally believed; all jollity was, therefore, at an end, the companydeparted, the council was summoned, and every man offered suchexpedients as his present thoughts, confused and oppressed with theproximity of the danger, suggested to him. One proposed, that a body oftroops should be sent to a distant part of the kingdom, to restrain theseditions of the populace; another apprehended more danger from adifferent quarter, and advised that the inhabitants should be awed byanother detachment sent thither; the most experienced easily saw theunprofitableness of the measures proposed, but could not so easilystrike out more efficacious expedients, and therefore sat in greatperplexity. Lord Somers, particularly, shook his head, and seemed toconsider the kingdom as in the hands of the invaders, and the dreadfulpretender as seated on the throne. 

At last, the duke of MARLBOROUGH, who had hitherto sat silent, askedcalmly, whether they were certain that any forces were really landed, and was answered, that though it might not be absolutely certain, yetthey were to consult and send orders upon that supposition. Then, sayshe, I will lay down this great rule to be observed invariably, wheneveryou are invaded. Attend only to one point, nor have any other purpose inview than that of destroying the regular forces that shall be landed inthe kingdom, without any regard to petty insurrections, which may bealways easily quelled, and which will probably cease of themselves, whenthe army by which they were excited is cut off. For this end, let it beyour rule, to keep your army undivided, and to make no motion buttowards the enemies; fight them with the utmost expedition before theycan fortify themselves, or receive reinforcements from the continent. Bythe observation of this plain method of operation, continued he, I willengage, without any other force than the regiments generally stationedabout the capital, to put a stop to any troops that shall be landed onthe coast of Britain. 

So far was this great officer, who was acquainted with the whole art ofwar, from sinking into astonishment at the sound of an invasion, and sofar from thinking it necessary that the nation should be harassed bystanding troops, to preserve it from being plundered by a foreign army. 

But though our troops, sir, should not be necessary to prevent aninvasion, they may be useful in services of equal importance; theministry may think the suffrages of the officers more serviceable thantheir swords, and may be more afraid of exposing themselves than thenation by any detachment of their forces. 

Such is, at present, sir, the state of this unhappy country, thatneither in peace nor war are any measures taken, but with a view ofincreasing or confirming the power of the ministry; for this purposethose troops whose officers have seats here, are to be retained at home, and the fate of our American settlements to be committed to new-leviedforces, without military skill. 

For this reason is an army to be raised without necessity, and raised ina manner that may furnish the court with an opportunity of extending itsinfluence, by the disposal of great numbers of new commissions. By thisplan every family that is burdened with a relation whose vices haveruined his fortune, or whose stupidity disqualifies him for employment, will have an opportunity of selling, for a commission, its interest atthe approaching election; dependence will be propagated, and thetroublesome spirit of liberty be depressed. 

To little purpose will it be objected, that soldiers and officers willbe equally ignorant, that discipline is not infused instantaneously, that a military dress will not make a soldier, that men can only knowtheir duty by instruction, and that nothing is to be hoped fromploughmen and manufacturers, commanded by schoolboys. The success of theexpedition is not so much considered by those who have the direction ofthe levies, as that of the election, and while they keep their posts, they are very little concerned about the affairs of America. 

In defence of this method, it has, indeed, been affirmed, that it waspreferred by the duke of MARLBOROUGH; but we are not informed to whom, or upon what occasion he declared his opinion, and, therefore, are leftat liberty to doubt, whether his authority is not produced for a methodwhich he did not approve, or approved only at some particular time forsome extraordinary service. 

It is urged, that he recommended it by his practice, and that hissuccess is a sufficient proof that his practice was founded upon rightmaxims. But if it be remembered what was, in that time, the method ofobtaining commissions, and who it was that had the disposal of them, itwill appear not absolutely certain, that his practice ought to beproduced as a decisive proof of his opinion. 

If the success of troops be properly urged as an argument for the formof their establishment, may not the victories of prince Eugene afford aproof, equally convincing, that a few officers are sufficient? And ifthe arguments which arise from success are equal on both sides, oughtnot the necessity of saving the publick money to turn the balance?

War, sir, is in its own nature a calamity very grievous to the mostpowerful and flourishing people, and to a trading nation is particularlydestructive, as it at once exhausts our wealth, and interrupts ourcommerce, at once drinks up the stream and chokes up the fountain. Inthose countries whose affairs are wholly transacted within their ownfrontiers, where there is either very little money, or where theirwealth is dug out of their own mines, they are only weakened by the lossof men, or by the diminution of their dominions, and, in general, canonly suffer by being overcome. 

But the state of Britain is far different; it is not necessary to ourruin that an enemy should be stronger than ourselves, that he should beable to pour armies into our country, to cover the sea with fleets, toburn our villages by incursions, or destroy our fortresses with bombs;for he that can secure his own dominions from our attacks, to whichnothing but distance and some advantages of situation are necessary, maysupport a war against us, and he that can fit out privateers tointerrupt our trade, may, without obtaining a victory, reduce us todistress. 

Our situation, sir, as it preserves us from the danger of an invasion, except from that powerful monarch, the pretender, who is, indeed, alwaysto be dreaded, has, likewise, the effect of securing other nations frombeing invaded by us; for it is very difficult to transport in one fleet, and to land at one time, a number sufficient to force their way into acountry where the ports are fortified, and the inhabitants in arms. 

Our wars, sir, are, therefore, to be determined by naval battles, andthose nations have very little to fear from us who have no trade to bedisturbed, and no navies to be destroyed; if they can only fit outcruisers, which may always be done by granting commissions to foreignadventurers, they may ruin our merchants by captures, exhaust the nationby the necessity of convoys, and give neutral traders an opportunity ofestablishing their credit at those markets which have been, hitherto, supplied by our manufactures. 

This is, indeed, far from being at present an exact account of the stateof Spain, whose wide-extended dominions are liable to insults, and fromwhom many of her most wealthy provinces may be torn without great hazardor difficulty. The particular state of her commerce, which, being onlycarried on from one part of her dominions to another, can only be for atime interrupted, but is in no danger of being invaded by any rival, orlost by disuse, at least requires our consideration, and we ought tomake war with the utmost frugality, against a people whom no hostilitiescan really impoverish, whose commerce may be said to lie at rest ratherthan to be shackled, as it will rise into greater vigour at the end ofthe war, and whose treasures, though the want of them is a presentinconvenience, are only piled up for a time of security. 

As the only method, sir, of reducing this nation, must be that ofinvading its colonies, and dismembering its provinces, by which thechief persons will be deprived of their revenues, and a generaldiscontent be spread over the people, the forces which are levied forthis expedition, an expedition on which so much of the honour of ourarms and the prosperity of our trade must necessarily depend, ought tobe selected with the greatest care, and disciplined with the exactestregularity. 

On this occasion, therefore, it is surely improper to employ troopsnewly collected from shops and villages, and yet more irrational totrust them to the direction of boys called on this occasion from thefrolicks of a school, or forced from the bosoms of their mothers, andthe softness of the nursery. It is not without compassion, compassionvery far extended, that I consider the unhappy striplings doomed to acamp, from whom the sun has hitherto been screened, and the windexcluded, who have been taught, by many tender lectures, theunwholesomeness of the evening mists and the morning dews, who have beenwrapt in furs in winter, and cooled with fans in summer, who have livedwithout any fatigue but that of dress, or any care but that of theircomplexion. 

Who can forbear, sir, some degree of sympathy, when he sees animals likethese taking their last farewell of the maid that has fed them withsweetmeats, and defended them from insects; when he sees them drest upin the habiliments of soldiers, loaded with a sword, and invested with acommand, not to mount the guard at the palace, nor to display their laceat a review; not to protect ladies at the door of an assembly room, norto show their intrepidity at a country fair, but to enter into a kind offellowship with the rugged sailor, to hear the tumult of a storm, tosustain the change of climates, and to be set on shore in an enemy'sdominions?

Surely, he that can see such spectacles without sorrow, must havehardened his heart beyond the common degrees of cruelty, and it mayreasonably be expected, that he who can propose any method by which suchhardships may be escaped, will be thought entitled to gratitude andpraise. 

For my part, I should imagine, sir, that an easy method might bediscovered of obviating such misery, without lessening that number ofofficers, which, perhaps, in opposition to reason and experience, somegentlemen will continue to think necessary, and hope that this may be noimproper time to declare my opinion. 

I have observed, that for some time no private centinel has ever risento any rank above that of a serjeant, and that commissions have beenreserved as rewards for other services than those of the camp. Thisprocedure I cannot but think at once impolitick and unjust. 

It is impolitick, sir, as it has a natural tendency to extinguish in thesoldiery all emulation and all industry. Soldiers have an equal geniuswith other men, and undoubtedly there might be found among them greatnumbers capable of learning and of improving the military sciences; butthey have, likewise, the same love of ease, and the desire of honour andof profit, and will not condemn themselves to labour without theprospect of reward, nor sacrifice their time to the attainment of thatknowledge, which can have no other effect than to make them discover thestupidity of their commanders, and render their obedience moredifficult, as it will destroy that reverence which is necessary tosubordination. 

It is unjust, sir, because it is not to be doubted, that some soldiers, by the natural force of their faculties, or by a laudable activity ofmind, have extended their knowledge beyond the duties of a privatestation; and he that excels in his profession, has an equitable claim todistinction and preferment. To advance any man in the army, because hisfather is an orator in the senate, or the chief inhabitant of a borough, seems not more rational, than to make another man a judge, because someof his ancestors were skilled in gunnery; nor would the lawyers havejuster reasons for complaint in one case, than the soldiers in theother. 

It is, therefore, sir, in my opinion, necessary to the advancement ofmilitary knowledge, that, as a centinel is, for excelling in hisprofession, advanced to the degree of a serjeant, the serjeant, whocontinues his application, and performs his duty, should, in time, behonoured with a commission. 

It may be objected, indeed, that serjeants, though they are skilfulcommanders in war, can very seldom arrive at any remarkable skill inpoliticks, and though they should be so fortunate as to gain estates, could never be of any use as the representatives of a borough; and towhat purpose should those men be advanced, who can only serve theircountry, but can contribute very little to the support of the court?

This is, I own, sir, an objection, which I despair of answering to thesatisfaction of those by whom it will be raised. The hardy serjeantwould never cringe gracefully at a levee, would never attain to anysuccessful degree of address in soliciting votes; and if he should bymere bribery be deputed hither, would be unable to defend the conduct ofhis directors. 

In vindication of the present scheme, I believe few of those ruggedwarriours would find many arguments; they would not recommend to thenation a troop of boys, under the command of boys, as the most properforces to be sent to make conquests in distant countries, nor wouldimagine, that unskilful soldiers could, under the direction of officersequally ignorant with themselves, attain the knowledge of their duty inthe same time as if they were incorporated with regular troops, in whichevery man might receive instructions, and learn his business from hiscomrade. 

I had lately, sir, the opportunity of hearing the opinion of one of thegreatest generals in the world, on this subject, who declared, with theutmost confidence of certainty, that raw troops could be disciplined ina short time, only by being incorporated with those that had beenalready taught their duty, and asserted, that with an army so mixed, heshould think himself sufficiently enabled to meet any forces of the samenumber, and should not fear to acquit himself successfully, either inattacking or defending. 

Such are the sentiments of this great man, to whom I know not whetherany name can be opposed that deserves equally to be reverenced. He hashad the honour of defending the rights of his country in the senate aswell as in the field, has signalized himself equally in the debate andin the battle, and, perhaps, deserves less regard for having hazardedhis life, than for having been divested of his employments. 

Since, therefore, it is apparent that great numbers of officers are byno means necessary to success in war, since they are dangerous to ourliberty in time of peace, since they are certainly expensive, and atbest not certainly useful; and since the greatest general of the presentage has declared, that our new levies ought to be mingled with ourstanding forces, I shall think it my duty to vote against the presentscheme of raising new regiments, and shall agree to no other suppliesthan such as may be sufficient for adding the same numbers to thepresent army. 

General WADE then spoke as follows:--Sir, though I cannot pretend topursue the honourable gentleman through the whole compass of hisargument, nor shall attempt to stand up as his rival, either in extentof knowledge, or elegance of language, yet as my course of life hasnecessarily furnished me with some observations relating to the questionbefore us, and my present station in the army may, in some measure, besaid to make it my duty to declare my opinion, I shall lay before thehouse a few considerations, with the artless simplicity of a plainsoldier, without engaging in a formal debate, or attempting to overthrowthe arguments of others. 

It is observed, sir, that for the greatest part, the farther any man hasadvanced in life, the less confidence he places in speculation, and themore he learns to rest upon experience, as the only sure guide in humanaffairs; and as the transactions in which he is engaged are moreimportant, with the greater anxiety does he inquire after precedents, and the more timorously does he proceed, when he is obliged to regulatehis conduct by conjecture or by deliberation. 

This remark, sir, though it may be just with regard to all states oflife, is yet more constantly and certainly applicable to that of thesoldier; because, as his profession is more hazardous than any other, hemust with more caution guard against miscarriages and errours. The oldsoldier, therefore, very rarely ventures beyond the verge of experience, unless in compliance with particular accidents, which does not make anychange in his general scheme, or in situations where nothing canpreserve him but some new stratagem or unprecedented effort, which arenot to be mentioned as part of his original plan of operation, becausethey are produced always by unforeseen emergencies, and are to beimputed, not to choice, but to necessity; for, in consequence of myfirst principle, an old soldier never willingly involves himself indifficulties, or proceeds in such a manner as that he may not expectsuccess by the regular operations of war. 

It will not, therefore, be strange, if I, who, having served in thearmy, in the wars of king William, may justly claim the title of an oldsoldier, should not easily depart from the methods established in myyouth; methods of which their effects have shown me, that they at leastanswer the intention for which they were contrived, and which, therefore, I shall be afraid of rejecting, lest those which it isproposed to substitute in their place, however probable in speculation, should be found defective in practice, and the reasonings, which, indeed, I cannot answer, should be confuted in the field, whereeloquence has very little power. 

The troops of Britain, formed according to the present establishment, have been found successful; they have preserved the liberties of Europe, and driven the armies of France before them; they have appeared equallyformidable in sieges and in battles, and with strength equallyirresistible have pressed forward in the field, and mounted the breach. It may be urged, that this vigour, alacrity, and success, cannot beproved to have been produced by the number of officers by whom they werecommanded; but since, on the contrary, it cannot be shown that thenumber of officers did not contribute to their victories, I think it notprudent to try the experiment, which, if it should succeed, as itpossibly may, would produce no great advantage; and if it should fail, and that it may fail no man will deny, must bring upon us, not only theexpense which we are so solicitous to avoid, but disgrace and losses, along interruption of our trade, and the slaughter of great numbers ofour fellow-subjects. 

Thus far, sir, I have proceeded upon a supposition that the balance ofargument is equal on both sides, and that nothing could be alleged onone part but experience, or objected to the other but the want of it;but as I am now called to declare my opinion in a question relating tomy profession, a question of great importance to the publick, I shouldthink that I had not discharged my duty to my country with that fidelitywhich may justly be exacted from me, if I should omit any observationthat my memory may suggest, by which the house may be better enabled toproceed in this inquiry. 

I think it, therefore, proper to declare, that we not only, in the lastgreat war, experienced the usefulness of numerous officers, but that wehave likewise felt the want of them on a signal occasion, and that theonly great advantage which our enemies obtained, was gained over an armyrendered weak by the want of the usual number of officers. Such were theforces that were defeated at the fatal battle of Almanza, by whichalmost all Spain was recovered from us. And it is, sir, the opinion ofvery skilful commanders, that the Germans, only by having fewer officersthan the French, did not succeed in those long and obstinate battles ofParma and Guastalla. 

It is, indeed, natural to imagine, that a greater number of officersmust promote success, because courage is kindled by example, and it is, therefore, of use to every man to have his leader in his view. Shame, atone time, and affection at another, may produce the effects of couragewhere it is wanted, and those may follow their commander, who areinclined to desert their duty; for it is seldom known that, while theofficers appear confident, the soldiers despair, or that they think ofretreating but after the example of their leaders. 

Where there are only few officers, it is apparent that more is left tochance, in which it becomes not a wise man to place any confidence; forif the officers are killed at the beginning of the action, the soldiersmust become an useless, defenceless herd, without order, withoutunanimity, and without design; but by the present method, if an officerhappens to fall, his place is immediately supplied by another, theaction goes forward, and the enemy receives no advantage from confusionor delay. 

I am, therefore of opinion, that in raising troops for the expeditionnow intended, the established method ought to be followed, and that weought not to hazard the success of our attempt by new regulations, ofwhich no human sagacity can fortell the event. 

Though it cannot be denied, that some addition might be made to ourcompanies without any visible or certain inconvenience, yet theaugmentation now intended is too numerous to be so incorporated withoutsome neglect of discipline, as the officers would be charged with moremen than they could properly superintend. 

There is, indeed, sir, another method of incorporation, by adding newcompanies to each regiment; but of this method the advantage would besmall, because the number of captains and inferiour officers must be thesame, and the pay of only the field officers would be saved, and thistrifling gain would be far over-balanced by the inconveniencies whichexperience has shown to arise from it. There have been regiments formedof thirteen companies, instead of ten; but it was found, that as theofficers of a company may be over-charged with soldiers, a colonel maylikewise have more companies than he can conveniently inspect, and theancient regulation was restored, as the least liable to difficulties andobjections. 

Having thus endeavoured to vindicate the manner in which our new troopsare proposed to be levied, it may be expected that I should now makesome observations on the service in which they are to be employed, whichI cannot think liable to any unanswerable objection. It is now, sir, inour choice whether we will send the new regiments abroad or keep them athome; and our choice may easily be determined by comparing the value ofour colonies with that of their mother country. If it be not necessaryto have any army here to defend us against insults and invasions, thequestion about the manner of raising or employing new regiments issuperfluous, because none ought to be raised, as our old troops aresufficiently numerous for foreign service. But if the security of thenation requires an army, would it not be madness to send those troops toa distant part of the world, in which we can confide most! Would notthose, who speak with such contempt of an expedition undertaken by boys, have a better reason for their censure, if only boys were stationed onour coasts to repel the veterans of France? Would not such measuresanimate our enemies, and invite an invasion?

It may, perhaps, be urged farther, that the troops which are sent intoAmerica, are more likely to succeed in their design, than any regimentof ancient establishment. The chief danger to be feared in that part ofthe world, is not from the enemy but the climate, with which young menare most able to contend, though they may not be equally qualified forattempts in which skill is equally necessary with vigour. 

I am convinced, sir, that this war has hitherto been prosecuted withardour and fidelity, and that no measures have been taken but such asexperience and reason have supported, and therefore affirm, withoutscruple, that if we are not successful, our miscarriages must be imputedto the chance of war, from which no prudence can exempt us. 

Lord QUARENDON spoke next, in the following manner, being his firstspeech:--Sir, having-but very lately had the honour of a seat in thisassembly, I am conscious how little I am acquainted with either thesubjects or forms of debate, and should, therefore, continue to listento the sentiments of persons more experienced, with silent veneration, did I not observe with how much indulgence they are heard who mean well, however deficient in knowledge, or in eloquence. 

As the honourable gentleman who spoke last, sir, professes to haveformed his opinion rather from facts than arguments, I hope I shall beindulged by the house, in an attempt to examine those facts which he hasproduced, because I think them not sufficient to support his positions, which must, therefore, be established by some other proofs, before adecision of this question can be fixed by them. 

With regard to his experience, to which undoubtedly no small degree ofveneration is due, he confesses that we have tried only one of the twoforms of establishment now in competition, and that, therefore, thoughhe has had reason to approve that with which he is most acquainted, hehas no certain proofs of the inefficacy or imperfection of the other. 

But experience, sir, may be extended much farther than our own personaltransactions, and may very justly comprehend those observations which wehave had opportunities of making upon the conduct and success of others. This gentleman, though he has only commanded in the armies of Britain, has seen the forces of other nations, has remarked their regulations, and heard of their actions with our confederates in the last war; he hasprobably acted in conjunction, and though it is known that they differfrom us in the proportion of soldiers and officers, he has mentioned nodisadvantage which might be supposed to arise from their establishment, and therefore, I suppose, he cannot deny that their behaviour andsuccess was the same with that of our own troops. 

The battles of Almanza, Parma, and Guastalla, which he has particularlymentioned, were lost, as he informs us, by armies not officeredaccording to the establishment which he recommends to us: but it isobservable that his argument is defective in an essential part; forthough he affirms that the armies which were defeated had fewer officersthan the enemy, he has neither shown, nor attempted to show, that thewant of officers occasioned the defeat, or that the loss would have beenprevented by a greater number. 

These instances, therefore, can be of no effect on the determination ofthe present question; for though it is certain that at Germany, and atother places, armies with few officers have lost the battle, it is notless common for those troops that are more liberally supplied, to beoverthrown by others which are differently modelled. 

With regard, sir, to the troops of Germany, I have heard them praised, in many parts of Europe, as not inferiour either to those of France, orof any other nation, and have been informed, that their ill success, both at Parma and Guastalla, may be justly imputed to other causes thanthe want of officers. 

There has, perhaps, sir, seldom been an example of firmness, discipline, and resolution, beyond that which was shown by the Germans at the actionof Parma, where they attacked the trenches of the French, sustained thefire of the ramparts of the city, and though they lost theircommander-in-chief and two others, towards the beginning of the action, they continued the fight for eleven hours, and at last retired only atthe approach of night. 

At Guastalla, sir, they attacked the French in their trenches, even withforces inferiour in number, so far were they from any diffidence in theform of their establishment; and after a fight of seven hours, in whichtheir loss was, under all their disadvantages, not greater than that oftheir enemies, they retreated to their former camp unmolested andunpursued. The French, sir, were preserved in both these battles, not bythe number of their officers, but by their situation, by woods, cassines, ditches, and intrenchments. 

Nor do I discover, sir, what can be inferred from his observation of theinfluence of example in time of action, but that officers should beselected with great care, and not be promoted by favour, or interest, orcaprice; for an example of cowardice in a leader must be pernicious, inproportion as that of bravery is beneficial; and as, where more officersare supposed necessary, there is less room for choice, it must beallowed that the troops, which have more officers than other forces, arein more danger of being infected with cowardice. 

It appears, therefore, to me that the expense of the presentestablishment is a certain evil, and that the advantages are verydoubtful: it appears that the present state of the nation requiresfrugality, and, therefore, I shall vote for the incorporation of our newlevies with the old regiments. 

By this incorporation, sir, our new-levied troops will be no longerdistinguished from our veterans; they will be equally acquainted withdiscipline, and will learn, from the conversation of their associates, aspirit of enterprise, and a contempt of danger; we may then employforces equally formidable in all parts of the publick service, andinvade the dominions of our enemies, without leaving our own countrydesolate. 

The arguments which the honourable gentleman has offered in defence ofsending our younger troops to America, which may likewise be usedagainst an incorporation, is, in my opinion, sir, far from beingconclusive; for it supposes, what will not be granted, that a coldclimate may be changed for a hotter with more safety by a young than anold man. I have been told, on the contrary, that superabundant heat isthe great disease of youth, and that the want of it produces most of theinfirmities of age; and every one has known the lives of personslanguishing with age, prolonged by a removal into warm countries. I am, therefore, of opinion, that the honourable gentleman's argument isdefective in all its parts, and hope that I shall not be charged withobstinacy or perverseness for dissenting from him. 

Mr. HOWE spoke next, in substance as follows:--Sir, before I engage in adiscussion of the question, I cannot but think it necessary to observe, that the honourable gentleman who spoke the second in this debate, hasbeen very far from consulting either policy or justice in hisdeclamation, and that he deviated from the subject only to ridicule hiscountry, to exalt our enemies, and depress our efforts. 

He has described, sir, the British youth, the sons of noble families, and the hopes of the nation, in terms too contemptuous to be heardwithout indignation; he has amused himself with displaying theirignorance and their effeminacy, and has indulged his imagination in amalignant kind of gaiety, which, however it may divert himself, is veryfar from contributing either to the reformation or prevention of thosepractices which he censures. 

I believe, sir, it will be granted, that nothing ought to please but inproportion to its propriety and truth; and, if we try the satire that wehave lately heard, by this test, it will be found to have very littleclaim to applause; for our armies must be composed of the youth of thenation; and, for my part, I cannot discover what advantage we shall gainover the Spaniards, by informing them how little our troops areaccustomed to danger, how short a time they have been acquainted withfatigue, how tenderly they have been nursed, how easily they may befrighted, and how certainly they will be conquered, if they but meetwith opposition. 

Nor, sir, is such an account of the youth of Britain more true, in myopinion, than it is prudent. I am far from discovering any suchremarkable degeneracy in the age, or any great prevalence of cowardiceand unmanly delicacy; nor do I doubt of hearing that our youth, if theyare sent upon any expedition, have shown that the British courage is notyet extinguished, and that, if they are ranged on the plains of America, they will discover themselves the sons of those that forced thosepasses, and those trenches, that other troops would have failed inattempting. 

That the degeneracy of the British youth, is, at least, not universal, we have just now sir, received an incontestable proof from the gentlemanwho spoke last, and spoke with so much elegance of language, andjustness of reasoning, as shows, that there are to be found, among theyouth of Britain, persons very well qualified for the senate; and I havenever heard that a post in the army required greater abilities. 

The pleasure, however, with which I have attended to his remarks, hasnot so far prejudiced me in favour of his opinion, as that I shalleasily consent to change that method of discipline, to which our troopshave been accustomed, and of which we know by experience, that it is, atleast, not less efficacious than that of any other nation. Customs, ifthey are not bad, are not to be changed, because it is an argument infavour of a practice that the people have experienced it, and approvedit, and every change is disagreeable to those who judge only byprejudice, of whom I need not say how great is the number. 

Many arguments may, sir, in my opinion, be added to our experience infavour of the present establishment. The number of officers--but I findmyself unable to pursue my design, because I can no longer read mynotes, which, being written by another hand, somewhat embarrass me inthis decline of the light. I shall, therefore, only make someobservations upon the speech of the gentleman who spoke the second inthis debate, and hope that I shall be allowed to deviate from theprincipal question, since I do it only in pursuit of another. 

He has observed, that our troopers are mounted upon horses that are ofno use; a remark, sir, which I never heard from any other person, andfor which, I believe, no authority can be produced: they are mounted, indeed, upon horses very different from those which are used by othernations, because scarcely any other country breeds horses of equal sizeand strength, and, therefore, I am informed that the French havepurchased horses from this island, and believe that all the cavalry ofEurope would be mounted upon our horses if they could procure them. Ihave been informed, that their pressure in the shock of battle is such, as no forces in the world are able to sustain; and that it was not lessby the strength of our horses than the spirit of our soldiers, that thesquadrons of France were, in the battle of Blenheim, pushed into theDanube. 

Nor do I less disapprove his censure of the choice which has been madeof the troops intended for the American service, which, though Iardently desire its success, I cannot think of equal importance with thedefence of our own country; for though we may be disgraced by a defeat, we can be endangered only by an invasion; and, therefore, I think itnecessary to retain those troops on which we may best rely for thesecurity of this island, lest our enemies should take the advantage oftheir absence, and set the pretender on the throne. 

Sir William YONGE next rose, and spoke to the effect following:--Sir, itis a standing maxim, both in private life and public transactions, thatno man can obtain great advantages who is afraid of pettyinconveniencies; and that he that will hope to obtain his end withoutexpense, will languish for ever in fruitless wishes, and have themortification of seeing the adventurous and the liberal enjoy thatfelicity, which, though it is within his reach, he is afraid of seizing. 

When the depredations of the Spaniards became first the subject of ourdebates, nothing was heard amongst us but threats of vengeance, demandsof reparation, assertions of sovereignty, and resolutions to obtainsecurity: the importance of our commerce, the necessity of rigorousmeasures, the danger of pusillanimity, the meanness of negotiation, andthe disadvantages of delay, were thundered from every part of the house. Every man seemed to imagine that there was no mean between victory andruin, and that not to humble Spain was to betray our country to insults, ignominy, and slavery. 

Far was I then, sir, from suspecting, that when the war, thus vehementlyurged, should be declared, that the prosecution of it would produce anydebates. I doubted not but that every man would be desirous ofsignalizing his zeal for the prosperity of commerce, by expediting thesupplies, and forwarding the preparations; and that the only contentionamong us would be, who should appear the most ardent enemy of Spain. 

But no sooner are hostilities begun against this insolent and oppressivenation, than those who expressed most resentment at the prudence andmoderation by which they were delayed, those that accused every attemptfor an accommodation, of cowardice, and charged the ministry withconniving at the rapine of pirates, begin to inquire into the necessityof the expenses occasioned by the war, to harangue on the advantages ofparsimony, and to think it of more importance to ease our taxes than tosubdue our enemies. 

In pursuance of this new doctrine they are now endeavouring to embarrassthe measures of his majesty, that they may save, according to their owncomputation, only thirty thousand pounds, which, in reality, I caneasily show to be no more than fifteen thousand. 

For the sake of this important sum, our army is to be modelled by a newregulation, and the success of the war is to be impeded, the security ofour commerce to be hazarded, and our colonies are to be endangered. 

Frugality is, undoubtedly, a virtue, but is, like others, to bepractised on proper occasions: to compute expenses with a scrupulousnicety, in time of war, is to prefer money to safety, and, by a veryperverse kind of policy, to hazard the whole for the preservation of apart. 

The gentlemen, sir, who have most endeavoured to distinguish themselvesas the constant opponents of the administration, have charged it, on alloccasions, with giving encouragement to the Spaniards, but can charge itwith nothing so likely to raise the confidence and confirm the obstinacyof the enemy, as the objections which they themselves have made to thepresent scheme of levying forces; for to how great a degree of povertymust they believe that nation reduced, of which the warmest patriotsstruggle to save a sum so inconsiderable, by an experiment of so muchuncertainty? And how easily will the Spaniards promise themselves, thatthey shall gain the victory only by obliging us to continue in a stateof war, a state which, by our own confession, we are not able tosupport?

Had any other argument, sir, been produced than the necessity ofparsimony, it had been less dangerous to have agreed to this new scheme;but to adopt it only for the sake of sparing fifteen thousand pounds, would be to make ourselves contemptible, to intimidate our allies, andto unite all those against us, who are inclined to trample on misery, and to plunder weakness. 

I am inclined to judge so favourably, sir, of the intentions of thosewhom I am now opposing, that I believe they have only used thisargument, because they were able to produce no other, and that if eitherreason or experience had been on their side, the poverty of the nationhad not been mentioned. 

But the honourable gentleman, who has been so long engaged in militaryemployments, has shown that all our success has been obtained by thepresent establishment, and that the battle in which we suffered most, was lost by our unfortunate deficiency of officers. 

Nor do his reasons, sir, however modestly offered, deserve less regardthan his experience, for he has shown that a greater number of officersnaturally contribute to preserve discipline, and excite courage; and itis not necessary that a man should be much a soldier to discover, thatdiscipline and courage united, must generally prevail. To the exampleswhich he has produced in favour of his opinion, it has been objected, that victories equally wonderful have been gained with fewer officers, and, by the honourable gentleman that spoke the second on this occasion, the actions of Eugene were opposed to those of the duke of MARLBOROUGH. 

That victories have been gained by troops differently regulated, Icannot deny; victories have likewise been gained, sir, under everycircumstance of disadvantage; victories have been gained by inferiournumbers, and by raw troops, over veteran armies, yet no prudent generalever produced these instances as arguments against the usefulness ofdiscipline, or as proofs that superiority of numbers was no advantage. 

The success of prince Eugene, in the late war, was far from convincingthe British general, that the German establishment was preferable to ourown; for he required that the Hessian troops, which were paid byBritain, should be officered like our national troops. In this he couldbe influenced only by his own opinion; for he neither nominated theirofficers, nor could advance his interest at home by creating new poststo which he did not recommend; he could, therefore, only regard thesuccess of the war, and changed their model only because he thought itdefective. 

The Germans themselves, sir, are far from imagining that their armiesmight not be made more formidable by approaching nearer to the Britishmethods; for one of their officers, a man of great reputation andexperience, has informed me, that they were convinced of their defect, and that nothing hindered them from adding more officers, but the fearof expenses; that they imputed all their defeats to the necessity ofparsimony, that their men wanted not courage but leaders, and that theirenemies gained advantages merely by the superiority of their opulence. 

In the late war, it was common for the auxiliary troops, when they weresent upon any expedition of importance, to be supplied with officerseither from their other regiments, or by the British forces; sonecessary did the duke of MARLBOROUGH think a larger number of officersin time of action, that where he could not alter the establishment, hedeviated from the common methods of war, and transferred his officersoccasionally into troops over which they had no settled authority. 

It is, therefore, most evident, sir, that the model on which our troopsare formed, was, by this great commander, preferred to that which is nowso warmly recommended, and I know not why we should recede from hispractice, if we are desirous of his success. 

Nor can I discover, sir, any better method of selecting officers thanthat which has of late been followed, however some may censure orridicule it. To advance gentlemen to command, seems to be the mostlikely way to unite authority with rank, for no man willingly obeysthose to whom he has lately seen himself equal, or whose conduct inlower stations he has, perhaps, had opportunities of examining toonearly. 

The distinction of birth, however chimerical in itself, has been so longadmitted, and so universally received, that it is generally imagined toconfer on one man an indelible and evident superiority over another, asuperiority, which those who would easily imagine themselves equal inmerit cannot deny, and which they allow more willingly, because, thoughit be an advantage to possess it, to want it cannot be justly consideredas a reproach. 

For this reason, sir, men cheerfully obey those to whom their birthseems to have subjected them, without any scrupulous inquiries intotheir virtue or abilities; they have been taught from their childhood toconsider them as placed in a higher rank than themselves, and are, therefore, not disgusted at any transient bursts of impatience, orsudden starts of caprice, which would produce, at least, resentment, and, perhaps, mutiny, in men newly exalted from a low station. The moreattentively, sir, we look upon the world, the more strongly shall we beconvinced of the truth of these assertions, and the more evidently shallwe discover the influence which operates, in a degree scarcely credible, even to those who have experienced its power, and which is, indeed, oneof the chief means of subordination, by which society is held together. 

Nor are officers of birth, sir, to be preferred to men who arerecommended by nothing but military service, only because they are morecheerfully obeyed, but for another reason of equal importance. It hasbeen observed, that, in reality, they discharge the duty of commandersin a manner more likely to preserve dignity and increase reverence; thatthey discover, on all occasions, a sense of honour, and dread ofdisgrace, which are not easily to be found in a mind contracted by amean education, and depressed by long habits of subjection. 

It is not, indeed, sir, universally and unvariably certain, that a man, raised from meanness and poverty, will be insolent and oppressive; nordo I doubt but there are many now languishing in obscurity, whoseabilities might add new lustre to the highest honours, and whoseintegrity would very faithfully discharge the most important trust, andin their favour, wherever they can be discovered, some exceptions oughtto be made; but as general rules are generally to be followed, as wellin military regulations as other transactions, it will be found, uponthe exactest inquiry, by no means improper to advance gentlemen to postsof command rather than private sentinels, however skilful or courageous. 

It is to be considered, sir, that the present state of the continent, has for many years made it necessary to support an army, even when weare not engaged in an actual war; that this army, though of late it has, for the ease of the people, been sometimes encamped during the summer, is, for the greatest part, quartered in towns, and mingled with the restof the community, but governed, at the same time, by the officers, andsubject to the martial law. It has often been observed by those who haveargued against standing forces, that this difference of government makesdifferent societies, which do not combine in the same interest, nor muchfavour one another; and it is, indeed, certain, that feuds are sometimesproduced, that when any private quarrel happens, either by drunkennessor accident, or claims really disputable, between a soldier and anyother, person, each applies for support and assistance to those in thesame condition with himself, the cause becomes general, and the soldiersand townsmen are not easily restrained from blows and bloodshed. 

It is true, likewise, that the rhetorick of the patriots has been soefficacious, that their arguments have been so clamorously echoed, andtheir weekly productions so diligently dispersed, that a great part ofthe nation, as men always willingly admit what will produce immediateease or advantage, believes the army to be an useless burden imposedupon the people for the support of the ministry; that the landlord, therefore, looks upon the soldier as an intruder forced into his house, and rioting in sloth at his expense; and the farmer and manufacturerhave learned to call the army the vermin of the land, the caterpillarsof the nation, the devourers of other men's industry, the enemies ofliberty, and the slaves of the court. 

It is not to be supposed, sir, that the soldiers entertain the sameideas of their profession, or that they do not conceive themselvesinjured by such representations: they undoubtedly consider themselves asthe bulwark of their country, as men selected for the defence of therest of the community, as those who have engaged, at the hazard of theirlives, to repel invasion, and repress rebellion, and who contribute morethan their part to the general felicity, by securing property, andpreventing danger. 

It is not to be doubted, sir, but sentiments so widely different, mustproduce an equal contrariety of claims, and diversity of conduct: thetrader imagines, that the man who subsists upon the taxes which areraised only from his labour, ought to consider himself as his inferiour, at least, if not as his hireling and his servant; the soldier wondershow he can ever conceive himself sufficiently grateful to him that hasdevoted his life to his defence, and to whom he must fly for protectionwhenever danger shall approach him, and concludes, that he has anincontestable right to the better part of that, of which thepreservation of the whole depends upon him. 

Thus does self-love magnify every man in his own eyes, and sodifferently will men determine when each is to judge in his own cause. Which of these competitors thinks most justly of his own station andcharacter, or whether both are not mistaken in their opinion, I think itby no means necessary to decide. This, at least, is evident, that topreserve peace and harmony between two bodies of men obliged to livetogether with sentiments so opposite, there is required an uncommondegree of prudence, moderation, and knowledge of mankind, which ischiefly to be exerted on the part of the soldiers, because they aresubject to more rigorous command, and are more easily governed by theauthority of their superiours. 

Let us suppose any dispute of this kind, sir, to happen where thesoldiers were commanded only by private sentinels, disguised in thedress of officers, but retaining, what it cannot be expected that theyshould suddenly be able to lay aside, the prejudices which they hadimbibed in the ranks, and all the ardour of trifling competition inwhich their station had once engaged them. What could be expected fromtheir councils and direction? Can it be imagined that they would inquireimpartially into the original cause of the dispute, that they wouldattend equally to the parties, endeavour, by mildness and candour, tosoften the malevolence of each, and terminate the dispute by someaddressful expedient, or decent accommodation? He, surely, must be verylittle acquainted with the vulgar notions of bravery and honour, thatcould form any hopes of such conduct. 

The plain soldier, sir, has not accustomed himself to regulate hismotions by reason, nor has learned any more of honour, than that itconsists in adhering invariably to his pretensions, even though heshould discover that they are false; and in resenting affronts with theutmost rigour, even when they were provoked by himself, he is taught, that it is his business to conquer in whatever cause, and that to desistfrom any of his attempts, or retract any of his assertions, is unworthyof a man of honour. 

Warm with such notions as these, sir, would such officers, as have beenrecommended by the honourable gentleman, apply themselves to thetermination of differences? Without any knowledge of the laws ofsociety, without any settled ideas of the different rights of differentpersons, they would have nothing in view but the honour of theirprofession, nor endeavour to support it by any other method than that ofviolence. If a soldier was affronted by a farmer, they would probablylay his territories waste, and ravage his plantations like an enemy'scountry; if another disagreed with his landlord, they would advise himto _make good his quarters_, to invade the magazines of provisionwithout restraint, to force the barricadoes of the cellar, and to foragein the stables without controul. 

But gentlemen, sir, are proper judges of debates between the army andthe rest of the community, because they are equally related to bothparties, as men who possess or expect estates, or who are allied tothose whose influence arises from their property. As men bred inaffluence and freedom, and acquainted with the blessings of ourconstitution, and the necessity of civil government, they cannotwillingly contribute to the increase of the military power, and asmembers of the army they cannot but be desirous to support their ownrank, and to hinder their profession from sinking into contempt; it is, therefore, their care to repress insolence on one part, and to preventoppression on the other, to stop dissensions in their beginning, andreconcile all the different pretensions of Britons and soldiers. 

I am, indeed, surprised, sir, to hear the promotion of serjeantsrecommended by the honourable gentleman who has so often strained hislungs, and exhausted his invention, to explain how much our constitutionis endangered by the army, how readily those men will concur in theabolition of property who have nothing to lose, and how easily they maybe persuaded to destroy the liberties of their country, who are alreadycut off from the enjoyment of them, who, therefore, can only behold withenvy and malevolence those advantages which they cannot hope to possess, and which produce in them no other effects than a quicker sense of theirown misery. 

Upon what principles, sir, any gentleman can form those notions, or withwhat view he can so long and so studiously disperse them, it is hisprovince to explain; for the only reason that can be offered by anyother person for his incessant declamations, the desire of securing hiscountry from the oppression of a standing army, is now for everoverthrown by this new proposal; which, if it were to be received, wouldin a very few years produce an army proper to be employed in theexecution of the most detestable designs, an army that could be of noother use than to gratify an ambitious prince, or a wicked ministry, asit would be commanded, not by men who had lost their liberty, but by menwho never enjoyed it, by men who would abolish our constitution withoutknowing that they were engaged in any criminal undertaking, who have noother sense of the enjoyment of authority than that it is the power ofacting without controul, who have no knowledge of any other laws thanthe commands of their superiours. 

To men like these, sir, to men raised up from poverty and servility torank and power, to ignorance invested with command, and to meannesselated with preferment, would any real patriot, any zealous assertor ofliberty, any inflexible enemy to the corruptions of the ministry, consign the protection of his country, and intrust to these ourhappiness, properties, and our lives?

Whether the honourable gentleman has changed any of the sentiments whichhe has hitherto appeared to admit with regard to the army, whether thisnew determination is only an instance of that inconsistency which isscarcely to be avoided in the vindication of a bad cause, or whether hewas betrayed to it only by his hatred of the administration, which wouldprompt him to recant his own advice, if it should happen to be approved, I will not pretend to determine, but I must lament, on this occasion, the entertainment which the house will lose, by the eternal cessation ofany harangues on the army, since he cannot now declaim on either partwithout contradicting his former declarations. 

Nor will the honourable gentleman find less difficulty in proving, thatjustice, rather than policy, requires the promotion of Serjeants tocommissions. Military preferments are always at the disposal of thecrown, nor can any right be pretended to them, but such as arises fromthe custom which has been generally followed in conferring them, whichis not only variable at pleasure, but has never been, at any time, regularly observed. The order of rotation has been suffered sometimes toproceed, because of two persons, otherwise equal, he that has servedlongest may plead the most merit; but the plea of service has beenalways overruled by birth or powerful recommendation. And though, sir, it is natural for men disappointed to complain, yet as those officers, whose preferment has been delayed, were not thought, in reality, to havereceived any injury, their murmurs have been the less regarded. 

It might be expected, sir, from a patriot, a lamenter of the degeneracyof mankind, and an inflexible opponent of corruption, that he shouldconsider rather facts than persons, that he should regulate his decisionby the unvariable principles of reason and justice, and that, therefore, he should not applaud at one time what he condemns at another. 

But this gentleman seems to have established some new maxims of conduct, and, perhaps, upon new notions of morality; for he seems to imagine, that his friends may seize, as their right, what his adversaries cannottouch without robbery, though the claim of both be the same. 

It is well known, sir, to the whole army, that a noble person, whoseabilities are so loudly celebrated, whose virtues are so liberallypraised, and whose removal from his military employments is so solemnlylamented as a publick calamity, obtained his first preferments bypretensions very different from military merit, and that at the age onlyof seventeen, a time of life in which, whatever might be his abilities, very little prudence or experience could be expected, he was advanced tothe command of a regiment, and exalted above many officers whose knownbravery and frequent hazards entitled them to favour. 

I do not assert that he was undeservedly promoted, or condemn those whoeither solicited or granted his commission; I maintain only, that whatwas then reasonable and just, is not now either iniquitous orridiculous, and different persons in the same circumstances have a rightto the same treatment. 

In the reign of queen Anne, a reign, sir, which every Briton recollectswith so much satisfaction, and which will for ever afford examples ofthe wisest councils, and most successful wars, when new regiments wereto be raised, it was far from being thought necessary to observe thisgentleman's favourite method of rotation; posts were filled, not withthe officers of other regiments, that room might be left for thepromotion of serjeants, but with gentlemen who had never seen a battle, or learned any part of the military discipline. 

But though, sir, the regulation of our army be thus violently attacked, the greatest crime of the ministry is, in this gentleman's opinion, thatof levying new troops, when we have no employment for our standingforces, of laying unnecessary impositions upon the nation, and alarmingwith the fears of an invasion, only that the army might be increased. 

On this head, sir, a declaration of the duke of MARLBOROUGH has beenproduced, with a great pomp of circumstances, and such a seemingaccuracy of narration, that the attention of the house was engaged, andthe account was received with all the solemnity of universal silence, and with the veneration due to so high an authority in a question of somuch importance. 

The subject is, indeed, so worthy of regard, that I think, sir, everyman ought to contribute to its elucidation, and, therefore, I take theliberty of adding to the honourable gentleman's relation, what I hopewill be heard with equal curiosity, the method by which that greatcommander proposed to put a stop to an invasion with so small a number. 

He was very far, sir, from imagining that he should be able to repelthem by open force, he was far from being so confident of hissuperiority in military skill, as to imagine that he should defeat themby stratagem, and, therefore, he designed, by burning the villages, anddestroying the country, to deprive them of the means of subsistence, andharass them with famine; to hover at a distance, and cut off thoseparties which necessity should force out to forage, till a body oftroops could be assembled sufficient to overthrow them in a battle, orto drive them back to their ships. 

Such was the scheme, sir, as I have been informed, of this great man, nor, perhaps, can any other be struck out by human abilities, wheregreater numbers are to be opposed by smaller. But this scheme, thoughpreferable, in the last extremities, to slavery, is such as cannot bementioned without horrour, and of which the execution ought to beavoided by every expedient that can be practised without the danger ofour liberties. We ought, certainly, not to reject a nauseous medicine, by which that health is preserved, which, if lost, can only be restoredby the amputation of a limb. 

As it was, therefore, necessary, sir, to secure our coasts from aninvasion, it was necessary to raise new troops for the Americanexpedition; nor did this method produce any delay, for the regimentswere completed a long time before the ships of war and the transportswere ready to convoy and receive them, nor could the utmost ardour anddiligence despatch them sooner from our coasts. 

The ships, sir, were, by the violence of a frost, scarcely exampled, retained, for a long time, in the harbours, without a possibility ofbeing put to sea; when they were all assembled at the place appointedfor their conjunction, they waited for a wind; all the delay that can beobjected, was produced by the seasons, of which the regulation was in noman's power. 

But the time, sir, which was unwillingly spent in the camp, was not, however, lost or misemployed, for the troops were, by the order of thegeneral, every day exercised, and instructed in the art of war, so thatwhat was lost in time, was more than recompensed by the advantage ofbetter discipline. 

Nor did these troops appear an herd so ignorant and contemptible, asthey have been represented by malicious invectives and ludicrousdescriptions; there were not, indeed, among them many grey-headedwarriours, nor were their former campaigns and past exploits thesubjects of their conversation; but there was not one amongst them whodid not appear ready to suffer, in the cause of his country, all thatthe most hardened veteran could undergo, or whose alacrity and eagernessdid not promise perseverance in the march, and intrepidity in thebattle. 

Their general, sir, who saw them pursue their exercises, declared howmuch he was satisfied with their proficiency, applauded theirappearance, and expressed his confidence in their courage; nor do Idoubt, but our enemies will find, that it is not necessary to send outour most formidable forces to humble them, and that the youth of Britainwill compensate their want of experience by their courage. 

If I, sir, have been drawn aside from the present question, it is byfollowing, perhaps, with an exactness too scrupulous, the honourablegentleman, whose propositions I have now shown to be erroneous, andwhose reproaches will, I believe, now appear rather the effects ofdisappointment than of zeal, and, therefore, I think it now necessary toreturn to the business before us, the consideration of the presentestablishment, from which, as it was approved by the duke ofMARLBOROUGH, and has been defended with very strong arguments, by one ofthe most experienced officers of this time, I cannot think it safe orprudent to depart. 

Mr. GRENVILLE spoke next, to the following effect:--Sir, as a nobleperson has been frequently hinted at in this debate, to whom my relationis well known, and whom, as I know him well, I have the strongestmotives to reverence and honour, I cannot forbear to give, on thisoccasion, an attestation which he will be allowed to deserve by allthose whom interest has not blinded, and corruption depraved. 

It will be allowed, sir, that he is one of those who are indebted fortheir honours only to merit, one whom the malice of a court cannotdebase, as its favour cannot exalt; he is one of those whose loss ofemployments can be a reproach only to those who take them from him, ashe cannot forfeit them but by performing his duty, and can only giveoffence by steady integrity, and a resolution to speak as he thinks, andto act as his conscience dictates. 

There are, sir, men, I know, to whom this panegyrick will seem romantickand chimerical, men, to whom integrity and conscience are idle sounds, men, who are content to catch the word of their leader, who have nosense of the obligation of any law but the supreme will of him that paysthem, and who know not any virtue but diligence in attendance, andreadiness in obedience. 

It is surely, sir, no loss to the noble person to be debarred from anyfellowship with men like these. Nothing can be more unpleasing to virtuethan such a situation as lays it under a necessity of beholdingwickedness that cannot be reformed; as the sight of a pesthouse mustraise horrour, though we should suppose the spectator secure from thecontagion. 

Mr. ORD spoke next, in substance as follows:--Sir, as I cannot approvethe scheme now proposed, for augmenting our forces, I shall endeavour toshow why the arguments, by which it has hitherto been supported, havefailed to convince me, and shall lay before the house some reasonsagainst it, to which I shall expect an answer, before I shall think thatI can agree to it, without squandering the money of which myconstituents have intrusted me with the disposal. 

The argument, sir, with which this motion was introduced, which is, indeed, the strongest that has yet been offered, was, that this estimateis less expensive than one that was laid before the house in a latereign, and that, therefore, it could not reasonably be charged withextravagance. 

Let us now consider this argument with that care which is required bythe importance of the question, let us inquire what consequences willfollow from it, and to what previous suppositions it must owe its force. 

The argument, sir, evidently supposes that the estimate in kingWilliam's reign was drawn up without any intention to deceive the house, or to raise money for purposes different from those for which it wasreally expended. But if we suppose that estimate to be fraudulentlycalculated, this may contain the same fallacies in a lower degree, andthe only merit that can be claimed by the authors of it, will be, thatthey are not the most rapacious plunderers of their country, that, however they may be charged with profusion of publick money, they areyet more modest than some of their predecessors. 

But it is known, sir, that in king William's reign, very few estimateswere honestly computed; it is known that the rotation of parties, andfluctuation of measures, reduced the ministry to subsist upon artifices, to amuse the senate with exorbitant demands, only that they might obtainthe necessary grants, and to pretend expenses which never were incurred, that the supplies which the publick affairs really required, might notbe withheld; as fraudulent tradesmen fix immoderate prices, that thebuyer may make offers proportionate to their demands. 

The estimates, therefore, of that reign are of very little authority, though they might sometimes pass the house without censure; for it is tobe considered, that by the frequency of new elections, the greatest partof the members were often unacquainted with the state of publickaccounts, and that an army was so little known to this kingdom, that thetrue expense of it might easily be concealed. 

Nor is this, sir, the only fallacy of this argument; for it supposes, likewise, that the nation is no less wealthy than in the time when thatcomputation was offered, with which this is so triumphantly compared. For every man knows that publick as well as private expenses are to beproportioned to the revenue by which they are supplied, and that thecharges which are easily supported at one time, may threaten ruin atanother. 

But unhappily, sir, it is evident, that, since the days of thatsovereign, the nation has been exhausted by a long and wasteful war, andsince, by a peace equally destructive, it is embarrassed with anenormous debt, and entangled in treaties, of which the support may callevery day for new expenses; it has suffered since that time a thousandlosses, but gained no advantage, and yet the expenses of that time arementioned as an example to be compared with those which are proposed inthis. 

The difference of the condition of the British nation at those twoperiods of time, sir, is not less than that of the strength of the sameman in the vigour of youth and the frigidity of old age, in the flush ofhealth and the languor of disease, of the same man newly risen from restand plenty, and debilitated with hunger and fatigue. 

To make such a comparison, sir, betrays, at least, a very criminalinsensibility, of the publick misery, if it may not be charged withgreater malignity. I know not whether those who shall hear of thisdebate, may not impute such reflections rather to cruelty thannegligence, and imagine that those who squander the treasure of thenation take pleasure in reproaching that poverty which their counselsproduce, and indulge their own vanity by contemplating the calamitiesfrom which they are themselves secure, and to which they are indebtedfor opportunities of increasing their own fortunes, and gratifying theirambition. It is evident, that an estimate which requires less than thatwhich has been mentioned, may yet exact more than the nation can nowraise, without feeling too great inconveniencies to be compensated bythe advantages which can be expected from our new forces. Nor is itsufficient that it is lower than those of former times; for, as it oughtto be the care of the government to preserve the ease and happiness ofthe people, it should be reduced in proportion to the diminution of thenational wealth. 

The right honourable gentleman confesses, sir, that frugality is avirtue, and his argument supposes that to contract expenses is anargument of prudent measures; why then is he afraid of carrying virtueto a greater height, of making the burden still more light, andpreferring the cheapest estimate that can be proposed, when it isasserted by those whose authority is most worthy of regard, that it willproduce no weakness in our troops, nor give our enemies any superiority?

I do not pretend any other skill in military affairs, than may be gainedby casual conversation with soldiers, and by a cursory observation ofdaily occurrences; but I speak with greater confidence on this occasion, because I do not think any other qualifications necessary for thedetermination of this question, than a habit of just reasoning, andfreedom from the prejudices of interest. 

Every man knows, sir, without a military education, that it is imprudentto purchase any thing at a greater price which may be procured at aless, and that when the same sum will buy two things, of which one isevidently preferable to the other, the best ought to be chosen. 

If the application of either of these two positions will decide thiscontroversy, there will be no need of recurring to experience, of citingthe authority of foreign commanders, of comparing the actions of theGerman and British generals, or of inquiring how battles have been lost, or to what victories are to be ascribed. 

It is evident, sir, that the scheme now proposed, is twice as costly asthat which is recommended in opposition to it, and therefore, unless itwill produce twice the advantage, it must be acknowledged to beimprudently chosen. The advantage in war, is to be rated by comparingthe strength of different numbers in different circumstances, andinquiring what degree of superiority will be found. 

If we suppose, sir, two bodies of men, equally armed and disciplined, opposed to each other without any advantage of situation, we mustconceive that neither party could be conquered, that the balance of theday must remain equal, and that the contest would continue undecided. 

It cannot be objected to this supposition, sir, that no such event isrecorded in history, because in war many causes really act which cannotbe estimated; one army may consist of soldiers more courageous, and moreconfident in the justice of their cause; unforeseen accidents mayoperate, orders may be mistaken, or leaders may be misinformed; but allthese considerations are to be set aside in speculation, because theymay equally be alleged on either part. 

Two bodies of men, sir, equally numerous, being, therefore, supposedequal, it is to be inquired how either may be superiour to the other. Itis proposed, on one part, to produce this effect by doubling the numberof officers rather than increasing that of the soldiers; on the other, to double the soldiers under the same officers, the expense being thesame of both methods. 

When two armies, modelled according to these different schemes, enterthe field, what event can be expected? Either five thousand men, with adouble number of officers, must be equal to ten thousand, differentlyregulated, or the publick has paid more for assistance of the officersthan its real value, and has chosen, of two methods equally expensive, that which is least efficacious. 

This, sir, is the state of the question now before us; our presentdeficiency is not of men but money, and we may procure ten thousand menregulated like the foreign troops, at the same expense as five thousandin the form proposed; but I am afraid that no man will be found toassert, that the addition of officers will be equivalent to a doublenumber of soldiers. 

Thus it is evident, sir, evident to demonstration, that the mostexpensive method is, at the same time, the least advantageous, and thatthe proposal of new regiments is intended to augment the strength of theministry rather than of the army. 

If we suppose, sir, what is more than any foreigner will grant, that theadditional officers raise a body of five thousand men to an equalitywith six thousand, is not the pay of four thousand men apparently thrownaway? And do not the officers receive a reward which their servicecannot deserve? Would it not be far more rational to raise seventhousand, by which our army would be stronger by a seventh part, and asthe pay of three thousand would be saved, the publick would be richer byalmost a third. 

Surely, sir, numerical arguments cannot but deserve some consideration, even from those who have learned by long practice to explain away mereprobability at pleasure, to select the circumstances of complicatedquestions, and only to show those which may be produced in favour oftheir own opinions. 

In the present question, sir, there is very little room for fallacy; nordo I see what remains to the decision of it, but that those gentlemenwho have been acquainted with military operations, inform us, whatdegree of superiority is conferred by any assignable number of officers;that we may compare their service with the price, and discover whetherthe same money will not purchase greater advantages. 

The experience of the late war may evince, sir, that those troops whichhave the greatest number of officers are not always victorious; for ourestablishment never admitted the same, or nearly the same number withthat of the French, our enemies; nevertheless, we still boast of ourvictories; nor is it certain that we might not have been equallysuccessful, though the number of our officers had been yet less. 

Foreigners, sir, are very far from discovering the defect of their ownestablishment, or imagining that they should become more formidable byimitating our methods. When I travelled, I took opportunities ofconversing with the generals of those nations which are most famous forthe valour of their troops, and was informed by them, that they thoughta multitude of officers by no means useful, and that they were so farfrom desiring to see their own regulation changed, that they should makeno scruple of recommending it to other nations, who, in their opinion, squandered their treasure upon useless commissions, and increased thecalamities of war by unnecessary burdens. 

I hope no man will think it sufficient to reply to these arguments withgeneral assertions, or will deny the necessity of frugality, and extolthe opulence of the nation, the extent of our commerce, and thehappiness of our condition. Such indeed, sir, is the method ofargumentation made use of by the hireling scribblers of the court, who, because they feel none of the publick calamities, represent allcomplaints as criminal murmurs, and charge those with sedition whopetition only for relief. Wretches like these would celebrate ourvictories, though our country should be overrun by an invader, wouldpraise the lenity of any government by which themselves should bespared, and would boast of the happiness of plenty, when half the peopleshould be languishing with famine. 

I do not suppose, sir, that the despicable sophistry of prostitutes likethese has any effect here, nor should I have thought them worthy of theleast notice, had it not been proper to inquire, whether those may notbe justly suspected of some inclination to deceive, even in thisassembly, by whom the most profligate of mankind are openly paid for thepromulgation of falsehood, and the patronage of corruption. 

It is indeed, sir, artful, in those who are daily impairing our honourand influence, to endeavour to conceal from the people their ownweakness, that weakness which is so well known in foreign countries, that every nation is encouraged to insult us, and by which it mayreasonably be imagined that new enemies will, in a short time, beraised. 

The late changes in our military regulations have, indeed, taken awayall the terrour of our arms; those troops are now no longer dreaded, bywhich the liberties of Europe were recovered, and the French reduced toabandon their schemes of universal empire, for the defence of their owncountry, because the officers by whom they were formerly conducted toglory and to victory, are now dismissed, and men advanced to theirposts, who are neither feared nor known. 

When the duke of ARGYLE was lately deprived of his command, theSpaniards could not conceal their satisfaction; they bestowed, howeverunwillingly, the highest panegyrick upon his bravery and conduct, byshowing that he was the only Briton of whom they were afraid. Nor didtheir allies, the French, discover less exultation; for by them it wasdeclared, that the nation was now disarmed, that either no war wasintended, or that none could be successfully prosecuted, since, as theymade no scruple to assert, though I know not whether I ought to repeatit, we have no other man capable of commanding armies, or conducting anygreat design. 

I am informed that this illustrious warriour, whose abilities aresufficiently attested by these enemies, that have felt their prevalence, is of opinion, that the number of officers now required is notnecessary, and has declared that he should with equal confidenceundertake either invasion or defence, with forces modelled after theGerman custom; and since I have shown, that, unless the troops soregulated, are equivalent to a double number, added to the standingregiments, part of the expense of the officers is evidently squandered, I shall vote against the motion, unless it be proved, which I believewill not be attempted, that the force of a regiment is doubled bydoubling the officers. 

General WADE then spoke, to the purpose following:--Sir, the learnedgentleman who spoke last, must be acknowledged to have discovered a veryspecious method of reasoning, and to have carried his inquiry as far asspeculation without experience can hope to proceed, but has, in myopinion, admitted a false principle, by which all his argument has beenperplexed. 

He supposes, that the advantages must be always in proportion to themoney expended in procuring them, and that, therefore, if five thousandmen, raised at any given cost, will be equal to five thousand, theyought, if they are regulated according to an establishment of double thecharge, to be able to encounter ten thousand. 

But in this supposition, sir, he forgets that the possibility of loss isto be thrown into the balance against the advantage of the expensesaved, and that though the strength of the troops be not increased inproportion to the increase of the cost, yet the additional securityagainst a great loss may justly entitle the most expensive regulation tothe preference. 

Suppose five thousand men to be brought into the field against sixthousand; if they can, by multiplying their officers at a doubleexpense, be enabled to engage successfully a body superiour in number byonly a sixth part, the nation may be justly said to gain all that wouldhave been lost by suffering a defeat. 

That we ought not to choose a worse method when we can discover abetter, is indisputably true, but which method is worse or better, canbe discovered only by experience. The last war has taught us, that ourtroops in their present establishment are superiour to the forces ofFrance, but how much they might suffer by any alteration it is notpossible to foresee. 

Success is gained by courage, and courage is produced by an opinion ofsuperiority; and it may easily be imagined, that our soldiers, who judgeof their own strength only by experience, imagine their ownestablishment and discipline advanced to the highest perfection; norwould they expect any other consequences from an alteration of it, butweakness and defeats. It is, therefore, dangerous to change the model ofour forces, because it is dangerous to depress the spirit of oursoldiers. 

Though it is confessed, sir, that the French, whose officers are stillmore numerous, have been conquered by our troops, it must be likewisealleged, that they had yielded us far easier victories had theirofficers been wanting; for to them are they indebted for their conquestswherever they have been successful, and for their resistance whereverthey have been with difficulty defeated; their soldiers are a spiritlessherd, and were they not invigorated by the example of their leaders, andrestrained by the fear of instant punishment, would fly at the approachof any enemy, without waiting for the attack. 

I cannot, therefore, sir, but be of opinion, that the necessity of alarge number of officers, may be learned even from the behaviour ofthose troops which have been unsuccessful, since it is certain, thatthough they have been often overcome, they have generally resisted withgreat steadiness, and retired with great order. 

If those, who are only speculative warriours, shall imagine that theirarguments are not confuted, I can only repeat what I declared when Ifirst attempted to deliver my sentiments in this debate, that I do notpretend to be very skilful in the arts of disputation. I, who claim noother title than that of an old soldier, cannot hope to prevail much bymy oratory; it is enough for me that I am confident of confuting thosearguments in the field, which I oppose in the senate. 

Mr. FOX spoke next, in this manner:--Sir, I am far from thinking thatthis question has been hitherto fully explained by those who have eitherconsidered it only as a dispute about money, or a question merelyspeculative concerning the proportions between different degrees ofexpense, and probability of success. In a war of this kind, expense isthe last and lowest consideration, and where experience may beconsulted, the conjectures of speculation ought to have no weight. 

The method, sir, by which our troops have hitherto been regulated, iswell known to have produced success beyond our expectations, to haveexalted us to the arbitration of the world, to have reduced the Frenchto change their threats of forcing a monarch upon us, into petitions forpeace, and to have established the liberties of almost every nation ofthe world that can call itself free. 

Whether this method, sir, so successful, so easy, and so formidable, shall be changed, whether it shall be changed at a time when the wholecontinent is in commotion, and every nation calling soldiers to itsstandard; when the French, recovered from their defeats, seem to haveforgotten the force of that hand that crushed them in the pride ofvictory; when they seem to be reviving their former designs, andrekindling their extinguished ambition; whether, at such a time, theregulations of our army shall be changed to save, upon the highestcomputation, only thirty thousand pounds, is the present question. 

On such a question, sir, I cannot observe, without astonishment, any mandeliberating for a single moment. To suspend our opinion in this case, would be to balance our lives, our liberties, our patrimonies, and ourposterity, against thirty thousand pounds. 

The effects of our present method, sir, are well known to ourselves, ourconfederates, our enemies, to every man that has heard the name ofBlenheim and Ramillies; the consequences of the establishment, nowcontended for, our most experienced commanders own themselves unable toforesee, and I am far from believing that theoretical disquisitions canenable any man to make great discoveries in military affairs. 

Our own inexperience of the method which is so warmly recommended, isnot the strongest objection to it, though even this ought, in myopinion, to restrain us from trying it at this hazardous conjuncture. But since arguments, merely negative, may be thought over-balanced bythe prospect of saving money, I shall lay before the house, what effectsthe want of officers has produced, with regard to those nations whosepoverty has laid them under a necessity of parsimonious establishments. 

When the Germans were defeated by the French, in the late war, I was atthe Sardinian court, where the battle was, as it may easily be supposed, the reigning subject of conversation, and where they did not wantopportunities of informing themselves minutely of all the circumstanceswhich contributed to the event; it was there, sir, universallydetermined, that the Germans lost the day merely for want of officers. 

It was observed also, sir, that some troops, which were once courted andfeared by all the neighbouring potentates, had lost their reputation inlater times, of which no reason could be alleged, but that they hadlessened the number of their officers; such is the change in the modelof the Walloons, and such is the consequence produced by it. 

I am very far, sir, from thinking, that reason is not to be consulted inmilitary operations, as in other affairs, and have no less satisfactionthan the learned gentleman who spoke last but one, in clear anddemonstrative deductions; but in this question, reason itself informsme, that regard ought only to be had to experience, and that authorityunsupported by practice, ought to have no prevalence. 

I shall, therefore, sir, make no inquiry into the abilities of thegenerals, by whom these contrary opinions are defended, nor draw anyparallel between their actions or their knowledge. It is sufficient forme that the one is proposing a new scheme, and that the opinion of theother can plead the practice of king William, and the duke ofMARLBOROUGH, and the success of the last war. 

Yet, sir, if parsimony be a virtue at this time so eminently necessary, it may be urged in favour of this estimate, that it will be lessexpensive than those that have been formerly offered, and that as allchanges ought to be gradual, this may be considered as the first steptowards a general reduction of the publick charge. 

Mr. HEATHCOTE spoke to the following purpose:--Sir, it is not withoutastonishment, that I heard the honourable gentleman who spoke lately, conclude his remarks with an attempt to renew our apprehensions of thepretender, a chimerical invader, an enemy in the clouds, without spirit, and without forces, without dominions, without money, and withoutallies; a miserable fugitive, that has not a friend in this kingdom, ornone but such as are exasperated by those whom the men that mention himwith so much terrour are attempting to vindicate. 

The vanity, sir, of such fears, the folly of admitting them, if they arereal, and of counterfeiting them, if they are false, has beensufficiently exposed in this debate, by my honourable friend; but as hethought it unnecessary to employ arguments in proof of what cannot bedenied, and believed it sufficient to ridicule a panick which hesupposed merely political, I, who judge, perhaps, more favourably of thesincerity of some, and more tenderly of the cowardice of others, shallendeavour to show, that the frequent revolutions which have happened inthis nation, afford us no reason for fearing another, equally sudden andunforeseen in favour of the pretender. 

The government, sir, is always stronger, as it is complicated with theprivate interest of more individuals; because, though there are few thathave comprehension sufficient to discern the general advantage of thecommunity, almost every man is capable of attending to his own; andthough not many have virtue to stand up in opposition to the approach ofgeneral calamities, of which every one may hope to exempt himself fromhis particular share, yet the most sanguine are alarmed, and the mostindolent awakened at any danger which threatens themselves, and willexert their utmost power to obviate or escape it. 

For this reason, sir, I have long considered the publick fundsestablished in this nation, as a barrier to the government, which cannoteasily be broken: a foreign prince cannot now be placed upon the throne, but in opposition almost to every wealthy man, who, having trusted thegovernment with his money, has reposited a pledge of his own fidelity. 

But to this gentleman, sir, whom I am now answering, arguments can be ofvery little importance, because, by his own confession, he is retainedas a mere machine, to speak at the direction of another, and to uttersentiments which he never conceived, and which his hesitation and abruptconclusion shows him to admit with very little examination. He had noteven allowed himself time to know the opinion which he was to assert, orto imprint upon his memory those arguments to which he was to add thesanction of his authority. He seems to have boldly promised to speak, and then to have inquired what he was to say. Yet has this gentlemanoften declaimed here with all the apparent ardour of integrity, and beenheard with that regard which is only due to virtue and independence. 

Some of his assertions are such, however, as require confutation, whichis, perhaps, more necessary since he has produced an authority for them, which many of those who heard him may think of much greater weight thanhis own. He affirms, that we can suffer only by an invasion, and infersfrom this position, that we need only to guard our own coasts. I am ofan opinion very different, and having not yet prevailed upon myself toreceive notes from any other person, cannot forbear to speak what Ithink, and what the publick prosperity requires to be generally known. We may surely suffer by many other causes, by the ignorance, ortreachery, or cowardice of the ministry, by the negligence of thatperson to whom this gentleman was probably indebted for his notes. Wemay suffer by the loss of our sugar colonies, which may be justly valuedat ten millions. 

These plantations, which afford us almost all the profitable trade thatis now left us, have been exposed to the insults of the enemy, withoutany other guard than two ships, almost unfit for service. They have beenleft to the protection of chance, with no other security, at a time whenthe Spaniards had fitted out a squadron, to infest and ravage ourAmerican dominions. 

The admiral, who was sent into America, was confined for almost a yearin the ports, without forces, ships, or ammunition, which yet might havebeen sent in a few months, had not pretences of delay been studiouslyinvented, had not the preparations been obstructed by clandestineexpedients, and had not every man been tacitly assured, that he shouldrecommend himself to his superiours, by raising difficulties, ratherthan by removing them. 

Such was the conduct of those who now stand up in the face of theircountry, and, without diffidence or shame, boast of their zeal, theirassiduity, and their despatch; who proclaim, with an air of triumphantinnocence, that no art or diligence could have been more expeditious, and that the embarkation was only impeded by the seasons and the winds. 

With assertions equally intrepid, and arguments equally contemptible, has the same person, who boasted his expedition, endeavoured to defendthe establishment of new regiments, in opposition to the practice offoreign nations, and to the opinion of the greatest general among us;and, to show how little he fears confutation, has recommended his schemeon account of its frugality. 

It is not to be wondered, sir, that such an orator should undertake todefend the model of the troops sent to America, that he should preferboys to veterans, and assert the propriety of intrusting new levies tounexperienced commanders; for he has given us in this debate such proofsof controversial courage, that nothing can be now imagined too arduousfor him to attempt. 

His strength, sir, is, indeed, not equal to his spirit, and he isfrequently unsuccessful in his most vigorous efforts, but it must beconfessed that he is generally overborne only by the force of truth, bya power which few can resist so resolutely as himself, and which, therefore, though it makes no impression upon him, prevails upon othersto leave him sometimes alone in the vindication of his positions. 

The examples, sir, of those noble persons who were advanced early tocommissions, will be produced by him without effect, because the casesare by no means parallel. They were not invested with command till theyhad spent some time in the service, and exhibited proofs of theircourage and their capacity; and it cannot be doubted, but some men maydiscover at seventeen, more merit than others in the full strength ofmanhood. 

But, sir, there is another consideration of more importance, which willannihilate the parallel, and destroy the argument founded upon it. Atthe time in which these persons were preferred, the nation had but newlyseen an army, and had, therefore, very few old officers whose experiencecould be trusted, or whose services required to be rewarded: theministers were obliged to select those, who, though they did notunderstand the military sciences, were likely to attain them in a shorttime, and the event has sufficiently proved, that in the choice nogreater regard was paid to interest than to judgment. 

It was prudent, likewise, sir, to choose young persons, supposing theirabilities equal with those of others, because the nation was likely topossess them longer, and would not be reduced, by an interval of peace, to make war again with raw forces, under the direction of ignorantcommanders. 

But this provision, however reasonable, the wisdom of this ministry hasfound means to defeat, by detaining at home the disciplined troops, anddepriving the most experienced generals of their commands, at a timewhen they are most necessary, at a time when the whole world is in arms, when the ambition of France is reviving its claims, and the Spaniardsare preparing to invade our colonies. 

But, sir, though our generals are discarded, we are sufficientlyinformed, that it is not because we are imagined to be in a state ofsafety; for the increase of our army betrays our fear, of which, whetherit will be dispelled or increased by such measures, it is not difficultto determine. 

An army thus numerous, sir, is, in the opinion of every honest Briton, of every man that reveres the constitution, or loves his liberty, anevil more to be dreaded, than any from which we can be defended by it. The most unpopular act of the most unpopular of our monarchs, was theestablishment of a standing-army; nor do I know any thing to be fearedfrom the exaltation of the dreadful pretender to the throne, but that hewill govern the nation with an armed force. 

If our troops continue to be increased, which we may reasonably suspect, since, if arguments like these be admitted, pretences for augmentationscan never be wanting, the consequences are easily foreseen; they willgrow too numerous to be quartered in the towns, and, with an affectationof easing them of such unwelcome guests, it will be proposed, that afterhaving spent the summer in a camp, they shall retire in winter tobarracks. Then will the burden of a standing army be imposed for ever onthe nation; then may our liberties be openly invaded, and those who nowoppress us by the power only of money, will then throw aside the mask, and deliver themselves from the constraint of hypocrisy; those who nowsooth us with promises and protestations, will then intimidate us withthreatenings, and, perhaps, revenge the opposition of their schemes bypersecution and sequestrations. 

Mr. GAGE spoke next, to the following effect:--Sir, if the weakness ofarguments proved the insincerity of those who produce them, I should beinclined to suspect the advocates for the establishment of newregiments, of designs very different from the defence of their country;but as their intentions cannot be known, they cannot be censured, and Ishall, therefore, confine myself to an examination of the reasons whichthey have offered, and the authorities which they have cited. 

The German general, who has been mentioned on this occasion with so muchregard, is not less known to me than to the honourable gentleman, norhave I been less diligent to improve the hours in which I enjoyed hisfriendship and conversation. Among other questions, which my familiaritywith him entitled me to propose, I have asked him to what causes heimputed the ill success of the last war, and he frankly ascribed themiscarriages of it to the unhappy divisions by which the German councilswere at that time embarrassed. 

Faction produces nearly the same consequence in all countries, and hadthen influenced the imperial court, as of late the court of GreatBritain, to dismiss the most able and experienced commanders, and tointrust the conduct of the war to men unequal to the undertaking; who, when they were defeated for want of skill, endeavoured to persuade theirpatrons and their countrymen, that they lost the victory for want ofofficers. 

They might, perhaps, think of their countrymen, what our ministers seemto imagine of us, that to gain belief among them, it was sufficient toassert boldly, that they had not any memory of past transactions, andthat, therefore, they could not observe, that the same troops werevictorious under Eugene, which were defeated under the direction of hissuccessours; nor could discover that the regulation was the same, wherethe effects were different. 

Thus, in every place, it is the practice of men in power, to blind thepeople by false representations, and to impute the publick calamitiesrather to any other cause than their own misconduct. It is every whereequally their practice to oppress and obscure those who owe theirgreatness to their virtue or abilities, because they can never bereduced to blind obedience, or taught to be creatures of the ministry, because men who can discover truth, will sometimes speak it, and becausethose are best qualified to deceive others, who can be persuaded thatthey are contending for the right. 

But it is surely time for this nation to rouse from indolence, and toresolve to put an end to frauds that have been so long known. It is timeto watch with more vigilance the distribution of the publick treasure, and to consider rather how to contract the national expenses, than uponwhat pretences new offices may be erected, and new dependencies created. It is time to consider how our debts may be lessened, and by whatexpedients our taxes may be diminished. 

Our taxes, sir, are such, at present, as perhaps no nation was everloaded with before, such as never were paid to raise forces against aninvader, or imposed by the insolence of victory upon a conquered people. Every gentleman pays to the government more than two thirds of hisestate, by various exactions. --This assertion is received, I see, withsurprise, by some, whose ample patrimonies have exempted them from thenecessity of nice computations, and with an affected appearance ofcontempt by others, who, instead of paying taxes, may be said to receivethem, and whose interest it is to keep the nation ignorant of the causesof its misery, and to extenuate those calamities by which themselves areenriched. 

But, sir, to endeavour to confute demonstration by a grin, or to laughaway the deductions of arithmetick, is, surely, such a degree ofeffrontery, as nothing but a post of profit can produce; nor is it forthe sake of these men, that I shall endeavour to elucidate my assertion;for they cannot but be well informed of the state of our taxes, whosechief employment is to receive and to squander the money which arisesfrom them. 

It is frequent, sir, among gentlemen, to mistake the amount of the taxeswhich are laid upon the nation, by passing over, in their estimates, allthose which are not paid immediately out of the visible rents of theirlands, and imagining that they are in no degree interested in theimposts upon manufactures or other commodities. They do not considerthat whenever they purchase any thing of which the price is enhanced byduties, those duties are levied upon them, and that there is nodifference between paying ten shillings a year in land taxes, and payingfive shillings in land taxes, and five shillings to manufacturers to bepaid by them to the government. 

It would be, in reality, equally rational for a man to please himselfwith his frugality, by directing half his expenses to be paid by hissteward, and the event is such as might be expected from such a methodof economy; for, as the steward might probably bring in false accounts, the tradesman commonly adds twopence to the price of his goods for everypenny which is laid on them by the government; as it is easy to show, particularly in the prices of those two great necessaries of life, candles and leather. 

Now, sir, let any gentleman add to the land tax the duties raised fromthe malt, candles, salt, soap, leather, distilled liquors, and othercommodities used in his house; let him add the expenses of travelling sofar as they are increased by the burden laid upon innkeepers, and theextortions of the tradesmen which the excises have occasioned, and hewill easily agree with me that he pays more than two-thirds of hisestate for the support of the government. 

It cannot, therefore, be doubted that it is now necessary to stop in ourcareer of expenses, and to inquire how much longer this weight ofimposts can possibly be supported. It has already, sir, depressed ourcommerce, and overborne our manufactures, and if it be yet increased, ifthere be no hope of seeing it alleviated, every wise man will seek amilder government and enlist himself amongst slaves that have mastersmore wise or more compassionate. 

We ought to consider, sir, whether some of our present expenses are notsuperfluous or detrimental, whether many of our offices are not merelypensions without employment, and whether multitudes do not receivesalaries, who serve the government only by their interest and theirvotes. Such offices, if they are found, ought immediately to beabolished, and such salaries withdrawn, by which a fund might be nowestablished for maintaining the war, and afterwards for the payment ofour debts. 

It is not now, sir, in my opinion, a question whether we shall choosethe dearest or the cheapest method of increasing our forces, for itseems to me not possible to supply any new expenses. New troops willrequire more money to raise and to pay them, and more money can only beobtained by new taxes; but what now remains to be taxed, or what tax canbe increased? The only resource left us is a lottery, and whether thatwill succeed is likewise a lottery; but though folly and credulityshould once more operate according to our wishes, the nation is, in themeantime, impoverished, and at last lotteries must certainly fail, likeother expedients. When the publick wealth is entirely exhausted, artifice and violence will be equally vain. And though the troops maypossibly be raised, according to the estimate, I know not how we shallpay them, or from what fund, yet unmortgaged, the officers who will beentailed upon us, can hope to receive their half-pay. 

For my part, sir, I think the question so easy to be decided, that I amastonished to see it the subject of a debate, and imagine that thecontroversy might be ended only by asking the gentleman, on whoseopinion all his party appear to rely, without any knowledge orconviction of their own, whether, if he were to defend a nation from itsenemies, and could procure only a small sum for the war, he would notmodel his forces by the cheapest method. 

Mr. SLOPER then spoke thus:--Sir, I cannot, without the highestsatisfaction, observe any advances made in useful knowledge, by myfellow-subjects, as the glory of such attainments must add to thereputation of the kingdom which gives rise to such elevated abilities. 

This satisfaction I have received from the observations of the righthonourable member, whose accurate computations cannot but promise greatimprovements of the doctrine of arithmetick; nor can I forbear tosolicit him, for the sake of the publick, to take into his considerationthe present methods of traffick used by our merchants, and to strike outsome more commodious method of stating the accoinpts between those twocontending parties, debtor and creditor. This he would, doubtless, execute with great reputation, who has proved, from the state of ourtaxes, that new forces require new funds, and that new funds cannot beestablished without a lottery. 

I am, indeed, inclined to differ from him in the last of his positions, and believe the nation not yet so much exhausted but that it may easilybear the expense of the war, and shall, therefore, vote for thatestablishment of our troops which will be most likely to procuresuccess, without the least apprehension of being censured either by thepresent age, or by posterity, as a machine of the ministry, or anoppressor of my country. 

General WADE spoke again, thus:--Sir, since the right honourable memberhas been pleased to insinuate, that by answering a plain question I mayput an end to the debate, I am willing to give a proof of my desire topromote unanimity in our councils, and despatch in our affairs, bycomplying with his proposal. 

If I were obliged with a small sum to raise an army for the defence of akingdom, I should, undoubtedly, proceed with the utmost frugality; butthis noble person's ideas of frugality would, perhaps, be very differentfrom mine; he would think those expenses superfluous, which to me wouldseem indispensably necessary, and though we should both intend thepreservation of the country, we should provide for its security bydifferent methods. 

He would employ the money in such a manner as might procure the greatestnumbers; I should make my first inquiry after the most skilful officers, and should imagine myself obliged, by my fidelity to the nation thatintrusted me with its defence, to procure their assistance, though at ahigh price. 

It is not easy for persons who have never seen a battle or a siege, whatever may be their natural abilities, or however cultivated byreading and contemplation, to conceive the advantage of discipline andregularity, which is such, that a small body of veteran troops willdrive before them multitudes of men, perhaps equally bold and resolutewith themselves, if they are unacquainted with the rules of war, andunprovided with leaders to direct their motions. 

I should, therefore, in the case which he has mentioned, preferdiscipline to numbers, and rather enter the field with a few troops, well governed and well instructed, than with a confused multitude, unacquainted with their duty, unable to conduct themselves, and withoutofficers to conduct them. 

Mr. VINER spoke next, to the following effect:--Sir, I am not verysolicitous what may be the determination of the house upon thisquestion, because I think it more necessary to resolve against anaugmentation of the army, than to inquire, whether it shall be made byone method or another. 

Every addition to our troops, I consider as some approach towards theestablishment of arbitrary power, as it is an alienation of part of theBritish people, by which they are deprived of the benefits of theconstitution, and subjected to rigorous laws, from which every otherindividual is exempt. 

The principal of these laws, which all the rest are intended to enforce, requires from every soldier an unlimited and absolute obedience to thecommands of his officers, who hold their commission, and expectadvancement, by the same compliance with the orders of the ministry. 

The danger of adding to the number of men, thus separated from theirfellow-subjects, and directed by the arbitrary determinations of theirofficers, has been often explained with great strength and perspicuity;nor should I have taken this occasion of recalling it to the attentionof the house, but that I think it a consideration, to which, in alldebates on the army, the first regard ought to be paid. 

Colonel MORDAUNT spoke to the purpose following:--Sir, the objectionwhich the honourable gentleman has raised, will be most easily removed, by considering the words of the act by which the military authority isestablished, where it is by no means declared, that either officers orsoldiers are obliged indiscriminately to obey all the orders which theyshall receive, but that they shall, on pain of the punishments thereenacted, obey all the _lawful_ orders of their commanders. 

The obedience, therefore, sir, required from a soldier, is an obedienceaccording to law, like that of any other Briton, unless it can beimagined that the word _lawful_ is, in that place, without a meaning. Nor does his condition differ from that of his fellow-subjects by anexemption from any law, but by a greater number of duties, and stricterobligations to the performance of them; and I am not able to conceivehow our constitution can be endangered by augmenting an army, which, asit can only act in conformity to it, can act only in defence of it. 

[The question at last was put, that the new-raised troops beincorporated into the standing corps, but it passed in the negative, 232to 166. ]

HOUSE OF LORDS, DEC. 9, 1740. 

DEBATE ON TAKING THE STATE OF THE ARMY INTO CONSIDERATION. 

The duke of ARGYLE rose first, and spoke to the following effect:--Mylords, as the present situation of our affairs may require anaugmentation of our forces, and as the success of our arms, and thepreservation of our liberties, may equally depend upon the manner inwhich the new forces shall be raised, there is, in my opinion, noquestion more worthy the attention of this august assembly, than whatmay be the most proper method of increasing our army. 

On this question, my lords, I shall offer my own sentiments with greaterconfidence, as there are few men who have had more opportunities ofbeing acquainted with it in its whole extent, as I have spent great partof my life in the field and in the camp. I commanded a regiment underking William, and have long been either the first, or almost the firstman in the army. 

I hope, my lords, it will be allowed, without difficulty, that I have, at least, been educated at the best school of war, and that nothing butnatural incapacity can have hindered me from making some usefulobservations upon the discipline and government of armies, and theadvantages and inconveniencies of the various plans upon which othernations regulate their forces. 

I have always maintained, my lords, that it is necessary, in the presentstate of the neighbouring countries, to keep up a body of regulartroops, that we may not be less able to defend ourselves, than ourenemies to attack us. 

It is well known, my lords, that states must secure themselves bydifferent means, as they are threatened by dangers of different kinds:policy must be opposed by policy, and force by force; our fleets must beincreased when our neighbours grow formidable by their naval power, andarmies must be maintained at a time like this, in which every prince onthe continent estimates his greatness by the number of his troops. 

But an army, my lords, as it is to be admitted only for the security ofthe nation, is to be so regulated, that it may produce the end for whichit is established; that it may be useful without danger, and protect thepeople without oppressing them. 

To this purpose, my lords, it is indispensably necessary, that themilitary subordination be inviolably preserved, and that discipline bediscreetly exercised without any partial indulgence, or maliciousseverities; that every man be promoted according to his desert, and thatmilitary merit alone give any pretensions to military preferment. 

To make the army yet more useful, it ought to be under the sole commandof one man, exalted to the important trust by his known skill, courage, justice, and fidelity, and uncontrouled in the administration of hisprovince by any other authority, a man enabled by his experience todistinguish the deserving, and invested with power to reward them. 

Thus, my lords, ought an army to be regulated, to which the defence of anation is intrusted, nor can any other scheme be formed which will notexpose the publick to dangers more formidable than revolutions orinvasions. And yet, my lords, how widely those who have assumed thedirection of affairs have deviated from this method is well known. It isknown equally to the highest and meanest officers, that those who havemost opportunities of observing military merit, have no power ofrewarding it; and, therefore, every man endeavours to obtain otherrecommendations than those of his superiours in the army, and todistinguish himself by other services than attention to his duty, andobedience to his commanders. 

Our generals, my lords, are only colonels with a higher title, withoutpower, and without command; they can neither make themselves loved norfeared in their troops, nor have either reward or punishment in theirpower. What discipline, my lords, can be established by men, whom thosewho sometimes act the farce of obedience, know to be only phantoms ofauthority, and to be restrained by an arbitrary minister from theexercise of those commissions which they are invested with? And what isan army without discipline, subordination, and obedience? What, but arabble of licentious vagrants, set free from the common restraints ofdecency, exempted from the necessity of labour, betrayed by idleness todebauchery, and let loose to prey upon the people? Such a herd can onlyawe the villages, and bluster in the streets, but can never be able tooppose an enemy, or defend the nation by which they are supported. 

They may, indeed, form a camp upon some of the neighbouring heaths, orpass in review with tolerable regularity; they may sometimes seize asmuggler, and sometimes assist a constable with vigour and success. Butunhappy would be the people, who had no other force to oppose against anarmy habituated to discipline, of which every one founds his hopes ofhonour and reward upon the approbation of the commander. 

That no man will labour to no purpose, or undergo the fatigue ofmilitary vigilance, without an adequate motive; that no man willendeavour to learn superfluous duties, and neglect the easiest road tohonour and to wealth, merely for the sake of encountering difficulties, is easily to be imagined. And, therefore, my lords, it cannot beconceived, that any man in the army will very solicitously apply himselfto the duties of his profession, of which, when he has learned them, themost accurate practice will avail him nothing, and on which he must losethat time, which might, have been employed in gaining an interest in aborough, or in forming an alliance with some orator in the senate. 

For nothing, my lords, is now considered but senatorial interest, nor isany subordination desired but in the supreme council of the empire. Forthe establishment of this new regulation, the honours of everyprofession are prostituted, and every commission is become merelynominal. To gratify the leaders of the ministerial party, the mostdespicable triflers are exalted to an authority, and those whose want ofunderstanding excludes them from any other employment, are selected formilitary commissions. 

No sooner have they taken possession of their new command, and gratifiedwith some act of oppression the wantonness of new authority, but theydesert their charge with the formality of demanding a permission to beabsent, which their commander dares not deny them. Thus, my lords, theyleave the care of the troops, and the study of the rules of war, tothose unhappy men who have no other claim to elevation than knowledgeand bravery, and who, for want of relations in the senate, are condemnedto linger out their lives at their quarters, amuse themselves withrecounting their actions and sufferings in former wars, and with readingin the papers of every post, the cormissions which are bestowed on thosewho never saw a battle. 

For this reason, my lords, preferments in the army, instead of beingconsidered as proofs of merit, are looked on only as badges ofdependence; nor can any thing be inferred from the promotion of anofficer, but that he is in some degree or other allied to some memberof the senate, or the leading voters of a borough. 

After this manner, my lords, has the army been modelled, and on theseprinciples has it subsisted for the last and the present reign; neithermyself, nor any other general officer, have been consulted in thedistribution of commands, or any part of military regulations. Ourarmies have known no other power than that of the secretary of war, whodirects all their motions, and fills up every vacancy withoutopposition, and without appeal. 

But never, my lords, was his power more conspicuous, than in raising thelevies of last year; never was any authority more despotically exerted, or more tamely submitted to; never did any man more wantonly sport withhis command, or more capriciously dispose of posts and preferments;never did any tyrant appear to set censure more openly at defiance, treat murmurs and remonstrances with greater contempt, or with moreconfidence and security distribute posts among his slaves, without anyother reason of preference than his own uncontroulable pleasure. 

And surely no man, my lords, could have made choice of such wretches formilitary commands, but to show that nothing but his own privateinclinations should influence his conduct, and that he consideredhimself as supreme and unaccountable: for we have seen, my lords, thesame animals to-day cringing behind a counter, and to-morrow swelling ina military dress; we have seen boys sent from school in despair ofimprovement, and intrusted with military command; fools that cannotlearn their duty, and children that cannot perform it, have beenindiscriminately promoted; the dross of the nation has been swepttogether to compose our new forces, and every man who was too stupid orinfamous to learn or carry on a trade, has been placed, by this greatdisposer of honours, above the necessity of application, or the reach ofcensure. 

Did not sometimes indignation, and sometimes pity, check the sallies ofmirth, it would not be a disagreeable entertainment, my lords, toobserve, in the park, the various appearances of these raw commanders, when they are exposing their new scarlet to view, and strutting with thefirst raptures of sudden elevation; to see the mechanick new-modellinghis mien, and the stripling tottering beneath the weight of his cockade;or to hear the conversation of these new adventurers, and theinstructive dialogues of schoolboys and shopkeepers. 

I take this opportunity, my lords, of clearing myself from any suspicionof having contributed, by my advice, to this stupendous collection. Ionly once interposed with the recommendation of a young gentleman, whohad learned his profession in two campaigns among the Muscovians, andwhom yet neither his own desert, nor my patronage could advance to acommission. And, I believe, my lords, all the other general officerswere equally unconsulted, and would, if their advice had been asked, equally have disapproved the measures that have been pursued. 

But thus, my lords, were our new regiments completed, in which, of twohundred and fifty officers who have subsisted upon half-pay, onlythirty-six have been promoted, though surely they might have pleaded ajuster claim to employment, who had learned their profession in theservice of their country, and had long languished in penury, than thosewho had neither knowledge nor capacity, who had neither acted norsuffered any thing, and who might have been destined to the hammer orthe plough, without any disreputation to their families, ordisappointment to themselves. 

I have been told, indeed, my lords, that to some of these officerscommissions were offered, which they refused, and for this refusal everyreason is alleged but the true: some, indeed, excused themselves asdisabled by age and infirmities from military service; nor can anyobjection be made to so just a plea. For how could those be refused intheir age the comforts of ease and repose, who have served their countrywith their youth and vigour?

Others there are, my lords, who refused commissions upon motives verydifferent, in which, nevertheless, some justice cannot be denied. Theywho had long studied and long practised their profession; they, who hadtried their courage in the breach, and given proofs of their skill inthe face of the enemy, refused to obey the command of novices, oftradesmen, and of schoolboys: they imagined, my lords, that they oughtto govern those whom they should be obliged to instruct, and to leadthose troops whom they must range in order. But they had forgot thatthey had outlived the time when a soldier was formed by study andexperience, and had not heard, in their retreats, that a colonel or acaptain was now formed in a day; and, therefore, when they saw and heardtheir new commanders, they retired back to their half-pay, with surpriseand indignation. 

But, my lords, the follies of last year cannot be easily rectified, andare only now to be exposed that they may not be repeated. If we are nowto make new levies, and increase the number of our land-forces, it is, in my opinion, incumbent upon us to consider by what methods we may bestaugment our troops, and how we may be able to resist our foreignenemies, without exposing the nation to intestine miseries, and leavingour liberties at the mercy of the court. 

There are, my lords, two methods of increasing our forces; the first is, that of raising new regiments; the other, of adding new men to thosewhich already subsist. 

By raising new regiments, my lords, we shall only gratify the ministerwith the distribution of new commissions, and the establishment of newdependents; we shall enlarge the influence of the court, and increasethe charge of the nation, which is already loaded with too many taxes tosupport any unnecessary expense. 

By the other method, of adding a hundred men to every company, we shallnot only save the pay of the officers, which is no slight consideration, but what seems, if the reports raised by the ministry of our presentdanger be true, of far more importance, shall form the new forces withmore expedition into regular troops; for, by distributing them amongthose who are already instructed in their duty, we shall give them anopportunity of hourly improvement; every man's comrade will be hismaster, and every one will be ambitious of forming himself by theexample of those who have been in the army longer than themselves. 

If it be objected, my lords, that the number of officers will not thenbear a just proportion to that of the soldiers, it may be answered, thatthe foreign troops of the greatest reputation have no greater number ofofficers, as every one must know who is acquainted with the constitutionof the most formidable armies of Europe. Those of the Prussian monarch, or of the various nations by which we were assisted in the late war, either as confederates or mercenaries, have but few officers. And I verywell remember, my lords, that whenever they were joined by parties ofour own nation, the inequality in the number of the officers producedcontests and disputes. 

The only troops of Europe, my lords, that swarm with officers, are thoseof France, but even these have fewer officers, in proportion to theirprivate men, in time of war; for when they disband any part of theirforces, they do not, like us, reduce their officers to half-pay, but addthem to the regiments not reduced, that the families of their nobilitymay not be burdened with needy dependents, and that they may never wantofficers for new levies. 

There are many reasons, my lords, that make this practice in France morereasonable than it would be in our kingdom. It is the chief view oftheir governours to continue absolute, and therefore their constantendeavour to keep great numbers in dependence; it ought to be our careto hinder the increase of the influence of the court, and to obstructall measures that may extend the authority of the ministry, andtherefore those measures are to be pursued by which independence andliberty will be most supported. 

It is likewise to be remembered, my lords, that a French officer issupported with pay not much larger than that of a private soldier amongus, and that, therefore, the argument which arises from the necessity offrugality is not of the same force in both nations. 

There is yet another reason why the French are under the necessity ofemploying more officers than any other nation: the strength of theirarmies consists in their gentlemen, who cannot be expected to servewithout some command: the common soldiers of the French army are a mean, spiritless, despicable herd, fit only to drudge as pioneers, to raiseintrenchments, and to dig mines, but without courage to face an enemy, or to proceed with vigour in the face of danger. 

Their gentlemen, my lords, are of a very different character; jealous oftheir honour, and conscious of their birth, eager of distinction, andambitious of preferment. They have, commonly, their education in thearmy, and have no expectations of acquiring fortunes equal to theirdesires by any other profession, and are, therefore, intent upon theimprovement of every opportunity which is offered them of increasingtheir knowledge and exalting their reputation. 

To the spirit of these men, my lords, are the French armies indebted forall their victories, and to them is to be attributed the presentperfection of the art of war. They have the vigilance and perseveranceof Romans joined with the natural vivacity and expedition of their ownnation. 

We are, therefore, not to wonder, my lords, that there is in the Frencharmies an establishment for more gentlemen than in other countries, where the disparity between the military virtues of the higher and lowerclasses of men is less conspicuous. In the troops of that nation nothingis expected but from the officers, but in ours the common soldier meetsdanger with equal intrepidity, and scorns to see himself excelled by hisofficer in courage or in zeal. 

We are, therefore, my lords, under no necessity of burdening our countrywith the expense of new commissions, which, in the army, will besuperfluous, and, in the state, dangerous, as they will fill our senatewith new dependents, and our corporations with new adherents to theminister, whose steady perseverance in his favourite scheme ofsenatorial subordination, will be, perhaps, the only occasion of thesenew levies, or, at least, has hindered the right application of ourstanding troops. For what reason, my lords, can invention or imaginationassign, why the troops, who had been for some time disciplined, were notrather sent to the assistance of Vernon than the new marines, exceptthat some of them were commanded by men who had obtained seats in theother house, and who, by their settled adherence and avowed fidelity tothe minister, had recommended themselves too powerfully to be rashlyexposed in the service of their country to the bullets of the Spaniards. 

So great, my lords, has been the minister's regard to senatorialabilities, and so strict his gratitude to his friends, that I know ofbut one member of the other house that has been hazarded in thisexpedition, and he a hopeless, abandoned patriot, insensible of thecapacity or integrity of our ministry, and whom nothing has been able toreconcile to our late measures. He, therefore, who has never exertedhimself in defence of the ministry, was, in his turn, thought unworthyof ministerial protection, and was given up to the chance of war withoutreluctance. 

But I hope your lordships will concur with me in the opinion, that it isnot always necessary to gratify the ministry, but that our countryclaims some part of our regard, and, therefore, that in establishing ourarmy we should pursue that method which may be most accommodated to ourconstitution, and, instead of imitating the military policy of theFrench, follow the example of those nations by whose troops they havebeen conquered. 

Had this scheme been hitherto followed, had our new levies, instead ofbeing put under the command of boys, been distributed in justproportions among the standing regiments, where they might soon havebeen qualified for service by the inspection of experienced officers, wemight now have seen an army capable of awing the court of Spain intosubmission, or, if our demands had been still refused, of revenging ourinjuries, and punishing those who have insulted and despised us. 

From an army thus raised and disciplined, detachments, my lords, oughtto have been sent on board of all our fleets, and particularly thatwhich is now stationed in the Mediterranean, which would not then havecoasted about from one port to another, without hurting or frighting theenemy, but might, by sudden descents, have spread terrour through agreat part of the kingdom, harassed their troops by continual marches, and, by frequent incursions, have plundered all the maritime provinces, driven the inhabitants into the inland country, and laid the villages inashes. 

There is yet, my lords, no appearance of a peace, for our success hasnot enabled us to prescribe terms, and I hope we are not yet fallen solow as to receive them; it is, therefore, proper to form suchresolutions as may influence the conduct of the war, and enable us toretrieve the errours of our past measures. 

The minister, my lords, is not without panegyrists, who may, perhaps, endeavour to persuade us, that we ought to resign all our understandingsto his superiour wisdom, and blindly trust our fortunes and ourliberties to his unshaken integrity. They will, in proof of hisabilities, produce the wonderful dexterity and penetration which thelate negotiations have discovered, and will confirm the reputation ofhis integrity by the constant parsimony of all his schemes, and theunwillingness with which he at any time increases the expenses of thenation. 

But, my lords, it is the great duty of your high station to watch overthe administration, and to warn those, who are more immediatelyintrusted with the publick affairs, against measures which may endangerthe safety or happiness of the nation; and, therefore, if I have provedto your lordships, that to raise new regiments is dangerous to ourliberties, that a multitude of officers is of no use in war, and that anarmy may be more expeditiously disciplined by adding new men to everycompany, I hope your lordships will agree to this resolution, which Ihave drawn up with the utmost brevity, and of which the meaning cannotbe mistaken:

"That the augmenting the army by raising regiments, as it is the mostunnecessary and expensive method of augmentation, is also the mostdangerous to the liberties of the nation. "

The duke of NEWCASTLE next spoke, to this effect:--My lords, as myeducation and employments have afforded me no opportunity of acquiringany skill in military affairs, it will not be expected by yourlordships, that I should be able to confute the arguments of the nobleduke, whose acknowledged superiority in the art of war, and theabilities which he has displayed in the administration of every provincewhich he has undertaken, give him a claim to the highest deference. 

But, my lords, as I cannot assume the province of disputing on thisquestion, so I cannot, without longer consideration, form any resolutionconcerning it; for arguments may be fallacious, which, yet, I cannotconfute, and to approve without knowledge is no less weak than tocensure. 

There is not any present necessity, my lords, of forming a resolution onthis subject; we are not now called upon particularly to consider it, and certainly it cannot be prudent, by so determinate a decision, pronounced without reflection or deliberation, to preclude a fullerexamination of this important question. 

Lord CARTERET rose, and spoke in this manner:--My lords, the noble dukewho made the present motion has supported it by such strength ofargument, and so fully explained the advantages of the method which ittends to recommend, that not only the present age, but posterity may, probably, be indebted to him, for juster notions of a militaryestablishment, than have been yet attained even by those whoseprofession obliges them to such inquiries. 

Nor, my lords, could we expect less from his long experience andextensive capacity; experience gained in the heat of war, and in themidst of danger; a capacity not only cultivated by solitarydisquisitions in retirement and security, but exercised by difficulties, and quickened by opposition. 

Such abilities, my lords, matured by such an education, have justly madethe noble duke the oracle of war, and procured him the esteem andreverence of all the powers upon earth. 

As I did not receive from my education any military knowledge, I am notable to add much to the arguments which your lordships have alreadyheard; but, nevertheless, having been under the necessity of regulatingthe army when I had the honour to be employed in Ireland, and havingmade, in those countries where I transacted the business of the crown, some observations upon the different forms of military establishments, Ihope I shall be allowed to offer what my experience or my remarks maysuggest to me, in confirmation of the sentiments of the noble duke. 

When I was in Ireland, my lords, the troops of that kingdom consisted oftwenty-one regiments, of which ten were, as last year, brought intoBritain, and the Irish forces were to be filled up by new levies, whichwere raised in the manner now proposed, by increasing every regimentfrom three hundred and forty to six hundred men; so that the elevenregiments remaining composed a body of nearly the same number with thetwenty-one regiments, as formerly constituted. 

Of the Swedish establishment, my lords, the reputation and success oftheir troops are an uncontrovertible vindication, attd I have often hadan opportunity of comparing the number of officers with that of ours, and found their private men to be far more numerous in proportion to theofficers. 

In Hanover, my lords, I have seen his majesty's troops remarkable forthe elegance of their appearance; and being once asked, by thecommander, at what expense one of those gallant troopers and his horsewas supported, was told, after confessing my ignorance, that he cost nomore than fourteen pounds a year, who could not, in this country, bemaintained for less than forty. 

I believe, my lords, that the French forces are not more expensive thanthose of Hanover, and, therefore, we are by no means to imitate theirestablishment, for the price of provisions and habits of life do notadmit of any diminution of the pay of either our officers or soldiers, and we can only lessen our expenses by reducing their numbers, to whichI shall, for my part, most willingly contribute. 

But as this, my lords, is not the proper time for disbanding our forces, of which the present state of our affairs may, perhaps, demand anaugmentation, it is necessary to compare the state of our forces withthat of foreign troops, and supply, by prudent methods, thedisadvantages to which we are subject, by the peculiar condition of ourcountry. For, if the French can support an army at a fourth part of ourexpense, what must be the consequence of a war, supposing the wealth ofthe two nations nearly equal? It will be to little purpose that weboast, however justly, of the superiority of our troops; for though itshould be granted that the British cannot be resisted by an equalnumber, yet it can never be expected that they should conquer troopsfour times as numerous as themselves. 

Thus, my lords, it appears, with all the evidence of arithmeticaldemonstration, that the method now proposed is highly expedient, nor canany objection, in my opinion, be made to the resolution offered to yourlordships. 

That this is not a proper time for this inquiry has been, indeed, urged, but surely no time can be more proper than when we may, by a resolutionunanimously passed, regulate, in some degree, the conduct of the otherhouse, and faint to them the opinion of this assembly on a questionwhich is, perhaps, to-morrow to be brought before them. 

Lord CHOLMONDELEY then spoke thus:--My lords, though I was once honouredwith a command in the army, and consequently ought to have attained somemilitary knowledge, yet I have so long resigned my commission, possessedit for so short a time, and have suffered my attention to be divertedfrom inquiries on that subject by employments of so different a kind, that I cannot presume to oppose any knowledge of my own to the reasonswhich have been offered; but I cannot think that the conclusions drawnby the noble duke, are so evidently true as to force conviction, andexclude all possibility of reply; nor can I conceive it consistent withthe dignity of this assembly, to yield implicitly to any man'sassertions, or to pass any resolution without an accurate inquiry. 

Some objections, my lords, arise, upon reflection, from my narrowobservation and transient reading, and these I shall lay before yourlordships, with an open acknowledgment of my insufficiency to discussthe question, and a sincere desire of being instructed where I may bemistaken. 

The subordination of the army, my lords, appears to me, in general, tobe sufficiently maintained, nor is it ever infringed but by particularpartiality, that can never be prevented, or a casual difference in thecircumstances of the officers, which, though not relative to theirmilitary characters, will always produce some degree of influence. 

I know not, my lords, how the general regulation of our forces, and thedistribution of military honours, can be condemned, without extendingsome degree of censure to a person who ought not to be mentioned asconcurring in any measures injurious to the publick. Our army, my lords, is maintained by the parliament, but commanded by the king, who has noteither done or directed any thing of which his people may justlycomplain. 

Here the duke of ARGYLE interrupted him:--My lords, it is necessary toclear myself from misrepresentations, and to preserve, at the same time, the order of this assembly, by reminding the noble lord, that hismajesty is never to be introduced into our debates, because he is neverto be charged with wrong; and by declaring to your lordships, that Iimpute no part of the errours committed in the regulation of the army tohis majesty, but to those ministers whose duty it is to advise him, andwhom the law condemns to answer for the consequences of their counsels. 

Lord CHOLMONDELEY resumed:--My lords, if I misrepresented any assertionof the noble duke, it was by misapprehension, or failure of memory, andnot by malice or design; and if in any other objections which I shallmake, I shall fall into any errour of the same kind, I desire that itmay be ascribed to the same cause. 

The ignorance and inexperience of our present officers have been exposedwith great gaiety of imagination, and with the true spirit of satiricalrhetorick, nor can I presume to support them against so formidablecensures. But, my lords, I cannot discover any method of protracting thelives of our old officers beyond the usual term, nor of supplying theloss of those whom death takes away from the army, but by substitutingothers, who, as they have seen no wars, can have little experience. 

With regard to the number of officers in the foreign troops, I have beeninformed, that they were, by an express stipulation, to be constitutedin the same manner with the British and Dutch forces. 

Then the duke of ARGYLE again interrupted him:--My lords, as it was myprovince in the late war to superintend the payment of the foreigntroops, I may be allowed to have some knowledge of the establishment, and hope I shall not be imagined to need any information on thatsubject. 

Lord CHOLMONDELEY said:--My lords, I do not presume to dispute anyassertion of the noble duke, for whose knowledge I have the highestveneration, but only to offer such hints for inquiry as may be pursuedby other lords of greater abilities, and to show, that as somedifficulties may be raised, the resolution ought not to be agreed towithout farther deliberation; since it not only tends to prescribe themeasures which shall be hereafter taken, and prohibit a method ofraising forces, which, when diligently examined, may, perhaps, appearmost eligible, but to censure the methods, which, when they were put inpractice the last year, received the approbation of all the powers ofthe legislature. 

Lord WESTMORELAND spoke next, as follows:--My lords, I have, for my ownsatisfaction, stated the difference of the expense between the twomethods of raising forces, and find it so great, that the methodproposed by the noble duke ought, undoubtedly, to be preferred, eventhough it were attended with some inconvenience, from which he has shownit to be free. 

Frugality, my lords, is one of the chief virtues of an administration; avirtue without which no government can be long supported: the publickexpense can never be too accurately computed, or the first tendency toprofusion too rigorously opposed; for as in private life, so inpolitical economy, the demands of necessity are easily supplied; but ifonce the calls of wantonness and caprice are complied with, no limitscan be fixed, nor will any treasure be sufficient. 

Whether the burdens under which the people are now toiling were allimposed by necessity, I will not inquire, but I think, my lords, we mayreadily determine, that whatever is not necessary is cruel andoppressive, and that, therefore, since the expense of raising newregiments appears, at least, not to be necessary, it ought to beopposed; and how can it be opposed more properly or effectually than bythe noble duke's resolution?

Lord HERVEY spoke to this effect:--My lords, I do not claim anysuperiority of knowledge in any affairs that relate to the publick, buthave less acquaintance with the military establishment than with anyother part of the government, and can, therefore, neither oppose theresolution now offered to your lordships by such arguments as maydeserve your attention, nor agree to it with that degree of convictionwhich the importance of it seems to require. 

That the chief argument which has been produced against raising newregiments, is less formidable than it has been represented, will, Ibelieve, appear to your lordships, when it is considered that theofficers are always gentlemen of the first families in the empire, who, therefore, cannot be supposed voluntarily to give up their relations andposterity to the power of any ministry, or, for the sake of theircommissions, to betray that constitution by which their own propertiesare secured. 

Whether every other argument may not with equal justice be controverted, is not, without longer consideration, possible to be determined, and, therefore, it cannot be reasonably expected that we should agree to theresolution, which would be only to decide without examination, and todetermine what we don't understand; for I am under no apprehension ofbeing imagined to reflect unjustly on this assembly, in supposing thatmany of your lordships may be strangers to the question, which, when thelast levies were made, was neither discussed nor proposed. 

I therefore move, that the previous question may be put, which may, perhaps, gain time sufficient for a more exact inquiry upon thisimportant subject. 

Lord TALBOT replied to this purport:--My lords, if, in imitation of somenoble lords, I profess my ignorance of the subject on which I am tospeak, may it not yet be allowed me, after the example of others, toemploy the little knowledge which I have in the defence of a resolution, which appears to have no other tendency than the advantage of thepublick, and to show my zeal for the happiness of my country, though, perhaps, without the true knowledge of its interest?

The noble lord, who spoke last, is too great a master of eloquence notto be heard with all the attention which pleasure naturally produces, and a reasoner too formidable not to raise in his hearers all theanxiety which is produced by the fear of being deceived by partialrepresentations, and artful deductions. I am always afraid, my lords, lest errour should appear too much like truth in the ornaments which hislordship's imagination may bestow, and lest sophistry should dazzle myunderstanding whilst I imagine myself only guided by the light ofreason. 

I shall, therefore, endeavour, my lords, to review his ornaments, andtry whether they owe their influence to the force of truth, or to thatof eloquence. 

His lordship has observed, that the objections which are now made to themethod of raising new regiments, were not produced last year upon a likeoccasion. I know not, indeed, what can be inferred from this assertion;for, surely, it will not maintain, that an errour, once admitted, is tobecome perpetual. 

But, my lords, another reason may be assigned, for which the objectionsthat occurred last year might not be produced. The ministry, after along course of disgraceful negotiations, and artful delays, were, atlength, compelled to a war, by the general clamours of the whole nation;but they acted as men unwilling to execute what they did not approve. They proceeded so slowly in their preparations, and were so languid inall their motions, that it was evident how willingly they would haveimproved every opportunity of retarding the vengeance which they wereforced to threaten; and with what artifices they would have protractedany delay, which they could have imputed to those by whom they wereopposed. It was, therefore, to the last degree, improper to embarrasstheir measures of themselves sufficiently perplexed, or to lay anyobstacle in the way of those who would gladly be stopped. 

That the army is filled with gentlemen, is so far, my lords, fromproving that there is nothing to be feared from it, that it is the onlyfoundation of all our solicitude. For none but gentlemen can injure ourliberties, and while the posts of the army are bestowed as rewards ofsenatorial slavery, gentlemen will always be found who will be corruptedthemselves, and can corrupt a borough; who will purchase a vote in thehouse, and sell it for military preferments. By the posts of the armythe senate may be corrupted, and by the corruption of the senate thearmy be perpetuated. 

Those, my lords, who are the warmest opponents of the army, apprehendnot any danger from their swords, but from their votes. As they havebeen of late regulated without discipline or subordination, I should notfeel such anxiety at seeing them led on by their new commanders againsta body of honest ploughmen, united in the cause of virtue and ofliberty; I should, with great alacrity, draw my sword against them, andshould not doubt of seeing them in a short time heaped upon our fields. 

But, my lords, they are employed to ruin us by a more slow and silentmethod; they are directed to influence their relations in the senate, and to suborn the voters in our small towns; they are dispersed over thenation to instil dependence, and being enslaved themselves, willinglyundertake the propagation of slavery. 

That the army is instrumental in extending the influence of the ministryto the senate, cannot be denied, when military preferments are held nolonger than while he that possesses them gives a sanction, by his vote, to the measures of the court; when no degree of merit is sufficient tobalance a single act of senatorial opposition, and when the nation israther to be left to the defence of boys, than the minister be suspectedof misconduct. 

Could either bravery or knowledge, reputation, or past services, knownfidelity to his majesty, or the most conspicuous capacity for hightrust, have secured any man in the enjoyment of his post, the noble dukewho made the motion, had carried his command to his grave, nor had thenation now been deprived either of his arms, or of his counsels. 

But, as he has now offered his advice to his country, and supported hisopinion with proofs from reason and experience, which even those whooppose them have confessed themselves unable to answer; as the justnessof his reasoning, and the extent of his knowledge, have silenced thosewhose prejudices will not suffer them to own themselves convinced; letus not, my lords, reject what we cannot condemn, nor suffer our countryto be defrauded of the advantage of this resolution, by that lowsenatorial craft, the previous question. 

Then the CHANCELLOR spoke to the following purpose:--My lords, I am farfrom suspecting that an open profession of my inability to examine thequestion before us, in its full extent, will be imputed to anaffectation of modesty, since any knowledge of military affairs couldnot be acquired in those stations in which I have been placed, or bythose studies, in which the greatest part of my life is known to havebeen spent. 

It will not be expected, my lords, that I should attempt a formalconfutation of the noble duke's positions, or that I should be able todefend my own opinion against his knowledge and experience; nor would I, my lords, expose myself to the censure of having harangued upon war inthe presence of Hannibal. 

The noble duke has explained his sentiments to your lordships with theutmost accuracy of method, and the most instructive perspicuity oflanguage; he has enforced them with a strength of reasoning rarely to befound, and with an extent of knowledge peculiar to himself. Yet, mylords, as his arguments, however powerful in themselves, do not strikeme with the same force with which others may be affected, who are morecapable of receiving them, I hope that your lordships will allow me tomention such objections as occur to me, that in voting on this questionI may, at least, preserve my conscience from violation, and neitheradopt the opinion of another, however great, without examination, norobstinately reject the means of conviction. 

Every lord who has spoken either in support of the noble duke's opinion, or in opposition to it, has confessed that he is very little acquaintedwith the subject of our debate; and it may not, therefore, be animproper or useless attempt, if I endeavour by objections, howeverinjudicious, or by arguments, however inconclusive, to procure someillustration of a question so important, and, at the same time, solittle understood. 

The objections, my lords, which I shall produce, are such as I haveheard in conversation with those whose long acquaintance with militaryemployments give them a just claim to authority in all questions whichrelate to the art of war; among whom I find no uniformity of opinionwith regard to the most proper method of augmenting our forces. And, mylords, when we observe those to differ in their sentiments, whoseeducation, experience, and opportunities of knowledge have been nearlythe same, and who have all obtained a very great degree of reputation intheir profession, what can be inferred, but that the question is in itsown nature obscure and difficult? That it involves a multitude ofrelations, and is diffused through a great variety of circumstances?And that, therefore, it is prudent for every man, who can judge onlyupon the authority of others, to suspend his opinion?

The chief argument, or that, at least, which impressed itself moststrongly on my mind, against any innovation in our militaryconstitution, was drawn from the success of our armies in their presentform, with that proportion of soldiers and officers, which the presentmotion tends to abolish. Our forces, say the advocates for the presentestablishment, have afforded us a sufficient testimony of the proprietyof their regulation, by their frequent victories over troops, whosediscipline has been studied with the utmost vigilance, and which havebeen trained up to war with a degree of attention not disproportioned tothe mighty design for which they were raised, the subjection of theworld, and attainment of universal monarchy. These troops, who have beentaught, almost from their infancy, that cowardice and flight are thegreatest crimes, and persuaded, by national prejudices, and principlesstudiously instilled, that no foreign forces could withstand them, havefled before equal numbers of Britons, and been driven from one provinceto another, till, instead of grasping at general dominion, they werereduced to defend their wives and children. 

How much of this success was to be ascribed to that part of theregulation which this motion proposes to be changed, it is not, mylords, within my province to determine; the great commander whom I havethe honour to oppose, can best explain to your lordships the province ofevery officer in the field, and how far the number of inferiour officersmay influence the success of a battle and the fate of a kingdom. 

But to me, my lords, the establishment of our armies, comprisingdifferent views, and connecting various subordinate regulations, may becompared to a medicine composed of different ingredients, and foundinfallibly efficacious in a dangerous disease, in which, though some ofthe parts may seem to physicians of the profoundest learning, superfluous or improper, it would be no less than the folly ofpreferring experiments to life, to make any alteration. 

The wantonness of innovation, my lords, is a dangerous disease of themind; in a private station, it prompts men to be always discontentedwith what they find, and to lose the enjoyment of good in search ofsomething better; it incites them to leave the safe and beaten tracks oflife, in search of those which they imagine nearer, but, which are, atbest, less secure, and which generally lead them to points far differentfrom that to which they originally intended to direct their course. 

It is dangerous, my lords, to admit any alteration which is notabsolutely necessary, for one innovation makes way for another. Theparts of a constitution, like a complicated machine, are fitted to eachother, nor can one be changed without changing that which corresponds toit. This necessity is not always foreseen, but when discovered byexperience is generally complied with; for every man is more inclined tohazard farther changes, than to confess himself mistaken by retractinghis scheme. Thus, my lords, one change introduces another, till theoriginal constitution is entirely destroyed. 

By the ambition of innovation, my lords, have almost all those empiresbeen destroyed, of which nothing now is left but the memory. Every humanestablishment has its advantages and its inconveniencies, and by weakattempts to remedy these defects, which, notwithstanding the utmostattention, will embarrass the machine of government, alterations havebeen introduced which have been quickly followed by a total dissolution. 

There seem, my lords, to be few regulations on which it is moredangerous to make experiments than on that of the armies of a nation. Weare sufficiently convinced how much of success is the consequence ofcourage, and that courage is only an opinion of our own superiority, arising from certain circumstances, either imaginary or real. 

The courage which at present animates our forces, arises, my lords, froma very proper ground, their former victories over the enemies which theyare now to combat, and will, therefore, doubtless, continue while theycan consider themselves as enjoying the same advantage with thoseparticular men by whom the victories were obtained. But, my lords, ifany essential part of their establishment be changed, they will beconsidered, both by themselves and their enemies, as a different army;they will then charge with less alacrity, and be opposed with lessdejection; they will consider themselves as fighting without thatcertainty of success which arises from experience, and their enemieswill resolve to try, by an obstinate resistance, whether they are nowequally formidable as in their former state. 

Thus, my lords, I have attempted, however weakly, to represent thearguments which I have heard for the continuance of the establishment, of which your lordships will examine the validity, and shall now proceedto consider the noble duke's system of a military subordination in timeof peace. 

Whether a standing army in time of peace is made necessary to the changeof conduct in foreign courts, it is now useless to inquire; but it willbe easily granted by your lordships, that no motive but necessity, necessity absolute and inevitable, ought to influence us to support astanding body of regular forces, which have always been accounteddangerous, and generally found destructive to a free people. 

The chief reason, my lords, of the danger arising from a standing army, may be ascribed to the circumstances by which men, subject to militarylaws, are distinguished from other members of the same community; theyare, by the nature of martial government, exposed to punishment whichother men never incur, and tried by forms of a different and morerigorous kind than those which are practised by the civil power. Theyare, if not exempted from the jurisdiction of a magistrate, yet subjectto another authority which they see more frequently and more severelyexerted, and which, therefore, they fear and reverence in a higherdegree. They, by entering into the army, lay aside, for the most part, all prospect of advantage from commerce or civil employments, and, in afew years, neither fear nor hope any thing but from the favour ordispleasure of their own officers. 

For these, my lords, or for other reasons, the soldiers have always beeninclined to consider themselves as a body distinct from the rest of thecommunity, and independent on it, a government regulated by their ownlaws, without regard to the general constitution of their country; theyhave, therefore, been ready to subvert the constitution, from which theyreceived little advantage, and to oppress the civil magistrates, forwhom they had lost their reverence. 

And how soon, my lords, might such outrages be expected from an armyformed after the model of the noble duke, released from the commonobligations of society, disunited from the bulk of the nation, directedsolely by their own officers, and ultimately commanded by a man who hadthe right of commanding no other? Would they not soon considerthemselves as a separate community, whose interests were, no less thantheir laws, peculiar to themselves? Would they not consider him, fromwhom they received all their rewards, and all their punishments, as theproper object of their supreme regard, and endeavour to exalt him to thesame dominion over others, which he enjoyed in regard to themselves, that they might share in his superiority?

A body of men, my lords, thus separated from the rest of the people, must consider themselves as either ennobled or degraded by suchdistinction, and would soon find themselves inclined to use the power oftheir arms, either in the exertion of their privileges, or the revengeof their disgrace. Then, my lords, would they set at defiance the lawsof the nation, nor would one of these noble lords be able to disband, nor the other to resist them. 

The army, my lords, is, in time of peace, then best regulated when it iskept under the strictest subordination to the civil power, that powerwhich it is instituted to protect and to preserve. 

Thus, my lords, have I examined the proposal and reasons of the nobleduke, perhaps not much to the information of your lordships; but itcannot be expected that any capacity should be able, in an unexpectedand sudden debate, to dispute on a subject, which the noble duke'seducation gave him particular opportunities of understanding far beyondalmost every other man, and which he has had time to consider withrespect to this present motion. 

For this reason, my lords, I cannot but think the previous questionhighly expedient, but not for this reason alone; for as the state of thearmy, and the proper methods of augmenting it, are soon to be examinedby the other house, to prejudice their determinations, may raise acontest about privileges, and oblige us either to persist, for our ownhonour, in opposition to measures necessary to the security of thepublick, or, in compliance with the present exigence, accept theirscheme, however opposite to our own resolution. 

Lord CARTERET spoke in substance as follows:--My lords, the knownabilities of that noble lord incline me always to hear him with uncommonexpectation and attention, which seldom fail to be rewarded by suchpleasure and information as few other men are able to afford. But hisobservations on the question before us, my lords, have only convincedme, that the greatest abilities may be sometimes betrayed into errour, and the most candid disposition be vitiated by accidental prejudices. For his own arguments neither appear just, nor his representationimpartial, of those advanced in favour of the motion. 

With regard to the number of officers necessary in time of war, hislordship asserted nothing from his own knowledge, nor do I believe thatany other lord will imagine himself qualified to dispute with the nobleduke upon questions purely military. His experience entitles him to thehighest authority, in debates of this kind; and if every man has a claimto credit in his own profession, surely, he who has given evidence ofhis proficiency in the art of war in the eyes of the whole world, willnot be denied, in this house, that superiority which would readily beallowed him in any other part of the universe. 

And yet less, my lords, can it be suspected, that he intends to deceiveus, than that he can be deceived himself; for not only his probity, hislove of his country, and his fidelity to the crown, concur to secure himfrom any temptations to make an ill use of his credit, but his owninterest obliges him to offer that scheme for the regulation of ourforces, which, in his own opinion, will most certainly contribute totheir success. For it is not to be doubted, my lords, that when we shallbe engaged in war too far for negotiations and conventions, when weshall be surrounded by enemies, and terrified at the near approach ofdanger, he will be called upon to lead our armies to battle, and attack, once more, those enemies that have fled so often before him. 

Then, my lords, if he has contributed to form a weak plan of ourmilitary constitution, must he atone for it with the loss of hisreputation; that reputation, for which he has undergone so manyfatigues, and been exposed to so many dangers. 

But, my lords, it is ridiculous to suspect where nothing appears toprovoke suspicion, and I am very far from imagining that the dangers ofinnovation, however artfully magnified, or the apprehensions of thesoldiers, however rhetorically represented, will be thought of anyweight. 

The establishment of the army, my lords, is an innovation, and, as thenoble lord has justly represented it, an innovation that threatensnothing less than the destruction of our liberties, and the dissolutionof our government. Our vigilance ought, therefore, to be very anxiouslyemployed in regulating this new part of our government, and adapting it, in such a manner, to the national constitution, that no detriment mayarise from it, and that our civil rights may be protected, notoppressed, by the military power. 

To this purpose, says the noble lord, the soldiers are to be restrainedby a due subordination to the magistrate, a position undoubtedly true, but now superfluously urged: for it was never controverted by the nobleperson whose opinion he intended to oppose. 

Should any man assert, my lords, that the army ought to be formed into adistinct and independent society, which should receive laws only from acouncil of war, and have no other governour than their officers, noneshould oppose such an assertion with more ardour or constancy thanmyself, but what was never advanced it is unnecessary to confute. 

Yet, my lords, to obviate those dangers from the army which have been sostrongly and justly represented, it is necessary, not only that a legalsubordination to the civil authority be firmly established, but that apersonal dependence on the ministry be taken away. 

How readily men learn to reverence and obey those on whom their fortunesdepend, has been already shown by the noble lord, and therefore it willfollow, that a minister who distributes preferments at his pleasure, mayacquire such an influence in the army, as may be employed to securehimself from justice by the destruction of liberty. And unless it can beproved, that no such minister can ever exist; that corruption, ambition, and perfidy, have place only in the military race; every argument thatshows the danger of an army, dependent only on the general, will showthe danger, likewise, of one dependent only on the minister. 

The influence of the minister, my lords, is known to arise from thenumber of the officers, and to be proportioned to the value of thepreferment, which it is in his power to bestow; it is, therefore, evident, by adding new officers to our army, we shall throw weight intothe scale, which already is, at least, an equal balance to ourconstitution, and enable the ministry either to employ an army indefence of their measures, or to obtain such an influence in the senate, as shall make any other security superfluous. 

Such, my lords, is the danger of a multitude of officers, a danger whichsurely deserves more attention than the imaginary prejudice of thesoldiers in favour of the present establishment; a prejudice representedso powerful, both in our own forces, and those of our enemies, that thefuture success of our arms may probably depend upon it. 

Surely, my lords, that cause may be allowed indefensible, which such apatron defends so weakly. What can be more chimerical than to imaginethat men would lay down their arms, and forsake their standards, becausethere are twenty more in a company than have formerly been? That such apanick, from such a cause, was never found, I need not prove; and Iscarce think it necessary to assert, that, without supposing a universaldepravity of reason, it never can be found. 

The establishment proposed by the noble duke, is the same with that ofmost foreign troops, and particularly with that of his majesty's forcesin his foreign dominions, and, therefore, cannot but be approved by him, if it should be proposed by your lordships. For why should he imagine agreater number of officers necessary to the troops of Britain, than tothose of any other nation. 

The expediency of the motion, my lords, is, in my opinion, so obviousand incontestable, as to require no farther consideration, and, therefore, it is no argument against it, that we were not previouslyinformed of the question. 

Much less, my lords, can I discover the force of the assertion, that bysuch a resolution we shall excite the displeasure of the other house; wehave, my lords, at least, an equal right with them to examine anyposition relating to the publick security, a right which we may exertwith less danger of disgusting them, while they have yet formed nodetermination, and with less danger to the nation, than when theiropinion, whatever it may be, cannot be controverted without retardingthe important bill against mutiny. 

We are never offended, my lords, at receiving the opinions of the otherhouse, which we often adopt without any alteration, and often make useof for our own instruction, and now are become so contemptible as thatno regard should be paid by them to our resolutions. 

It is well known, my lords, that this assembly is an essential andconstituent part of the legislature of this kingdom, and that wereceived from our ancestors a great extent of power, which it ought tobe our care not to suffer to be contracted by degrees, till thisassembly shall become merely formal, and sit only to ratify implicitlythe determinations of the other house. 

[Several other lords spoke in the debate, and the president having putthe previous question, "Whether the question should be then put?" upon adivision, it passed in the negative. Content, 42. Not content, 59. ]

HOUSE OF COMMONS, DECEMBER 12, 1740. 

RESPECTING OFFICERS ON HALF-PAY. 

Mr. SANDYS this day moved for an humble address to his majesty, that, for the future ease of his majesty's subjects, all officers nowsubsisting upon half-pay, etc. Might be employed in the army, andsupported it to the following effect:

Sir, though I have often known motions opposed without any justobjections, or at least without any proof of such inconveniencies likelyto arise from them, as were equivalent to the advantages which theywould have produced, yet I cannot but confess, that any opposition tothis will be unexpected and surprising; for it is, in my opinion, supported by every law of justice and humanity. If we regard the publickin general, it cannot but produce some alleviation of the nationalexpense; and if we consider the particular persons to whom itimmediately relates, they have certainly a just claim to that regardwhich it is the tendency of this motion to procure them. 

To burden with superfluous officers, and unnecessary expenses, a peoplealready overwhelmed with taxes, and overrun with the dependents on thecrown, is, surely, to the highest degree cruel and absurd. And tocondemn those men to contempt and penury, who have served their countrywith bravery and fidelity, to prefer unexperienced striplings to thosecommissions, which would gladly be accepted by men who have alreadytried their courage in the battle, and borne the fatigues of marches, and the change of climates, is surely not only to oppress the deserving, and scatter promotion without just distinction; but, what is yet moreenormous, it is to wanton with the publick safety, and expose us to ourenemies. 

Nor does it appear to me sufficient, that the veteran officers berestored to the commissions which they formerly enjoyed; they ought, upon an augmentation of our troops, to be recompensed by someadvancement for their services and their sufferings; the ensign ought tobecome a lieutenant, and the lieutenant be exalted to a captain;stations which they will surely fill with more dignity and greaterabilities, than boys newly discharged from school, and intrusted withunexpected authority. 

If it be reasonable, sir, that expense should be spared in a time ofgeneral poverty, if it be politick to carry on war in the manner mostlikely to produce success, if it be just, that those who have servedtheir country should be preferred to those who have no merit to boast, this motion cannot be rejected. 

Sir William YONGE answered to this purpose:--Sir, to the motion nowmade, it will not, I believe, be objected, that it is unreasonable, orunjust, but that it is unnecessary, and that it is not drawn up withsufficient consideration. 

It is unnecessary, because his majesty is advised by it to no othermeasures than those which he has already determined to pursue; for hehas declared to me, sir, his intention of conferring the new commissionsupon the officers who receive half-pay, before any other officers shallbe promoted. 

The motion appears to me not to be very attentively considered, or drawnup with great propriety of expression; for it supposes all the half-payofficers fit for the service, which cannot be imagined by any man, whoconsiders that there has been peace for almost thirty years; a space oftime, in which many vigorous constitutions must have declined, and many, who were once well qualified for command, must be disabled by theinfirmities of age. Nor is the promotion of one of these gentlemenconsidered always by him as an act of favour; many of them have, in thislong interval of peace, engaged in methods of life very littleconsistent with military employments, many of them have families whichdemand their care, and which they would not forsake for any advantageswhich a new commission could afford them, and therefore it would not bevery consistent with humanity to force them into new dangers andfatigues which they are now unable to support. 

With regard to these men, compassion and kindness seem to require thatthey should be suffered to spend their few remaining days withoutinterruption, and that the dangers and toils of their youth should berequited in their age with ease and retirement. 

There are others who have less claim to the regard of the publick, andwho may be passed by in the distribution of new preferments without theimputation of neglecting merit. These are they who have voluntarilyresigned their commissions for the sake of half-pay, and have preferredindolence and retreat to the service of their country. 

So that it appears, that of those who subsist upon half-pay, some areunable to execute a commission, some do not desire, and some do notdeserve it; and with regard to the remaining part, which can be no greatnumber, I have already stated the intention of his majesty, andtherefore cannot but conclude that the motion is needless. 

Mr. PULTENEY spoke as follows:--Sir, I know not by what fatality it is, that all the motions made by one party are reasonable and necessary, andall that are unhappily offered by the other, are discovered either to beneedless, or of pernicious tendency. Whenever a question can be cloudedand perplexed, the opponents of the ministry are always mistaken, confuted, and, in consequence of the confutations, defeated by themajority of votes. When truth is too notorious to be denied, and tooobvious to be contested, the administration claim the honour of thefirst discovery, and will never own that they were incited to their dutyby the remonstrances of their opponents, though they never, before thoseremonstrances, had discovered the least intention of performing it. 

But that the motion is allowed to be just and proper, is sufficient; theimportance of it will be easily discovered. For my part I shall alwaysconsider that motion as important, which tends to contract the expensesof the publick, to rescue merit from neglect, and to hinder the increaseof the dependents on the ministry. 

Sir Robert WALPOLE answered:--Sir, there is no temper more opposite tothat incessant attention to the welfare of the publick, which is theperpetual boast of those who have signalized themselves by opposing themeasures of the administration, than a lust of contradiction, and adisposition to disturb this assembly with superfluous debates. 

Whether this disposition is not discovered in the reply made to thedeclaration of his majesty's intentions, and the confession of thepropriety of the motion, let the house determine. It must surely beconfessed, that it is not necessary to advise what is alreadydetermined. 

Nor is it less evident, that many of the officers whose interest is nowso warmly solicited, must be incapacitated by their age for service, andunable to receive any benefit from the offer of new commissions. To denythis, is to question the flux of time, or to imagine that theconstitution of a soldier is exempt from its injuries. 

Mr. SANDYS explained himself to this effect:--Sir, I am far fromintending by this motion to fill the army with decrepit officers, or toobstruct in any manner the service of the publick; nor have I any otherintention, than to secure to those whose years permit, and whoseinclinations incite them to enter once more into the army, thatpreferment to which they have a claim, not only from their pastservices, but from the state of penury and obscurity in which they havelanguished. 

I desire to preserve those, whose valour has heretofore made our nationthe terrour of the world, from the mortification of seeing themselvesinsulted by childhood, and commanded by ignorance; by ignorance exaltedto authority by the countenance of some rhetorician of the senate, orsome mayor of a borough. 

Whoever has observed the late distribution of military honours, willeasily discover that they have been attained by qualifications verydifferent from bravery, or knowledge of the art of war; he will findthat regiments and companies are the rewards of a seasonable vote, andthat no man can preserve his post in the army, whether given him as thereward of acknowledged merit, or sold him for the full value, any longerthan he employs all his influence in favour of the ministry. 

Sir Robert WALPOLE then said:--Sir, it has been already admitted, thatthe motion can only be objected to as superfluous, and, therefore, allfarther debate is mere waste of time, without any prospect of advantage;nor is any thing now necessary, but to review the motion, and correctsuch expressions as may be thought inaccurate or improper. 

That _all_ the half-pay officers are not able to enter into the service, has been already shown, and, therefore, I should imagine, that, insteadof _all the officers_, we might very justly substitute _officersproperly qualified_. 

Sir John BARNARD replied:--Sir, though I cannot discover the necessityof any alteration, since it cannot be conceived that the senate canadvise impossibilities, yet since so much accuracy is affected, it maybe allowed that the word _all_ shall be left out, as seeming to implymore than can be intended. 

But the honourable gentleman is not, in my opinion, so happy in hisamendment, as in his objection; for the words _properly qualified_convey to me no distinct idea. He that is qualified is, I suppose, _properly qualified_, for I never heard of _improper qualifications_;but if the word _properly_ be omitted, I have no objection to theamendment. 

This motion was agreed to. 

HOUSE OF COMMONS, JAN. 24, 1740-1. 

[DEBATE ON AN ADDRESS FOR PAPERS RELATING TO ADMIRAL HADDOCK. ]

Mr. WALLER this day offered the following motion in writing, That anhumble address be presented to his majesty, that he will be graciouslypleased to give directions that there may be laid before this housecopies of two particular letters written by his majesty's secretary ofstate to admiral Haddock, which had been addressed for before, and ofthe letters received from admiral Ogle mentioned therein; together withall letters written by admiral Haddock to either of his majesty'ssecretaries of state, concerning the said letters, and the execution ofthe orders contained therein. 

This motion he supported by arguments to the following effect:--Sir, noman who considers the present situation of our foreign affairs, theexpense and inefficacy of our military preparations, the appearance ofnegligence in our naval expeditions, and the general disappointment ofthe hopes which the nation had conceived of victories, vengeance, andreparations, can, in my opinion, doubt the expediency of the motionwhich I have taken the liberty to make. 

When the expectations of the nation are deceived, it certainly becomesthose who are deputed to watch over the prosperity of the publick, toinquire whence the disappointment proceeds, and either to inform theirconstituents that their uneasiness arises from their own errour, andthat their hopes are destroyed because they had no rational foundation;or to detect the weak management of those by whom the publick measureshave been ill-conducted, or the national treasure has been misapplied. 

With regard, sir, to the present war, I know not how the nation can becharged with having formed unreasonable expectations. If they consideredthe speech from the throne, the most authentick declaration of theintentions of the government, they found there the warmest resentmentsof the injuries which they had sustained, and the strongest assurancesof a vigorous prosecution of all those measures which might producespeedy recompense, and inviolable security. 

If they reflect, sir, on the preparations for war, on the multitude ofships, the demand of materials for naval equipments, and the high pricesat which workmen were retained, they could not but imagine that eithersome mighty attempt was designed, or some formidable enemy dreaded, andas they know not whom they had to fear, they ascribed the vigour of ourproceedings to a resolution of humbling our enemies by one fatal blow, and re-establishing our naval dominion by a single effort. 

And justly, sir, might they indulge this pleasing imagination; withreason might they anticipate a triumph over an enemy whose strengthbears no proportion to the force that was fitted out against them, andexpect that in a few months they should see the ambassadors of Spainsupplicating for peace. 

To raise their expectations yet higher, their trade was suspended by anembargo, long continued, and in the strictest manner enforced, and theimpresses were let loose upon the sailors; they saw nothing omitted, however grievous to the nation, that could contribute to make itformidable, and bore part of the miseries of war without impatience, inhopes of being rewarded by military glory, and repaid by the plunder ofSpain. 

But, sir, when so long a time has elapsed, and no account is brought ofeither a victory or a battle, when they hear nothing but that our fleetshave visited several neutral ports, and those of the enemy sailedunmolested from coast to coast, and when they are every day told of thelosses of our merchants, are insulted in our own channel by the Spanishprivateers, and receive no relations of our success upon the shores ofour enemies, can it be wondered that they suspect the reality of ourdesigns, or inquire whence it proceeds that their money has been wasted, their trade interrupted, and the liberty of their fellow-subjectsinvaded to no purpose?

But how much more justly, sir, are they inflamed when they hear of thelucky stratagems, or daring enterprises of those enemies, which a justsense of their own superiority, had induced them to consider asvanquished before the battle, and of whom they had no apprehensions butthat their cowardice would always secure them from vengeance? Howjustly may they murmur when they read, that our fleets leave every partof the enemy's coast where their presence is necessary, and haveafforded the Spaniards an opportunity of changing one port for another, as it is most convenient, and at length of joining the French squadrons, and sailing to the defence of their American dominions?

May they not justly, sir, require of their representatives some reasonfor such inexplicable conduct? May they not reasonably demand an accountof the arguments which procured their approbation of measures, which, sofar as they can be examined by those who have no opportunity of perusingthe necessary papers, appear either cowardly or treacherous?

And what answer, sir, can we return to such remonstrances, unless thismotion be agreed to? How can we appease the discontents of ourconstituents, or discharge the trust reposed in us, without a veryminute and attentive inquiry into questions thus obscure and thusimportant?

Are we to tell our constituents, that we absolutely rely upon theprudence and fidelity of the ministry and admirals, and recommend tothem the same implicit dependence? Are we to confess that we have nowfor two sessions voted in the dark, and approved what we were notsuffered to examine and understand?

Such answers, sir, to questions so reasonable, will not contribute toincrease the veneration of the people either for ourselves, or ourconstitution; and yet this answer, and this only, they can receive fromus, if the papers mentioned in the motion I have made are denied. 

Mr. CLUTTERBUCK replied in the following manner:--Sir, this motion, though so warmly urged, and so artfully supported, I can consider onlyas a repetition of a former motion which was approved by the assembly, so far as it could properly be complied with, nor was any paper thenconcealed which it would not have been an injury to the nation to havedivulged. 

If the design of this motion be to promote the success of the presentwar, and the zeal with which it has been pressed, be incited only by theardour of true patriotism, I doubt not but it will easily be withdrawnby those who are now most inclined to support it, when they shallreflect that it tends to the discovery of our schemes, and to theoverthrow of our designs, that it will expose all our consultations toour enemies, and instruct them how to annoy us with most success, andhow to shelter themselves from our intended attacks. 

It is the first care, sir, of every administration, that their militarydesigns should only be discovered by the execution of them, and thattheir enemies, by being obliged to guard all parts, should be weak inall. If, by laying our papers before this house, the Spaniards shouldcome to be informed against what part of their dominions our expeditionsare designed, will they not increase their strength, improve theirfortifications, and double their vigilance? And if we are thus obligedto form new schemes, must we not impute the defeat of the former to ourown imprudent zeal, or unseasonable curiosity?

Mr. SANDYS spoke to this effect:--Sir, that we should demand the schemeslaid for the future conduct of the war with Spain was never proposed, nor, as it may reasonably be concluded, ever imagined; for what ismentioned in the motion but the papers relating to the transactions ofthe two last years. 

That it should be necessary to remind gentlemen of the differencebetween the _future_ and the _past_, would hardly be suspected by anyman not accustomed to senatorial controversies and artifices of state;and yet in the argument which has been offered against the motion, nothing has been asserted but that the orders relating to pasttransactions are not to be laid before us, lest the enemy should therebygain intelligence of what we now design against them. 

The necessity of secrecy in war needs not be urged, because it will notbe denied; but when designs have been laid, and miscarried, the reasonsof that miscarriage may surely be inquired, without danger of betrayingthe councils of our country. 

If the negligence of our councils, and the misconduct of our commanders, has been such, that no designs have been premeditated; if a war has beencarried on by chance, and nothing has succeeded, because nothing hasbeen attempted; if our commanders have not done ill, and have only donenothing; if they have avoided loss by avoiding danger; we may surelyinquire to whom such proceedings are to be imputed, whether the defeatof our designs is to be charged upon the strength of our enemy, or thecowardice of our officers; or whether the inactivity and apparentneutrality of our forces is occasioned by the negligence of ouradmirals, or the irresolution of our own ministry. 

There have been, sir, many incidents in these two last years, of whichthe examination can be of very little advantage to the Spaniards. I donot know what pernicious intelligence they can glean from an inquiryinto the reasons for which Haddock's fleet was divided, and Ogle sent tothe defence of Minorca, or for which he afterwards returned. 

Nor can I conceive that any advantage, except that of merriment anddiversion, can be thrown into the hands of our enemies, though we shouldseriously inquire into what no man has yet pretended to understand, thewonderful escape of the Spanish squadron. A transaction on which we haddwelt long enough with that admiration which ignorance produces, and onwhich it may not be improper at length to enable us to reason. 

This is an affair, perhaps, much better understood by our enemies thanby ourselves, and surely we cannot, therefore, be afraid of informingthem of it; at least since the fleet has long since sailed out, and lefttheir coast, we can hardly be restrained in our inquiries by the fear ofdiscovering our _future_ designs. 

If, therefore, it be the incontestable right of the senate to examinethe conduct of publick affairs, which I suppose will scarcely be denied, this motion cannot be rejected as unseasonable, nor can the papers berefused, without increasing those suspicions which are already tooprevalent throughout the nation. 

Nor, indeed, for our own sakes, ought we to delay this inquiry anylonger, lest by having long acted without being accountable, theminister should form a prescription against our privilege, and, in time, tell us in plain terms that we are his slaves, and that we are not topresume to carry our examinations, however solemn and important they maycontinue to appear, farther than he shall be pleased to permit; andthat, whatever may be the opinion of the people that deputes us, or, whatever ancient claims we may plead to authority, we are now toconsider ourselves only as the oppressors of the nation, and thepanegyrists of the court. 

Mr. WALPOLE next rose, and spoke to this purpose:--Sir, it cannot bedenied to be reasonable that all those papers should be laid before thesenate, which can be communicated without injury to the publick. Of thisnumber we may justly imagine the orders sent to the admirals, in whichthe time of their departure is fixed, and many others which may be ofuse to inform the house, but cannot enable the enemy to judge either ofour force or our designs. 

But it is evident, that there must be others included in this motion, which our regard for the success of the war, and the prosperity of ourcountry, ought to determine us to conceal, and such as are never exposedby any administration; it is, therefore, proper to limit the address topapers of a certain kind, or a certain date, which may be considered bythe house without benefit to our enemies, and for the examination ofwhich a day or two will be more than sufficient. 

Mr. PULTENEY spoke in substance as follows:--Sir, I know not whatnumber of papers the wisdom of the administration will allow us, but, ifwe judge by the time proposed to be spent in examination, we shall notbe distracted with a great diversity of subjects; intelligence will bevery penuriously dealt out, and if we submit to their choice of thewritings which shall be laid before us, our inquiry will probably endwithout any discoveries made either by our enemies or ourselves. 

But I hope, sir, we shall not be so cheaply satisfied, nor exposed bythe fear of one enemy, to the insolence of another. I hope we shallresolutely continue our demands of information, while a single line isconcealed, from which any light can be expected. 

There may, indeed, be circumstances in which our demands, however loud, will necessarily be vain. It is not impossible that we may suspect thosetransactions of deep art, and secret contrivance, which have been theconsequences of mere indolence, and want of consideration. Our greatministers have been, perhaps, only doing nothing, while we have imaginedthat they were working out of sight. 

Misled, sir, by this notion, we may call for the orders that have beendespatched in these two last years, when, perhaps, our secretaries ofstate have been fattening on their salaries without employment, and haveslept without care, and without curiosity, while we have beencongratulating ourselves upon their vigilance for our preservation. 

Or if orders have been given, it is to be considered, that the end ofinspecting orders is to compare them with the conduct of the admirals towhom they were directed: from this comparison, I doubt not but manygentlemen expect uncommon discoveries; but to check all unreasonablehopes before they have taken possession of their hearts, forunreasonable hopes are the parent of disappointment, I think it properto remind them, that to draw any conclusions from the orders, it isnecessary to understand them. 

This consideration alone is sufficient to redress the ardour of inquiry, for every man that has had opportunities of knowing the wonderfulaccomplishments of our ministry, the depth of their designs, thesubtilty of their stratagems, and the closeness of their reasoning, willeasily conceive it probable that they might send such orders as none butthemselves could understand; and what then will be the consequence ofour idle curiosity, but that we be led into a labyrinth of endlessconjectures? For we have long ago found that no explanations are to beexpected, and that our ministry are too wise to discover their secretsto their enemies. 

Let us, therefore, examine the naked facts which have fallen within ourobservation, and endeavour to inform ourselves of the meaning of thesesecret orders by the execution of them. 

Admiral Ogle was despatched from Haddock's fleet to protect Minorca, and, in his absence, the Spanish squadron sailed away. Perhaps he wasordered to watch Ferrol and Minorca at the same time, and notunderstanding how that was to be done, neglected one part of his charge, by an attention to the other: as a watchman who should be employed toguard at once the bank in London, and the treasury in Westminster. 

Admiral NORRIS, sir, sailed lately forth, I suppose, in pursuance oforders, with a very formidable fleet, and after having lost sight forsome days of the British coast, sailed back again with greatprecipitation. Whether his orders were only to sail forth, or whether, when he examined them farther, he could not understand them, I pretendnot to determine; but it may reasonably be imagined that his orders wereof the same kind with those of our other admirals, because they producedthe same consequences. 

I have been told, that formerly our commanders were ordered to _burn_, _sink_, and _destroy_; and that in those times it was not uncommon for aBritish admiral to do much mischief with a strong fleet; but it isevident that the style is since changed, for our admirals are now veryinoffensive, and go out only to come back. I, therefore, think themotion highly necessary, and such as ought to be complied with. 

Admiral NORRIS here rose up, and spoke thus:--Sir, I am not consciousthat my conduct in any part of my life has exposed me to be justlytreated with contempt and ridicule, and what I have not deserved I willnot bear. 

If any gentleman in this house can accuse me of having neglected myduty, or deserted it, let him not spare insults or invectives, let himnow expose my cowardice or my carelessness, let him prove me unworthy oftrust or of command. 

But my own conscience acquits me, and I defy any man to produce andsupport his accusation; nor can you, sir, [Footnote: Addressing himselfto Mr. PULTENEY. ] who have thus contemptuously treated me, allege anything against me that may justify your neglect of decency: that you havetransgressed the rules of decency is the softest censure that yourbehaviour admits, and I think it may with equal propriety be asserted, that you have broken the laws of justice. 

Mr. PULTENEY replied in this manner:--Sir, I shall submit to you and allwho hear me, whether I have treated the honourable gentleman's name withany contemptuous freedom of speech. The usual method of mentioning anexpedition is that of naming the commander, who is not therebynecessarily included in the censure of an unsuccessful attempt, and I amvery far from calling his courage and capacity into question. 

Not that I shall ever think it necessary to make an apology forexpressing my sentiments with freedom as a member of this house, inwhich I shall always speak what I think, and in what manner it shallappear to me most proper, nor shall I fear to repeat without doors whatI say here. 

Sir Robert WALPOLE next rose up, and spoke to this purpose:--Sir, as Iam not acquainted with any measures pursued by the administration, whichit is their particular interest to conceal, I am desirous that allpapers should be laid before the house which will not afford our enemiesany opportunity of obviating our designs. 

What necessity there is for this address I cannot, indeed, discover, because I know not any foundation for suspicion of either negligence ortreachery, which have been both insinuated in this debate. 

Nor are the ministry, however ludicrously their abilities have beentreated, afraid of discovering their ignorance, by laying before thehouse the orders which they have given to our admirals; orders of whichthey are far from doubting that they will appear, upon a candidexamination, rational and proper. 

The chief objection to this motion arises from its unreasonableness, andthe necessity which it will produce of assigning to a fruitless inquirythose hours that may be more usefully employed. 

Mr. PITT replied in terms to the effect following:--Sir, it is myopinion, that our time cannot be more usefully employed during a war, than in examining how it has been conducted, and settling the degree ofconfidence that may be reposed in those to whose care are intrusted ourreputations, our fortunes, and our lives. 

There is not any inquiry, sir, of more importance than this; it is not aquestion about an uncertain privilege, or a law, which, if foundinconvenient, may hereafter be repealed; we are now to examine whetherit is probable that we shall preserve our commerce and our independence, or whether we are sinking into subjection to a foreign power. 

But this inquiry, sir, will produce no great information, if those, whose conduct is examined, are allowed to select the evidence. For whataccounts will they exhibit but such as have often already been laidbefore us, and such as they now offer without concern: accounts obscureand fallacious, imperfect and confused, from which nothing can belearned, and which can never entitle the minister to praise, though theymay screen him from punishment. 

Mr. PELHAM spoke as follows:--Sir, I am confident that no man engaged inthe administration desires to be _screened_ from the most rigorousinquiry, or would defer to exhibit the papers a moment for any otherreason than his regard for the publick. 

I am confident, that nothing could so much contribute to advance theparticular and distinct interest of the ministry as the publication ofall the writings that relate to the present war, by which it wouldincontestably appear that nothing has been omitted that could promoteour success, that our commanders have been sent out with orders to actwith the utmost vigour, and that our preparations have been notdisproportioned to the importance of our design. 

It will appear that no former ministry have given greater proofs oftheir zeal for the publick interest, or have more steadily pursued themost proper measures by which it might be advanced. 

I am not, indeed, certain that those who now call so loudly forinformation would be prevailed on by any degree of evidence to suspendtheir censures. Them, who are now dissatisfied, I shall despair ofinfluencing by reason or testimony; for they seem to inquire only tocondemn; nor is this motion, perhaps, made so much for the sake ofobtaining information, as of harassing the ministry with delays, andsuspending affairs of greater importance. 

This motion was agreed to, and upon another motion made by Mr. SANDYS, it was resolved, "That an humble address be presented to his majesty, that he will begraciously pleased to give directions, that there may be laid beforethis house a copy of the reasons sent by admiral Cavendish, in pursuanceof an order from the commissioners of the admiralty, which had retardedthe sailing of admiral Ogle's squadron, so much beyond expectation. "

Likewise, "That an humble address be presented to his majesty, that he will begraciously pleased to give directions, that there may be laid beforethis house a copy of the reasons transmitted by admiral Ogle, that didprevent him from sailing, pursuant to his repeated orders for thatpurpose, and particularly to those sent him by the commissioners of theadmiralty. "

HOUSE OF COMMONS, FEB. 3, 1740-1. 

[DEBATE REGARDING THE DEPARTURE OF THE FRENCH AND SPANISH SQUADRONS. ]

Mr. SANDYS this day presented a motion in writing, for petitioning hismajesty to inform them when the regency received intelligence that theFrench and Spanish squadrons sailed, which was seconded, as follows, byMr. WALLER:--

Sir, the information now moved for, appears to me so necessary in theirdeliberations on the conduct of the war, that without it we can onlyconjecture in the dark, and entangle ourselves in an inextricablelabyrinth. 

It is well known, that in war all motions are, in a great degree, to beregulated by those of the enemy, and that, therefore, no vigilance is tobe spared by which any knowledge can be gained of their designs, nor anymethods omitted of communicating them to those who have the direction ofthe war. 

A ministry may, in conducting military operations, disappoint theexpectations of their country, either by neglecting to procureintelligence, or by failing to make use of those opportunities whichseasonable information puts into their power, and they may, when theirdesigns fail of success, justify themselves, by proving that they weredeceived by intelligence which it was reasonable to believe, or thatbetter intelligence was not attainable, or that they made use, howeverunsuccessfully, of all the forces that could then be employed, and ofall the advantages that were then in their possession. 

But how shall we judge of our administration, how shall we know whatconfidence we ought to repose in their prudence and fidelity, and whatmiscarriages are to be attributed to the chance of war or superiourforce of our enemies, if we cannot be informed with what diligence theyendeavour at information, and how early they have notice of the motionsof the enemy?

The sailing, or rather escape of the Ferrol squadron, and departure ofthe French fleet, are the most important events of the present war;events that threaten very dangerous consequences, no less than descentsupon our American colonies, the conquest of our dominions, the slaveryof our fellow-subjects, and perhaps the destruction of the brave Vernon, who is secure in the imagined vigilance of the other commanders, andmay, perhaps, in a few days see himself surrounded by formidablesquadrons of different nations, and exposed to the attack of forces towhich his little fleet bears no proportion. 

Nothing appears more evident, than that we had opportunities ofobserving, at least, all the preparations of the French, and of watchingthe moment of their departure, and that our force on the coast of Spainwas sufficient to have confined their fleets for ever in their harbours, or to have destroyed them at their first entrance into the open seas, ofwhich we may justly inquire, why it was not attempted, but shall inquireto no purpose till we know when they departed, that we may consider thestate of our own forces, and whether our enemies escaped by ournegligence, cowardice, or weakness. 

Mr. WINNINGTON then spoke to the following purpose:--Sir, that wecannot deliberate upon subjects which we do not understand, and that, therefore, no necessary or useful information ought to be denied to thehouse, I shall readily admit; but must observe, at the same time, thatthe reputation of the house would be very little consulted, in demandinginformation which cannot be given. 

To address his majesty to inform us of the time at which the squadronsof our enemies sailed, is to inquire of him what it ought to be thehighest care of those princes to conceal from him, and which he can onlyknow by having spies in their privy councils. 

And of what importance is it to inquire what intelligence was broughthim, or when he received it, if it appears that his intelligence must bein its own nature uncertain and dubitable?

That they have left their ports is now certain, because they have beentwice discovered in different parts of the world; but, as we can nowonly form conjectures on their designs and courses, so, before theysailed, it was impossible to know when they were fully equipped, or whattime was fixed for their departure. It is to be remembered, that theyform their measures, and make their preparations in their own dominions, and therefore, have more advantages of concealing their schemes than weof discovering them. 

Mr. Advocate CAMPBELL then spoke thus:--Sir, this motion, which has beenrepresented as unreasonable and absurd, is, in my opinion, not onlyproper, but important. 

It is important, because it will enable us to judge, upon sufficientfoundations, of the conduct of the ministry, who are censured by thevoice of the nation, for having been either defective in vigilance or inactivity, for having been either ignorant by their own fault of thedesigns of the enemy, or perfidiously passive in permitting theexecution of them. 

I am far from believing that such intelligence as our ministry isexpected to procure, requires any uncommon subtilty, or any other agentsthan are always employed by every minister, to transmit to theminformations from foreign courts. Such, I am afraid, are always hoveringabout our consultations, and I know not why our ministers should be lessdiligent or less successful than those of other princes. 

If, therefore, such intelligence might have been obtained, it wascriminal not to obtain it; and if the departure of the Spanish squadronwas foreseen, it ought to be inquired, why it was not prevented; and ifit was only known when it was too late to hinder it from sailing, why itwas not pursued, or why succours were not immediately despatched toadmiral Vernon. 

All these questions can only be resolved, in consequence of theinformation which his majesty shall give us; and for which it is, therefore, in my opinion, necessary to petition. 

Mr. Henry PELHAM spoke next, to this purpose:--Sir, how the regencycould be informed of the intention of the Spaniards to leave their portstill it appeared by their departure, or by what means it can be expectedthat his majesty should be now acquainted with their particular course, or farther designs, I confess myself unable to conceive. 

With regard, sir, to the intelligence transmitted from foreign courts byagents and spies, a little consideration will easily discover that it isnot to be trusted. For what can be generally expected from them, butthat they should catch flying reports, or by chance intercept uncertainwhispers, that they should inquire timorously, and, therefore, for thegreatest part, of those from whom no satisfactory accounts can bereceived, and that they should often endeavour to deserve their salariesby such information as is rather pleasing than true. 

All the knowledge that can be obtained of an enemy's designs, must arisefrom a diligent comparison of one circumstance with another, and from ageneral view of his force, his interest, and his opportunities. And thatsuch conjectures will be often erroneous, needs not be told. 

Probability, therefore, is, in such inquiries, all that can be attained, and he that sits idle in the time of war, expecting certainintelligence, will see his enemies enjoying the advantages of his folly, and laying hold on a thousand opportunities which he has neglected toimprove. 

The war in which we are now engaged, has been carried on by theadministration with the utmost diligence and vigour; nor have anymeasures been omitted that could probably produce success, and thesuccess of the wisest measures is only probable. 

Should the great admiral, who is now present in the house, have met theFrench and Spaniards in the open seas, by what art could he arrive at acertain knowledge of their designs? He might by his acquaintance withthe situation and state of neighbouring countries, the observation oftheir course, the periods of particular winds, and other hints ofobservation, form probable conjectures, but could never reach tocertainty or confidence. 

It seems to me, therefore, highly improper, to petition his majesty forintelligence which he cannot be imagined to have received, and I cannotagree to any motion for that purpose. 

Mr. SANDYS then made another motion, to address his majesty, that theremay be laid before the house copies of all letters received from, orwritten to, admiral Vernon since his going to the West Indies. Whichbeing seconded, Mr. PELHAM spoke to this effect:--Sir, this motion, if the intention ofit be limited by proper restrictions, is doubtless reasonable and just;for the right of this house to examine into the conduct of publickaffairs, and, consequently, for calling for the papers necessary toenlighten their inquiries, is not to be disputed. 

But, as the end of all such inquiries is the promotion of the publickwelfare, so they are not to be made in a manner by which that end may bedefeated. Papers are not to be demanded, which cannot be producedwithout discovering our own secrets, and acquainting our enemies eitherwith that weakness which we ought carefully to conceal, or that forcewhich will be most effectually employed if it is not known, and, therefore, no preparations are made to oppose it. 

It cannot be imagined, but that many of the papers which have passedbetween the admiralty and the commander in America, contain plans forthe prosecution of the war, observations on the conditions of our owncolonies, and, perhaps, intelligence of the estate of the Spanishfortresses and towns. Many informations of the utmost consequence to ourenemies may be collected from those papers, but nothing can be expectedfrom them, that will enable us to prosecute a senatorial inquiry withmore success, that will put it in our power to discover frauds, negligence, or treachery. 

There are, sir, other papers which may, indeed, be laid before us, without any benefit to our enemies, and, perhaps, with some advantage toourselves; the papers which contain the accompts of our preparations andstores, the lists of our forces, and the calculation of our expenses, are the proper subjects of senatorial inquiries; and if the motion berestrained to those, I believe it will not be opposed by any gentlemanengaged in the administration of our affairs. I shall beg leave topropose these words may be added, "So far as the same relates to asupply of ships, marines, or land forces. "

The motion, thus amended, was agreed to. 

HOUSE OF LORDS, FEB. 13, 1740-1. 

DEBATE ON ADDRESSING HIS MAJESTY FOR REMOVING SIR ROBERT WALPOLE. 

The opposition which for a long time had been made in the commons, tothe measures of the administration, was on this day pushed to a crisis, and produced a motion in both houses. In the house of lords itoccasioned the following debate:

Lord CARTERET began in this manner:--My lords, as the motion which I amabout to make is of the highest importance, and of the most extensiveconsequences; as it cannot but meet with all the opposition which theprejudices of some, and the interest of others, can raise against it; asit must have the whole force of ministerial influence to encounter, without any assistance but from justice and reason; I hope to be excusedby your lordships for spending some time in endeavouring to show, thatit wants no other support, that it is not founded upon doubtfulsuspicions, but upon uncontestable facts; that it is not dictated byprivate interest, but by the sincerest regard to publick happiness; notabetted by the personal malevolence of particular men, but enforced bythe voice of the people; a voice which ought always to be attended to, and, generally, to be obeyed. 

To endeavour, my lords, to remove from places of publick trust all thosewho appear to want either the virtues or abilities necessary forexecuting their offices, is the interest of every member of a community. And it is not only the interest but the duty of all those who are, either by the choice of the people, or by the right of birth, investedwith the power of inspecting publick affairs, and intrusted with thegeneral happiness of their country. That, therefore, every motivecombines to make it the duty, and every argument concurs to prove it theprivilege of your lordships, is too evident to be doubted. 

How often this privilege has been exerted by this house, and how oftenit has rescued our country from oppression, insolence, and rapine; howoften our constitution has been reanimated, and impending ruin beenaverted by it, a superficial acquaintance with history may inform us. And we are now called upon by the universal cry of the nation, and urgedby the perplexed and uncertain state of our foreign affairs, anddeclension of our wealth, and attacks upon our liberties at home, torecollect these precedents of magnanimity and justice, and to makeanother effort for the relief of our country. 

This house, my lords, has proceeded against ministers, whose conductthey disapproved, by methods of greater or less severity, according tothe necessity of affairs, or the supposed malignity of the crimesalleged against them; and, therefore, have sometimes thought itnecessary to deter posterity from imitating them by rigorous censures, and exemplary punishments, and sometimes have thought it sufficient toset the nation free from its distresses, without inflicting anypenalties on those by whose misconduct they imagined them produced. 

What were the more violent and vindictive methods of proceeding, it isnot necessary, with regard to this motion, to examine; since I shallonly propose, that we should, in imitation of our predecessors, in casesof this nature, humbly address his majesty to remove the minister fromhis presence and councils. 

Nothing, my lords, can be more moderate or tender than such an address, by which no punishment is inflicted, nor any forfeiture exacted. Theminister, if he be innocent, if his misconduct be only the consequenceof his ignorance or incapacity, may lay down in peace an office forwhich nature has not designed him, enjoy the vast profits of longemployment in tranquillity, and escape the resentment of an unhappypeople; who, when irritated to the highest degree, by a continuation ofthe same miscarriages, may, perhaps, in the heat of a more malevolentprosecution, not sufficiently distinguish between inability and guilt. 

Those, therefore, among your lordships, that think him honest butmistaken, must willingly agree to a motion like this, as the bestexpedient to appease the people without the ruin of the minister. Forsurely no man who has read the history, or is acquainted with the temperof this nation, can expect that the people will always bear to seehonours, favours, and preferments, distributed by the direction of oneuniversally suspected of corruption, and arbitrary measures; or willlook only with silent envy upon the affluence of those whom they believeto be made great by fraud and plunder, swelled to insolence by theprosperity of guilt, and advanced to wealth and luxury by publickmiseries. 

Such of your lordships who join with the people in ascribing our presentunhappy state not to the errours, but to the crimes of the minister, andwho, therefore, think a bare removal not sufficient to satisfy thedemands of justice, must, doubtless, give their consent to the motion, for the sake of obtaining proper evidence of his wickedness, whichcannot be expected while he stands exalted in prosperity, anddistributes the riches of the nation, and the gifts of his sovereign athis own choice; while he is in possession of every motive that caninfluence the mind, enforce secrecy, and confirm fidelity; while he canbribe the avaricious, and intimidate the fearful; while he can increasethe gratification of luxury, and enlarge the prospects of ambition. For, my lords, if it be considered from whom this evidence must be drawn, itwill soon appear that no very important discoveries can be made, but bythose whom he has intrusted with his secrets, men whose disregard ofvirtue recommended them to his favour, and who, as they are moved onlyby interest, will continue faithful while they can hope for recompense;but may, perhaps, be willing to buy their own security by sacrificingtheir master, when they shall see no farther prospect of advantage fromserving him, or any other method of escaping punishment. 

But, my lords, all must allow this motion to be reasonable, whateverthey think of the minister's conduct, who are of opinion that a freepeople have a right of complaining when they feel oppression, and ofaddressing the crown to remove a minister that has incurred theiruniversal detestation. That such is the condition of the presentminister, I believe, will scarcely be denied, or may be discovered bythose who find themselves inclined to doubt it, by asking any man whomthey shall accidentally meet, what are his sentiments on the situationof national affairs, and of the hands by which they are administered. What answer he will receive is well known to most of your lordships. Lethim not be satisfied with a single suffrage, let him repeat the questionto ten thousand persons, different in their ages, their conditions, andreligious opinions, in every thing that produces contrariety ofdispositions and affections, he will yet find them unanimous incomplaining of publick misconduct, and in censuring one gentleman as theauthor of it. 

Let us not imagine, my lords, that these accusations and murmurs areconfined to the lowest class of the people, to men whose constantattention to more immediate distresses, hinder them from makingexcursions beyond their own employments. For though, perhaps, it mightbe made evident from the accounts of past times, that no generaldissatisfaction, even among men of this rank, was ever groundless;though it might be urged that those who see little can only clamour, because they feel themselves oppressed; and though it might notunseasonably be hinted that they are at least formidable for theirnumbers, and have, sometimes, executed that justice which they had notinterest to procure, and trampled upon that insolence that has dared todefy them; yet I shall not insist upon such motives, because it isnotorious that discontent is epidemical in all ranks, and that conditionand observation are far from appeasing it. 

Whether the discontent, thus general, is groundless, whether it israised only by the false insinuations of the disappointed, and thewicked arts of the envious, whether it is, in exception to all themaxims of government, the first dislike of an administration that everoverspread a nation without just reasons, deserves to be inquired into. 

In this inquiry, my lords, it will be necessary to consider not only thestate of domestick affairs, increase or diminution of our debts, thesecurity or violation of our liberties, the freedom or dependence of oursenates, and the prosperity or declension of our trade, but to examinethe state of this nation, with regard to foreign powers; to inquire, whether we are equally feared and equally trusted now as in formeradministrations; whether our alliances have contributed to secure usfrom our inveterate and habitual enemies, or to expose us to them;whether the balance of Europe be still in our hands; and whether, duringthis long interval of peace, our power has increased in the sameproportion with that of our neighbours. France, my lords, is theconstant and hereditary enemy of Britons, so much divided from her inreligion, government, and interest, that they cannot both be prosperoustogether; as the influence of one rises, that of the other must, byconsequence, decline. Alliances may form a temporal show of friendship, but it cannot continue; for their situation produces a naturalrivalship, which every accidental circumstance has contributed toincrease. Long wars, for many reigns after the conquest, established aradical and insuperable hatred between us, nor did those wars cease tillthe reformation produced new occasions of jealousy and aversion. Francewas, by these reasons, obliged for many ages to employ all her influenceand policy in strengthening herself against us, by treaties andalliances; and in our times, has given us a new reason for jealousy byextending her commerce, and improving her manufactures. 

It has been, therefore, my lords, the settled principle of every wiseadministration, of every Briton, whose opinions were not regulated bysome other motives than those of reason, to attend, with the highestdegree of vigilance, to all the designs of the French, and oppose, withincessant diligence, every attempt to increase their force, or extendtheir influence, and to check their conquests, obstruct their alliances, and forestal their trade. 

For this great end it has been our constant endeavour to support theAustrian family, whose large dominions and numerous forces make acounterbalance on the continent to the power of France. For this end weentered into a long war, of which we still languish under theconsequences, squandered the lives of our countrymen, and mortgaged thepossessions of our posterity. For failing in the prosecution of thispurpose, for leaving France too formidable, and neglecting the interestsof the emperour, was the treaty of Utrecht censured, and the authors ofit prosecuted by the present minister; but how much he has improved theerrours of his predecessors to his own advantage, how diligent he hasbeen to rectify the miscarriages of their conduct, and supply thedefect, I shall endeavour to explain. 

It is well known, my lords, that during the regency of the duke ofOrleans, we had nothing to apprehend from French machinations; hisinterest, a tie which that nation is seldom found to break, held himsteady to his engagements with us; nor is it less known how much hedistrusted Spain, and how little, by consequence, he favoured her. Wehad, at that time, no necessity of anxiously attending to every whisperof the French court, which was sufficiently engaged in regulating theirdomestick affairs, and repairing the ruins of a destructive war; but, mylords, we ought to observe, that it had been happy for us had ourminister laboured with equal address at the same employment. 

After the death of this duke, the affairs of France were restored totheir former situation, her old schemes were revived, her ancientalliances cultivated, and her general interest pursued. Spain was againconsidered as the power which had the same views with her, and whichcould never rival, but might always assist her. 

This alliance, my lords, was intended to have been unalterably confirmedby a marriage, but as no human policy can form measures certain ofsuccess, an irreconcilable hatred was nearly produced by the measureintended to confirm a settled and indissoluble friendship. The infantawas sent back after her arrival in France, an affront which no nationwould soon have forgot, but which the general character and habitualsentiments of the Spaniards inclined them to resent beyond any otherpeople. To any one acquainted with their character in this respect, itwill readily appear, that no other insult or injury could so sensiblyaffect them, or excite so eager a desire of revenge, This, my lords, thesagacity of our minister should have discovered, this opportunity shouldhave been improved with the utmost care, by which Spain and France mightpossibly have been disunited for ages, and Britain have gained suchadvantages as would have made her the sole arbitress of Europe. 

The Spaniards were not deficient on their side, nor did they neglect tocourt our friendship, but gave us the highest proof of their confidenceby offering us the sole mediation of their differences with the emperourof Germany: but at this time it was, that the gentleman whose conduct Iam examining, obtained the chief influence in our councils, and by hispeculiar penetration discovered, that nothing was to be done which mightgive the least offence to the French. We, therefore, refused to mediate, unless French ministers might be associated with ours, which theSpaniards had too much spirit to consent to. 

Thus, my lords, was neglected the first opportunity of forming againstthe French an alliance by which they might have been awed in all theirdesigns, and by which the peace of Europe might have been longpreserved. 

The Spaniards, finding that we would not undertake to reconcile theirdifferences with the emperour of Germany, and continuing theirabhorrence of French mediators, concluded, without the intervention ofany other power, a treaty both of peace and alliance with his imperialmajesty. 

This, my lords, was the famous treaty of Vienna, the source of so manyprojects and expedients, of so much terrour and solicitude, of suchimmense expenses, and perplexed negotiations. This treaty, a paperinnocent and well-meaning, which related only to the contractingparties, kept, for some time, this nation in alarms, in apprehensions ofconspiracies, and expectations of invasions. 

To this treaty, had we singly regarded our own affairs, without applyingto France for instructions, we ought to have acceded, by which we shouldhave divided the interest of the house of Bourbon, broken thecombination of these pontifical powers, and, by improving one luckyincident, obtained what our arms and our politicks had never, hitherto, been able to accomplish. 

But the French, sensible of their danger, and well acquainted with ourminister, contrived an expedient which, indeed, would not often havesucceeded, but which was so well adapted to the intellects of thisgentleman, that it extricated them from all their difficulties. 

They told us, my lords, and, what is yet more wonderful, they prevailedupon us to believe, that in this dreadful treaty of Vienna, it wasstipulated between the German emperour and Spain, that they shouldemploy their joint forces against Britain, that they should exalt thepretender to the throne, take immediate possession of Gibraltar, and, without mercy, debar us for ever from our trade both in Spain and in theWestern Indies. This his late majesty was advised to assert in hisspeech from the throne, which I desire may be read. 

Of which the following clauses were read:

"My lords and gentlemen, "The distressed condition of some of our religious brethren abroad, andthe negotiations and engagements entered into by some foreign powers, which seem to have laid the foundation of new troubles and disturbancesin Europe, and to threaten my subjects with the loss of several of themost advantageous branches of their trade, obliged me, without any lossof time, to concert with other powers such measures as might give acheck to the ambitious views of those who are endeavouring to renderthemselves formidable, and put a stop to the farther progress of suchdangerous designs. For these ends I have entered into a defensivealliance with the French king, and the king of Prussia, to which severalother powers, and particularly the Dutch, have been invited to accede, and I have not the least reason to doubt of their concurrence. Thistreaty shall, in a short time, be laid before you. 

"By these means, and by your support and assistance, I trust in God, Ishall be able not only to secure to my own subjects the enjoyment ofmany valuable rights and privileges, long since acquired for them by themost solemn treaties, but effectually to preserve the peace and balanceof Europe, the only view and end of all my endeavours. 

"It is not to be doubted, but the enemies to my government will conceivehopes, that some favourable opportunity for renewing their attempts mayoffer, from the prospect of new troubles and commotions: they arealready very busy by their instruments and emissaries in those courtswhose measures seem most to favour their purposes, in soliciting andpromoting the cause of the pretender; but I persuade myself, notwithstanding the countenance and encouragement they may havereceived, or flatter themselves with, the provision you shall make forthe safety and defence of the empire, will effectually secure me fromany attempts from abroad, and render all such projects vain andabortive. 

"When the world shall see that you will not suffer the British crown andnation to be menaced and insulted, those who most envy the presenthappiness and tranquillity of this empire, and are endeavouring to makeus subservient to their ambition, will consider their own interest andcircumstances before they make any attempt upon so brave a people, strengthened and supported by prudent and powerful alliances, and thoughdesirous to preserve the peace, able and ready to defend themselvesagainst the efforts of all aggressors. Such resolutions and suchmeasures, timely taken, I am satisfied, are the most effectual means ofpreventing a war, and continuing to us the blessings of peace andprosperity. "

Who would not have been terrified, my lords, at a treaty like this? Ourreligion was to be destroyed, our government subverted, and our tradereduced to nothing. What could a ministry, thus intimidated, do, butresign themselves implicitly to the direction of a kind neighbour, thatpromised to shelter them from the storm?

There have been ministers, my lords, in former times, who, upon hearingsuch a representation, would have considered, that Britain was anisland, that the pretender could not be forced upon us without an army, and that an army could not be transported without ships, that theemperour of Germany had neither navies nor ports, that Gibraltar mightbe easily supplied with every thing requisite for its defence, and thatany attempt made by Spain to injure our trade, might easily be punishedby intercepting their Plate fleets. 

They would then have considered whether attempts so improbable, andstipulations so absurd and ridiculous, ought to be credited upon theinformation of an ambassadour's secretary, who, as he proposed to revealhis master's secrets for a bribe, might as probably take another rewardfor imposing upon those whom he pretended to inform. Those, therefore, who advised his majesty to assert to the senate what they knew from nobetter authority, those whose daring insolence could make theirsovereign instrumental in alarming the people with false terrours, andoppressing them with unnecessary burdens, well deserve to feel asenatorial censure. 

But our ministers, my lords, were too much frighted to make suchreflections: they imagined that destruction was hanging over us, and, ina dread of arbitrary government, oppression, and persecution, concludedat Hanover a treaty with the French. 

Thus the French gained our confidence, and raised in us a distrust ofboth the powers with whom it was our interest to be united: but thealliance of the emperour of Germany with Spain made them still uneasy;and, therefore, they determined, once more, to make our credulityinstrumental in procuring a reconciliation between them and theSpaniards. 

To effect this, they kindly gave us intelligence, that when theSpaniards should receive their treasures from the Western Indies, theydesigned to employ it in favour of the pretender, and that, therefore, it was necessary to intercept it. This advice was thankfully listenedto, a fleet was fitted out, and thousands were sacrificed without anyadvantage; for the French not only forbore to assist us in theexpedition, but forbade us to seize the treasure when we had found it. 

The Spaniards, apprehending themselves attacked, omitted no opportunityof showing their resentment; they seized our ships, and laid siege toGibraltar, while our new allies looked quietly on, and expected theevent of their own scheme, which was far from being defeated by ourpolicy; for the Spaniards, finding the return of their American revenuesinsuperably obstructed, and knowing that the emperour of Germany, thatemperour who was to invade Britain, had not any power even to assistthem, were obliged to have recourse to the nation which they then hated, and to forgive the past affront, that they might obtain their goodoffices in this exigence. 

But, my lords, it was not sufficient for the designs of the French, thatthey had recovered their ancient allies the Spaniards, unless they coulddisunite them from the emperour of Germany: this it was, likewise, ourinterest to prevent, and yet this, likewise, we enabled them to effect;for they prevailed upon us to promise, in our stipulations with theSpaniards, what they had not the least claim to demand, that Spain, instead of neutral troops, should be introduced into Italy, to securecertain successions there to a son of the queen of Spain. 

With what reluctance the emperour of Germany would consent to see troopsplaced in the provinces bordering upon his dominions, which wouldcertainly, on the first occasion, be employed to invade them, it waseasy to foresee, and with what degree of good-will he would regard thoseby whom they were introduced; yet, my lords, such was the influence ofFrance, and so ardent our desire of diverting Spain from setting thepretender upon the throne of Britain, that we complied at all events, without any prospect or promise of advantage. 

Thus were the Spaniards, by being persuaded to make this demand, and we, by granting it, brought equally to ill terms with the emperour ofGermany; and France was, by procuring such agreeable conditions to theSpaniards, again considered as their most useful ally. 

That nation, my lords, is in a very unhappy state, which is reduced toadmit such terms as mediators are pleased to prescribe. We durst notrefuse the introduction of Spanish troops, nor durst we introduce themwithout the emperour of Germany's consent, which, however, he granted atan easy rate, for he demanded only that we should become guarantees ofthe Pragmatick sanction. This we gladly agreed to, and thought ourselvesso happy in purchasing, so cheaply, an opportunity of ingratiatingourselves with Spain, that we desired no other recompense. 

This treaty with the emperour of Germany, was, however, by no meansimproper, nor could we, after the errours which had been committed, doany thing more effectual to preserve the balance of Europe, andreestablish our credit. 

But, my lords, this only treaty, which it was for our interest to make, seems to have been made without any intention of observing it; for aboutthis time all the northern powers were alarmed by the approachingelection of Poland, and every nation that had any thing either to hopeor fear from the event of it, endeavoured to influence it. 

How this election was determined, my lords, and by what means, it isunnecessary to relate; but it may not be improper to remark, thatwhatever cause we may have to congratulate ourselves upon the choice, itdoes not appear that we had any part in promoting it. Nay, as it is notcommon for ministers to keep the best part of their conduct secret, there is reason for suspecting that they were not altogether withoutfoundation reported to have favoured France. 

The emperour of Germany, sensible of his own interest, promoted theelection with vigour and resolution, proportioned to the greatness ofthe danger that might have arisen from neglecting it. By this conduct hedrew upon himself the resentment of the French, who had now a pretencefor taking measures which might effectually reunite them to Spain, and, as the event showed, alienate us from the emperour, and, therefore, invindication of the claim of Stanislaus, declared war upon Germany, inconjunction with Spain. 

Now, my lords, the emperour learned to set the true value upon hisalliance with Britain, and all Europe had an opportunity of remarkingour spirit, our power, and our vigilance. The troops which we prevailedupon his imperial majesty to admit into Italy, were now drawn out of thegarrisons against him, his dominions were attacked on each side, byformidable enemies, and his British allies looked with tranquillity andunconcern upon the difficulties into which they had betrayed him. Theliberties of Europe were endangered by a new combination of the housesof Bourbon; and Britain, the great protectress of the rights of mankind, the great arbitress of the balance of power, either neglected or fearedto interpose. 

Of the event of the war, my lords, I need only observe, that it addednew strength to France, and contributed to such an union between her andSpain, as the most artful politician cannot hope to dissolve. 

Thus, my lords, whether by negligence, ignorance, cowardice, ortreachery, it is not easy to determine, we were made the instruments ofthe French policy. Thus was that power enabled by our assistance toretrieve all that she had lost by the ill success of her arms, and byher indecent and contemptuous treatment of Spain. Thus was the Germanemperour dispirited and weakened; thus were we deprived at once of ourallies and our reputation. 

Our loss of reputation, the greatest loss that bad measures can bringupon a nation, is made evident beyond controversy, by the insolence withwhich the Spaniards have treated us while we were flattering, enriching, and supporting them. While we were fitting out squadrons to convey theirprinces to Italy, and increasing their dominions at our own expense, they seem to have considered our good offices, not as the benefits offriends, but the drudgery of slaves, and, therefore, could scarcelyrefrain from insults while they employed us, at least when they nolonger wanted our immediate assistance. They renewed their contempt andcruelty, their robberies and oppressions; they prescribed laws to ournavigation, and laid claim to our colonies. 

To these ravages and injuries what did we oppose? What but humbleintreaties, pacifick negotiations, and idle remonstrances? Instead ofasserting our just claims, and incontestable possessions, instead ofpreventing war by threatening it, and securing ourselves from a secondinjury by punishing the first, we amused ourselves with inquiries, demands, representations, and disputes, till we became the jest of thatnation which it was in our power to distress, by intercepting theirtreasure, and to reduce to terms almost without bloodshed. 

Thus, my lords, did we proceed, new questions ever arose, and thecontroversy became more intricate; commissaries were despatched toSpain, who returned without obtaining either restitution or security, and in the mean time no opportunity was neglected of plundering ourmerchants, and insulting our flag: accounts of new confiscations and ofnew cruelties daily arrived, the nation was enraged, and the senateitself alarmed, and our ministers, at length awakened from theirtranquillity, sent orders to the envoy at the Spanish court to expeditean accommodation; these directions were immediately obeyed, and producedthe celebrated convention. 

What was given up, or what was endangered by this detestable treaty, your lordships have often had occasion to observe, and the consequencesof it were so obvious, that the nation was astonished. Every man sawthat we were either treacherously betrayed by our own ministry, or thatthe ministers were almost the only men in the kingdom utterlyunacquainted with our claims, our injuries, and our danger. 

A war could now no longer be avoided, it was not in the power of theministry any longer to refuse to send out our fleets, and make anappearance of hostile measures; but they had still some expedientsremaining to shelter the Spaniards from our resentment, and to maketheir country yet more contemptible: they could contrive such orders fortheir admirals as should prevent them from destroying their enemies withtoo little mercy; and if any one was suspected of intentions lesspacifick, there were methods of equipping his fleet in such a manner aswould effectually frustrate his schemes of revenge, reprisals, anddestruction. 

These, my lords, are not the murmurs of the disappointed, nor theinsinuations of the factious; it is well known to our countrymen and toour enemies, how ill admiral Vernon was furnished with naval andmilitary stores, and how little his importunate demands of a supply wereregarded. What opportunities were lost, and what advantages neglected, may be conjectured from the success of his inconsiderable force. A verylittle reflection on the situation and state of those countries willeasily satisfy your lordships, how far a small body of land-forces mighthave penetrated, what treasures they might have gained, and whatconsternation they might have spread over the whole Spanish America. 

That our squadrons in the Mediterranean have been, at least, useless, that they have sailed from point to point, and from one coast toanother, only to display the bulk of our ships, and to show the opulenceof our nation, can require no proof: I wish, my lords, there was lessreason for suspecting that they acted in concert with our enemies, thatthey retired from before their ports only to give them an opportunity ofescaping, and that they, in reality, connived at some attempts whichthey were, in appearance, sent to prevent. 

There are some miscarriages in war, my lords, which every reasonable manimputes to chance, or to causes of which the influence could not beforeseen; there are others that may justly be termed the consequences ofmisconduct, but of misconduct involuntary and pardonable, of adisregard, perhaps, of some circumstances of an affair produced by tooclose an attention to others. But there are miscarriages, too, for whichcandour itself can find no excuses, and of which no other causes can beassigned than cowardice or treachery. From the suspicion of one, thepast actions of the admiral who commands our fleet in those seas willsecure him, but I know not whether there are now any that will attemptto clear the minister's character from the imputation of the other. 

All the insolence of the Spaniards, a nation by no means formidable, isthe consequence of the reunion of the houses of Bourbon; a reunion whichcould not easily have been accomplished, but by the instrumentaloffices of our ministry, whom, therefore, the nation has a right tocharge with the diminution of its honour, and the decay of its trade. 

Nor has our trade, my lords, been only contracted and obstructed by thepiracies of Spain, but has been suffered to languish and decline athome, either by criminal negligence, or by their complaisance forFrance, which has given rise to our other calamities. The state of ourwoollen manufactures is well known, and those whose indolence or love ofpleasure keeps them strangers to the other misfortunes of their country, must yet have been acquainted with this, by the daily accounts of riotsand insurrections, raised by those who, having been employed in thatmanufacture, can provide for their families by no other business, andare made desperate by the want of bread. 

We are told, my lords, by all parties, and told with truth, that ourmanufactures decline, because the French have engrossed most of theforeign markets; and it is not denied even by those whose interest itmight be to' deny it, that the cloth which they ruin us by vending, ismade of our own wool, which they are suffered to procure either by thefolly of an unskilful, or the connivance of a treacherousadministration. 

If our own manufactures, my lords, had been carefully promoted, if thewhole influence of our government had been made to cooperate with theindustry of our traders, there had always been such a demand for ourwool, that they could not have afforded to purchase it at a priceequivalent to the danger of exporting it: and if any means were nowsteadily practised to prevent the exportation, our trade mustconsequently revive, because cloth is one of the necessaries of lifewhich other nations must have from Britain, when France can no longersupply them. 

But, my lords, notwithstanding the decay of trade, our expenses havenever been contracted; we have squandered millions in idle preparations, and ostentatious folly; we have equipped fleets which never left theharbour, and raised armies which were never to behold any other enemythan the honest traders and husbandmen that support them. We have, indeed, heard many reasons alleged for oppressing the empire withstanding troops, which can have little effect upon those who have nointerest to promote by admitting them: sometimes we are in danger ofinvasions, though it is not easy to imagine for what purpose any princeshould invade a nation, which he may plunder at pleasure, without theleast apprehension of resentment, and which will resign any of itsrights whenever they shall be demanded: sometimes, as we have alreadyheard, the pretender is to be set upon the throne by a sudden descent ofarmies from the clouds; and sometimes the licentiousness anddisobedience of the common people requires the restraint of a standingarmy. 

That the people are, to the last degree, exasperated and inflamed, I amfar from intending to deny, but surely they have yet been guilty of nooutrage so enormous as to justify so severe a punishment; they havegenerally confined themselves to harmless complaints, or, at least, toexecutions in effigy. The people, my lords, are enraged because they areimpoverished, and, to prevent the consequences of their anger, theirpoverty is increased by new burdens, and aggravated by the sight of anuseless, despicable herd, supported by their industry, for no otherpurpose than to insult them. 

By these useless armaments and military farces, our taxes, my lords, have been continued without diminishing our debts, and the nation seemscondemned to languish for ever under its present miseries, which, byfurnishing employment to a boundless number of commissioners, officers, and slaves, to the court, under a thousand denominations, by diffusingdependence over the whole country, and enlarging the influence of thecrown, are too evidently of use to the minister for us to entertain anyhopes of his intention to relieve us. 

Let it not be boasted that nine millions are paid, when a new debt ofseven millions appears to be contracted; nothing is more easy than toclear debts by borrowing, or to borrow when a nation is mortgaged forthe payment. 

But the weight of the present taxes, my lords, though heavier than wasperhaps ever supported by any nation for so long a time, taxes greaterthan ever were paid, to purchase neither conquests nor honours, neitherto prevent invasions from abroad, nor to quell rebellions at home, isnot the most flagrant charge of this wonderful administration, which, not contented with most exorbitant exactions, contrives to make them yetmore oppressive by tyrannical methods of collection. With what reasonthe author of the excise scheme dreads the resentment of the nation issufficiently obvious; but surely, in a virtuous and benevolent mind, thefirst sentiments that would have arisen on that occasion, would not havebeen motions of anger, but of gratitude. A whole nation was condemned toslavery, their remonstrances were neglected, their petitions ridiculed, and their detestation of tyranny treated as disaffection to theestablished government; and yet the author of this horrid scheme riotsin affluence, and triumphs in authority, and without fear, as withoutshame, lifts up his head with confidence and security. 

How much, my lords, is the forbearance of that people to be admired, whom such attacks as these have not provoked to transgress the bounds oftheir obedience, who have continued patiently to hope for legal methodsof redress, at a time when they saw themselves threatened with legalslavery, when they saw the legislative power established only for theirprotection, influenced by all possible methods of corruption to betraythem to the mercy of the ministry?

For, that corruption has found its way into one of the houses of thelegislature, is universally believed, and, without scruple, maintainedby every man in the nation, who is not evidently restrained fromspeaking as he thinks; and that any man can even be of a differentopinion, that any man can even affirm that he thinks otherwise, wouldbe, in any other age, the subject of astonishment. That an immenserevenue is divided among the members of the other house, by knownsalaries and publick employments, is apparent; that large sums areprivately scattered on pressing exigencies, that some late transactionsof the ministry were not confirmed but at a high price, the presentcondition of the civil list, a civil list vastly superiour to all theknown expenses of the crown, makes highly probable. That the commonsthemselves suspect the determinations of their assembly to be influencedby some other motives than justice and truth, is evident from the billthis day sent hither for our concurrence; and, surely, no aggravationcan be added to the crimes of that man who has patronised our enemies, and given up our navigation, sunk his country into contempt abroad, andinto poverty at home, plundered the people, and corrupted thelegislature. 

But, my lords, the minister has not only contributed, by his wickednessor his ignorance, to the present calamities, but has applied all his artand all his interest to remove from posts of honour and trust, to banishfrom the court, and to exclude from the legislature all those whosecounsels might contribute to restore the publick affairs, without anyregard to the popularity of their characters, the usefulness of theirtalents, or the importance of their past services to the crown. Had anyof these considerations prevailed, we had not seen the greatest generalin Britain dispossessed of all his preferments, dispossessed at a timewhen we are at war with one nation, and in expectation of being attackedby another far more powerful, which will, doubtless, be encouraged, byhis removal, to more daring contempt, and more vigorous measures. 

What were the motives of this procedure it is easy to discover. As hisopen defence of the present royal family in the late rebellion, exemptshim from the imputation of being disaffected to the crown, the onlycrime with which he can be charged is disaffection to the minister. 

Perhaps, my lords, the minister may have determined to have no need ofgenerals in his transactions with foreign powers; but in proportion ashe relies less upon the sword, he must depend more upon the arts ofpeaceable negotiation, and, surely, there has been another persondismissed from his employments, whose counsels it had been no reproachto have asked, and to have followed. 

The nature of my motion, my lords, makes it not necessary to produceevidence of these facts, it is sufficient that any minister isuniversally suspected; for when did an innocent man, supported by power, and furnished with every advantage that could contribute to exalt orpreserve his character, incur the general hatred of the people? But ifit could ever happen by a combination of unlucky accidents, what couldbe more for the happiness of himself, his master, and the nation, thanthat he should retire and enjoy the consciousness of his own virtue. 

His own interest, in such a retirement, I have already considered, andthat both of the prince and the people is no less apparent: while ahated minister is employed, the king will always be distrusted by thenation, and, surely, nothing can so much obstruct the publick happiness, as a want of confidence in those who are intrusted with itspreservation. 

That common fame is, in this case, sufficient, will not be questioned, when it is considered that common fame is never without a foundation infacts, that it may spread disquiet and suspicion over all the kingdom, and that the satisfaction of millions is very cheaply purchased by thedegradation of one man, who was exalted only for their benefit. 

The objection, that there is no sole minister, will create no greaterdifficulty; if there be many concerned in these transactions, _respondeat superior:_ but it is too apparent that there is, in reality, one whose influence is greater than that of any other private man, andwho is arrived at a height not consistent with the nature of the Britishgovernment; it is uncontested that there is one man to whom the peopleimpute their miseries, and by whose removal they will be appeased. 

The affairs of Europe, my lords, will probably be so much embarrassed, and the struggles between the different designs of its princes be soviolent, that they will demand all our attention, and employ all ouraddress, and it will be to the highest degree dangerous to be distractedat the same time with apprehensions of domestick troubles; yet, such isthe present unhappy state of this nation, and such is the generaldiscontent of the people, that tranquillity, adherence to thegovernment, and submission to the laws, cannot reasonably be hoped, unless the motion I shall now take leave to make your lordships, becomplied with: and I move, "That an humble address be presented to hismajesty, most humbly to advise and beseech his majesty, that he will bemost graciously pleased to remove the right honourable sir RobertWALPOLE, knight of the most noble order of the blue riband, firstcommissioner of his majesty's treasury, and chancellor of the exchequer, and one of his majesty's most honourable privy council, from hismajesty's presence and councils for ever. "

He was seconded by lord ABINGDON in the following manner:--My lords, thecopiousness and perspicuity with which the noble lord has laid down thereasons of his motion, make it neither easy nor necessary to enlargeupon them. I shall, therefore, only offer to your lordships a fewthoughts upon the authority of common fame, as the evidence upon whichthe motion is in part founded. 

That all the miscarriages of our late measures are by common fameimputed to one man, I suppose, will not be denied; nor can it, in myopinion, be reasonably required, that in the present circumstances ofthings any other proof should be brought against him. 

Common fame, my lords, is admitted in courts of law as a kind ofauxiliary or supplemental evidence, and is allowed to corroborate thecause which it appears to favour. The general regard which every wiseman has for his character, is a proof that in the estimation of allmankind, the testimony of common fame is of too great importance to bedisregarded. 

If we consider the nature of popular opinions on publick affairs, itwill be difficult to imagine by what means a persuasion not founded ontruth should universally take possession of a people; it will be yetmore difficult to believe that it should preserve its empire, and thatin opposition to every art that can be made use of to undeceive them, they should pertinaciously adhere to an errour not imbibed in theireducation, nor connected with their interest. And how has any man beenoriginally prejudiced against the present minister? Or what passion orinterest can any man gratify, by imagining or declaring his country onthe verge of ruin? The multitude, my lords, censure and praise withoutdissimulation, nor were ever accused of disguising their sentiments;their voice is, at least, the voice of honesty, and has been termed thevoice of heaven, by that party of which those affect to be thought whomit now condemns. 

Let it not be urged, that the people are easily deceived, that theythink and speak merely by caprice, and applaud or condemn without anycalm inquiry or settled determination; these censures are applicableonly to sudden tumults, and gusts of zeal excited by fallaciousappearances, or by the alarms of a false report industriouslydisseminated, but have no relation to opinions gradually propagated, andslowly received. 

If the credulity of the people exposes them to so easy an admission ofevery report, why have the writers for the minister found so littlecredit? Why have all the loud declamations, and the laboured arguments, the artful insinuations, and positive assertions, which have been formany years circulated round the nation, at the expense of thegovernment, produced no effect upon the people, nor convinced any man, who was not apparently bribed, to resign his private opinion to that ofhis patrons? Whence comes it, my lords, that falsehood is moresuccessful than truth, and that the nation is inclined to complainrather than to triumph? It is well known that the people have beencharged in all former ages, with being too much dazzled by the glitterof fortune, and the splendour of success, and bestowing their applausesnot according to the degrees of merit, but prosperity. The minister, mylords, has defeated his opponents in almost all their attempts; hisfriends have sounded victory every session, and yet the people declareagainst him; his adversaries have retired into the country with all thevexation of disappointment, and have been rewarded for theirunsuccessful efforts with general acclamations. What is it, my lords, but the power of truth, that can preserve the vanquished from ridicule, and influence the nation to believe them the only patrons of theircommerce and liberty, in opposition to all the writers and voters forthe ministry?

If we consult history, my lords, how seldom do we find an innocentminister overwhelmed with infamy? Innocent men have sometimes beendestroyed by the hasty fury, but scarcely ever by the settled hatred ofthe populace. Even that fury has generally been kindled by realgrievances, though imputed to those who had no share in producing them;but when the tempest of their first rage has subsided, they have seldomrefused to hear truth, and to distinguish the patriot from theoppressor. 

But though it should be acknowledged, my lords, that the people havebeen blinded by false representations, and that some causes yetundiscovered, some influence which never has been known to operate inany state before, hinder them from beholding their own felicity; yet, aspublick happiness is the end of government, and no man can be happy thatthinks himself miserable, it is, in my opinion, necessary to the honourof his majesty, and to the tranquillity of the nation, that yourlordships should agree to the present motion. 

The duke of NEWCASTLE answered to this effect:--My lords, it is notwithout wonder that I hear a motion so uncommon and important, a motionwhich may be reasonably supposed to have been long premeditated, and ofwhich such affecting expectations have been raised, so weakly supportedby evidence. I cannot think that any other attestation is needful forthe vindication of the right honourable gentleman, whose conduct is thisday to be examined, than the declaration of the noble lord, that thereappears no positive evidence against him. 

The pretence that no evidence can be expected while he continues in hispresent station, is too openly fallacious to impose upon your lordships;for why should his influence be greater, and his power less resistiblethan that of other ministers, who are well known to have found accusersin the height of their authority, and to have been dragged to punishmentalmost from behind the throne?

It is sufficiently known, that during the continuance of thisadministration, many have been dismissed from their employments, whoappear not altogether unaffected with the loss, and from whoseresentment a discovery of wicked measures might be reasonably expected, as their acquaintance with the secrets of the government must have givenopportunities of detecting them. If, therefore, no particular crimes arecharged upon him, if his enemies confine themselves to obscure surmises, and general declamations, we may reasonably conclude, that his behaviourhas been at least blameless. For what can be a higher encomium than thesilence of those who have made it the business of years to discoversomething that might be alleged against him on the day of trial. 

I suppose that no man can question the penetration of those noble lordswho have opened this debate, and I, my lords, shall be very far frominsinuating that cowardice suppresses any of their sentiments. As thehighest reproach that can be thrown upon any man, is to suggest that hespeaks what he does not think; the next degree of meanness would be tothink what he dares not speak, when the publick voice of his countrycalls upon him. 

When, therefore, popular reports are alleged as the foundation of theaddress, it is probable that it is not founded, in reality, upon knowncrimes or attested facts, and if the sudden blasts of fame may beesteemed equivalent to attested accusations, what degree of virtue canconfer security?

That the clamour is so loud and so general as it is represented, I candiscover no necessity of admitting; but, however the populace may havebeen exasperated against him, we are surely not to be influenced bytheir complaints, without inquiring into the cause of them, andinforming ourselves whether they proceed from real hardships, unnecessary severities, and calamities too heavy to be borne, or fromcaprice, and inconstancy, idle rumours, and artful representations. 

I very readily allow, my lords, that nothing has been left unattemptedthat might fill the people with suspicion and discontent. Thatinevitable calamities have been imputed to misconduct, or to treachery, and even the inconstancy of the winds and severity of the weathercharged upon the right honourable gentleman, the daily libels that arein every man's hand, are a standing evidence; and though I should grantthat the people never complain without cause, and that their burdens arealways heavy before they endeavour to shake them off, yet it will by nomeans follow, that they do not sometimes mistake the cause of theirmiseries, and impute their burdens to the cruelty of those whose utmostapplication is employed to lighten them. 

Common fame is, therefore, my lords, no sufficient ground for such acensure as this, a censure that condemns a man long versed in highemployments, long honoured with the confidence of his sovereign, anddistinguished by the friendship of the most illustrious persons in thenation, to infamy and contempt, unheard, and even unaccused; for heagainst whom nothing is produced but general charges, supported by theevidence of common fame, may be justly esteemed to be free fromaccusation. 

That other evidence will appear against him when he shall be reduced, inconsequence of our agreeing to this motion, to the level with hisfellow-subjects, that all informations are now precluded by the terroursof resentment, or the expectations of favour, has been insinuated by thenoble lord, who made the motion: whether his insinuation be founded onlyupon conjecture, whether it be one of those visions which are raised byhope in a warm imagination, or upon any private informationscommunicated to his lordship, I pretend not to determine; but if we mayjudge from the known conduct of the opposition, if we consider theirfrequent triumphs before the battle, and their chimerical schemes ofdiscoveries, or prosecutions and punishments, their constant assuranceof success upon the approach of a new contest, and their dailypredictions of the ruin of the administration, we cannot but suspectthat men so long accustomed to impose upon themselves, and flatter oneanother with fallacious hopes, may now, likewise, be dreaming ofintelligence which they never will receive, and amusing themselves withsuspicions which they have no reasonable expectation of seeingconfirmed. 

And to confess the truth, my lords, if I may be allowed, in imitation ofthese patrons of their country, to indulge my own imagination, andpresume to look forward to the future conduct of those who have exertedsuch unwearied industry in their attempts upon the administration, andso long pursued the right honourable gentleman with inquiries, examinations, rhetorick, and ridicule, I cannot but find myself inclinedto question whether, after their motion shall have been received in thishouse, and their petition granted by his majesty, they will verysolicitously inquire after evidence, or be equally diligent in thediscovery of truth, as in the persecution of the minister. 

I am afraid, my lords, that they will be too deeply engaged in the careof making a dividend of the plunder in just proportions, to find leisurefor pursuit of the enemy, and that the sight of vacant posts, largesalaries, and extensive power, will revive some passions, which the loveof their country has not yet wholly extinguished, and leave in theirattention no room for deep reflections, and intricate inquiries. Therehave formerly, my lords, been patriots, who, upon a sudden advancementto a place of profit, have been immediately lulled into tranquillity, learned to repose an implicit confidence in the ministers, forgotten toharangue, threaten, inquire, and protest, and spent the remaining partof their lives in the harmless amusement of counting their salaries, perquisites, and gratuities. 

How great, my lords, would be the disappointment of the people, thatunhappy people which has been long neglected and oppressed, which sojustly detests the minister, and calls so loudly for vengeance, whenthey shall see their defenders remit the vigour of the pursuit, whenonce the minister flies before them, and instead of driving him intoexile, contend about his places!

Unhappy then surely, my lords, would the nation be: the administration, we are told, is already universally abhorred, and its hope is only inthe opposition; but should the zeal of the patriots once grow cold, should they discover to the publick, that they have been labouring notfor general liberty, but for private advantage; that they were enemiesto power only because it was not in their hands; and disapproved themeasures of the government only because they were not consulted; howinevitably must the people then sink into despair; how certain must theythen imagine their destruction?

It seems, therefore, my lords, equally prudent and just to reject thismotion, till better proof shall be brought to support it; lest, bycomplying with it, we should heighten rather than appease the discontentof the people; lest we should too soon deprive them of their onlyconsolation, and expose the patriots to censure, without vindicating theministry. 

In my opinion, my lords, all who have approved the conduct of thepresent ministry, must necessarily join in rejecting the motion, ascruel and unequitable, and incline to support a just, and continue awise administration; and all those whom the restless clamours of theopposite party have persuaded to regard them as arbitrary, corrupt, andperfidious, must, if they are true friends to their country, and steadyexacters of justice, resolve to defer their compliance, in order tobring to light the evidences necessary for a legal conviction, andseverer punishment. 

That these evidences will never be found, and that, therefore, no legalpunishment will ever be inflicted, we may reasonably collect from theinjustice of the laboured charge which your lordships have now heard; acharge drawn up with all the assistance of senatorial and politicalknowledge, and displayed with all the power of eloquence, a collectionof every occurrence for many years, of which any circumstance could beshown in an unfavourable light, and a recapitulation of all the measureswhich have miscarried by unforeseen events, or which the populace havebeen persuaded to dislike. 

In the administration of governments, my lords, many measures reasonableand just, planned out in pursuance of a very exact knowledge of thestate of things then present, and very probable conjectures concerningfuture events, have yet failed to produce the success which wasexpected; they have been sometimes defeated by the inconstancy ordishonesty of those who are equally engaged in them, and sometimesfrustrated by accidents, of which only providence has the disposal. Itwill even be allowed, my lords, that the ministry have been sometimesmistaken in their conjectures, and, perhaps, deceived by theirintelligence, but I will presume to say, it never will be discoveredthat they willingly betrayed, or heedlessly neglected their trust, thatthey ever oppressed their country with unnecessary burdens, or exposedit to be insulted by foreign powers. Nor will it, perhaps, be found thatthey ever appeared grossly ignorant of the publick interest, or failedto discover any obvious truth, or foresee any probable contingencies. 

But, my lords, I am willing to confess that they cannot judge of eventsto come with such unerring and demonstrative knowledge as theiropponents can obtain of them after they have happened; and they areinclined to pay all necessary deference to the great sagacity of thosewonderful prognosticators, who can so exactly _foresee_ the _past_. Theyonly hope, my lords, that you will consider how much harder their taskis than that of their enemies; they are obliged to determine very oftenupon doubtful intelligence, and an obscure view of the designs andinclinations of the neighbouring powers; and as their informers may beeither treacherous or mistaken, and the interests of other states aresubject to alterations, they may be sometimes deceived and disappointed. But their opponents, my lords, are exempt, by their employment, from thelaborious task of searching into futurity, and collecting theirresolutions, from a long comparison of dark hints and minutecircumstances. Their business is not to lead or show the way, but tofollow at a distance, and ridicule the perplexity, and aggravate themistakes of their guides. They are only to wait for consequences, which, if they are prosperous, they misrepresent as not intended, or pass overin silence, and are glad to hide them from the notice of mankind. But ifany miscarriages arise, their penetration immediately awakes, they see, at the first glance, the fatal source of all our miseries, they areastonished at such a concatenation of blunders, and alarmed with themost distracting apprehensions of the danger of their country. 

Accusation of political measures is an easy province; easy, my lords, inthe same proportion as the administration of affairs is difficult; forwhere there are difficulties there will be some mistakes; and wherethere are mistakes, there will be occasions of triumph, to the factiousand the disappointed. But the justice of your lordships will certainlydistinguish between errours and crimes, and between errours of weaknessand inability, and such as are only discoverable by consequences. 

I may add, my lords, that your wisdom will easily find the differencebetween the degree of capacity requisite for recollecting the past, andforeknowing the future; and expect that those whose ambition incitesthem to endeavour after a share in the government of their country, should give better proofs of their qualifications for that high trust, than mere specimens of their memory, their rhetorick, or their malice. 

Even the noble lord, who must be confessed to have shown a veryextensive acquaintance with foreign affairs, and to have very accuratelyconsidered the interests and dispositions of the princes of Europe, hasyet failed in the order of time, and by one errour very much invalidatedhis charge of misconduct in foreign affairs. 

The treaty of Vienna, my lords, was not produced by the rejection of theinfanta, unless a treaty that was made before it could be theconsequence of it; so that there was no such opportunity thrown into ourhands as the noble lord has been pleased to represent. Spain haddiscovered herself our enemy, and our enemy in the highest degree, before the French provoked her by that insult; and, therefore, how muchsoever she might be enraged against France, there was no prospect thatshe would favour us, nor could we have courted her alliance without thelowest degree of meanness and dishonour. 

See then, my lords, this atrocious accusation founded upon false dates, upon a preposterous arrangement of occurrences; behold it vanish intosmoke at the approach of truth, and let this instance convince us howeasy it is to form chimerical blunders, and impute gross follies to thewisest administration; how easy it is to charge others with mistakes andhow difficult to avoid them. 

But we are told, my lords, that the dangers of the confederacy at Viennawere merely imaginary, that no contract was made to the disadvantage ofour dominions, or of our commerce, and that if the weakness of theSpaniards and Germans had contrived such a scheme, it would soon havebeen discovered by them to be an airy dream, a plan impossible to bereduced to execution. 

We have been amused, my lords, on this occasion with great profusion ofmirth and ridicule, and have received the consolation of hearing thatBritain is an island, and that an island is not to be invaded withoutships. We have been informed of the nature of the king's territories, and of the natural strength of the fortress of Gibraltar; but the noblelord forgot that though Britain has no dominions on the continent, yetour sovereign has there a very extensive country, which, though we arenot to make war for the sake of strengthening or enlarging it, we are, surely, to defend when we have drawn an invasion upon it. 

The weakness of the Spaniards, my lords, has been also much enlargedupon, but the strength of the jacobites at home has been passed over insilence, though it is apparent how easily the pretender might havelanded here, and with what warmth his cause would have been espoused, not only by those whose religion avowed and professed makes them theenemies of the present royal family, but by many whom prospects ofinterest, the love of novelty, and rage of disappointment, might haveinclined to a change. 

That no such stipulations were made by that treaty, that no injury wasintended to our commerce, nor any invasion proposed in favour of thepretender, are very bold assertions, and though they could be supportedby all the evidence that negatives admit of, yet will not easily bebelieved by your lordships, in opposition to the solemn assurances ofhis late majesty. It is evident, from this instance, how much prejudiceprevails over argument; they are ready to condemn the right honourablegentleman to whom they give the title of sole minister, upon thesuffrage of common fame, yet will not acquit him upon the testimony ofthe king himself. 

But, my lords, the arguments alleged to prove the improbability of sucha confederacy, are so weak in themselves, that they require no suchillustrious evidence to overbalance them. For upon what are theyfounded, but upon the impossibility of executing such designs?

It is well known, my lords, how differently different parties considerthe same cause, the same designs, and the same state of affairs. Everyman is partial in favour of his own equity, strength, and sagacity. Whocan show that the same false opinion of their own power, and of ourintestine divisions, which now prompts the Spaniards to contend with us, might not then incite them to invade us, or at least to countenance theattempts of one, whom they are industriously taught to believe thegreatest part of the nation is ready to receive?

That they might have injured our trade is too evident from our presentexperience, and that they would have supported the Ostend company, whichthey espoused in an open manner, is undeniable. Nor is it in the leastunlikely, that, elated with the certain power of doing much mischief, and with the imaginary prospects of far greater effects, they mightengage in a confederacy, and farther attempts against us. 

I am far from imagining, my lords, that it was in the power of theGermans and Spaniards united to force the pretender upon us, though wehad stood alone against them; but the impossibility of succeeding intheir design was not then so apparent to them as it is at present to us;they had many reasons to wish, and therefore would not be long withoutsome to believe it practicable; and it was not the danger but the insultthat determined his late majesty to enter into an alliance with France. 

War, my lords, is always to be avoided, if the possessions andreputation of a people can be preserved without it; it was, therefore, more eligible to oblige them to lay aside their scheme while it was yetonly in idea, than to defeat it in its execution. And an alliance withFrance effectually restrained the emperour, as our fleets in Americareduced the Spaniards to desire peace. 

Why we did not seize the cargo of the galleons, has been often asked, and as often such answers have been returned as ought to satisfy anyrational examiner. We did not seize them, my lords, because a largerpart belonged to other nations than to the Spaniards, and because theinterests of our trade made it convenient not to exasperate theSpaniards, so far as to render a reconciliation very difficult. 

In the terms of this reconciliation, my lords, it is charged upon theministry, that they were guilty of contributing to the power of thehouse of Bourbon, by stipulating that Spain, instead of neutral troops, should be introduced into Italy. That those troops were less agreeableto the emperour cannot be denied, but it has already been shown howlittle reason we had to consult his satisfaction; and with regard to theadvantages gained by the French and Spaniards in the late war, a verysmall part of them can be ascribed to six thousand troops. 

With as little reason, my lords, is the charge advanced of neglecting topreserve the balance of Europe, by declining to assist the emperouragainst the French; for the intention of the war seems to have beenrather revenge than conquest, and the emperour rather exchanged thanlost his dominions. 

That we declined engaging too far in the affairs of the continent, proceeded, my lords, from a regard to the trade of the nation, which isnot only suspended and interrupted during the time of war, but oftenthrown into another channel, out of which it is the business of manyyears to recover it. 

Nor have the ministry, my lords, deviated from their regard to trade, intheir transactions with Spain, which have been the subject of so muchclamour, and such pathetick declamations; they always knew what thenation now feels, that the merchants would suffer much more from a warthan from piracies and depredations, which, however, they were far fromsubmitting to, and for which they constantly made demands ofsatisfaction. To these demands they received such answers, as, if theyhad been sincere, would have left the nation no room to complain; butwhen it was discovered that nothing but verbal satisfaction was to beexpected, the security of our trade, and the honour of our country, demanded that war should be declared. 

The conduct of the war, my lords, has been frequently the subject ofcensure; we are told of the inactivity of one fleet, and the imperfectequipment of another, the escape of our enemies, and the interception ofour trading ships. War, my lords, is confessed to be uncertain, and illsuccess is not always the consequence of bad measures: naval wars are bythe nature of the element on which they are to be conducted, moreuncertain than any other; so that, though it cannot but be suspectedthat the common people will murmur at any disappointment, call everymisfortune a crime, and think themselves betrayed by the ministry, ifSpain is not reduced in a single summer, it might be reasonably hoped, that men enlightened by a long familiarity with the accounts of past, and instructed by personal experience in national transactions, willproduce stronger arguments than want of success, when they charge theministry with misconduct in war. 

But, my lords, they have not any misfortunes to complain of; nor is theaccusation, that we have been defeated ourselves, but that we have notenough molested our enemies. Of this, my lords, it is not easy to judge, at a distance from the scene of action, and without a more accurateknowledge of a thousand minute circumstances, which may promote orretard a naval expedition. It is undoubtedly true, my lords, that manyof our merchant ships have been taken by the enemy; but it is notcertain that they do not murmur equally that they have been obstructedin their commerce, and have been so little able to interrupt ours, sincethey have so many advantages from the situation of their coasts. When wereckon those that are lost, let us not forget to number those that haveescaped. If admiral Vernon's fleet was ill provided with arms andammunition, even then, let all censure be suspended till it can beproved that it was ill furnished by the fault of the ministry. 

Nothing is more common, my lords, in all naval wars, than sudden changesof fortune; for on many occasions an accidental gust of wind, orunexpected darkness of the weather, may destroy or preserve a fleet fromdestruction, or may make the most formidable armaments absolutelyuseless; and in the present disposition of some people towards theministry, I should not wonder to hear an alteration of wind charged uponthem. 

For what objections may they not expect, my lords, when all thedisadvantages which the nation suffers from the enemies of his majesty, are imputed to them; when daily endeavours are used to make themsuspected of favouring arbitrary power, for maintaining an army whichnothing has made necessary but the struggles of those men whoseprinciples have no other tendency than to enslave their country. Let notour domestick animosities be kept alive and fomented by a constantopposition to every design of the administration, nor our foreignenemies incited by the observation of our divisions, to treat us withinsolence, interrupt our trade, prescribe bounds to our dominions, andthreaten us with invasions--and the army may safely be disbanded. 

For the ministry, my lords, are not conscious of having consulted anything but the happiness of the nation, and have, therefore, noapprehensions of publick resentment, nor want the protection of an armedforce. They desire only the support of the laws, and to them theywillingly appeal from common fame and unequitable charges. 

I mention the ministry, my lords, because I am unacquainted with any manwho either claims or possesses the power or title of sole minister. Iown, in my province, no superiour but his majesty, and am willing andready to answer any charge which relates to that part of the publickbusiness which I have had the honour to transact or direct. 

A great part of what I have now offered was, therefore, no otherwisenecessary on the present occasion, than because silence might haveappeared like a consciousness of misconduct, and have afforded a newsubject of airy triumph to the enemies of the administration; for veryfew of the transactions which have been so severely censured, fell underthe particular inspection of the right honourable gentleman against whomthe motion is levelled; he was not otherwise concerned in counselling orin ratifying, than as one of his majesty's privy council; and, therefore, though they should be defective, I do not see how it isreasonable or just, that he should be singled out from the rest fordisgrace or punishment. 

The motion, therefore, my lords, appears to me neither founded on facts, nor law, nor reason, nor any better grounds than popular caprice, andprivate malevolence. 

If it is contrary to law to punish without proof; if it is not agreeableto reason that one should be censured for the offences of another; if itis necessary that some crime should be proved before any man can sufferas a criminal, then, my lords, I am convinced that your lordships willbe unanimous in rejecting the motion. 

The duke of ARGYLE spoke next, as follows:--My lords, if we willobstinately shut our eyes against the light of conviction; if we willresolutely admit every degree of evidence that contributes to supportthe cause which we are inclined to favour, and to reject the plainestproofs when they are produced against it, to reason and debate is tolittle purpose: as no innocence can be safe that has incurred thedispleasure of partial judges, so no criminal that has the happiness ofbeing favoured by them, can ever be in danger. 

That any lord has already determined how to vote on the presentoccasion, far be it from me to assert: may it never, my lords, besuspected that private interest, blind adherence to a party, personalkindness or malevolence, or any other motive than a sincere andunmingled regard for the prosperity of our country, influences thedecisions of this assembly; for it is well known, my lords, thatauthority is founded on opinion; when once we lose the esteem of thepublick, our votes, while we shall be allowed to give them, will be onlyempty sounds, to which no other regard will be paid than a standing armyshall enforce. 

The veneration of the people, my lords, will not easily be lost: thishouse has a kind of hereditary claim to their confidence and respect;the great actions of our ancestors are remembered, and contribute to thereputation of their successours; nor do our countrymen willingly suspectthat they can be betrayed by the descendants of those, by whose braveryand counsels they have been rescued from destruction. 

But esteem must languish, and confidence decline, unless they arerenewed and reanimated by new acts of beneficence; and the higherexpectations the nation may have formed of our penetration to discoverits real advantages, and of our steadiness to pursue them, the moreviolent will be its resentment, if it shall appear, on this importantquestion, that we are either ignorant or timorous, that we areunconcerned at the miseries of the people, or content ourselves withpitying what our ancestors never failed to redress. 

Let us, therefore, my lords, for our own interest, attend impartially tothe voice of the people; let us hear their complaints with tenderness, and if, at last, we reject them, let it be evident that they wereimpartially heard, and that we only differed from them because we werenot convinced. 

Even then, my lords, we shall suffer, for some time, under the suspicionof crimes, from which I hope we shall always be free; the people willimagine that we were influenced by those whose interest it appears tocontinue their miseries, and, my lords, all the consolation that will beleft us, must arise from the consciousness of having done our duty. 

But, my lords, this is to suppose what I believe no history can furnishan example of; it is to conceive that we may inquire diligently afterthe true state of national affairs, and yet not discover it, or not beable to prove it by such evidence as may satisfy the people. 

The people, my lords, however they are misrepresented by those who, froma long practice of treating them with disregard, have learned to thinkand speak of them with contempt, are far from being easily deceived, andyet farther from being easily deceived into an opinion of their ownunhappiness: we have some instances of general satisfaction, and anunshaken affection to the government, in times when the publick good hasnot been very diligently consulted, but scarcely any of perpetualmurmurs and universal discontent, where there have been plain evidencesof oppression, negligence, or treachery. 

Let us not, therefore, my lords, think of the people as of a herd to beled or driven at pleasure, as wretches whose opinions are founded uponthe authority of seditious scribblers, or upon any other than that ofreason and experience; let us not suffer them to be at once oppressedand ridiculed, nor encourage, by our example, the wretched advocates forthose whom they consider as their enemies, nor represent them asimputing to the misconduct of the ministry the late contrariety of thewinds, and severity of the winter. 

The people, my lords, if they are mistaken in their charge, are mistakenwith such evidence on their side, as never misled any nation before; notonly their reason but their senses must have betrayed them; and thosemarks of certainty that have hitherto established truth, must havecombined in the support of falsehood. 

They are persuaded, my lords, too firmly persuaded, to yield up theiropinions to rhetorick, or to votes, or any proof but demonstration, thatthere is a _first_, or, to speak in the language of the nation, a _sole_minister, one that has the possession of his sovereign's confidence, andthe power of excluding others from his presence, one that exalts anddegrades at his pleasure, and distributes, for his own purposes, therevenues of his master, and the treasure of the nation. 

Of this, my lords, can it be maintained that they have no proof? Canthis be termed a chimerical suspicion, which nothing can be produced tosupport? How can power appear but by the exercise of it? What can proveany degree of influence or authority, but universal submission andacknowledgment? And surely, my lords, a very transient survey of thecourt and its dependents, must afford sufficient conviction, that thisman is considered by all that are engaged in the administration, as theonly disposer of honours, favours, and employments. 

Attend to any man, my lords, who has lately been preferred, rewarded, orcaressed, you will hear no expressions of gratitude but to that _man_;no other benefactor is ever heard of, the royal bounty itself isforgotten and unmentioned, nor is any return of loyalty, fidelity, oradherence professed, but to the minister; the minister! a term which, however lately introduced, is now in use in every place in the kingdom, except this house. 

Preferments, my lords, whether civil, ecclesiastical, or military, areeither wholly in his hands, or those who make it the business of theirlives to discover the high road to promotion, are universally deceived, and are daily offering their adorations to an empty phantom that hasnothing to bestow; for, no sooner is any man infected with avarice orambition, no sooner is extravagance reduced to beg new supplies from thepublick, or wickedness obliged to seek for shelter, than this man isapplied to, and honour, conscience, and fortune offered at his feet. 

Did either those whose studies and station give them a claim toadvancement in the church, or those whose bravery and long serviceentitle them to more honourable posts in the army; did either those whoprofess to understand the laws of their own country, or they who declarethemselves versed in the interests and transactions of foreign powers, apply to any other man for promotion or employment, he might then, indeed, be called the _chief_, but not properly the _sole_ minister. 

But it is well known, my lords; many of us know it too well, thatwhatever be the profession or the abilities of any person, there is nohope of encouragement or reward by any other method than that ofapplication to this man, that he shall certainly be disappointed whoshall attempt to rise by any other interest, and whoever shall dare todepend on his honesty, bravery, diligence, or capacity, or to boast anyother merit than that of implicit adherence to his measures, shallinevitably lie neglected and obscure. 

For this reason, my lords, every one whose calmness of temper can enablehim to support the sight, without starts of indignation and sallies ofcontempt, may daily see at the levee of this great man, what I amashamed to mention, a mixture of men of all ranks and all professions, of men whose birth and titles ought to exalt them above the meanness ofcringing to a mere child of fortune, men whose studies ought to havetaught them, that true honour is only to be gained by steady virtue, andthat all other arts, all the low applications of flattery and servilitywill terminate in contempt, disappointment, and remorse. 

This scene, my lords, is daily to be viewed, it is ostentatiouslydisplayed to the sight of mankind, the minister amuses himself inpublick with the splendour, and number, and dignity of his slaves; andhis slaves with no more shame pay their prostrations to their master inthe face of day, and boast of their resolutions to gratify and supporthim. And yet, my lords, it is inquired why the people assert that thereis a _sole_ minister?

Those who deny, my lords, that there is a _sole_ minister to whom themiscarriages of the government may justly be imputed, may easilypersuade themselves to believe that there have been no miscarriages, that all the measures were necessary, and well formed, that there isneither poverty nor oppression felt in the nation, that our compliancewith France was no weakness, and that our dread of the treaty of Viennawas not chimerical. 

The treaty of Vienna, my lords, which has been the parent of so manyterrours, consultations, embassies, and alliances is, I find, not yet tobe acknowledged, what it certainly was, a mere phantom, an emptyillusion, sent by the arts of the French to terrify our ministry. Hislate majesty's testimony is cited to prove that stipulations were reallyentered into by the two powers allied by that treaty, to destroy ourtrade, subvert our constitution, and set a new king upon the throne, without consent of the nation. 

Such improbabilities, my lords, ought, indeed, to be proved by a hightestimony, by a testimony which no man shall dare to question orcontradict; for as any man is at liberty to consult his reason, it willalways remonstrate to him, that it is no less absurd to impute the follyof designing impossibilities to any powers not remarkable for weakcounsels, than unjust to suspect princes of intending injuries, to whichthey have not been incited by any provocation. 

But, my lords, nowithstanding the solemnity with which his late majestyhas been introduced, his testimony can prove nothing more than that hebelieved the treaty to be such as he represents, that he had beendeceived into false apprehensions and unnecessary cautions by his ownministers, as they had been imposed upon by the agents of France. 

This is all, my lords, that can be collected from the royal speech, andto infer more from it is to suppose that the king was himself a party inthe designs formed against him; for if he was not himself engaged inthis treaty, he could only be informed, by another, of the stipulations, and could only report what he had been told upon the credit of theinformer, a man, necessarily of very little credit. Thus, my lords, allthe evidence of his late majesty vanishes into nothing more than thewhisper of a spy. 

But as great stress ought, doubtless, to be laid upon intelligence whichthe nation is believed to purchase at a very high price, let it beinquired, what proofs those have who dare to suspect the sagacity of ourministers, to put in the balance against their intelligence, and it willbe discovered, my lords, that they have a testimony no less than that ofthe German emperour himself, who could not be mistaken with regard tothe meaning of the treaty concluded at his own court, and to whom itwill not be very decent to deny such a degree of veracity as may set himat least on the level with a traitor and a hireling. 

If the treaty of Vienna was an imposture, most of our misfortunes areevidently produced by the weakness of the minister; but even supposingit real, as it was only a formidable mockery, an idle threat, that couldnever be executed, it was not necessary, that in order to obviate it, weshould give ourselves implicitly into the hands of France. 

It was not necessary, my lords, that we should suffer them first toelude the treaty of Utrecht, by making a port at Mardyke, and thendirectly and openly to violate it by repairing Dunkirk. That this latteris a port contrary to treaty, the bills of entry at the custom-housedaily show; and as the customs are particularly under the inspection ofthe commissioners of the treasury, this man cannot plead ignorance ofthis infraction, were no information given him by other means. If itshould now be asked, my lords, what, in my opinion, ought to be done, Icannot advise that we should attempt to demolish it by force, or drawupon ourselves the whole power of France by a declaration of war, butwhat it may be difficult now to remedy, it was once easy to obviate. 

Had we shown the same contempt of the French power with our ancestors, and the same steadiness in our councils, the same firmness in ouralliances, and the same spirit in our treaties, that court would neverhave ventured to break a known solemn stipulation, to have exasperated abrave and determined adversary by flagrant injustice, and to haveexposed themselves to the hazard of a war, in which it would have beenthe interest of every prince of Europe who regarded justice or posterityto wish their defeat. 

Now they see us engaged in a war, my lords, they may be animated to amore daring contempt of the faith of treaties, and insult us with yetgreater confidence of success, as they cannot but remark the cowardiceor the ignorance with which we have hitherto carried on this war. Theycannot but observe that either our minister means in reality to make warrather upon the Britons than the Spaniards, or that he is totallyunacquainted with military affairs, and too vain to ask the opinion ofothers who have greater knowledge than himself. 

Nothing, my lords, is more apparent than that the minister was forced, by the continual clamours of the nation, to declare war, contrary to hisown inclination, and that he always affected to charge it upon others, and to exempt himself from the imputation of it. It is, therefore, probable that he has not acted on this occasion so wisely as even hisown experience and penetration might, if they were honestly employed, enable him to act, and that he has suffered our counsels to beembarrassed; that he sees with great tranquillity those suffering by thewar, at whose request it was begun, and imagines it a proof of theexcellence of his own scheme, that those who forced him to break it, mayin time repent of their importunities. 

For that in the management of the war, my lords, no regard has been hadeither to the advantages which the course of our trade inevitably givesto our enemies, or to the weakness to which the extent of theirdominions necessarily subjects them, that neither the interest of themerchant has been consulted, nor the ease of the nation in generalregarded, that the treasure of the publick has been squandered, and thatour military preparations have intimidated no nation but our own, isevident beyond contradiction. 

It is well known, my lords, to every man but the minister, that we havenothing to fear from either the fleets or armies of the Spaniards, thatthey cannot invade us except in America, and that they can only molestus by intercepting our traders. This they can only effect by means oftheir privateers, whose vessels, being light and active, may be easilyfitted out, nimbly seize their prey, and speedily retire. 

The experience of the last French war, my lords, might have taught ushow much we have to fear from the activity of men incited by prospectsof private gain, and equipped with that care and vigilance, which, however omitted in national affairs, the interest of particular mennever fails to dictate. It is well known, my lords, how much we lostamidst our victories and triumphs, and how small security the merchantsreceived from our magnificent navies, and celebrated commanders. It was, therefore, surely the part of wise men, not to miscarry twice by thesame omission, when they had an opportunity to supply it. 

I need not inform your lordships of what every reader of newspapers cantell, and which common sense must easily discover, that privateers areonly to be suppressed by ships of the same kind with their own, whichmay scour the seas with rapidity, pursue them into shallow water, wheregreat ships cannot attack them, seize them as they leave the harbours, or destroy them upon their own coasts. 

That this is, in its own nature, at once obvious to be contrived, andeasy to be done, must appear upon the bare mention of it, and yet thatit has been either treacherously neglected, or ignorantly omitted, theaccounts of every day have long informed us. Not a week passes in whichour ships are not seized, and our sailors carried into a state ofslavery. Nor does this happen only on the wide ocean, which is toospacious to be garrisoned, or upon our enemies' coasts, where they mayhave, sometimes, insuperable advantages, but on our own shores, withinsight of our harbours, and in those seas of which we vainly style ournation the sovereign. 

Who is there, my lords, whose indignation is not raised at suchignominy? Who is there by whom such negligence will not be resented? Itcannot be alleged that we had not time to make better preparations; wehad expected war long before we declared it, and if the minister was theonly man by whom it was not expected, it will make another head ofaccusation. 

Nor was his disregard of our dominions less flagrant than that of ourtrade: it was publickly declared by don Geraldino, that his master wouldnever give up his claim to part of our American colonies, which yet wereneither fortified on the frontiers, nor supplied with arms, nor enabledto oppose an enemy, nor protected against him. 

One man there is, my lords, whose natural generosity, contempt ofdanger, and regard for the publick, prompted him to obviate the designsof the Spaniards, and to attack them in their own territories; a man, whom by long acquaintance I can confidently affirm to have been equal tohis undertaking, and to have learned the art of war by a regulareducation, who yet miscarried in his design, only for want of suppliesnecessary to a possibility of success. 

Nor is there, my lords, much probability that the forces sent lately toVernon will be more successful; for this is not a war to be carried onby boys: the state of the enemy's dominions is such, partly bysituation, and partly by the neglect of that man whose conduct we areexamining, that to attack them with any prospect of advantage, willrequire the judgment of an experienced commander; of one who had learnedhis trade, not in Hyde-park, but in the field of battle; of one that hasbeen accustomed to sudden exigencies and unsuspected difficulties, andhas learned cautiously to form, and readily to vary his schemes. 

An officer, my lords, an officer qualified to invade kingdoms is notformed by blustering in his quarters, by drinking on birth-nights, ordancing at assemblies; nor even by the more important services ofregulating elections, and suppressing those insurrections which areproduced by the decay of our manufactures. Many gallant colonels haveled out their forces against women and children, with the exactestorder, and scattered terrour over numerous bodies of colliers andweavers, who would find difficulties not very easily surmountable, werethey to force a pass, or storm a fortress. 

But, my lords, those whom we have destined for the conquest of America, have not even flushed their arms with such services, nor have learned, what is most necessary to be learned, the habit of obedience; they areonly such as the late frost hindered from the exercise of their trades, and forced to seek for bread in the service; they have scarcely had timeto learn the common motions of the exercise, or distinguish the words ofcommand. 

Nor are their officers, my lords, extremely well qualified to supplythose defects, and establish discipline and order in a body ofnew-raised forces; for they are absolutely strangers to service, andtaken from school to receive a commission, or if transplanted from otherregiments, have had time only to learn the art of dress. We have sentsoldiers undisciplined, and officers unable to instruct them, and sit inexpectation of conquests to be made by one boy acting under thedirection of another. 

To their commander-in-chief, my lords, I object nothing but hisinexperience, which is by no means to be imputed to his negligence, buthis want of opportunities; though of the rest, surely it may be said, that they are such a swarm as were never before sent out on militarydesigns; and, in my opinion, to the other equipments, the governmentshould have added provisions for women to nurse them. 

Had my knowledge of war, my lords, been thought sufficient to havequalified me for the chief command in this expedition, or had my advicebeen asked with regard to the conduct of it, I should willingly haveassisted my country with my person or my counsels; but, my lords, thisman, who engrosses all authority, seems, likewise, to believe that he isin possession of all knowledge, and that he is equally capable, as he isequally willing, to usurp the supreme and uncontroulable direction bothof civil and military affairs. 

Why new forces were raised, my lords, it is very easy to judge; newforces required new commissions, and new commissions produced newdependencies, which might be of use to the minister at the approachingelection; but why the new-raised troops were sent on this expeditionrather than those which had been longer disciplined, it is verydifficult to assign a reason, unless it was considered that some who hadcommands in them had likewise seats in the senate; and the minister wastoo grateful to expose his friends to danger, and too prudent to hazardthe loss of a single vote. Besides the commander-in-chief, there is butone senator in the expedition, and, my lords, he is one of too greatintegrity to be corrupted, and, though sensible of the weakness of thetroops, too brave to quit his post. How much our country may suffer bysuch absurd conduct, I need not explain to your lordships; it may easilybe conceived how much one defeat may dispirit the nation, and to whatattempts one victory may excite our enemies; those enemies whom, under asteady and wise administration, we should terrify into submission, evenwithout an army. 

I cannot forbear to remark on this occasion, how much the ignorance ofthis man has exposed a very important part of our foreign dominions tothe attempts of the Spaniards. Gibraltar, my lords, is well known to beso situated, as to be naturally in very little danger of an attack fromthe land, and to command the country to a great distance; but thesenatural advantages are now taken away, or greatly lessened, by newfortifications, erected within much less than gunshot of the place, erected in the sight of the garrison, and while one of our admirals wascruizing upon the coast. 

The pretence, my lords, upon which they were erected, was, that thoughGibraltar was granted to Britain, yet there was no district appendent toit, nor did the British authority extend beyond the walls of the town:this poor excuse did the chicanery of the Spaniards invent, and withthis, my lords, was our minister contented, either not knowing or notappearing to know what, I hope, the children whom we have despatched toAmerica have been taught, and what no man, versed in national affairs, can be ignorant of without a crime, that when a fortress is yielded toanother nation, the treaty always virtually includes, even withoutmentioning it, an extent of land as far as the guns of the fortificationcan reach. 

Whether this man, my lords, was so ignorant as to be deceived thusgrossly, or so abandoned as willingly to deceive his country, he isequally unqualified to support the office of first minister, and almostequally deserves to be prosecuted by the indignation and justice of thisassembly, in the severest manner; for how great must be his wickednesswho undertakes a charge above his abilities, when his country may beprobably ruined by his errours?

Your lordships cannot but observe, that I make use rather of the termminister than that of the administration, which others are so desirousto substitute in its place, either to elude all inquiry into themanagement of our affairs, or to cover their own shameful dependence. 

Administration, my lords, appears to me a term without a meaning, a wildindeterminate word, of which none can tell whom it implies, or howwidely it may extend: a charge against the administration may beimagined a general censure of every officer in the whole subordinationof government, a general accusation of instruments and agents, ofmasters and slaves: my charge, my lords, is against the minister, against that man, who is believed by every one in the nation, and knownby great numbers, to have the chief, and, whenever he pleases to requireit, the sole direction of the publick measures; he, to whom all theother ministers owe their elevation, and by whose smile they hold theirpower, their salaries, and their dignity. 

That this appellation is not without sufficient reason bestowed uponthat man, I have already proved to your lordships; and as it has alreadybeen made appear that common fame is a sufficient ground of accusation, it will easily be shown that this man has a just claim to the title ofminister; for if any man be told of an accusation of the minister; hewill not ask the name of the person accused. 

But there is in the motion one title conferred upon him, to which he hasno pretensions; for there is no law for styling him the firstcommissioner of the treasury. The commissioners, my lords, whodischarge, in a collective capacity, the office of lord high treasurer, are constituted by the same patent, invested with equal power and equaldignity, and I know not why this man should be exalted to anysuperiority over his associates. 

If we take, my lords, a review of our affairs, and examine the state ofthe nation in all its relations and all its circumstances, we cannot, surely, conceive that we are in a state of prosperity, unless discontentat home, and scorn abroad, the neglect of our allies, and insolence ofour enemies, the decay of trade, and multitude of our imposts, are to beconsidered as proofs of a prosperous and nourishing nation. 

Will it be alleged, my lords, has this man one friend adventurous enoughto assert, in open day, that the people are not starving by thousands, and murmuring by millions, that universal misery does not overspread thenation, and that this horrid series of calamities is not universally, among all conditions, imputed to the conduct of this man?

That great evils are felt, my lords, no Briton, I am certain, whoconverses promiscuously with his countrymen, will attempt to dispute, and until some other cause more proportioned to the effect shall beassigned, I shall join the publick in their opinion, and while I thinkthis man the author of our miseries, shall conclude it necessary tocomply with the motion. 

Lord HARDWICK spoke next, to the following effect:--My lords, though Ivery readily admit that crimes ought to be punished, that a treacherousadministration of publick affairs is, in a very high degree, criminal, that even ignorance, where it is the consequence of neglect, deservesthe severest animadversion, and that it is the privilege and duty ofthis house to watch over the state of the nation, and inform his majestyof any errours committed by his ministers; yet I am far from beingconvinced either of the justice or necessity of the motion now underconsideration. 

The most flagrant and invidious part of the charge against the righthonourable gentleman appears to consist in this, that he has engrossedan exorbitant degree of power, and usurped an unlimited influence overthe whole system of government, that he disposes of all honours andpreferments, and that he is not only _first_ but _sole_ minister. 

But of this boundless usurpation, my lords, what proof has been laidbefore you? What beyond loud exaggerations, pompous rhetorick, andspecious appeals to common fame; common fame, which, at least, maysometimes err, and which, though it may afford sufficient ground forsuspicion and inquiry, was never yet admitted as conclusive evidence, where the immediate necessities of the publick did not preclude thecommon forms of examination, where the power of the offender did notmake it dangerous to attack him by a legal prosecution, or where theconduct of the accusers did not plainly discover that they were moreeager of blood than of justice, and more solicitous to destroy than toconvict. 

I hope none of these circumstances, my lords, can at present obstruct acandid and deliberate inquiry: with regard to the publick, I am not ableto discover any pressing exigencies that demand a more compendiousmethod of proceeding, than the established laws of the land, and thewisdom of our ancestors have prescribed. I know not any calamity thatwill be aggravated, nor any danger that will become move formidable, bysuffering this question to be legally tried. 

Nor is there, my lords, in the circumstances of the person accused, anything that can incite us to a hasty process; for, if what is alleged bythe noble lords is not exaggerated beyond the truth, if he isuniversally detested by the whole nation, and loaded with execrations bythe publick voice; if he is considered as the author of all ourmiseries, and the source of all our corruptions; if he has ruined ourtrade, and depressed our power, impoverished the people, and attemptedto enslave them, there is, at least, no danger of an insurrection in hisfavour, or any probability that his party will grow stronger by delays. For, my lords, to find friends in adversity, and assertors in distress, is only the prerogative of innocence and virtue. 

The gentleman against whom this formidable charge is drawn up, is, Ithink, not suspected of any intention to have recourse either to forceor flight; he has always appeared willing to be tried by the laws of hiscountry, and to stand an impartial examination; he neither opposes noreludes inquiry, neither flies from justice, nor defies it. 

And yet less, my lords, can I suspect, that those by whom he is accused, act from any motive that may influence them to desire a sentence notsupported by evidence, or conformable to truth; or that they can wishthe ruin of any man whose crimes are not notorious and flagrant, thatthey persecute from private malice, or endeavour to exalt themselves bythe fall of another. 

Let us, therefore, my lords, inquire before we determine, and sufferevidence to precede our sentence. The charge, if it is just, must be, byits own nature, easily proved, and that no proof is brought may, perhaps, be sufficient to make us suspect that it is not just. 

For, my lords, what is the evidence of common fame, which has been somuch exalted, and so confidently produced? Does not every man see that, on such occasions, two questions may be asked, of which, perhaps, neither can easily be answered, and which, yet, must both be resolvedbefore common fame can be admitted as a proof of facts. 

It is first to be inquired, my lords, whether the reports of fame arenecessarily or even probably true? A question very intricate anddiffusive, entangled with a thousand, and involving a thousand, distinctions; a question of which it may be said, that a man may veryplausibly maintain either side, and of which, perhaps, after months oryears wasted in disputation, no other decision can be obtained than whatis obvious at the first view, that they are often true, and often false, and, therefore, can only be grounds of inquiry, not reasons ofdetermination. 

But if it appear, my lords, that this oracle cannot be deceived, we arethen to inquire after another difficulty, we are to inquire, _What isfame?_

Is fame, my lords, that fame which cannot err? a report that flies, on asudden, through a nation, of which no man can discover the original; asudden blast of rumour, that inflames or intimidates a people, andobtains, without authority, a general credit? No man versed in historycan inquire whether such reports may not deceive. Is fame rather asettled opinion, prevailing by degrees, and for some time established?How long, then, my lords, and in what degree must it have beenestablished, to obtain undoubted credit, and when does it commenceinfallible? If the people are divided in their opinions, as in allpublick questions it has hitherto happened, fame is, I suppose, thevoice of the majority; for, if the two parties are equal in theirnumbers, fame will be equal; then how great must be the majority beforeit can lay claim to this powerful auxiliary? and how shall that majoritybe numbered?

These questions, my lords, may be thought, perhaps with justice, tooludicrous in this place, but, in my opinion, they contribute to show theprecarious and uncertain nature of the evidence so much confided in. 

Common fame, my lords, is to every man only what he himself commonlyhears; and it is in the power of any man's acquaintance to vitiate theevidence which they report, and to stun him with clamours, and terrifyhim with apprehensions of miseries never felt, and dangers invisible. But, without such a combination, we are to remember, that most menassociate with those of their own opinions, and that the rank of thosethat compose this assembly naturally disposes such as are admitted totheir company, to relate, or to invent, such reports as may befavourably received, so that what appears to one lord the general voiceof common fame, may, by another, be thought only the murmur of a pettyfaction, despicable, with regard to their numbers, and detestable, if weconsider their principles. 

So difficult is it, my lords, to form any solid judgment concerning theextent and prevalence of any particular report, and the degree of creditto be given to it. The industry of a party may supply the defect ofnumbers, and some concurrent circumstances may contribute to give creditto a false report. 

But, my lords, we are ourselves appealed to as witnesses of the truth offacts, which prove him to be sole minister, of the number of hisdependents, the advancement of his friends, the disappointments of hisopponents, and the declarations made by his followers of adherence andfidelity. 

If it should be granted, my lords, that there is nothing in theserepresentations exaggerated beyond the truth, and that nothing isrepresented in an improper light, what consequence can we draw, but thatthe followers of this gentleman, make use of those arts which havealways been practised by the candidates of preferment, that theyendeavour to gain their patron's smile by flattery and panegyrick, andto keep it by assiduity and an appearance of gratitude. And if suchapplications exalted any man to the authority and title of firstminister, the nation has never, in my memory, been without some man inthat station, for there is always some one to whom ambition and avaricehave paid their court, and whose regards have been purchased at theexpense of truth. 

Nor is it to be wondered at, my lords, that posts of honour and profithave been bestowed upon the friends of the administration; for whoenriches or exalts his enemies? who will increase the influence that isto be exerted against him, or add strength to the blow that is levelledat himself?

That the right honourable gentleman is the only disposer of honours, hasnever yet appeared; it is not pretended, my lords, that he distributesthem without the consent of his majesty, nor even that hisrecommendation is absolutely necessary to the success of any man'sapplications. If he has gained more of his majesty's confidence andesteem than any other of his servants, he has done only what every manendeavours, 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 haveparticular motions of inclination or dislike; it is possible that theymay fix their affection upon objects not in the highest degree worthy oftheir regard, and overlook others that may boast of greater excellenciesand 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 ofdesert more than he can produce, who has endeavoured after it withouteffect. 

This imputed usurpation must be proved upon him either by his ownconfession, or by the evidence of others; and it has not been yetpretended that he assumes the title of _prime minister_, or indeed, thatit is applied to him by any but his enemies; and it may easily beconceived how weakly the most uncorrupted innocence would be supported, if all the aspersions of its enemies were to be received as proofsagainst it. 

Nor does it appear, my lords, that any other evidence can be broughtagainst him on this head, or that any man will stand forth and affirmthat either he has been injured himself by this gentleman, or known anyinjury done by him to another by the exertion of authority with which hewas not lawfully invested; such evidence, my lords, the laws of ourcountry require to be produced before any man can be punished, censured, or disgraced. No man is obliged to prove his innocence, but may callupon his prosecutors to support their accusation; and why thishonourable gentleman, whatever may have been his conduct, should betreated in a different manner than any other criminal, I am by no meansable to discover. 

Though there has been no evidence offered of his guilt, your lordshipshave heard an attestation of his innocence, from the noble duke whospoke first against the motion, of whom it cannot be suspected that hewould, voluntarily, engage to answer for measures which he pursued inblind compliance with the direction of another. The same testimony, mylords, can I produce, and affirm with equal truth, that in theadministration of my province, I am independent, and left entirely tothe decisions of my own judgment. 

In every government, my lords, as in every family, some, either byaccident or a natural industry, or a superiour capacity, or some othercause, will be engaged in more business, and treated with moreconfidence than others; but if every man is willing to answer for theconduct of his own province, there is all the security againstcorruption that can possibly be obtained; for if every man's regard tohis own safety and reputation will prevent him from betraying his trust, or abusing his power, much more will it incite him to prevent anymisconduct in another for which he must himself be accountable. Men are, usually, sufficiently tenacious of power, and ready to vindicate theirseparate rights, when nothing but their pride is affected by theusurpation, but surely no man will patiently suffer his province to beinvaded when he may himself be ruined by the conduct of the invader. 

Thus, my lords, it appears to me to be not only without proof, butwithout probability, and the first minister can, in my opinion, benothing more than a formidable illusion, which, when one man thinks hehas seen it, he shows to another, as easily frighted as himself, whojoins with him in propagating the notion, and in spreading terrour andresentment over the nation, till at last the panick becomes general, andwhat was at first only whispered by malice or prejudice in the ears ofignorance or credulity, is adopted by common fame, and echoed back fromthe people to the senate. 

I have hitherto, my lords, confined myself to the consideration of onesingle article of this complicated charge, because it appears to me tobe the only part of it necessary to be examined; for if once it beacknowledged that the affairs of the nation are transacted not by theminister but the administration, by the council in which every man thatsits there has an equal voice and equal authority, the blame or praiseof all the measures must be transferred from him to the council, andevery man that has advised or concurred in them, will deserve the samecensure or the same applause; as it is unjust to punish one man for thecrimes of another, it is unjust to choose one man out for punishmentfrom among many others equally guilty. 

But I doubt not, my lords, when all those measures are equitablyconsidered, there will be no punishment to be dreaded, because neithernegligence nor treachery will be discovered. For, my lords, with regardto the treaty of Vienna, let us suppose our ministers deceived byignorant or corrupt intelligence, let us admit that they were cautiouswhere there was no danger, and neglected some opportunities, which, ifthey had received better information, they might have improved to theadvantage and security of the nation. What have they done, even underall these disadvantageous suppositions, but followed the lights whichthey judged most clear, and by which they hoped to be conducted tohonour and to safety?

Policy, my lords, is very different from prescience; the utmost that canbe attained is probability, and that, for the most part, in a lowdegree. It is observed, that no man is wise but as you take intoconsideration the weakness of another; a maxim more eminently true ofpolitical wisdom, which consists, very often, only in discoveringdesigns which could never be known but by the folly or treachery ofthose to whom they are trusted. If our enemies were wise enough to keeptheir own secrets, neither our ministers nor our patriots would be ableto know or prevent their designs, nor would it be any reproach to theirsagacity, that they did not know what nobody would tell them. 

If therefore, my lords, the princes, whose interest is contrary to ourown, have been at any time served by honest and wise men, there was atime when our ministers could act only by conjecture, and might bemistaken without a crime. 

If it was always in our power to penetrate into the intentions of ourenemies, they must necessarily have the same means of making themselvesacquainted with our projects, and yet when any of them are discovered wethink it just to impute it to the negligence of the minister. 

Thus, my lords, every man is inclined to judge with prejudice andpartiality. When we suffer by the prudence of our enemies, we charge ourministers with want of vigilance, without considering, that very oftennothing is necessary to elude the most penetrating sagacity, butobstinate silence. 

If we inquire into the transactions of past times, shall we find anyman, however renowned for his abilities, not sometimes imposed upon byfalsehoods, and sometimes betrayed by his own reasonings into measuresdestructive of the purposes which he endeavoured to promote? There is noman of whose penetration higher ideas have been justly formed, or whogave more frequent proofs of an uncommon penetration into futurity thanCromwell; and yet succeeding times have sufficiently discovered theweakness of aggrandizing France by depressing Spain, and we wonder nowhow so much policy could fall into so gross an errour, as not rather tosuffer power to remain in the distant enemy, than transfer it to anotherequally divided from us by interest, and far more formidable by thesituation of his dominions. 

Cromwell, my lords, suffered himself to be hurried away by the nearprospect of present advantages, and the apprehension of present dangers;and every other man has been, in the same manner, sometimes deluded intoa preference of a smaller present advantage, to a greater which was moreremote. 

Let it not be urged, my lords, that politicks are advanced since thetime of Cromwell, and that errours which might then be committed by thewisest administration, are now gross and reproachful; we are to rememberthat every part of policy has been equally improved, and that if moremethods of discovery have been struck out, there have been likewise morearts invented of eluding it. 

When, therefore, we inquire into the conduct, or examine the abilitiesof a minister, we are not to expect that he should appear never to havebeen deceived, but that he should never be found to have neglected anyproper means of information, nor ever to have willingly given up theinterest of his country; but we are not to impute to his weakness whatis only to be ascribed to the wisdom of those whom he opposed. 

If this plea, my lords, is reasonable, it will be necessary for thosewho support the motion, to prove, not only that the treaty of Vienna wasnever made, but that the falsehood of the report either was or mighthave been known by our ministers; otherwise, those who are inclined toretain a favourable opinion of their integrity and abilities, mayconclude, that they were either not mistaken, or were led into errour bysuch delusions as would no less easily have imposed on their accusers, and that by exalting their enemies to their stations, they shall notmuch consult the advantage of their country. 

This motion, therefore, my lords, founded upon no acknowledged, noindisputable facts, nor supported by legal evidence; this motion, which, by appealing to common fame, as the ultimate judge of every man'sactions, may bring every man's life, or fortune, into danger; thismotion, which condemns without hearing, and decides without examining, Icannot but reject, and hope your lordships will concur with me. 

Lord CARLISLE spoke next, to the following purport:--My lords, the stateof the question before us has, in my opinion, not been rightlyapprehended by the noble lord who spoke last, nor is the innocence orguilt of the minister the chief question before us, because a ministermay possibly mean well, and yet be, in some particular circumstances, unqualified for his station. 

He may not only want the degree of knowledge and ability requisite tomake his good intentions effectual, but, my lords, however skilful, sagacious, or diligent, he may be so unfortunate, in some parts of hisconduct, as to want the esteem and confidence of the people. 

That a very able and honest minister may be misinformed by hisintelligence, disappointed by his agents, or baffled by other men ofequal capacity and integrity with himself, cannot be controverted; butit must surely be owned likewise, that when this has happened so often, and in cases of such importance, as to deprive him entirely of theregard and affection of the people; when he is reduced to intrenchhimself behind his privileges, to employ all the influence of the crownfor his own security, and make it his daily endeavour to create newdependencies, he ought to be pitied and discarded. 

That this is the state of the minister whose removal is desired by themotion, cannot be denied; the exaltation of his adherents to places andpreferments, the noble lord has been so far from questioning, that hehas endeavoured to justify it, and has in plain terms inquired, whowould have acted otherwise?

Every man, my lords, would have acted otherwise, whose character had notbeen blasted by general detestation; every man would have actedotherwise, who preferred the publick good to his own continuance inpower; and every man has acted otherwise who has distinguished himselfas a friend to the publick. 

It is the interest of the nation, my lords, that every office should befilled by that man who is most capable of discharging it, whatever maybe his sentiments with regard to the minister; and that his attentionshould be confined to his employment, rather than distracted by variousconcerns and opposite relations. It is, therefore, an injury to thepublick, to thrust a skilful commissioner into the senate, or toembarrass an industrious senator with a post or commission. 

Yet, my lords, that multitudes have obtained places, who have noacquaintance with the duties of their offices, nor any other pretensionsto them, than that they have seats in the other house, and that bydistinguishing himself in that assembly, any man may most easily obtainthe preferments of the crown, is too obvious for controversy. 

This practice, my lords, is a sufficient foundation for the motion; apractice so injurious to the nation, so long continued, and so openlyavowed, requires to be vigorously opposed, lest it should becomeestablished by long custom, and entangle itself with our constitution. 

If the minister, my lords, has made it necessary to employ none but hisadherents and blind followers, this necessity is alone a sufficientproof how little he confides in his own prudence or integrity, howapprehensive he is of the censure of the senate, and how desirous ofcontinuing his authority, by avoiding it. And, surely, my lords, it isour duty, as well as our right, to address the throne, that a ministershould be removed who fears the people, since few men fear withouthating, and nothing so much contributes to make any man an enemy to hiscountry, as the consciousness that he is universally abhorred. 

But, my lords, if this is done by him without necessity, if the generalpreference of his friends is only the consequence of mistaken judgment, or corrupt gratitude, this address is equally necessary, because theeffects are equally pernicious. 

When a minister, suspected of ill intentions, is continued inemployment, discontent must naturally spread over the nation; and if theend of government be the happiness of the people; if suspicion andjealousy be contrary to a state of happiness; and if this suspicionwhich generally prevails, this discontent which fills the whole nation, can only be appeased by the removal of the minister; prudence, justice, and the examples of our ancestors, ought to influence us to endeavourthat the affairs of the nation may be transferred to such whose greaterintegrity or wisdom has recommended them to the affection of the people. 

In this motion, therefore, we need not be supposed to imply that theminister is either ignorant or corrupt, but that he is disliked by thepeople, disliked to such a degree, my lords, that it is not safe for hismajesty to employ him. 

It is, doubtless, our duty, my lords, to guard both the rights of thepeople, and the prerogatives of the throne, and with equal ardour toremonstrate to his majesty the distresses of his subjects, and his owndanger. We are to hold the balance of the constitution, and neither tosuffer the regal power to be overborne by a torrent of popular fury, northe people to be oppressed by an illegal exertion of authority, or themore insupportable hardships of unreasonable laws. 

By this motion, my lords, the happiness of the people, and the securityof his majesty, are at once consulted, nor can we suppress so general aclamour without failing equally in our duty to both. 

To what, my lords, is the untimely end of so many kings and emperours tobe imputed, but to the cowardice or treachery of their counsellors, ofthose to whom they trusted that intercourse, which is always to bepreserved between a monarch and his people? Were kings honestly informedof the opinions and dispositions of their subjects, they would never, or, at least rarely, persist in such measures, as, by exasperating thepeople, tend necessarily to endanger themselves. 

It is the happiness of a British monarch, that he has a standing andhereditary council, composed of men who do not owe their advancement tothe smiles of caprice, or the intrigues of a court; who are, therefore, neither under the influence of a false gratitude, nor of a serviledependence, and who may convey to the throne the sentiments of thepeople, without danger, and without fear. But, my lords, if we areeither too negligent, or too timorous to do our duty, how is thecondition of our sovereign more safe, or more happy than that of anemperour of Turkey, who is often ignorant of any complaints made againstthe administration, till he hears the people thundering at the gates ofhis palace. 

Let us, therefore, my lords, whatever may be our opinion of the conductof the minister, inform his majesty of the discontent of his subjects, since, whether it is just or not, the danger is the same, and wheneverany danger threatens the king, we ought either to enable him to oppose, or caution him to avoid it. 

Lord CHOLMONDELEY spoke next, to the following effect:--My lords, Icannot but observe in this debate an ambition of popularity, in myopinion not very consistent with the freedom of debate, and the dignityof this assembly, which ought to be influenced by no other motive thanthe force of reason and truth. 

It has been a common method of eluding the efficacy of arguments, tocharge the opponent with blind adherence to interest, or corruptcompliance with the directions of a court; nor has it been less frequentto prevent inquiries into publick measures, by representing them as theclamours of faction, the murmurs of disobedience, and the prelude torebellion. 

So necessary, my lords, has it been always thought to be uninfluenced inour examinations by dependence or interest, that the most irrefragablereasons have lost the power of conviction, by the condition andcharacters of those by whom they were produced; and so much is itexpected from innocence and justice to despise all foreign assistance, and to stand the test of inquiry without asking the support of power, that every man has been concluded guilty that has fled for shelter tothe throne. 

And surely, my lords, if that man's suffrage is of little weight, whoappears determined to subscribe to the dictates of a minister, nogreater credit can be assigned to another, who professes himself onlythe echo of the clamours of the populace. If it be a proof of a weakcause, and consciousness of misconduct, to apply to the crown forsecurity and protection, it may be accounted an acknowledgment of theinsufficiency of arguments, when the people is called in to second them, and they are only to expect success from the violence of multitudes. 

That all government is instituted for the happiness of the people, thattheir interest ought to be the chief care of the legislature, that theircomplaints ought patiently to be heard, and their grievances speedilyredressed, are truths well known, generally acknowledged, and, I hope, always predominant in the mind of every lord in this assembly. But, thatthe people cannot err, that the voice of fame is to be regarded as anoracle, and every murmur of discontent to be pacified by a change ofmeasures, I have never before heard, or heard it only to disregard it. 

True tenderness for the people, my lords, is to consult their advantage, to protect their liberty, and to preserve their virtue; and perhapsexamples may be found sufficient to inform us that all these effects areoften to be produced by means not generally agreeable to the publick. 

It is possible, my lords, for a very small part of the people to formjust ideas of the motives of transactions and the tendency of laws. Allnegotiations with foreign powers are necessarily complicated with manydifferent interests, and varied by innumerable circumstances, influencedby sudden exigencies, and defeated by unavoidable accidents. Laws haverespect to remote consequences, and involve a multitude of relationswhich it requires long study to discover. And how difficult it is tojudge of political conduct, or legislative proceedings, may be easilydiscovered by observing how often the most skilful statesmen aremistaken, and how frequently the laws require to be amended. 

If then, my lords, the people judge for themselves on these subjects, they must necessarily determine without knowledge of the questions, andtheir decisions are then of small authority. If they receive, implicitly, the dictates of others, and blindly adopt the opinions ofthose who have gained their favour and esteem, their applauses andcomplaints are, with respect to themselves, empty sounds, which theyutter as the organs of their leaders. Nor are the desires of the peoplegratified when their petitions are granted; nor their grievancesoverlooked when their murmurs are neglected. 

As it is no reproach to the people that they cannot be the proper judgesof the conduct of the government, so neither are they to be censuredwhen they complain of injuries not real, and tremble at the apprehensionof severities unintended. Unjust complaints, my lords, and unreasonableapprehensions, are to be imputed to those who court their regard only todeceive them, and exalt themselves to reputation by rescuing them fromgrievances that were never felt, and averting dangers that were nevernear. 

He only who makes the happiness of the people his endeavour, loves themwith a true affection and a rational tenderness, and he certainlyconsults their happiness who contributes to still all groundlessclamours, and appease all useless apprehensions, who employs his care, not only to preserve their quiet and their liberty, but to secure themfrom the fear of losing it, who not only promotes the means ofhappiness, but enables them to enjoy it. 

Thus, it appears, my lords, that it is possible to be a friend, at thesame time, to the people and the administration, and that no man canmore deserve their confidence and applause, than he that dissipatestheir unreasonable terrours, and contributes to reconcile them to a goodgovernment. 

That most of the clamours against the present government arise fromcalumnies and misrepresentations, is apparent from the sanction of thesenate, which has been given to all the measures that are charged ascrimes upon the administration. 

That the army is supported by the consent of the senate, that the senatehas approved the convention, and that our taxes are all imposed andcontinued by the senate, cannot be denied. What then is demanded bythose that censure the conduct of publick affairs, but that theiropinion should be considered as an overbalance to the wisdom of thesenate, that no man should be allowed to speak but as they dictate, norto vote but as they shall influence them by their rhetorick or example?

To repeat the particular topicks of accusation, and recapitulate thearguments which have been produced to confute it, would be a tedious andunnecessary labour; unnecessary, because it is well known that they oncehad the power of convincing this house, and that nothing has sincehappened to lessen their force, and because many of them now have beenalready repeated by the noble lords that have opposed the motion. 

To search far backward for past errors, and to take advantage of laterdiscoveries in censuring the conduct of any minister, is in a highdegree disingenuous and cruel; it is an art which may be easilypractised, of perplexing any question, by connecting distant facts, andentangling one period of time with another. 

The only candid method of inquiry is to recur back to the state ofaffairs, as it then appeared, to consider what was openly declared, andwhat was kept impenetrably secret, what was discoverable by humansagacity, and what was beyond the reach of the most piercing politician. 

With regard to the Hanover treaty, it is not, my lords, requisite thatwe should engage ourselves in a very minute examination; for it was notonly not transacted by the right honourable gentleman whose behaviour isthe subject of this debate, but cannot be proved to have been known byhim till it was formally ratified. If he afterwards approved it eitherin the council or the senate, he cannot justly, how destructive orridiculous soever that treaty may be thought, be charged with more thanhis share of the guilt, the bare guilt of a single vote. 

But there is one accusation yet more malicious, an accusation not onlyof crimes which this gentleman did not commit, but which have not yetbeen committed, an accusation formed by prying into futurity, andexaggerating misfortunes which are yet to come, and which may probablybe prevented. Well may any man, my lords, think himself in danger, whenhe hears himself charged not with high crimes and misdemeanours, notwith accumulative treason, but with misconduct of publick affairs, past, present, and future. 

The only charge against this gentleman, which seems to relate more tohim than to any other man engaged in the administration, is thecontinuance of the harbour of Dunkirk, which, says the noble duke, hemust be acquainted with as commissioner of the treasury; but if thetitle of first commissioner be denied, if his authority be but the samewith that of his associates, whence comes it, my lords, that he is moreparticularly accused than they? Why is his guilt supposed greater if hispower is only equal?

But, my lords, I believe it will appear, that no guilt has beencontracted on this account, and that Dunkirk was always intended, evenby those that demanded the demolition of it, to continue a harbour forsmall trading vessels, and that if larger ever arrived from thence, theylay at a distance from the shore, and were loaded by small vessels fromthe town. 

With regard to other affairs, my lords, they were all transacted by thecouncil, not by his direction, but with his concurrence; and how it isconsistent with justice to single him out for censure, I must desire thenoble lords to show who approve the motion. 

If the people, my lords, have been, by misrepresentations industriouslypropagated, exasperated against him, if the general voice of the nationcondemns him, we ought more cautiously to examine his conduct, lest weshould add strength to prejudice too powerful already, and instead ofreforming the errours, and regulating the heat of the people, inflametheir discontent and propagate sedition. 

The utmost claim of the people is to be admitted as accusers, andsometimes as evidence, but they have no right to sit as judges, and tomake us the executioners of their sentence; and as this gentleman hasyet been only condemned by those who have not the opportunities ofexamining his conduct, nor the right of judging him, I cannot agree togive him up to punishment. 

Lord HALIFAX spoke next, in substance as follows:--My lords, though I donot conceive the people infallible, yet I believe that in questions likethis they are seldom in the wrong, for this is a question not ofargument but of fact; of fact discoverable, not by long deductions andaccurate ratiocinations, but by the common powers of seeing and feeling. 

That it is difficult to know the motives of negotiations, and theeffects of laws, and that it requires long study and intense meditationto discover remote consequences, is indubitably true. And, with regardto the people in general, it cannot be denied, that neither theireducation qualifies them, nor their employments allow them to be muchversed in such inquiries. 

But, my lords, to refer effects to their proper causes, and to observe, when consequences break forth, from whence they proceed, is no sucharduous task. The people of the lowest class may easily feel that theyare more miserable this year than the last, and may inquire and discoverthe reason of the aggravation of their misery; they may know that thearmy is increased, or our trade diminished; that the taxes are heavier, and penal laws become more grievous. 

Nor is it less easy for them to discover that these calamities are notbrought upon them by the immediate hand of heaven, or the irresistibleforce of natural causes; that their towns are not ruined by an invasion, nor their trade confined by a pestilence; they may then easily collect, that they are only unhappy by the misconduct of their governours; theymay assign their infelicity to that cause, as the only remaining causethat is adequate to the effect. 

If it be granted, my lords, that they may be mistaken in theirreasoning, it must be owned, that they are not mistaken withoutprobabilities on their side: it is probable that the ministry mustinjure the publick interest when it decays without any other visiblecause; it is still more probable, when it appears that among those whosestation enables them to enter into national inquiries, every man imputeshis calamities to the minister, who is not visibly dependent on hisfavour. It becomes more probable, yet, when it appears that it is thegreat business of the minister to multiply dependencies, to listaccomplices, and to corrupt his judges. 

At least, my lords, if it be granted, which, surely, cannot be denied, that the people may be sensible of their own miseries, it is their partto declare their sufferings, and to apply to this house for relief, andit is our business to discover the authors of them, and bring them topunishment. 

That the people are very loud and importunate in their complaints, isdaily evident; nor is it less apparent, that their complaints are just;if, therefore, their miseries must have an author, let the defenders ofthis gentleman point out the man whom they may more properly accuse. 

But, my lords, nothing is more evident, than that the crimes and thecriminal are equally known, that there is one man predominant in hismajesty's councils, and that it has long been the practice of that manat once to oppress and ridicule the people, to plunder them, and setthem at defiance. 

Nothing is more known than that this man pretends to a superiourknowledge, and exerts a superiour power in the management of the publickrevenues, and that they have been so ill managed for many years, thatthe expenses of peace have been almost equal to those of a most vigorousand extensive war. 

Nothing is more probable, than that most of the foreign negotiations areconducted by his direction, nor more certain, than that they havegenerally tended only to make us contemptible. 

That the excise was projected in his own head, that it was recommendedby him upon his own conviction, and pressed upon the legislature by hisinfluence, cannot be questioned; and if this were his only crime, ifthis were the only scheme of oppression that ever he planned out, it issuch a declaration of war upon the publick liberty, such an attack ofour natural and constitutional rights, as was never, perhaps, pardonedby any nation. 

Nor is it less notorious, that the late infamous convention wastransacted by one of his own dependents, that he palliated or concealedthe losses of our merchants, that he opposed the declaration of war, andhas since obstructed its operations. 

On this occasion, my lords, it may be useful to remark the apparentpartiality of this gentleman's vindicators, who declare, that measuresare not to be censured as imprudent, only because they are unsuccessful, and yet when other instances of his conduct fall under our examination, think it a sufficient defence to exclaim against the unreasonableness ofjudging before the event. 

To deny that, in the conduct both of civil and military affairs, he hasobtained, I know not by what means, an authority superiour to that ofany other man, an authority irresistible, uncontroulable, and regal, isto oppose not only common fame, but daily experience. If as commissionerof the treasury he has no more power than any of his associates, whenceis it, that to oppose or censure him, to doubt of his infallibility, tosuspect his integrity, or to obstruct his influence, is a crime punishedwith no lighter penalty than forfeiture of employment, as appears, mylords, from the late dismission of a gentleman, against whom nothing canbe alleged but an obstinate independence and open disregard of thisarbitrary minister. 

But happy would it be, my lords, for this nation, if he endeavoured notto extend his authority beyond the treasury or the court; if he wouldcontent himself with tyrannising over those whose acceptance of salariesand preferments has already subjected them to his command, withoutattempting to influence elections, or to direct the members of the otherhouse. 

How much the influence of the crown has operated upon all publickcouncils since the advancement of this gentleman, how zealously it hasbeen supported, and how industriously extended, is unnecessary toexplain, since what is seen or felt by almost every man in the kingdomcannot reasonably be supposed unknown to your lordships. 

Nothing can be more contrary to the true notion of the Britishconstitution, than to imagine, that by such measures his majesty's realinterest is advanced. The true interest, my lords, of every monarch, isto please the people, and the only way of pleasing Britons, is topreserve their liberties, their reputation, and their commerce. Everyattempt to extend the power of the crown beyond the limits prescribed byour laws, must in effect make it weaker, by diverting the only source ofits strength, the affection of his subjects. 

It is, therefore, my opinion, my lords, that we ought to agree to thismotion, as a standing memorial not only of our regard for the nation, but of our adherence to our sovereign; that his councils may be nolonger influenced by that man whose pernicious advice, and unjustifiableconduct, has added new hopes and new strength to his enemies, impoverished and exasperated his subjects, inflamed the discontent ofthe seditious, and almost alienated the affection of the loyal. 

The bishop of SALISBURY spoke next, to the following purport:--My lords, after all the exaggerations of the errours, and all the representationsof the malconduct of the right honourable gentleman; after the mostaffecting rhetorick, and the most acute inquiries, nothing has appearedof weight sufficient to prevail with me to agree to the present motion;a motion, if not of an unprecedented, yet of a very extraordinary kind, which may extend in its consequences to futurity, and be, perhaps, moredangerous to innocence than guilt. 

I cannot yet discover any proof sufficient to convict him of havingusurped the authority of _first_ minister, or any other power than thataccidental influence which every man has, whose address or services haveprocured him the favour of his sovereign. 

The usurpation, my lords, of regal power must be made evident bysomewhat more than general assertions, must appear from some publick actlike that of one of the prelates left regent of the kingdom by Richardthe first, who, as soon as the king was gone too far to return, in thefirst elevations of his heart, began his new authority by imprisoninghis colleague. 

To charge this gentleman with the dismission of any of his colleagues, can, after the strongest aggravations, rise no higher than to anaccusation of having advised his majesty to dismiss him, and even that, my lords, stands, at present, unsupported by evidence; nor could it, however uncontestably proved, discover either wickedness or weakness, orshow any other authority than every man would exercise, if he were ableto attain it. 

If he had discharged this gentleman by his own authority, if he hadtransacted singly any great affair to the disadvantage of the publick, if he had imposed either upon the king or the senate by falserepresentations, if he had set the laws at defiance, and openly trampledon our constitution, and if by these practices he had exalted himselfabove the reach of a legal prosecution, it had been worthy of thedignity of this house, to have overleaped the common boundaries ofcustom, to have neglected the standing rules of procedure, and to havebrought so contemptuous and powerful an offender to a level with therest of his fellow-subjects by expeditious and vigorous methods, to haverepressed his arrogance, broken his power, and overwhelmed him at onceby the resistless weight of an unanimous censure. 

But, my lords, we have in the present case no provocations from crimeseither openly avowed, or evidently proved; and certainly no incitementfrom necessity to exert the power of the house in any extraordinarymethod of prosecution. We may punish whenever we can convict, andconvict whenever we can obtain evidence; let us not, therefore, condemnany man unheard, nor punish any man uncondemned. 

The duke of BEDFORD spoke next, in substance as follows:--My lords, itis easy to charge the most blameless and gentle procedure with injusticeand severity, but it is not easy to support such an accusation withoutconfounding measures widely different, and disguising the nature ofthings with fallacious misrepresentations. 

Nothing is more evident than that neither condemnation nor punishment isintended by the motion before us, which is only to remove from power aman who has no other claim to it than the will of his master, and who, as he had not been injured by never obtaining it, cannot justly complainthat it is taken from him. 

The motion, my lords, is so far from inflicting punishment, that itconfers rewards, it leaves him in the possession of immense wealth, however accumulated, and enables him to leave that office in security, from which most of his predecessors have been precipitated by nationalresentment, or senatorial prosecution. 

There is no censure, my lords, made of his conduct, no charge ofweakness, or suspicion of dishonesty, nor can any thing be equitablyinferred from it, than that in the opinion of this house his majesty mayprobably be served by some other person, more to the satisfaction of theBritish nation. 

Though it is not just to punish any man without examination, or tocensure his conduct merely because it has been unpleasing orunsuccessful; though it is not reasonable that any man should forfeitwhat he possesses in his own right, without a crime, yet it is just towithdraw favours only to confer them on another more deserving; it isjust in any man to withhold his own, only to preserve his right, orobviate an injurious prescription, and it is, therefore, just to advisesuch a conduct whenever it appears necessary to those who have the rightof offering advice. 

To advise his majesty, my lords, is not only our right but our duty; weare not only justifiable in practising, but criminal in neglecting it. That we should declare our apprehensions of any impending danger, andour disapprobation of publick misconduct, is expected both by oursovereign and the people, and let us not, by omitting such warnings, lull the nation and our sovereign into a dangerous security, and, fromtenderness to one man, prolong or increase the miseries of our country, and endanger or destroy the honour of our sovereign. 

Lord HERVEY spoke next, in effect as follows:--My lords, this is surelya day destined by the noble lords who defend the motion, for the supportof paradoxical assertions, for the exercise of their penetration, andostentation of their rhetorick; they have attempted to maintain thecertainty of common fame in opposition to daily observation; theexistence of a sole minister in contradiction to the strongest evidence;and having by these gradations arrived at the highest degree ofcontroversial temerity, are endeavouring to make it appear that thepublick censure of the house of lords is no punishment. 

If we take the liberty, my lords, of using known words in a new sense, in a meaning reserved to ourselves only, it will, indeed, be difficultto confute, as it will be impossible to understand us; but if punishmentbe now to be understood as implying the same idea which has hithertobeen conveyed by it, it will not be easy to show that a man thuspublickly censured is not severely punished, and, if his crimes are notclearly proved, punished in opposition to law, to reason, and tojustice. 

It has been hitherto imagined, my lords, that no punishment is heavierthan that of infamy; and shame has, by generous minds, been avoided atthe hazard of every other misery. That such a censure as is proposed bythe motion, must irreparably destroy the reputation of the personagainst whom it is directed, that it must confirm the reports of hisenemies, impair the esteem of his friends, mark him out to all Europe asunworthy of his sovereign's favour, and represent him to latestposterity as an enemy to his country, is indisputably certain. 

These, my lords, are the evident consequences of the address moved forby the noble lord; and, if such consequences are not penal, it will beno longer in our power to enforce our laws by sanctions of terrour. 

To condemn a man unheard, is an open and flagrant violation of the firstlaw of justice, but it is still a wider deviation from it to punish aman unaccused; no crime has been charged upon this gentlemanproportioned to the penalty proposed by the motion, and the charge thathas been produced is destitute of proof. 

Let us, therefore, my lords, reverence the great laws of reason andjustice, let us preserve our high character and prerogative of judges, without descending to the low province of accusers and executioners; letus so far regard our reputation, our liberty, and our posterity, as toreject the motion. 

[Several other lords spoke in this debate, which lasted eleven hours; atlength the question was put, and, on a division, carried in thenegative. Content, 59. Not content, 108. ]

After the determination of the foregoing question, the duke ofMARLBOROUGH rose up, and spoke as follows:--My lords, though yourpatience must undoubtedly be wearied by the unusual length of this day'sdebate, a debate protracted, in my opinion, not by the difficulty of thequestion, but by the obstinacy of prejudice, the ardour of passion, andthe desire of victory; yet, I doubt not but the regard which thisassembly has always paid to the safety and happiness of the state, willincline you to support the fatigue of attention a little longer, and tohear with your usual impartiality another motion. 

The proposition which I am about to lay down, my lords, is not such ascan admit of controversy; it is such a standing principle as was alwaysacknowledged, even by those who have deviated from it. Such a knowntruth as never was denied, though it appears sometimes to have beenforgotten. 

But, my lords, as it never can be forgotten, without injury toparticular persons, and danger to the state in general, it cannot be toofrequently recollected, or too firmly established; it ought not only tobe tacitly admitted, but publickly declared, since no man's fortune, liberty, or life, can be safe, where his judges shall think themselvesat liberty to act upon any other principle. I therefore move, "That anyattempt to inflict any kind of punishment on any person without allowinghim an opportunity to make his defence, or without any proof of anycrime or misdemeanour committed by him, is contrary to natural justice, the fundamental laws of this realm, and the ancient established usage ofthe senate, and is a high infringement of the liberties of the subject. "

He was seconded by the duke of DEVONSHIRE:--My lords, though the motionmade by the noble duke is of such a kind, that no opposition can beexpected or feared, yet I rise up to second it, lest it should beimagined that what cannot be rejected is yet unwillingly admitted. 

That where this maxim is not allowed and adhered to, rights andliberties are empty sounds, is uncontestably evident; if this principlebe forsaken, guilt and innocence are equally secure, all caution isvain, and all testimony useless. Caprice will, in our courts, supply theplace of reason, and all evidence must give way to malice, or to favour. 

I hope, therefore, my lords, that your regard to justice, to truth, andto your own safety, will influence you to confirm this great andself-evident principle by a standing resolution, that may not onlyrestrain oppression in the present age, but direct the judiciaryproceedings of our successors. 

Lord LOVEL rose next, and spoke as follows:--My lords, liberty andjustice must always support each other, they can never long flourishapart; every temporary expedient that can be contrived to preserve orenlarge liberty by means arbitrary and oppressive, forms a precedentwhich may, in time, be made use of to violate or destroy it. Liberty isin effect suspended whenever injustice is practised; for what isliberty, my lords, but the power of doing right without fear, withoutcontrol, and without danger. 

But, my lords, if any man may be condemned unheard, if judgment mayprecede evidence, what safety or what confidence can integrity afford?It is in vain that any man means well, and acts prudently; it is even invain that he can prove the justice and prudence of his conduct. 

By liberty, my lords, can never be meant the privilege of doing wrongwithout being accountable, because liberty is always spoken of ashappiness, or one of the means to happiness, and happiness and virtuecannot be separated. The great use of liberty must, therefore, be topreserve justice from violation; justice, the great publick virtue, bywhich a kind of equality is diffused over the whole society, by whichwealth is restrained from oppression, and inferiority preserved fromservitude. 

Liberty, general liberty, must imply general justice; for wherever anypart of a state can be unjust with impunity, the rest are slaves. Thatto condemn any man unheard is oppressive and unjust, is beyondcontroversy demonstrable, and that no such power is claimed by yourlordships will, I hope, appear from your resolutions. 

Lord GOWER spoke next:--My lords, to the principle laid down by thosenoble lords, I have no objection, and concur with them in hoping thatall our proceedings will contribute to establish it; but why it shouldbe confirmed by a formal resolution, why the house should solemnlydeclare their assent to a maxim which it would be madness to deny, it isbeyond my penetration to discover. 

Though the noble lord's position cannot be controverted, yet his motion, if it is designed to imply any censure of the proceedings of this day, may reasonably be rejected, and that some censure is intended we mayconjecture, because no other reason can be given why it was not made atsome other time. 

Lord HALIFAX then rose:--My lords, that a censure is intended, will, Isuppose, not be denied, and that such a censure is unjust must doubtlessbe the opinion of all those who are supposed to have incurred it, and itwill, therefore, not be wondered that the motion is opposed by them, asindecent and calumnious: late as it is, my lords, I will not, for mypart, suffer such an indignity without opposition, and shall think myconscience and my honour require, that I should not be overborne byperseverance or by numbers, but that I should, if I cannot convince thenoble lords by argument, of the impropriety of the motion, record myreasons against it, which may, perhaps, be more candidly received byposterity. 

Lord TALBOT spoke to this effect:--My lords, it is not withoutindignation that I hear a motion so injurious to my own honour, and tothat of the noble lords who have concurred with me in the last debate, nor without contempt that I observed the motion confounded with thepositions contained in it; the low subtilty of such conduct is no lessto be despised than the malice to be abhorred. 

Fifty-nine lords are here branded as strangers, or enemies to the firstprinciple of judicial equity, for doing what will entitle them to thegeneral applause of every man in the kingdom that has the fullpossession of his understanding, or the free use of his senses; of everyman that can distinguish truth, or feel oppression. 

They have endeavoured to rescue their country from the rapine ofpensioners and the tyranny of an army, from perpetual taxes, and uselessexpenses; they have attempted to expose the errours of arrogantignorance, and to depress the power of greatness, founded on corruption, and swelling beyond legal restraints. 

That for such attempts they are vilified and reproached, is not to beobserved without indignation and astonishment; astonishment whichnothing could abate but the recollection of the situation of those lordswho have united to promote so unjust a censure. 

Let us, my lords, consider the circumstances of the three noble lords bywhom this motion has been made and supported, let us take a view oftheir conduct, and consider the visible motives to which it may beascribed, their places, their dependence--

Lord CHOLMONDELEY spoke next, in substance as follows:--My lords, I risethus abruptly to preserve that order and decency which is essential topublick councils, and particularly suitable to the dignity of thisassembly, which can only become a scene of tumult and confusion by suchmethods of debate, and lose that respect which it has hithertopreserved, not only by the justice of its determinations, but by thesolemn grandeur of its procedure. 

The motion, my lords, is allowed to contain nothing but what every manavows in speculation, and observes, or ought to observe, in publicktransactions, and yet those that offer and support it are represented asabettors of oppression, and instruments of tyranny. 

It is surely wonderful, my lords, that those who are solicitous for thepreservation of their own honour, and so diligent to obviate the mostremote reflection that may glance upon it, should not remember, that thesame delicacy may raise in others the same resentment, when theirreputation is openly attacked; and that while they are asserting theright of the minority to an exemption from censure, they shall not allowthe greater number at least an equal claim to the same privilege. 

Lord TALBOT then resumed:--My lords, whether any thing has escaped fromme that deserves such severe animadversions, your lordships must decide. For what I might intend to say, since by the interruption of that noblelord I was hindered from proceeding, I hope I shall not be accountable. 

Not that I acknowledge myself to have asserted any thing either contraryto law, or to the privileges of the house, or inconsistent with thecharacter of an independent lord, a character which I shall alwaysendeavour to preserve, and which I will not forfeit for the smiles of acourt, the dignity of high employment, or the affluence of a pension. 

Nor, my lords, whenever the necessities of my country require that Ishould speak my sentiments with freedom, will I be awed into silence andsubmission, but will set any power at defiance that shall dare torestrain me. 

I pretend not, my lords, to be always in the right, I claim no othermerit than that of meaning well; and when I am convinced, after properexamination, that I am engaged on the side of truth, I will trample onthat insolence that shall command me to suppress my sentiments. 

When I reflect, my lords, on the distresses of my country, when Iobserve the security and arrogance of those whom I consider as theauthors of the publick miseries, I cannot always contain my resentment;I may, perhaps, sometimes start out into unbecoming transports, andspeak in terms not very ceremonious of such abandoned, such detestable--But as this is, perhaps, not the language of the house, I shallendeavour to repress it, and hope that the bounds of decency have neverbeen so far transgressed by me that I should be exposed to the censureof your lordships. 

Lord ABINGDON next rose, and said:--My lords, the present motion isundoubtedly just, but by no means necessary, or particularly adapted tothe present time. It contains a general principle, uncontested, andestablished; a principle which this assembly has never denied, and fromwhich I know not that it has ever departed. 

As there is, therefore, no particular necessity of confirming it by anew resolution, and as the present time seems less proper than anyother, I cannot but declare my opinion, that to resume it at some othertime will be more prudent, than to give the lords, who think theirconduct censured, any occasion of resentment or discontent. 

Lord CARTERET spoke to the following effect:--My lords, the maxim laiddown in the present motion, is in itself incontestable, and so far fromany inconsistency with the former, that as there was no reason formaking, there is, in my opinion, none for opposing it; as it may at anytime be made, it may at any time be properly passed. And I hope that ourunanimity on this occasion will show that truth, however unseasonablyadvanced, will, in this house, be always received. 

But, lest the noble lords who have opposed the motion, should thinktheir honour engaged in continuing the opposition, I take the liberty, my lords, to move that the previous question may be put. 

[Other lords spoke on each side; at last the previous question was putby the president, who demanded, "Is it your lordships' pleasure, thatthe question be now put? Those lords who are for it, say, Content:those who are against it, say, Not content. " There was, accordingly, acry of both; after which the president declared, "the contents have it;"and some lords replying, "the non-contents have it, " his lordship said, "the non-contents must go below the bar:" which is the manner ofdividing the house. Those who remained being told in their seats, andthose who went out being told at coming in again, there were Content, 81; Not content, 54: so that the resolution moved for, passed without adivision. ]

HOUSE OF COMMONS, FEB. 24, 1740-1. 

[DEBATE ON CLEANSING THE CITY OF WESTMINSTER. ]

Lord TYRCONNEL made a motion for bringing in a bill for the bettercleansing and paving the streets of Westminster, and the libertiesthereof; in support of which motion he spoke to the following purpose:--

Sir, though the grievance which I am about to lay before the house isnot of the most formidable or dangerous kind, yet as it is such as growsevery day greater, and such as every day endangers the lives ofthousands, I hope it will not be thought useless or improper to proposeit to the consideration of this assembly, to offer my thoughts on themethods by which it may be most easily removed, and to endeavour toincite others to the same considerations. 

It is impossible, sir, to come to this assembly, or to return from itwithout observations on the present condition of the streets ofWestminster; observations forced upon every man, however inattentive, orhowever engrossed by reflections of a different kind. 

The warmest zeal for publick happiness, the most anxious vigilanceagainst general dangers, must, I believe, sometimes give way to objectsof immediate, though of less importance, nor will the mostpublick-spirited senators deny, that they have often been in the streetsalarmed with obstructions, or shocked with nuisances. 

The filth, sir, of some parts of the town, and the inequality andruggedness of others, cannot but in the eyes of foreigners disgrace ournation, and incline them to imagine us a people, not only withoutdelicacy, but without government, a herd of barbarians, or a colony ofhottentots. 

The most disgusting part of the character given by travellers, of themost savage nations, is their neglect of cleanliness, of which, perhaps, no part of the world affords more proofs, than the streets of theBritish capital; a city famous for wealth, and commerce, and plenty, andfor every other kind of civility and politeness, but which abounds withsuch heaps of filth, as a savage would look on with amazement. 

If that be allowed which is generally believed, that putrefaction andstench are the causes of pestilential distempers, the removal of thisgrievance may be pressed from motives of far greater weight than thoseof delicacy and pleasure; and I might solicit the timely care of thisassembly for the preservation of inuumerable multitudes, and intreatthose, who are watching against slight misfortunes, to unite theirendeavours with mine, to avert the greatest and most dreadful ofcalamities. 

Not to dwell, sir, upon dangers, which may, perhaps, be thought onlyimaginary, I hope that it will be at least considered, how much thepresent neglect of the pavement is detrimental to every carriage, whether of trade, or pleasure, or convenience, and that those who haveallowed so much of their attention to petitions, relating to the roadsof the kingdom, the repair of some of which is almost every sessionthought of importance sufficient to produce debates in this house, willnot think the streets of the capital alone unworthy of their regard. 

That the present neglect of cleansing and paving the streets is such asought not to be borne, that the passenger is every where eithersurprised and endangered by unexpected chasms, or offended or obstructedby mountains of filth, is well known to every one that has passed asingle day in this great city; and that this grievance is without remedyis a sufficient proof that no magistrate has, at present power to removeit; for every man's private regard to his own ease and safety, wouldincite him to exert his authority on this occasion. 

I humbly propose, therefore, that a bill may be brought into the house, to enable his majesty's justices of peace for the liberties ofWestminster, to inspect the publick ways of this city, and punish theneglect of cleansing and paving them; or that a new officer beappointed, and vested with full authority for the same purpose. 

Mr. SANDYS spoke next, to this effect:--Sir, I believe the grievance, somuch complained of by the right honourable member, is not difficult tobe removed without a new act of the legislature, being, perhaps, moreproperly to be imputed to the negligence of the justices, than a defectof their authority; for they have already sufficient power to regulatethis disorder: and I may be allowed to hope, sir, that they do not wantleisure to observe it, for their number is so great, that if we supposethem to be wholly engaged by the common business of their office, aforeigner would have occasion of reproaching us with defects moreimportant than want of delicacy, and might justly censure us as a peoplecorrupt beyond the common rate of human wickedness, a nation dividedonly into two classes, magistrates and criminals. 

But they, in reality, abound so much among us, that most of them areonly nominal magistrates, vested with authority which they never exert, or exert to bad purposes, and which it were well if they were obliged toemploy in the real service of their country, by superintending thepaviers and the scavengers. 

For this reason it is unnecessary to erect a new officer, as aninspector of our streets, since every office that is not necessary ispernicious. Were the consequences of this grievance such as they havebeen represented, I should, perhaps, willingly erect a new office, though I should not be surprised to hear the wisest man declare ratherfor a pestilence than an increase of officers. 

As I neither think the grievance insupportable, nor the methods proposedfor removing it necessary or proper, I declare myself against themotion. 

Lord GAGE spoke in the following manner:--Sir, as the grievance cannotbe denied to be real, and the motion, therefore, may reasonably beimagined to have been made without any other intention than ofbenefiting the publick by an useful law, I cannot discover anysufficient reason for a rejection so peremptory and contemptuous. 

That every man is disgusted, and almost every man daily endangered inour streets, has not been denied; nor will any man, I suppose, questionwhat, if he has not yet experienced it, he may, perhaps, be fullyconvinced of, in his next visit or excursion. 

Those evils, which every man feels, though slight, are worthy of theattention of the legislature; and that danger that threatens multitudes, though distant, ought to be averted: for a small disorder, like a smallexpense, when it extends to multitudes, becomes a national affair. 

But though this motion may, perhaps, be liable to some objections, thereis, certainly, no such absurdity to be found in it, as may justify us inrejecting it without examination; to reject a motion when it is firstoffered, is a proof of prejudice, next to that of rejecting it unheard;it is to determine a question, before it is discussed, or can be fullyunderstood. 

Mr. SANDYS replied, in substance as follows:--Sir, I cannot but differvery widely in opinion from the right honourable member that spoke last, with regard to the propriety of opposing a motion when it is first made;a practice, which I can by no means think inconsistent with eitherdecency or prudence, and which would, perhaps, be of use to the publick, if it was more frequent. 

When any motion is made, it is subjected to the consideration of thisassembly, and every member is at full liberty to examine and discuss it. If it appears to deserve farther attention, it may be admitted, but ifthe subject be either improper or unseasonable, or the measures proposedinjudicious or dangerous, it is then to be rejected; and if it is atlast to be rejected, it is apparent that no time ought to be thrown awayupon it. 

The hours, and days, and weeks, that have been improfitably spent uponbills which after all our endeavours could not be passed; the delays ofreal benefits to the publick, which have been produced by long pursuitsof shadowy advantages, have inclined me to a more expeditious method ofproceeding, and determined me speedily to reject what I cannot hope toamend. 

[The question being put, passed in the negative, 142 against 109. ]

HOUSE OF COMMONS, FEB. 27, 1740-1. 

DEBATE ON THE SECOND READING OF A BILL TO PREVENT INCONVENIENCIESARISING FROM INSURANCE OF SHIPS. 

The bill being read, sir John BARNARD spoke thus:--Sir, there cannot bebrought before this house any questions more difficult in themselves, more entangled with a multiplicity of relations, or more perplexed withan endless diversity of circumstances, than those which relate tocommercial affairs; affairs on which the most experienced oftendisagree, and on which the most sagacious may deceive themselves witherroneous conjectures. 

There are no questions, sir, which require so much personal knowledge ofthe subject to which they relate, nor is there any subject with which sofew gentlemen in this house have had opportunities of being acquainted. There are no questions, sir, which their variety of relations todifferent persons exposes to be so easily misrepresented withoutdetection, nor any in which the opposition of particular interests somuch incites a false representation. In all these cases, deceit is easy, and there is a strong temptation to deceive. 

Nor are these questions, sir, always perplexed by intentional fraud, orfalse assertions, of which they that utter them are themselvesconscious. 

Those who deceive us, do not always suppress any truth of which they areconvinced, nor set facts before us in any other light, than that inwhich themselves behold them; they for the most part err with an honestintention, and propagate no mistakes but those which they havethemselves admitted. 

Of this kind, sir, are, doubtless, the measures proposed in the billbefore us, which those by whom they are promoted may easily think to beof benefit to the publick, but which, I believe, will appear the resultof imperfect views, and partial consideration. 

The great and fundamental errour, sir, of the patrons of this bill, seems to be an opinion that the practice of insuring is not known toother nations, nor can be carried on in any other place; and from thisprinciple they deduce consequences, which, if they were inevitablycertain, might easily influence us to an immediate approbation of thebill, as necessary to secure our commerce, and distress our enemies. 

They conclude, sir, with sufficient justness, that very few merchantswould hazard their fortunes in long voyages or distant commerce, orexpose themselves to the dangers of war, without the security whichinsurances afford them; and having persuaded themselves that suchsecurity is to be obtained from no other nation, they imagine that wemight, by prohibiting it, confine all the foreign vessels in theirports, and destroy, by one resolution, the trade of both our rivals andour enemies. 

That our East India company may desire the ratification of this bill, Icannot deny, because they might, perhaps, receive from it some temporaryadvantage by the short inconveniencies which those whom they consider asthe enemies of their commerce would feel from it. They may desire it, because the experiment, if it fails, as it must, cannot injure them; andif it succeeds, may produce great advantages to them: they may wish it, because they will feel the immediate benefit, and the detriment willfall upon others. 

I shall not inquire whether our merchants are inclined to look withmalevolence on all those who cultivate the same branches of commercewith themselves, though they have neither the violation of naturalrights, nor the infringement of national treaties, to complain of. Ishould be unwilling to suspect a British merchant, whose acquaintancewith the constitution of his own country ought to show him the value ofliberty, who ought to be above narrow schemes, by the knowledge whichhis profession enables him to gain, of a desire to encroach upon therights of others, or to engross the general benefits of nature; andshall only observe, that several other nations can plead a claim to theEast India trade, a claim of equal validity with our own; that the Daneshave their settlement there, and that the Portuguese discovered the wayto those regions of wealth, from which some, perhaps, are inclined toexclude them. 

But nothing is more vain than to attempt to exclude them by refusing toensure their ships, because the opinion that they can be insured by noother nation is entirely without foundation. There are at this timeoffices of insurance along the whole coasts of the midland sea, amongthe Dutch, and even among the French. Nothing can debar any nation fromthe trade of insurance but the want of money; and that money is notwanted by foreigners for this purpose, appears from the great sums whichthey have deposited in our funds. 

That this trade is now carried on chiefly by this nation, though notsolely, is incontestable; but what can be inferred from that, but thatwe ought not to obstruct our own gain; that we ought not to make a lawto deprive ourselves of that advantage of which either favourableaccidents or our own sagacity have put us in possession. 

For this reason it appears that it would not contribute to the wealth ofthe publick to debar us from insuring the ships even of those with whomwe are at war, for it is always to be remembered that they will receiveno detriment from such prohibitions, nor will feel any other consequencefrom them than a necessity of transferring to some other nation theprofit which we receive from it. 

What the profit is which arises to the nation from the trade ofinsurance it is not possible exactly to determine, but that the trade isreally advantageous may be reasonably conceived, because after manyyears' experience it is diligently followed, and a law was nevernecessary to prohibit the pursuit of a business by which nothing was tobe gained. But could the gain of the insurer be a doubtful point, thereis a certain advantage to the nation by the money paid for commission, brokerage, stamps, and the credit of the premium deposited here. 

I might add, sir, another considerable sum yearly arising to thegovernment from the additional letters, occasioned by this trade, whichincrease the revenues of the post-office, without any deduction foradditional charge. 

That the loss of this profit, and the gain of insuring, will ensue uponthe ratification of this bill, cannot be denied; nor does it appear, that this loss will be counterbalanced by any advantage that will begained over our rivals or our enemies. 

Whether this bill, sir, would produce to the merchants of that city bywhich it is promoted, the advantages which they expect from it, orremove any of the grievances of which they complain, I am not ablepositively to determine; but know, that it is not uncommon formerchants, as well as other men, to confound private with publickgrievances, and to imagine their own interest the interest of thenation. 

With regard, sir, to the practice of insuring, _interest or nointerest_, as the term is, when an imaginary value is put upon the shipor cargo, often much above its real worth, it cannot be denied, thatsome opportunities may be given by it for wicked practices. But therewill always be circumstances in which there can be no security againstfrauds, but common faith; nor do I see how we can secure the insurersagainst the possibility of being defrauded. 

I cannot, indeed, discover, sir, how this method of insuring can beprevented; for how can the value of a cargo be estimated, which is to becollected in a long voyage, at different ports, and where the success ofthe adventurers often depends upon lucky accidents, which are, indeed, always hoped for, but seldom happen. An imaginary value must, therefore, be fixed upon, when the ship leaves the port; because the success ofthat voyage cannot be foreknown, and the contracting parties may besafely trusted to set that value, without any law to direct or restrainthem. 

If the merchants are oppressed by any peculiar inconveniencies, and canfind means of redressing them without injuring the publick commerce, anyproposal for that purpose ought to be favourably received; but as thebill now before us proposes general restraints, and proposes to removegrievances which are not felt, by remedies, which those upon whom theyare to operate, do not approve, I think it ought not to be referred to acommittee, but rejected. 

Mr. SOUTHWELL spoke next, in terms to this purpose:--Sir, when I firstproposed this bill to the house, I lamented the absence of thathonourable gentleman, from whose discussions and arguments I expectedgreat information; and for whose judgment, in all commercial questions, I have the highest esteem, as his penetration not only enables him todiscover the consequences of methods which have not yet been tried, butas his extensive acquaintance with many branches of trade, cannot buthave informed him of the success of many expedients tried, as well inother nations as our own, for the advancement of it. 

Trade, sir, is a subject, of which it has been justly observed, thatvery few gentlemen have attained knowledge sufficient to qualifythemselves to judge of the propriety of any new regulation; and I cannotbut confess, that I have no uncommon skill in these questions. What Ihave to offer on this occasion, has been suggested to me, not so much bymy own observations, as by the intelligence which I have veryindustriously sought, and by which, as I endeavoured to inquire of thosewhose opinion was least likely to be perverted by their interest, I hopeI have not been misled. 

The merchants, sir, to whom it has been my fortune to apply, havegenerally concurred in the opinion that the present practice of insuringis prejudicial to our commerce, nor have I found any disagreementbetween my constituents and the traders of this great metropolis. 

I am unwilling to imagine that there can be any evil for which thewisdom of this assembly cannot discover a remedy, and am, therefore, ofopinion, that if the grievance is real, some expedient may be discoveredfor removing it; and that it is real, I cannot but be convinced by thedeclarations of so many men, who can have no interest in complainingwhen they suffer nothing, and whose known abilities exempt them from thesuspicion of imputing any part of their uneasiness to a cause whichcannot produce it. 

The bill before us, sir, requires, in my opinion, some amendments, andin its present state might, perhaps, produce more detriment thanadvantage; but since it is necessary at least to attempt something forthe relief of men so useful to this nation, it appears to me necessaryto form a committee, and to deliberate on this subject with moreattention. 

Mr. LOCKWOOD spoke next, to the following effect:--Sir, though I am notof opinion that the bill in its present state ought to be passed into alaw, yet I am far from thinking it so imperfect as not easily to beamended, and, therefore, am desirous that it should be considered in acommittee. 

I have not, indeed, sir, often observed, that bills injudiciously drawnup at first have received great improvements from a secondconsideration, and have found it more easy to form a new bill, than tomake alterations in one that is laid before us; for some original errourwill commonly remain, and the sentiments of different men, pursuingdifferent views, can seldom be modelled into one consistent scheme. ButI am far from considering this bill as one of those that cannot beamended, for I can discover but few objections to the regulationsproposed in it, and those not relating to any of the essential parts, but slight and circumstantial, such as will easily be removed, or, perhaps, answered. 

The grievance, sir, for which this bill proposes a remedy, is sogenerally known, and so universally lamented, that, I believe, there isnot any thing more worthy of the attention of the legislature than aninquiry into the cause of it, and the proper method of redressing it. 

In our inquiry into the causes of this obstruction of trade, I am ofopinion, sir, that the practice of insuring, _interest or no interest_, will appear to be the foundation of this general uneasiness; it will befound a practice of so natural a tendency to fraud, and so easilysusceptible of dishonest artifices, that I believe every member of thishouse will desire its suppression. 

To confirm my assertion, sir, and illustrate the question before us, Ishall mention some particular instances of fraud to which this customhas given occasion; of fraud so evident and so detestable that it cannotbe related without indignation. 

The Royal George was a large ship belonging to the South sea company, which, having been a voyage to Vera Cruz, put in at Jamaica in herreturn; and being there refitted to proceed on her voyage homewards, setsail, and came within a week's sailing of the port, when, upon a sudden, the officers entered into a consultation, and determined to go back amonth's voyage to Antigua; for what reason, sir, may easily be guessed, when it was told that a ship was insured upon a supposed value of sixtythousand pounds. 

This resolution, sir, was no sooner formed, than orders were given tochange the course and steer to Antigua, in opposition to all theremonstrances of the carpenter, who is the proper judge of the conditionof a vessel, and who declared, with honesty and resolution, againsttheir whole procedure. But they pursued their new scheme without anyregard to his murmurs or assertions; and when they arrived at Antigua, found some method of influencing the officers of that island to declarethe ship unfit for the prosecution of the voyage. 

Their design, sir, was now happily completed. To confirm thedetermination which had been pronounced in their favour, they strandedthe ship upon a bank of sand, forced out the iron that grapples thetimber together, and having first taken away the masts and rigging, andwhatever else could be used or sold, threw the ballast to each end, andso broke the vessel in the middle. 

By this well-contrived shipwreck, having, as they imagined, raised theirfortunes, they came home triumphantly from their prosperous voyage, andclaimed the money for which the ship was insured. The insurers, startledat a demand so unexpected, inquired into the affair with all theindustry which its importance might naturally incite, and, after someconsultation, determined to try whether the ship might not be refittedand brought to Britain. 

In pursuance of this resolution, they sent workmen and materials, and, without much expense, or any difficulty, brought it hither. 

I believe, sir, this relation is sufficient at once to prove thepractice, and explain the nature of the frauds to which this method ofinsurance gives occasion; but as the frequency of them is such, thatmany instances may be produced, I shall offer another short narrative ofthe same kind. 

A ship that belonged to the East India company, insured after thismethod, was run ashore by the captain, in such a manner that he imaginednone but himself able to recover it, and therefore, though it cost fivethousand pounds, sold it for five hundred; but the purchaser, no lessexpert than the captain, found means very speedily to disengage it, torestore it to a proper condition with little expense, and was muchenriched by his fortunate bargain. 

I cannot but observe, sir, that this kind of fraud is more formidable, as it may be practised without a possibility of detection: had thecaptain, instead of stranding, destroyed his vessel, how could hiswickedness ever have been discovered; or how could the South seacompany's ship have been brought home, had it been sunk in some distantcorner of the world. 

This practice, sir, and the frauds which it has occasioned, and thesuspicions which the easy practice of frauds always creates, haveproduced so many trials, and filled the courts of justice with suchintricate contentions, that the judges, who know, perhaps, nothing ofthis practice but from its effects, have often declared it to be sopregnant with contests and cheats, that it ought not to be suffered, andthat a law for suppressing it would much contribute to the establishmentof peace, and the security of property. 

I am not insensible, sir, of the force of the argument made use of bythe honourable gentleman who spoke in favour of this practice, andcannot but allow it that regard which his reasonings always deserve; itis the strongest, and perhaps the only argument that can be produced. His assertion of the impossibility of estimating the real value of aship, or of foreknowing the success of a voyage, is incontestable: butperhaps it will follow from thence, not that an imaginary value ought tobe admitted, but that no insurance ought to be allowed, where there isno rational method of ascertaining it; or, at least, that all suchinsurance ought to be rather below the probable value than above it. 

If the grievance complained of has been proved not to be imaginary, weought, doubtless, to consult how it may be remedied; nor do I believethat our consultations will be ineffectual, if we engage in them, notwith an intention to perplex, but to inform each other. I am of opinion, sir, that the importance of the question requires a committee; nor can Idiscover any essential defect in the bill, which should hinder it frompassing into a law. 

Mr. BURRELL spoke to this effect:--Sir, I am convinced by experience, aswell as reason, that so many inconveniencies arise from this method ofinsurance, that it affords so many opportunities of fraud, and givessuch encouragement to negligence, that I shall willingly concur in anymeasures that may effectually suppress it. 

It is, sir, too well known to require proof, that interest is the parentof diligence, and that men attend to the performance of their duty, inproportion as they must suffer by the neglect of it; and, therefore, every practice that deprives honesty of its reward is injurious to thepublick. 

But that this is the consequence of estimating ships at an imaginaryvalue in the offices of insurance, is, to the highest degree, evident. When a ship is estimated above its real value, how will the commandersuffer by a wreck, or what shall restrain him from destroying hisvessel, when it may be done with security to himself, except thatintegrity, which, indeed, ought to be generally diffused, but which isnot always to be found, and to which few men think it safe to trust uponoccasions of far less importance. 

To show, sir, that I do not indulge groundless suspicions, or magnifythe bare possibility of fraud into reality; that I do not blacken humannature, or propose laws against wickedness that has not yet existed; itmay be proper to mention some letters, in which I have been informed, bymy correspondent at Leghorn, of the state of the ships which havearrived there; ships so weakly manned, and so penuriously or negligentlystored, so much decayed in the bottoms, and so ill fitted with rigging, that he declares his astonishment at their arrival. 

It may deserve our consideration, sir, whether the success of theSpanish privateers may not be, in great part, attributed to thispernicious practice; whether captains, when their vessels are insuredfor more than their value, do not rashly venture into known danger?whether they do not wilfully miss the security of convoys? whether theydo not direct their courses where privateers may most securely cruise?whether they do not surrender with less resistance than interest wouldexcite? and whether they do not raise clamours against the governmentfor their ill success, to avoid the suspicion of negligence or fraud?

That other frauds are committed in the practice of insuring, is wellknown to the honourable gentleman: it is a common practice to take moneyupon bottomry, by way of pledge, for the captain's fidelity, and todestroy this security by insuring above the real value; so that thecaptain may gain by neglecting the care of his vessel, or, at least, secure himself from loss, and indulge his ease or his pleasure withoutany interruption from the fear of diminishing his fortune. 

The whole practice of insurance, sir, is, in its present state, Ibelieve, so perplexed with frauds, and of such manifest tendency to theobstruction of commerce, that it absolutely requires some legalregulations. 

Sir John BARNARD then spoke to this purpose:--Of frauds in the practiceof insurance, with regard to which the honourable gentleman has appealedto me, I can confidently affirm that I am totally ignorant: I know notof any fraudulent practices openly carried on, or established by custom, which I suppose are meant: for with regard to single acts of fraud, committed by particular men, it is not to be supposed but that they havebeen detected in this, as in all other branches of traffick: nor can Iconceive that any argument can be drawn from them against the practice;for if every part of commerce is to be prohibited, which has furnishedvillains with opportunities of deceit, we shall contract trade into anarrow compass. 

With regard, sir, to the instance of the Royal George, though theproceedings of the officers are not wholly to be vindicated, yet part oftheir conduct is less inexplicable than it has been represented. Theirreturn to Antigua, when they were bound for Britain, and were within aweek's sailing of their port, is easily to be defended, if the wind wascontrary to their intended course; for it is not difficult to conceivethat they might reach a distant port, with a favourable wind, muchsooner than one much nearer, with the wind against them. 

I have always observed, sir, that the gentlemen engaged in the trade tothe East Indies, assume an air of superiority, to which I know not whatclaim they can produce, and seem to imagine, that their charter givesthem more extensive knowledge, and more acute sagacity, than falls tothe lot of men not combined in their association. 

But however these gentlemen may disapprove my arguments, and howeverthey may misrepresent them, I shall be satisfied, that they will have, with the disinterested and impartial, their just weight, and that thisaffair will not be hastily determined upon an imperfect examination. 

Sir Robert WALPOLE replied to this effect:--Whether the merchants aresatisfied with the present methods of insuring, or what is the opinionof any separate body of men, I think it absolutely unnecessary toinquire. We are constituted for the publick advantage, and are engagedby our senatorial character to consider, not the private interest ofparticular men, but the general advantage of our country. 

In our pursuit, sir, of national interest, we shall be obligedfrequently to oppose the schemes which private men or separatefraternities, have formed for their own advantage, and which they may beexpected to defend with all their art; both because every man isunwilling to imagine that the publick interest and his own are opposite, and because it is to be feared, that many may consider the publick onlyin subordination to themselves, and be very little solicitous about thegeneral prosperity of their country, provided none of the calamitieswhich afflict it extend their influence to themselves. 

We are in the discussion of this question, sir, to consider that we areengaged in a war against a nation from which insults, depredations, oppressions, and cruelties, have been long complained of, and againstwhich we are, therefore, to act with a resolution proportioned to theinjuries which we have suffered, and to our desire of vengeance. We areto practice every method of distressing them, and to promote the successof our arms even at the expense of present gain, and the interest ofprivate men. 

It is well known, sir, to all who have either heard or read of theSpaniards, that they live in carelessness and indolence, neglect all thenatural advantages of their own country, despise the gain of foreigncommerce, and depend wholly on their American settlements, for all theconveniences, and, perhaps, for most of the necessaries of life. 

This is the particular circumstance that makes a war with Britain somuch to be dreaded by them. A nation superiour to them by sea holds thembesieged, like a garrison surrounded by an army, precludes them fromsupplies, intercepts their succours, and if it cannot force their wallsby attack, can, at least, by a blockade, starve them to a capitulation. 

Thus, sir, by a naval war with an enemy of superiour strength, they mustat length be subdued, and subdued, perhaps, without a battle, andwithout the possibility of resistance; against such an enemy theircourage or their discipline is of no use; they may form armies, indeed, but which can only stand upon the shore, to defend what their enemieshave no intention of invading, and see those ships seized in which theirpay is treasured, or their provisions are stored. 

Such, sir, is our natural superiority over the Spaniards, a species ofsuperiority that must inevitably prevail, if it be not defeated by ourown folly; and surely a more effectual method of defeating it, theSpaniards themselves could not have discovered, than that of insuring, their ships among our merchants. 

When a ship thus insured is taken, which, notwithstanding allprecautions, must sometimes happen, we examine the cargo, find itextremely valuable, and triumph in our success; we not only count thegain to ourselves, but the loss to our enemies, and determine that asmall number of such captures will reduce them to offer us peace uponour own terms. 

Such are the conclusions which are made, and made with reason, by menunacquainted with the secret practices of our merchants, and who do notsuspect us to be stupid enough to secure our enemies against ourselves;but it is often found, upon a more close examination, that our ships ofwar have only plundered our merchants, and that our privateers may, indeed, have enriched themselves, but impoverished their country. It isdiscovered that the loss of the Spaniards is to be repaid, and, perhaps, sometimes with interest, by the British insurers. 

If it be urged, that we ought not to enact any laws which may obstructthe gain of our fellow-subjects, may it not be asked, why all trade withSpain is prohibited; may not the trade be equally gainful with theinsurance, and may not the gain be more generally distributed, and, therefore, be more properly national?

But this trade was prohibited, because it was more necessary to ourenemies than to ourselves; it was prohibited, because the laws of warrequire, that a less evil should be suffered to inflict a greater; it isupon this principle that every battle is fought, and that we fire ourown ships to consume the navies of the enemy. 

For this reason, sir, it appears to me evident beyond contradiction, that the insurance of Spanish ships ought to be prohibited: we shall, indeed, lose the profit of the insurance, but we shall be reimbursed bythe captures, which is an argument that cannot be produced for theprohibition of commerce. 

It is urged, sir, that they may insure their ships in other countries;an assertion, of which, whether it be true or not, I am not able todecide; but it is acknowledged, that the necessity of establishing newcorrespondence will be at least a temporary obstruction of their trade, and an obstruction of even a short continuance may lay them at ourmercy. 

But let us, sir, reflect upon the weakness of this argument, --_theymust be allowed to insure here, because they may insure in otherplaces;_ will it not be equally just to urge, that _they must trade withus, because they may trade with other nations?_ And may it not beanswered, that though we cannot wholly suspend their commerce, it is yetour business to obstruct it as far as we are able?

May it-not, sir, be farther affirmed, that by insuring in other nations, they may injure their allies by falling into our hands, but do not theless benefit us? that if they do not grow weaker, we at least arestrengthened; but that by insuring among us, whatever steps are taken, the equilibrium of the war is preserved always the same?

It is asserted, and I suppose with truth, that we insure at a lower ratethan others, and it will, therefore, follow, that the Spaniards, whenever their ships shall escape us, will suffer more by having-insuredamongst foreigners, than if they had contracted with our merchants. 

Thus it appears, sir, that there are stronger reasons for prohibitingthe insurance of Spanish ships, than for putting a stop to our commercewith them; and that whether their ships are taken by us, or escape us, it is the general interest of the nation, that they shall be insured byforeign merchants. 

With respect, sir, to the East India company, I have no regard to theirinterest, considered as distinct from that of the rest of the nation;nor have received any solicitations from them to promote this bill, orto espouse their interest; but cannot, without concealing my realsentiments, deny, that as they have the grant of an exclusive trade tothe East Indies, to insure the ships that are sent thither without theirpermission, is to invade their rights, and to infringe their charter;and that the practice, if the validity of their charter be admitted, isillegal, and ought to be discountenanced. 

The practice, sir, of insuring, _interest or no interest_, or ofassigning to ships an imaginary value, is nothing more than a particulargame, a mere solemn species of _hazard_, and ought, therefore, to beprohibited, for every reason that can be urged against games of chance. 

With regard to this bill in general, it is, in my opinion, highlynecessary, nor can I discover any important objection that can be madeagainst it. Some law of this kind, and to this purpose, I have longintended to offer to the consideration of this assembly, and since it isnow before us, I think we ought to consider it with the attention whichmay be justly expected from us. 

Lord BALTIMORE spoke thus:--Sir, I know not how properly the practice ofinsuring may be termed a species of hazard, nor do I think any thingmore is to be considered, than whether the game be gainful to thenation, or not, for I cannot discover that there is any absurdity inenriching ourselves at the expense of other nations, whether enemies orallies. That we ought to prefer the general good to the advantage ofindividuals, is undoubted, but I cannot conceive that in this case therecan be any opposition between private and publick interest. If ourinsurers gain by securing the ships of our enemies, the nation isbenefited, for all national gain must circulate through the hands ofindividuals. 

No man will assert that we ought to assist our enemies, nor will any manimagine that we assist them by impoverishing them, and if our insurersgain by their practice, the Spaniards must undoubtedly be losers. 

Mr. WILLIMOT spoke next, to the following purpose:--Sir, I haveconversed on the question to which this bill relates, with men engagedin various kinds of traffick, and who have no common interest but thatof their country. I have dispersed among the merchants, most eminent fortheir acquaintance with the whole extent of commerce, and for theirknowledge of the true interest of the nation, copies of this bill, andcannot find any of them so sensible of the grievance of which we have soloud complaints, as to desire that it should be redressed by themeasures now proposed. 

That frauds are practised on every side, in this, as well as in othertrades, the general corruption of our age gives us sufficient reason tosuspect; but what is common to every sort of traffick, cannot beproduced as an argument for the prohibition of any. 

That the practice of insuring an imaginary value may give opportunityfor greater frauds than can be practised in common dealings, is likewiseevident, but I cannot discover such frauds to require the interpositionof the legislature. 

If they are practised only by those of our own nation, the publick doesnot suffer; for property is only transferred from one subject toanother: the fraud ought, indeed, to be severely punished in the courtsof criminal justice, but the custom which gave the opportunity ofpractising it, ought not to be restrained, any more than any otherprofession not criminal in itself, but liable to accidental abuses. 

If our insurers are defrauded by foreigners, the nation is then, indeed, more nearly affected, but even in that case, it is to be remembered, that the private interest of the insurers, who must be immediatelyruined, is a sufficient security for the publick. For it cannot, sir, beconceived that any man will obstinately carry on a business, by which hebecomes every day poorer, or, that when he desists he will be succeededby another, who cannot but know that he engages in that traffick to hiscertain ruin. 

The true state of this affair is, that frauds are, indeed, oftencommitted, and are for that reason always suspected, and that theinsurers, when they insure the ship and cargo against accidents, reckon, among other chances, the probability of being cheated, and proportiontheir demands, not only to the length and danger of the voyage, but tothe character, likewise, of the man with whom they contract. 

This, sir, is always the practice of those whom experience has madeacquainted with the danger of implicit confidence and unsuspectingcredulity, nor do any but the young and unskilful suffer themselves tobe so exposed to frauds, as that their fortunes should be injured, orthe general gain of their business overbalanced, by a few deceits. 

Thus it appears, that notwithstanding the ease and safety with which thepresent methods of insurance admit fraud to be practised, the insurers, by a proportionate degree of caution, secure themselves from beinginjured, and, by consequence, the nation. 

The insurance of foreign ships is now to be considered, by which greatprofit arises to the nation. We insure, sir, as it has been observed, atlower rates than other nations, because we have more business of thiskind, and the smallness of our profit is compensated by the frequency;the cheapness of insurances, and eagerness of foreigners to insure here, reciprocally contribute to each other; we are often applied to, becausewe insure at an easy rate, and we can insure at an easy rate, because weare often applied to. 

Nor is the cheapness of British insurance the only motive to thepreference which it preserves among foreigners, who are induced to applyto this nation, by the reputation which our merchants have deservedlygained for probity and punctuality superiour to that of any othertraders. Our merchants, sir, bargain without artifice, pay withoutsubterfuges, and are ready on all occasions to preserve their characterat the hazard of their profit. 

From these two considerations we may draw unanswerable arguments againstany restraints upon the practice of insuring: if foreigners are oncedisappointed in their applications to us, our business will in a greatpart cease, and as we shall not then be able to insure at lower ratesthan other nations, we shall never recover that branch of our trade. Andas the character of the British merchants exempts them from anysuspicion of practices pernicious to the publick, why should they berestrained? Why, sir, should they appear to be suspected by thelegislature of their own country, whom foreigners trust withouthesitation. 

It has been objected to them with great warmth, and urged with muchrhetorical exaggeration, that they assist the enemies of their country, that they prolong the war, and defeat those advantages which oursituation and commerce have given us; imputations sufficientlyatrocious, if they were founded upon truth. 

But let us, sir, examine the arguments by which this accusation has beensupported, and inquire whether this triumph of eloquence has beenoccasioned by any real superiority of evidence or reason; it is urged, that we have already prohibited commerce with the Spaniards, and that, therefore, we ought, likewise, to prohibit the insurance of their ships. 

It will not require, sir, an imagination very fertile, or a knowledgevery extensive, to supply arguments sufficient to refute the supposeddemonstration; in opposition to which it may be urged, that this kind ofcommerce is of a peculiar nature, that it subsists upon opinion, and ispreserved by the reputation of our insurers; a reputation that theinsurers of other nations may obtain by the same means, and from whom weshall, therefore, never recover it. 

It may be observed, sir, that other commodities are the peculiar productof different countries, and that there is no danger of losing our othertrade by suspending it, because it depends upon the excellence of ourmanufactures; but that insurance may be the commodity of any country, where money and common honesty are to be found. 

This argument may, perhaps, be yet more effectually invalidated, or, perhaps, entirely subverted, by denying the expedience of thatprohibition which is produced as a precedent for another restraint. Nor, indeed, does it appear why we should preclude ourselves from a gainfultrade, because the money is drawn by it out of the hands of our enemies;or why the product of our lands should lie unconsumed, or ourmanufactures stand unemployed, rather than we should sell to our enemieswhat they will purchase at another place, or by the intervention of aneutral power. 

To sell to an enemy that which may enable him to injure us, that whichhe must necessarily obtain, and which he could buy from no other, would, indeed, be to the last degree, absurd; but that may surely be sold themwithout any breach of morality or policy, which they can want with lessinconvenience than we can keep. If we were besieging a town, I shouldnot advise our soldiers to sell to the inhabitants ammunition orprovisions, but cannot discover the folly of admitting them to purchaseornaments for their houses, or brocades for their ladies. 

But, without examining with the utmost accuracy, whether the lateprohibition was rational or not, I have, I hope, suggested objectionssufficient to make the question doubtful, and to incline us to try thesuccess of one experiment, before we venture upon another morehazardous. 

I am never willing, sir, to load trade with restraints; trade is, in itsown nature, so fugitive and variable, that no constant course can beprescribed to it; and those regulations which were proper when they weremade, may, in a few months, become difficulties and obstructions. Wewell know, that many of the measures which our ancestors pursued for theencouragement of commerce, have been found of pernicious consequence;and even in this age, which, perhaps, experience, more than wisdom, hasenlightened, I have known few attempts of that kind which have notdefeated the end for which they were made. 

It is more prudent to leave the merchants at liberty to pursue thosemeasures which experience shall dictate upon every occasion, and sufferthem to snatch the present opportunity of honest gain, whenever it shallhappen; they will never injure their own interest by the use of thisliberty, and by preserving themselves, they will preserve the nationfrom detriment; nor will they need to be restrained by a law proposedwithout their solicitation, and of which they cannot discover anybeneficial consequences. 

Mr. Horace WALPOLE spoke next, to this purpose:--Sir, for the bill nowbefore us I have no particular fondness, nor desire that it should bepromoted by any other means than rational arguments, and therepresentation of indubitable facts. 

I have no regard, sir, in this inquiry, to any private interest, or anyother desire than that of securing the interest of my country, which, inmy opinion, evidently requires that we should give no assistance to ourenemies, that our merchants should cooperate with our navies, and thatwe should endeavour to withhold every thing that may make the war lessburdensome to them, and, consequently, of longer continuance. 

It was observed, sir, in the beginning of the debate, by a gentlemaneminently skilled in mercantile affairs, that insurance was practised bymany nations; but he did not inform us of what one of the clauses makesit proper to inquire, whether they allowed the method of insuring_interest or no interest_, and rating ships at an imaginary value. Thisis, I know, prohibited by the Dutch, a nation whose authority oncommercial questions will not be disputed, nor do they allow their EastIndian ships to be insured at all. 

The difficulty of estimating the value of any cargo has been urged indefence of this practice, nor is the defence wholly without weight, because the cargo in many voyages cannot be ascertained. I shall, however, take this opportunity of observing, though I may somewhatdigress from the present argument, how necessary it is that some of ourexported cargoes should be exactly specified. 

I have been lately informed, sir, that six ships laden with Britishwool, have entered at one time into a port of France; nor do I know howthis practice, which is justly complained of as pernicious to our trade, and threatening the ruin of our country, can be prevented but by aconstant and regular particularization of every cargo carried to France. 

I admit, sir, that some cargoes which are imported cannot beparticularly registered; such is the gold with which we are dailysupplied by our commerce with the Portuguese, in opposition to theirlaws, and which our merchants are, therefore, under the necessity ofconcealing. 

It is not, indeed, easy to foresee all the inconveniencies that mayarise from new regulations of commerce; but the difficulty is not sogreat as has been represented, nor can I conceive why all ourconsultations on trade should be without effect. Gentlemen may obtainsome knowledge of commerce from their own observation, which they mayenlarge by an unconfined and indifferent conversation with traders ofvarious classes, and by inquiries into the different branches ofcommerce; inquiries, sir, which are generally neglected by those whoseemployments confine their attention to particular parts of commerce, orwhose application to business hinders them from attending to anyopinions but those which their own personal experience enables them toform. 

From these informations impartially collected, and diligently compared, a man not engaged in the profession of a merchant may form generalprinciples, and draw consequences, more certain, and more extensive intheir relations, than those which are struck out only from theobservation of one subdivided species of commerce. 

A member of this house, sir, thus enlightened by inquiry, and whosejudgment is not diverted from its natural rectitude by the impulse ofany private consideration, may judge of any commercial debate with lessdanger of errour or partiality than the merchants, of whom, nevertheless, I have the highest esteem, and whose knowledge, orprobity, I do not intend to depreciate, when I declare my fears thatthey may sometimes confound general maxims of trade with the opinions ofparticular branches, and sometimes mistake their own gain for theinterest of the publick. 

The interest of the merchants ought, indeed, always to be considered inthis house; but then it ought to be regarded only in subordination tothat of the whole community, a subordination which the gentleman whospoke last seems to have forgotten. He may, perhaps, not intend long toretain his senatorial character, and, therefore, delivered his opiniononly as a merchant. 

He has distinguished between the conduct of experienced and unskilfulinsurers, with how much justice I shall not determine. I am afraid thata vigorous inquiry would discover, that neither age nor youth has beenable to resist strong temptations to some practices, which neither lawnor justice can support, and that those, whose experience has made themcautious, have not been always equally honest. 

But this is a subject upon which I am not inclined to dwell, and onlymention as the reason which convinces me of the propriety of the billbefore us. 

Sir William YONGE spoke to this effect:--Sir, there appears noprobability that the different opinions which have been formed of thisbill will be reconciled by this debate; nor, indeed, is there any reasonfor wondering at this contrariety of sentiments. 

The several clauses of the bill have relations and consequences sodifferent, that scarce any one man can approve them all; and in ourpresent deliberation, an objection to a particular clause is consideredas an argument against the whole bill. 

It is, therefore, necessary, to prevent an unprofitable expense of time, to resolve the house into a committee, in which the bill may beconsidered by single clauses, and that part which cannot be defended maybe rejected, and that only retained which deserves our approbation. Inthe committee, when we have considered the first clause, and heard theobjections against it, we may mend it; or, if it cannot be amended, reject or postpone it, and so proceed through the whole bill with muchgreater expedition, and at the same time, with a more diligent view ofevery clause, than while we are obliged to take the whole at once intoour consideration. 

I shall, for my part, approve some clauses, and make objections toothers; but think it proper to reserve my objections, and the reasons ofmy approbation, for the committee into which we ought to go on thisoccasion. 

[The bill was referred to a committee, but not forty members staying inthe house, it was dropped. ]

HOUSE OF COMMONS, MARCH 2, 1740-1. 

DEBATE ON THE BILL FOR THE ENCOURAGEMENT AND INCREASE OF SEAMEN. 

The bill was ordered to be read the second time, and to be printed forthe use of the members, that it might be thoroughly examined andunderstood. 

On the forty-fourth day, the second reading of the bill was postponed tothe fiftieth; but the grand motion being debated on that day, nothingelse was heard. 

On the fifty-first it was again put off; but

On the fifty-sixth day, being read a second time, it was, after someopposition, referred to a committee of the whole house, to sit five daysafter. In the meanwhile, On the fifty-seventh, it was ordered that the proper officers do laybefore this house an account of what persons were authorized, by virtueof the act in the 4th of queen Anne, for "the encouragement and increaseof seamen, and for the better and speedier manning her fleet;" toconduct seamen or seafaring men taken upon privy searches made byapplications to justices; and what number of seamen or seafaring menwere returned; also, the charge attending the same. 

On the sixty-first day, moved that the said account should be read;which being done, the house resolved itself into a grand committee onthe present bill; and the first clause being read, proposing the blanksto be filled thus: that every volunteer seamen, after five years'service, be entitled to six pounds per year, during life. 

Sir John BARNARD rose, and spoke as follows:--Sir, as it is our duty toprovide laws, by which all frauds and oppressions may be punished, whenthey are detected, we are no less obliged to obviate such practices asshall make punishments necessary; nor are we only to facilitate thedetection, but take away, as far as it is possible, the opportunities ofguilt. It is to no purpose that punishments are threatened, if they canbe evaded, or that rewards are offered, if they may by any meanartifices be withheld. 

For this reason, sir, I think it necessary to observe, that the intentof this clause, the most favourable and alluring clause in the bill, maylose its effect by a practice not uncommon, by which any man, howeverinclined to serve his country, may be defrauded of the right of avolunteer. 

Many men have voluntarily applied to the officers of ships of war, andafter having been rejected by them as unfit for the service, have beendragged on board within a few days, perhaps within a few hoursafterwards, to undergo all the hardships, without the merit, ofvolunteers. 

When any man, sir, has been rejected by the sea officers, he ought tohave a certificate given him, which shall be an exemption from animpress, that if any other commander shall judge more favourably of hisqualifications, he may always have the privilege of a volunteer, and beentitled to the reward which he deserved, by his readiness to enter theservice. 

If such provisions are not made, this hateful practice, a practice, sir, common and notorious, and very discouraging to such as would enter theservice of the publick, may so far prevail, that no man shall be able todenominate himself a volunteer, or claim the reward proposed by thebill. 

Admiral WAGER spoke next, to the following effect:--Sir, it is notcommon for men to receive injuries without applying for redress, when itmay certainly be obtained. If any proceedings like those which are nowcomplained of, had been mentioned at the board of admiralty, they hadbeen immediately censured and redressed; but as no such accusations wereoffered, I think it may probably be concluded, that no such crimes havebeen committed. 

For what purpose oppressions of this kind should be practised, it is noteasy to conceive; for the officers are not at all rewarded forimpressing sailors. As, therefore, it is not probable that any man actswickedly or cruelly without temptation: as I have never heard any suchinjury complained of by those that suffered it, I cannot but imagine, that it is one of those reports which arise from mistake, or are forgedby malice, to injure the officers, and obstruct the service. 

Lord BALTIMORE rose next, and spoke to the following effect:--That thepractice now complained of, sir, is very frequent, and, whatever may bethe temptation to it, such as every day produces some instances of, Ihave reasons for asserting with great confidence. I have, within thesefew days, as I was accidentally upon the river, informed myself of twowatermen ignominiously dragged by force into the service to which theyhad voluntarily offered themselves a few days before. The reasons ofsuch oppression, it is the business of those gentlemen to inquire, whomhis majesty intrusts with the care of his fleet; but to interrupt thecourse of wickedness, to hinder it from frustrating the rewards offeredby the publick, is the province of the representatives of the people. And I hope, sir, some proviso will be made in this case. 

Admiral NORRIS rose and said:--Sir, if any such practices had beenfrequent, to what can it be imputed, that those who employ their livesin maritime business should be strangers to them? Why have no complaintsbeen made by those that have been injured? Or why should officers exposethemselves to the hazard of censure without advantage? I cannotdiscover why these hardships should be inflicted, nor how they couldhave been concealed, and, therefore, think the officers of the navy maybe cleared from the imputation, without farther inquiry. 

Sir John BARNARD spoke again, to the following purpose:--Sir, it is invain that objections are made, if the facts upon which they are foundedmay be denied at pleasure: nothing is more easy than to deny, becauseproofs are not required of a negative. But as negatives require noproof, so they have no authority, nor can any consequence be deducedfrom them. I might, therefore, suffer the facts to remain in theirpresent state, asserted on one side by those that have reasons tobelieve them, and doubted on the other without reasons; for surely hecannot be said to reason, who questions an assertion only because hedoes not know it to be true. 

But as every question, by which the liberty of a Briton may be affected, is of importance sufficient to require that no evidence should besuppressed by which it may be cleared, I cannot but think it proper thata committee should be formed to examine the conduct of the officers inthis particular; and in confidence of the veracity of those from whom Ireceived my information, I here promise to produce such evidence asshall put an end to controversy and doubt. 

If this is not granted, sir, the fact must stand recorded and allowed;for to doubt, and refuse evidence, is a degree of prejudice andobstinacy without example. Nor is this the only objection to the clausebefore us, which appears very imperfect, with regard to thequalifications specified as a title to the reward. The reward ought notto be confined to those who shall hereafter be invited by the promise ofit to engage in the service, while those who entered into it without anysuch prospect, are condemned to dangers and fatigues without arecompense. Where merit is equal, the reward ought to be equal; and, surely, where there is greater merit, the reward proposed by the senate, as an encouragement to bravery, ought not to be less. To be excludedfrom the advantages which others have obtained, only by avoiding theservice, cannot but depress the spirit of those whose zeal and courageincited them, at the beginning of the war, to enter into the fleet; andto deject those from whom we expect defence and honour, is neitherprudent nor just. 

Nor is it, in my opinion, proper to offer the same rewardindiscriminately to all that shall accept it; rewards ought to beproportioned to desert, and no man can justly be paid for what he cannotperform; there ought, therefore, to be some distinction made between aseaman by profession, one that has learned his art at the expense oflong experience, labour, and hazard, and a man who only enters the shipbecause he is useless on land, and who can only incommode the sailorstill he has been instructed by them. 

It appears, sir, to me, a considerable defect in our naval regulations, that wages are not proportioned to ability; and I think it may not benow unseasonably proposed, that sailors should be paid according to theskill which they have acquired; a provision by which an emulation wouldbe raised among them, and that industry excited, which now languishesfor want of encouragement, and those capacities awakened which nowslumber in ignorance and sloth, from the despair of obtaining anyadvantage by superiority of knowledge. 

Sir Robert WALPOLE then rose, and spoke as follows:--That this charge, sir, however positively urged, is generally unjust, the declarations ofthese honourable gentlemen are sufficient to evince, since it is notprobable that the injured persons would not have found some friend tohave represented these hardships to the admiralty, and no suchrepresentations could have been made without their knowledge. 

Yet, sir, I am far from doubting that by accident, or, perhaps, bymalice, some men have been treated in this manner; for it is not in thepower of any administration to make all those honest or wise whom theyare obliged to employ; and when great affairs are depending, minutecircumstances cannot always be attended to. If the vigilance of thosewho are intrusted with the chief direction of great numbers ofsubordinate officers be such, that corrupt practices are not frequent, and their justice such, that they are never unpunished when legallydetected, the most strict inquirer can expect no more. Power willsometimes be abused, and punishment sometimes be escaped. 

It is, sir, easy to be conceived that a report may become general, though the practice be very rare. The fact is multiplied as often as itis related, and every man who hears the same story twice, imagines thatit is told of different persons, and exclaims against the tyranny of theofficers of the navy. 

But these, in my opinion, sir, are questions, if not remote from thepresent affair, yet by no means essential to it. The question now beforeus is, not what illegalities have been committed in the execution ofimpresses, but how impresses themselves may become less necessary? howthe nation may be secured without injury to individuals? and how thefleet may be manned with less detriment to commerce?

Sir, the reward now proposed is intended to excite men to enter theservice without compulsion; and if this expedient be not approved, another ought to be suggested: for I hope gentlemen are united in theirendeavours to find out some method of security to the publick, and donot obstruct the proceedings of the committee, that when the fleets lieinactive and useless, they may have an opportunity to reproach theministry. 

Admiral NORRIS spoke next, in substance:--Sir, though it is notnecessary to enter into an accurate examination of the gentleman'sproposal, yet I cannot but observe, that by making it, he discovershimself unacquainted with the disposition of seamen, among whom nothingraises so much discontent as the suspicion of partiality. Should oneman, in the same rank, receive larger wages than another, he who thoughthimself injured, as he who is paid less will always think, would be sofar from exerting his abilities to attain an equality with hisassociate, that he would probably never be prevailed on to lay his handupon the tackling, but would sit sullen, or work perversely, though theship were labouring in a storm, or sinking in a battle. 

Mr. GORE then spoke as follows:--Sir, the danger of introducingdistinctions among men in the same rank, where every man that imagineshis merit neglected, may have an opportunity of resenting the injury, is, doubtless, such as no prudent commander will venture to incur. 

Every man, in this case, becomes the judge of his own merit; and as hewill always discover some reason for the preference of another verydifferent from superiority of desert, he will, by consequence, be eitherenraged or dispirited, will either resolve to desert his commander, orbetray him to the enemies, or not oppose them. 

I remember, sir, though imperfectly, a story which I heard in mytravels, of an army in which some troops received a penny a day lessthan the rest; a parsimony which cost dear in the day of battle; for thedisgusted troops laid down their arms before the enemy, and sufferedtheir general to be cut in pieces. 

General WADE then spoke to this effect:--Sir, I cannot but concur withthe honourable gentleman in his opinion, that those who are alreadyengaged in the service, who have borne the fatigues of a long voyage, and perhaps are, at this hour, exposing their lives in battle to defendthe rights of their country, ought to have the same claim to the rewardproposed, with those who shall hereafter offer themselves. Nor, in myopinion, ought those who have hitherto been pressed into our fleets tobe discouraged from their duty by an exclusion from the same advantage. For if they were compelled to serve in the fleet, they were compelledwhen there was not this encouragement for volunteers, which, perhaps, they would have accepted if it had been then proposed, Every man, atleast, will allege, that he would have accepted it, and complain hesuffers only by the fault of the government; a government which he willnot be very zealous to defend, while he is considered with less regardthan others, from whom no greater services are expected. 

A prospect of new rewards, sir, will add new alacrity to all the forces, and an equal distribution of favour will secure an unshaken andinviolable fidelity. Nothing but union can produce success, and nothingcan secure union but impartiality and justice. 

Mr. SANDYS rose, and spoke as follows:--Sir, the efficacy of rewards, and the necessity of an impartial distribution, are no unfruitfulsubjects for rhetorick; but it may, perhaps, be more useful at presentto consider, with such a degree of attention as the question must beacknowledged to deserve, to whom these rewards are to be paid, and fromwhat fund they are expected to arise. 

With regard to those who are to claim the reward, sir, they seem verynegligently specified; for they are distinguished only by the characterof having served five years; a distinction unintelligible, withoutexplanation. 

It is, I suppose, sir, the intent of the bill, that no man shall missthe reward but by his own fault; and, therefore, it may be inquired, what is to be the fate of him who shall be disabled in his firstadventure, whom in the first year, or month, of his service, an unluckyshot shall confine for the remaining part of his life to inactivity: asthe bill is now formed, he must be miserable without a recompense; andhis wounds, which make him unable to support himself, will, thoughreceived in defence of his country, entitle him to no support from thepublick. 

Nor is this the only difficulty that may arise from the specifying of solong a service; for how can any man that shall enter on board the fleetbe informed that the war will continue for five years? May we not alljustly hope, that alacrity, unanimity, and prudence, may, in a muchshorter time, reduce our enemies to beg for peace? And shall our sailorslose the reward of their hazards and their labours, only because theyhave been successful? What will this be less than making their bravery acrime or folly, and punishing them for not protracting the war bycowardice or treachery?

But let us suppose, sir, those defects supplied by a more explicit anddeterminate specification; there will yet arise an objection far moreformidable; an objection, which the present state of our revenues willnot suffer to be answered. The consideration of the greatness of theannual payment which this proposal requires, ought to incite every manto employ all his sagacity in search of some other method, equallyefficacious, and less expensive. 

We have already, sir, forty thousand seamen in our pay, to whom eightthousand more are speedily to be added: when each of these shall demandhis stipend, a new burden of two hundred and eighty-eight thousandpounds must be laid upon the nation; upon a nation, whose lands aremortgaged, whose revenues are anticipated, and whose taxes cannot beborne without murmurs, nor increased without sedition. 

The nation has found, by experience, that taxes once imposed for justreasons, and continued upon plausible pretences, till they are becomefamiliar, are afterwards continued upon motives less laudable, are tooproductive of influence, and too instrumental towards facilitating themeasures of the ministry, to be ever willingly remitted. 

Mr. BLADEN spoke next, as follows:--Sir, it is obvious, that when thebalance is unequal, it may be reduced to an equilibrium, as well bytaking weight out of one scale, as adding it to the other. The wagesoffered by the merchants overbalance, at present, those which areproposed by the crown; to raise the allowance in the ships of war, willbe, to lay new loads upon the publick, and will incommode the merchants, whose wages must always bear the same proportion to the king's. The onlymethod, then, that remains, is to lighten the opposite scale, byrestraining the merchants from giving wages, in time of war, beyond acertain value; for, as the service of the crown is then more immediatelynecessarv to the general advantage than that of the merchants, it oughtto be made more gainful. Sailors, sir, are not, generally, men of veryextensive views; and, therefore, we cannot expect that they shouldprefer the general good of their country before their own presentinterest; a motive of such power, that even in men of curiousresearches, refined sentiments, and generous education, we see, toooften, that it surmounts every other consideration. 

Lord BALTIMORE then spoke again:--Sir, to the expedient which thehonourable gentleman who spoke last has suggested, and which he must beconfessed to have placed in the strongest light, many objections may beraised, which I am afraid will not easily be removed. 

The first, sir, which occurs to me on this short reflection is not lessthan the impossibility of putting his scheme in execution. Theprescription of wages which he proposes, may be eluded by a thousandartifices, by advanced money, by gratuitous acknowledgments, the paymentof money for pretended services, or by secret contracts, which it wouldbe the interest of both parties to conceal. 

But if this objection could be surmounted by severity and vigilance, would not this expedient help to defeat the general intention of thebill? A bill not designed as an immediate resource, a mere temporaryproject to supply our fleets for the present year, but as a method forremoving the only obstruction of the British power, the difficulty ofmanning our ships of war. 

It is, I hope, sir, the intention of every man who has offered hissentiments on this occasion, to contrive some general encouragement forseamen, which shall not only invite them to assist their country at thefirst summons, but shall allure others to qualify themselves for thepublick service, by engaging in the same profession. 

This is only to be done by making the condition of sailors lessmiserable, by entitling them to privileges, and honouring them withdistinctions. But by limiting the merchant's wages, if such limitationsare, indeed, possible, though we may palliate the present distress, weshall diminish the number of sailors, and thereby not only contract ourcommerce but endanger our country. 

Mr. TRACEY spoke next, to the following effect:--Sir, I know not forwhat reasons the present method of advancing rewards at entrance ispractised, of which, however specious it might appear, the success by nomeans encourages the continuance. The sailors, though not a generationof men much disposed to reflection, or qualified for ratiocination, arenot yet so void of thought as not easily to perceive that a smallincrease of constant wages is of more value than several pounds to bepaid only at once, and which are squandered as soon as they arereceived. 

Instead, therefore, of restraining the wages of the merchants, it seemsprobable, that by raising those of the king, we may man the fleet withmost expedition; and one method of raising the wages will be to suppressthe advanced money. 

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL spoke next:--Sir, if the sum of money now paid byway of advance can be supposed to have any effect, if it can be imaginedthat any number of seamen, however inconsiderable, are allured by itinto the fleet, it is more usefully employed than it can be supposed tobe when sunk into the current wages, and divided into small payments. 

The advance money is only paid to those that enter: if no volunteerspresent themselves, no money is paid, and the nation doth not suffer bythe offer: but if the wages are raised, the expense will be certain, without the certainty of advantage; for those that enter voluntarilyinto the fleet, will receive no more than those that are forced into itby an impress; and therefore there will be no incitement to enterwithout compulsion. Thus every other inconvenience will remain, with theaddition of a new burden to the nation; our forces will be maintained ata greater expense, and not raised with less difficulty. 

Lord BALTIMORE said:--Sir, I cannot but concur in opinion with thehonourable gentleman who spoke last, from my own acquaintance with thesentiments and habits that unalterably prevail among those who have beenaccustomed to the sea, a race of men to the last degree negligent of anyfuture events, and careless about any provision against distant evils;men who have no thoughts at sea, but how to reach the land; nor at land, but how to squander what they have gained at sea. To men like these, itmay easily be imagined that no encouragement is equal to the temptationof present gain, and the opportunity of present pleasure. 

Of this any man, sir, may convince himself, who shall talk to a crew buthalf an hour; for he shall find few among them, who will not, for asmall sum of present money, sell any distant prospect of affluence orhappiness. 

Whether I am mistaken in my opinion, the honourable members who havelong commanded in the naval service can easily determine, and I doubtnot but they will agree that no motive can be proposed to a sailorequivalent to immediate reward. 

Sir William YONGE spoke next:--Sir, that some distinction ought to bemade to the advantage of volunteers, if we intend to man our fleetwithout compulsion, is obvious and incontestable; and to avoid thenecessity of compulsion ought to be the chief end of this bill; fornothing can be less to the advantage of the nation, than to continue theuse of such ungrateful methods, and yet increase the publick expense. 

We ought, therefore, in my opinion, to determine upon some peculiarreward, either to be advanced upon their entrance into the service, orpaid at their dismission from it. 

But as I see, sir, no reason for hoping that all the encouragement whichcan be offered, will raise volunteers in a sufficient number to secureour navigation, and assert our sovereignty, it seems not proper toconfine our consultations to this part of the bill; for since compulsionis on many occasions apparently necessary, some method requires to beconsidered, in which it may be legal. 

What new power ought to be placed in the magistrate, for what time, andwith what restrictions, I am far from assuming the province ofdetermining; but that some measures must be taken for compelling thosewho cannot be persuaded, and discovering those that will not offerthemselves, cannot admit of doubt; and as the magistrate is at presentwithout any authority for this purpose, it is evident that his powermust be extended, for the same reason as it was given in its presentdegree--the general benefit of the whole community. 

Sir John BARNARD then spoke to the following effect:--Sir, if theintent of this bill be to enable one part of the nation to enslave theother; if the plausible and inviting professions of encouraging andincreasing seamen, are to terminate in violence, constraint, andoppression; it is unnecessary to dwell longer upon particular clauses. The intention of the bill is detestable, and deserves not the ceremonyof debate, or the forms of common regard. 

If a man, sir, is liable to be forced from the care of his own privateaffairs, from his favourite schemes of life, from the engagements ofdomestick tenderness, or the prospects of near advantage, and subjected, without his consent, to the command of one whom he hates, or dreads, orperhaps despises, it requires no long argument to show, that by whateverauthority he is thus treated, he is reduced to the condition of a slave, to that abject, to that hateful state, which every Englishman has beentaught to avoid at the hazard of his life. 

It is therefore evident, that a law which tends to confer such a power, subverts our constitution as far as its effects extend; a constitution, which was originally formed as a barrier against slavery, and which oneage after another has endeavoured to strengthen. 

Such a power, therefore, in whatever hands it may be lodged, I shallalways oppose. It is dangerous, sir, to intrust any man with absolutedominion, which is seldom known to be impartially exercised, and whichoften makes those corrupt, and insolent, whom it finds benevolent andhonest. 

The bill proposes only encouragement, and encouragement may be given byhis majesty, without a new law; let us, therefore, draw up an address, and cease to debate, where there is no prospect of agreement. 

Mr. WINNINGTON spoke as follows:--Sir, the payment of an annual salarywill, in my opinion, be to the last degree inconvenient and dangerous. The yearly expense has been already estimated, and arises to a sum veryformidable in our present state. Nor is the necessity of adding to thepublick burden, a burden which already is hard to be borne, the onlyobjection to this proposal. 

Nothing can more contribute to dispirit the nation, than to protract theconsequences of a war, and to make the calamity felt, when the pleasuresof victory and triumph have been forgotten; we shall be inclined ratherto bear oppression and insult than endeavour after redress, if wesubject ourselves and our posterity to endless exactions. 

The expenses of the present provision for superannuated and disabledsailors, is no inconsiderable tax upon the publick, which is not lessburdened by it for the manner of collecting it by a deduction from thesailors' wages; for, whoever pays it immediately, it is the ultimategift of the nation, and the utmost that can be allowed for this purpose. 

It must be confessed, sir, the persons entitled to the pension are notsufficiently distinguished in the bill; by which, as it now stands, anyof the worthless superfluities of a ship, even the servants of thecaptains, may, after five years, put in their demand, and plunder thatnation which they never served. 

Nor do I think, sir, the efficacy of this method will bear anyproportion to the expense of it; for I am of opinion, that few of thesailors will be much affected by the prospect of a future pension. I am, therefore, for dazzling them with five pounds, to be given them at theirentrance, which will be but a single payment, and probably fill ourfleets with greater expedition, than methods which appear more refined, and the effects of deeper meditation. 

Lord GAGE spoke in the following manner:--Sir, nothing is more clearthan that a yearly pension will burden the nation, without anyadvantage; and as it will give occasion to innumerable frauds, it is amethod which ought to be rejected. 

As to the new power, sir, which is proposed to be placed in the hands ofthe magistrates, it undoubtedly reduces every sailor to a state ofslavery, and is inconsistent with that natural right to liberty, whichis confirmed and secured by our constitution. The bill, therefore, is, in my opinion, defective in all its parts, of a tendency generallypernicious, and cannot be amended but by rejecting it. 

Mr. Henry PELHAM spoke next, to this effect:--Sir, I cannot but think itnecessary, that on this occasion, at least, gentlemen should remit theardour of disputation, and lay the arts of rhetorick aside; that theyshould reserve their wit and their satire for questions of lessimportance, and unite, for once, their endeavours, that this affair maymeet with no obstructions but from its natural difficulty. 

We are now, sir, engaged in a war with a nation, if not of the firstrank in power, yet by no means contemptible in itself; and, by itsalliances, extremely formidable. We are exposed, by the course of ourtrade, and the situation of our enemies, to many inevitable losses, andhave no means of preventing our merchants from being seized, without anydanger or expense to the Spaniards, but by covering the sea with oursquadrons. 

Nor are we, sir, to satisfy ourselves with barely defeating the designsof the Spaniards; our honour demands that we should force them to peaceupon advantageous terms; that we should not repulse, but attack them;not only preserve our own trade and possessions, but endanger theirs. 

It is by no means certain, sir, that in the prosecution of these designswe shall not be interrupted by the interest or jealousy of a nation farmore powerful, whose forces we ought, therefore, to be able to resist. 

A vigorous exertion of our strength will probably either intimidate anyother power that may be inclined to attack us, or enable us to repel theinjuries that shall be offered: discord and delay can only confirm ouropen enemies in their obstinacy, and animate those that have hithertoconcealed their malignity to declare against us. 

It is, therefore, sir, in no degree prudent to aggravate theinconveniencies of the measures proposed for accomplishing what everyman seems equally to desire; to declaim against the expedients offeredin the bill as pernicious, unjust, and oppressive, contributes verylittle to the production of better means. That our affairs will notadmit of long suspense, and that the present methods of raising seamenare not effectual, is universally allowed; it, therefore, evidentlyfollows, sir, that some other must be speedily struck out. 

I think it necessary to propose, that the house be resolved into acommittee to-morrow morning; and hope all that shall assemble on thisoccasion, will bring with them no other passion than zeal for theircountry. 

[The speaker having taken the chair, the chairman of the committeereported, that they had made some progress; and desiring leave to sitagain, it was resolved to go into the committee again on the morrow. ]

MARCH 4, 1740-1. 

On the sixty-second day the affair was put off; but on the sixty-third, the house resolving itself into a committee, a clause was offered, bywhich five pounds were proposed to be advanced to an able seaman, andthree pounds to every other man that should enter voluntarily into hismajesty's service, after twenty days, and within sixty. 

After which, Mr. WINNINGTON spoke as follows:--Sir, this is a clause inwhich no opposition can be apprehended, as those gentlemen who declaredtheir disapprobation of the former, were almost unanimous in proposingthis expedient, as the least expensive, and the most likely to succeed. 

The time for the reception of volunteers upon this condition, is, sir, in my opinion, judiciously determined. If it was extended to a greaterlength, or left uncertain, the reward would lose its efficacy, thesailors would neglect that which they might accept at any time, andwould only have recourse to the ships of war when they could find noother employment. 

Yet I cannot conceal my apprehensions, that this bounty will not alonebe sufficient to man our fleets with proper expedition; and that asallurements may be useful on one hand, force will be found necessary onthe other; that the sailors may not only be incited to engage in theservice by the hopes of a reward, but by the fear of having theirnegligence to accept it punished, by being compelled into the sameservice, and forfeiting their claim by staying to be compelled. 

Lord BALTIMORE then spoke to the following effect:--Sir, to the rewardproposed in this clause, I have declared in the former conference onthis bill, that I have no objection, and, therefore, have no amendmentto propose, except with regard to the time limited for the payment. 

As our need of seamen, sir, is immediate, why should not a law for theirencouragement immediately operate? What advantage can arise fromdelays? Or why is not that proper to be advanced now, that will beproper in twenty days? That all the time between the enaction andoperation of this law must be lost, is evident; for who will enter fortwo pounds, that may gain five by withholding himself from the servicetwenty days longer?

Nor do I think the time now limited sufficient; many sailors who are nowin the service of the merchants, may not return soon enough to lay claimto the bounty, who would gladly accept it, and who will either not servethe crown without it, or will serve with disgust and complaints; as theloss of it cannot be imputed to their backwardness, but to an accidentagainst which they could not provide. 

Mr. WINNINGTON replied:--Sir, though I think the time now fixed by thebill sufficient, as I hope that our present exigency will be but ofshort continuance, and that we shall soon be able to raise naval forcesat a cheaper rate, yet as the reasons alleged for an alteration of thetime may appear to others of more weight than to me, I shall not opposethe amendment. 

Sir John BARNARD next rose, and said:--Sir, with regard to the durationof the time fixed for the advancement of this bounty, we may haveleisure to deliberate; but surely it must be readily granted by thosewho have expatiated so copiously upon the present exigencies of ouraffairs, that it ought immediately to commence. And if this be thegeneral determination of the house, nothing can be more proper than toaddress his majesty to offer, by proclamation, an advance of fivepounds, instead of two, which have been hitherto given; that while weare concerting other measures for the advantage of our country, those inwhich we have already concurred may be put in execution. 

Mr. PULTENEY rose up next, and spoke as follows:--Sir, I take thisopportunity to lay before the house a grievance which very much retardsthe equipment of our fleets, and which must be redressed before anymeasures for reconciling the sailors to the publick service can bepursued with the least probability of success. 

Observation, sir, has informed me, that to remove the detestation of theking's service, it is not necessary to raise the wages of the seamen; itis necessary only to secure them; it is necessary to destroy thosehateful insects that fatten in idleness and debauchery upon the gains ofthe industrious and honest. 

When a sailor, sir, after the fatigues and hazards of a long voyage, brings his ticket to the pay-office, and demands his wages, thedespicable wretch to whom he is obliged to apply, looks upon his ticketwith an air of importance, acknowledges his right, and demands a rewardfor present payment; with this demand, however exorbitant, thenecessities of his family oblige him to comply. 

In this manner, sir, are the wives of the sailors also treated when theycome to receive the pay of their husbands; women, distressed, friendless, and unsupported; they are obliged to endure every insult, and to yield to every oppression. And to such a height do thesemerciless exacters raise their extortions, that sometimes a third partof the wages is deducted. 

Thus, sir, do the vilest, the meanest of mankind, plunder those who havethe highest claim to the esteem, the gratitude, and the protection oftheir country. This is the hardship which withholds the sailors from ournavies, and forces them to seek for kinder treatment in other countries. This hardship, sir, both justice and prudence call upon us to remedy;and while we neglect it, all our deliberations will be ineffectual. 

Mr. SOUTHWELL then spoke to this effect:--Sir, of the hardshipsmentioned by the honourable gentleman who spoke last, I have myselfknown an instance too remarkable not to be mentioned. A sailor inIreland, after his voyage, met with so much difficulty in obtaining hiswages, that he was at length reduced to the necessity of submitting tothe reduction of near a sixth part. Such are the grievances with whichthose are oppressed, upon whom the power, security, and happiness of thenation are acknowledged to depend. 

Sir Robert WALPOLE, the prime minister, then rose, and spoke asfollows:--Sir, it is not without surprise that I hear the disgust of thesailors ascribed to any irregularity in the payment of their wages, which were never, in any former reign, so punctually discharged. Theyreceive, at present, twelve months' pay in eighteen months, withoutdeduction; so that there are never more than six months for which anydemand remains unsatisfied. 

But, sir, the punctuality of the payment has produced of late greatinconveniencies; for there has been frequently a necessity of removingmen from one ship to another; and it is the stated rule of thepay-office, to assign every man so removed his full pay. These men, whenthe government is no longer indebted to them, take the first opportunityof deserting the service, and engaging in business to which they aremore inclined. 

This is not a chimerical complaint, founded upon rare instances, andproduced only to counterbalance an objection; the fact and theconsequences are well known; so well, that near fourteen hundred sailorsare computed to have been lost by this practice. 

The PRESIDENT of the commons, who always in a committee takes his seatas another member, rose here, and spoke to the following effect, hishonour being paymaster of the navy:--Mr. Chairman, the nature of theemployment with which I am intrusted makes it my duty to endeavour thatthis question may be clearly understood, and the condition of theseamen, with regard to the reception of their pay, justly represented. 

I have not been able to discover that any sailor, upon producing histicket, was ever obliged to submit to the deduction of any part of hiswages, nor should any clerk or officer under my inspection, escape, forsuch oppression, the severest punishment and most publick censure: Iwould give him up to the law without reserve, and mark him as infamous, and unworthy of any trust or employment. 

But there are extortions, sir, by which those unhappy men, after havingserved their country with honesty and courage, are deprived of theirlawful gains of diligence and labour. There are men to whom it is usualamongst the sailors to mortgage their pay before it becomes due, whonever advance their money but upon such terms as cannot be mentionedwithout indignation. These men advance the sum which is stipulated, andby virtue of a letter of attorney are reimbursed at the pay-office. 

This corruption is, I fear, not confined to particular places, but hasspread even to America, where, as in his own country, the poor sailor isseduced, by the temptation of present money, to sell his labour toextortioners and usurers. 

I appeal to the gentleman, whether the instance which he mentioned wasnot of this kind. I appeal to him without apprehension of receiving ananswer that can tend to invalidate what I have asserted. 

This, sir, is, indeed, a grievance pernicious and oppressive, which noendeavours of mine shall be deficient in attempting to remove; for bythis the sailor is condemned, notwithstanding his industry and success, to perpetual poverty, and to labour only for the benefit of hisplunderer. 

[The clauses were then read, "empowering the justices of the peace, etc. To issue warrants to the constables, etc. To make general privysearches, by day or night, for finding out and securing such seamen andseafaring men as lie hid or conceal themselves; and making it lawful forthe officers appointed to make such searches, to force open the doors ofany house, where they shall _suspect_ such seamen to be concealed, ifentrance be not readily admitted; and for punishing those who shallharbour or conceal any seaman. "]

Sir John BARNARD upon this rose up, and spoke to the followingeffect:--Mr. Chairman, we have been hitherto deliberating uponquestions, in which diversity of opinions might naturally be expected, and in which every man might indulge his own opinion, whatever it mightbe, without any dangerous consequences to the publick. But the clausesnow before us are of a different kind; clauses which cannot be readwithout astonishment and indignation, nor defended without betraying theliberty of the best, the bravest, and most useful of ourfellow-subjects. 

If these clauses, sir, should pass into a law, a sailor and a slave willbecome terms of the same signification. Every man who has devotedhimself to the most useful profession, and most dangerous service of hiscountry, will see himself deprived of every advantage which he haslaboured to obtain, and made the mere passive property of those who livein security by his valour, and owe to his labour that affluence whichhardens them to insensibility, and that pride that swells them toingratitude. 

Why must the sailors alone, sir, be marked out from all the other ordersof men for ignominy and misery? Why must they be ranked with the enemiesof society, stopped like vagabonds, and pursued like the thief and themurderer by publick officers? How or when have they forfeited the commonprivilege of human nature, or the general protection of the laws oftheir country? If it is a just maxim, sir, that he who contributes mostto the welfare of the publick, deserves most to be protected in theenjoyment of his private right or fortune; a principle which surely willnot be controverted; where is the man that dares stand forth and assert, that he has juster claims than the brave, the honest, the diligentsailor?

I am extremely unwilling, sir, to engage in so invidious an undertakingas the comparison of the harmless, inoffensive, resolute sailor, withthose who think themselves entitled to treat him with contempt, tooverlook his merit, invade his liberty, and laugh at his remonstrances. 

Nor is it, sir, necessary to dwell upon the peculiar merit of this bodyof men; it is sufficient that they have the same claims, founded uponthe same reasons with our own, that they have never forfeited them byany crime, and, therefore, that they cannot be taken away without themost flagrant violation of the laws of nature, of reason, and of ourcountry. 

Let us consider the present condition of a sailor, let us reflect alittle upon the calamities to which custom, though not law, has alreadymade him subject, and it will surely not be thought that his unhappinessneeds any aggravation. 

He is already exposed to be forced, upon his return from a tediousvoyage, into new hardships, without the intermission of a day, andwithout the sight of his family; he is liable, after a contract for apleasing and gainful voyage, to be hurried away from his prospects ofinterest, and condemned amidst oppression and insolence, to labour andto danger, almost without the possibility of a recompense. He hasneither the privilege of choosing his commander, nor of leaving him whenhe is defrauded and oppressed. 

These, sir, I say, are the calamities to which he is now subject, butthere is now a possibility of escaping them. He is not yet deprived ofthe right of resistance, or the power of flight; he may now retire tohis friend, and be protected by him; he may take shelter in his owncottage, and treat any man as a robber, that shall attempt to force hisdoors. 

When any crews are returning home in time of war, they are acquaintedwith the dangers of an impress, but they comfort themselves withcontriving stratagems to elude it, or with the prospect of obtaining anexemption from it by the favour of their friends; prospects which areoften deceitful, and stratagems frequently defeated, but which yetsupport their spirits, and animate their industry. 

But if this bill, sir, should become a law, the sailor, instead ofamusing himself on his return with the prospects of ease, or ofpleasure, will consider his country as a place of slavery, a residenceless to be desired than any other part of the world. He will probablyseek, in the service of some foreign prince, a kinder treatment; andwill not fail, in any country but his own, to see himself, at least, ona level with other men. 

Nor will this bill, sir, only give the seamen new reasons of disgust, but it will tend, likewise, to aggravate those grievances, which alreadyhave produced a detestation of the publick service, scarcely to beconquered. 

The officers of the navy, sir, will hardly be made less insolent by anincrease of power; they whose tyranny has already alienated theirfellow-subjects from the king's service, though they could only dependupon the character of probity and moderation for the prospect of manningtheir ships in succeeding expeditions, will probably, when they areanimated by a law like this, and made absolute both by land and sea, indulge themselves in the enjoyment of their new authority, contrive newhardships and oppressions, and tyrannise without fear and without mercy. Thus, sir, will the bill not only be tyrannical in itself, but theparent of tyranny; it will give security to the cruel, and confidence tothe arrogant. 

That any man, at least any man bred from his infancy to change hisresidence, and accustomed to different climates and to foreign nations, will fix by choice in that country where he finds the worst reception, is hardly to be imagined. We see indeed, that men unqualified to supportthemselves in other countries, or who have, by long custom, contracted afondness for particular methods of life, will bear very uncomfortablecircumstances, without endeavouring to improve their conditions by achange of their habitations. But the temper of a sailor, acquainted withall parts, and indifferent to all, is of another kind. Such, sir, is hislove of change, arising either from wantonness, or curiosity, that he ishard to be retained by the kindest treatment and most liberal rewards;and will, therefore, never struggle with his habitual dispositions, onlyto continue in a state of slavery. 

I think it, therefore, sir, very evident that this new method of_encouraging_ sailors will be so far from _increasing_ them, that it mayprobably drive them out of the empire, and at once ruin our trade andour navy; at once beggar and disarm us. 

Let me now suppose, sir, for a moment, the bill less pernicious in itsconsequences, and consider only the difficulties of executing it. Everyseafaring man is to be seized, at pleasure, by the magistrate; but whatdefinition is given of a seafaring man? Or by what characteristick isthe magistrate to distinguish him? I have never been able to discoverany peculiarities in the form of a seaman that mark him out from therest of the species. There is, indeed, less servility in his air, andless effeminacy in his face, than in those that are commonly to be seenin drawing-rooms, in brothels, and at reviews; but I know not that aseaman can be distinguished from any other man of equal industry or use, who has never enervated himself by vice, nor polished himself intocorruption. So that this bill, sir, if it shall pass into a law, willput it at once in the power of the magistrate to dispose of seamen athis pleasure, and to term whom he pleases a seaman. 

Another expedient, sir, has been offered on this occasion, not equallytyrannical, but equally inadequate to the end in view. It is proposed torestrain the merchants from giving wages beyond a certain rate, on thesupposition that the sailors have no motive but that of larger wages, toprefer the service of the merchants to that of the crown. 

This, sir, is a mistake which might easily arise from a partial andimperfect knowledge of the affair, with which very few gentlemen haveopportunities of being well acquainted. The wages, sir, are the smallestinducements which fix the seamen in their choice. The prospect of kindertreatment, the certainty of returning home in a fixed time, and thepower of choosing what voyages they will undertake, cannot but beacknowledged very reasonable motives of preference. 

On the contrary, sir, when they are once engaged in a ship of war, theyknow neither whither they are going, what dangers they shall encounter, what hardships they shall suffer, nor when they shall be dismissed. 

Besides, sir, I do not think it possible by any law to limit the wagesto be paid by merchants, since they will change the term of wages intothat of a present, or admit the sailors to a small share in the freight, and so all the precaution we can take will become ineffectual. 

In the mean time, sir, how much shall we embarrass our own commerce, andimpair our natural strength--the power of our fleets? We shall terrifyour sailors on the one hand, and endeavour to starve them on the other;we shall not only drive them from us by unheard-of severities, but takeaway every motive that can induce them to expose themselves to thedanger of suffering them. 

If we consider, sir, with what effect methods nearly approaching thesewere practised in the reign of the late queen, we shall find that notmore than one thousand five hundred seamen were raised, and those at theexpense of more than four thousand pounds; so that the effects bore noproportion to the means; our laws were infringed, and our constitutionviolated to no purpose. 

But what reason, sir, can be assigned for which it must be moredifficult to supply the fleet now with sailors than at any other time?This war, sir, was demanded by the publick voice, in pursuance of theparticular remonstrances of the merchants, and it is not to be supposedthat the sailors or any other body of men engage in it with a particularreluctance. 

I am, therefore, inclined to believe that the suspicion of great numbershid in the country, at a distance from the coast, is merely chimerical;and that if we should pass this bill, we should do nothing more thangrant an oppressive and unconstitutional power of search for what, inreality, is not to be found. 

How oppressive this power may become in the hands of a corrupt orinsolent magistrate, any man may discover, who remembers that themagistrate is made judge without appeal, of his own right to denominateany man a sailor, and that he may break open any man's doors at anytime, without alleging any other reason than his own suspicion; so thatno man can secure his house from being searched, or, perhaps, his personfrom being seized. 

It may, indeed, be alleged, sir, that this will be only a temporary law, and is to cease with the exigence that made it necessary: but longexperience has informed us, that severe laws are enacted more readilythan they are repealed; and that most men are too fond of power tosuffer willingly the diminution of it. 

But, sir, though this law should not be perpetuated, every precedent ofan infringement of our constitution, makes way for its dissolution; andthe very cessation of an oppressive law, may be a plea, hereafter, forthe revival of it. 

This bill, therefore, must be confessed to be at once violent andineffectual; to be a transgression of the laws of justice to particularmen, without any prospect of real benefit to the community; and, therefore, cannot be passed without deviating at once from prudence andour constitution. 

Captain CORNWALL then rose, and spoke to this effect:--I have observed, sir, that every man is apt to think himself ill treated, who is nottreated according to his own opinion of his deserts, and will endeavourto diffuse his own notion of the partiality and tyranny of the navalofficers; general clamours, therefore, are little to be regarded. 

I have had, from my early years, a command in the sea service, and canassert, that I never knew more than one instance of injustice, and thatwas punished with the severity which it deserved. 

The PRIME MINISTER rose next, and spoke to this effect:--Mr. Chairman, it is with uncommon satisfaction that I see every clause of this billregularly debated, without unbecoming impatience, or passionateexclamations. I am willing to collect from this conduct, that thedisposition of every gentleman is, on this occasion, the same with myown; and that every expedient here proposed will be diligently examined, and either be seriously approved, or be calmly rejected. 

Such coolness and impartiality, sir, is certainly required by theimportance of the present question; a question which cannot butinfluence the prosperity of the nation for many years. 

It is not necessary to remind any gentleman of the importance of ourtrade, of the power of the enemy against whom we have declared war indefence of it, or of the necessity of showing the world that ourdeclarations of war are not empty noises, or farces of resentment. Butit may be proper, sir, to remark, that this is not the only enemy, northe most powerful, whose attempts we have reason to provide against, andwho may oblige us to exert our whole power, and practise every expedientto increase our forces. 

The war has been, hitherto, prosecuted with the utmost vigour, with allthe attention that its importance requires, and with success notdisproportioned to our preparations; nor will it ever be suffered tolanguish, if the powers necessary for carrying it on are not denied. 

Nothing is more evident, sir, than that the natural power of the nationconsists in its fleets, which are now, by the care of the government, sonumerous, that the united power of many nations cannot equal them. Butwhat are fleets unfurnished with men? How will they maintain thedominion of the sea, by lying unactive in our harbours?

That no methods, hitherto used, have been sufficient to man our navies, and that our preparations have, therefore, been little more than anexpensive show of war, the whole nation is sufficiently informed; it is, therefore, not doubtful that some new measures must be taken; whetherany better can be suggested than are offered in this bill, must beinquired. 

With regard, sir, to the clause now under our consideration, it is to beremembered, that little more is proposed by it, than to add the sanctionof legality to a power which has long been exercised by the admiralty, without any other authority than that of long prescription, the power ofissuing warrants of impress upon emergent occasions, by which sailorsare forced into the publick service. 

This power, in its present state, must be allowed to have no foundationin any law, and, by consequence, to be unlimited, arbitrary, and easilyabused, and, upon the whole, to be justifiable only by necessity: butthat necessity is so frequent, that it is often exercised, and, therefore, ought to be regulated by the legislature; and by making suchregulations, we may rather be said to remove than introduce a grievance. 

The power of searching for sailors, however it has been represented, isfar from setting them on a level with felons, murderers, or vagabonds;or, indeed, from distinguishing them, to their disadvantage, from therest of the community, of which every individual is obliged to supportthe government. 

Those that possess estates, or carry on trades, transfer part of theirproperty to the publick; and those ought, by parity of reason, to servethe publick in person, that have no property to transfer. Every man issecured by the constitution in the enjoyment of his life, his liberty, or his fortune; and, therefore, every man ought reciprocally to defendthe constitution to which he is himself indebted for safety andprotection. 

I am, therefore, sir, unable to discover in what consists the hardshipof a law by which no new duties are enjoined, nor any thing required, which is not already every man's duty. Every man, indeed, who isdesirous of evading the performance of any of the duties of society, will consider every compulsion as a hardship, by which he is obliged tocontribute to the general happiness; but his murmurs will prove nothingbut his own folly and ingratitude, and will certainly deserve no regardfrom the legislative power. 

There is in the bill before us, sir, encouragement sufficient forvolunteers, and an offer of greater rewards than some gentlemen thinkconsistent with the present state of the national revenues; and whatremains to be done with respect to those who are deaf to allinvitations, and blind to all offers of advantage? Are they to sit atease only because they are idle, or to be distinguished with indulgenceonly for want of deserving it?

It seems generally granted, sir, that such drones are the proper objectsof an impress. Let us then suppose that every man who is willing toserve his country, has laid hold of the reward proposed, and entered avolunteer. The fleets are not yet sufficiently manned, and more sailorsmust be procured. Warrants are issued out in the common form. Thenegligent, the imprudent, the necessitous, are taken. The vigilant, thecunning, and those that have more money, find shelter and escape. Can itbe said, that those whose circumstances, or good fortune, enable them tosecure themselves from the officers of the impress, deserve anyexemption from the publick service, or from the hardships to which theircompanions are exposed? Have they discharged their debt of gratitude tothe publick so effectually by running away from its service, that nosearch ought to be made after them? It seems evident, that if it wasright to seize the one, it is likewise right to pursue the other; and ifit be right to pursue him, it is likewise right to hinder him fromescaping the pursuers. It is then right to vest some persons with thepower of apprehending him, and in whom is that power to be lodged, butin the civil magistrate?

Every man, sir, is obliged by compulsive methods to serve his country, if he can be prevailed upon by no other. If any man shall refuse to payhis rates or his taxes, will not his goods be seized by force, and soldbefore his face? If any particular methods are proposed for obligingseamen to contribute to the publick safety, it is only because theirservice is necessary upon more pressing occasions than that of others;upon occasions which do not admit of delay, without the hazard of thewhole community. 

I must confess, sir, there are instances in which the hardships of theseafaring part of the nation are peculiar, and truly calamitous. Asailor, after the dangers and toils of a long voyage, when he is now inthe sight of the port, where he hopes to enjoy that quiet which he hasdeserved by so long a series of fatigues, to repair the injuries whichhis health has suffered, by change of climate, and the diet of theships, and to recover that strength which incessant vigilance has wornaway; when he is in expectation of being received by his family withthose caresses, which the succours that he brings them naturallyproduce, and designs to rest awhile from danger and from care; in themidst of these pleasing views, he is, on the sudden, seized by animpress, and forced into a repetition of all his miseries, without anyinterval of refreshment. 

Let no man who can think without compassion on such a scene as this, boast his zeal for freedom, his regard for bravery, or his gratitude tothose who contribute to the wealth and power of their country; let everyman who declares himself touched with the pity which the slightestreflection upon such a disappointment must naturally produce, sincerelyendeavour to obviate the necessity of such oppressive measures, whichmay, at least in part, be prevented, by assigning to magistrates thepower of hunting out of their retreats, those who neglect the businessof their callings, and linger at once in laziness and want. 

There are great numbers who retire not from weariness but idleness, oran unreasonable prepossession against the publick service; and, surely, nothing is more unreasonable, than that bad dispositions should begratified, and that industry should expose any man to penalties. 

Upon the whole, sir, I am not able to discover, that any man should beexempted from an impress merely because he finds means to escape it, orbecause idleness or disinclination to the publick service prompts him toabscond. 

If any men deserve indulgence, in opposition to the demands of thepublick, they are rather those who have already, in some degree, discharged their duty to it, by contributing to bring in that wealthwhich is the consequence of a prosperous and well-regulated commerce, and without which war cannot be supported. 

It is not without grief and regret, that I am obliged to represent, onthis occasion, the obstructions which the war has suffered from those atwhose request it was undertaken; and to declare, that the conduct of themerchants, has afforded proof that some law of this tendency isabsolutely necessary. 

The merchants, sir, who have so loudly complained of the decline oftrade, the interruption of navigation, and the insolence, rapacity, andcruelty of the Spaniards; the merchants, who filled the nation withrepresentations of their hardships, discouragements, and miseries, andlamented in the most publick manner, that they were the only body forwhom the legislature had no regard, who were abandoned to the caprice ofother nations, were plundered abroad, and neglected at home; themerchants, after having at length by their importunities engaged thestate in a war, of which they have themselves certainly not the leastpretensions to question either the justice or necessity, now, when bythe natural consequences of a naval armament, sailors become lessnumerous, and ships more difficult to be equipped, contract in privatewith such sailors as they are inclined to employ, and conceal them ingarrets, hired for that purpose, till the freight is ready, or thedanger of an impress is past, and thus secure their own private affairsat the hazard of the publick, and hinder the operations of a war, whichthey, and they only, solicited. 

The danger of having other enemies than the Spaniards, enemies, sir, more active, more powerful, and more ambitious, has already beenmentioned; a danger so near, and so formidable, that he will not bethought very solicitous for his country, whom the bare mention of itdoes not alarm. This danger we are, therefore, to obviate by vigorouspreparations, and unanimous resolutions; nor do I doubt but both ourenemies, if they find us united, will repent of attacking us. 

Sir, the most efficacious method of manning our fleets, which law orcustom has yet put into our hands, is that of suspending our commerce byan embargo; and yet the whole nation knows how much, and by what means, it has been eluded: no sooner was it known that an embargo was laid, than the sailors flew away into the country, or hid themselves incorners of this great city, as from the most formidable danger; and nosooner did the embargo cease, than the banks of the river were againcrowded with sailors, and all the trading vessels were immediatelysupplied. 

As I cannot doubt, sir, that every gentleman is equally zealous for thesuccess of the war, and the prosperity of his country; and as theinsufficiency of the present methods of providing for them is apparent, I hope, that either the regulations proposed by this bill, to which Isee no important objections, or some other of equal use, will beestablished by a general concurrence. 

Lord BALTIMORE spoke next:--Though no gentleman in this assembly, sir, can more ardently wish the success of the British arms, or shall morewillingly concur in any measure that may promote it, yet I cannot agreeto the clause now under our consideration; I disapprove it both frommoral and political motives; I disapprove it as neither just norprudent. 

The injustice of so flagrant an invasion of the liberty of particularmen has been already exposed; nor is it, in my opinion, less easy todiscover the imprudence of exhausting all our supplies at once, andsweeping away all our sailors, to supply a single exigency. 

It has often been remarked, sir, in favour of a standing army, that itis requisite to have a number of regular forces, who, though too weak tooppose an invasion, might be able to establish discipline in a largerbody. An observation which may, with much greater justness, be appliedto the seamen, whose art is much more difficult to be attained, and whoare equally necessary in war and peace. 

If our stock of seamen, sir, be destroyed, if there is not left in ourtrading vessels a sufficient number of experienced artists to initiatenovices, and propagate the profession, not only our ships of war mustlie useless, but our commerce sink to nothing. 

Nor have I reason to believe the naval power of France so formidable, asthat we ought to be terrified by the apprehensions of it into anyextraordinary methods of procedure. I am informed that they have nowvery few ships of force left in their harbours; and that they haveexerted their whole strength in the American fleet. 

I am not, therefore, sir, for providing against present dangers, withoutregard to our future security; and think nothing more worthy of theconsideration of this assembly, than the means of encouraging andincreasing our seamen, which will not be effected by the bill before us. 

Land forces may be hired upon emergencies; but sailors are our ownpeculiar strength, and the growth of our own soil; we are, therefore, above all other regards, to attend, if I may use the term, to thepreservation of the species. 

Mr. VYNER next spoke:--Mr. Chairman, as there can be no strongerobjection to any law than ambiguity, or indeterminate latitude ofmeaning, I think it necessary to propose, that some word of known andlimited import, be substituted in the place of _seafaring men_; anexpression which, if I was asked the meaning of it, I should find itdifficult to explain. 

Are _seafaring_ men those only who navigate in the _sea_? The term isthen superfluous, for all such are evidently comprised in the word_seamen_. Are they bargemen or watermen, who ply on rivers and transportprovision or commodities from one inland town to another? In that sensenobody will affirm that it is a proper word; and impropriety in theexpression of laws, produces uncertainty in the execution of them. 

Captain CORNWALL rose up:--Sir, the term _seafaring men_, of which anexplication is desired, is intended to include all those who live byconveying goods or passengers upon the water, whether the sea or inlandrivers: nor can we restrain it to a narrower sense, without exemptingfrom the publick service great numbers, whose manner of life hasqualified them for it, and from whom their country may, with equaljustice, expect assistance, as from those who are engaged in foreigntraffick. 

Mr. VYNER replied:--Sir, I am far from concurring with the honourablegentleman in his opinion, that the inland watermen are, by theirprofession, in any degree qualified for sea service, or can properly becalled _seafaring men_. 

All qualifications for the service must consist either in some knowledgeof the arts of navigation, or in some familiarity with the dangers ofthe sea. With regard to any previous knowledge of naval business, it iswell known that they have no advantage over any common labourer; for themanner of navigating a ship and a barge have, for the most part, nothingin common. 

Nor are these watermen, sir, more able to stand firm in the terrours ofthe storm, or the noise of a battle, than those who follow any otheroccupation. Many of them never saw the sea, nor have less dread of itsdanger than the other inhabitants of the inland counties. They are, therefore, neither _seafaring_ men, nor peculiarly capable of being made_seamen_. 

But the hardship upon particular men is not the strongest objection tothis clause, which, by obstructing our inland navigation, may make ourrivers useless, and set the whole trade of the nation at a stand. Forwho will bring up his son a waterman, who knows him exposed by thatprofession to be impressed for a seaman?

It seems, therefore, necessary, sir, either to omit the term _seafaringmen_ [Footnote: Agreed to be omitted. ], or to explain it in such amanner, that inland watermen may not be included. 

Lord GAGE spoke next:--Sir, so much has been urged against thecompulsive methods proposed in this clause, and so little produced infavour of them, that it may seem superfluous to add any thing, or toendeavour, by a multiplicity of arguments, to prove what common reasonmust immediately discover. But there is one consequence of this clausewhich has not yet been observed, and which is yet too important not tobe obviated by a particular proviso. 

It is well known, sir, that many of those to whom this act will extend, are freeholders and voters, for electing the representatives of thenation; and it is therefore apparent, that elections may be influencedby an ill-timed or partial execution of it. How easy will it be, when anelection approaches, to raise a false alarm, to propose some secretexpedition, or threaten us with an invasion from some unknown country, and to seize on all the seafaring voters whose affections are suspected, and confine them at Spithead till the contest is over. 

I cannot, therefore, sir, but think it necessary, that if this clause besuffered to pass, some part of its hateful consequences should beprevented by an exception in favour of freeholders and voters, which, surely, is no less than what every man owes to his own security, to thewelfare of his country, and to those by whom he has been honoured withthe care of their liberties. 

Mr. Henry PELHAM then said, as follows:--Sir, I do not rise inopposition to the proposal made by that right honourable member, nor doI think this the proper time either for opposing or approving it. Methodis of the highest importance in inquiries like these; and if the orderof the debate be interrupted by foreign questions, or incidentalobjections, no man will be able to consider the clauses before us withthe attention necessary to his own satisfaction, or to the conviction ofothers; the mind will be dissipated by a multiplicity of views, andnothing can follow but perplexity and confusion. 

The great end, sir, for which we are now assembled, is to strike outmethods of manning the fleet with expedition and certainty. It is, therefore, proper, in the first place, to agree upon some generalmeasures, to each of which there may, undoubtedly, be particularobjections raised, that may be afterwards removed by exceptions orprovisions; but these provisions should, for the sake of order, beinserted in particular clauses, to be separately considered. 

Of this kind is the exception now offered, to which I have no objectionbut its present impropriety, and the interruption of the debate which itmay now occasion; for I see, at present, no reason against admitting itin a particular clause. 

When it is considered how much the success of the war may depend uponthe determinations of this day, and how much our future happiness andsecurity may depend upon the success of our present undertakings, I hopemy solicitude for regularity and expedition will be easily excused. 

Sir Hind COTTON answered:--I am not able, sir, to discover any imminentdanger to the nation in suspending our attention to the clause beforeus, for a few moments; nor, indeed, do we cease to attend to it, whilewe are endeavouring to mollify it, and adapt it to our constitution. 

The exception proposed is, in the opinion of the honourable gentleman, so reasonable, that he declares himself ready to approve it in anotherplace; and, to me, no place seems more proper of its making part of thisbill than this. As a connexion between the clause and exception appearsnecessary and immediate, I cannot see why it should be postponed, unlessit is hoped that it may be forgotten. 

Mr. PULTENEY then spoke:--Sir, that this exception should be forgottenthere is no danger; for how long soever it be delayed, I will neveragree to the act till I see it inserted. If we suffer the liberty of thefreeholders to be infringed, what can we expect but to be charged withbetraying our trust, and giving up to servitude and oppression those whodeputed us to this assembly, as the guardians of their privileges, andthe asserters of their birthright; a charge too just to be denied, andtoo atrocious to be borne. 

Sir, the right of a freeholder is independent on every othercircumstance, and is neither made more or less by wealth or poverty: theestate, however small, which gives a right of voting, ought to exemptthe owner from every restraint that may hinder the exertion of hisright; a right on which our constitution is founded, and which cannot betaken away without subverting our whole establishment. 

To overlook the distinctions which the fundamental laws of our countryhave made in respect to different orders of men, and to regard only theaccidents of affluence and necessity, is surely unjust in itself, andunworthy of this assembly; an assembly, sir, instituted principally toprotect the weak against the strong, and deputed to represent those, ina collective state, who are not considerable enough to appear singly, and claim a voice in the legislature. 

To expose an honest, a laborious, and an useful man, to be seized by thehands of an insolent officer, and dragged from the enjoyment of hisright, only because he will not violate his conscience, and add hisvoice to those of sycophants, dependents, and prostitutes, the slaves ofpower, the drudges of a court, and the hirelings of a faction, is thehighest degree of injustice and cruelty. Let us rather, sir, sweep away, with an impress, the drones of large fortunes, the tyrants of villages, and the oppressors of the poor; let us oblige those to serve theircountry by force, whose fortunes have had no other effect than to makethem insolent and worthless; but let such who, by contributing tocommerce, make every day some addition to the publick wealth, be left inthe full enjoyment of the rights which they deserve: let those, by whoselabour the expenses of the war are furnished, be excused fromcontributing to it by personal service. 

It is necessary, sir, to have our laws established by therepresentatives of the people; it is necessary that thoserepresentatives should be freely elected; and, therefore, every law thatobstructs the liberty of voters, is contrary to the fundamental laws ofour constitution; and what multitudes may, by this law, be eitherhindered from giving their votes, or be terrified into such a choice asby no means corresponds with their judgments or inclinations, it is easyto foresee. 

I am, indeed, of opinion, sir, that this clause cannot be adapted to ourconstitution, nor modified, by any expedient, into a law, which will notlay insupportable hardships upon the nation, and make way for absolutepower. But as it is necessary that a constant supply of seamen should beprovided, I think it not improper to observe, that there is oneexpedient yet remaining, by which, though it will not much assist us inour present exigence, the fleets of this nation may hereafter beconstantly supported. 

We have, at present, great numbers of charity schools established inthis nation, where the children of the poor receive an educationdisproportioned to their birth. This has often no other consequencesthan to make them unfit for their stations, by placing them, in theirown opinion, above the drudgery of daily labour; a notion which is toomuch indulged, as idleness, cooperating with vanity, can hardly fail togain the ascendant, and which sometimes prompts them to supportthemselves by practices not only useless, but pernicious to society. This evil, sir, cannot be better obviated than by allotting a reasonableproportion out of every school to the service of the sea, in which, byentering early, they cannot fail to become proficients; and where theirattainments, which, at present, too frequently produce laziness anddishonesty, might enable them to excel, and entitle them to promotion. 

Mr. WINNINGTON replied:--Sir, notwithstanding the confidence with whichsome gentlemen have proposed this amendment, and the easiness with whichothers have consented to it, I declare, without hesitation, that Ioppose it now, and intend to oppose it whenever it shall be offered, because it will defeat all the other provisions which shall be made inthe bill. 

I will venture to say, sir, that if every man, who has, by whatevertenure, the right of voting, shall be exempted from the necessity ofcontributing to the publick safety by his personal service, every manqualified for the sea will by some means acquire a vote. 

Sir, a very small part of those who give their votes in this nation forrepresentatives in senate, enjoy that right as the appendage of afreehold; to live in some towns, and to be born only in others, givesthe unalienable privilege of voting. Any gentleman, to secure his owninterest, or obstruct the publick service, may, by dividing a smallpiece of barren ground among a hundred sailors, exalt them all tofreeholders, and exempt them from the influence of this law. 

However, sir, I am not less a friend to the freeholders than those whopropose the exception in their favour, but, in my opinion, the greatinterest of the freeholders is the preservation of their freeholds, which can only be secured by a vigorous exertion of the power of thenation, in the war which is now declared against the Spaniards. 

Mr. BARRINGTON spoke next:--Sir, by the observations which I haveopportunities of making at the place which I have the honour torepresent, I am convinced of the influence that this law will have uponall the boroughs along the coasts. There, most of the voters are, in onesense or other, sir, seafaring men, being, almost all of them, owners ofvessels, and in some degree acquainted with navigation; they may, therefore, be hurried away at the choice of an officious or oppressivemagistrate, who may, by partiality and injustice, obtain a majority, contrary to the general inclination of the people, and determine theelection by his own authority. 

Sir William YONGE then said:--Sir, if every freeholder and voter is tobe exempted from the influence of the law, the bill that we are with somuch ardour endeavouring to draw up and rectify, and of which thenecessity is so generally acknowledged, will be no other than an emptysound, and a determination without an object; for while we areempowering the government to call seamen into the service, we areexempting almost all that are able to serve from the denomination ofseamen: what is this but to dispute without a subject? to raise with onehand and demolish with the other?

In the western parts of the nation, sir, where I reside, many who voteat elections claim their privilege by no other title than that ofboiling a pot; a title which he who has it not, may easily obtain, whenit will either gratify his laziness or his cowardice, and which, thoughnot occasionally obtained, seems not sufficient to set any man out ofthe reach of a just and necessary law. 

It is, therefore, sir, undoubtedly requisite that the terms of theexception should be explicit and definitive, and that only those shouldbe exempted who have such possessions or qualifications as this assemblyshall think a just title to exemption. For on the western coast, fromwhence great supplies may be expected, almost every sailor has a vote, to which nothing is there required but to hire a lodging, and boil apot; after which, if this exception be admitted in all its latitude, hemay sit at ease amidst the distresses of his country, ridicule the lawwhich he has eluded, and set the magistrate at open defiance. 

The PRIME MINISTER spoke next:--As I think, Sir, some exception may bejust and proper, so I suppose every gentleman will concur with me inrejecting one of such extent as shall leave no object for the operationof the law. 

It is, in my opinion, proper to restrain the exemption to thosefreeholders who are possessed of such an estate as gives a vote for therepresentative of the county, by which those whose privilege arises fromtheir property will be secured; and it seems reasonable that those whohave privileges without property, should purchase them by theirservices. 

Counsellor BROWN spoke next:--Sir, the exception proposed will not onlydefeat the end of the bill, by leaving it few objects, but will obstructthe execution of it on proper occasions, and involve the magistrate indifficulties which will either intimidate him in the exertion of hisauthority, or, if he persists in discharging his duty with firmness andspirit, will perhaps oblige him sometimes to repent of his fidelity. 

It is the necessary consequence, sir, of a seaman's profession, that heis often at a great distance from the place of his legal settlement, orpatrimonial possessions; and he may, therefore, assert of his owncircumstances what is most convenient, without danger of detection. Distance is a security that prompts many men to falsehoods, by whichonly vanity is gratified; and few men will tell truth in opposition totheir interest, when they may lie without apprehension of beingconvicted. 

When, therefore, a magistrate receives directions to impress all theseamen within his district, how few will he find who will not declarethemselves freeholders in some distant county, or freemen of someobscure borough. It is to no purpose, sir, that the magistratedisbelieves what he cannot confute; and if in one instance in a hundredhe should be mistaken, and, acting in consequence of his errour, force afreeman into the service, what reparation may not be demanded?

I, therefore, propose it to the consideration of the committee, whetherany man ought to claim exemption from this law by a title, that may soreadily be procured, or so safely usurped. 

The ATTORNEY GENERAL spoke next:--Sir, the practice of impressing, whichhas been declaimed against with such vehement exaggerations, is not onlyfounded on immemorial custom, which makes it part of the common law, butis likewise established by our statutes; for I remember to have found itin the statutes of queen Mary, and therefore cannot allow that it oughtto be treated as illegal, and anti-constitutional. 

That it is not inconsistent with our constitution may be proved from thepractice of erecting the royal standard, upon great emergencies, towhich every man was obliged immediately to repair; this practice is asold as our constitution, and as it may be revived at pleasure, may beproperly mentioned as equivalent to an impress. 

Mr. VYNER answered:--This word, sir, which the learned member has by hiswonderful diligence discovered in the statutes, may perhaps be there, but in a signification far different from that which it bears atpresent. The word was, without doubt, originally French, _prêt_, andimplied what is now expressed by the term _ready_; and to impress anyman was in those days only to make him _ready_, or engage him to holdhimself in _readiness_, which was brought about not by compulsion, pursuit, and violence, but by the allurements of a pecuniary reward, orthe obligation of some ancient tenure. 

HOUSE OF COMMONS, MARCH 9, 1740-1. 

On the sixty-sixth day, the consideration of the bill for raising seamenwas resumed, and a clause read, by which every constable, headborough, tithingman, or other person, was liable to be examined upon oath by thejustices of peace, who were empowered to lay a fine upon them for anyneglect, offence, or connivance. 

Sir John BARNARD rose up, and spoke to the following effect:--Mr. Chairman, it is the peculiar happiness of the Britons, that no law canbe made without the consent of their representatives, and I hope no suchinfatuation can ever fall upon them as may influence them to choose arepresentative capable of concurring in absurdities like this. 

The folly, the iniquity, the stupidity of this clause, can only beconceived by hearing it repeated; it is too flagrant to be extenuated, and too gross to admit exaggerations: to oblige a man to make oathagainst himself, to subject himself by his own voice to penalties andhardships, is at once cruel and ridiculous, a wild complication oftyranny and folly. 

To call upon any man to accuse himself, is only to call upon him tocommit perjury, and has therefore been always accounted irrational andwicked: in those countries where it is practised, the confession isextorted by the rack, which indeed is so necessary on such occasions, that I should not wonder to hear the promoters of this clause openlydeclaring for the expediency of tortures. 

Nothing is more evident than that this bill, however the importance ofthe occasion may be magnified, was drawn up without reflection, and thatthe clauses were never understood by those that offered them: errourslike these must arise only from precipitation and neglect, for they aretoo gross to be committed either by ignorance or design. 

To expose such absurdities is, indeed, easy, but not pleasing; for whatend is answered by pointing at folly, or how is the publick serviceadvanced by showing that the methods proposed are totally to berejected? Where a proposition is of a mixed kind, and only erroneous inpart, it is an useful and no disagreeable task to separate truth fromerrour, and disentangle from ill consequences such measures as may bepursued with advantage to the publick; but mere stupidity can onlyproduce compassion, and afford no opportunities for inquiry or dispute. 

Admiral WAGER replied:--Sir, this clause, however contemptuouslytreated, has been already passed into a law by a senate which brought nodishonour upon the British nation, by a senate which was courted anddreaded by the greatest part of the universe, and was drawn up by aministry that have given their posterity no reason to treat them withderision and contumely. 

In the reign of the late great queen, this method of proceeding wasapproved and established, and we may judge of the propriety of themeasures followed in that war by the success which they procured. 

Those, therefore, by whom this bill was drawn up have committed no newabsurdities, nor have proposed any thing which was not enacted by thewisest of our predecessors, in one of the most illustrious periods ofour history. 

Mr. GYBBON answered:--Sir, I am far from thinking a propositionsufficiently defended by an assertion that it was admitted by ourpredecessors; for though I have no inclination to vilify their memory, Imay without scruple affirm, that they had no pretensions toinfallibility, and that there are in many of our statutes instances ofsuch ignorance, credulity, weakness, and errour, as cannot be consideredwithout astonishment. 

In questions of an abstruse and complicated nature, it is certain, sir, that experience has taught us what could never have been discoveredpreviously by the wisdom of our ancestors; and we have found, by theirconsequences, the impropriety of many practices which they approved, andwhich we should have equally applauded in the same circumstances. 

But to what purpose is observation, if we must shut our eyes against it, and appeal for ever to the wisdom of our ancestors?--if we must fallinto errour, merely because they were mistaken, and rush upon rocks outof veneration to those who were wrecked against them. 

In questions easily to be examined, and determinations which comprisedno perplexing contrarieties of interest, or multiplicity ofcircumstances, they were equally liable with ourselves to be supine andnegligent, to sink into security, or be surprised by haste. That theclause now before us was enacted by them, must be ascribed merely to thehurry of the session in which it was brought before them; a time inwhich so many inquiries of the highest importance were to be made, andgreat diversity of views to be regarded, that it is no wonder that someabsurdities should escape without detection. 

In the fourth of the reign of the queen, this bill was brought in, asnow, at the latter end of a session, when the attention of the senatewas fatigued and distracted; and it was hurried through both houses, andratified by the queen, with very little consideration. 

But then, as this circumstance may be justly termed an extenuation oftheir errour, it ought to be a lesson of caution to us, that we may notbe, in the like manner, betrayed into the same weakness. 

Mr. Henry PELHAM next rose up:--Sir, the conduct of our predecessorsseems not to stand in need of any excuse; for it might be easy tovindicate it by arguments, but that it is more proper to approve it byimitation. 

Whenever the bill was passed, or how hastily soever the law was enacted, it was, I believe, rather the effect of necessity than of inadvertency;of the same necessity which now presses, and which is very ill consultedby tedious debates. 

They were then involved in a war, and were not so distracted by privateinterests as not to unite in the most vigorous opposition of theirenemies. They knew that the publick good is often promoted by thetemporary inconveniencies of individuals; and when affairs of thehighest importance demanded their attention, when the security of thewhole nation and the happiness of their posterity were the subject oftheir inquiries, they wisely suffered less considerations to pass, without superfluous and unseasonable solicitude. 

How justly they reasoned, sir, and what vigour their resolutions gave tothe military operations, our victories are a sufficient proof: and ifexperience be the surest guide, it cannot be improper to imitate thosewho, in the same circumstances with ourselves, found means to raise thehonour, and improve the commerce of their country. 

That our circumstances are the same with those of the senate by whichthis law was made, is obvious beyond dispute; or where they vary, thedifference is, perhaps, to our disadvantage. We have, sir, the sameenemies, or, at least, have reason to apprehend the same; but havelittle hope of the same allies. The present war is to be carried on at agreater distance, and in more places at the same instant; we cannot, therefore, supply our ships occasionally, but must raise great numbersin a short time. 

If, therefore, it was then concluded, that the method under ourexamination was useful; if measures, not eligible in themselves, may beauthorized by necessity, why may not we, in compliance with the sameexigencies, have recourse to the same expedients?

Sir William YONGE then spoke:--Sir, how much weight is added to thedeterminations of the senate, by the dignity of their procedure, and thedecency of their disputations, a slight knowledge of mankind issufficient to evince. It is well known that government is supported byopinion; and that he who destroys the reputation, destroys the authorityof the legislative power. Nor is it less apparent, that he who degradesdebate into scurrility, and destroys the solemnity of consultation, endeavours to sink the senate into contempt. 

It was, therefore, sir, with indignation and surprise, that I heard theclause before us censured with such indecency of language, and theauthors of it treated with contumelies and reproaches that mere errourdoes not deserve, however apparent, but which were now vented before anyerrour was detected. 

I know not, sir, why the gentlemen, who are thus indecently attacked, have suffered such reproaches without censure, and without reply. I knownot why they have omitted to put the honourable gentleman in mind of therespect due to this assembly, or to the characters of those whom heopposes; gentlemen equally skilled with himself in the subject of ourinquiries, and whom his own attainments, however large, or hisabilities, however comprehensive, cannot give him a right to charge withignorance or folly. 

To reproach men with incapacity, is a cheap method of answering theirarguments; but a method which the rules of this house ought to excludefrom our debates, as the general civility of the world has banished itfrom every other place of concourse or conversation. 

I, for my part, sir, shall always endeavour to confine my attention tothe question before us, without suffering my reason to be biassed, or myinquiries diverted by low altercations, or personal animosities; norwhen any other man deviates into reproachful and contemptuous language, shall I be induced to think more highly of either his arguments orcapacity. 

Sir John BARNARD replied:--Sir, I have always heard it represented as aninstance of integrity, when the tongue and heart move in concert, whenthe words are representations of the sentiments; and have, therefore, hitherto, endeavoured to explain my arguments with perspicuity, andimpress my sentiments with force; I have thought it hypocrisy to treatstupidity with reverence, or to honour nonsense with the ceremony of aconfutation. As knavery, so folly, that is not reclaimable, is to bespeedily despatched; business is to be freed from obstruction, andsociety from a nuisance. 

Nor, sir, when I am censured by those whom I may offend, by the use ofterms correspondent with my ideas, will I, by a tame and silentsubmission, give reason to suspect that I am conscious of a fault, butwill treat the accusation with open contempt, and show no greater regardto the abettors, than to the authors of absurdity. 

That decency is of great use in publick debates, I shall readily allow;it may sometimes shelter folly from ridicule, and preserve villany frompublick detection; nor is it ever more carefully supported, than whenmeasures are promoted that nothing can preserve from contempt, but thesolemnity with which they are established. 

Decency is a proper circumstance; but liberty is the essence ofsenatorial disquisitions: liberty is the parent of truth; but truth anddecency are sometimes at variance: all men and all propositions are tobe treated here as they deserve; and there are many who have no claimeither to respect or decency. 

Mr. WINNINGTON then rose:--Sir, that it is improper in its own nature, and inconsistent with our constitution, to lay any man under anobligation to accuse himself, cannot be denied; it is, therefore, evident, that some amendment is necessary to the clause before us. 

I have, for this reason, drawn up an amendment, sir, which, if approvedby the committee, will, in my opinion, remove all the objections to thispart of the bill, and, by reconciling it with our natural and legalrights, I hope, induce those to approve it, who have hitherto opposedit. 

I therefore propose, that these words should be substituted instead ofthose which are the subject of the debate; or some other to thispurpose: _That no person shall be liable to be fined by virtue of thisact, unless a witness, being examined, shall make oath of themisdemeanour or neglect_. 

Thus the necessity of examining men upon oath in their own cause will beentirely taken away; and, as the clause will then stand, there willremain no suspicion of injustice, or oppression, because none can bepractised without the concurrence of many persons of differentinterests. 

[This clause, though agreed to in the committee, was at last rejected. ]

Mr. Horace WALPOLE spoke next, to this effect:--Mr. Chairman, it doesnot yet appear that the gentlemen who have engaged in this debate, havesufficiently attended to the exigence of our affairs, and the importanceof the question. They have lavished their oratory in declaiming upon theabsurdity of the methods proposed, and discovered their sagacity, byshowing how future navies may be supplied from charity schools, but havesubstituted no expedients in the place of those which they so warmlycondemn, nor have condescended to inform us, how we may now guard ourcoasts, or man our fleets for immediate service. 

There are some circumstances, sir, of the present war, which make ournecessity of raising sea forces greater than in those of William, andAnne that succeeded him. The chief advantages that we gained over theFrench, in their wars, were the consequences of our victories by land. 

At sea, sir, the balance was almost equal, though the Dutch fleet andours were united; nor did they quit the sea because their fleets weredestroyed, but because they were obliged to recruit their land forceswith their sailors. Should they now declare war against us, they wouldbe under no such necessity of defrauding the sea service, for they havenow on foot an army of one hundred and sixty thousand men, which aremaintained at no greater expense than forty thousand, by the Britishgovernment; as they are, therefore, sir, so formidable by land, we haveno way of opposing them but by our sea forces. 

Nor is their navy so contemptible as some have, either by conjecture ormisinformation, represented it. The fleet which they have despatched toAmerica, consists not of fewer than twenty ships, of which the leastcarry sixty guns, and they are fitting out now an equal number in theirown ports; besides, their East India company is obliged to furnish tenships of the line, at the demand of the government. 

Thus it appears that we have neighbours sufficiently powerful to alarmus with the sense of immediate danger; danger which is made moreimminent by the expeditious methods by which the French man theirfleets, and which we must imitate if we hope to oppose them withsuccess. 

I need not say how little we can depend upon any professions ofneutrality, which will be best observed when they cannot be securelyviolated; or upon the pacifick inclination of their minister, whichinterest, persuasion, or caprice, may alter, and to which it is not veryhonourable to trust for safety. How can that nation sink lower, which isonly free because it is not invaded by its neighbours; and retains itspossessions, only because no other has leisure or inclination to takethem away?

If it be asked, what can provoke the French to interrupt us in theprosecution of our designs, and in the punishment of those who haveplundered and insulted us, it is not only easy to urge the strictalliance between the two crowns, the ties of blood, the conformity ofinterests, and their equal hatred of the Britons, but another moreimmediate reason may be added. It is suspected, that under pretence ofvindicating our own rights, we are endeavouring to gain the possessionof the Spanish dominions, and engross the wealth of the new world; andthat, therefore, it is the interest of every power, whose subjectstraffick to those countries, to oppose us. 

Thus, whether we succeed or fail in our attempts upon America, we havethe French power to apprehend. If we make conquests, they may, probably, think it necessary to obviate the torrent of our victories, and tohinder the increase of our dominions, that they may secure their owntrade, and maintain their own influence. 

If we should be defeated, of which no man, sir, can deny thepossibility, the inclination of all to insult the depressed, and to pushdown the falling, is well known; nor can it be expected that ourhereditary enemies would neglect so fair an opportunity of attacking us. 

How they might ravage our coasts, and obstruct our trade; how they mighttriumph in the Channel, and block us up in our own ports, bombard ourtowns, and threaten us with invasions, I hope I need but barely mention, to incite this assembly to such despatch in manning our fleets, as maysecure us at once from insults and from terrour. 

It is, undoubtedly, sir, in our power to raise a naval force sufficientto awe the ocean, and restrain the most daring of our enemies from anyattempts against us; but this cannot be effected by harangues, objections, and disputations. 

There is nothing, sir, more frequently the subject of raillery ordeclamation, than the uselessness or danger of a standing army, to whichI declare myself no otherwise inclined than by my concern for the commonsafety; I willingly allow that not one soldier ought to be supported bythe publick, whose service is not necessary; but surely none of thosewho declare so warmly for the honour and privileges of their country, would expose it to the insults of foreign powers, without defence. If, therefore, they think the danger of land forces more than equivalent tothe benefit, they ought unanimously to concur in the increase of ournaval strength, by which they may be protected, but cannot be oppressed:they ought willingly to give their assistance to any propositions formaking the fleet, formidable, that their declarations against the armymay not be thought to proceed from a resolution to obstruct the measuresof the government, rather than from zeal for the constitution. For hethat equally opposes the establishment of the army, and the improvementof the navy, declares in effect against the security of the nation; andthough, perhaps, without design, exposes his countrymen to the mercy oftheir enemies. 

Mr. PULTENEY spoke next:--Sir, I cannot discover for what reason thebill before us is so vigorously supported, but must observe, that I haveseldom known such vehement and continued efforts produced by merepublick spirit, and unmingled regard for the happiness of the nation. Nothing, sir, that can be urged in favour of the measures now proposedhas been omitted. When arguments are confuted, precedents are cited;when precedents fail, the advocates for the bill have recourse toterrour and necessity, and endeavour to frighten those whom they cannotconvince. 

But, perhaps, sir, these formidable phantoms may soon be put to flight, and, like the other illusions of cowardice, disappear before the light. Perhaps this necessity will be found only chimerical; and these dangersappear only the visions of credulity, or the bugbears of imposture. 

To arrive at a clear view of our present condition, it will benecessary, sir, not to amuse ourselves with general assertions, oroverwhelm our reason by terrifying exaggerations: let us considerdistinctly the power and the conduct of our enemies, and inquire whetherthey do not affright us more than they are able to hurt us. 

That the force of Spain alone, sir, is much to be dreaded, no man willassert; for that empire, it is well known, has long been seized with allthe symptoms of declining power, and has been supported, not by its ownstrength, but by the interests of its neighbours. The vast dominions ofthe Spaniards are only an empty show; they are lands withoutinhabitants, and, by consequence, without defence; they are ratherexcrescences, than members of the monarchy, and receive support ratherthan communicate. In the distant branches of their empire the governmentlanguishes, as the vital motion in an expiring body; and the struggleswhich they now make, may be termed rather agonies than efforts. 

From Spain, therefore, unassisted, we have nothing to apprehend, and yetfrom thence we have been threatened with insults and invasions. 

That the condition of the French is far different, cannot be denied;their commerce flourishes, their dominions are connected, their wealthincreases, and their government operates with full vigour: theirinfluence is great, and their name formidable. But I cannot allow, sir, that they have yet attained such a height of power as should alarm uswith constant apprehensions, or that we ought to secure ourselvesagainst them by the violation of our liberties. Not to urge that theloss of freedom, and the destruction of our constitution, are the worstconsequences that can be apprehended from a conquest, and that to aslave the change of his master is of no great importance, it is evident, that the power of the French is of such kind as can only affect usremotely, and consequentially. They may fill the continent with alarms, and ravage the territories of Germany, by their numerous armies, but canonly injure us by means of their fleets. We may wait, sir, without apanick terrour, though not without some degree of anxiety, the event oftheir attempts upon the neighbouring princes, and cannot be reduced tofight for our altars and our houses, but by a second armada, which, eventhen, the winds must favour, and a thousand circumstances concur toexpedite. 

But that no such fleet can be fitted out by the united endeavours of thewhole world; that our navy, in its present state, is superiour to anythat can be brought against us, our ministers ought not to be ignorant:and, therefore, to dispirit the nation with apprehensions of armieshovering in the air, and of conquerors to be wafted over by supernaturalmeans, is to destroy that happiness which government was ordained topreserve; to sink us to tameness and cowardice; and to betray us toinsults and to robberies. 

If our danger, sir, be such as has been represented, to whom must weimpute it? Upon whom are our weakness, our poverty, and our miseries tobe charged? Upon whom, but those who have usurped the direction ofaffairs which they did not understand, or to which their solicitude forthe preservation of their own power hindered them from attending?

That the Spaniards, sir, are now enabled to make resistance, and, perhaps, to insult and depopulate our colonies; that the French havedespatched a fleet into the American seas, to obstruct, as may beconjectured, the progress of our arms, and that we are in danger ofmeeting opposition which we did not expect, is too evident to beconcealed. 

But, sir, is not the spirit of our enemies the consequence rather of ourcowardice than of their own strength? Does not the opposition to ourdesigns, by whatever nation it shall be made, arise from the contemptwhich has been brought upon us by our irresolution, forbearance, anddelays? Had we resented the first insult, and repaired our earliestlosses by vigorous reprisals, our merchants had long ago carried ontheir traffick with security, our enemies would have courted us withrespect, and our allies supported us with confidence. 

Our negotiations, treaties, proposals, and concessions, not onlyafforded them leisure to collect their forces, equip their fleets, andfortify their coasts; but gave them, likewise, spirit to resist thosewho could not be conquered but by their own cowardice and folly. By ourill-timed patience, and lingering preparations, we encouraged those tounite against us, who would, otherwise, have only hated us in secret;and deterred those from declaring in our favour, whom interest orgratitude might have inclined to assist us. For who will support thosefrom whom no mutual support can be expected? And who will expect thatthose will defend their allies, who desert themselves?

But, sir, however late our resentment was awakened, had the war beenprosecuted vigorously after it was declared, we might have been nowsecure from danger, and freed from suspense, nor would any thing haveremained but to give laws to our enemies. 

From the success of Vernon with so inconsiderable forces, we mayconjecture what would have been performed with an armament proportionedto his undertaking; and why he was not better supplied, no reason hasyet been given; nor can it be easily discovered why we either did notbegin the war before our enemies had concerted their measures, or delayit till we had formed our own. 

Notwithstanding some opportunities have been neglected, and all theadvantages of a sudden attack have been irrecoverably lost;notwithstanding our friends, sir, have learned to despise and neglectus, and our enemies are animated to confidence and obstinacy, yet ourreal and intrinsick strength continues the same; nor are there yet anypreparations made against us by the enemy, with views beyond their ownsecurity and defence. It does not yet appear, sir, that our enemies, however insolent, look upon us as the proper objects of a conquest, orthat they imagine it possible to besiege us in our own ports, or toconfine us to the defence of our own country. We are not, therefore, tohave recourse to measures, which, if they are ever to be admitted, canbe justified by nothing but the utmost distress, and can only becomeproper, as the last and desperate expedient. The enemy, sir, ought toappear not only in our seas, but in our ports, before it can benecessary that one part of the nation should be enslaved for thepreservation of the rest. 

To destroy any part of the community, while it is in our power topreserve the whole, is certainly absurd, and inconsistent with theequity and tenderness of a good government: and what is slavery lessthan destruction? What greater calamity has that man to expect, who hasbeen already deprived of his liberty, and reduced to a level withthieves and murderers? With what spirit, sir, will he draw his swordupon his invaders, who has nothing to defend? Or why should he repel theinjuries which will make no addition to his misery, and will fall onlyon those to whom he is enslaved?

It is well known that gratitude is the foundation of our duty to ourcountry, and to our superiours, whom we are obliged to protect upon someoccasions, because, upon others, we receive protection from them, andare maintained in the quiet possession of our fortunes, and the securityof our lives. But what gratitude is due to his country from a mandistinguished, without a crime, by the legislature, from the rest of thepeople, and marked out for hardships and oppressions? From a man who iscondemned to labour and to danger, only that others may fatten withindolence, and slumber without anxiety? From a man who is dragged tomisery without reward, and hunted from his retreat, as the property ofhis master?

Where gratitude, sir, is not the motive of action, which may easilyhappen in minds not accustomed to observe the ends of government, andrelations of society, interest never fails to preside, which may bedistinguished from gratitude, as it regards the immediate consequencesof actions, and confines the view to present advantages. But whatinterest can be gratified by a man who is not master of his own actions, nor secure in the enjoyment of his acquisitions? Why should he besolicitous to increase his property, who may be torn from the possessionof it in a moment? Or upon what motive can he act who will not becomemore happy by doing his duty?

Many of those to whom this bill is proposed to extend, have raisedfortunes at the expense of their ease, and at the hazard of their lives;and now sit at rest, enjoying the memory of their past hardships, andinciting others to the prosecution of the same adventures. How will itbe more reasonable to drag these men from their houses, than to seizeany other gentleman upon his own estate? and how negligently will ournavigation and our commerce be promoted, when it is discovered thateither wealth cannot be gained by them, or, if so gained, cannot beenjoyed. 

But it is still urged, sir, that there is a necessity of manning thefleet; a necessity which, indeed, cannot totally be denied, though ashort delay would produce no frightful consequences, would expose us tono invasions, nor disable us from prosecuting the war. Yet, as thenecessity at least deserves the regard of the legislature, let usconsider what motives have hitherto gained men over to the publickservice; let us examine how our land forces are raised, and how ourmerchants equip their ships. How is all this to be effected withoutmurmurs, mutinies, or discontent, but by the natural and easy method ofoffering rewards?

It may be objected, sir, that rewards have been already proposed withouteffect; but, not to mention the corrupt arts which have been made use ofto elude that promise, by rejecting those that came to claim them, wecan infer from their inefficacy only, that they were too small; thatthey were not sufficient to dazzle the attention, and withdraw it fromthe prospect of the distant advantages which may arise from the serviceof the merchants. Let the reward, therefore, be doubled, and if it benot then sufficient, doubled anew. There is nothing but may be bought, if an adequate price is offered; and we are, therefore, to raise thereward, till it shall be adjudged by the sailors equivalent to theinconveniencies of the service. 

Let no man urge, that this is profusion; that it is a breach of ourtrust, and a prodigality of the publick money. Sir, the money thus paidis the price of liberty; it is disbursed to hinder slavery fromencroaching, to preserve our natural rights from infraction, and theconstitution of our country from violation. If we vote away theprivilege of one class among us, those of another may quickly bedemanded; and slavery will advance by degrees, till the last remains offreedom shall be lost. 

But perhaps, sir, it will appear, upon reflection, that even this methodneeds not to be practised. It is well known, that it is not necessaryfor the whole crew of a ship to be expert sailors; there must be somenovices, and many whose employment has more of labour than of art. Wehave now a numerous army, which burdens our country, without defendingit, and from whom we may, therefore, draw supplies for the fleet, anddistribute them amongst the ships in just proportions; they mayimmediately assist the seamen, and will become able, in a short time, totrain up others. 

It will, doubtless, sir, be objected to this proposal, that thecontinent is in confusion, and that we ought to continue such a force asmay enable us to assist our allies, maintain our influence, and turn thescale of affairs in the neighbouring countries. I know not how we areindebted to our allies, or by what ties we are obliged to assist thosewho never assisted us; nor can I, upon mature consideration, think itnecessary to be always gazing on the continent, watching the motions ofevery potentate, and anxiously attentive to every revolution. There isno end, sir, of obviating contingencies, of attempting to secureourselves from every possibility of danger. I am, indeed, desirous thatour friends, if any there be that deserve that name, should succeed intheir designs, and be protected in their claims; but think it oughtalways to be remembered, that our own affairs affect us immediately, theirs only by consequence, and that the nearest danger is to be firstregarded. 

With respect to the amendment offered to this clause, I cannot see thatit will produce any advantage, nor think any evidence sufficient tojustify the breach of our constitution, or subject any man to thehardship of having his dwelling entered by force. 

And, sir, I am not entirely satisfied of the impartiality and equitywith which it is promised that this law will be put in execution, orwhat new influence is to cooperate with this law, by which corruptionand oppression will be prevented. 

It is well known, sir, that many other laws are made ineffectual bypartiality or negligence, which remarkably appears by the immensequantities of corn that are daily carried into foreign countries, byillegal exportations, by which traffick I am informed that we obtainmost of our foreign gold, which, in reality, is paid us for corn by theDutch; though it is studiously represented to the nation as gained byour traffick with Portugal. Who can assure us that this law will not beperverted, after the example of others? and that there will not bewretches found that may employ it to the extortion of money, or thegratification of revenge?

Thus, sir, I have shown by what means our fleet may now be equipped, andhow a supply of sailors may be perpetuated; for I cannot think how theboys which are educated in charity schools can be more properlyemployed. A proportion may be easily selected for the service, who willbenefit the publick much more than by serving sharpers and attorneys, and pilfering either at low gaming houses, or in the inns of court. 

Since, therefore, it is not pretended, sir, that this bill can bejustified otherwise than by necessity, and it appears that supplies maybe raised by other means; since, instead of increasing and encouragingseamen, nothing is proposed that does not manifestly tend, by depressingand harassing them, to diminish their numbers, I think it reasonable todeclare that I shall continue to oppose it, and hope that every friendof liberty, or commerce, will concur in the opposition. 

Sir Robert WALPOLE spoke next, to the following effect:--Sir, I haveconsidered the bill before us with the utmost impartiality, and I cansee no reason to apprehend that it will produce such universaldiscontent, and give occasion to so many abuses, as the honourablegentlemen by whom it is opposed, appear to suspect. It is not uncommon, sir, in judging of future events, and tracing effects from causes, forthe most sagacious to be mistaken. 

The safest method of conjecturing upon the future, is to consider thepast, for it is always probable, that from like causes like consequenceswill arise. Let us, therefore, sir, examine what injustice or oppressionhas been hitherto produced by laws of the same kind. 

The power of searching, however it is now become the subject of loudexclamation and pathetick harangues, is no new invasion of the rights ofthe people, but has been already granted in its utmost extent, for anend of no greater importance than the preservation of the game. Thisformidable authority has been already trusted to the magistrate, and thenation has been already subjected to this insupportable tyranny, onlylest the hares and partridges should be destroyed, and gentlemen beobliged to disband their hounds and dismiss their setting dogs. Yet, sir, even with regard to this power, thus exorbitant, and thus lightlygranted, I have heard no general complaints, nor believe that it islooked upon as a grievance by any, but those whom it restrains fromliving upon the game, and condemns to maintain themselves by a morehonest and useful industry. 

I hope, sir, those that think this law for the preservation of theiramusement, rational and just, will have at least the same regard to thedefence of their country, and will not think their venison deservesgreater solicitude than their fortunes and their liberties. 

Nor is it difficult, sir, to produce instances of the exercise of thispower, for the end which is now proposed, without any consequences thatshould discourage us from repeating the experiment. I have now in myhand a letter, by which the mayor and aldermen of Bristol are empoweredto seize all the sailors within the bounds of their jurisdiction, whichorder was executed without any outcries of oppression, or apprehensionsof the approach of slavery. 

That this law, sir, will be always executed with the strictestimpartiality, and without the least regard to any private purposes, cannot, indeed, be demonstratively proved; every law may possibly beabused by a combination of profligates; but it must, I think, begranted, that it is drawn up with all the caution that reason, orjustice, or the corruption of the present age requires. I know not whatcan be contrived better than an association of men, unlikely to concurin their views and interests--a justice of the peace, a lieutenant of aship, and a commissioner of the navy--three men, probably unknown toeach other, and of which no one will be at all solicitous to desire therest to unite to commit a crime, to which no temptation can be readilyimagined. 

This caution, sir, which cannot but be approved, and which surely issome proof of judgment and consideration, ought, in my opinion, to haveexempted the bill, and those by whose assistance it was drawn up, fromthe reproachful and indecent charge of absurdity, ignorance, andincapacity; terms which the dignity of this assembly does not admit, even when they are incontestably just, and which surely ought not to bemade use of when the question is of a doubtful nature. 

The gentlemen, sir, who are now intrusted with publick employments, havenever yet discovered that they are inferiour to their predecessors inknowledge or integrity; nor do their characters suffer any diminution bya comparison with those who vilify and traduce them. 

Those, sir, that treat others with such licentious contempt, oughtsurely to give some illustrious proof of their own abilities; and yet ifwe examine what has been produced on this question, we shall find noreason to admire their sagacity or their knowledge. 

We have been told, sir, that the fleet might properly be manned by adetachment from the army; but it has not been proved that we have anysuperfluous forces in the kingdom, nor, indeed, will our army be foundsufficiently numerous, if, by neglecting to equip our fleet, we give ourenemies an opportunity of entering our country. 

If it be inquired what necessity there is for our present forces? Whatexpeditions are designed? Or what dangers are feared? I shall not thinkit my duty to return any answer. It is, sir, the great unhappiness ofour constitution, that our determinations cannot be kept secret, andthat our enemies may always form conjectures of our designs, by knowingour preparations; but surely more is not to be published than necessityextorts, and the government has a right to conceal what it would injurethe nation to discover. 

Nor can I, sir, approve the method of levying sailors by the incitementof an exorbitant reward, a reward to be augmented at the pleasure ofthose who are to receive it. For what can be the consequence of suchprodigality, but that those to whom the largest sum is offered, will yetrefuse their service in expectation of a greater. The reward alreadyproposed is, in my opinion, the utmost stretch of liberality; and allbeyond may be censured as profusion. 

It is not to be imagined, sir, that all these objections were not made, and answered, in the reign of the late queen, when a bill of the samenature was proposed; they were answered, at least, by the necessity ofthose times, which necessity has now returned upon us. 

We do not find that it produced any consequences so formidable anddestructive, that they should for ever discourage us from attempting toraise forces by the same means; it was then readily enacted, andexecuted without opposition, and without complaints; nor do I believethat any measures can be proposed of equal efficacy, and less severity. 

Mr. SANDYS replied, in substance as follows:--Sir, whether theprecedents produced in defence of this bill, will have more weight thanthe arguments, must be shown by a careful examination, which willperhaps discover that the order sent to the magistrates of Bristolconveyed no new power, nor such as is, in any respect, parallel to thatwhich this bill is intended to confer. 

They were only enjoined to inquire with more than usual strictness, after strollers and vagabonds, such as the law has always subjected topunishment, and send them to the fleet, instead of any other place ofcorrection; a method which may now be pursued without danger, opposition, or complaint. 

But for my part, I am not able, upon the closest attention to thepresent scene of affairs, to find out the necessity of extraordinarymethods of any kind. The fears of an invasion from France, are, in myopinion, sir, merely chimerical; from their fleet in America the coastsof Britain have nothing to fear, and after the numerous levies of seamenby which it was fitted out, it is not yet probable that they canspeedily send out another. We know, sir, that the number of seamendepends upon the extent of commerce, and surely there is as yet no suchdisproportion between their trade and ours, as that they should be ableto furnish out a naval armament with much greater expedition thanourselves. 

In America our forces are at least equal to theirs, so that it is notvery probable, that after the total destruction of our fleet by them, they should be so little injured, as to be able immediately to set sailfor the channel, and insult us in our own ports; to effect this, sir, they must not only conquer us, but conquer us without resistance. 

If they do not interrupt us in our attempts, nor expose themselves to anengagement, they may, indeed, return without suffering great damages, but I know not how they can leave the shores of America unobserved, orpour an unexpected invasion upon us. If they continue there, sir, theycannot hurt as, and when they return, we may prepare for theirreception. 

There are men, I know, sir, who have reason to think highly of theFrench policy, and whose ideas may be exalted to a belief that they canperform impossibilities; but I have not yet prevailed upon myself toconceive that they can act invisibly, or that they can equip a fleet bysorcery, collect an army in a moment, and defy us on our own coast, without any perceptible preparations. 

Then admiral WAGER spoke thus:--The calamities produced by discord andcontention, need not to be pointed out; but it may be proper to reflectupon the consequences of a house divided against itself, that we mayendeavour to avoid them. 

Unanimity is produced by nothing more powerfully than by impendingdanger, and, therefore, it may be useful to show those who seem atpresent in profound security, that the power of France is moreformidable than they are willing to allow. 

My age, sir, enables me to remember many transactions of the wars in thelate reigns, to which many gentlemen are strangers, or of which theyhave only imperfect ideas from history and tradition. 

In the second year of the reign of William, the French gained a victoryover the united fleets of the maritime powers, which gave them, for thesummer following, the dominion of the Channel, enabled them to shut upour merchants in their ports, and produced a total suspension of ourcommerce. 

Those, sir, to whom the importance of trade is so well known, willeasily apprehend the weight of this calamity, and will, I hope, rejectno measures that have a manifest tendency to prevent it. 

Our ships, sir, do not lie useless because there is any want of seamenin the nation, but because any service is preferred to that of thepublick. 

There are now, to my knowledge, in one town on the west coast, no fewerthan twelve hundred sailors, of which surely a third part may be justlyclaimed by the publick interest; nor do I know why they who obstinatelyrefuse to serve their country, should be treated with so muchtenderness. It is more reasonable that they should suffer by theirrefusal, than that the general happiness should be endangered. 

Mr. SOUTHWELL spoke next, to the following purpose:--Sir, when anyauthority shall be lodged in my hands, to be exercised for the publickbenefit, I shall always endeavour to exert it with honesty anddiligence; but will never be made the instrument of oppression, norexecute any commission of tyranny or injustice. 

As, therefore, the power of searching is to be placed in the hands ofjustices of the peace, I think it necessary to declare, that I willnever perform so hateful a part of the office, and that if this billbecomes a law, I will retire from the place to which my authority islimited, rather than contribute to the miseries of my fellow-subjects. 

Mr. LITTLETON spoke as follows:--Sir, all the arguments which have beenoffered in support of this bill, are reduced at last to one constantassertion of the necessity of passing it. 

We have been told, sir, with great acuteness, that a war cannot becarried on without men, and that ships are useless without sailors; andfrom thence it is inferred that the bill is necessary. 

That forces are by some means necessary to be raised, the warmestopponents of the bill will not deny, but they cannot, therefore, allowthe inference, that the methods now proposed are necessary. 

They are of opinion, sir, that cruel and oppressive measures can neverbe justified, till all others have been tried without effect; they thinkthat the law, when it was formerly passed, was unjust, and areconvinced, by observing that it never was revived, and that it was byexperience discovered to be useless. 

Necessity, absolute necessity, is a formidable sound, and may terrifythe weak and timorous into silence and compliance; but it will be found, upon reflection, to be often nothing but an idle feint, to amuse and todelude us, and that what is represented as necessary to the publick, isonly something convenient to men in power. 

Necessity, sir, has, heretofore, been produced as a plea for that whichcould be no otherwise defended. In the days of Charles the first, ship-money was declared to be legal, because it was necessary. Such wasthe reasoning of the lawyers, and the determination of the judges; butthe senate, a senate of patriots! without fear, and without corruption, and influenced only by a sincere regard for the publick, were of adifferent opinion, and neither admitted the lawfulness nor necessity. 

It will become us, on this occasion, to act with equal vigour, andconvince our countrymen, that we proceed upon the same principles, andthat the liberties of the people are our chief care. 

I hope we shall unite in defeating any attempts that may impair therights which every Briton boasts as his birthright, and reject a lawwhich will be equally dreaded and detested with the inquisition ofSpain. 

Sir William YONGE spoke next, to this effect:--Sir, though manyparticular clauses of this bill have been disapproved and opposed, somewith more, and some with less reason, yet the committee has hithertoagreed that a bill for this purpose is necessary in the present state ofour affairs; upon this principle we have proceeded thus far, severalgentlemen have proposed their opinions, contributed their observations, and laboured as in an affair universally admitted to be of highimportance to the general prosperity. 

But now, sir, when some of the difficulties are surmounted, someexpedients luckily struck out, some objections removed, and the greatdesign brought nearer to execution, we are on a sudden informed, thatall our labour is superfluous, that we are amusing ourselves withuseless consultations, providing against calamities that can neverhappen, and raising bulwarks without an enemy; that, therefore, thequestion before us is of no importance, and the bill ought, withoutfarther examination, to be totally rejected. 

I suppose, sir, I shall be readily believed, when I declare that I shallwillingly admit any arguments that may evince our safety; but, inproportion as real freedom from danger is to be desired, a supine andindolent neglect of it is to be dreaded and avoided; and I cannot butfear that our enemies are more formidable, and more malicious, than thegentlemen that oppose this bill have represented them. 

This bill can only be opposed upon the supposition that it gives asanction to severities, more rigorous than our present circumstancesrequire; for nothing can be more fallacious or invidious than acomparison of this law with the demand of ship-money, a demand contraryto all law, and enforced by the manifest exertion of arbitrary power. 

How has the conduct of his present majesty any resemblance with that ofCharles the first? Is any money levied by order of the council? Are thedeterminations of the judges set in opposition to the decrees of thesenate? Is any man injured in his property by an unlimited extension ofthe prerogative? or any tribunal established superiour to the laws ofthe nation?

To draw parallels, sir, where there is no resemblance; and to accuse, byinsinuations, where there is no shadow of a crime; to raise outcrieswhen no injury is attempted; and to deny a real necessity because it wasonce pretended for a bad purpose; is surely not to advance the publickservice, which can be promoted only by just reasonings, and calmreflections, not by sophistry and satire, by insinuations withoutground, and by instances beside the purpose. 

Mr. LITTLETON answered:--Sir, true zeal for the service of the publickis never discovered by collusive subterfuges and maliciousrepresentations; a mind, attentive to the common good, would hardly, onan occasion like this, have been at leisure to pervert an harmlessillustration, and extract disaffection from a casual remark. 

It is, indeed, not impossible, sir, that I might express myselfobscurely; and it may be, therefore, necessary to declare that Iintended no disrespectful reflection on the conduct of his majesty; butmust observe, at the same time, that obscure or inaccurate expressionsought always to be interpreted in the most inoffensive meaning, and thatto be too sagacious in discovering concealed insinuations, is no greatproof of superiour integrity. 

Wisdom, sir, is seldom captious, and honesty seldom suspicious; a mancapable of comprehending the whole extent of a question, disdains todivert his attention by trifling observations; and he that is above thepractice of little arts, or the motions of petty malice, does not easilyimagine them incident to another. 

That in the question of ship-money necessity was pretended, cannot bedenied; and, therefore, all that I asserted, which was only that thenation had been once terrified without reason, by the formidable soundof necessity, is evident and uncontested. 

When a fraud has once been practised, it is of use to remember it, thatwe may not twice be deceived by the same artifice; and, therefore, Imentioned the plea of necessity, that it may be inquired whether it isnow more true than before. 

That the senate, sir, and not the judges, is now applied to, is no proofof the validity of the arguments which have been produced; for in thedays of ship-money, the consent of the senate had been asked, had therebeen any prospect of obtaining it; but the court had been convinced, byfrequent experiments, of the inflexibility of the senate, and despairedof influencing them by prospects of advantage, or intimidating them byfrowns or menaces. 

May this and every future senate imitate their conduct, and, like them, distinguish between real and pretended necessity; and let not us beterrified, by idle clamours, into the establishment of a law at onceuseless and oppressive. 

Sir William YONGE replied:--Sir, that I did not intend to misrepresentthe meaning of the honourable gentleman, I hope it is not necessary todeclare; and that I have, in reality, been guilty of anymisrepresentation, I am not yet convinced. If he did not intend aparallel between ship-money and the present bill, to what purpose washis observation? and if he did intend it, was it not proper to showthere was no resemblance, and that all which could be inferred from itwas, therefore, fallacious and inconclusive?

Nor do I only differ, sir, in opinion with the honourable gentleman withrelation to his comparison of measures, which have nothing in commonwith each other; but will venture to declare, that he is not moreaccurate in his citations from history. The king did not apply to thejudges, because the senate would not have granted him the money that hedemanded, but because his chief ambition was to govern the nation by theprerogative alone, and to free himself and his descendants fromsenatorial inquiries. 

That this account, sir, is just, I am confident the histories of thosetimes will discover; and, therefore, any invidious comparison betweenthat senate and any other, is without foundation in reason or in truth. 

Mr. BATHURST spoke as follows:--Sir, that this law will easily admit, inthe execution of it, such abuses as will overbalance the benefits, mayreadily be proved; and it will not be consistent with that regard to thepublick, expected from us by those whom we represent, to enact a lawwhich may probably become an instrument of oppression. 

The servant by whom I am now attended, may be termed, according to thedetermination of the vindicators of this bill, a seafaring man, havingbeen once in the West Indies; and he may, therefore, be forced from myservice, and dragged into a ship, by the authority of a justice of thepeace, perhaps of some abandoned prostitute, dignified with a commissiononly to influence elections, and awe those whom excises and riot-actscannot subdue. 

I think it, sir, not improper to declare, that I would by force opposethe execution of a law like this; that I would bar my doors and defendthem; that I would call my neighbours to my assistance; and treat thosewho should attempt to enter without my consent, as thieves, ruffians, and murderers. 

Lord GAGE spoke to this effect:--Sir, it is well known that by the lawsof this nation, poverty is, in some degree, considered as a crime, andthat the debtor has only this advantage over the felon, that he cannotbe pursued into his dwelling, nor be forced from the shelter of his ownhouse. 

I think it is universally agreed, that the condition of a man in debt isalready sufficiently miserable, and that it would be more worthy of thelegislative power to contrive alleviations of his hardships, thanadditions to them; and it seems, therefore, no inconsiderable objectionto this bill, that, by conferring the power of entering houses by force, it may give the harpies of the law an opportunity of entering, in thetumult of an impress, and of dragging a debtor to a noisome prison, under pretence of forcing sailors into the service of the crown. 

Mr. TRACEY then said:--Sir, that some law for the ends proposed by thebill before us, is necessary, I do not see how we can doubt, after thedeclarations of the admirals, who are fully acquainted with the servicefor which provision is to be made; and of the ministry, whose knowledgeof the present state of our own strength, and the designs of ourenemies, is, doubtless, more exact than they can acquire who are notengaged in publick employments. 

If, therefore, the measures now proposed are necessary, though they maynot be agreeable to the present dispositions of the people, for whosepreservation they are intended, I shall think it my duty to concur inthem, that the publick service may not be retarded, nor the safety of awhole nation hazarded, by a scrupulous attention to minute objections. 

Mr. CAMPBELL spoke as follows:--Sir, I have often, amidst my elogies onBritish liberty, and my declarations of the excellence of ourconstitution, the impartiality of our government, and the efficacy ofour laws, been reproached by foreigners with the practice of impresses, as a hardship which would raise a rebellion in absolute monarchies, andkindle those nations into madness, that have, for many ages, known noother law than the will of their princes. A hardship which includesimprisonment and slavery, and to which, therefore, no aggravations oughtto be added. 

But if justice and reason, sir, are to be overborne by necessity; ifnecessity is to stop our ears against the complaints of the oppressed, and harden our hearts at the sight of their misery, let it, at least, not destroy our memories, nor deprive us of the advantages ofexperience. 

Let us inquire, sir, what were the effects of this hateful authoritywhen it was formerly consigned to the magistrates. Were our fleetsmanned in an instant? were our harbours immediately crowded withsailors? did we surprise our enemies by our expedition, and makeconquests before an invasion could be suspected? I have heard, sir, ofno such consequences, nor of any advantages which deserved to bepurchased by tyranny and oppression. We have found that very few wereprocured by the magistrates, and the charge of seizing and conveying wasvery considerable; and, therefore, cannot but conclude that illegalmeasures, which have been once tried without success, should, for adouble reason, never be revived. 

Sir John BARNARD spoke to this effect:--Sir, it is not without regretthat I rise so often on this occasion: for to dispute with those whosedeterminations are not influenced by reason, is a ridiculous task, atiresome labour, without prospect of reward. 

But, as an honourable gentleman has lately remarked, that by denying thenecessity of the bill, instead of making objections to particularclauses, the whole design of finding expedients to supply the seaservice is at once defeated; I think it necessary to remind him, that Ihave made many objections to this bill, and supported them by reasonswhich have not yet been answered. But I shall now no longer confine myremarks to single errours, but observe that there is one general defect, by which the whole bill is made absurd and useless. 

For the foundation of a law like this, sir, the description of a seamanought to be accurately laid down, it ought to be declared what actsshall subject him to that denomination, and by what means, after havingonce enlisted himself in this unhappy class of men, he may withdraw intoa more secure and happy state of life. 

Is a man, who has once only lost sight of the shore, to be for everhunted as a seaman? Is a man, who, by traffick, has enriched a family, to be forced from his possessions by the authority of an impress? Is aman, who has purchased an estate, and built a seat, to solicit theadmiralty for a protection from the neighbouring constable? Suchquestions as these, sir, may be asked, which the bill before us willenable no man to answer. 

If a bill for this purpose be truly necessary, let it, at least, befreed from such offensive absurdities; let it be drawn up in a form asdifferent as is possible from that of the bill before us; and, at last, I am far from imagining that a law will be contrived not injurious toindividuals, nor detrimental to the publick; not contrary to the firstprinciples of our establishment, and not loaded with folly andabsurdities. 

Mr. VYNER then spoke:--Sir, a definition of a seaman is so necessary ina bill for this purpose, that the omission of it will defeat all themethods that can be suggested. How shall a law be executed, or a penaltyinflicted, when the magistrate has no certain marks whereby he maydistinguish a criminal? and when even the man that is prosecuted may notbe conscious of guilt, or know that the law extended to him, which he ischarged with having offended. 

If, in defining a seaman on the present occasion, it be thought properto have any regard to the example of our predecessors, whose wisdom has, in this debate, been so much magnified; it may be observed, that aseaman has been formerly defined, a man who haunts the seas; adefinition which seems to imply habit and continuance, and not tocomprehend a man who has, perhaps, never gone more than a single voyage. 

But though this definition, sir, should be added to the amendmentsalready proposed, and the bill thereby be brought somewhat nearer to theconstitutional principles of our government; I cannot yet think it somuch rectified, as that the hardships will not outweigh the benefits, and, therefore, shall continue to oppose the bill, though to someparticular clauses I have no objection. 

[The term _seafaring man_ was left out, and the several amendments wereadmitted in the committee, but the clauses themselves, to the number ofeleven, were given up on the report. ]

HOUSE OF COMMONS, MARCH 10, 1740-1. 

The commons resolved their house into a committee, to consider the billfor the encouragement of sailors, when admiral WAGER offered a clause, by which it was to be enacted, "That no merchants, or bodies corporateor politick, shall hire sailors at higher wages than thirty-fiveshillings for the month, on pain of forfeiting the treble value of thesum so agreed for;" which law was to commence after fifteen days, andcontinue for a time to be agreed on by the house: and then spoke to thefollowing purpose:--

Sir, the necessity of this clause must be so apparent to every gentlemanacquainted with naval and commercial affairs, that as no opposition canbe apprehended, very few arguments will be requisite to introduce it. 

How much the publick calamities of war are improved by the sailors totheir own private advantage; how generally they shun the publickservice, in hopes of receiving exorbitant wages from the merchants; andhow much they extort from the merchants, by threatening to leave theirservice for that of the crown, is universally known to every officer ofthe navy, and every commander of a trading vessel. 

A law, therefore, sir, to restrain them in time of war from suchexorbitant demands; to deprive them of those prospects which have oftenno other effect than to lull them in idleness, while they skulk about inexpectation of higher wages; and to hinder them from deceivingthemselves, embarrassing the merchants, and neglecting the generalinterest of their country, is undoubtedly just. It is just, sir, becausein regard to the publick it is necessary to prevent the greatestcalamity that can fall upon a people, to preserve us from receiving lawsfrom the most implacable of our enemies; and it is just, because withrespect to particular men it has no tendency but to suppress idleness, fraud, and extortion. 

Mr. Henby FOX spoke next:--Sir, I have no objection to any part of thisclause, except the day proposed for the commencement: to make a lawagainst any pernicious practice, to which there are strong temptations, and to give those whose interest may incite them to it, time to effecttheir schemes, before the law shall begin to operate, seems not veryconsistent with wisdom or vigilance. 

It is not denied, sir, that the merchants are betrayed by that regard toprivate interest which prevails too frequently over nobler views, tobribe away from the service of the crown, by large rewards, thosesailors whose assistance is now so necessary to the publick; and, therefore, it is not to be imagined that they will not employ theirutmost diligence to improve the interval which the bill allows in makingcontracts for the ensuing, year, and that the sailors will not eagerlyengage themselves before this law shall preclude their prospects ofadvantage. 

As, therefore, to make no law, and to make a law that will not beobserved, is in consequence the same; and the time allowed by theclause, as it now stands, may make the whole provision ineffectual; itis my opinion, that either it ought to begin to operate to-morrow, orthat we ought to leave the whole affair in its present state. 

Then sir Robert WALPOLE spoke as follows:--Sir, nothing has a greaterappearance of injustice, than to punish men by virtue of laws, withwhich they were not acquainted; the law, therefore, is always supposedto be known by those who have offended it, because it is the duty ofevery man to know it; and certainly it ought to be the care of thelegislature, that those whom a law will affect, may have a possibilityof knowing it, and that those may not be punished for failing in theirduty, whom nothing but inevitable ignorance has betrayed into offence. 

But if the operation of this law should commence to-morrow, what numbersmay break it, and suffer by the breach of it involuntarily, and withoutdesign; and how shall we vindicate ourselves from having been accessoryto the crime which we censure and punish?

Mr. FOX replied:--Sir, I shall not urge in defence of my motion what isgenerally known, and has been frequently inculcated in all debates uponthis bill, that private considerations ought always to give way to thenecessities of the publick; for I think it sufficient to observe, thatthere is a distinction to be made between punishments and restraints, and that we never can be too early in the prevention of perniciouspractices, though we may sometimes delay to punish them. 

The law will be known to-morrow, to far the greatest number of those whomay be tempted to defeat it; and if there be others that break itignorantly, how will they find themselves injured by being only obligedto pay less than they promised, which is all that I should proposewithout longer warning. The debate upon this particular, will be atlength reduced to a question, whether a law for this purpose is just andexpedient? If a law be necessary, it is necessary that it should beexecuted; and it can be executed only by commencing to-morrow. 

Lord BALTIMORE spoke thus:--Sir, it appears to me of no great importancehow soon the operation of the law commences, or how long it is delayed, because I see no reason for imagining that it will at any time producethe effects proposed by it. 

It has been the amusement, sir, of a great part of my life, to conversewith men whose inclinations or employments have made them wellacquainted with maritime affairs, and amidst innumerable other schemesfor the promotion of trade, have heard some for the regulation of wagesin trading ships; schemes, at the first appearance plausible and likelyto succeed, but, upon a nearer inquiry, evidently entangled withinsuperable difficulties, and never to be executed without danger ofinjuring the commerce of the nation. 

The clause, sir, now before us contains, in my opinion, one of thosevisionary provisions, which, however infallible they may appear, will beeasily defeated, and will have no other effect than to promote cunningand fraud, and to teach men those acts of collusion, with which theywould otherwise never have been acquainted. 

Mr. LODWICK spoke to this effect:--Sir, I agree with the honourablegentleman by whom this clause has been offered, that the end for whichit is proposed, is worthy of the closest attention of the legislativepower, and that the evils of which the prevention is now endeavoured, may in some measure not only obstruct our traffick, but endanger ourcountry; and shall therefore very readily concur in any measures forthis purpose, that shall not appear either unjust or ineffectual. 

Whether this clause will be sufficient to restrain all elusivecontracts, and whether all the little artifices of interest aresufficiently obviated, I am yet unable to determine; but by a reflectionupon the multiplicity of relations to be considered, and the variety ofcircumstances to be adjusted in a provision of this kind, I am inclinedto think that, it is not the business of a transient inquiry, or of asingle clause, but that it will demand a separate law, and engage thedeliberation and regard of this whole assembly. 

Sir John BARNARD said:--Sir, notwithstanding the impatience andresentment with which some men see their mistakes and ignorancedetected; notwithstanding the reverence which negligence and haste aresaid to be entitled to from this assembly, I shall declare once more, without the apprehension of being confuted, that this bill was drawn upwithout consideration, and is defended without being understood; thatafter all the amendments which have been admitted, and all the additionsproposed, it will be oppressive and ineffectual, a chaos of absurdities, and a monument of ignorance. 

Sir Robert WALPOLE replied:--Sir, the present business of this assemblyis to examine the clause before us; but to deviate from so necessary aninquiry into loud exclamations against the whole bill, is to obstructthe course of the debate, to perplex our attention, and interrupt thesenate in its deliberation upon questions, in the determination of whichthe security of the publick is nearly concerned. 

The war, sir, in which we are now engaged, and, I may add, engaged bythe general request of the whole nation, can be prosecuted only by theassistance of the seamen, from whom it is not to be expected that theywill sacrifice their immediate advantage to the security of theircountry. Publick spirit, where it is to be found, is the result ofreflection, refined by study and exalted by education, and is not to behoped for among those whom low fortune has condemned to perpetualdrudgery. It must be, therefore, necessary to supply the defects ofeducation, and to produce, by salutary coercions, those effects which itis vain to expect from other causes. 

That the service of the sailors will be set up to sale by auction, andthat the merchants will bid against the government, is incontestable;nor is there any doubt that they will be able to offer the highestprice, because they will take care to repay themselves by raising thevalue of their goods. Thus, without some restraint upon the merchants, our enemies, who are not debarred by their form of government from anymethod which policy can invent, or absolute power put in execution, willpreclude all our designs, and set at defiance a nation superiour tothemselves. 

Sir John BARNARD then said:--Sir, I think myself obliged by my duty tomy country, and by my gratitude to those by whose industry we areenriched, and by whose courage we are defended, to make, once more, adeclaration, not against particular clauses, not against singlecircumstances, but against the whole bill; a bill unjust and oppressive, absurd and ridiculous; a bill to harass the industrious and distress thehonest, to puzzle the wise and add power to the cruel; a bill whichcannot be read without astonishment, nor passed without the violation ofour constitution, and an equal disregard of policy and humanity. 

All these assertions will need to be proved only by a bare perusal ofthis hateful bill, by which the meanest, the most worthless reptile, exalted to a petty office by serving a wretch only superiour to him infortune, is enabled to flush his authority by tyrannising over those whoevery hour deserve the publick acknowledgments of the community; tointrude upon the retreats of brave men, fatigued and exhausted by honestindustry, to drag them out with all the wantonness of grovellingauthority, and chain them to the oar without a moment's respite, orperhaps oblige them to purchase, with the gains of a dangerous voyage, or the plunder of an enemy lately conquered, a short interval to settletheir affairs, or bid their children farewell. 

Let any gentleman in this house, let those, sir, who now sit at ease, projecting laws of oppression, and conferring upon their own slaves suchlicentious authority, pause a few moments, and imagine themselvesexposed to the same hardships by a power superiour to their own; letthem conceive themselves torn from the tenderness and caresses of theirfamilies by midnight irruptions, dragged in triumph through the streetsby a despicable officer, and placed under the command of those by whomthey have, perhaps, been already oppressed and insulted. Why should weimagine that the race of men for whom those cruelties are preparing, have less sensibility than ourselves? Why should we believe that theywill suffer without complaint, and be injured without resentment? Whyshould we conceive that they will not at once deliver themselves, andpunish their oppressors, by deserting that country where they areconsidered as felons, and laying hold on those rewards and privilegeswhich no other government will deny them?

This is, indeed, the only tendency, whatever may have been the intentionof the bill before us; for I know not whether the most refined sagacitycan discover any other method of discouraging navigation than thosewhich are drawn together in the bill before us. We first give ourconstables an authority to hunt the sailors like thieves, and drivethem, by incessant pursuit, out of the nation; but lest any man shouldby friendship, good fortune, or the power of money, find means ofstaying behind, we have with equal wisdom condemned him to poverty andmisery; and lest the natural courage of his profession should incite himto assist his country in the war, have contrived a method of precludinghim from any advantage that he might have the weakness to hope from hisfortitude and diligence. What more can be done, unless we at onceprohibit to seamen the use of the common elements, or doom them to ageneral proscription. 

It is just that advantage, sir, should be proportioned to the hazard bywhich it is to be obtained, and, therefore, a sailor has an honest claimto an advance of wages in time of war; it is necessary to exciteexpectation, and to fire ambition by the prospect of great acquisitions, and by this prospect it is that such numbers are daily allured to navalbusiness, and that our privateers are filled with adventurers. The largewages which war makes necessary, are more powerful incentives to thosewhom impatience of poverty determines to change their state of life, than the secure gains of peaceful commerce; for the danger is overlookedby a mind intent upon the profit. 

War is the harvest of a sailor, in which he is to store provisions forthe winter of old age, and if we blast this hope, he will inevitablysink into indolence and cowardice. 

Many of the sailors are bred up to trades, or capable of any laboriousemployment upon land; nor is there any reason for which they exposethemselves to the dangers of a seafaring life, but the hope of suddenwealth, and some lucky season in which they may improve their fortunesby a single effort. Is it reasonable to believe that all these will notrather have recourse to their former callings, and live in security, though not in plenty, than encounter danger and poverty at once, andface an enemy without any prospect of recompense?

Let any man recollect the ideas that arose in his mind upon hearing of abill for encouraging and increasing sailors, and examine whether he hadany expectation of expedients like these. I suppose it was never knownbefore, that men were to be encouraged by subjecting them to peculiarpenalties, or that to take away the gains of a profession, was a methodof recommending it more generally to the people. 

But it is not of very great importance to dwell longer upon theimpropriety of this clause, which there is no possibility of putting inexecution. That the merchants will try every method of eluding a law soprejudicial to their interest, may be easily imagined, and a mind notvery fruitful of evasions, will discover that this law may be eluded bya thousand artifices. If the merchants are restrained from allowing mentheir wages beyond a certain sum, they will make contracts for thevoyage, of which the time may very easily be computed, they may offer areward for expedition and fidelity, they may pay a large sum by way ofadvance, they may allow the sailors part of the profits, or may offermoney by a third hand. To fix the price of any commodity, of which thequantity and the use may vary their proportions, is the most excessivedegree of ignorance. No man can determine the price of corn, unless hecan regulate the harvest, and keep the number of the people for ever ata stand. 

But let us suppose these methods as efficacious as their most sanguinevindicators are desirous of representing them, it does not yet appearthat they are necessary, and to inflict hardships without necessity, isby no means the practice of either wisdom or benevolence. To tyranniseand compel is the low pleasure of petty capacities, of narrow minds, swelled with the pride of uncontroulable authority, the wantonness ofwretches who are insensible of the consequences of their own actions, and of whom candour may, perhaps, determine, that they are only cruelbecause they are stupid. Let us not exalt into a precedent the mostunjust and rigorous law of our predecessors, of which they themselvesdeclared their repentance, or confessed the inefficacy, by neverreviving it; let us rather endeavour to gain the sailors by lenity andmoderation, and reconcile them to the service of the crown by realencouragements; for it is rational to imagine, that in proportion as menare disgusted by injuries, they will be won by kindness. 

There is one expedient, sir, which deserves to be tried, and from which, at least, more success may be hoped than from cruelty, hunger, andpersecution. The ships that are now to be fitted out for service, arethose of the first magnitude, which it is usual to bring back into theports in winter. Let us, therefore, promise to all seamen that shallvoluntarily engage in them, besides the reward already proposed, adischarge from the service at the end of six or seven months. By thisthey will be released from their present dread of perpetual slavery, andbe certain, as they are when in the service of the merchants, of arespite from their fatigues. The trade of the nation will be onlyinterrupted for a time, and may be carried on in the winter months, andlarge sums will be saved by dismissing the seamen when they cannot beemployed. 

By adding this to the other methods of encouragement, and throwing asideall rigorous and oppressive schemes, the navy may easily be manned, ourcountry protected, our commerce reestablished, and our enemies subdued;but to pass the bill as it now stands, is to determine that trade shallcease, and that no ship shall sail out of the river. 

Mr. PITT spoke to the following purport:--Sir, it is common for those tohave the greatest regard to their own interest who discover the leastfor that of others. I do not, therefore, despair of recalling theadvocates of this bill from the prosecution of their favourite measures, by arguments of greater efficacy than those which are founded on reasonand justice. 

Nothing, sir, is more evident, than that some degree of reputation isabsolutely necessary to men who have any concern in the administrationof a government like ours; they must either secure the fidelity of theiradherents by the assistance of wisdom, or of virtue; their enemies musteither be awed by their honesty, or terrified by their cunning. Mereartless bribery will never gain a sufficient majority to set thementirely free from apprehensions of censure. To different tempersdifferent motives must be applied: some, who place their felicity inbeing accounted wise, are in very little care to preserve the characterof honesty; others may be persuaded to join in measures which theyeasily discover to be weak and ill-concerted, because they are convincedthat the authors of them are not corrupt but mistaken, and are unwillingthat any man should be punished for natural defects or casual ignorance. 

I cannot say, sir, which of these motives influences the advocates forthe bill before us; a bill in which such cruelties are proposed as areyet unknown among the most savage nations, such as slavery has not yetborne, or tyranny invented, such as cannot be heard without resentment, nor thought of without horrour. 

It is, sir, perhaps, not unfortunate, that one more expedient has beenadded, rather ridiculous than shocking, and that these tyrants of theadministration, who amuse themselves with oppressing theirfellow-subjects, who add without reluctance one hardship to another, invade the liberty of those whom they have already overborne with taxes, first plunder and then imprison, who take all opportunities ofheightening the publick distresses, and make the miseries of war theinstruments of new oppressions, are too ignorant to be formidable, andowe their power not to their abilities, but to casual prosperity, or tothe influence of money. 

The other clauses of this bill, complicated at once with cruelty andfolly, have been treated with becoming indignation; but this may beconsidered with less ardour of resentment, and fewer emotions of zeal, because, though, perhaps, equally iniquitous, it will do no harm; for alaw that can never be executed can never be felt. 

That it will consume the manufacture of paper, and swell the books ofstatutes, is all the good or hurt that can be hoped or feared from a lawlike this; a law which fixes what is in its own nature mutable, whichprescribes rules to the seasons and limits to the wind. I am too wellacquainted, sir, with the disposition of its two chief supporters, tomention the contempt with which this law will be treated by posterity, for they have already shown abundantly their disregard of succeedinggenerations; but I will remind them, that they are now venturing theirwhole interest at once, and hope they will recollect, before it is toolate, that those who believe them to intend the happiness of theircountry, will never be confirmed in their opinion by open cruelty andnotorious oppression; and that those who have only their own interest inview, will be afraid of adhering to those leaders, however old andpractised in expedients, however strengthened by corruption, or elatedwith power, who have no reason to hope for success from either theirvirtue or abilities. 

Mr. BATHURST next spoke to this effect:--Sir, the clause now under ourconsideration is so inconsiderately drawn up, that it is impossible toread it in the most cursory manner, without discovering the necessity ofnumerous amendments; no malicious subtilties or artful deductions arerequired in raising objections to this part of the bill, they crowd uponus without being sought, and, instead of exercising our sagacity, wearyour attention. 

The first errour, or rather one part of a general and complicatederrour, is the computation of time, not by days, but by calendar months, which, as they are not equal one to another, may embarrass the accountbetween the sailors and those that employ them. In all contracts of ashort duration, the time is to be reckoned by weeks and days, by certainand regular periods, which has been so constantly the practice of theseafaring men, that, perhaps, many of them do not know the meaning of acalendar month: this, indeed, is a neglect of no great importance, because no man can be deprived by it of more than the wages due for thelabour of a few days; but the other part of this clause is moreseriously to be considered, as it threatens the sailors with greaterinjuries: for it is to be enacted, that all contracts made for morewages than are here allowed shall be totally void. 

It cannot be denied to be possible, and in my opinion it is very likely, that many contracts will be made without the knowledge of this law, andconsequently without any design of violating it; but ignorance, inevitable ignorance, though it is a valid excuse for every other man, is no plea for the unhappy sailor; he must suffer, though innocent, thepenalty of a crime; must undergo danger, hardships, and labour, withouta recompense, and at the end of a successful voyage, after havingenriched his country by his industry, return home to a necessitousfamily, without being able to relieve them. 

It is scarcely necessary, sir, to raise any more objections to a clausein which nothing is right; but, to show how its imperfections multiplyupon the slightest consideration, I take the opportunity to observe, that there is no provision made for regulating the voyages performed inless time than a month, so that the greatest part of the abuses, whichhave been represented as the occasion of this clause, are yet withoutremedy, and only those sailors who venture far, and are exposed to thegreatest dangers, are restrained from receiving an adequate reward. 

Thus much, sir, I have said upon the supposition that a regulation ofthe sailors' wages is either necessary or just; a supposition of which Iam very far from discovering the truth. That it is just to oppress themost useful of our fellow-subjects, to load those men with peculiarhardships to whom we owe the plenty that we enjoy, the power that yetremains in the nation, and which neither the folly nor the cowardice ofministers have yet been able to destroy, and the security in which wenow sit and hold our consultations; that it is just to lessen ourpayments at a time when we increase the labour of those who are hired, and to expose men to danger without recompense, will not easily beproved, even by those who are most accustomed to paradoxes, and areready to undertake the proof of any position which it is their interestto find true. 

Nor is it much more easy to show the necessity of this expedient in ourpresent state, in which it appears from the title of the bill, that ourchief endeavour should be the increase and encouragement of sailors, and, I suppose, it has not often been discovered, that by taking awaythe profits of a profession greater numbers have been allured to it. 

The high wages, sir, paid by merchants are the chief incitements thatprevail upon the ambitious, the necessitous, or the avaricious, toforsake the ease and security of the land, to leave easy trades, andhealthful employments, and expose themselves to an element where theyare not certain of an hour's safety. The service of the merchants is thenursery in which seamen are trained up for his majesty's navies, andfrom thence we must, in time of danger, expect those forces by whichalone we can be protected. 

If, therefore, it is necessary to encourage sailors, it is necessary toreject all measures that may terrify or disgust them; and as theirnumbers must depend upon our trade, let us not embarrass the merchantswith any other difficulties than those which are inseparable from war, and which very little care has been hitherto taken to alleviate. 

Mr. HAY replied:--Sir, the objections which have been urged with so muchardour, and displayed with such power of eloquence, are not, in myopinion, formidable enough to discourage us from prosecuting ourmeasures; some of them may be, perhaps, readily answered, and the resteasily removed. 

The computation of time, as it now stands, is allowed not to produce anyformidable evil, and therefore did not require so rhetorical a censure:the inconveniency of calendar months may easily be removed by a littlecandour in the contracting parties, or, that the objection may not berepeated to the interruption of the debate, weeks or days may besubstituted, and the usual reckoning of the sailors be still continued. 

That some contracts may be annulled, and inconveniencies or delays ofpayment arise, is too evident to be questioned; but in that case thesailor may have his remedy provided, and be enabled to obtain, by aneasy process, what he shall be judged to _have deserved_; for it must beallowed reasonable, that every man who labours in honest and usefulemployments, should receive the reward of his diligence and fidelity. 

Thus, sir, may the clause, however loudly censured and violentlyopposed, be made useful and equitable, and the publick service advancedwithout injury to individuals. 

Sir Robert WALPOLE next rose, and spoke as follows:--Sir, every lawwhich extends its influence to great numbers in various relations andcircumstances, must produce some consequences that were never foreseenor intended, and is to be censured or applauded as the generaladvantages or inconveniencies are found to preponderate. Of this kind isthe law before us, a law enforced by the necessity of our affairs, anddrawn up with no other intention than to secure the publick happiness, and produce that success which every man's interest must prompt him todesire. 

If in the execution of this law, sir, some inconveniencies should arise, they are to be remedied as fast as they are discovered, or if notcapable of a remedy, to be patiently borne, in consideration of thegeneral advantage. 

That some temporary disturbances may be produced is not improbable; thediscontent of the sailors may, for a short time, rise high, and ourtrade be suspended by their obstinacy; but obstinacy, howeverdetermined, must yield to hunger, and when no higher wages can beobtained, they will cheerfully accept of those which are here allowedthem. Short voyages, indeed, are not comprehended in the clause, andtherefore the sailors will engage in them upon their own terms, but thisobjection can be of no weight with those that oppose the clause, because, if it is unjust to limit the wages of the sailors, it is justto leave those voyages without restriction; and those that think theexpedient here proposed equitable and rational, may, perhaps, be willingto make some concessions to those who are of a different opinion. 

That the bill will not remove every obstacle to success, nor add weightto one part of the balance without making the other lighter; that itwill not supply the navy without incommoding the merchants in somedegree; that it may be sometimes evaded by cunning, and sometimes abusedby malice; and that at last it will be less efficacious than is desired, may, perhaps, be proved; but it has not yet been proved that any othermeasures are more eligible, or that we are not to promote the publickservice as far as we are able, though our endeavours may not produceeffects equal to our wishes. 

Sir John BARNARD then spoke, to this effect:--Sir, I know not by whatfatality it is that nothing can be urged in defence of the clause beforeus which does not tend to discover its weakness and inefficacy. Thewarmest patrons of this expedient are impelled, by the mere force ofconviction, to such concessions as invalidate all their arguments, andleave their opponents no necessity of replying. 

If short voyages are not comprehended in this provision, what are we nowcontroverting? What but the expedience of a law that will never beexecuted? The sailors, however they are contemned by those who thinkthem only worthy to be treated like beasts of burden, are not yet sostupid but that they can easily find out, that to serve a fortnight forgreater wages is more eligible than to toil a month for less; and as thenumerous equipments that have been lately made have not left many moresailors in the service of the merchants than may be employed in thecoasting trade, those who traffick to remoter parts, must shut up theirbooks and wait till the expiration of this act, for an opportunity ofrenewing their commerce. 

To regulate the wages for one voyage, and to leave another withoutlimitation, in time of scarcity of seamen, is absolutely to prohibitthat trade which is so restrained, and is, doubtless, a more effectualembargo than has been yet invented. 

Let any man but suppose that the East India company were obliged to giveonly half the wages that other traders allow, and consider how that partof our commerce could be carried on; would not their goods rot in theirwarehouses, and their ships lie for ever in the harbour? Would not thesailors refuse to contract with them? or desert them after a contract, upon the first prospect of more advantageous employment?

But it is not requisite to multiply arguments in a question which maynot only be decided without long examination, but in which we maydetermine our conclusions by the experience of our ancestors. Scarcelyany right or wrong measures are without a precedent, and, amongstothers, this expedient has been tried by the wisdom of former times; alaw was once made for limiting the wages of tailors, and that it istotally ineffectual we are all convinced. Experience is a very safeguide in political inquiries, and often discovers what the mostenlightened reason failed to foresee. 

Let us, therefore, improve the errours of our ancestors to our ownadvantage, and whilst we neglect to imitate their virtues, let us, atleast, forbear to repeat their follies. 

Mr. PERRY spoke to this purpose:--Sir, there is one objection more whichmy acquaintance with foreign trade impresses too strongly upon my mindto suffer me to conceal it. 

It is well known that the condition of a seaman subjects him to thenecessity of spending a great part of his life at a distance from hisnative country, in places where he can neither hear of our designs, norbe instructed in our laws, and, therefore, it is evident that no lawought to affect him before a certain period of time, in which he mayreasonably be supposed to have been informed of it. For every man oughtto have it in his power to avoid punishment, and to suffer only fornegligence or obstinacy. 

It is quite unnecessary, sir, to observe to this assembly, that thereare now, as at all times, great numbers of sailors in every part of theworld, and that they, at least, equally deserve our regard with thosewho are under the more immediate influence of the government. 

These seamen have already contracted for the price of their labour, andthe recompense of their hazards, nor can we, in my opinion, withoutmanifest injustice, dissolve a contract founded upon equity, andconfirmed by law. 

It is, sir, an undisputed principle of government, that no person shouldbe punished without a crime; but is it no punishment to deprive a man ofwhat is due to him by a legal stipulation, the condition of which is, onhis part, honestly fulfilled?

Nothing, sir, can be imagined more calamitous than the disappointment towhich this law subjects the unhappy men who are now promoting theinterest of their country in distant places, amidst dangers andhardships, in unhealthy climates, and barbarous nations, where theycomfort themselves, under the fatigues of labour and the miseries ofsickness, with the prospect of the sum which they shall gain for therelief of their families, and the respite which their wages will enablethem to enjoy; but, upon their return, they find their hopes blasted, and their contracts dissolved by a law made in their absence. 

No human being, I think, can coolly and deliberately inflict a hardshiplike this, and, therefore, I doubt not but those who have, byinadvertency, given room for this objection, will either remove it by anamendment, or what is, in my opinion, more eligible, reject the clauseas inexpedient, useless, and unjust. 

Sir William YONGE spoke next to this effect:--Sir, this debate has beenprotracted, not by any difficulties arising from the nature of thequestions which have been the subject of it, but by a neglect with whichalmost all the opponents of the bill may be justly charged, the neglectof distinguishing between measures eligible in themselves, and measurespreferable to consequences which are apprehended from particularconjunctures; between laws made only to advance the publick happiness, and expedients of which the benefit is merely occasional, and of whichthe sole intention is to avert some national calamity, and which are tocease with the necessity that produced them. 

Such are the measures, sir, which are now intended; measures, which, indays of ease, security, and prosperity, it would be the highest degreeof weakness to propose, but of which I cannot see the absurdity in timesof danger and distress. Such laws are the medicines of a state, uselessand nauseous in health, but preferable to a lingering disease, or to amiserable death. 

Even those measures, sir, which have been mentioned as most grosslyabsurd, and represented as parallel to the provision made in this clauseonly to expose it to contempt and ridicule, may, in particularcircumstances, be rational and just. To settle the price of corn in thetime of a famine, may become the wisest state, and multitudes might, intime of publick misery, by the benefit of temporary laws, be preservedfrom destruction. Even those masts, to which, with a prosperous gale, the ship owes its usefulness and its speed, are often cut down by thesailors in the fury of a storm. 

With regard to the ships which are now in distant places, whither noknowledge of this law can possibly be conveyed, it cannot be denied thattheir crews ought to be secured from injury by some particularexception; for though it is evident in competitions between publick andprivate interest, which ought to be preferred, yet we ought to rememberthat no unnecessary injury is to be done to individuals, even while weare providing for the safety of the nation. 

Mr. FAZAKERLY spoke to this effect:--Sir, though I cannot be supposed tohave much acquaintance with naval affairs, and, therefore, may not, perhaps, discover the full force of the arguments that have been urgedin favour of the clause now under consideration, yet I cannot but thinkmyself under an indispensable obligation to examine it as far as I amable, and to make use of the knowledge which I have acquired, howeverinferiour to that of others. 

The argument, sir, the only real argument, which has been produced infavour of the restraint of wages now proposed, appears to me by no meansconclusive; nor can I believe that the meanest and most ignorant seamanwould, if it were proposed to him, hesitate a moment for an answer toit. Let me suppose, sir, a merchant urging it as a charge against aseaman, that he raises his demand of wages in time of war, would not thesailor readily reply, that harder labour required larger pay? Would henot ask, why the general practice of mankind is charged as a crime uponhim only? Inquire, says he, of the workmen in the docks, have they notdouble wages for double labour? and is not their lot safe and easy incomparison with mine, who at once encounter danger and support fatigue, carry on war and commerce at the same time, conduct the ship and opposethe enemy, and am equally exposed to captivity and shipwreck?

That this is, in reality, the state of a sailor in time of war, I think, sir, too evident to require proof; nor do I see what reply can be madeto the sailor's artless expostulation. 

I know not why the sailors alone should serve their country to theirdisadvantage, and be expected to encounter danger without the incitementof a reward. 

Nor will any part of the hardships of this clause be alleviated by theexpedient suggested by an honourable member, who spoke, some time ago, of granting, or allowing, to a sailor, whose contract shall be void, what our courts of law should adjudge him to deserve, a _quantummeruit_: for, according to the general interpretation of our statutes, it will be determined that he has forfeited his whole claim by illegalcontract. To instance, sir, the statute of usury. He that stipulates forhigher interest than is allowed, is not able to recover his legaldemand, but irrecoverably forfeits the whole. 

Thus, sir, an unhappy sailor who shall innocently transgress this law, must lose all the profit of his voyage, and have nothing to relieve himafter his fatigues; but when he has by his courage repelled the enemy, and, by his skill, escaped storms and rocks, must suffer yet severerhardships, in being subject to a forfeiture where he expected applause, comfort, and recompense. 

The ATTORNEY GENERAL spoke next, to this purport:--Sir, the clausebefore us cannot, in my opinion, produce any such dreadful consequencesas the learned gentleman appears to imagine: however, to remove alldifficulties, I have drawn up an amendment, which I shall beg leave topropose, that the contracts which may be affected as the clause nowstands, _shall be void only as to so much of the wages as shall exceedthe sum to which the house shall agree to reduce the seamen's pay;_ and, as to the forfeitures, they are not to be levied upon the sailors, butupon the merchants, or trading companies, who employ them, and who areable to pay greater sums without being involved in poverty and distress. 

With regard, sir, to the reasons for introducing this clause, they are, in my judgment, valid and equitable. We have found it necessary to fixthe rate of money at interest, and the rate of labour in several cases, and if we do not in this case, what will be the consequence?--a secondembargo on commerce, and, perhaps, a total stop to all militarypreparations. Is it reasonable that any man should rate his labouraccording to the immediate necessities of those that employ him? or thathe should raise his own fortune by the publick calamities? If this hashitherto been a practice, it is a practice contrary to the generalhappiness of society, and ought to prevail no longer. 

If the sailor, sir, is exposed to greater dangers in time of war, is notthe merchant's trade carried on, likewise, at greater hazard? Is not thefreight, equally with the sailors, threatened at once by the ocean andthe enemy? And is not the owner's fortune equally impaired, whether theship is dashed upon a rock, or seized by a privateer?

The merchant, therefore, has as much reason for paying less wages intime of war, as the sailor for demanding more, and nothing remains butthat the legislative power determine a medium between their differentinterests, with justice, if possible, at least with impartiality. 

Mr. Horace WALPOLE, who had stood up several times, but was prevented byother members, spoke next, to this purport:--Sir, I was unwilling tointerrupt the course of this debate while it was carried on withcalmness and decency, by men, who do not suffer the ardour of oppositionto cloud their reason, or transport them to such expressions as thedignity of this assembly does not admit. I have hitherto deferred toanswer the gentleman who declaimed against the bill with such fluency ofrhetorick, and such vehemence of gesture; who charged the advocates forthe expedients now proposed, with having no regard to any interest buttheir own, and with making laws only to consume paper, and threatenedthem with the defection of their adherence, and the loss of theirinfluence, upon this new discovery of their folly and their ignorance. 

Nor, sir, do I now answer him for any other purpose than to remind himhow little the clamours of rage and petulancy of invectives contributeto the purposes for which this assembly is called together; how littlethe discovery of truth is promoted, and the security of the nationestablished by pompous diction and theatrical emotions. 

Formidable sounds, and furious declamations, confident assertions, andlofty periods, may affect the young and unexperienced; and, perhaps, thegentleman may have contracted his habits of oratory by conversing morewith those of his own age, than with such as have had more opportunitiesof acquiring knowledge, and more successful methods of communicatingtheir sentiments. 

If the heat of his temper, sir, would suffer him to attend to thosewhose age and long acquaintance with business give them an indisputableright to deference and superiority, he would learn, in time, to reasonrather than declaim, and to prefer justness of argument, and an accurateknowledge of facts, to sounding epithets and splendid superlatives, which may disturb the imagination for a moment, but leave no lastingimpression on the mind. 

He will learn, sir, that to accuse and prove are very different, andthat reproaches, unsupported by evidence, affect only the character ofhim that utters them. Excursions of fancy, and flights of oratory, are, indeed, pardonable in young men, but in no other; and it would surelycontribute more, even to the purpose for which some gentlemen appear tospeak, that of depreciating the conduct of the administration, to provethe inconveniencies and injustice of this bill, than barely to assertthem, with whatever magnificence of language, or appearance of zeal, honesty, or compassion. 

Mr. PITT replied:--Sir, the atrocious crime of being a young man, whichthe honourable gentleman has with such spirit and decency charged uponme, I shall neither attempt to palliate nor deny, but content myselfwith wishing that I may be one of those whose follies may cease withtheir youth, and not of that number, who are ignorant in spite ofexperience. 

Whether youth can be imputed to any man as a reproach, I will not, sir, assume the province of determining; but surely age may become justlycontemptible, if the opportunities which it brings have passed awaywithout improvement, and vice appears to prevail when the passions havesubsided. The wretch that, after having seen the consequences of athousand errours, continues still to blunder, and whose age has onlyadded obstinacy to stupidity, is surely the object of either abhorrenceor contempt, and deserves not that his grey head should secure him frominsults. 

Much more, sir, is he to be abhorred, who, as he has advanced in age, has receded from virtue, and becomes more wicked with less temptation;who prostitutes himself for money which he cannot enjoy, and spends theremains of his life in the ruin of his country. 

But youth, sir, is not my only crime; I have been accused of acting atheatrical part--a theatrical part may either imply some peculiaritiesof gesture, or a dissimulation of my real sentiments, and an adoption ofthe opinions and language of another man. 

In the first sense, sir, the charge is too trifling to be confuted, anddeserves only to be mentioned, that it may be despised. I am at liberty, like every other man, to use my own language; and though I may, perhaps, have some ambition to please this gentleman, I shall not lay myselfunder any restraint, nor very solicitously copy his diction, or hismien, however matured by age, or modelled by experience. 

If any man shall, by charging me with theatrical behaviour, imply that Iutter any sentiments but my own, I shall treat him as a calumniator anda villain; nor shall any protection shelter him from the treatment whichhe deserves. I shall, on such an occasion, without scruple, trample uponall those forms, with which wealth and dignity intrench themselves, norshall any thing but age restrain my resentment: age, which always bringsone privilege, that of being insolent and supercilious withoutpunishment. 

But, with regard, sir, to those whom I have offended, I am of opinion, that if I had acted a borrowed part, I should have avoided theircensure; the heat that offended them is the ardour of conviction, andthat zeal for the service of my country, which neither hope nor fearshall influence me to suppress. I will not sit unconcerned while myliberty is invaded, nor look in silence upon publick robbery. I willexert my endeavours, at whatever hazard, to repel the aggressor, anddrag the thief to justice, whoever may protect them in their villany, and whoever may partake of their plunder. And if the honourablegentleman--

Here Mr. WINNINGTON called to order, and Mr. PITT sitting down, he spokethus:--It is necessary, sir, that the order of this assembly beobserved, and the debate resumed without personal altercations. Suchexpressions as have been vented on this occasion, become not an assemblyintrusted with the liberty and welfare of their country. To interruptthe debate on a subject so important as that before us, is, in somemeasure, to obstruct the publick happiness, and violate our trust: butmuch more heinous is the crime of exposing our determinations tocontempt, and inciting the people to suspicion or mutiny, by indecentreflections, or unjust insinuations. 

I do not, sir, undertake to decide the controversy between the twogentlemen, but must be allowed to observe, that no diversity of opinioncan justify the violation of decency, and the use of rude and virulentexpressions; expressions dictated only by resentment, and utteredwithout regard to--

Mr. PITT called to order, and said:--Sir, if this be to preserve order, there is no danger of indecency from the most licentious tongue: forwhat calumny can be more atrocious, or what reproach more severe, thanthat of speaking with regard to any thing but truth. Order may sometimesbe broken by passion, or inadvertency, but will hardly be reestablishedby monitors like this, who cannot govern his own passion, whilst he isrestraining the impetuosity of others. 

Happy, sir, would it be for mankind, if every one knew his own province;we should not then see the same man at once a criminal and a judge. Norwould this gentleman assume the right of dictating to others what he hasnot learned himself. 

That I may return, in some degree, the favour which he intends me, Iwill advise him never hereafter to exert himself on the subject oforder; but, whenever he finds himself inclined to speak on suchoccasions, to remember how he has now succeeded, and condemn, insilence, what his censures will never reform. 

Mr. WINNINGTON replied:--Sir, as I was hindered by the gentleman'sardour and impetuosity from concluding my sentence, none but myself canknow the equity or partiality of my intentions, and, therefore, as Icannot justly be condemned, I ought to be supposed innocent; nor oughthe to censure a fault of which he cannot be certain that it would everhave been committed. 

He has, indeed, exalted himself to a degree of authority never yetassumed by any member of this house, that of condemning others tosilence. I am henceforward, by his inviolable decree, to sit and hearhis harangues without daring to oppose him. How wide he may extend hisauthority, or whom he will proceed to include in the same sentence, Ishall not determine; having not yet arrived at the same degree ofsagacity with himself, nor being able to foreknow what another is goingto pronounce. 

If I had given offence by any improper sallies of passion, I ought tohave been censured by the concurrent voice of the assembly, or havereceived a reprimand, sir, from you, to which I should have submittedwithout opposition; but I will not be doomed to silence by one who hasno pretensions to authority, and whose arbitrary decisions can only tendto introduce uproar, discord, and confusion. 

Mr. Henry PELHAM next rose up, and spoke to this effect:--Sir, when, inthe ardour of controversy upon interesting questions, the zeal of thedisputants hinders them from a nice observation of decency andregularity, there is some indulgence due to the common weakness of ournature; nor ought any gentleman to affix to a negligent expression amore offensive sense than is necessarily implied by it. 

To search deep, sir, for calumnies and reproaches is no laudable norbeneficial curiosity; it must always be troublesome to ourselves byalarming us with imaginary injuries, and may often be unjust to othersby charging them with invectives which they never intended. Generalcandour and mutual tenderness will best preserve our own quiet, andsupport that dignity which has always been accounted essential tonational debates, and seldom infringed without dangerous consequences. 

Mr. LYTTLETON spoke as follows:--Sir, no man can be more zealous fordecency than myself, or more convinced of the necessity of a methodicalprosecution of the question before us. I am well convinced how nearindecency and faction are to one another, and how inevitably confusionproduces obscurity; but I hope it will always be remembered, that he whofirst infringes decency, or deviates from method, is to answer for allthe consequences that may arise from the neglect of senatorial customs:for it is not to be expected that any man will bear reproaches withoutreply, or that he who wanders from the question will not be followed inhis digressions, and hunted through his labyrinths. 

It cannot, sir, be denied, that some insinuations were uttered injuriousto those whose zeal may sometimes happen to prompt them to warmdeclarations, or incite them to passionate emotions. Whether I am ofimportance enough to be included in the censure, I despise it too muchto inquire or consider, but cannot forbear to observe, that zeal for theright can never become reproachful, and that no man can fall intocontempt but those who deserve it. 

[The clause was amended, and agreed to. ]

HOUSE OF COMMONS, MARCH 13, 1740-1. 

The seventieth day of the session being appointed for the report fromthe committee on the bill for the increase and encouragement of sailors, sir John BARNARD presented a petition from the merchants of London, andspoke as follows:--

Sir, this petition I am directed to lay before this house by many of theprincipal merchants of that great city which I have the honour torepresent; men too wise to be terrified with imaginary dangers, and toohonest to endeavour the obstruction of any measures that may probablyadvance the publick good, merely because they do not concur with theirprivate interest; men, whose knowledge and capacity enable them to judgerightly, and whose acknowledged integrity and spirit set them above thesuspicion of concealing their sentiments. 

I therefore present this petition in the name of the merchants ofLondon, in full confidence that it will be found to deserve the regardof this assembly, though I am, equally with the other members, astranger to what it contains; for it is my opinion that a representativeis to lay before the house the sentiments of his constituents, whetherthey agree with his own or not, and that, therefore, it would have beensuperfluous to examine the petition, which, though I might not whollyhave approved it, I had no right to alter. 

The petition was read, and is as follows:

"The humble petition of the merchants and traders of the city ofLondon--showeth, that your petitioners are informed a bill is dependingin this honourable house, for the encouragement and increase of seamen, and for the better and speedier manning his majesty's fleet, in whichare clauses, that, should the bill pass into a law, your petitionersapprehend will be highly detrimental to the trade and navigation of thiskingdom, by discouraging persons from entering into or being bred to thesea service, and entirely prevent the better and speedier manning hismajesty's fleet, by giving the seamen of Great Britain, and of all otherhis majesty's dominions, a distaste of serving on board the royal navy. 

"That your petitioners conceive nothing can be of so bad consequence tothe welfare and defence of this nation, as the treating so useful andvaluable a body of men, who are its natural strength and security, likecriminals of the highest nature, and so differently from all other hismajesty's subjects; and at the same time are persuaded, that the onlyeffectual and speedy method of procuring, for the service of hismajesty's fleet, a proportionable number of the sailors in this kingdom, is to distinguish that body of men by bounties and encouragements, bothpresent and future, and by abolishing all methods of severity and illusage, particularly that practice whereby they are deprived, after longand hazardous voyages, of enjoying, for a short space of time, thecomforts of their families, and equal liberty with other theirfellow-subjects in their native country. 

"That your petitioners believe it will not be difficult to have suchmethods pointed out as will tend to supply the present necessities, andat the same time effectually promote the increase of seamen, when thishonourable house shall think fit to inquire into a matter of such highimportance to the naval power, trade, and riches of this kingdom. 

"That your petitioners are convinced this bill will not only beineffectual to answer the ends proposed by it, but will be destructiveof the liberties of all his majesty's subjects, as it empowers anyparish officer, accompanied with an unlimited number of persons, at anyhour, by day or by night, to force open the dwelling-houses, warehouses, or other places, provided for the security and defence of their livesand fortunes, contrary to the undoubted liberties of the people of GreatBritain, and the laws of this land. 

"In consideration, therefore, of the premises, and of the particularprejudices, hardships, and dangers, which must inevitably attend yourpetitioners, and all others the merchants and traders of this kingdom, should this bill pass into a law, your petitioners most humbly pray thishonourable house, that they may be heard by their counsel against thesaid clauses in the said bill. "

Mr. BATHURST then presented a petition, and spoke as follows:--Sir, thealarm which the bill, now depending, has raised, is not confined to thecity of London, or to any particular province of the king's dominions;the whole nation is thrown into commotions, and the effects of the lawnow proposed, are dreaded, far and wide, as a general calamity. Everytown which owes its trade and its provisions to navigation, apprehendsthe approach of poverty and scarcity, and those which are lessimmediately affected, consider the infraction of our liberties as aprelude to their destruction. Happy would it be, if we, who areintrusted with their interest, could find any arguments to convince themthat their terrour was merely panick. 

That these fears have already extended their influence to the countywhich I represent, the petition which I now beg leave to lay before thehouse, will sufficiently evince; and I hope their remonstrances willprevail with this assembly to remove the cause of their disquiet, byrejecting the bill. 

This was entitled "a petition of several gentlemen, freeholders, andother inhabitants of the county of Gloucester, in behalf of themselves, and all other, the freeholders of the said county, " setting forth, insubstance, "That the petitioners being informed that a bill wasdepending in this house, for the encouragement and increase of seamen, and for the better and speedier manning his majesty's fleet, containingseveral clauses which, should the bill pass into a law, would, as thepetitioners apprehend, impose hardships upon the people too heavy to beborne, and create discontents in the minds of his majesty's subjects;would subvert all the rights and privileges of a Briton; and overturnMagna Charta itself, the basis on which they are built; and, by thesemeans, destroy that very liberty, for the preservation of which thepresent royal family was established upon the throne of Britain; forwhich reasons, such a law could never be obeyed, or much blood would beshed in consequence of it. "

Mr. Henry PELHAM then spoke, to this purport:--Sir, I have attended tothis petition with the utmost impartiality, and have endeavoured toaffix, to every period, the most innocent sense; but cannot forbear todeclare it as my opinion, that it is far distant from the style ofsubmission and request: instead of persuading, they attempt tointimidate us, and menace us with no less than bloodshed and rebellion. They make themselves the judges of our proceedings, and appeal, from ourdeterminations, to their own opinion, and declare that they will obey nolonger than they approve. 

If such petitions as these, sir, are admitted; if the legislature shallsubmit to receive laws, and subjects resume, at pleasure, the power withwhich the government is vested, what is this assembly but a conventionof empty phantoms, whose determinations are nothing more than a mockeryof state?

Every insult upon this house is a violation of our constitution; and theconstitution, like every other fabrick, by being often battered, mustfall at last. It is, indeed, already destroyed, if there be, in thenation, any body of men who shall, with impunity, refuse to comply withthe laws, plead the great charter of liberty against those powers thatmade it, and fix the limits of their own obedience. 

I cannot, sir, pass over, in silence, the mention of the king, whosetitle to the throne, and the reasons for which he was exalted to it, areset forth with uncommon art and spirit of diction; but spirit, which, inmy opinion, appears not raised by zeal, but by sedition; and which, therefore, it is our province to repress. 

That his majesty reigns for the preservation of liberty, will be readilyconfessed; but how shall we be able to preserve it, if his laws are notobeyed?

Let us, therefore, in regard to the dignity of the assembly, to theefficacy of our determinations, and the security of our constitution, discourage all those who shall address us for the future, on this or anyother occasion, from speaking in the style of governours and dictators, by refusing that this petition should be laid on the table. 

[The question was put, and it was agreed, by the whole house, that itshould not lie on the table. ]

Mr. Henry PELHAM rose up again, and spoke thus:--Sir, I cannot butcongratulate the house upon the unanimity with which this petition, apetition of which I speak in the softest language, when I call itirreverent and disrespectful, has been refused the regard commonly paidto the remonstrances of our constituents, whose rights I am far fromdesiring to infringe, when I endeavour to regulate their conduct, andrecall them to their duty. 

This is an occasion, on which it is, in my opinion, necessary to exertour authority with confidence and vigour, as the spirit of oppositionmust always be proportioned to that of the attack. Let us, therefore, not only refuse to this petition the usual place on our table, butreject it as unworthy of this house. 

[The question was put, and the petition rejected, with scarcely anyopposition. ]

The house then entered upon the consideration of the bill, and when thereport was made from the committee, and the blanks filled up, sirWilliam YONGE spoke, in the following manner:--

Sir, the bill has been brought, by steady perseverance and diligentattention, to such perfection, that much more important effects may beexpected from it than from any former law for the same purpose, if it beexecuted with the same calmness and resolution, the same contempt ofpopular clamour, and the same invariable and intrepid adherence to thepublick good, that has been shown in forming and defending it. 

But what can we hope from this, or any other law, if particular men, whocannot be convinced of its expedience, shall not only refuse to obey it, but declare their design of obstructing the execution of it? shalldetermine to retire from the sphere of their authority, rather thanexercise it in compliance with the decree of the senate, and threaten, in plain terms, to call the country in to their assistance, and to pourthe rabble by thousands upon those who shall dare to do their duty, andobey their governours?

Such declarations as these, sir, are little less than sallies ofrebellion; and, if they pass without censure, will, perhaps, producesuch commotions as may require to be suppressed by other means thanforms of law and senatorial censures. 

Nor do I think that, by rejecting the petition, we have sufficientlyestablished our authority; for, in my opinion, we yielded too much inreceiving it. The bill before us whatever may be its title, is, inreality, a money bill; a bill, by which aids are granted to the crown;and we have, therefore, no necessity of rejecting petitions on thisoccasion, because the standing orders of the house forbid us to admitthem. 

They then proceeded to the amendments, and when the clause for limitingthe wages of seamen was read, sir John BARNARD rose up, and spoke tothis effect:--

Sir, we are now to consider the clause to which the petition relates, which I have now presented, a petition on a subject of so generalimportance, and offered by men so well acquainted with every argumentthat can be offered, and every objection which can be raised, that theirrequest of being heard by their council cannot be denied, withoutexposing us to the censure of adhering obstinately to our own opinions, of shutting our ears against information, of preferring expedition tosecurity, and disregarding the welfare of our country. 

It will not be necessary to defer our determinations on this clause formore than three days, though we should gratify this just and commonrequest. And will not this loss be amply compensated by the satisfactionof the people, for whose safety we are debating, and by theconsciousness that we have neglected nothing which might contribute tothe efficacy of our measures?

The merchants, sir, do not come before us with loud remonstrances andharassing complaints, they do not apply to our passions, but ourunderstandings, and offer such informations as will very much facilitatethe publick service. It has been frequent, in the course of this debate, to hear loud demands for better expedients, and more efficacious, thanthose which have been proposed; and is it to be conceived that those whocalled thus eagerly for new proposals, intended not to informthemselves, but to silence their opponents?

From whom, sir, are the best methods for the prosecution of navalaffairs to be expected, but from those whose lives are spent in thestudy of commerce, whose fortunes depend upon the knowledge of the sea, and who will, most probably, exert their abilities in contrivingexpedients to promote the success of the war, than they whom themiscarriage of our fleets must irreparably ruin?

The merchants, sir, are enabled by their profession to inform us--aredeterred by their interest from deceiving us; they have, like all othersubjects, a right to be heard on any question; and a better right thanany other when their interest is more immediately affected; and, therefore, to refuse to hear them, will be, at once, impolitick andcruel; it will discover, at the same time, a contempt of the mostvaluable part of our fellow-subjects, and an inflexible adherence to ourown opinions. 

The expedient of asserting this to be a money bill, by which the justremonstrances of the merchants are intended to be eluded, is too trivialand gross to be adopted by this assembly: if this bill can be termed amoney bill, and no petitions are, therefore, to be admitted against it, I know not any bill relating to the general affairs of the nation whichmay not plead the same title to an exemption from petitions. 

I therefore desire that the consideration of this clause may be deferredfor two days, that the arguments of the merchants may be examined, andthat this affair may not be determined without the clearest knowledgeand exactest information. 

Sir Robert WALPOLE spoke next, to this effect:--Sir, the petition, whether justifiable or not, with regard to the occasion on which it ispresented, or the language in which it is expressed, is certainlyoffered at an improper time, and, therefore, can lay no claim to theregard of this assembly. 

The time prescribed, by the rules of this house, for the reception ofpetitions, is that at which the bill is first introduced, not at whichit is to be finally determined. 

The petition before us is said not to regard the bill in general, but aparticular clause; and it is, therefore, asserted, that it may nowproperly be heard: but this plea will immediately vanish, when it shallbe made appear that the clause is not mentioned in it, and that there isno particular relation between that and the petition, which I shallattempt--

Here sir John BARNARD, remarking that sir Robert WALPOLE had thepetition in his hand, rose, and said:--Sir, I rise thus abruptly topreserve the order of this assembly, and to prevent any gentleman fromhaving, in this debate, any other advantage, above the rest, than thatof superiour abilities, or more extensive knowledge. 

The petition was not ordered, by the house, to be placed in the righthonourable gentleman's hand, but on the table; nor has he a right tomake use of any other means for his information, than are in the powerof any other member: if he is in doubt upon any particulars contained init, he may move that the clerk should read it to the house. 

Sir Robert WALPOLE laid down the paper; Mr. PELHAM rose, and said:--Sir, I am so far from thinking the rules of the house asserted, that, in myopinion, the right of the members is infringed by this peremptorydemand. Is it not, in the highest degree, requisite, that he who isabout to reason upon the petition should acquaint himself with thesubject on which he is to speak. 

What inconveniencies can ensue from such liberties as this, I am notable to discover; and, as all the orders of the house are, doubtless, made for more easy and expeditious despatch, if an order be contrary tothis end, it ought to be abrogated for the reasons for which others areobserved. 

The confidence with which this petition was presented, will not sufferus to imagine that the person who offered it fears that it can suffer bya close examination; and I suppose, though he has spoken so warmly infavour of it, without perusing, he does not expect that others shouldwith equal confidence admit--

Sir John BARNARD observing that sir Robert WALPOLE leaned forwardtowards the table, to read the petition as it lay, rose, and said:--Sir, I rise once more to demand the observation of the orders of the house, and to hinder the right honourable gentleman from doing by stratagem, what he did more openly and honestly before. 

It was to little purpose that he laid down the petition, if he placed itwithin reach of his inspection? for I was only desirous, sir, to hinderhim from reading, and was far from suspecting that he would take itaway. I insist, that henceforward, he obey the rules of this assembly, with his eyes as well as with his hands, and take no advantage of hisseat, which may enable him to perplex the question in debate. 

Then the PRESIDENT spoke thus:--Sir, it is, undoubtedly, required by theorders of the house, that the petitions should lie upon the table; andthat any member, who is desirous of any farther satisfaction, shouldmove that they be read by the clerk, that every member may have the sameopportunity of understanding and considering them; and that no one maybe excluded from information, by the curiosity or delays of another. Butthe importance of this affair seems not to be so very great as torequire a rigorous observance of the rules; and it were to be wished, for the ease and expedition of our deliberations, that gentlemen wouldrather yield points of indifference to one another, than insist sowarmly on circumstances of a trivial nature. 

Sir Robert WALPOLE then desired that the clerk might read the petition, which being immediately done, he proceeded in the following manner:--

Sir, having sat above forty years in this assembly, and never beencalled to order before, I was somewhat disconcerted by a censure so newand unexpected, and, in my opinion, undeserved. So that I am somewhat ata loss, with regard to the train of arguments which I had formed, andwhich I will now endeavour to recover. Yet I cannot but remark, thatthose gentlemen who are so solicitous for order in others, ought, themselves, invariably to observe it; and that if I have once given anunhappy precedent of violating the rules of this house, I have, in somemeasure, atoned for my inadvertence, by a patient attention to reproof, and a ready submission to authority. 

I hope, sir, I may claim some indulgence from the motive of my offence, which was only a desire of accuracy, and an apprehension that I might, by mistaking or forgetting some passages in the petition, lose my owntime, and interrupt the proceedings of the house to no purpose. 

But having now, according to order, heard the petition, and found noreason to alter my opinion, I shall endeavour to convince the house thatit ought not to be granted. 

The petition, sir, is so far from bearing any particular relation to theclause now before us, that it does not, in any part, mention theexpedient proposed in it, but contains a general declaration ofdiscontent, suspicion, apprehensions of dangerous proceedings, anddislike of our proceedings; insinuations, sir, by no means consistentwith the reverence due to this assembly, and which the nature of civilgovernment requires always to be paid to the legislative power. 

To suspect any man, sir, in common life, is in some degree to detractfrom his reputation, which must suffer in proportion to the supposedwisdom and integrity of him who declares his suspicion. To suspect theconduct of this senate, is to invalidate their decisions, and subjectthem to contempt and opposition. 

Such, and such only, appears to be the tendency of the petition whichhas now been read; a petition, sir, very unskilfully drawn, if it wasintended against the clause under our consideration, for it has not asingle period or expression that does not equally regard all the otherclauses. 

If any particular objection is made, or any single grievance moredistinctly pointed at, it is the practice of impresses, a hardship, Iown, peculiar to the sailors; but it must be observed that it is apractice established by immemorial custom, and a train of precedents notto be numbered; and it is well known that the whole common law of thisnation is nothing more than custom, of which the beginning cannot betraced. 

Impresses, sir, have in all ages been issued out by virtue of theimperial prerogative, and have in all ages been obeyed; and if thisexertion of the authority had been considered as a method of severitynot compensated by the benefits which it produces, we cannot imagine butformer senates, amidst all their ardour for liberty, all theirtenderness for the people, and all their abhorrence of the power of thecrown, would have obviated it by some law, at those times when nothingcould have been refused them. 

The proper time for new schemes and long deliberations, for amending ourconstitution, and removing inveterate grievances, are the days ofprosperity and safety, when no immediate danger presses upon us, nor anypublick calamity appears to threaten us; but when war is declared, whenwe are engaged in open hostilities against one nation, and expect to bespeedily attacked by another, we are not to try experiments, but applyto dangerous evils those remedies, which, though disagreeable, we knowto be efficacious. 

And though, sir, the petitioners have been more particular, I cannotdiscover the reasonableness of hearing them by their council; for towhat purpose are the lawyers to be introduced? Not to instruct us bytheir learning, for their employment is to understand the laws that havebeen already made, and support the practices which they findestablished. But the question before us relates not to the past but thefuture, nor are we now to examine what has been done in former ages, butwhat it will become us to establish on the present occasion; a subjectof inquiry on which this house can expect very little information fromthe professors of the law?

Perhaps the petitioners expect from their counsel, that they shoulddisplay the fecundity of their imagination, and the elegance of theirlanguage; that they should amuse us with the illusions of oratory, dazzle us with bright ideas, affect us with strong representations, andlull us with harmonious periods; but if it be only intended that justfacts and valid arguments should be laid before us, they will bereceived without the decorations of the bar. For this end, sir, it wouldhave been sufficient had the merchants informed their representatives ofthe methods which they have to propose; for the abilities of thegentlemen whom the city has deputed to this assembly, are well known tobe such as stand in need of no assistance from occasional orators. Norcan it be expected that any men will be found more capable ofunderstanding the arguments of the merchants, or better qualified to laythem before the senate. 

That every petitioner has, except on money bills, a right to be heard, is undoubtedly true; but it is no less evident that this right islimited to a certain time, and that on this occasion the proper time iselapsed. Justice is due both to individuals and to the nation; ifpetitions may at any time be offered, and are, whenever offered, to beheard, a small body of men might, by unseasonable and importunatepetitions, retard any occasional law, till it should become unnecessary. 

Petitions, sir, are to be offered when a new bill is brought into thehouse, that all useful information may be obtained; but when it haspassed through the examination of the committees, has been approved bythe collective wisdom of the senate, and requires only a formalratification to give it the force of a law, it is neither usual nordecent to offer petitions, or declare any dislike of what the senate hasadmitted. 

We are not, when we have proceeded thus far, to suffer pleaders toexamine our conduct, or vary our determinations, according to theopinions of those whom we ought to believe less acquainted with thequestion than ourselves. Should we once be reduced to ask advice, andsubmit to dictators, what would be the reputation of this assembly inforeign courts, or in our own country? What could be expected, but thatour enemies of every kind would endeavour to regulate our determinationsby bribing our instructers. 

Nor can I think it necessary that lawyers should be employed in layingbefore us any scheme which the merchants may propose, for supplying thedefects, and redressing the inconveniencies, of the laws by whichsailors are at present levied for the royal navy; for how should lawyersbe more qualified than other men, to explain the particular advantagesof such expedients, or to answer any objections which may happen torise?

It is well known that it is not easy for the most happy speaker toimpress his notions with the strength with which he conceives them, andyet harder is the task of transmitting imparted knowledge, of conveyingto others those sentiments which we have not struck out by our ownreflection, nor collected from our own experience, but received merelyfrom the dictates of another. 

Yet such must be the information that lawyers can give us, who can onlyrelate what they have implicitly received, and weaken the argumentswhich they have heard, by an imperfect recital. 

Nor do I only oppose the admission of lawyers to our bar, but think theright of the merchants themselves, in the present case, veryquestionable; for though in general it must be allowed, that everypetitioner has a claim to our attention, yet it is to be inquiredwhether it is likely that the publick happiness is his chief concern, and whether his private interest is not too much affected to suffer himto give impartial evidence, or honest information. Scarcely any law canbe made by which some man is not either impoverished, or hindered fromgrowing rich; and we are not to listen to complaints, of which thefoundation is so easily discovered, or imagine a law less useful, because those who suffer some immediate inconvenience from it, do notapprove it. 

The question before us is required, by the present exigence of ouraffairs, to be speedily decided; and though the merchants have, withgreat tenderness, compassion, and modesty, condescended to offer ustheir advice, I think expedition preferable to any information that canreasonably be expected from them, and that as they will suffer, in thefirst place, by any misconduct of our naval affairs, we shall show moreregard to their interest by manning our fleet immediately, than bywaiting three or four days for farther instructions. 

Mr. SANDYS answered to this effect:--Sir, the merchants of Londonwhether we consider their numbers, their property, their integrity, ortheir wisdom, are a body of too much importance to be thuscontemptuously rejected; rejected when they ask nothing that can bejustly denied to the meanest subject of the empire, when they propose tospeak on nothing but what their profession enables them to understand. 

To no purpose is it urged, that the bill is far advanced, for if we havenot proceeded in the right way, we ought to be in more haste to return, in proportion as we have gone farther; nor can I discover why we shouldexpedite, with so much assiduity, measures which are judged ineffectual, by those who know their consequences best, and for whose advantage theyare particularly designed. 

That we have already spent so much time in considering methods formanning the fleet, is surely one reason why we should endeavour at lastto establish such as may be effectual; nor can we hope to succeedwithout a patient attention to their opinion, who must necessarily bewell experienced in naval affairs. 

It is surely, therefore, neither prudent nor just to shut outintelligence from our assemblies, and ridicule the good intention ofthose that offer it, to consult upon the best expedients for encouragingand increasing sailors, and when the merchants offer their scheme, totreat them as saucy, impertinent, idle meddlers, that assume--

Here the ATTORNEY GENERAL called him to order, and spoke after thismanner:--Sir, it is not very consistent to press the despatch ofbusiness, and to retard it, at the same time, by invidious insinuations, or unjust representations of arguments or expressions: whenever anyexpression is censured, it ought to be repeated in the same words; forotherwise, does not the animadverter raise the phantom that heencounters? Does he not make the stain, which he endeavours, with somuch officious zeal, to wipe away. 

That no epithets of contempt or ridicule have, in this debate, beenapplied to the merchants, nor any violation of decency attempted, it isunnecessary to prove, and, therefore, it is neither regular nor candidto represent any man as aggravating the refusal of their petition withreproaches and insults. But not to dwell longer on this incident, I willtake the liberty of reminding the gentleman, that personal invectivesare always, at least superfluous, and that the business of the dayrequires rather arguments than satire. 

Mr. SANDYS then spoke as follows:--Sir, I am by no means convinced thatthe learned gentleman who charges me with irregularity, is betteracquainted than myself with the rules and customs of this house, which Ihave studied with great application, assisted by long experience. Ihope, therefore, it will be no inexcusable presumption, if, instead of atacit submission to his censure, I assert, in my own vindication, that Ihave not deviated from the established rules of the senate, that I havespoken only in defence of merit insulted, and that I have condemned onlysuch injurious insinuations. I did not, sir, attempt to repeatexpressions, as ought not to be heard without reply. 

Then the PRESIDENT said:--I believe the gentleman either heardimperfectly, or misunderstood these expressions, which he so warmlycondemns, for nothing has been uttered that could justly excite hisindignation. My office obliges me on this occasion to remark, that theregard due to the dignity of the house ought to restrain every memberfrom digressions into private satire; for in proportion as we proceedwith less decency, our determinations will have less influence. 

Mr. PELHAM spoke next, in substance as follows:--Sir, the reputationwhich the honourable gentleman has acquired by his uncommon knowledge ofthe usages of the senate, is too well founded to be shaken, nor was anyattack upon his character intended, when he was interrupted in theprosecution of his design. To censure any indecent expression, bywhomsoever uttered, is, doubtless, consistent with the strictestregularity; nor is it less proper to obviate any misrepresentation whichinattention or mistake may produce. 

I am far, sir, from thinking that the gentleman's indignation wasexcited rather by malice than mistake; but mistakes of this kind mayproduce consequences which cannot be too cautiously avoided. Howunwillingly would that gentleman propagate through the nation an opinionthat the merchants were insulted in this house, their interestneglected, and their intelligence despised, at a time when no aspersionwas thrown upon them, nor any thing intended but tenderness and regard?And yet such had been the representation of this day's debate, whichthis numerous audience would have conveyed to the populace, had not themistake been immediately rectified, and the rumour crushed in the birth. 

Nothing, sir, can be more injurious to the character of this assembly, by which the people are represented, than to accuse them of treating anyclass of men with insolence and contempt; and too much diligence cannotbe used in obviating a report which cannot be spread in the nation, without giving rise to discontent, clamours, and sedition. 

Those who shall be inclined to reject the petition, may, perhaps, actwith no less regard to the merchants, and may promote their interest andtheir security with no less ardour than those who most solicitouslylabour for its reception: for, if they are not allowed to be heard, itis only because the publick interest requires expedition, and becauseevery delay of our preparations is an injury to trade. 

That this is not a proper time for petitions against the bill to beheard, is universally known; and I can discover nothing in the petitionthat restrains it to this particular clause, which is so far from beingspecified, that it appears to be the only part of the bill of which theyhave had no intelligence. 

Let the warmest advocates for the petition point out any part of it thatrelates to this single clause, and I will retract my assertion; but asit appears that there are only general declarations of the inexpediencyof the measures proposed, and the pernicious tendency of the methods nowin use, what is the petition, but a complaint against the bill, and arequest that it should be laid aside. 

The practice of impresses, sir, is particularly censured, as severe andoppressive; a charge which, however true, has no relation to thisclause, which is intended to promote the voluntary engagement of sailorsin the service of the crown; yet it may not be improper to observe, thatas the practice of impressing is, in itself, very efficacious, and welladapted to sudden emergencies; as it has been established by a longsuccession of ages, and is, therefore, become almost a part of ourconstitution; and as it is at this time necessary to supply the navywith the utmost expedition, it is neither decent nor prudent to complaintoo loudly against, or to heighten the discontent of the people at anecessary evil. 

We have, sir, examined every part of this bill with the attention whichthe defence of the nation requires; we have softened the rigour of themethods first proposed, and admitted no violence or hardship that is notabsolutely necessary, to make the law effectual, which, like every otherlaw, must be executed by force, if it be obstructed or opposed. We haveinserted a great number of amendments, proposed by those who arerepresented as the most anxious guardians of the privileges of thepeople; and it is not, surely, to no purpose that the great council ofthe nation has so long and so studiously laboured. 

Those who are chosen by the people to represent them, have undoubtedly, sir, some claim as individuals to their confidence and respect; for toimagine that they have committed the great charge of senatorialemployments, that they have trusted their liberties and their happinessto those whose integrity they suspect, or whose understandings theydespise, is to imagine them much more stupid than they have beenrepresented by those who are censured as their enemies. 

But far different is the regard due to the determinations formed by thecollective wisdom of the senate; a regard which ought to border uponreverence, and which is scarcely consistent with the least murmur ofdissatisfaction. 

If we are to hear the present petitioners, is it not probable, thatbefore we have despatched them, we shall be solicited by others, whowill then plead the same right, supported by a new precedent? And is itnot possible that by one interruption upon another, our measures may bedelayed, till they shall be ineffectual?

It seems to me to be of much more importance to defend the merchantsthan to hear them; and I shall, therefore, think no concessions at thistime expedient, which may obstruct the great end of our endeavours, theequipment of the fleet. 

Mr. PULTENEY then spoke as follows:--Sir, notwithstanding the art andeloquence with which this grant of the merchants' petition has beenopposed, I am not yet able to discover that any thing is askedunreasonable, unprecedented, or inconvenient; and I am confident, thatno real objection can have been overlooked by the gentlemen who havespoken against it. 

I have spent, sir, thirty-five years of my life in the senate, and knowthat information has always, upon important questions, been willinglyreceived; and it cannot surely be doubted that the petitioners are bestable to inform us of naval business, and to judge what will be the rightmethod of reconciling the sailors to the publick service, and ofsupplying our fleets without injuring our trade. 

Their abilities and importance have been hitherto so generallyacknowledged, that no senate has yet refused to attend to their opinion;and surely we ought not to be ambitious of being the first assembly ofthe representatives of the people, that has refused an audience to themerchants. 

With regard to the expedience of delaying the bill at the presentconjuncture, he must think very contemptuously of the petitioners, whoimagines that they have nothing to offer that will counterbalance adelay of two days, and must entertain an elevated idea of the vigilanceand activity of our enemies, enemies never before eminent forexpedition, if he believes that they can gain great advantages in soshort a time. 

The chief reason of the opposition appears, indeed, not to be either theirregularity or inexpediency of hearing them, but the offence which somehave received from an irreverent mention of the power of impressing, apower which never can be mentioned without complaint or detestation. 

It is not, indeed, impossible that they may intend to represent to thehouse, how much the sailors are oppressed, how much our commerce isimpeded, and how much the power of the nation is exhausted, by thiscruel method. They may propose to show that sailors, not having thechoice of their voyages, are often hurried through a sudden change ofclimates, from one extreme to another, and that nothing can be expectedfrom such vicissitudes, but sickness, lameness, and death. They maypropose, that to have just arrived from the south may be pleaded as anexemption from an immediate voyage to the north, and that the seaman mayhave some time to prepare himself for so great an alteration, by aresidence of a few months in a temperate climate. 

If this should be their intention, it cannot, in my opinion, sir, becalled either unreasonable or disrespectful, nor will their allegationsbe easily disproved. 

But it is insinuated, that their grievances are probably such as affectthem only as distinct from the rest of the community, and that they havenothing to complain of but a temporary interruption of their privateadvantage. 

I have, indeed, no idea of the _private advantage_ of a legal trader:for unless, sir, we neglect our duty of providing that no commerce shallbe carried on to the detriment of the publick, the merchant's profitmust be the profit of the nation, and their interests inseparablycombined. 

It may, however, be possible, that the merchants may, like other men, prefer their immediate to their greater advantage, and may be impatientof a painful remedy, though necessary to prevent a more grievous evil. But let us not censure them by suspicion, and punish them for a crimewhich it is only possible they may commit; let us, sir, at least haveall the certainty that can be obtained, and allow them an audience; letus neither be so positive as not to receive information, nor so rigorousas not to listen to entreaties. 

If the merchants have nothing to offer, nothing but complaints, and canpropose no better measures than those which they lament, if theirarguments should be found to regard only their present interest, and tobe formed upon narrow views and private purposes, it will be easy todetect the imposture, and reject it with the indignation it shalldeserve; nor will our proceedings be then censured by the nation, whichrequires not that the merchants should be implicitly believed, though itexpects that they should be heard. Let us at least have a _convention_, though we should not be able to conclude a treaty. 

I know not, sir, why we have not taken care to obviate all thesedifficulties, and to remove the necessity of petitions, debates, searches, and impresses, by the plain and easy method of a voluntaryregister; by retaining such a number of seamen as may probably berequisite upon sudden emergencies. Would not the nation with morecheerfulness contribute half-pay to those who are daily labouring forthe publick good, than to the caterpillars of the land service, thatgrow old in laziness, and are disabled only by vice?

Let ten thousand men receive daily a small salary, upon condition thatthey shall be ready, whenever called upon, to engage in the service ofthe crown, and the difficulty of our naval preparations will be at anend. 

That it is necessary to exert ourselves on this occasion, and to strikeout some measures for securing the dominion of the ocean, cannot bedenied by any one who considers that we have now no other pretensions tomaintain; that all our influence on the continent, at whatever expensegained and supported, is now in a manner lost, and only the reputationof our naval strength remains to preserve us from being trampled on andinsulted by every power, and from finding Spaniards in every climate. 

Sir William YONGE spoke, in substance, as follows:--Sir, the violenceand severity of impresses, so often and so pathetically complained of, appears to be now nothing more than a punishment inflicted upon thosewho neglect or refuse to receive the encouragement offered, with theutmost liberality, by the government, and decline the service of theircountry from a spirit of avarice, obstinacy, or resentment. 

That such men deserve some severities, cannot be doubted, and thereforea law by which no penalty should be enacted, would be imperfect andineffectual. The observation, sir, of all laws is to be enforced byrewards on one side, and punishments on the other, that every passionmay be influenced, and even our weakness made instrumental to theperformance of our duty. 

In the bill before us no punishment is, indeed, expressly decreed, because the sailors who shall disregard it, are only left to theirformer hardships, from which those who engage voluntarily in the serviceof the navy are exempted. 

Why so many rewards and so much violence should be necessary to allureor force the sailors into the publick service, I am unable tocomprehend: for, excepting the sudden change of climates, which may, doubtless, sometimes bring on distempers, the service of the king has nodisadvantages which are not common to that of the merchants. 

The wages in the navy are, indeed, less: but then it is to beremembered, that they are certainly paid, and that the sailor is in lessdanger of losing, by a tempest or a wreck, the whole profits of hisvoyage; because, if he can preserve his life, he receives his pay. Butin trading voyages, the seamen mortgage their wages, as a security fortheir care, which, if the ship is lost, they are condemned to forfeit. 

Thus, sir, the hardships of the navy appear not so great when comparedwith those of the merchants' service, as they have been hithertorepresented; and I doubt not, that if counsellors were to be heard onboth sides, the measures taken for supplying the fleet would be found tobe reasonable and just. 

Sir John BARNARD rose to speak, when Mr. FOX called to order, andproceeded:

Sir, it is well known to be one of the standing and unvariable orders ofthis house, that no member shall speak twice in a debate on the samequestion, except when for greater freedom we resolve ourselves into acommittee. Upon this question the honourable gentleman has alreadyspoken, and cannot, therefore, be heard again without such atransgression of our orders as must inevitably produce confusion. 

Sir John BARNARD spoke thus:--Sir, I know not for what reason thehonourable gentleman apprehends any violation of the order of the house;for, as I have not yet spoken upon the present question, I have anundoubted right to be heard, a right which that gentleman cannot takeaway. 

Sir William YONGE next spoke, to this effect:--Sir, I know not by whatsecret distinction the gentleman supports in his own mind thisdeclaration, which, to the whole house, must appear very difficult to bedefended; for we must, before we can admit it, allow our memories tohave forsaken us, and our eyes and ears to have been deceived. 

Did he not, as soon as the clause before us was read, rise and assertthe characters of the petitioners, and their right to the attention ofthe house? Did he not dwell upon their importance, their abilities, andtheir integrity; and enforce, with his usual eloquence, every motive tothe reception of the petition? How then can he assert that he has notspoken in the present debate, and how can he expect to be heard a secondtime, since, however his eloquence may please, and his argumentsconvince, that pleasure and conviction cannot now be obtained, withoutinfringing the standing orders of the house. 

Then the PRESIDENT rose, and spoke to this purport: It is not withoutuneasiness that I see the time of the house, and of the publick, wastedin fruitless cavils and unnecessary controversies. Every gentleman oughtnow to consider that we are consulting upon no trivial question, andthat expedition is not less necessary than accuracy. It cannot bedenied, sir, [to sir John BARNARD] that you have already spoken on thisquestion, and that the rules of the house do not allow you to speak asecond time. 

Sir Robert WALPOLE said:--Sir, I am far from thinking the order of thehouse so sacred, as that it may not be neglected on some importantoccasions; and if the gentleman has any thing to urge so momentous, that, in his own opinion, it outweighs the regard due to our rules, Ishall willingly consent that he shall be heard. 

Sir John BARNARD spoke as follows:--Sir, I am far from being inclined toreceive as a favour, what, in my own opinion, I may claim as a right, and desire not to owe the liberty of speaking to the condescension ofthe right honourable gentleman. 

What I have to urge is no less against the bill in general, than theparticular clause now immediately under our consideration, and thoughthe petition should relate likewise to the whole bill, I cannot discoverwhy we should refuse to hear it. 

Petitions from men of much inferiour rank, and whose interest is muchless closely connected with that of the publick, have been thoughtnecessary to be heard, nor is the meanest individual to be injured orrestrained, without being admitted to offer his arguments in his ownfavour. Even the journeymen shoemakers, one of the lowest classes of thecommunity, have been permitted to bring their counsel to our bar, andremonstrate against the inconveniencies to which they were afraid ofbeing subjected. 

Mr. WINNINGTON spoke thus:--Sir, I am always willing to hear petitions, when respectfully drawn up, and regularly subscribed, but can by nomeans discover that this is a real petition, for I have heard of nonames affixed to it; it is, therefore, a request from nobody, and byrejecting it no man is refused. It may, so far as can be discovered, bedrawn up by the gentleman who offered it, and, perhaps, no other personmay be acquainted with it. 

Mr. HAY spoke to the following purport:--Sir, it is, in my opinion, necessary that a petition in the name of the merchants of London shouldbe subscribed by the whole number, for if only a few should put theirnames to it, how does it appear that it is any thing more than anapprehension of danger to their own particular interest, which, perhaps, the other part, their rivals in trade, may consider as an advantage, orat least regard with indifference. This suspicion is much morereasonable, when a petition is subscribed by a smaller number, who mayeasily be imagined to have partial views, and designs not whollyconsistent with the interest of the publick. 

Admiral WAGER then spoke thus:--Sir, if I am rightly informed, anotherpetition is preparing by several eminent merchants, that this clause maystand part of the bill; and, certainly, they ought to be heard as wellas the present petitioners, which will occasion great and unnecessarydelays, and, therefore, I am against the motion. 

Advocate CAMPBELL answered to this effect:--Sir, I agree with thathonourable gentleman, that if the merchants are divided in opinion uponthis point, one side ought to be heard as well as the other, and hopethe house will come to a resolution for that purpose: for I shallinvariably promote every proposal which tends to procure the fullestinformation in all affairs that shall come before us. 

[Then the question was put, that the farther consideration of the reportbe adjourned for two days, in order to hear the merchants, and it passedin the negative, ayes, 142; noes, 192. ]

[On the report this day, the eleven clauses of severity were given upwithout any division, and a clause was added, viz. "Provided thatnothing in this bill shall be construed to extend to any contracts oragreements for the hire of seamen (or persons employed as such) invoyages from parts beyond the seas, to any other parts beyond the seas, or to Great Britain. "]

The engrossed bill "for the increase and encouragement of seamen, " wasread, according to order, when Mr. DIGBY rose, and spoke as follows:--

Sir, I have a clause to be offered to the house, as necessary to beinserted in the bill before us, which was put into my hands by a member, whom a sudden misfortune has made unable to attend his duty, and which, in his opinion, and mine, is of great importance, and I shall, therefore, take the liberty of reading it. 

"Be it enacted, that every seaman offering himself to serve his majesty, shall, upon being refused, receive from such captain, lieutenant, orjustice of the peace, a certificate, setting forth the reasons for whichhe is refused, which certificate may be produced by him, as an exemptionfrom being seized by a warrant of impress. "

I hope the reasonableness and equity of this clause is so incontestablyapparent, that it will find no opposition; for what can be more cruel, unjust, or oppressive, than to punish men for neglect of a law whichthey have endeavoured to obey. To what purpose are rewards offered, ifthey are denied to those who come to claim them? What is it less thantheft, and fraud, to force a man into the service, who would willinglyhave entered, and subject him to hardships, without the recompense whichhe may justly demand from the solemn promise of the legislature. 

Admiral WAGER next spoke to this effect:--Sir, to this clause, which thegentleman has represented as so reasonable and just, objections may, inmy opinion, be easily made, of which he will himself acknowledge theforce. The great obstruction of publick measures is partiality, whetherfrom friendship, bribery, or any other motive; against partiality alonethe clause which is now offered, is levelled; and, indeed, it is sodangerous an evil, that it cannot be obviated with too much caution. 

But this clause, instead of preventing private correspondence, andillegal combinations, has an evident tendency to produce them, byinciting men to apply with pretended offers of service to those who arebefore suborned to refuse them, then make a merit of their readiness, and demand a certificate. 

By such artifices multitudes may exempt themselves from the impress, whomay be known to be able sailors, even by those that conduct it; and may, under the protection of a certificate, fallaciously obtained, laugh atall endeavours to engage them in the publick service. 

Mr. DIGBY spoke thus:--Sir, if this authority, lodged in the hands ofthose who are proposed in the clause to be intrusted with it, be indanger of being executed, without due regard to the end for which it isgranted, let it be placed where there is neither temptation noropportunity to abuse it. Let the admiralty alone have the power ofgranting such certificates, the officers of which will be able to judgewhether the sailor is really unfit for the service, and deliver thosewhom age or accidents have disabled from the terrour of impresses; forsurely, he that is fit to serve, when taken by violence, is no lessqualified when he enters voluntarily, and he who could not be admittedwhen he tendered himself, ought not to be dragged away, when, perhaps, he has contracted for another voyage. 

Mr. WAGER replied:--Sir, it is, doubtless, more proper to place suchauthority in the officers of the admiralty, than in any other; but itdoes not appear that the benefit which the sailors may receive from it, to whatever hands it is intrusted, will not be overbalanced by theinjury which the publick will probably suffer. 

Sailors are frequently levied in remote parts of the kingdom; in portswhere the admiralty cannot speedily be informed of the reasons for whichthose that may petition for certificates have been refused, andtherefore cannot grant them without danger of being deceived byfraudulent accounts. 

The grievance for which the remedy is proposed cannot frequently occur;for it is not probable that in a time of naval preparations, any manqualified for the service should be rejected, since the officers gainnothing by their refusal. 

Mr. HAY spoke as follows:--Sir, it is very possible that those instanceswhich may be produced of men, who have been impressed by one officer, after they have been rejected by another, may be only the consequencesof the high value which every man is ready to set upon his ownabilities: for he that offers himself, no doubt, demands the highestpremium, though he be not an able sailor; and, if rejected, andafterwards impressed as a novice, thinks himself at liberty to complain, with the most importunate vehemence, of fraud, partiality, andoppression. 

[The question being put was resolved in the negative, almostunanimously. ]

Mr. SOUTHWELL offered a clause, importing, "That all sailors who shouldtake advance-money of the merchants, should be obliged to perform theiragreements, or be liable to be taken up by any magistrate or justice ofthe peace, and deemed deserters, except they were in his majesty's shipsof war. "

He was seconded by lord GAGE:--Sir, as this clause has no other tendencythan to promote the interest of the merchants, without obstructing thepublick preparations; as it tends only to confirm legal contracts, andfacilitate that commerce from whence the wealth and power of this nationarises, I hope it will readily be admitted; as we may, by adding thissanction to the contracts made between the merchants and sailors, insome degree balance the obstructions wherewith we have embarrassed tradeby the other clauses. 

Admiral WAGER replied:--This clause is unquestionably reasonable, butnot necessary; for it is to be found already in an act made for theencouragement of the merchants, which is still in force, and ought, whenever any such frauds are committed, to be rigorously observed. 

Sir Robert WALPOLE then desired that the clerk might read the act, inwhich the clause was accordingly found, and Mr. SOUTHWELL withdrew hismotion. 

[Then the question was put, whether the bill "for the increase andencouragement of sailors" do pass, which was resolved in theaffirmative, 153 against 79. ]

HOUSE OF COMMONS, MARCH 13, 1740-1. 

[DEBATE ON THE BILL FOR THE PUNISHMENT OF MUTINY AND DESERTION. ]

The house being resolved into a committee for the consideration of thebill for the punishment of mutiny and desertion, and for the betterpayment of the army and their quarters, etc. Sir William YONGE desiredthat the twentieth and twenty-sixth clauses of the late act might beread, which were read as follows:

XX. It is hereby enacted, that the officers and soldiers, so quarteredand billeted, shall be received by the owners of the inns, livery-stables, ale-houses, victualling-houses, and other houses inwhich they are allowed to be quartered and billeted by this act; andshall pay such reasonable prices as shall be appointed, from time totime, by the justices of the peace, in their general andquarter-sessions of each county, city, or division, within theirrespective jurisdictions: and the justices of the peace aforesaid, arehereby empowered and required to set and appoint, in their general orquarter-sessions aforesaid, such reasonable rates, for all necessaryprovisions for such officers and soldiers, for one or more nights, inthe several cities, towns, villages and other places, which they shallcome to in their march, or which shall be appointed for their residenceand quarters. 

XXVI. That the quarters, both of officers and soldiers in Great Britain, may be duly paid and satisfied, be it enacted, that every officer, towhom it belongs to receive the pay or subsistence-money, either for awhole regiment, or particular troops and companies, shall immediately, upon each receipt of every particular sum, on account of pay orsubsistence, give publick notice thereof to all persons keeping inns, orother places where officers or soldiers are quartered by virtue of thisact: also appoint them and others to repair to their quarters, withinfour days at the farthest, after the receipt of the same, to declare theaccounts or debts (if any shall be) between them and the officers andsoldiers quartered in their respective houses: which accounts the saidofficer or officers are hereby required immediately to discharge, beforeany part of the said pay or subsistence be distributed to the officersor soldiers: provided the said accounts exceed not for a commissionofficer of horse, under a captain, for _one day's diet and small beer_, two shillings; for one commission officer of dragoons, under a captain, one shilling; for one commission officer of foot, under a captain oneshilling; and for hay and straw, for one horse, sixpence; for onedragoon or light horseman's diet and small beer, each day sixpence, andhay and straw for his horse, sixpence; and also not to exceed_fourpence_ a-day, for one _foot soldier's diet and small beer_. 

He then spoke to the following effect:--Sir, whether there is any realdifficulty in the clauses which you have now heard read, or whetherthere are such passages as may be easily understood by those who have nointerest to mistake them, and which are only clouded by an artificialobscurity, whether they are in themselves capable of different meanings, or whether avarice or poverty have produced unreasonableinterpretations, and found ambiguities only because they were determinednot to be disappointed in their search; whether this law is disobeyedbecause it is misunderstood, or only misunderstood by those who haveresolved to disobey it, the committee must determine. 

It has been for many years understood that innholders and keepers ofpublick-houses were obliged by this law to supply soldiers quarteredupon them with diet and small beer, and hay and straw for their horses, at such rates as are mentioned in the act; nor can I discover that theseclauses admit of any other interpretation, or that any other could beintended by the senate by which it was enacted. The pay of the soldiers, sir, was well known to those who gave their consent to this law, it wasintended by them that the soldiers should be supplied with necessaries, and it could not be meant that they should pay for them more than theyreceived; they, therefore, established the rate at which they were to befurnished, and fixed the highest rate which the wages of a soldier allowhim to pay. 

This interpretation was, as I suppose, from its apparent consonance toreason, universally allowed, till the inhabitants of Ledbury, whithersoldiers had been sent to suppress a riot and enforce the laws, foundtheir apprehensions so sharpened by their malice, that they discoveredin the act an ambiguity, which had, till that time, escaped thepenetration of the most sagacious, and, upon comparison of onecircumstance with another, found themselves under no obligation to giveany assistance to the soldiers. 

They therefore, sir, not only refused to afford them victuals at theaccustomed rates, but proceeding from one latitude of interpretation toanother, at length denied them not only the privilege of diet, but theuse of kitchen utensils, to dress the provisions which they bought forthemselves, and at last denied their claim to the fire itself. 

The soldiers, exasperated not only at the breach of their establishedand uncontested privileges, but at the privation of the necessaries oflife, began to think of methods more speedy and efficacious than thoseof arguments and remonstrances, and to form resolutions of procuring byforce, what, in their opinions, was only by force withheld from them. 

What might have been the event of this controversy, to what extremitiesa contest about things so necessary might have been carried, how widethe contest might have spread, or how long it might have lasted, we mayimagine, but cannot determine; had not a speedy decision been procured, its consequences might have been fatal to multitudes, and a great partof the nation been thrown into confusion. 

Having received an account of the affair from the officers who commandedat that place, I consulted the attorney-general what was the design ofthe law, and the extent of the obligation enforced by it, and wasanswered by him, that the sums which were to be paid for the diet of themen, and the hay and straw for the horses, being specified, it mustnecessarily be intended, by the legislature, that no higher rates shouldbe demanded;--that the power granted to the justices of peace was whollyin favour of the soldier, and that they might lessen the payment atdiscretion in places of uncommon cheapness, or years of extraordinaryplenty, but could not increase it on any occasion. 

Another dispute, sir, of the like nature was occasioned by the latescarcity at Wakefield, where the justices, upon the application of theinnkeepers, made use of the authority which they supposed to have beenreposed in them by the act, and raised the price of hay and straw toeight-pence, which the soldiers were not able to pay, without sufferingfor want of victuals. 

On this occasion, likewise, I was applied to, and upon consulting thepresent attorney-general, received the same answer as before; andtransmitting his opinion to the place from whence I received thecomplaint, it had so much regard paid to it, that the additional demandwas thence-forward remitted. 

The letters which those two learned lawyers sent to me on this subject Ihave now in my hand; and hope their opinion will be thought sufficientauthority for the interpretation of an act of the senate. 

Nor is their authority, sir, however great, so strong a proof of thejustness of this interpretation, as the reasonableness, or rathernecessity of admitting it. The only argument that can be producedagainst it, is the hardship imposed by it on the innholder, who, as itis objected, must be obliged by the law, so understood, to furnish thesoldiers with provisions for a price at which he cannot afford them. 

But let it be considered, how much more easily the landlord can furnishthem at this price, than they can provide for themselves, and thedifficulty will immediately vanish. If soldiers are necessary, they mustnecessarily be supported, and it appears, upon reflection, that theirpay will not support them by any other method. If they are obliged tobuy their victuals, they must likewise buy fire and implements to dressthem; and what is still a greater hardship, they must sell them, and buynew, at every change of their quarters; if this is impossible, it willbe allowed not to be the meaning of the senate, upon whose wisdom itwould be a censure too severe to suppose them capable of enactingimpossibilities. 

But to the innholder, sir, whose utensils are always in use, and whosefire is always burning, the diet of a soldier costs only the originalprice paid to the butcher; and, in years of common plenty, may beafforded, without loss, at the price mentioned in the act. It cannot, indeed, be denied, that, at present, every soldier is a burden to thefamily on which he is quartered, in many parts of the kingdom; but, itmay be reasonably hoped, that the present scarcity will quickly cease, and that provisions will fall back to their former value; and even, amidst all the complaints with which the severity and irregularity ofthe late seasons have filled the nation, there are many places wheresoldiers may be maintained at the stated rates, with very littlehardship to their landlords. 

However, sir, as this interpretation of the act, though thus supported, both by authority and reason, has been disputed and denied; as somelawyers may be of a different opinion from those whom I have consulted;and as it is not likely that the practice, thus interrupted, will now becomplied with as a prescription; I think it necessary to propose, thatthe price of a soldier's diet be more explicitly ascertained, that noroom may remain for future controversies. 

Mr. SANDYS then rose, and spoke as follows:--Sir, I am very far fromthinking the authority of these learned gentlemen, whose letters areproduced, incontrovertible proof of the justness of an interpretation ofan act of the senate, where that interpretation is not in itselfwarranted by reason, nor consistent with the preservation or enjoymentof property. Much less shall I agree to support their interpretation bya new law; or establish, by an act of the legislature, a kind ofoppression, for which, however tacitly submitted to, nothing could bepleaded hitherto but custom. 

The burden, sir, of a standing army, is already too heavy to be muchlonger supported, nor ought we to add weight to it by new impositions;it surely much better becomes the representatives of the nation toattend to the complaints of their constituents; and where they are foundto arise from real grievances, to contrive some expedient foralleviating their calamities. 

A heavy and dreadful calamity, sir, lies now, in a particular manner, upon the people; the calamity of famine, one of the severest scourges ofprovidence, has filled the whole land with misery and lamentation; and, surely, nothing can be more inhuman than to choose out this season ofhorrour for new encroachments on their privileges, and new invasions ofthe rights of nature, the dominion of their own houses, and theregulation of their own tables. 

The honourable gentleman, sir, has mentioned places where provisions, ashe says, are still to be bought at easy rates. For my part, I am fixedin no such happy corner of the kingdom; I see nothing but scarcity, andhear nothing but complaints; and shall, therefore, be very far fromadmitting now such methods of supporting the army, as were thought tooburdensome in times of plenty; nor will combine in laying a new tax uponany class of my countrymen, when they are sinking under an enormous loadof imposts, and in want of the necessaries of life. 

Sir William YONGE replied, in the manner following:--Sir, nothing ismore easy than outcry and exaggeration; nor any thing less useful forthe discovery of truth, or the establishment of right. The mostnecessary measures may often admit of very florid exclamations againstthem, and may furnish very fruitful topicks of invective. 

When our liberties, sir, are endangered, or our country invaded, it maybe very easy, when it is proposed that we should have recourse to ourswords for security, to bewail, in pathetick language, the miseries ofwar, to describe the desolation of cities, the waste of kingdoms, theinsolence of victory, and the cruelty of power inflamed by hostilities. Yet to what will those representations contribute, but to make thatdifficult which yet cannot be avoided, and embarrass measures whichmust, however, be pursued. 

Such, sir, appear to me to be the objections made to the methods nowproposed of providing necessaries for the soldiers; methods not eligiblefor their own sake, but which ought not to be too loudly condemned, tillsome better can be substituted; for why should the publick be alarmedwith groundless apprehensions? or why should we make those laws whichour affairs oblige us to enact, less agreeable to the people by partialrepresentations?

In the discussion of this question, sir, is to be considered whethersoldiers are to be supported, and whether it will be more proper tomaintain them by the method of ascertaining the rates at which they areto be supplied, or by increasing their pay. 

One of these two ways it is necessary to take; the provisions arealready fixed at as high a price as their pay will allow; if, therefore, they are expected to pay more, their wages must be increased. 

For my part, I shall comply with either method; though I cannot butthink it my duty to declare, that, in my opinion, it is safer to fix theprice of provisions, which must sink in their value, than to raise thepay of the army, which may never afterwards be reduced. 

Mr. GYBBON then spoke, to this effect:--Sir, I agree with the honourablegentleman, that if soldiers are necessary, we must make provision fortheir support. This is indisputably certain; but it is no less certain, that where soldiers are necessary, restraints and regulations arenecessary likewise, to preserve those from being insulted and plunderedby them, who maintain them for the sake of protection. 

The usefulness, sir, of this caution seems not to be known, or notregarded, by the gentleman whose proposal gave occasion to this debate;for, by enacting laws in general terms, as he seems to advise, we shouldleave the unhappy innkeeper wholly at the mercy of his guests, who mightplunder and insult him under the protection of the legislature, mightriot, as in a conquered country, and say, "To this treatment you aresubjected by the determination of the senate. "

The unhappy man, sir, could have no prospect, either of quiet or safety, but by gratifying all the expectations of his masters; returningcivilities for insolence, and receiving their commands with the samesubmission that is paid in capitulating towns to the new garrison. 

If it be necessary to ascertain the price, is it not necessary, at thesame time, to ascertain the species and quantity of provisions to beallowed for it? Is a soldier to fatten on delicacies, and to revel insuperfluities, for fourpence a-day? Ought not some limits to be set tohis expectations, and some restraints prescribed to his appetite? Is heto change his fare, with all the capriciousness of luxury, and relieve, by variety, the squeamishness of excess?

Such demands as these, sir, may be thought ludicrous and trifling, bythose who do not reflect on the insolence of slaves in authority, who donot consider that the license of a military life is the chief inducementthat brings volunteers into the army; an inducement which would, indeed, make all impresses superfluous, were this proposal to be adopted: forhow readily would all the lazy and voluptuous engage in a state of lifewhich would qualify them to live upon the labour of others, and to beprofuse without expense?

Our army may, by this method, be increased; but the number of those bywhom they are to be maintained, must quickly diminish: for, by exactionand oppression, the poorer innkeepers must quickly become bankrupts; andthe soldiers that lose their quarters, must be added to the dividendallotted to the more wealthy, who, by this additional burden will soonbe reduced to the same state, and then our army must subsist upon theirpay, because they will no longer have it in their power to increase itby plunder. 

It will then be inevitably necessary to divide the army from the rest ofthe community, and to build barracks for their reception; an expedientwhich, though it may afford present ease to the nation, cannot be put inpractice without danger to our liberties. 

The reason, for which so many nations have been enslaved by standingarmies, is nothing more than the difference of a soldier's conditionfrom that of other men. Soldiers are governed by particular laws, andsubject to particular authority; authority which, in the manner of itsoperation, has scarcely any resemblance of the civil power. Thus, theysoon learn to think themselves exempt from all other laws; of which theyeither do not discover the use, and, therefore, easily consent toabolish them; or envy the happiness of those who are protected by them, and so prevail upon themselves to destroy those privileges which have noother effect, with regard to them, but to aggravate their owndependence. 

These, sir, are the natural consequences of a military subjection; andif these consequences are not always speedily produced by it, they mustbe retarded by that tenderness which constant intercourse with the restof the nation produces, by the exchange of reciprocal acts of kindness, and by the frequent inculcation of the wickedness of contributing to thepropagation of slavery, and the subversion of the rights of nature;inculcations which cannot be avoided by men who live in constantfellowship with their countrymen. 

But soldiers, shut up in a barrack, excluded from all conversation withsuch as are wiser and honester than themselves, and taught that nothingis a virtue but implicit obedience to the commands of their officer, will soon become foreigners in their own country, and march against thedefenders of their constitution, with the same alacrity as against anarmy of invaders ravaging the coasts; they will lose all sense of socialduty, and of social happiness, and think nothing illustrious but toenslave and destroy. 

So fatal, sir, will be the effects of an establishment of barracks, orpetty garrisons, in this kingdom; and, therefore, as barracks must bebuilt when innkeepers are ruined, and our concurrence with this proposalmust produce their ruin, I hope it-will not be necessary to prove by anyother argument, that the motion ought to be rejected. 

Mr. PELHAM spoke next, in terms to this purpose:--Sir, though I am notinclined, by loud exaggerations and affected expressions of tenderness, to depress the courage or inflame the suspicions of the people, to teachthem to complain of miseries which they do not feel, or ward against illdesigns, which were never formed, yet no man is more really solicitousfor their happiness, or more desirous of removing every real cause offear and occasion of hardships. 

This affection to the people, an affection steady, regular, andunshaken, has always prompted me to prefer their real to their seeminginterest, and rather to consult the security of their privileges thanthe gratification of their passions; it has hitherto determined me tovote for such a body of troops, as may defend us against sudden inroadsand wanton insults, and now incites me to propose that some efficaciousmethod may be struck out for their support, without exasperating eitherthe soldiers or their landlords by perpetual wrangles, or adding to theburden of a military establishment the necessity of contentions incourts of law. 

I know not with what view those have spoken, by whom the proposal firstmade has been opposed; they have, indeed, produced objections, some ofwhich are such as may be easily removed, and others such as arise fromthe nature of things, and ought not, therefore, to be mentioned, becausethey have no other tendency than to inflame the minds of those that hearthem against an army, at a time when it is allowed to be necessary, andprove only what was never denied, that no human measures are absolutelyperfect, and that it is often impossible to avoid a greater evil, but bysuffering a less. 

The question before us, sir, is in its own nature so simple, so littleconnected with circumstances that may distract our attention, or inducedifferent men to different considerations, that when I reflect upon it, I cannot easily conceive by what art it can be made the subject of longharangues, or how the most fruitful imagination can expatiate upon it. 

It is already admitted that an army is necessary; the pay of that armyis already established; the accidental scarcity of forage and victualsis such, that the pay is not sufficient to maintain them; how then mustthe deficiency be supplied? It has been proposed, either to fix theprice of provisions with respect to them, or to advance their wages insome proportion to the price of provisions. Both these methods seem tomeet with disapprobation, and yet the army is to be supported. 

Those who reason thus, do surely not expect to be answered, or at leastexpect from a reply no other satisfaction than that of seeing the timeof the session wasted, and the administration harassed with trivialdelays; for what can be urged with any hope of success to him who willopenly deny contradictory propositions, who will neither move nor standstill, who will neither disband an army nor support it?

Whether these gentlemen conceive that an army may subsist withoutvictuals till the time of scarcity is over, or whether they have raisedthose forces only to starve them, I am not sagacious enough toconjecture, but shall venture to observe, that if they have such aconfidence in the moderation and regularity of the soldiers, as toimagine that they will starve with weapons in their hands, that theywill live within the sight of full tables, and languish with hunger, andperish for want of necessaries, rather than diminish the superfluitiesof others, they ought for ever to cease their outcries about thelicentiousness, insolence, and danger of a standing army. 

But, not to sink into levity unworthy of this assembly, may I bepermitted to hint that these arts of protracting our debates, are by nomeans consistent with the reasons for which we are assembled, and thatit is a much better proof, both of ability and integrity, to removeobjections, than to raise them, and to facilitate, than to retard, thebusiness of the publick. 

The proposal made at first was only to elucidate a law which had beenregularly observed for fifty years, and to remove such ambiguities astended only to embarrass the innholders, not to relieve them. 

To this many objections have been made, and much declamation has beenemployed to display the hardships of maintaining soldiers, but no bettermethod has been yet discovered, nor do I expect that any will be startednot attended with greater difficulties. 

In all political questions, questions too extensive to be fullycomprehended by speculative reason, experience is the guide which a wiseman will follow with the least distrust, and it is no trivialrecommendation of the present method, that it has been so long pursuedwithout any formidable inconvenience or loud complaints. 

Hardships, even when real, are alleviated by long custom; we bear anypresent uneasiness with less regret, as we less remember the time inwhich we were more happy: at least, by long acquaintance with anygrievance we gain this advantage, that we know it in its whole extent, that it cannot be aggravated by our imagination, and that there is noroom for suspecting that any misery is yet behind more heavy than thatwhich we have already borne. 

Such is the present state of the practice now recommended to thisassembly, a practice to which the innkeepers have long submitted, andfound it at least tolerable, to which they knew themselves exposed whenthey took out a license for the exercise of that profession, and whichthey consider as a tax upon them, to be balanced against the advantageswhich they expect from their employment. 

This tax cannot be denied at present to be burdensome in a very uncommondegree, but this weight has not been of long continuance, and it may bereasonably hoped that it will now be made every day lighter. It is, indeed, true, that no unnecessary impositions ought to be laid upon thenation even for a day; and if any gentleman can propose a method bywhich this may be taken off or alleviated, I shall readily comply withhis proposal, and concur in the establishment of new regulations. 

With regard to barracks, I cannot deny that they are justly names ofterrour to a free nation, that they tend to make an army seem part ofour constitution, and may contribute to infuse into the soldiers adisregard of their fellow-subjects, and an indifference about theliberties of their country; but I cannot discover any connexion betweena provision for the support of soldiers in publick-houses, in a state ofconstant familiarity with their countrymen, and the erection ofbarracks, by which they will be, perhaps for ever, separated from them, nor can discover any thing in the method of supporting them nowrecommended that does not tend rather to the promotion of mutual goodoffices, and the confirmation of friendship and benevolence. 

The advocate CAMPBELL next spoke, in substance as follows:--Sir, whencethe impropriety of raising objections to any measures that are proposedis imagined to arise I am unable to discover, having hitherto admittedas an incontrovertible opinion, that it is the duty of every member ofthis assembly to deliver, without reserve, his sentiments upon anyquestion which is brought before him, and to approve or censure, according to his conviction. 

If it be his duty, sir, to condemn what he thinks dangerous orinconvenient, it seems by no means contrary to his duty, to show thereason of his censure, or to lay before the house those objections whichhe cannot surmount by his own reflection. It certainly is not necessaryto admit implicitly all that is asserted; and to deny, or disapprovewithout reason, can he no proof of duty, or of wisdom; and how shall itbe known, that he who produces no objections, acts from any othermotives, than private malevolence, discontent, or caprice?

Nor is it, sir, to be imputed as a just reason for censure to those whohave opposed the motion, that no other measures have been offered bythem to the consideration of the committee. It is necessary to demolisha useless or shattered edifice, before a firm and habitable building canbe erected in its place: the first step to the amendment of a law is toshow its defects; for why should any alteration be made where noinconveniency is discovered?

To the chief objection that was offered, no answer has yet been made, nor has the assembly been informed how the innkeeper shall be able todiscover when he has paid the tax which this law lays upon him. This is, indeed, a tax of a very particular kind, a tax without limits, and to belevied at the discretion of him for whose benefit it is paid. Soldiersquartered upon these terms, are more properly raising contributions inan enemy's country, than receiving wages in their own. 

Is it intended, by this motion, that the innkeepers shall judge whatought to be allowed the soldier for his money? I do not see, then, thatany alteration is proposed in the present condition of our army; for whohas ever refused to sell them food for their money at the common price, or what necessity is there for a law to enforce a practice equally tothe advantage of all parties? If it be proposed that the soldier shalljudge for himself, that he shall set what value he shall think fit onhis own money, and that he shall be at once the interpreter andexecutioner of this new law, the condition of the innkeeper will then besuch as no slave in the mines of America can envy, and such as he willgladly quit for better treatment under the most arbitrary and oppressivegovernment. 

Nor will the insolence of the soldier, thus invested with unlimitedauthority, thus entitled to implicit obedience, and exalted above therest of mankind, by seeing his claim only bounded by his own moderation, be confined to his unhappy landlord. Every guest will become subject tohis intrusion, and the passenger must be content to want his dinner, whenever the lord of the inn shall like it better than his own. 

That these apprehensions, sir, are not groundless, may be proved fromthe conduct of these men, even when the law was not so favourable totheir designs; some of them have already claimed the sole dominion ofthe houses in which they have been quartered, and insulted persons ofvery high rank, and whom our ancient laws had intended to set above theinsults of a turbulent soldier. They have seen the provisions which theyhad ordered taken away by force, partly, perhaps, to please the appetiteof the invader, and partly to gratify his insolence, and give him anopportunity of boasting among his comrades, how successfully heblustered. 

If it be necessary, sir, to insert a new clause in the act to preventlawsuits, which, however advantageous they may sometimes be to me, Ishall always be ready to obviate, it is surely proper to limit the claimof one party as well as that of the other, for how else is the ambiguitytaken away? The difficulty may be, indeed, transferred, but is by nomeans removed, and the innkeeper must wholly repose himself upon thelenity and justice of the soldier, or apply to the courts of law for theinterpretation of the act. 

The question before us is said to be so free from perplexity, that itcan scarcely give occasion for harangues or disputations; and, indeed, it cannot but be allowed, that the controversy may soon be brought to asingle point, and I think nothing more is necessary than to inquire, ifinnholders shall be obliged to provide victuals for soldiers at a statedprice, what, and how much the soldier shall demand. 

The power of raising money at pleasure, has been hitherto denied to ourkings, and surely we ought not to place that confidence in the lowest, that has been refused to the most exalted of mankind, or invest oursoldiers with power, which neither the most warlike of our monarchscould constrain us, nor the most popular allure us to grant. 

The power now proposed to be granted, is nothing less than the power oflevying money, or what is exactly equivalent, the power of raising themoney in their own hands, to any imaginary value. A soldier may, if thismotion be complied with, demand for a penny, what another man mustpurchase at forty times that price. While this is the state of ourproperty, it is surely not very necessary to raise armies for thedefence of it; for why should we preserve it from one enemy only tothrow it into the hands of another, equally rapacious, equallymerciless, and only distinguished from foreign invaders by thiscircumstance, that he received from our own hands the authority by whichhe plunders us. 

Having thus evinced the necessity of determining the soldier'sprivileges, and the innkeeper's rights, I think it necessary torecommend to this assembly an uncommon degree of attention to theregulation of our military establishment, which is become not only moreburdensome to our fellow-subjects by the present famine, but by theincrease of our forces; an increase which the nation will not beholdwithout impatience, unless they be enabled to discern for what end theyhave been raised. 

The people of this nation are, for very just reasons, displeased, evenwith the appearance of a standing army, and surely it is not prudent toexasperate them, by augmenting the troops in a year of famine, andgiving them, at the same time, new powers of extortion and oppression. 

Mr. WINNINGTON spoke to this purpose:--Sir, I have heard nothing in thisdebate, but doubts and objections, which afford no real information, nortend to the alleviation of those grievances, which are so loudlylamented. 

It is not sufficient to point out inconveniencies, or to give strikingrepresentations of the hardships to which the people are exposed; forunless some better expedient can be proposed, or some method discoveredby which we may receive the benefits, without suffering thedisadvantages of the present practice, how does it appear that thesehardships, however severe, are not inseparable from our presentcondition, and such as can only be removed by exposing ourselves to moreformidable evils?

As no remedy, sir, has been proposed by those who appear dissatisfiedwith the present custom, it is reasonable to imagine that none will beeasily discovered; and, therefore, I cannot but think it reasonable thatthe motion should be complied with. By it no new imposition is intended, nor any thing more than the establishment of a practice which hascontinued for more than fifty years, and never, except on two occasions, been denied to be legal. It is only proposed that the senate shouldconfirm that interpretation of the act which has been almost universallyreceived; that they should do what can produce no disturbance, becauseit will make no alterations; but may prevent them, because it mayprevent any attempts of innovation, or diversity of opinions. 

Sir John BARNARD spoke next, to the following effect:--Sir, whether theinterpretation of the act which is now contended for, has beenuniversally admitted, it is impossible to know; but it is at leastcertain, that the practice which is founded upon it, has in many placesnever been followed, nor, indeed, can it be made general without greatimpropriety. 

Many of those, sir, who are styled keepers of publick-houses, and onwhom soldiers are quartered under that denomination, have no conveniencyof furnishing provisions, because they never sell them; such are many ofthe keepers of livery stables, among whom it is the common method to paysoldiers a small weekly allowance, instead of lodging them in theirhouses, a lodging being all which they conceive themselves obliged toprovide, and all that the soldiers have hitherto required; nor can wemake any alteration in this method without introducing the license andinsolence of soldiers into private houses; into houses hithertounacquainted with any degree of riot, incivility, or uproar. 

The reason for which publick-houses are assigned for the quarters ofsoldiers, is partly the greater conveniency of accommodating them infamilies that subsist, by the entertainment of strangers, and partly thenature of their profession, which, by exposing them to frequentencounters with the rude and the debauched, enables them either to bearor repress the insolence of a soldier. 

But with regard, sir, to the persons whom I have mentioned, neither ofthese reasons have any place; they have not, from their dailyemployment, any opportunities of furnishing soldiery with beds orvictuals, nor, by their manner of life, are adapted to support intrusionor struggle with perverseness. Nor can I discover why any man shouldforce soldiers into their houses, who would not willingly admit theminto his own. 

Mr. COCKS spoke to this effect:--Sir, the practice mentioned by thehonourable gentleman, I know to be generally followed by all those thatkeep alehouses in the suburbs of this metropolis, who pay the soldiersbilleted on them a composition for their lodging, nor ever see them butwhen they come to receive it; so far are they from imagining that theycan claim their whole subsistence at any stated price. 

It is apparent, therefore, that by admitting this motion, we should notconfirm a law already received, but establish a new regulation unknownto the people; that we should lay a tax upon the nation, and send oursoldiers to collect it. 

General WADE rose, and spoke to this purpose:--Sir, I have been longconversant with military affairs; and, therefore, may perhaps be able togive a more exact account, from my own knowledge, of the antiquity andextent of this practice, than other gentlemen have had, from their wayof life; an opportunity of obtaining. 

It was, sir, in the reign of king William, the constant method by whichthe army was supported, as may be easily imagined by those who reflect, that it was common for the soldiers to remain for eight or ten monthsunpaid, and that they had, therefore, no possibility of providing forthemselves the necessaries of life. Their pay never was received inthose times by themselves, but issued in exchequer bills for large sums, which the innkeepers procured to be exchanged and divided amongthemselves, in proportion to their debts. 

Such was the practice, sir, in that reign, which has been generallyfollowed to this time, and the rates then fixed have not since beenchanged; and as no inconveniency has arisen from this method, I candiscover no reason against confirming and continuing it. 

Mr. PULTKNEY spoke next, in the manner following:--Sir, those that havespoken in defence of the motion, have accused their opponents, withgreat confidence, of declaiming without arguments, and of wasting thetime of the session in a useless repetition of objections. I do not, indeed, wonder that the objections which have been raised should havegiven some disgust, for who can be pleased with hearing his opponentproduce arguments which he cannot answer? But surely the repetitions maybe excused; for an objection is to be urged in every debate till it isanswered, or is discovered to be unanswerable. 

But what, sir, have those urged in defence of their own opinions, who sofreely animadvert upon the reasonings of others? What proofs, sir, havethey given of the superiority of their own abilities, of the depth oftheir researches, or the acuteness of their penetration?

They have not produced one argument in favour of their motion, but thatit is founded on custom; they have not discovered, however wise andsagacious, that it is always necessary to inquire whether a custom begood or bad; for surely without such inquiry no custom ought to beconfirmed. The motion which they would support, is, indeed, useless ineither case, for a good custom will continue of itself, and one that isbad ought not to be continued. It is the business of the legislature toreform abuses, and eradicate corruptions, not to give them new strengthby the sanction of a law. 

It has been urged, sir, that the law in reality exists already in thatthe act has been interpreted in this sense by the attorney general; andthat his interpretation is generally received. This is then the state ofthe question: if the practice, founded upon this sense of the act, generally prevails, there is no need of a new clause to enforce what isalready complied with; if it does not prevail, all that has been urgedin defence of the motion falls to the ground. 

I do not doubt, sir, that this custom has been received without manyexceptions, and therefore think it ought still to remain a custom, rather than be changed into a law; because it will be complied with as acustom, where there are no obstacles to the observation of it; and itought not to be enforced by law, where it is inconvenient andoppressive. 

While the soldier, sir, is moderate in his demands, and peaceable andmodest in his behaviour, the innkeeper will cheerfully furnish him evenmore than he can afford at the stated price; and certainly, rudeness, insolence, and unreasonable expectations, may justly be punished by theforfeiture of some conveniencies. Thus, sir, the innkeeper will preservesome degree of authority in his own house, a place where the laws ofnature give every man dominion, and the soldier will continue a regularand inoffensive member of civil society. 

The absurdity of leaving the soldier at large in his demands, andlimiting the price which the innkeeper is to require, has been alreadyexposed beyond the possibility of reply; nor, indeed, has the leastattempt been made to invalidate this objection; for it has been passedin silence by those who have most zealously espoused the motion. Theaccount given by the honourable gentleman of the reason for which thisregulation was first introduced in the reign of king William, isundoubtedly just; but it proves, sir, that there is no necessity ofcontinuing it; for the soldiers are now constantly paid, and thereforeneed not that assistance from the innkeeper, which was absolutelyrequisite when they were sometimes six months without money. 

It has been urged, sir, with great importunity and vehemence, that someexpedient should be proposed in the place of this, which so manygentlemen who have spoken on this occasion seem inclined to reject, andwhich, indeed, cannot be mentioned without contempt or abhorrence. Thatthe soldiers should know, as well as their landlord, their own rights, is undoubtedly just, as well as that they should have some certain meansof procuring the necessaries of life; it may, therefore, be proper toenact, that the innkeeper shall either furnish them with diet at theestablished rates, or permit them to dress the victuals which they shallbuy for themselves, with his fire and utensils, and allow them candles, salt, vinegar, and pepper. By this method the soldiers can never be muchinjured by the incivility of their landlord, nor can the innkeeper besubjected to arbitrary demands. The soldier will still gain, by decencyand humanity, greater conveniencies than he can procure for himself byhis pay alone, and all opportunities of oppression on either side will, in a great measure, be taken away. 

I cannot but express my hopes that this method will be generallyapproved. Those that have opposed the establishment of an army will bepleased to see it made less grievous to the people; and those that havedeclared in its favour, ought surely to adopt, without opposition, anymeasures, by the pursuit of which it may be borne with fewer complaints, and less reluctance. 

[The consideration of this question was deferred, and the chairmanhaving moved for leave to sit again, it was resolved to proceed on thisbusiness upon the next day but one, in a committee of the whole house. ]

HOUSE OF COMMONS, MARCH 15, 1740-1. 

The order of the day being read for the house to resolve itself into acommittee of the whole house, to consider the bill for punishing mutinyand desertion, and the better paying the army and their quarters, Sir William YONGE spoke, in substance as follows:--Sir, the last daywhich was assigned to the consideration of this bill, was spent in longaltercations, in vague and unnecessary disquisitions, in retrospectivereflections upon events long past, and in aggravating of grievances thatmay never happen; much sagacity was exerted, and much eloquencedisplayed, but no determination was attained, nor even that expedientexamined, by which those objections might be removed which appeared soimportant, or those dangers obviated which were represented soformidable and so near. 

I hope, sir, part of the time which has intervened between that debateand the present day, has been employed by the gentlemen, whose scrupleswere so numerous, and whose caution is so vigilant, in contriving somemethods of maintaining the army without oppressing the victuallers, andof providing for our defence against foreign enemies without subjectingus to the evils of discontent and disaffection, which they impute to thepresent state of the military establishment. 

To object for ever, and to advance nothing, is an easy method ofdisputation upon any question, but contributes very little to theincrease of knowledge: an artful and acute objector may confound, anddarken, and disturb, but never assists inquiry, or illustrates truth. 

In political questions, sir, it is still more easy and less ingenuous;for all political measures are in some degree right and wrong at thesame time: to benefit some they very frequently bear hard upon others, and are, therefore, only to be approved or rejected as advantages appearto overbalance the inconveniencies, or the inconveniencies to outweighthe advantages. 

It is, sir, the proper province of a senator to promote, not to obstructthe publick counsels; and when he declares his disapprobation of anyexpedient, to endeavour to substitute a better: for how can he be saidto sustain his part of the general burden of publick affairs, who laysothers under the necessity of forming every plan, and inventing everyexpedient, and contents himself with only censuring what he neverendeavours to amend?

That every man, who is called forth by his country to sit here as theguardian of the publick happiness, is obliged, by the nature of hisoffice, to propose, in this assembly, whatever his penetration orexperience may suggest to him as advantageous to the nation, I doubt notbut all that hear me are sufficiently convinced; and, therefore, cannotbut suppose that they have so far attended to their duty, as to be ableto inform us how the present inconveniencies of this bill may beremedied, and its defects supplied. 

To show, sir, at least my inclination to expedite an affair soimportant, I shall lay before the house an amendment that I have made tothe clause, pursuant to a hint offered the last day by an honourablemember, "That all innholders, victuallers, etc. Shall be obliged tofurnish soldiers with salt, vinegar, small beer, candles, fire, andutensils to dress their victuals, and so doing shall not be obliged tosupply the troops with provisions, except on a march. "

I am far, sir, from thinking the clause, as it will stand after thisamendment, complete and unexceptionable, being conscious that somearticles in it may require explanation. The quantity of small beer to beallowed to each soldier must necessarily be ascertained, in order toprevent endless and indeterminable disputes; for one man, sir, maydemand a greater quantity than another, and a man may be prompted bymalice or wantonness to demand more than health requires; it will, therefore, be proper to limit the quantity which must be furnished, thatneither the soldier may suffer by the avarice of his landlord, nor thelandlord be oppressed by the gluttony of the soldier. 

With regard to this question, sir, I expect to find different opinionsin this assembly, which every man is at liberty to offer and tovindicate; and I shall take this opportunity of proposing on my part, that every man may have a daily allowance of three quarts. One quart toeach meal may be allowed in my opinion to be sufficient, and sure nogentleman can imagine that by this limitation much superfluity isindulged. 

There are some parts, sir, of this kingdom, in which cider is moreplentiful, and cheaper than small beer; consequently, it may be for theease of the victualler to have the choice allowed him of furnishing oneor the other; it will, therefore, be a very proper addition to thisclause, that the innkeepers shall allow the soldier, every day, threequarts of either small beer or cider. 

That penal sanctions, sir, are essential to laws, and that no man willsubmit to any regulations inconvenient to himself, but that he may avoidsome heavier evil, requires not to be proved; and, therefore, tocomplete this clause, I propose that the victualler who shall neglect orrefuse to observe it, shall be subject to some fine for hisnon-compliance. 

Mr. PELHAM spoke to this effect:--Sir, I cannot omit this opportunity ofobserving how much the burden of the army is diminished by the judiciousregulations invariably observed in the late reigns, and how little theassignment of troops is to be dreaded by the victualler. 

In the reign of king William, sir, before funds were established, whilethe credit of the government was low, the measures of the court wereoften obviated or defeated by the superiority of the discontented party, and the supplies denied which were necessary to support them, and inexpectation of which they had been undertaken, it was not uncommon forthe towns in which the troops were stationed, to murmur at their guests;nor could they be charged with complaining without just reasons: for toquarter soldiers upon a house, was in those days little less than tosend troops to live at discretion. 

As all supplies, sir, were then occasional and temporary, and nothingwas granted but for the present exigence, the prevalence of theopposition, for a single session, embarrassed all the measures of thecourt in the highest degree; their designs were at a stand, the forceswere unpaid, and they were obliged to wait till another session for anopportunity of prosecuting their schemes. 

Thus, sir, the soldiers were sometimes five months without their pay, and were necessarily supported by the innkeeper at his own expense, withhow much reluctance and discontent I need not mention. It cannot but beimmediately considered, upon hearing this account of the soldier'scondition, with how many reproaches he would receive his victuals, howroughly he would be treated, how often he would be insulted as an idler, and frowned upon as an intruder. Nor can it be imagined that suchaffronts, however they might be provoked, would be borne without return, by those who knew themselves not the authors of the provocation, and whothought themselves equal suf-ferers with those who complained. When theinnkeeper growled at the soldier, the soldier, it may be supposed, seldom failed to threaten or to plunder the innkeeper, and to rise inhis demands as his allowance was retrenched. 

Thus, sir, the landlord and his guest were the constant enemies of eachother, and spent their lives in mutual complaints, injuries, andinsults. 

But by the present regularity of our military establishment, this greatevil is taken away; as the soldier requires no credit of the victualler, he is considered as no great incumbrance on his trade; and being treatedwithout indignities, like any other member of the community, heinhabits his quarters without violence, insolence, or rapacity, andendeavours to recommend himself by officiousness and civility. 

In the present method of payment, sir, the troops have always onemonth's pay advanced, and receive their regular allowance on the statedday; so that every man has it in his power to pay his landlord everynight for what he has had in the day; or if he imagines himself able toprocure his own provisions at more advantage, he can now go to marketwith his own money. 

It appears, therefore, to me, sir, that the amendment now proposed isthe proper mean between the different interests of the innkeeper andsoldier; by which neither is made the slave of the other, and by whichwe shall leave, to both, opportunities of kindness, but take from themthe power of oppression. 

Mr. CAREW next spoke as follows:--Sir, the amendment now offered is not, in my opinion, so unreasonable or unequitable as to demand a warm andstrenuous opposition, nor so complete as not to be subject to someobjections; objections which, however, may be easily removed, and whichwould, perhaps, have been obviated, had they been foreseen by thegentleman who proposed it. 

The allowance, sir, of small liquors proposed, I cannot but think morethan sufficient; three quarts a-day are surely more than the demands ofnature make necessary, and I know not why the legislature shouldpromote, or confirm in the soldiery, a vice to which they are alreadytoo much inclined, the habit of tippling. 

The innkeeper, sir, will be heavily burdened by the obligation to supplythe soldier with so many of the necessaries of life without payment;and, therefore, it may be justly expected by him, that no superfluitiesshould be enjoyed at his expense. 

But there remains another objection, sir, of far more importance, andwhich must be removed before this clause can be reasonably passed into alaw. It is not declared, or not with sufficient perspicuity, that it isto be left to the choice of the innkeeper, whether he will furnish thesoldier with provisions at fourpence a-day, or with the necessariesenumerated in the clause for nothing. If it is to be left to the choiceof the soldier, the victualler receives no relief from the amendment, towhose option, since he must suffer in either case, it ought to bereferred, because he only can tell by which method he shall sufferleast. 

Mr. CORNWALL spoke in the manner following:--Sir, it is not without thegreatest diffidence that I rise to oppose the gentleman who offered theamendment; for his abilities are so far superiour to mine, that Iobject without hope of being able to support my objection, and contendwith an absolute certainty of being overcome. I know not whether it maybe allowed me to observe, that the difference between our faculties is, with regard to strength and quickness, the same as between the cider ofhis county and that of mine, except that in one part of the parallel theadvantage is on our side, and in the other on his. 

The cider, sir, of our county is one of our most valuable commodities;so much esteemed in distant places, that our merchants often sell it bythe bottle, for more than the soldier has to give for the provision of aday; and of such strength, that I, who am accustomed to the use of it, never was able to drink three quarts in any single day. 

If, therefore, sir, the soldier is to have three quarts of this cider, when small beer is not easily to be procured, not only the innkeeper, but the army will be injured; for what greater harm can be done to anyman, than to initiate him in a habit of intemperance? and what outragesand insolencies may not be expected from men trusted with swords, andkept, from day to day, and from month to month, in habitual drunkennessby a decree of the senate?

Sir William YONGE replied to this purpose:--Sir, I know not why thegentleman has thought this a proper opportunity for displaying hiseloquence in the praise of his own cider. That he loves his own countycannot be wondered, for no passion is more universal, and few less to becensured;-but he is not to imagine that the produce of his native soilwill be generally allowed to excel that of other counties, because earlyhabits have endeared it to him, and familiarized it to his particularpalate. 

The natives of every place prefer their own fruits and their own liquor, and, therefore, no inference can be drawn from approbation so apparentlypartial. From this prejudice I am far from suspecting myself free, noram desirous or industrious to overcome it: neither am I afraid ofexposing myself to all the censure that so innocent a prepossession maybring upon me, by declaring that, in my opinion, the cider of my nativecounty is of equal excellence with that which this gentleman has soliberally extolled. 

Mr. CORNWALL answered to the following effect:--Sir, how little I expectvictory in this controversy I have already declared, and I need notobserve of how small importance it is what soil produces cider of thegreatest excellence and value; since, if there be other places where thecider is equally esteemed, and purchased at the same rate, it is yetmore necessary to provide, by some exception, that the soldier shall notbe entitled to demand, of the victualler, liquor to more than thrice thevalue of his pay, nor be allowed to revel in continual drunkenness, andto corrupt his morals, and enervate his limbs by incessant debauchery. 

But since, sir, the preference due to the cider of my county has beendenied, in my opinion, with great partiality and injustice, I thinkmyself obliged, by all the laws of honour and gratitude, to stand uponce more to vindicate its superiority, and assert its value. 

The laws of honour, sir, require this from me, as they oblige every manto stand forth a vindicator of merit slighted and oppressed; andgratitude calls loudly upon me to exert myself in the protection of thatto which I have been often indebted for a pleasing suspense of care, anda welcome flow of spirit and gaiety. 

The cider, sir, which I am now rescuing from contemptuous comparisons, has often exhilarated my social hours, enlivened the freedom ofconversation, and improved the tenderness of friendship, and shall not, therefore, now want a panegyrist. It is one of those few subjects onwhich an encomiast may expatiate without deviating from the truth. 

Would the honourable gentleman, sir, who has thus vilified thiswonder-working nectar, but honour my table with his company, he wouldquickly be forced to retract his censures; and, as many of hiscountrymen have done, confess that nothing equal to it is produced inany other part of the globe; nor will this confession be the effect ofhis regard to politeness, but of his adherence to truth. 

Of liquor like this, sir, two quarts is, undoubtedly, sufficient for adaily allowance, in the lieu of small beer; nor ought even that to bedetermined by the choice of the soldier, but of the innkeeper, for whosebenefit this clause is said to be inserted, and from whose grievances Ihope we shall not suffer our attention to be diverted by any incidentalquestions, or ludicrous disputes. 

Mr. GORE then spoke to the following effect:--Sir, that the allowance oftwo quarts a-day is sufficient, and that to demand more is a wantonindulgence of appetite, is experimentally known, and, therefore, no moreought to be imposed upon the innkeeper. 

Nor is this, sir, the only part of the clause that requires ourconsideration; for some of the other particulars to be provided by thevictualler, may easily furnish perverse tempers with an opportunity ofwrangling: vinegar is not to be had in every part, of the kingdom, and, where it cannot be procured, ought not to be required; for neitherreason nor experience will inform us that vinegar ought to be rankedamong the necessaries of life. 

Sir William YONGE made the following reply:--Sir, by the alteration nowmade in the clause, the innkeepers are effectually relieved from a greatpart of the burden which, in my opinion, this act has hitherto laid uponthem; the necessity of furnishing the soldiers quartered upon them, withprovisions at the stated price, whatever might be the scarcity of theseason or of the country. That this was the intention of the act, isasserted by those whose reputation and promotion are sufficientevidences of their ability in the interpretation of our laws. 

The innkeeper may now either accept or refuse the limited price, as itshall appear to him most consistent with his interest; nor will therebe, for the future, any room for murmuring at unreasonable demands, since he may oblige that soldier whom he cannot satisfy, to pleasehimself better at his own expense. 

The choice of the liquor is, likewise, wholly referred to the innkeeper;for the words in the clause requiring that he shall furnish three quartsof small beer or cider, he complies, indisputably, with the law bysupplying either; and, therefore, the value of cider in any particularcounty is not of much importance in the question before us; if cider bemore valuable than small beer, it may be withheld; if it be cheaper, itmay be substituted in its place; so that the innkeeper has nothing toconsult but his own interest. 

That this is the meaning of the clause, is, I suppose, obvious to everyman that hears it read; and, therefore, I see no reason for anyalterations, because I know not any effect which they can possibly have, except that of obscuring the sense which is now too clear to bemistaken. 

Sir John BARNARD spoke next, to the effect following:--Sir, though itshould be granted, that the clause before us is intelligible to everymember of this assembly, it will not certainly follow, that there is nonecessity of farther elucidations; for a law very easily understood bythose who make it, may be obscure to others who are less acquainted withour general intention, less skilled in the niceties of language, or lessaccustomed to the style of laws. 

It is to be considered, that this law will chiefly affect a class of menvery little instructed in literature, and very unable to drawinferences; men to whom we often find it necessary, in common cases, touse long explanations, and familiar illustrations, and of whom it maybenot unreasonably suspected, that the same want of education, which makesthem ignorant, may make them petulant, and at once incline them towrangle, and deprive them of the means of deciding their controversies. 

That both innholders and soldiers are, for the greatest part, of thisrank and temper, I suppose, sir, every gentleman knows, from dailyobservation; and, therefore, it will, I hope, be thought necessary todescend to their understandings, and to give them laws in terms of whichthey will know the meaning; we shall, otherwise, more consult theinterest of the lawyers than the innholders, and only, by onealteration, produce a necessity of another. 

I am therefore desirous, sir, that all the difficulties which have beenmentioned by every gentleman on this occasion, should be removed byclear, familiar, and determinate expressions; for what they have founddifficult, may easily be, to an innholder or soldier, absolutelyinexplicable. 

I cannot but declare, while I am speaking on this subject, that in myopinion, two quarts of liquor will be a sufficient allowance. If weconsider the demands of nature, more cannot be required; if we examinethe expense of the innholder, he ought not to supply soldiers with agreater quantity for nothing. It is to be remembered, that small beer, like other liquors, is charged with an excise in publick-houses; andthat two quarts will probably cost the landlord a penny, and as wecannot suppose that fire, candles, vinegar, salt, pepper, and the use ofutensils, and lodging, can be furnished for less than threepence a-day, every soldier that is quartered upon a publick-house, may be consideredas a tax of six pounds a-year--a heavy burden, which surely ought not tobe aggravated by unnecessary impositions. 

[The committee having gone through the bill, and settled the amendments, the chairman was ordered to make his report the next day. ]

HOUSE OF COMMONS, MARCH 16, 1740-1. 

The report was read, and the amendments to the clauses in debate, whichthen ran thus:--

That the officers and soldiers to be quartered and billeted asaforesaid, shall be received, and furnished with diet and small beer bythe owners of the inns, livery stables, alehouses, victualling-houses, etc. Paying and allowing for the same the several rates mentioned. 

Provided, that in case the innholder on whom any non-commission officersor soldiers shall be quartered, by virtue of this act, (except on amarch, ) shall be desirous to furnish such officers or soldiers withcandles, vinegar, and salt, and with either small beer or cider, notex-ceeding three quarts for each man _a-day gratis_, and to allow themthe use of fire, and the necessary utensils for dressing and eatingtheir meat, and shall give notice of such his desire to the commandingofficers, and shall furnish and allow them the same accordingly; then, and in such case, the non-commission officers and soldiers so quarteredshall provide their own victuals; and the officer to whom it belongs toreceive, or that does actually receive the pay and subsistence of suchnon-commission officers and soldiers, shall pay the several sums, payable out of the subsistence-money for diet and small beer, to thenon-commission officers and soldiers aforesaid, and not to the innholderor other person on whom such non-commission officers or soldiers arequartered. 

The question being put whether this clause should stand thus, Mr. CAREW spoke to this effect:--Sir, though it may, perhaps, beallowed, that the circumstances of our present situation oblige us tosupport a more numerous army than in former years, surely no argumentcan be drawn from them that can show the necessity of a profuseallowance to our soldiers, or of gratifying their desires by theoppression of the innholders. 

If, sir, the designs of our enemies are so malicious, and their power soformidable, as to demand augmentations of our troops, and additions toour natural securities, they ought, surely, to impress upon us thenecessity of frugal measures, that no useless burdens may be imposedupon the people. 

To furnish two quarts of beer, sir, every day for nothing, is, undoubtedly, an imposition sufficiently grievous; and I can, therefore, discover no reason for which an allowance of three should beestablished; a proposal injurious to the victualler, because it exactsmore than he can afford to allow, and of no benefit to the soldier, because it offers him more than he can want. 

Sir William YONGE spoke next, to this purpose:--Sir, if it is aninstance of misconduct to spend upon any affair more time than theimportance of it deserves, I am afraid that the clause, to which ourattention is now recalled, may expose us to censure, and that we may becharged with neglecting weighty controversies, and national questions, to debate upon trifles; of wasting our spirits upon subjects unworthy ofcontention; of defeating the expectations of the publick, and divertingour enemies rather than opposing them. 

But, sir, as nothing has a more immediate tendency to the security ofthe nation than a proper establishment of our forces, and the regulationof their quarters is one of the most necessary and difficult parts ofthe establishment; it is requisite that we think no question of thiskind too trivial for our consideration, since very dangerousdisturbances have often been produced by petty disputes. 

The quantity, sir, of small beer to be allowed by the victualler tothose soldiers who shall provide their own victuals, was disputedyesterday, and, as I thought, agreed upon; but since this question isrevived, I must take the opportunity to declare, that we ought not toassign less than three quarts a-day to each man; for it is to beremembered by those who estimate the demands by their own, how muchtheir way of life is different from that of a common soldier, and howlittle he can be charged with wantonness and superfluity, for drinkingmore small liquor than themselves. 

There are few members of this house, who do not, more than once a-day, drink tea, coffee, chocolate, or some other cooling and dilutinginfusion; delicacies which the soldier cannot purchase; to which he isentirely a stranger, and of which the place must be supplied by someother cheap and wholesome liquors. 

If, sir, those gentlemen whose close attention to the interest of theinnholder has, perhaps, abstracted them, in some degree, from any regardto the necessities of a soldier, will consent to allow him five pintsa-day, I shall contend no longer; for though I cannot agree that it is asufficient provision, yet, as other gentlemen, equally able to judge inthis subject with myself, are of a different opinion, I shall show myregard for their sentiments by desisting from opposition. 

Lord BALTIMORE spoke in substance as follows:--Sir, I am not able todiscover any necessity of compromising this debate, by taking the meanbetween the two different opinions, or for denying to the soldiers whatevery labourer or serving-man would murmur to be refused for a singleday. 

I believe, sir, every gentleman, who examines the expense of his family, will find that each of his servants consumes daily at least three quartsof small beer, and surely it is not to be required that a soldier shouldlive in a perpetual state of war with his constitution, and a constantinability to comply with the calls of nature. 

General HANDASYD spoke to the following purpose:--Sir, the inclinationshown by several gentlemen for a penurious and scanty provision for thesoldiers, must, in my opinion, proceed from an inattentive considerationof their pay, and will, therefore, be removed, by laying before them anaccount of his condition, and comparing his daily pay with his dailyexpenses. 

The whole pay of a foot soldier, sir, is sixpence a-day, of which he isto pay fourpence to his landlord for his diet, or, what is very nearlythe same, to carry fourpence daily to the market, for which how small asupply of provisions he can bring to his quarters, especially in time ofscarcity, I need not mention. 

There remain then only twopence, sir, to be disbursed for things notimmediately necessary for the preservation of life, but which no man canwant without being despicable to others and burdensome to himself. Twopence a-day is all that a soldier has to lay out upon cleanliness anddecency, and with which he is likewise to keep his arms in order, and tosupply himself with some part of his clothing. If, sir, after thesedeductions, he can, from twopence a-day, procure himself the means ofenjoying a few happy moments in the year with his companions over a cupof ale, is not his economy much more to be envied than his luxury? Orcan it be charged upon him that he enjoys more than his share of thefelicities of life? Is he to be burdened with new expenses lest heshould hoard up the publick money, stop the circulation of coin, andturn broker or usurer with twopence a-day?

I have been so long acquainted, sir, with the soldier's character, thatI will adventure to secure him from the charge of avarice, and topromise that whatever he shall possess not necessary to life, he willenjoy to the advantage of his landlord. 

Then the advocate CAMPBELL spoke in substance as follows:--Sir, I am farfrom intending to oppose this proposal of five pints, though, upon arigorous examination, it might appear more than the mere wants of naturerequire; for I cannot but declare that this question has too longengaged the attention of the house, and that the representatives of amighty nation beset with enemies, and encumbered with difficulties, seemto forget their importance and their dignity, by wrangling from day today upon a pint of small beer. 

I conceive the bill, which we are now considering, sir, not as aperpetual and standing law, to be interwoven with our constitution, oradded to the principles of our government, but as a temporaryestablishment for the present year; an expedient to be laid aside whenour affairs cease to require it; an experimental essay of a newpractice, which may be changed or continued according to its success. 

To allow, sir, five pints of small beer a-day to our soldiers, for asingle year, can produce no formidable inconveniency, and may, though itshould not be entirely approved, be of less disadvantage to the publick, than the waste of another day. 

[An alteration was made to five pints, instead of three quarts; and thebill, thus amended, was ordered to be engrossed, and a few daysafterwards, being read a third time, was passed, and ordered to thelords, where it occasioned no debate. ]

HOUSE OF COMMONS, APRIL 12, 1741. 

[DEBATE ON ADDRESSING THE KING. ]

A copy of his majesty's speech being read, Mr. CLUTTERBUCK-BUCK rose, and spoke as follows:--

Sir, the present confusion in Europe, the known designs of the French, the numerous claims to the Austrian dominions, the armies which arelevied to support them, and the present inability of the queen ofHungary to maintain those rights which descend to her from herancestors, and have been confirmed by all the solemnities of treaties, evidently require an uncommon degree of attention in our consultations, and of vigour in our proceedings. 

Whatever may be the professions of the French, their real designs areeasily discovered, designs which they have carried on, either openly, orin private, for near a century, and which it cannot be expected thatthey will lay aside, when they are so near to success. Their view, sir, in all their wars and treaties, alliances and intrigues, has been theattainment of universal dominion, the destruction of the rights ofnature, and the subjection of all the rest of mankind; nor have we anyreason to imagine that they are not equally zealous for the promotion ofthis pernicious scheme, while they pour troops into Germany, for theassistance of their ally, as when they wasted kingdoms, laid cities inashes, and plunged millions into misery and want, without any othermotive than the glory of their king. 

But the French are not the only nation at this time labouring for thesubversion of our common liberties. Our liberties, sir, are endangeredby those equally interested with ourselves in their preservation; for inwhat degree soever any of the princes who are now endeavouring to divideamong themselves the dominions of Austria, may be pleased with theacquisition of new territories, and an imaginary increase of influenceand power, it must be evident to all who are not dazzled by immediateinterest, that they are only fighting for France, and that by thedestruction of the Austrian family, they must in a short time fallthemselves. 

It is well known, sir, though it is not always remembered, thatpolitical as well as natural greatness is merely comparative, and thathe only is a powerful prince, who is more powerful than those with whomhe can have any cause of contention. That prince, therefore, whoimagines his power enlarged by a partition of territories, which giveshim some additional provinces, may be at last disappointed in hisexpectations: for, if this partition gives to another prince alreadygreater than himself, an opportunity of increasing his strength in adegree proportionate to his present superiority, the former will soonfind, that he has been labouring for nothing, and that his danger isstill the same. 

Such, sir, is the case of the king of Prussia, who, when he has overrunthat part of Germany, to which he now lays claim, will only haveweakened the house of Austria, without strengthening himself. 

He is at present secure in the possession of his dominions, becauseneither the Austrians would suffer the French, nor the French permit theAustrians to increase-their power by subduing him. Thus, while thepresent equipoise of power is maintained, jealousy and caution wouldalways procure him an ally whenever he should be attacked; but when, byhis assistance, the Austrian family shall be ruined, who shall defendhim against the ambition of France?

While the liberties of mankind are thus equally endangered by folly andambition, attacked on one side, and neglected on the other, it isnecessary for those who foresee the calamity that threatens them, toexert themselves in endeavours to avert it, and to retard the fatalblow, till those who are now lulled by the contemplation of privateadvantage, can be awakened into a just concern for the general happinessof Europe, and be convinced that they themselves can only be secure byuniting in the cause of liberty and justice. 

For this reason, sir, our sovereign has asserted the Pragmaticksanction, and promised to assist the queen of Hungary with the forceswhich former treaties have entitled her to demand from him; for thisreason he has endeavoured to rouse the Dutch from their supineness, andexcite them to arm once more for the common safety, to intimidate, bynew augmentations, those powers whose ardour, perhaps, only subsistsupon the confidence that they shall not be resisted, and to animate, byopen declarations in favour of the house of Austria, those who probablyare only hindered from offering their assistance, by the fear ofstanding alone against the armies of France. 

That by this conduct he may expose his dominions on the continent toinvasions, ravages, and the other miseries of war, every one who knowstheir situation must readily allow; nor can it be doubted by any man whohas heard of the power of the Prussians and French, that they may commitgreat devastations with very little opposition, the forces of theelectorate not being sufficient to give them battle; for though thefortified towns might hold out against them, that consideration willvery little alleviate the concern of those who consider the miseries ofa nation, whose enemies are in possession of all the open country, andwho from their ramparts see their harvest laid waste, and their villagesin flames. The fortifications contain the strength, but the field andthe trading towns comprise the riches of a people, and the country maybe ruined which is not subdued. 

As, therefore, sir, the electoral dominions of his majesty are nowendangered, not by any private dispute with the neighbouring princes, but by his firmness in asserting the general rights of Europe; as theconsequences of his conduct, on this occasion, will be chieflybeneficial to Britain, we ought surely to support him in the prosecutionof this design; a design which we cannot but approve, since ourancestors have always carried it on without regard either to the dangeror the expense. 

In conformity to this maxim of politicks, so clearly founded in equity, and so often justified by the votes of the senate, has his majesty beenpleased to declare to us his resolution to adhere to his engagements, and oppose all attempts that may be forming in favour of any unjustpretensions to the prejudice of the house of Austria. 'Tis for this endhe desires the concurrence of his senate. I hope every gentleman in thishouse will agree with me that we ought to declare our approbation ofthese measures, in such terms as may show the world, that those whoshall dare to obstruct them, must resolve to incur the resentment ofthis nation, and expose themselves to all the opposition which thesenate of Britain can send forth against them. We ought to pronouncethat the territories of Hanover will be considered, on this occasion, asthe dominions of Britain, and that any attack on one or the other willbe equally resented. I, therefore, move, that an humble address bepresented by this house to his majesty, To return our thanks for his speech; to express our dutiful sense of hismajesty's just regard for the rights of the queen of Hungary, and formaintaining the Pragmatick sanction; to declare our concurrence in theprudent measures which his majesty is pursuing for the preservation ofthe liberties and balance of power in Europe; to acknowledge hismajesty's wisdom and resolution, in not suffering himself to be divertedfrom steadily persevering in his just purposes of fulfilling hisengagements with the house of Austria; also, further to assure hismajesty, that, in justice to and vindication of the honour and dignityof the British crown, we will effectually stand by and support hismajesty against all insults and attacks, which any prince or power, inresentment of the just measures which he has so wisely taken, shall makeupon any of his majesty's dominions, though not belonging to the crownof Great Britain. And that in any future events, which might make itnecessary for him to enter into still larger expenses, this house willenable him to contribute, in the most effectual manner, to the supportof the queen of Hungary, to the preventing, by all reasonable means, thesubversion of the house of Austria, and to the maintaining thePragmatick sanction and the liberties and balance of Europe. 

Mr. FOX seconded the motion in this manner:--Sir, the expediency, if notthe necessity of the address now moved for, will, I believe, be readilyallowed by those who consider the just measures which are pursued by hismajesty, the end which is intended by them, and the powers by which theyare opposed. 

How much it is our duty to support the house of Austria it is notnecessary to explain to any man who has heard the debates of thisassembly, or read the history of the last war. How much it is our dutyto support it, is evident, as soon as it is known by whom it isattacked; by the ancient enemy of these nations, by the generaldisturber of the universe, by the formidable oppressors of liberty, exulting in new acquisitions, inflamed with the madness of universalmonarchy, and elated with an opportunity of subjecting Germany, byexalting to the supreme power a prince who shall hold his authority onlyby their permission. 

The house of Austria, which has so often stood forth in defence of ourcommon rights, which has poured armies into the field, in confederacywith Britain, to suppress the insolence of that family which nothingcould satisfy but boundless power, now demands the assistance which ithas so often afforded; that assistance is demanded from us by everyclaim which the laws of society can enact, or the dictates of nature cansuggest, by treaties maturely considered, and solemnly confirmed, by theties of ancient friendship, and the obligations of common interest. 

To violate the publick faith, and to neglect the observation oftreaties, is to sink ourselves below barbarity, to destroy thatconfidence which unites mankind in society. To deny or evade ourstipulations, sir, is to commit a crime which every honest mind mustconsider with abhorrence, and to establish a precedent which may be usedhereafter to our own destruction. 

To forsake an ancient ally only because we can receive no immediateadvantage from his friendship, or because it may be in some degreedangerous to adhere to him; to forsake him when he most wants our goodoffices, when he is distressed by his enemies, and deserted by othersfrom whom he had reason to hope for kinder treatment, is the mostdespicable, the most hateful degree of cowardice and treachery. 

The obligations of interest, sir, it is not often needful to enforce, but it may be observed on this occasion, that a single year of neglectmay never be retrieved. We may, sir, now be able to support those whom, when once dispossessed, it will not be in our power to restore; and thatif we suffer the house of Austria to be overborne, our posterity, through every generation, may have reason to curse our injudiciousparsimony, our fatal inactivity, and our perfidious cowardice. 

With what views the king of Prussia concurs in the French measures, orupon what principles of policy he promises to himself any security inthe enjoyment of his new dominions, it is not easy to conjecture; but asit is easy to discover, that whatever he may propose to himself, hisconduct evidently tends to the ruin of Europe, so he may, in my opinion, justly be opposed, if he cannot be diverted or made easy. 

Nor can we, sir, if this opposition should incite him, or any otherpower, to an invasion of his majesty's foreign dominions, refuse themour protection and assistance: for as they suffer for the cause which weare engaged to support, and suffer only by our measures, we are atleast, as allies, obliged by the laws of equity and the general compactsof mankind, to arm in their defence; and what may be claimed by thecommon right of allies, we shall surely not deny them, only because theyare more closely united to us, because they own the same monarch withourselves. 

Mr. PULTENEY spoke to the following purpose:--Sir, with what eagernessthe French snatch every opportunity of increasing their influence, extending their dominions, and oppressing their neighbours, theexperience of many years has convinced all Europe; and it is evidentthat unless some power be preserved in a degree of strength nearly equalto theirs, their schemes, pernicious as they are, cannot be defeated. 

That the only power from which this opposition can be hoped, is thehouse of Austria, a very superficial view of this part of the globe, will sufficiently demonstrate; of this we were long since so stronglyconvinced, that we employed all our forces and all our politicks toaggrandize this house. We endeavoured not only to support it in all itshereditary rights, but to invest it with new sovereignties, and extendits authority over new dominions. 

Why we afterwards varied in our councils and our measures, I have longinquired without any satisfaction, having never, sir, with the utmostapplication, been able to discover the motives to the memorable treatyof Hanover, by which we stipulated to destroy the fabrick that we hadbeen so long and so laboriously endeavouring to erect; by which weabandoned that alliance which we had so diligently cultivated, which wehad preferred to peace, plenty, and riches, and for which we hadcheerfully supported a tedious, a bloody, and an expensive war. 

This conduct, sir, raises a greater degree of admiration, as the authorsof it had exhausted all their eloquence in censuring the treaty ofUtrecht, and had endeavoured to expose those who transacted it to thegeneral hatred of the nation; as they always expressed in the strongestterms their dread and detestation of the French; as they animated alltheir harangues, and stunned their opponents with declarations of theirzeal for the liberties of Europe. 

By what impulse or what infatuation, these asserters of liberty, theseenemies of France, these guardians of the balance of power, were on thesudden prevailed on to declare in favour of the power whom they had solong thought it their chief interest and highest honour to oppose, mustbe discovered by sagacity superiour to mine. But after such perplexityof councils and such fluctuation of conduct, it is necessary to inquiremore particularly what are the present intentions of the ministry, whatalliances have been formed, and what conditions are required to befulfilled. 

If we are obliged only to supply the queen of Hungary with twelvethousand men, we have already performed our engagements; if we havepromised any pecuniary assistance, the sum which we have stipulated tofurnish ought to be declared; for I suppose, at least, our engagementshave some limits, and that we are not to exert all the force of thenation, to fight as if fire and sword were at our gates, or an invaderwere landing armies upon our coasts. 

I have, sir, from my earliest years been zealous for the defence andexaltation of the house of Austria, and shall be very far from proposingthat any danger or distress should influence us to desert it; but I donot easily discover by what means we shall be able to afford anyefficacious assistance: for the power of Britain consists chiefly innaval armaments, which can be of very little use to the queen ofHungary, and I know not any state that will easily consent to unite withus on this occasion. 

If there be, sir, any states remaining in Europe which the French canneither intimidate nor bribe, we ought studiously to solicit anddiligently to cultivate their friendship; but whether any, except theMoscovites, are now independent, or sufficiently confident of their ownstrength to engage in such a hazardous alliance, may be justly doubted. 

The late grand alliance, sir, was supported at the expense of thisnation alone; nor was it required from the other confederates to exhaustthe treasure of their country in the common cause. I hope the debt whichthat war has entailed upon us will instruct us to be more frugal in ourfuture engagements, and to stipulate only what we may perform withoutinvolving the nation in misery, which victories and triumphs cannotcompensate. 

The necessity, sir, of publick economy obliges me to insist, that beforeany money shall be granted, an account be laid before the senate, inparticular terms, of the uses to which it is to be applied. To ask forsupplies in general terms, is to demand the power of squandering thepublick money at pleasure, and to claim, in softer language, nothingless than despotick authority. 

It has not been uncommon for money, granted by the senate, to be spentwithout producing any of those effects which were expected from it, without assisting our allies, or humbling our enemies; and, therefore, there is reason for suspecting that money has sometimes been asked forone use and applied to another. 

If our concurrence, sir, is necessary to increase his majesty'sinfluence on the continent, to animate the friends of the house ofAustria, or to repress the disturbers of the publick tranquillity, Ishall willingly unite with the most zealous advocates for theadministration in any vote of approbation or assistance, not contrary tothe act of settlement, that important and well-concerted act, by whichthe present family was advanced to the throne, and by which it isprovided, that Britain shall never be involved in war for theenlargement or protection of the dominions of Hanover, dominions fromwhich we never expected nor received any benefit, and for which, therefore, nothing ought to be either suffered or hazarded. 

If it should be again necessary to form a confederacy, and to unite thepowers of Europe against the house of Bourbon, that ambitious, thatrestless family, by which the repose of the world is almost every dayinterrupted, which is incessantly labouring against the happiness ofhuman nature, and seeking every hour an opportunity of newencroachments, I declare, sir, that I shall not only, with the greatestcheerfulness, bear my share of the publick expense, but endeavour toreconcile others to their part of the calamities of war. This, sir, Ihave advanced in confidence, that sufficient care shall be taken, thatin any new alliance we shall be parties, not principals; that theexpense of war, as the advantage of victory, shall be common; and thatthose who shall unite with us will be our allies, not our mercenaries. 

Mr. WALPOLE then spoke, to the following purpose:--Sir, it is notwithout reason that the honourable gentleman desires to be informed ofthe stipulations contained in the treaty by which we have engaged tosupport the Pragmatick sanction; for I find that he either never knewthem or has forgotten them; and, therefore, those reasonings which hehas formed upon them fall to the ground. 

We are obliged, sir, by this treaty, to supply the house of Austria withtwelve thousand men, and the Dutch, who were engaged in it by ourexample, have promised a supply of five thousand. This force, joined tothose armies which the large dominions of that family enable them toraise, were conceived sufficient to repel any enemy by whom their rightsshould be invaded. 

But because in affairs of such importance nothing is to be left tohazard, because the preservation of the equipoise of power, on which theliberties of almost all mankind, who can call themselves free, must beacknowledged to depend, ought to be rather certain, than barelyprobable; it is stipulated farther, both by the French and ourselves, that if the supplies, specified in the first article, shall appearinsufficient, we shall unite our whole force in the defence of our ally, and struggle, once more, for independence, with ardour proportioned tothe importance of our cause. 

By these stipulations, sir, no engagements have been formed that can beimagined to have been prohibited by the act of settlement, by which itis provided, that the house of Hanover shall not plunge this nation intoa war, for the sake of their foreign dominions, without the consent ofthe senate; for this war is by no means entered upon for the particularsecurity of Hanover, but for the general advantage of Europe, to repressthe ambition of the French, and to preserve ourselves and our posterityfrom the most abject dependence upon a nation exasperated against us bylong opposition, and hereditary hatred. 

Nor is the act of settlement only preserved unviolated by the reasons ofthe present alliance, but by the regular concurrence of the senate whichhis majesty has desired, notwithstanding his indubitable right of makingpeace and war by his own authority. I cannot, therefore, imagine uponwhat pretence it can be urged, that the law, which requires that no warshall be made on account of the Hanoverian dominions without the consentof the senate, is violated, when it is evident that the war is made uponother motives, and the concurrence of the senate is solemnly desired. 

But such is the malevolence with which the conduct of the administrationis examined, that no degree of integrity or vigilance can secure it fromcensure. When, in the present question, truth and reason are evidentlyon their side, past transactions are recalled to memory, and thosemeasures are treated with the utmost degree of contempt and ridicule, ofwhich the greatest part of the audience have probably forgotten thereasons, and of which the authors of them do not always stand up in thedefence, because they are weary of repeating arguments to those wholisten with a resolution never to be convinced. 

How well, sir, those by whom the ministry is opposed, have succeeded inhardening their minds against the force of reason, is evident from theirconstant custom of appealing from the senate to the people, andpublishing, in pamphlets, those arguments which they have foundthemselves, in this assembly, unable to support; a practice whichdiscovers rather an obstinate resolution to obstruct the government, than zeal for the prosperity of their country, and which, to speak of itin the softest terms, seems to be suggested more by the desire ofpopularity than the love of truth. 

Mr. SANDYS spoke to the effect following:--Sir, notwithstanding theconfidence with which this motion has been offered and defended, notwithstanding the specious appearance of respect to his majesty, bywhich it is recommended, I am not ashamed to declare, that it appears tome inconsistent with the trust reposed in us by our constituents, whoowe their allegiance to the king of Britain, and not to the elector ofHanover. 

It will be urged, sir, by the people, whom we sit here to represent, that they are already embarrassed with debts, contracted in a late war, from which, after the expense of many millions, and the destruction ofprodigious multitudes, they receive no advantage; and that they are nowloaded with taxes for the support of another, of which they perceive noprospect of a very happy or honourable conclusion, of either security orprofit, either conquests or reprisals; and that they are, therefore, byno means willing to see themselves involved in any new confederacy, bywhich they may entail on their posterity the same calamities, and obligethemselves to hazard their fortunes and their happiness in defence ofdistant countries, of which many of them have scarcely heard, and fromwhich no return of assistance is expected. 

Mr. WALPOLE spoke again, to this purpose:--Sir, though it is notnecessary to refute every calumny that malice may invent, or credulityadmit, or to answer those of whom it may reasonably be conceived thatthey do not credit their own accusations, I will yet rise, once more, invindication of the treaty of Hanover, to show with how little reason itis censured, to repress the levity of insult, and the pride ofunreasonable triumph. 

The treaty of Hanover, sir, how long soever it has been ridiculed, andwith whatever contempt those by whom it was negotiated have beentreated, was wise and just. It was just, because no injury was intendedto any power, no invasion was planned, no partition of dominionsstipulated, nothing but our own security desired. It was wise, becauseit produced the end proposed by it, and established that security whichthe Austrians and Spaniards were endeavouring to destroy. 

The emperour of Germany, sir, had then entered into a secret treaty ofalliance with Spain, by which nothing less was designed than the totaldestruction of our liberties, the diminution of our commerce, thealienation of our dominions, and the subversion of our constitution. Wewere to have been expelled from Gibraltar, and totally excluded from theMediterranean, the pretender was to have been exalted to the throne, anda new religion, with the slavery that always accompanies it, to havebeen introduced amongst us, and Ostend was to have been made a port, andto have shared the poor remains of our commerce to foreign nations. 

This unjust, this malicious confederacy, was then opposed with theutmost vehemence by the imperial general, whose courage and militarycapacity are celebrated throughout the world, and whose politicalabilities and knowledge of the affairs of Europe, were equal to hisknowledge of war. He urged, with great force, that such a confederacywould disunite the empire for ever from the maritime powers, by which ithad been supported, and which were engaged by one common interest in thepromotion of its prosperity: but his remonstrances availed nothing, andthe alliance was concluded. 

When our ancient allies, who had been so often succoured with ourtreasure, and defended by our arms, had entered into such engagements;when it was stipulated not only to impoverish but enslave us; not onlyto weaken us abroad, but to deprive us of every domestick comfort; whena scheme was formed that would have spread misery over the whole nation, and have extended its consequences to the lowest orders of thecommunity, it was surely necessary to frustrate it by some alliance, andwith whom could we then unite, but with France?

This is not the only fact on which gentlemen have ventured to speak withgreat freedom without sufficient information; the conduct of our alliesin the late war has been no less misrepresented than that of ourministers in their negotiations. They have been charged with imposingupon us the whole expense of the confederacy, when it may be proved, beyond controversy, that the annual charge of the Dutch was fivemillions. 

Nor did they, sir, only contribute annually thus largely to the commoncause, but when we forsook the alliance, and shamefully abandoned theadvantages we had gained, they received our mercenaries into their ownpay, and expended nine millions in a single year. 

Of the truth of these assertions it is easy to produce incontestableevidence, which, however, cannot be necessary to any man who reflects, that from one of the most wealthy nations in the world, the Dutch, withall their commerce, and all their parsimony, are reduced to penury anddistress; for who can tell by what means they have sunk into theirpresent low condition, if they suffered nothing by the late war?

How this gentleman, sir, has been deceived, and to whose insinuationshis errours are to be imputed, I am at no loss to discover. I hope hewill, by this confutation, be warned against implicit credulity, andremember with what caution that man is to be trusted, whose perniciouscounsels have endangered his country. 

Mr. VYNER spoke thus:--Sir, it is, in my opinion, an incontestablemaxim, that no measures are eligible, which are unjust; and that, therefore, before any resolutions are formed, we ought to examine notwhat motives may be suggested by expedience, but what arguments may beadvanced by equity on one part or the other. 

If I do not mistake the true intent of the address now proposed, we areinvited to declare that we will oppose the king of Prussia in hisattempts upon Silesia, a declaration in which I know not how any man canconcur, who knows not the nature of his claim, and the laws of theempire. It ought, therefore, sir, to have been the first endeavour ofthose by whom this address has been so zealously promoted, to show thathis claim, so publickly explained, so firmly urged, and so stronglysupported, is without foundation in justice or in reason, and is onlyone of those imaginary titles, which ambition may always find to thedominions of another. 

But no attempt has been yet made towards the discussion of thisimportant question, and, therefore, I know not how any man can call uponus to oppose the king of Prussia, when his claim may probably be just, and, by consequence, such as, if it were necessary for us to engage inthe affairs of those distant countries, we ought to join with him inasserting. 

Lord GAGE spoke next, in substance as follows:--Sir, as no member ofthis assembly can feel a greater degree of zeal for his majesty's honourthan myself; none shall more readily concur in any expression of duty oradherence to him. 

But I have been always taught that allegiance to my prince is consistentwith fidelity to my country, that the interest of the king and thepeople of great Britain is the same; and that he only is a true subjectof the crown, who is a steady promoter of the happiness of the nation:

For this reason I think it necessary to declare, that Hanover is alwaysto be considered as a sovereignty separate from that of Britain, and asa country with laws and interests distinct from ours; and that it is theduty of the representatives of this nation, to take care that interestsso different may never be confounded, and that Britain may incur noexpense of which Hanover alone can enjoy the advantage. 

If the elector of Hanover should be engaged in war with any of theneighbouring sovereigns, who should be enabled, by a victory, to enterinto the country, and carry the terrours of war through all histerritories, it would by no means be necessary for this nation tointerpose; for the elector of Hanover might lose his dominions withoutany disadvantage or dishonour to the king or people of Britain. 

HOUSE OF COMMONS, APRIL 16, 1741. 

DEBATE ON A MOTION FOR SUPPORTING THE QUEEN OF HUNGARY. 

His majesty went this day to the house of lords, and after his assent toseveral bills, he, in a speech from the throne to both houses of thesenate, acquainted them, that the war raised against the queen ofHungary, and the various claims on the late German emperour'ssuccession, might expose the dominions of such princes as should inclineto support the Pragmatick sanction to imminent danger. That the queen ofHungary required the twelve thousand men stipulated by treaty, andthereupon he had demanded of the king of Denmark, and of the king ofSweden, as sovereign of Hesse Cassel, their respective bodies of troops, of six thousand men each, to be in readiness to march to her assistance. That he was concerting such farther measures as may disappoint alldangerous designs forming to the prejudice of the house of Austria, which might make it necessary for him to enter into still largerexpenses for maintaining the Pragmatick sanction. He, therefore, in aconjuncture so critical, desired the concurrence of his senate, inenabling him to contribute, in the most effectual manner, to the supportof the queen of Hungary, the preventing, by all reasonable means, thesubversion of the house of Austria, and to the maintaining the libertiesand balance of power in Europe. 

The house of commons, in their address upon this occasion, expressed adutiful sense of his majesty's just regard for the rights of the queenof Hungary, and for the maintaining the Pragmatick sanction; theydeclared their concurrence in the prudent measures which his majesty waspursuing for the preservation of the liberties and balance of power inEurope; they assured his majesty, that, in justice to, and vindicationof the honour and dignity of the British crown, they would effectuallystand by and support his majesty against all insults and attacks, whichany power, in resentment of the just measures which he had so wiselytaken, should make upon any of his majesty's dominions, though notbelonging to the crown of Great Britain. They farther assured hismajesty, that in any future events which might make it necessary for himto enter into still larger expenses, they would enable him tocontribute, in the most effectual manner, to the support of the designshe proposed. 

His majesty, in his answer to this address, observed their readiness inenabling him to make good his engagements with the queen of Hungary, andthe assurances given him not to suffer his foreign dominions to beinsulted on account of the measures he was pursuing for the support ofthe Pragmatick sanction, etc. 

In consequence of this procedure, the house, pursuant to order, resolveditself into a committee, to consider of the supplies granted to hismajesty. 

Upon this occasion, a motion was made by sir Robert WALPOLE for a grantof three hundred thousand pounds, for the support of the queen ofHungary, on which arose the following debate:

Sir Robert WALPOLE supported his motion by a speech, in substance asfollows:--Sir, the necessity of this grant appears so plainly from thebare mention of the purposes for which it is asked, that I can scarcelyconceive that its reasonableness will be disputed. I can discover noprinciples upon which an objection to this motion can be founded, northe least arguments by which such objection can be supported. 

The indispensable obligations of publick faith, the great ties by whichnations are united, and confederacies formed, I cannot suppose any maninclined to invalidate. An exact performance of national promises, andinviolable adherence to treaties, is enforced at once by policy andjustice, and all laws both of heaven and earth. 

Publick perfidy, sir, like private dishonesty, whatever temporaryadvantages it may promise or produce, is always, upon the whole, theparent of misery. Every man, however prosperous, must sometimes wish fora friend; and every nation, however potent, stand in need of an ally;but all alliances subsist upon mutual confidence, and confidence can beproduced only by unlimited integrity, by known firmness, and approvedveracity. 

The use of alliances, sir, has, in the last age, been too muchexperienced to be contested; it is by leagues well concerted, andstrictly observed, that the weak are defended against the strong, thatbounds are set to the turbulence of ambition, that the torrent of poweris restrained, and empires preserved from those inundations of war, that, in former times, laid the world in ruins. By alliances, sir, theequipoise of power is maintained, and those alarms and apprehensionsavoided, which must arise from daily vicissitudes of empire, and thefluctuations of perpetual contest. 

That it is the interest of this nation to cultivate the friendship ofthe house of Austria, to protect its rights, and secure its succession, to inform it when mistaken, and to assist it when attacked, is allowedby every party. Every man, sir, knows that the only power that cansensibly injure us, by obstructing our commerce, or invading ourdominions, is France, against which no confederacy can be formed, exceptwith the house of Austria, that can afford us any efficacious support. 

The firmest bond of alliances is mutual interest. Men easily uniteagainst him whom they have all equal reason to fear and to hate; by whomthey have been equally injured, and by whom they suspect that noopportunity will be lost of renewing his encroachments. Such is thestate of this nation, and of the Austrians. We are equally endangered bythe French greatness, and equally animated against it by hereditaryanimosities, and contests continued from one age to another; we areconvinced that, however either may be flattered or caressed, while theother is invaded, every blow is aimed at both, and that we are dividedonly that we may be more easily destroyed. 

For this reason we engaged in the support of the Pragmatick sanction, and stipulated to secure the imperial crown to the daughters of Austria;which was nothing more than to promise, that we would endeavour toprevent our own destruction, by opposing the exaltation of a prince whoshould owe his dignity to the French, and, in consequence of so close analliance, second all their schemes, admit all their claims, andsacrifice to their ambition the happiness of a great part of mankind. 

Such would probably be the consequence, if the French should gain thepower of conferring the imperial crown. They would hold the emperour inperpetual dependence, would, perhaps, take possession of his hereditarydominions, as a mortgage for their expenses; would awe him with thetroops which they sent under a pretence of assisting him, and leave himonly the titles of dominion, and the shadows of empire. 

In this state would he remain, whilst his formidable allies wereextending their dominions on every side. He would see one power subduedafter another, and himself weakened by degrees, and only not deprived ofhis throne, because it would be unnecessary to dethrone him; or he wouldbe obliged to solicit our assistance to break from his slavery, and weshould be obliged, at the utmost hazard, and at an expense not to becalculated, to remedy what it is, perhaps, now in our power to preventwith very little difficulty. 

That this danger is too near to be merely chimerical, that the queen ofHungary is invaded, and her right to the imperial dignity contested, iswell known; it is, therefore, the time for fulfilling our engagements;engagements of the utmost importance to ourselves and our posterity; andI hope the government will not be accused of profusion, if, for threehundred thousand pounds, the liberties of Europe shall be preserved. 

We cannot deny this grant without acting in opposition to our lateprofessions of supporting his majesty in his endeavours to maintain thePragmatick sanction, and of assisting him to defend his foreigndominions from any injuries to which those endeavours should exposethem; for how can he without forces defend his dominions, or assist hisally? or how can he maintain forces without supplies?

Mr. SHIPPEN next rose, and spoke thus:--Sir, as I have alwaysendeavoured to act upon conviction of my duty, to examine opinionsbefore I admit them, and to speak what I have thought the truth, I donot easily change my conduct, or retract my assertions; nor am Ideterred from repeating my arguments when I have a right to speak, bythe remembrance that they have formerly been unsuccessful. 

Every man, when he is confident himself, conceives himself able topersuade others, and imagines that their obstinacy proceeds from othermotives than reason; and that, if he fails at one time to gain over hisaudience, he may yet succeed in some happier moment, when theirprejudices shall be dissipated, or their interest varied. 

For this reason, though it cannot be suspected that I have forgotten theresentment which I have formerly drawn upon myself, by an opendeclaration of my sentiments with regard to Hanover, I stand up again, with equal confidence, to make my protestations against anyinterposition in the affairs of that country, and to avow my dislike ofthe promise lately made to defend it: a promise, inconsistent, in myopinion, with that important and inviolable law, the _act ofsettlement!_--a promise, which, if it could have been foreknown, would, perhaps, have for ever precluded from the succession that illustriousfamily, to which we owe such numberless blessings, such continuedfelicity!

Far be it from me to insinuate that we can be too grateful to hismajesty, or too zealous in our adherence to him; only let us remember, that true gratitude consists in real benefits, in promoting the trueinterest of him to whom we are indebted; and surely, by hazarding thewelfare of Britain in defence of Hanover, we shall very little consultthe advantage, or promote the greatness of our sovereign. 

It is well known how inconsiderable, in the sight of those by whom thesuccession was established, Hanover appeared, in comparison withBritain. Those men, to whom even their enemies have seldom denied praisefor knowledge and capacity, and who have been so loudly celebrated bymany, who have joined in the last address, for their honest zeal, andthe love of their country, enacted, that the king of Britain shouldnever visit those important territories, which we have so solemnlypromised to defend, at the hazard of our happiness. It was evidentlytheir design that our sovereign, engrossed by the care of his newsubjects, a care which, as they reasonably imagined, would arise fromgratitude for dignity and power so liberally conferred, should in timeforget that corner of the earth on which his ancestors had resided, andact, not as elector of Hanover, but as king of Britain, as the governourof a mighty nation, and the lord of large dominions. 

It was expressly determined, that, this nation should never be involvedin war for the defence of the dominions on the continent, and, doubtless, the same policy that has restrained us from extending ourconquests in countries from which some advantages might be received, ought to forbid all expensive and hazardous measures, for the sake ofterritories from whence no benefit can be reaped. 

Nor are the purposes, sir, for which this supply is demanded, the onlyobjections that may be urged against it, for the manner in which it isasked, makes it necessary at least to delay it. The ministers have beenso little accustomed to refusals that they have forgot when to ask withdecency, and expect the treasure of the nation to be poured upon them, whenever they shall think it proper to hint that they have discoveredsome new opportunity of expense. 

It is necessary, that when a supply is desired, the house should beinformed, some time before, of the sum that is required, and of the endsto which it is to be applied, that every member may consider, atleisure, the expediency of the measures proposed, and the proportion ofthe sum to the occasion on which it is demanded; that he may examinewhat are the most proper methods of raising it, and, perhaps, inquirewith what willingness his constituents will advance it. 

Whether any man is enabled by his acuteness and experience, to determineall these questions upon momentaneous reflection, I cannot decide. Formy part, I confess myself one of those on whom nature has bestowed nosuch faculties, and therefore move that the consideration of this supplymay be deferred for a few days; for if it be now pressed upon us, Ishall vote against it, because I do not yet fully discover all thereasons for it, nor all the consequences which it may produce, and Ithink myself obliged to know for what purpose I give away the moneywhich is not my own. 

Mr. VYNER spoke as follows:--Sir, whatever may be the necessity ofmaintaining the Pragmatick sanction, or whatever the obligations ofnational pacts, of which I hope no man is desirous of countenancing theneglect, yet they cannot oblige us to arm without an enemy, to embarrassourselves with watching every possibility of danger, to garrisondominions which are not threatened, or assert rights which are notinvaded. 

The expediency of maintaining the house of Austria on the imperialthrone, it is not at present necessary to assert, because it does notappear that any other family is aspiring to it. There may, indeed, bewhispers of secret designs and artful machinations, whispers, perhaps, spread only to affright the court into treaties, or the senate intogrants; or designs, which, like a thousand others that every dayproduces, innumerable accidents may defeat; which may be discovered, notonly before they are executed, but before they are fully formed, andwhich, therefore, are not worthy to engross much of our attention, or toexhaust the wealth of the people. 

The Pragmatick sanction is nothing more than a settlement of theimperial dignity upon the eldest daughter of the late German emperourand her son; and if she has no son, upon the son of the second daughter;nor has the crown of Britain, by engaging to support that sanction, promised any thing more than to preserve this order of succession, whichno power, at present, is endeavouring to interrupt; and which, therefore, at present, requires no defence. 

The dispute, sir, between the king of Prussia and the queen of Hungary, is of a different kind; nor is it our duty to engage in it, either asparties or judges. He lays claim to certain territories usurped, as healleges, from his ancestors by the Austrian family, and asserts, byforce, this claim, which is equally valid, whether the queen be emperessor not. We have no right to limit his dominions, or obligation toexamine the justice of his demands. If he is only endeavouring to gainwhat has been forcibly withheld from him, what right have we to obstructhis undertaking? And if the queen can show a better title, she is, likeall other sovereigns, at liberty to maintain it; nor are we necessarilyto erect ourselves into judges between sovereigns, or distributors ofdominions. 

The contest seems to have very little relation to the Pragmaticksanction: if the king of Prussia succeeds, he will contribute to supportit; and if the queen is able to frustrate his designs, she will be toopowerful to need our assistance. 

But though, sir, the Pragmatick sanction were in danger of violation, are we to stand up alone in defence of it, while other nations, equallyengaged with ourselves by interest and by treaties, sit still to lookupon the contest, and gather those advantages of peace which weindiscreetly throw away? Are we able to maintain it without assistance, or are we to exhaust our country, and ruin our posterity in prosecutionof a hopeless project, to spend what can never be repaid, and to fightwith certainty of a defeat?

The Dutch, whose engagements and whose interests are the same as ourown, have not yet made any addition to their expenses, nor augmentationof their troops; nor does a single potentate of Europe, however unitedby long alliances to the house of Austria, or however endangered byrevolutions in the empire, appear to rouse at the approach of alarm, orthink himself obliged to provoke enemies by whom he is not yet injured. 

I cannot, therefore, persuade myself that we are to stand up single inthe defence of the Pragmatick sanction, to fight the quarrel of others, or live in perpetual war, that our neighbours may be at peace. 

I shall always think it my duty to disburse the publick money with theutmost parsimony, nor ever intend, but on the most pressing necessity, to load with new exactions a nation already overwhelmed with debts, harassed with taxes, and plundered by a standing army. 

For what purpose these numerous forces are maintained, who are nowpreying on the publick; why we increase our armies by land when we onlyfight by sea; why we aggravate the burden of the war, and add domestickoppressions to foreign injuries, I am at a loss to determine. Surelysome regard should be had to the satisfaction of the people, who oughtnot, during the present scarcity of provisions, to be starved by theincrease of an army, which seems supported only to consume them. 

As, therefore, part of our present expense is, in my opinion, unnecessary, I shall not contribute to aggravate it by a new grant, forpurposes of which I cannot discover that they will promote the advantageof the publick. 

Sir Robert WALPOLE replied to the following effect:--Sir, the Pragmaticksanction, which we are engaged to support, is not confined to thepreservation of the order of succession, but extends to all the rightsof the house of Austria, which is now attacked, and by a very formidableenemy, at a time of weakness and distraction, and therefore requires ourassistance. 

That others, equally obliged by treaty and by interest to lend theirhelp on this occasion, sit reluctive, either through cowardice ornegligence, or some prospect of temporary advantage, may, perhaps, betrue; but is it any excuse of a crime, that he who commits it is not theonly criminal? Will the breach of faith in others excuse it in us?Ought we not rather to animate them by our activity, instruct them byour example, and awaken them by our representations?

Perhaps the other powers say to themselves, and to one another, Whyshould we keep that treaty which Britain is violating? Why should weexpose ourselves to danger, of which that mighty nation, so celebratedfor courage, is afraid? Why should we rush into war, in which our mostpowerful ally seems unwilling to support us?

Thus the same argument, an argument evidently false, and made speciousonly by interest, may be used by all, till some one, more bold andhonest than the rest, shall dare to rise in vindication of those rightswhich all have promised to maintain; and why should not the greatestnation be the first that shall avow her solemn engagements? Why shouldnot they be most diligent in the prosecution of an affair who have mostto lose by its miscarriage?

I am always willing to believe, that no member of this assembly makesuse, in any solemn debate, of arguments which do not appear rational tohimself, and yet it is difficult to conceive that any man can imaginehimself released from a promise, because the same promise is broken byanother, or that he is at liberty to desert his friend in distress, because others desert him, whose good offices he has equal reason toexpect, and that the more his assistance is needed, the more right hehas to deny it. 

Surely such arguments as these deserve not, need not a confutation. Before we regulate our conduct by that of others, we must either provethat they have done right, which proof will be a sufficient defencewithout the precedent, or own that they are more capable of judging thanwe, and that, therefore, we pay an implicit submission to their dictatesand example; a sacrifice which we shall not willingly make to the vanityof our neighbours. 

In the present case it is evident that if other nations neglect theperformance of their contracts, they are guilty of the breach of publickfaith; of a crime, that, if it should generally be imitated, woulddissolve society, and throw human nature into confusion, that wouldchange the most happy region into deserts, in which one savage would bepreying on another. 

Nor are they only propagating an example, which in some distant timesmay be pleaded against themselves, but they are exposing themselves tomore immediate dangers; they are forwarding designs that have notendency but to their ruin, they are adding strength to their inveterateenemies, and beckoning invasion to their own frontiers. 

Let us, therefore, instead of hardening ourselves in perfidy, or lullingourselves in security by their example, exert all our influence to unitethem, and all our power to assist them. Let us show them what they oughtto determine by our resolutions, and teach them to act by our vigour;that, if the house of Austria be preserved, our alliance may bestrengthened by new motives of gratitude; and that, if it must be thatthe liberties of this part of the world be lost, we may not reproachourselves with having neglected to defend them. 

Mr. PELHAM spoke next to this purpose:--Sir, it is not to be supposedthat such members of this assembly as are not engaged in publickaffairs, should receive very exact intelligence of the dispositions offoreign powers, and, therefore, I do not wonder that the conduct of theDutch has been misrepresented, and that they are suspected of neglectingtheir engagements at a time when they are endeavouring to perform them. 

The Dutch have now under consideration the most proper methods ofassisting the queen of Hungary, and maintaining the Pragmatick sanction;it may be, indeed, justly suspected, from the nature of theirconstitution, that their motions will be slow, but it cannot beasserted, that they break their engagements, or desert theirconfederates. 

Nor is there any reason for imagining that the other princes, who haveincurred the same obligations, will not endeavour to perform theirpromises; it may be easily conceived that some of them are not able at asudden summons to afford great assistance, and that others may wait theresult of our deliberations, and regulate their conduct by our example. 

Not that we ought to neglect our engagements, or endanger our country, because other powers are either perfidious, or insensible; for I am notafraid to declare, that if that should happen, which there is no reasonto suspect, if all the other powers should desert the defence of theAustrian line, should consent to annul the Pragmatick sanction, andleave the queen of Hungary to the mercy of her enemies, I would advisethat Britain alone should pour her armies into the continent, that sheshould defend her ally against the most formidable confederacy, and showmankind an example of constancy not to be shaken, and of faith not to beviolated. 

If it be, therefore, our duty to support the Pragmatick sanction, it isnow the time for declaring our resolutions, when the imperial crown isclaimed by a multitude of competitors, among whom the elector ofBavaria, a very powerful prince, has, by his minister, notified hispretensions to the court of Britain. 

The ancient alliance between this prince and the French is well known, nor can we doubt that he will now implore their assistance for theattainment of the throne to which he aspires; and I need not say whatmay be expected from an emperour, whose elevation was procured by theforces of France. 

Nor is this the only prince that claims the imperial crown uponplausible pretences, or whose claims other powers may combine tosupport; it is well known, that even the Spanish monarch believeshimself entitled to it, nor can we, who have no communication with him, know whether he has not declared to all the other princes of Europe, hisresolution to assert his claim. 

It is far from being impossible that the pretensions of the house ofBourbon may be revived, and that though no single prince of that familyshould attempt to mount the imperial throne, they may all conspire todismember the empire into petty kingdoms, and free themselves from thedread of a formidable neighbour, by erecting a number of diminutivesovereigns, who may be always courting the assistance of theirprotectors, for the sake of harassing each other. 

Thus will the house by which Europe has been hitherto protected, sinkinto an empty name, and we shall be left to stand alone against all thepowers that profess a different religion, and whose interest is oppositeto that of Britain. 

We ought, indeed, to act with the utmost vigour, when we see one of themost powerful of the reformed princes so far forgetful of the interestof our religion, as to cooperate with the designs of France, and sointent upon improving the opportunity of distressing the house ofAustria, as to neglect the common cause, and expose himself or hisposterity to the danger of becoming a dependant on the house of Bourbon. 

For this reason, I cannot agree that our army, though numerous andburdensome, is greater than the necessity of affairs requires: if wecast our eyes on the continent, nothing is to be seen but generalconfusion, powerful armies in motion, the dominions of one princeinvaded, of another threatened; the tumults of ambition in one place, and a panick stillness in another. 

What will be the event of these commotions who can discover? And how canwe know what may determine the course of that flood of power, which isnow in a state of uncertain fluctuation, or seems driven to differentpoints by different impulses? How soon may the Dutch see their barrierattacked, and call upon us for the ten thousand men which we are obligedto send them? How soon may the house of Austria be so distressed, as torequire all our power for its preservation?

That we are to leave nothing unattempted for the security of our ownreligion and liberty, will easily be granted, and, therefore, unless itcan be proved that we may be equally secure, though the house of Austriabe ruined, it will necessarily follow that we are, with all our power, to enforce the observation of the Pragmatick sanction. 

This is not an act of romantick generosity, but such as the closestattention to our own interest shows to be necessary; in defending thequeen of Hungary we defend ourselves, and only extinguish that flame, bywhich, if it be suffered to spread, we shall ourselves be consumed. Theempire may be considered as the bulwark of Britain, which, if it bethrown down, leaves us naked and defenceless. 

Let us, therefore, consider our own danger, and remember, that while weare considering this supply, we are deliberating upon nothing less thanthe fate of our country. 

Mr. PULTENEY spoke next, to the effect following:--Sir, I am on thisoccasion of an opinion different from that of the honourable member whospoke the second in this debate, though on most questions our judgmenthas been the same. I am so far from seconding his proposal for delayingthe consideration of this supply, that I think it may justly beinquired, why it was not sooner proposed. 

For the support of the house of Austria, and the assertion of thePragmatick sanction, no man can be more zealous than myself; I amconvinced how closely the interest of this nation and that of theAustrian family are united, and how much either must be endangered bythe ruin of the other, and, therefore, I shall not delay, for a singlemoment, my consent to any measures that may reestablish our interest onthe continent, and rescue Germany once more from the jaws of France. 

I am afraid that we have lost part of our influence in the neighbouringcountries, and that the name of Britain is less formidable thanheretofore; but if reputation is lost, it is time to recover it, and Idoubt not but it may be recovered by the same means that it was at firstobtained. Our armies may be yet equally destructive, and our moneyequally persuasive. 

We have not yet suffered, amidst all our misconduct, our naval force tobe diminished; our sailors yet retain their ancient courage, and ourfleets are sufficient to keep the dominion of the ocean, and prescribelimits to the commerce of every nation. While this power remainsunimpaired, while Britain retains her natural superiority, and assertsthe honour of her flag in every climate, we cannot become despicable, nor can any nation ridicule our menaces or scorn our alliance. We maystill extend our influence to the inland countries, and awe thosenations which we cannot invade. 

To preserve this power let us watch over the disposal of our money;money is the source of dominion; those nations may be formidable fortheir affluence which are not considerable for their numbers; and by anegligent profusion of their wealth, the most powerful people maylanguish into imbecility, and sink into contempt. 

If the grant which is now demanded will be sufficient to produce theends to which it is proposed to be applied, if we are assured of theproper application of it, I shall agree to it without hesitation. Butthough it cannot be affirmed that the sum now demanded is too high aprice for the liberties of Europe, it is at least more than ought to besquandered without effect, and we ought at least to know before we grantit, what advantages may be expected from it. 

May not the sum demanded for the support of the queen of Hungary beemployed to promote very different interests? May it not be lavished tosupport that power, to which our grants have too long contributed? thatpower by which ourselves have been awed, and the administration hastyrannised without control?

If this sum is really intended to support the queen of Hungary, may wenot inquire how it is to be employed for her service? Is it to be senther for the payment of her armies, and the support of her court? Shouldwe not more effectually secure her dominions by purchasing with it thefriendship and assistance of the king of Prussia, a prince, whose extentof dominions and numerous forces, make him not more formidable than hispersonal qualities. 

What may be hoped, sir, from a prince of wisdom and courage, at the headof a hundred and ten thousand regular troops, with eight millions in histreasury? How much he must necessarily add to the strength of any partyin which he shall engage, is unnecessary to mention; it is evident, without proof, that nothing could so much contribute to thereestablishment of the house of Austria, as a reconciliation with thismighty prince, and that, to bring it to pass, would be the mosteffectual method of serving the unfortunate queen that requires ourassistance. 

Why we should despair, sir, of such a reconciliation I cannot perceive;a reconciliation equally conducive to the real interest of both parties. It may be proved, with very little difficulty, to the king of Prussia, that he is now assisting those with whom interests incompatible andreligions irreconcilable have set him at variance, whom he can never seeprosperous but by the diminution of his own greatness, and who willalways project his ruin while they are enjoying the advantages of hisvictories. We may easily convince him that their power will soon become, by his assistance, such as he cannot hope to withstand, and show, fromthe examples of other princes, how dangerous it is to add to thestrength of an ambitious neighbour. We may show him how much the fate ofthe empire is now in his hands, and how much more glorious and moreadvantageous it will be to preserve it from ruin, than to contribute toits destruction. 

If by such arguments, sir, this potent monarch can be induced to actsteadily in defence of the common cause, we may once more stand at thehead of a protestant confederacy; of a confederacy that may contract theviews and repress the ambition of the house of Bourbon, and alter theirschemes of universal monarchy into expedients for the defence of theirdominions. 

But in transacting these affairs, let us not engage in any intricatetreaties, nor amuse ourselves with displaying our abilities fornegotiation; negotiation, that fatal art which we have learned as yetvery imperfectly, and which we have never attempted to practise but toour own loss. While we have been entangled in tedious disquisitions, andretarded by artful delays, while our commissaries have been debatingabout what was only denied to produce controversies, and inquiring afterthat which has been hid from them only to divert their attention fromother questions, how many opportunities have been lost, and how oftenmight we have secured by war, what was, at a much greater expense, lostby treaties. 

Treaties, sir, are the artillery of our enemies, to which we havenothing to oppose; they are weapons of which we know not the use, andwhich we can only escape by not coming within their reach. I know not bywhat fatality it is, that to treat and to be cheated, are, with regardto Britons, words of the same signification; nor do I intend, by thisobservation, to asperse the characters of particular persons, fortreaties, by whomsoever carried on, have ended always with the samesuccess. 

It is time, therefore, to know, at length, our weakness and ourstrength, and to resolve no longer to put ourselves voluntarily into thepower of our enemies: our troops have been always our ablestnegotiators, and to them it has been, for the most part, necessary atlast to refer our cause. 

Let us, then, always preserve our martial character, and neglect thepraise of political cunning; a quality which, I believe, we shall neverattain, and which, if we could obtain, would add nothing to our honour. Let it be the practice of the Britons to declare their resolutionswithout reserve, and adhere to them in opposition to danger; let them beambitious of no other elogies than those which may be gained by honestyand courage, nor will they then ever find their allies diffident, ortheir enemies contemptuous. 

By recovering and asserting this character, we may become once more thearbiters of Europe, and be courted by all the protestant powers as theirprotectors: we may once more subdue the ambition of the aspiring French, and once more deliver the house of Austria from the incessant pursuit ofthose restless enemies. 

The defence of that illustrious family, sir, has always appeared to me, since I studied the state of Europe, the unvariable interest of theBritish nation, and our obligations to support it on this particularoccasion have already been sufficiently explained. 

Whence it proceeded, sir, that those who now so zealously espouse theAustrian interest, have been so plainly forgetful of it on otheroccasions, I cannot determine. That treaties have been made very littleto the advantage of that family, and that its enemies have been sufferedto insult it without opposition, is well known; nor was it long ago thatit was debated in this house, whether any money should be lent to thelate emperour. 

No publick or private character can be supported, no enemy, sir, can beintimidated, nor any friend confirmed in his adherence, but by a steadyand consistent conduct, by proposing, in all our actions, such ends asmay be openly avowed, and by pursuing them without regard to temporaryinconveniencies, or petty obstacles. 

Such conduct, sir, I would gladly recommend on the present occasion, onwhich I should be far from advising a faint, an irresolute, or momentaryassistance, such supplies as declare diffidence in our own strength, ora mean inclination to please contrary parties at the same time, toperform our engagements with the queen, and continue our friendship withFrance. It is, in my opinion, proper to espouse our ally with the spiritof a nation that expects her decisions to be ratified, that holds thebalance of the world in her hand, and can bestow conquest and empire ather pleasure. 

Yet, sir, it cannot be denied that many powerful reasons may be broughtagainst any new occasions of expense, nor is it without horrour andastonishment that any man, conversant in political calculations, canconsider the enormous profusion of the national treasure. In the latedreadful confusion of the world, when the ambition of France had sethalf the nations of the earth on flame, when we sent our armies to thecontinent, and fought the general quarrel of mankind, we paid, duringthe reigns of king William and his great successour, reigns of whichevery summer was distinguished by some important action, but fourmillions yearly. 

But our preparations for the present war, in which scarcely a singleship of war has been taken, or a single fortress laid in ruins, havebrought upon the nation an expense of five millions. So much more are wenow obliged to pay to amuse the weakest, than formerly to subdue themost powerful of our enemies. 

Frugality, which is always prudent, is, at this time, sir, indispensable, when war, dreadful as it is, may be termed the lightestof our calamities; when the seasons have disappointed us of bread, andan universal scarcity afflicts the nation. Every day brings us accountsfrom different parts of the country, and every account is a new evidenceof the general calamity, of the want of employment for the poor, and itsnecessary consequence, the want of food. 

He that is scarce able to preserve himself, cannot be expected to assistothers; nor is that money to be granted to foreign powers, which iswanted for the support of our fellow-subjects, who are now languishingwith diseases, which unaccustomed hardships and unwholesome provisionshave brought upon them, while we are providing against distant dangers, and bewailing the distresses of the house of Austria. 

Let us not add to the miseries of famine the mortifications of insultand neglect; let our countrymen, at least, divide our care with ourallies, and while we form schemes for succouring the queen of Hungary, let us endeavour to alleviate nearer distresses, and prevent or pacifydomestick discontents. 

If there be any man whom the sight of misery cannot move to compassion, who can hear the complaints of want without sympathy, and see thegeneral calamity of his country without employing one hour on schemesfor its relief; let not that man dare to boast of integrity, fidelity, or honour; let him not presume to recommend the preservation of ourfaith, or adherence to our confederates: that wretch can have no realregard to any moral obligation, who has forgotten those first dutieswhich nature impresses; nor can he that neglects the happiness of hiscountry, recommend any good action for a good reason. 

It should be considered, sir, that we can only be useful to our allies, and formidable to our enemies, by being unanimous and mutually confidentof the good intentions of each other, and that nothing but a steadyattention to the publick welfare, a constant readiness to removegrievances, and an apparent unwillingness to impose new burdens, canproduce that unanimity. 

As the cause is, therefore, necessarily to precede the effect, asforeign influence is the consequence of happiness at home, let us firstendeavour to establish that alacrity and security that may animate thepeople to assert their ancient superiority to other nations, and restorethat plenty which may raise them above any temptation to repine atassistance given to our allies. 

No man, sir, can very solicitously watch over the welfare of hisneighbour whose mind is depressed by poverty, or distracted by terrour;and when the nation shall see us anxious for the preservation of thequeen of Hungary, and unconcerned about the wants of ourfellow-subjects, what can be imagined, but that we have some method ofexempting ourselves from the common distress, and that we regard not thepublick misery when we do not feel it?

Sir Robert WALPOLE replied, to the following effect:--Sir, it is alwaysproper for every man to lay down some principles upon which he proposesto act, whether in publick or private; that he may not be alwayswavering, uncertain, and irresolute; that his adherents may know whatthey are to expect, and his adversaries be able to tell why they areopposed. 

It is necessary, sir, even for his own sake, that he may not be alwaysstruggling with himself; that he may know his own determinations, andenforce them by the reasons which have prevailed upon him to form them;that he may not argue in the same speech to contrary purposes, and wearythe attention of his hearers with contrasts and antitheses. 

When a man admits the necessity of granting a supply, expatiates uponthe danger that may be produced by retarding it, declares against theleast delay, however speciously proposed, and enforces the argumentswhich have been already offered to show how much it is our duty andinterest to allow it; may it not reasonably be imagined, that he intendsto promote it, and is endeavouring to convince them of that necessity ofwhich he seems himself convinced?

But when the same man proceeds to display, with equal eloquence, thepresent calamities of the nation, and tells to how much better purposesthe sum thus demanded may be applied; when he dwells upon thepossibility that an impolitick use may be made of the national treasure, and hints that it may be asked for one purpose and employed to another, what can be collected from his harangue, however elegant, entertaining, and pathetick? How can his true opinion be discovered? Or how shall wefix such fugitive reasonings, such variable rhetorick?

I am not able, sir, to discern, why truth should be obscured; or why anyman should take pleasure in heaping together all the arguments that hisknowledge may supply, or his imagination suggest, against a propositionwhich he cannot deny. Nor can I assign any good purpose that can bepromoted by perpetual renewals of debate, and by a repetition ofobjections, which have in former conferences, on the same occasion, beenfound of little force. 

When the system of affairs is not fully laid open, and the schemes ofthe administration are in part unknown, it is easy to raise objectionsformidable in appearance, which, perhaps, cannot be answered till thenecessity of secrecy is taken away. When any general calamity has fallenupon a nation, it is a very fruitful topick of rhetorick, and may bevery pathetically exaggerated, upon a thousand occasions to which it hasno necessary relation. 

Such, In my opinion, sir, is the use now made of the present scarcity, amisfortune inflicted upon us by the hand of providence alone; not uponus only, but upon all the nations on this side of the globe, many ofwhich suffer more, but none less than ourselves. 

If at such a time it is more burdensome to the nation to raise supplies, it must be remembered, that it is in proportion difficult to othernations to oppose those measures for which the supplies are granted; andthat the same sum is of greater efficacy in times of scarcity than ofplenty. 

Our present distress will, I hope, soon be at an end; and, perhaps, afew days may produce at least some alteration. It is not without reason, that I expect the news of some successful attempts in America, whichwill convince the nation, that the preparations for war have not beenidle shows, contrived to produce unnecessary expenses. 

In the mean time it is necessary that we support that power which may beable to assist us against France, the only nation from which any dangercan threaten us, even though our fleets in America should beunsuccessful. 

If we defeat the Spaniards, we may assist the house of Austria withoutdifficulty, and if we fail in our attempts, their alliance will be morenecessary. The sum demanded for this important purpose cannot becensured as exorbitant, yet will, I hope, be sufficient: if more shouldhereafter appear necessary, I doubt not but it will be granted. 

The question passed without opposition. 

HOUSE OF COMMONS, DECEMBER 1, 1741. 

[DEBATE ON CHOOSING A SPEAKER. ]

The new house of commons being met, the usher came from the house oflords, with his majesty's commands for their immediate attendance, whenthey were ordered to choose a speaker; and being returned, Mr. PELHAMaddressed himself in the following manner to the clerk of the house:

Mr. HARDINGE, As we are here assembled, in pursuance of the imperial summons, it isnecessary, in obedience to his majesty's commands, and the establishedcustom of this house, that we proceed immediately to the choice of aperson qualified for the chair. --Gentlemen, it is with no common degreeof satisfaction, that I observe this assembly so numerous on the firstday; because whatever is transacted by us, must necessarily beconsidered by the nation with more regard, as it is approved by agreater number of their representatives; and because the present affair, which relates particularly to this house, must be more satisfactorilyconducted, as our number is greater; since every man must willinglyabide by his own choice, and cheerfully submit to that authority, ofwhich he has himself concurred to the establishment. 

The qualifications required in the person who shall fill the chair, tohis own reputation, and the advantage of the house, it is not necessaryminutely to recount; it being obvious to every gentleman who hears me, that he must possess such an equality of temper, as may enable himalways to preserve a steady and impartial attention, neither discomposedby the irregularities into which some gentlemen, unacquainted with theforms of this assembly, may easily fall, nor disconcerted by the heatand turbulence to which, in former parliaments, some of those whoseexperience might have taught them the necessity of decency, have beentoo often hurried by the eagerness of controversy. That he must add tohis perpetual serenity, such a firmness of mind, as may enable him torepress petulance and subdue contumacy, and support the orders of thehouse, in whatever contrariety of counsels, or commotion of debate, against all attempts of infraction or deviation. That to give efficacyto his interpositions, and procure veneration to his decisions, he must, from his general character and personal qualities, derive such dignityand authority, as may naturally dispose the minds of others toobedience, as may suppress the murmurs of envy, and prevent thestruggles of competition. 

These qualifications were eminently conspicuous in the gentleman whofilled the chair in the earlier part of my life, and who is now one ofthe ornaments of the other house. Such were his abilities, and such hisconduct, that it would be presumptuous in any man, however endowed bynature, or accomplished by study, to aspire to surpass him; nor can ahigher encomium be easily conceived, than this house bestowed upon thatperson, who was thought worthy to succeed him. 

The office which we have now to confer, is not only arduous with regardto the abilities necessary to the execution of it, but extremelyburdensome and laborious, such as requires continual attendance, andincessant application; nor can it be expected that any man would engagein it, who is not ready to devote his time and his health to the serviceof the publick, and to struggle with fatigue and restraint for theadvantage of his country. 

Such is the gentleman whom I shall propose to your choice; one whosezeal for the present imperial house, and the prosperity of the nation, has been always acknowledged, and of whom it cannot be suspected that hewill be deterred by any difficulties from a province which will affordhim so frequent opportunities of promoting the common interest of theemperour and the people. 

What success may be expected from his endeavours, we can only judge fromhis present influence; influence produced only by his private virtues;but so extensive in that part of the nation which lies within the reachof his beneficence, and the observation of his merit, that it sets himnot only above the danger, but above the fear of opposition, and secureshim a seat in this assembly without contest. 

Thus deputed by his country to many successive senates, he has acquiredan unrivalled degree of knowledge in the methods of our proceedings, andan eminent dexterity in digesting them with that order and perspicuityby which only the transaction of great affairs can be made expeditious, and the discussion of difficult questions be disentangled fromperplexity; qualities which are now made particularly necessary by theimportance of the subjects to be considered in this senate: so that Idoubt not but you will unanimously concur with me in desiring that thechair may be filled by a person eminently distinguished by hisknowledge, his integrity, his diligence, and his reputation; andtherefore I move, without scruple, that the right honourable ArthurONSLOW, esquire, be called to the chair. 

Then Mr. CLUTTERBUCK seconded the motion in this manner:--That I am notable to add any thing to the encomium of the right honourable gentlemannominated to the president's chair, gives me no concern, because I amconfident, that in the opinion of this assembly, his name alone includesall panegyrick, and that he who recommends Arthur ONSLOW, esquire, willnever be required to give the reason of his choice. I therefore rise nowonly to continue the common methods of the house, and to second a motionwhich I do not expect that any will oppose. 

[Here the whole assembly cried out, with a general acclamation, ONSLOW, ONSLOW. ]

Mr. ONSLOW then rose up and said:--Though I might allege many reasonsagainst this choice, of which the strongest is my inability to dischargethe trust conferred upon me in a manner suitable to its importance, yetI have too high an idea of the wisdom of this assembly, to imagine thatthey form any resolution without just motives; and therefore shall thinkit my duty to comply with their determination, however opposite to myown opinion. 

Mr. PELHAM and Mr. CLUTTERBUCK then led him to the chair, where, beforehe went up to it, he desired, That the house would consider how littlehe was qualified for the office which they were about to confer uponhim, and fix their choice upon some other person, who might be capableof discharging so important a trust. 

The members calling out, The chair, chair, chair, he ascended the step, and then addressed himself thus to the house:--Gentlemen, since it isyour resolution, that I should once more receive the honour of beingexalted to this important office, for which it is not necessary tomention how little I am qualified, since I may hope that those defectswhich have hitherto been excused, will still find the same indulgence;my gratitude for a distinction so little deserved, will always incite meto consult the honour of the house, and enable me to supply, by duty anddiligence, what is wanting in my knowledge and capacity. 

DECEMBER 4, 1741. 

[DEBATE ON THE ADDRESS. ]

The king came again to the house of lords, and the commons being sentfor, his majesty approved their choice of a president, and made a speechto both houses, in which he represented to them, That their counsel wasin a particular manner necessary, as they were engaged in a war withSpain, as the affairs of all Europe were in confusion, by theconfederacy of many formidable powers for the destruction of the houseof Austria; that both houses of the preceding session had come to thestrongest resolutions in favour of the queen of Hungary, but that theother powers who were equally engaged to support her, had not yet actedaccording to their stipulations; that he had endeavoured to assist herever since the death of the emperour Charles, and hoped that a justsense of common danger would induce other nations to unite with him; butthat in this uncertain situation, it was necessary that Britain shouldbe in a condition of supporting itself and its allies, as any exigencymight require. He therefore ordered the estimates for the ensuing yearto be laid before the commons. --This speech being under the considerationof the house of lords, lord MILTON spoke in the following manner:

My lords, though the present perplexity of our affairs, the contrarietyof opinions produced by it, and the warmth with which each opinion willprobably be supported, might justly discourage me from proposing any ofmy sentiments to this great assembly, yet I cannot repress myinclination to offer a motion, in my opinion, regular and seasonable, and which, if it should appear otherwise to your lordships, will, Ihope, though it should not be received, at least be forgiven, because Ihave never before wearied your patience, or interrupted or retarded yourconsultations. 

But I am very far from imagining that by this motion I can give anyoccasion to debate or opposition, because I shall propose no innovationin the principles, or alteration of the practice of this assembly, norintend any thing more than to lay before your lordships my opinion ofthe manner in which it may be proper to address his majesty. 

To return him our humble thanks for his most gracious speech from thethrone, and, at the same time, to present unto his majesty our sincereand joyful congratulations on his safe and happy return into thisempire. 

To observe with the utmost thankfulness the great concern which hismajesty has been pleased to express for carrying on the just andnecessary war against Spain, which we hope, by the divine blessing uponhis majesty's arms, will be attended with success equal to the justiceof his cause, and the ardent wishes of his people. That, His majesty has so truly represented the impending dangers to whichEurope is exposed, in the present critical conjuncture, as must awaken, in every one, an attention suitable to the occasion: and we cannot butbe fully sensible of the evil consequences arising from the designs andenterprises, formed and carrying on for the subversion or reduction ofthe house of Austria, which threaten such apparent mischiefs to thecommon cause. 

To acknowledge his imperial goodness in expressing so earnest a desireto receive, and so high a regard for, the advice of his parliament: hismajesty, secure of the loyalty and affections of his people, may relyupon that, with the best-grounded confidence; and to assure his majesty, that we will not fail to take the important points, which he has beenpleased to mention to us, into our most serious consideration; and, inthe most dutiful manner, to offer to his majesty such advice as shallappear to us to be most conducive to the honour and true interest of hiscrown and kingdoms. To assure his majesty that we have a due sense, howmuch the present posture of affairs calls upon us for that unanimity, vigour, and despatch, which his majesty has so wisely recommended to us;and to give his majesty the strongest assurances, that we willvigorously and heartily concur in all just and necessary measures forthe defence and support of his majesty, the maintenance of the balanceand liberties of Europe, and the assistance of our allies. 

That as duty and affection to his majesty are, in us, fixed andunalterable principles, so we feel the impressions of them, at thistime, so strong and lively in our breasts, that we cannot omit to layhold on this opportunity of approaching his imperial presence, to renewthe most sincere professions of our constant and inviolable fidelity:and to promise his majesty, that we will, at the hazard of all that isdear to us, exert ourselves for the defence and preservation of hissacred person and government, and the maintenance of the protestantsuccession in his imperial house, on which the continuance of theprotestant religion, and the liberties of Britain, do, under God, depend. 

My lords, as this address will not obstruct any future inquiries, by anyapprobation of past measures, either positive or implied, I doubt notbut your lordships will readily concur in it, and am persuaded, that itwill confirm his majesty's regard for our councils, and confidence inour loyalty. 

Lord LOVEL spoke next, to this effect:--My lords, the dangers which havebeen justly represented by his majesty, ought to remind us of theimportance of unusual circumspection in our conduct, and deter us fromany innovations, of which we may not foresee the consequences, at a timewhen there may be no opportunity of repairing any miscarriage, orcorrecting any mistake. 

There appears, my lords, not to be at this time any particular reasonfor changing the form of our addresses, no privileges of our house havebeen invaded, nor any designs formed against the publick. His majestyhas evidently not deviated from the practice of the wisest and mostbeloved of our British monarchs; he has, upon this emergence ofunexpected difficulties, summoned the senate to counsel and assist him;and surely it will not be consistent with the wisdom of this house toincrease the present perplexity of our affairs, by new embarrassments, which may be easily imagined likely to arise from an address differentfrom those which custom has established. 

The prospect which now lies before us, a prospect which presents us onlywith dangers, distraction, invasions, and revolutions, ought to engageour attentions, without leaving us at leisure for disputations uponceremonies or forms. It ought to be the care of every lord in thishouse, not how to address, but how to advise his majesty; how to assistthe councils of the publick, and contribute to such determinations, asmay avert the calamities that impend over mankind, and stop the wildexcursions of power and ambition. 

We ought to reflect, my lords, that the expectations of all Europe areraised by the convocation of this assembly; and that from ourresolutions, whole nations are waiting for their sentence. And how willmankind be disappointed when they shall hear, that instead of declaringwar upon usurpers, or imposing peace on the disturbers of mankind, instead of equipping navies to direct the course of commerce, or raisingarmies to regulate the state of the continent, we met here in a fullassembly, and disagreed upon the form of an address. 

Let us, therefore, my lords, lay aside, at least for this time, allpetty debates and minute inquiries, and engage all in the great attemptof reestablishing quiet in the world, and settling the limits of thekingdoms of Europe. 

Then lord CARTERET spoke, in substance as follows:--My lords, there is, I find, at least one point upon which it is probable that those will nowagree whose sentiments have hitherto been, on almost every occasion, widely different. The danger of our present situation is generallyallowed; but the consequences deduced from it are so contrary to eachother, as give little hopes of that unanimity which times of dangerparticularly require. 

It is alleged by the noble lord who spoke last, that since we are nowinvolved in difficulties, we ought only to inquire how to extricateourselves, and, therefore, ought not to leave ourselves the right ofinquiring how we were entangled in them, lest the perplexity ofdifferent considerations should dissipate our attention, and disable usfrom forming any useful determinations, or exerting any vigorous effortsfor our deliverance. 

But, in my opinion, my lords, the most probable way of removingdifficulties, is to examine how they were produced, and, by consequence, to whom they are to be imputed; for certainly, my lords, it is not to behoped that we shall regain what we have lost, but by measures differentfrom those which have reduced us to our present state, and by theassistance of other counsellors than those who have sunk us into thecontempt, and exposed us to the ravages of every nation throughout theworld. 

That this inquiry, my lords, may be free and unobstructed, it isnecessary to address the throne, after the manner of our ancestors, ingeneral terms, without descending to particular facts, which, as we havenot yet examined them, we can neither censure nor approve. 

It has been objected by the noble lord, that foreign nations will bedisappointed by hearing, that instead of menaces of vengeance, anddeclarations of unalterable adherence to the liberties of Europe, wehave wasted our time at this important juncture in settling the form ofan address. 

That little time may be wasted on this occasion, I hope your lordshipswill very speedily agree to an address suitable to the dignity of thosewho make it, and to the occasion upon which it is made; for I cannot butallow, that the present state of affairs calls upon us for despatch: butthough business ought, at this time, undoubtedly to be expedited, I hopeit will not be precipitated; and if it be demanded that the mostimportant questions be first determined, I know not any thing of greatermoment than that before us. 

How we shall gratify the expectations of foreign powers, ought not, mylords, to be our first or chief consideration; we ought, certainly, first to inquire how the people may be set free from those suspicions, which a long train of measures, evidently tending to impair theirprivileges, has raised; and how they may be confirmed in their fidelityto the government, of which they have for many years found no othereffects than taxes and exactions, for which they have received neitherprotection abroad, nor encouragement at home. 

But, my lords, if it be necessary to consult the inclinations, andcultivate the esteem of foreign powers, I believe nothing will raisemore confidence in our allies, if there be any who are not now ashamedof that name, or more intimidate those whose designs it is our interestto defeat, than an open testimony of our resolution no longer to approvethat conduct by which the liberty of half Europe has been endangered;and not to lavish praises on those men, who have in twenty years nevertransacted any thing to the real benefit of their country, and of whomit is highly probable that they have in the present war stipulated forthe defeat of all our attempts, and agreed, by some execrable compact, to facilitate the exaltation of the house of Bourbon. 

Upon what facts I ground accusations so atrocious may justly be inquiredby your lordships; nor shall I find any difficulty in answering yourdemand. For, if we extend our view over the whole world, and inquireinto the state of all our affairs, we shall find nothing but defeats, miscarriages, and impotence, with their usual consequences, contempt anddistrust. We shall discover neither any tokens of that fear among ourenemies, which the power of the nation, and the reputation of our formervictories, might naturally produce; nor any proofs of that confidenceamong those whom we still continue to term our allies, which the vigourwith which we have formerly supported our confederacies, give us a rightto expect. Those whom we once trampled, insult us; and those whom weonce protected, give us no credit. 

How reasonably, my lords, all nations have withdrawn from us theirreverence and esteem, will appear by a transient examination of our lateconduct, whether it regarded Europe in general, or influenced only theparticular affairs of the British nation; for it will appear beyondpossibility of doubt, that whoever has trusted the administration, whether their own country, or any foreign powers, has trusted only to bebetrayed. 

There is among our allies none whom we are more obliged to support thanthe queen of Hungary, whose rights we are engaged, by all thesolemnities of treaties, to defend, and in whose cause every motiveoperates that can warm the bosom of a man of virtue. Justice andcompassion plead equally on her side, and we are called upon to assisther by our own interest, as well as the general duty of society, bywhich every man is required to prevent oppression. 

What has been the effect of all these considerations may easily bediscovered from the present state of the continent, which is ravagedwithout mercy by the armies of Spain and France. Why all succours havebeen denied the queen of Hungary, and why the inveterate and hereditaryenemies of our nation, are suffered to enlarge their dominions withoutresistance; why the rivals of our trade are left at full liberty toequip their squadrons, and the persecutors of our religion suffered tooverrun those countries from whence only we can hope for assistance, when the hatred which the difference of opinions produces, shallthreaten us with invasions and slavery, the whole world has long askedto no purpose, and, therefore, it is without prospect of receivingsatisfaction that I engage in the same inquiry. 

Yet, since it is our duty to judge of the state of the publick, and atrue judgment can be the result only of accurate examination, I shallproceed, without being discouraged by the ill success of formerattempts, to discover the motives of our late measures, and the endsintended to be produced by them. 

Why the queen of Hungary was not assisted with land-forces, I shall, atpresent, forbear to ask; that she expected them is, indeed, evident fromher solicitations; and, I suppose, it is no less apparent from treaties, that she had a right to expect them; nor am I able to conceive, whysubsidies have been paid for troops which are never to be employed, orwhy foreign princes should be enriched with the plunder of a nationwhich they cannot injure, and do not defend. 

But I know, my lords, how easily it may be replied, that the expenses ofa land war are certain, and the event hazardous, and that it is alwaysprudent to act with evident advantage on our side, and that thesuperiority of Britain consists wholly in naval armaments. 

That the fleets of Britain are equal in force and number of ships to theunited navies of the greatest part of the world; that our admirals aremen of known bravery, and long experience, and, therefore, formidablenot only for their real abilities and natural courage, but for theconfidence which their presence necessarily excites in their followers, and the terrour which must always accompany success, and enervate thosewho are accustomed to defeats; that our sailors are a race of mendistinguished by their ardour for war, and their intrepidity in danger, from the rest of the human species; that they seem beings superiour tofear, and delighted with those objects which cannot be named withoutfilling every other breast with horrour; that they are capable ofrushing upon apparent destruction without reluctance, and of standingwithout concern amidst the complicated terrours of a naval war, isuniversally known, and confessed, my lords, even by those whose interestit is to doubt or deny it. 

Upon the ocean, therefore, we are allowed to be irresistible; to be ableto shut up the ports of the continent, imprison the nations of Europewithin the limits of their own territories, deprive them of all foreignassistance, and put a stop to the commerce of the world. It is allowedthat we are placed the sentinels at the barriers of nature, and thearbiters of the intercourse of mankind. 

These are appellations, my lords, which, however splendid andostentatious, our ancestors obtained and preserved with less advantagesthan we possess, by whom I am afraid they are about to be forfeited. Thedominion of the ocean was asserted in former times in opposition topowers far more able to contest it, than those which we have so longsubmissively courted, and of which we are now evidently afraid. 

For that we fear them, my lords, they are sufficiently convinced; and itmust be confessed, with whatsoever shame, that their opinion is wellfounded; for to what motive but fear can it be imputed, that we have solong supported their insolence without resentment, and their ravageswithout reprisals; that we have fitted out fleets without any design ofdismissing them from our harbours, or sent them to the sea only to begazed at from the shores, by those whose menaces or artifice had givenoccasion to their equipment, and in whom they raised no other emotionsthan contempt of our cowardice, or pity of our folly?

To what, my lords, can it be attributed, that the queen of Hungary hasyet received no assistance from allies thus powerful; from allies whosefleets cover the sea, whose commerce extends to the remotest part of theworld, and whose wealth may be justly expected to be proportionate totheir commerce. To what can we ascribe the confidence with which thehouse of Bourbon threatens the ruin of a princess, who numbers among herallies the emperour of Britain?

Nothing is more evident, my lords, than that the queen of Hungary hasbeen disappointed of the advantages which she expected from herfriendship with this nation, only by a degree of cowardice toodespicable to be mentioned without such terms, as the importance of thisdebate, and the dignity of this assembly, do not admit; nor is it lesscertain, from the conduct of her enemies, that they knew what would beour measures, and confided for security in that cowardice which hasnever yet deceived them. 

It cannot, my lords, be asserted, that our ally, however distressed, hasyet received the least assistance from our arms; neither the justice ofour cause has yet been able to awaken our virtue, nor the inseparableunion of her interest with our own, to excite our vigilance. 

But, perhaps, my lords, we have had no opportunity of exerting ourforce; perhaps the situation both of our enemies and ally was such, thatneither the one could be protected, nor the other opposed, by a navalpower; and, therefore, our inactivity was the effect not of want ofcourage, but want of opportunity. 

Though our ministers, my lords, have hitherto given no eminent proofs ofgeographical knowledge, or of very accurate acquaintance with the stateof foreign countries, yet there is reason to believe that they must atsome time have heard or read, that the house of Austria had territoriesin Italy; they must have been informed, unless their disbursements forsecret service are bestowed with very little judgment, that againstthese dominions an army has been raised by the Spaniards; and they musthave discovered, partly by the information of their correspondents, partly by the inspection of a map, and partly by the sagacity whichdistinguishes them from all past and present ministers, that this armywas to be transported by sea from the coast of Spain to that of Italy. 

This knowledge, my lords, however attained, might have furnished minds, which have always been found so fruitful of expedients, with a method ofhindering the descent of the Spanish troops, for which nothing more wasnecessary than that they should have ordered admiral Haddock, instead ofretiring before the Spanish fleet of war, and watching them only thatthey might escape, to lie still before Barcelona, where the transportswere stationed, with a convoy of only three men of war, and hinder theirdeparture. 

I hope it will be observed by your lordships, that though the road ofBarcelona is open and indefensible, though the fleet was unprotected byships of force, and though they lay, as I am informed, beyond the reachof the guns on the fortifications upon the shore, I do not require thatHaddock should have destroyed the army and the ships. 

I am too well acquainted, my lords, with the lenity of our ministers tothe enemies of their country, and am too well convinced of the prudenceand tenderness of the restrictions by which the power of our admirals islimited, to expect that our guns should be ever used but in salutationsof respect, or exultations on the conclusion of a peace. I am convinced, that our ministers would shudder at the name of bloodshed anddestruction, and that they had rather hear that a thousand merchantswere made bankrupts by privateers, or all our allies deprived of theirdominions, than that one Spanish ship was sunk or burnt by the navies ofBritain. 

But, my lords, though they are willing to spare the blood of theirenemies, yet surely they might have obstructed their enterprises; theymight have withheld those whom they were unwilling to strike, and haveendeavoured to fright those whom they determined never to hurt. 

To speak in terms more adapted to the subject before us: that the fleetof Spain, a fleet of transports with such a convoy, should lie threeweeks in an open road, professedly fitted out against an ally united tous by every tie of nature, and of policy, by the solemnity of treaties, and conformity of interest; that it should lie undisturbed almost withinsight of a British navy; that it should lie there not only withoutdanger, but without apprehension of danger, has raised the astonishmentof every nation in Europe, has blasted the reputation of our arms, impaired the influence of our counsels, and weakened the credit of ourpublick faith. 

There may be some, my lords, that will impute this absurdity of ourconduct, this disregard of our interest, this desertion of ouralliances, and this neglect of the most apparent opportunities ofsuccess, not to cowardice, but treachery; a cause more detestable, asmore atrociously criminal. 

This opinion, my lords, I think it not necessary to oppose, both becauseit cannot be charged with improbability, and because I think it may beeasily reconciled with my own assertions; for cowardice abroad producestreachery at home, and they become traitors to their country who arehindered by cowardice from the prosecution of her interest, and theopposition of her enemies. 

It may however be proper to declare, my lords, that I do not impute thisfatal cowardice to those who are intrusted with the command of ournavies, but to those from whom they are obliged to receive theirinstructions, and upon whom they unhappily depend for the advancement oftheir fortunes. 

It is at least reasonable to impute miscarriages rather to those, whoare known to have given, formerly, such orders as a brave admiralperished under the ignominious necessity of observing, than to those ofwhom it cannot be said that any former part of their lives has beenstained with the reproach of cowardice; at least it is necessary tosuspend our judgment, till the truth shall be made apparent by a rigidinquiry; and it is, therefore, proper to offer an address in generalterms, by which neither the actions or counsels of any man shall becondemned nor approved. 

It would be more unreasonable to charge our soldiers or our sailors withcowardice, because they have shown, even in those actions which havefailed of success, that they miscarried rather through temerity thanfear; and that whenever they are suffered to attack their enemies, theyare ready to march forward even where there is no possibility ofreturning, and that they are only to be withheld from conquest byobstacles which human prowess cannot surmount. 

Such, my lords, was the state of those heroes who died under the wallsof Carthagena; that died in an enterprise so ill concerted, that Iventured, with no great skill in war, and without the least pretence toprescience, to foretell in this house that it would miscarry. 

That it would, that it must miscarry; that it was even intended only toamuse the nation with the appearance of an expedition, without anydesign of weakening our enemies, was easily discovered; for why else, mylords, was the army composed of men newly drawn from the shop, and fromthe plough, unacquainted with the use of arms, and ignorant of the veryterms of military discipline, when we had among us large bodies oftroops long kept up under the appearance of a regular establishment;troops of whom we have long felt the expense, but of which the time isnot, it seems, yet come, that we are to know the use. 

These men, my lords, who have so long practised the motions of battle, and who have given in the park so many proofs of their dexterity andactivity, who have at least learned to distinguish the different soundsof the drum, and know the faces and voices of the subaltern officers, atleast, might have been imagined better qualified for an attempt upon aforeign kingdom, than those who were necessarily strangers to every partof the military operations, and might have been sent upon our firstdeclaration of war, while the new-raised forces acquired at home thesame arts under the same inspection. 

But, my lords, whether it was imagined that new forces would be longbefore they learned the implicit obedience necessary to a soldier;whether it was imagined that it would not be easy on a sudden to collecttroops of men so tall and well proportioned, or so well skilled in themartial arts of curling and powdering their hair; or whether it wouldhave been dangerous to have deprived the other house of the counsels andvotes of many worthy members, who had at the same time a seat in thesenate, and a commission in the army, it was thought necessary to sendout raw forces to attack our enemies, and to keep our disciplined troopsat home to awe the nation. 

Nor did the minister, my lords, think it sufficient to obstruct theexpedition to America by employing new-raised troops, unless they werelikewise placed under the command of a man, who, though of undoubtedcourage, was, with respect to the conduct of an army, as ignorant asthemselves. It was therefore determined, my lords, that all thoseofficers who had gained experience in former wars, and purchasedmilitary knowledge by personal danger, should be disappointed andrejected for the sake of advancing a man, who, as he had less skill, wasless likely to be successful, and was, therefore, more proper to directan expedition proposed only to intimidate the British nation. 

That the event was such as might be expected from the means, yourlordships need not to be informed, nor can it be questioned with whatintentions these means were contrived. 

I am very far, my lords, from charging our ministers with ignorance, orupbraiding them with mistakes on this occasion, for their whole conducthas been uniform, and all their schemes consistent with each other: nordo I doubt their knowledge of the consequence of their measures, so faras it was to be foreseen by human prudence. 

Whether they have carried on negotiations, or made war; whether theyhave conducted our own affairs, or those of our ally the queen ofHungary, they have still discovered the same intention, and promoted itby the same means. They have suffered the Spanish fleets to sail firstfor supplies from one port to another, and then from the coasts of Spainto those of America. They have permitted the Spaniards, withoutopposition, to land in Italy, when it was not necessary even to withholdthem from it by any actual violence; for had the fleet, my lords, beenunder my command, I would have only sent the Spanish admiral aprohibition to sail, and am sure it would have been observed. 

They have neglected to purchase the friendship of the king of Prussia, which might, perhaps, have been obtained upon easy terms, but which theyought to have gained at whatever rate; and, to conclude, we have beenlately informed that the neutrality is signed. 

Such, my lords, is the conduct of the ministry, by which it cannot bedenied that we are involved in many difficulties, and exposed to greatcontempt; but from this contempt we may recover, and disentangleourselves from these difficulties, by a vigorous prosecution of measuresopposite to those by which we have been reduced to our present state. 

If we consider, without that confusion which fear naturally produces, the circumstances of our affairs, it will appear that we haveopportunities in our hands of recovering our losses, and reestablishingour reputation; those losses which have been suffered while we had twohundred ships of war at sea, which have permitted three hundredmerchant-ships to be taken; and that reputation which has been destroyedwhen there was no temptation either to a compliance with our enemies, orto a desertion of our friends. 

It is well known, my lords, that we make war at present rather with thequeen than the people of Spain; and it is reasonable to conclude, that awar carried on contrary to the general good, and against the generalopinion, cannot be lasting. 

It is certain that the Spaniards, whenever they have been attacked bymen acquainted with the science of war, and furnished with necessarystores for hostile attempts, have discovered either ignorance orcowardice, and have either fled meanly, or resisted unskilfully. 

It is, therefore, probable, my lords, that either our enemies willdesist from the prosecution of a war, which few of them approve; or thatwe shall, by vigorous descents upon their coasts, and their colonies, the interruption of their trade, and the diminution of their forces, soon compel them to receive peace upon our own terms. 

But these advantages, my lords, are only to be expected from a change ofconduct, which change can never be produced by a seeming approbation ofthe past measures. I am therefore of opinion, that we ought to addressthe throne in general terms, according to the ancient practice of thishouse. 

In considering the address proposed, I cannot but conclude that it istoo much diffused, and that it would be more forcible if it was moreconcise: to shorten it will be no difficult task, by the omission of allthe clauses that correspond with particular parts of his majesty'sspeech, which I cannot discover the necessity of repeating. 

In the congratulation to his majesty upon his return to his onceglorious dominions, no lord shall concur more readily or more zealouslythan myself; nor shall I even deny to extend my compliments to theministry, when it shall appear that they deserve them; but I am neverwilling to be lavish of praise, because it becomes less valuable bybeing prodigally bestowed; and on occasions so important as this, I cannever consent to praise before I have examined, because inquiry comestoo late after approbation. 

Lord CHOLMONDELEY rose next, and spoke to this effect:--My lords, if thedangers that threaten our happiness and our safety be such as they havebeen represented; if ambition has extended her power almost beyond apossibility of resistance, and oppression, elated with success, beginsto design no less than the universal slavery of mankind; if the powersof Europe stand aghast at the calamities which hang over them, andlisten with helpless confusion to that storm which they can neitheravoid nor resist, how ought our conduct to be influenced by thisuncommon state of affairs? Ought we not to catch the alarm while it ispossible to make preparation against the danger? Ought we not toimprove, with the utmost diligence, the important interval? to unite ourcounsels for the protection of liberty, and exert all our influenceagainst the common enemies of society, the unwearied disturbers of thetranquillity of mankind?

To what purpose, my lords, are the miseries that the presentdistractions of Europe may bring upon us, so pathetically described, andso accurately enumerated, if they are to produce no effect upon ourcounsels? And what effect can be wished from them, but unanimity, withthat vigour and despatch which are its natural consequences, and thatsuccess with which steadiness and expedition are generally rewarded?

It might be hoped, my lords, that those who have so clear a view of ourpresent embarrassments, and whose sagacity and acuteness expose them toa sensibility of future miseries, perhaps more painful than would beexcited by any present and real calamities, should not be thus torturedto no purpose. Every passion, my lords, has its proper object by whichit may be laudably gratified, and every disposition of mind may bedirected to useful ends. The true use of that foresight of futureevents, with which some great capacities are so eminently endowed, isthat of producing caution and suggesting expedients. What advantage, mylords, would it be to navigators, that their pilot could, by anypreternatural power, discover sands or rocks, if he was too negligent ortoo stubborn to turn the vessel out of the danger?

Or how, my lords, to pursue the comparison, would that pilot be treatedby the crew, who, after having informed them of their approach to ashoal or whirlpool, and set before them, with all his rhetorick, thehorrours of a shipwreck, should, instead of directing them to avoiddestruction, and assisting their endeavours for their common safety, amuse them with the miscarriages of past voyages, and the blunders andstupidity of their former pilot?

Whether any parallel can be formed between such ill-timed satire, andwild misconduct, and the manner in which your lordships have beentreated on this occasion, it is not my province to determine. Nor have Iany other design than to show that the only proper conduct in time ofreal danger, is preparation against it; and that wit and eloquencethemselves, if employed to any other purpose, lose their excellence, because they lose their propriety. 

It does not appear, my lords, that the address now proposed includes anyapprobation of past measures, and therefore it is needless to inquire, on this occasion, whether the conduct of our ministers or admiralsdeserves praise or censure. 

It does not appear, my lords, that by censuring any part of our lateconduct, however detrimental to the publick it may at present beimagined, any of our losses will be repaired, or any part of ourreputation retrieved; and, therefore, such proceedings would only retardour counsels, and divert our thoughts from more importantconsiderations; considerations which his majesty has recommended to us, and which cannot be more strongly pressed upon us than by the noble lordwho opposed the motion; for he most powerfully incites to unanimity andattention, who most strongly represents the danger of our situation. 

Of the good effects of publick consultations, I need not observe, mylords, that they arise from the joint endeavour of many understandingscooperating to the same end; from the reasonings and observations ofmany individuals of different studies, inclinations, and experience, alldirected to the illustration of the same question, which is, therefore, so accurately discussed, so variously illustrated, and so amplydisplayed, that a more comprehensive view is obtained of its relationsand consequences, than can be hoped from the wisdom or knowledge of anysingle man. 

But this advantage, my lords, can only be expected from union andconcurrence; for when the different members of a national council enterwith different designs, and exert their abilities not so much to promoteany general purposes, as to obviate the measures, and confute thearguments of each other, the publick is deprived of all the benefit thatmight be expected from the collective wisdom of assemblies, whatever maybe the capacity of those who compose them. The senate thus divided anddisturbed, will, perhaps, conclude with less prudence than any singlemember, as any man may more easily discover truth without assistance, than when others of equal abilities are employed in perplexing hisinquiries, and interrupting the operations of his mind. 

Thus, my lords, it might be safer for a nation, even in time of terrourand disorder, to be deprived of the counsels of this house, than toconfide in the determinations of an assembly not uniform in its views, nor connected in its interests; an assembly from which little can behoped by those who observe that it cannot, without a tedious debate, prolonged with all the heat of opposition, despatch the first and mostcursory part of publick business, --an address to his majesty. 

It has been for a long time a practice too frequent, to confound pastwith present questions, to perplex every debate by an endlessmultiplication of objects, and to obstruct our determinations bysubstituting one inquiry in the place of another. 

The only question, my lords, now before us is, whether the address whichthe noble lord proposed, implies any commendation of past measures, notwhether those measures deserve to be commended; which is an inquiry notat present to be pursued, because we have not now before us the means ofattaining satisfaction in it, and which ought, therefore, to be delayedtill it shall be your lordships' pleasure to appoint a day for examiningthe state of the nation, and to demand those letters, instructions, andmemorials, which are necessary to an accurate and senatorialdisquisition. 

In the mean time, since it is at least as expedient for me to vindicate, as for others to accuse those of whose conduct neither they nor I haveyet any regular cognizance, and I may justly expect from the candour ofyour lordships, that you will be no less willing to hear an apologistthan a censurer, I will venture to suspend the true question a fewmoments, to justify that conduct which has been so wantonly and socontemptuously derided. 

That the preservation of the house of Austria, my lords, ought to engagethe closest attention of the British nation, is freely confessed. It isevident that by no other means our commerce, our liberty, or ourreligion can be secured, or the house of Bourbon restrained fromoverwhelming the universe. It is allowed that the queen of Hungary has aclaim to our assistance by other ties than those of interest; that itwas promised upon the faith of treaties, and it is demanded by theloudest calls of honour, justice and compassion. And did it not appeartoo juvenile and romantick, I might add, that her personal excellenciesare such as might call armies to her assistance from the remotestcorners of the earth; that her constancy in the assertion of her rightsmight animate every generous mind with equal firmness; and herintrepidity in the midst of danger and distress, when every day bringsaccounts of new encroachments, and every new encroachment discouragesthose from whom she may claim assistance from declaring in her favour, might inspire with ardour for her preservation all those in whom virtuecan excite reverence, or whom calamities unjustly inflicted can touchwith indignation. 

Nor am I afraid to affirm, my lords, that the condition of thisillustrious princess raised all these emotions in the court of Britain, and that the vigour of our proceedings will appear proportioned to ourardour for her success. No sooner was the true state of affairsincontestably known, than twelve thousand auxiliary troops were hired, and commanded to march to her assistance, but her affairs making it moreeligible for her to employ her own subjects in her defence, and the wantof money being the only obstacle that hindered her from raising armiesproportioned to those of her enemies, she required, that instead oftroops, a supply of money might be sent her, with which his majestywillingly complied. 

The British ministers in the mean time endeavoured, by the strongestarguments and most importunate solicitations, to animate her allies toequal vigour, or to procure her assistance from other powers whoseinterest was more remotely affected by her distress: if the effects oftheir endeavours are not yet manifest, it cannot be imputed to the wanteither of sincerity or diligence; and if any other powers should bepersuaded to arm in the common cause, it ought to be ascribed to theinfluence of the British counsels. 

In the prosecution of the war with Spain, it does not appear, my lords, that any measures have been neglected, which prudence, or bravery, orexperience, could be expected to dictate. If we have suffered greaterlosses than we expected, if our enemies have been sometimes favoured bythe winds, or sometimes have been so happy as to conceal their designs, and elude the diligence of our commanders, who is to be censured? orwhat is to be concluded, but that which never was denied, that thechance of war is uncertain, that men are inclined to make fallaciouscalculations of the probabilities of future events, and that our enemiesmay sometimes be as artful, as diligent, and as sagacious as ourselves?

It was the general opinion of the British people, my lords, if thegeneral opinion may be collected from the clamours and expectationswhich every man has had opportunities of observing, that in declaringwar upon Spain, we only engaged to chastise the insolence of a nation ofhelpless savages, who might, indeed, rob and murder a defencelesstrader, but who could only hold up their hands and cry out for mercy, orsculk in secret creeks and unfrequented coasts, when ships of war shouldbe fitted out against them. They imagined that the fortifications of theSpanish citadels would be abandoned at the first sound of cannon, andthat their armies would turn their backs at the sight of the standard ofBritain. 

It was not remembered, my lords, that the greatest part of our trade wascarried on in sight of the Spanish coasts, and that our merchants mustbe consequently exposed to incessant molestation from light vessels, which our ships of war could not pursue over rocks and shallows. It wasnot sufficiently considered, that a trading nation must always make warwith a nation that has fewer merchants, under the disadvantage of beingmore exposed to the rapacity of private adventurers. How much we had tofear on this account was shown us by the late war with France, in whichthe privateers of a few petty ports, injured the commerce of thisnation, more than their mighty navies and celebrated admirals. 

My lords, it would very little become this august assembly, thisassembly so renowned for wisdom, and for justice, to confound want ofprudence with want of success; since on many occasions the wisestmeasures may be defeated by accidents which could not be foreseen; sincethey may sometimes be discovered by deserters, or spies, and sometimeseluded by an enemy equally skilful with ourselves in the science of war. 

That any of these apologies are necessary to the administration, I amfar from intending to insinuate, for I know not that we have failed ofsuccess in any of our designs, except the attack of Carthagena, of whichthe miscarriage cannot, at least, be imputed to the ministry; nor is itevident that any other causes of it are to be assigned than thedifficulty of the enterprise; and when, my lords, did any nation makewar, without experiencing some disappointments?

These considerations, my lords, I have thought myself obliged, by myregard to truth and justice, to lay before you, to dissipate thosesuspicions and that anxiety which might have arisen from a differentrepresentation of our late measures; for I cannot but once more observe, that a vindication of the conduct of the ministry is by no means anecessary preparative to the address proposed. 

The address which was so modestly offered to your lordships, cannot besaid to contain any more than a general answer to his majesty's speech, and such declarations of our duty and affection, as are always due toour sovereign, and always expected by him on such occasions. 

If our allies have been neglected or betrayed, my lords, we shall bestill at liberty to discover and to punish negligence so detrimental, and treachery so reproachful to the British nation. If in the waragainst Spain we have failed of success, we shall still reserve in ourown hands the right of inquiring whether we were unsuccessful by thesuperiority of our enemies, or by our own fault; whether our commanderswanted orders, or neglected to obey them; for what clause can beproduced in the address by which any of these inquiries can be supposedto be predetermined?

Let us, therefore, remember, my lords, the danger of our present state, and the necessity of steadiness, vigour, and wisdom, for our ownpreservation and that of Europe; let us consider that publick wisdom isthe result of united counsels, and steadiness and vigour, of unitedinfluence; let us remember that our example may be of equal use with ourassistance, and that both the allies and the subjects of Great Britainwill be conjoined by our union, and distracted by our divisions; and letus, therefore, endeavour to promote the general interest of the world, by an unanimous address to his majesty, in the terms proposed by thenoble lord. 

Lord TALBOT spoke in the following manner:--My lords, after the displayof the present state of Europe, and the account of the measures of theBritish ministers, which the noble lord who spoke against the motion haslaid before you, there is little necessity for another attempt toconvince you that our liberty and the liberty of Europe are in danger, or of disturbing your reflections by another enumeration of follies andmisfortunes. 

To mention the folly of our measures is superfluous likewise, foranother reason. They who do not already acknowledge it, may be justlysuspected of suppressing their conviction; for how can it be possible, that they who cannot produce a single instance of wisdom or fortitude, who cannot point out one enterprise wisely concerted and successfullyexecuted, can yet sincerely declare, that nothing has been omitted whichour interest required?

The measures, my lords, which are now pursued, are the same which fortwenty months have kept the whole nation in continual disturbance, andhave raised the indignation of every man, whose private interest was notpromoted by them. These measures cannot be said to be rashly censured, or condemned before they are seen in their full extent, or expanded intoall their consequences; for they have been prosecuted, my lords, withall the confidence of authority and all the perseverance of obstinacy, without any other opposition than fruitless clamours, or petitionsunregarded. And what consequences have they produced? What but povertyand distractions at home, and the contempt and insults of foreignpowers? What but the necessity of retrieving by war the losses sustainedby timorous and dilatory negotiations; and the miscarriages of a war, inwhich only folly and cowardice have involved us?

Nothing, my lords, is more astonishing, than that it should be assertedin this assembly that we have no ill success to complain of. Might wenot hope for success, if we have calculated the events of war, and madea suitable preparation? And how is this to be done, but by comparing ourforces with that of our enemy, who must, undoubtedly, be more or lessformidable according to the proportion which his treasures and histroops bear to our own?

Upon the assurance of the certainty of this practice, upon the evidence, my lords, of arithmetical demonstration, we were inclined to believe, that the power of Britain was not to be resisted by Spain, and thereforedemanded that our merchants should be no longer plundered, insulted, imprisoned, and tortured by so despicable an enemy. 

That we did not foresee all the consequences of this demand, we are nowready to confess; we did not conjecture that new troops would be raisedfor the invasion of the Spanish dominions, only that we might be reducedto the level with our enemies. We did not imagine that the superiorityof our naval force would produce no other consequence than an inequalityof expense, and that the royal navies of Britain would be equipped onlyfor show, only to harass the sailors with the hateful molestation of animpress, and to weaken the crews of our mercantile vessels, that theymight be more easily taken by the privateers of Spain. 

We did not expect, my lords, that our navies would sail out under thecommand of admirals renowned for bravery, knowledge, and vigilance, andfloat upon the ocean without design, or enter ports and leave them, equally inoffensive as a packet-boat, or petty trader. 

But not to speak any longer, my lords, in terms so little suited to theimportance of the question which I am endeavouring to clear, or to theenormity of the conduct which I attempt to expose; the success of war isonly to be estimated by the advantages which are gained, in proportionto the loss which is suffered; of which loss the expenses occasioned bythe war are always the chief part, and of which it is, therefore, usual, at the conclusion of a peace, for the conquered power to promise thepayment. 

Let us examine, my lords, in consequence of this position, the successof our present war against Spain; let us consider what each nation hassuffered, and it will easily appear how justly we boast of our wisdomand vigour. 

It is not on this occasion necessary to form minute calculations, or tocompute the expense of every company of soldiers and squadron of ships;it is only necessary to assert, what will, I hope, not be very readilydenied, even by those whom daily practice of absurd apologies hasrendered impregnable by the force of truth, that such expenses as haveneither contributed to our own defence, nor to the disadvantage of theSpaniards, have been thrown away. 

If this be granted, my lords, it will appear, that no nation ever beheldits treasures so profusely squandered, ever paid taxes so willingly, andso patiently saw them perverted; for it cannot, my lords, be proved, that any part of our preparations has produced a proportionate effect;but it may be readily shown how many fleets have been equipped only thatthe merchants might want sailors, and that the public stores might beconsumed. 

As to our ill success in America, which has been imputed only to thechance of war, it will be reasonable, my lords, to ascribe to othercauses, so much of it as might have been prevented by a more speedyreinforcement of Vernon, or may be supposed to have arisen from theinexperience of our troops, and the escape of the Spaniards from Ferrol. 

If our fleets had been sent more early into that part of the world, theSpaniards would have had no time to strengthen their garrisons; had ourtroops been acquainted with discipline, the attack would have been madewith greater judgment; and had not the Spaniards escaped from Ferrol, weshould have had no enemy in America to encounter. Had all our ministersand all our admirals done their duty, it is evident that not onlyCarthagena had been taken, but that half the dominions of Spain mightnow have owned the sovereignty of the crown of Britain. 

This, my lords, may be observed of the only enterprise, which it isreasonable to believe was in reality intended against the Spaniards, ifeven of this our ministers had not before contrived the defeat. But ofall the rest of our armaments it does not appear that any effect hasbeen felt but by ourselves, it cannot be discovered that they evenraised any alarms or anxiety either in our enemies or their allies, bywhom perhaps it was known that they were only designed as punishmentsfor the merchants of Britain. 

That our merchants have already been severely chastised for theirinsolence in complaining of their losses, and their temerity in raisingin the nation a regard for its commerce, its honour, and its rights, isevident from a dreadful list of three hundred ships taken by theSpaniards, some of which were abandoned by their convoys, and othersseized within sight of the coasts of Britain. 

It may be urged, my lords, that the Spaniards have likewise lost a greatnumber of vessels; but what else could they expect when they engaged ina war against the greatest naval power of the universe? And it is to beremembered, that the Spaniards have this consolation in theirmisfortunes, that of their ships none have been deserted by theirconvoys, or wilfully exposed to capture by being robbed of their crews, to supply ships of war with idle hands. 

The Spaniards will likewise consider, that they have not harassed theirsubjects for the protection of their trade; that they have not fittedout fleets only to amuse the populace. They comfort themselves with thehope, that the Britons will soon be reduced to a state of weakness belowthemselves, and wait patiently for the time in which the masters of thesea shall receive from them the regulation of their commerce and thelimits of their navigation. 

Nor can it be doubted, my lords, but that by adhering to these measures, our ministers will in a short time gratify their hopes; for whatsoeverbe the difference between the power of two contending nations, if thericher spends its treasures without effect, and exposes its troops tounhealthy climates and impracticable expeditions, while the weaker isparsimonious and prudent, they must soon be brought to an equality; andby continuing the same conduct, the weaker power must at length prevail. 

That this has been hitherto the state of the war between Britain andSpain, it is not necessary to prove to your lordships; it is apparent, that the expenses of the Spaniards have been far less than those ofBritain; and, therefore, if we should suppose the actual losses of warequal, we are only wearing out our force in useless efforts, and ourenemies grow every day comparatively stronger. 

But, my lords, let us not flatter ourselves that our actual losses havebeen equal; let us, before we determine this question, accuratelycompare the number and the value of our ships and cargoes with those ofthe Spaniards, and see on which side the loss will fall. 

And let us not forget, what in all the calculations which I have yetseen on either part has been totally overlooked, the number of menkilled, or captives in the British and Spanish dominions. Men, my lords, are at once strength and riches; and, therefore, it is to be considered, that the most irreparable loss which any nation can sustain is thediminution of its people: money may be repaid, and commerce may berecovered; even liberty may be regained, but the loss of people cannever be retrieved. Even the twentieth generation may have reason toexclaim, How much more numerous and more powerful would this nation havebeen, had our ancestors not been betrayed in the expedition toCarthagena!

What loss, my lords, have the Spaniards sustained which can be put inbalance with that of our army in America, an army given up to thevultures of an unhealthy climate, and of which those who perished by thesword, were in reality rescued from more lingering torments?

What equivalent can be mentioned for the liberty of multitudes ofBritons, now languishing in the prisons of Spain, or obliged byhardships and desperation to assist the enemies of their country? Whathave the Spaniards suffered that can be opposed to the detriment whichthe commerce of this nation feels from the detention of our sailors?

These, my lords, are losses not to be paralleled by the destruction ofPorto Bello, even though that expedition should be ascribed to theministry. These are losses which may extend their consequences to manyages, which may long impede our commerce, and diminish our shipping. 

It is not to be imagined, my lords, that in this time of peculiardanger, parents will destine their children to maritime employments, orthat any man will engage in naval business who can exercise any otherprofession; and therefore the death or captivity of a sailor leaves avacuity in our commerce, since no other will be ready to supply hisplace. Thus, by degrees, the continuance of the war will contract ourtrade, and those parts of it which we cannot occupy, will be snatched bythe French or Dutch, from whom it is not probable that they will ever berecovered. 

This, my lords, is another circumstance of disadvantage to which theSpaniards are not exposed; for their traffick being only from one partof their dominions to another, cannot be destroyed, but will, after theshort interruption of a war, be again equally certain and equallyprofitable. 

It appears, therefore, my lords, that we have hitherto suffered morethan the Spaniards, more than the nation which we have so much reason todespise; it appears that our fleets have been useless, and that ourtroops have been only sent out to be destroyed; and it will, therefore, surely be allowed me to assert, that the war has not been hithertosuccessful. 

I am, therefore, of opinion, my lords, that as the address now proposed, cannot but be understood both by his majesty and the nation, to imply, in some degree, a commendation of that conduct which cannot becommended, which ought never to be mentioned but with detestation andcontempt, it will be unworthy of this house, offensive to the wholenation, and unjust to his majesty. 

His majesty, my lords, has summoned us to advise him in this importantjuncture, and the nation expects from our determinations its relief orits destruction: nor will either have much to hope from our counsels, if, in our first publick act, we endeavour to deceive them. 

It seems, therefore, proper to change the common form of our addressesto the throne, to do once, at least, what his majesty demands and thepeople expect, and to remember that no characters are more inconsistent, than those of a counsellor of the king, and a flatterer of the ministry. 

Then lord ABINGDON spoke to this effect:--My lords, I have alwaysobserved that debates are prolonged, and inquiries perplexed, by theneglect of method; and therefore think it necessary to move, That thequestion may be read, that the noble lords who shall be inclined toexplain their sentiments upon it, may have always the chief point inview, and not deviate into foreign considerations. 

[It was read accordingly. ]

Lord CARTERET spoke next, to the purpose following:--My lords, I amconvinced of the propriety of the last motion by the advantage which ithas afforded me of viewing more deliberately and distinctly the questionbefore us; the consideration of which has confirmed me in my ownopinion, that the address now proposed is only a flattering repetitionof the speech, and that the speech was drawn up only to betray us intoan encomium on the ministry; who, as they certainly have not deservedany commendations, will, I hope, not receive them from your lordships. For what has been the result of all their measures, but a generalconfusion, the depression of our own nation and our allies, and theexaltation of the house of Bourbon?

It is universally allowed, my lords, and therefore it would besuperfluous to prove, that the liberties of Europe are now in the utmostdanger; that the house of Bourbon has arrived almost at that exaltedpinnacle of authority, from whence it will look down with contempt uponall other powers, to which it will henceforward prescribe laws atpleasure, whose dominions will be limited by its direction, and whosearmies will march at its command. 

That Britain will be long exempted from the general servitude, that weshall be able to stand alone against the whole power of Europe, whichthe French may then bring down upon us, and preserve ourselvesindependent, while every other nation acknowledges the authority of anarbitrary conqueror, is by no means likely, and might be, perhaps, demonstrated to be not possible. 

How long we might be able to retain our liberty, it is beyond the reachof policy to determine, but as it is evident, that when the empire issubdued, the Dutch will quickly fall under the same dominion, and thatall their ports and all their commerce will then be in the hands of theFrench, it cannot be denied that our commerce will quickly be at an end. We shall then lose the dominion of the sea, and all our distant coloniesand settlements, and be shut up in our own island, where the continuanceof our liberties can be determined only by the resolution with which weshall defend them. 

That this, my lords, must probably, in a few years, be our state, if theschemes of the house of Bourbon should succeed, is certain beyond allcontroversy; and therefore it is evident, that no man to whom such acondition does not appear eligible, can look unconcerned at theconfusion of the continent, or consider the destruction of the house ofAustria, without endeavouring to prevent it. 

But, my lords, though such endeavours are the duty of all who areengaged in the transaction of publick affairs, though the importance ofthe cause of the queen of Hungary be acknowledged in the speech to whichwe are to return an address, it does not appear that the ministers ofBritain have once attempted to assist her, or have even forborne anything which might aggravate her distress. 

The only effectual methods by which any efficacious relief could havebeen procured, were that of reconciling her with the king of Prussia, orthat of prevailing upon the Muscovites to succour her. 

A reconciliation with the king of Prussia would have been my first care, if the honour of advising on this occasion had fallen to my lot. To havemediated successfully between them could surely have been no difficulttask, because each party could not but know how much it was their commoninterest to exclude the French from the empire, and how certainly thisuntimely discord must expose them both to their ancient enemy. 

As in private life, my lords, when two friends carry any dispute betweenthem to improper degrees of anger or resentment, it is the province of athird to moderate the passion of each, and to restore that benevolencewhich a difference of interest or opinion had impaired; so in alliances, or the friendships of nations, whenever it unhappily falls out that twoof them forget the general good, and lay themselves open to those evilsfrom which a strict union only can preserve them, it is necessary thatsome other power should interpose, and prevent the dangers of aperpetual discord. 

Whether this was attempted, my lords, I know not; but if any such designwas in appearance prosecuted, it may be reasonably imagined from theevent, that the negotiators were defective either in skill or indiligence; for how can it be conceived that any man should act contraryto his own interest, to whom the state of his affairs is trulyrepresented?

But not to suppress what I cannot doubt, I am convinced, my lords, thatthere is in reality no design of assisting the queen of Hungary; eitherour ministers have not yet recovered from their apprehensions of theexorbitant power of the house of Austria, by which they were frightedsome years ago into the bosom of France for shelter, and which left themno expedient but the treaty of Hanover; or they are now equally afraidof France, and expect the _pretender_ to be forced upon them by thepower whom they so lately solicited to secure them from him. 

Whatever is the motive of their conduct, it is evident, my lords, thatthey are at present to the unfortunate queen of Hungary, eitherprofessed enemies, or treacherous allies; for they have permitted theinvasion of her Italian dominions, when they might have prevented itwithout a blow, only by commanding the Spaniards not to transport theirtroops. 

To argue that our fleet in the Mediterranean was not of strengthsufficient to oppose their passage, is a subterfuge to which they canonly be driven by the necessity of making some apology, and an absoluteinability to produce any which will not immediately be discovered to begroundless. 

It is known, my lords, to all Europe, that Haddock had then under hiscommand thirteen ships of the line, and nine frigates, and that theSpanish convoy consisted only of three ships; and yet they sailed beforehis eyes with a degree of security which nothing could have produced buta passport from the court of Britain, and an assured exemption from thedanger of an attack. 

It may be urged, that they were protected by the French squadron, andthat Haddock durst not attack them, because he was unable to contendwith the united fleets; but my lords, even this is known to be false: itis known that they bore no proportion to the strength of the Britishsquadron, that they could not have made even the appearance of a battle, and that our commanders could have been only employed in pursuit andcaptures. 

This, my lords, was well known to our ministers, who were afraid only ofdestroying the French squadron, and were very far from apprehending anydanger from it; but being determined to purchase, on any terms, thecontinuance of the friendship of their old protectors, consented to theinvasion of Italy, and procured a squadron to sail out, under pretenceof defending the Spanish transports, that their compliance might not bediscovered. 

All this, my lords, may reasonably be suspected at the first view oftheir proceedings; for how could an inferiour force venture into the wayof an enemy, unless upon security that they should not be attacked? Butthe late treaty of neutrality has changed suspicion into certainty, hasdiscovered the source of all their measures, and shown that the invasionof Italy is permitted to preserve Hanover from the like calamity. 

There is great danger, my lords, lest this last treaty of Hanover shouldgive the decisive blow to the liberties of Europe. How much itembarrasses the queen of Hungary, by making it necessary for her todivide her forces, is obvious at the first view; but this is not, in myopinion, its most fatal consequence. The other powers will be incited, by the example of our ministry, to conclude treaties of neutrality inthe same manner. They will distrust every appearance of our zeal for thehouse of Austria, and imagine that we intend only an hypocriticalassistance, and that our generals, our ambassadors, and our admirals, have, in reality, the same orders. 

Nothing, my lords, is more dangerous than to weaken the publick faith. When a nation can be no longer trusted, it loses all its influence, because none can fear its menaces, or depend on its alliance. A nationno longer trusted, must stand alone and unsupported; and it is certainthat the nation which is justly suspected of holding with its openenemies a secret intercourse to the prejudice of its allies, can be nolonger trusted. 

This suspicion, my lords, this hateful, this reproachful character, isnow fixed upon the court of Britain; nor does it take its rise only fromthe forbearance of our admiral, but has received new confirmation fromthe behaviour of our ambassador, who denied the treaty of neutrality, when the French minister declared it to the Dutch. Such now, my lords, is the reputation of the British court, a reputation produced by themost flagrant and notorious instances of cowardice and falsehood, whichcannot but make all our endeavours ineffectual, and discourage all thosepowers whose conjunction we might have promoted, from entering into anyother engagements than such as we may purchase for stated subsidies. Forwho, upon any other motive than immediate interest, would form analliance with a power which, upon the first appearance of danger, givesup a confederate, to purchase, not a large extent of territory, not anew field of commerce, not a port or a citadel, but an abjectneutrality!

But however mean may be a supplication for peace, or however infamousthe desertion of an ally, I wish, my lords, that the liberty of invadingthe queen of Hungary's dominions without opposition, had been the mostculpable concession of our illustrious ministers, of whom it isreasonable to believe, that they have stipulated with the Spaniards, that they shall be repaid the expense of the war by the plunder of ourmerchants. 

That our commerce has been unnecessarily exposed to the ravages ofprivateers, from which a very small degree of caution might havepreserved it; that three hundred trading ships have been taken, and thatthree thousand British sailors are now in captivity, is a considerationtoo melancholy to be long dwelt upon, and a truth too certain to besuppressed or denied. 

How such havock could have been made, had not our ships of war concludeda treaty of neutrality with the Spaniards, and left the war to becarried on only by the merchants, it is not easy to conceive; for surelyit will not be pretended, that all these losses were the necessaryconsequence of our situation with regard to Spain, which, if it exposedthe Portugal traders to hazard, did not hinder us from guarding our owncoasts. 

And yet on our own coasts, my lords, have multitudes of our ships beentaken by the Spaniards; they have been seized by petty vessels as theywere entering our ports, and congratulating themselves upon their escapefrom danger. 

In the late war with France, an enemy much more formidable both forpower and situation, methods were discovered by which our trade was moreefficaciously protected: by stationing a squadron at the mouth of theChannel, of which two or three ships at a time cruized at a properdistance on the neighbouring seas, the privateers were kept in awe, andconfined to their own harbours, or seized if they ventured to leavethem. 

But of such useful regulations in the present war there is little hope;for if the publick papers are of any credit, the king of Spain considersthe captures of our merchants as a standing revenue, and has laid anindulto upon them as upon other parts of the Spanish trade. 

It is, therefore, to little purpose that measures are proposed in thishouse, or schemes presented by the merchants for the preservation of ourcommerce; for the merchants are considered as the determined enemies ofour minister, who therefore resolved that they should repent of the warinto which he was forced by them, contrary to those favourite schemesand established maxims, which he has pursued till the liberties ofmankind are almost extinguished. 

There are, indeed, some hopes, my lords, that new measures, resolutelypursued, might yet repair the mischiefs of this absurd and cowardlyconduct, and that by resolution and dexterity, the ambition of Francemight once more be disappointed. The king of Prussia appears, at length, convinced that he has not altogether pursued his real interest, and thathis own family must fall in the ruin of the house of Austria. The kingof Sardinia appears firm in his determination to adhere to the queen ofHungary, and has therefore refused a passage through his dominions tothe Spanish troops. The States of Holland seem to have taken the alarm, and nothing but their distrust of our sincerity can hinder them fromuniting against the house of Bourbon. 

This distrust, my lords, we may probably remove, by reviving, on thisoccasion, our ancient forms of address, and declaring at once to hismajesty, and to all the powers of Europe, that we are far from approvingthe late measures. 

There is another reason why the short addresses of our ancestors may bepreferred to the modern forms, in which a great number of particularfacts are often comprehended. It is evident, that the addresses arepresented, before there can be time to examine whether the factscontained in them are justly stated; and they must, therefore, losetheir efficacy with the people, who are sufficiently sagacious todistinguish servile compliance from real approbation, and who will noteasily mistake the incense of flattery for the tribute of gratitude. 

With regard to the propriety of the address proposed to your lordships, which is, like others, only a repetition of the speech, there is, atleast, one objection to it too important to be suppressed. 

It is affirmed in the speech, in what particular words I cannot exactlyremember, that since the death of the late German emperour, the interestof the queen of Hungary has been diligently and invariably promoted; anassertion which his majesty is too wise, too equitable, and too generousto have uttered, but at the persuasion of his ministers. 

His majesty well knows, that no important assistance has been hithertogiven to that unhappy princess; he knows that the twelve thousand men, who are said to have been raised for the defence of the empire, thosemighty troops, by whose assistance the enemies of Austria were to bescattered, never marched beyond the territory of Hanover, nor left thatblissful country for a single day. And is it probable that the queenwould have preferred money for troops, had she not been informed that itwould be more easily obtained?

Nor was even this pecuniary assistance, though compatible with thesecurity of Hanover, granted her without reluctance and difficulty; ofwhich no other proof is necessary, than the distance between the promiseand the performance of it. The money, my lords, is not yet all paid, though the last payment was very lately fixed. Such is the assistancewhich the united influence of justice and compassion has yet procuredfrom the court of Britain. 

Our ministers have been, therefore, hitherto, my lords, so far fromacting with vigour in favour of the house of Austria, that they havenever solicited the court of Muscovy, almost the only court nowindependent on France, to engage in her defence. How wisely that mightypower distinguishes her real interest, and how ardently she pursues it, the whole world was convinced in her alliance with the late emperour;nor is it unlikely, that she might have been easily persuaded to haveprotected his daughter with equal zeal. But we never asked her alliancelest we should obtain it, and yet we boast of our good offices. 

Our governours thought it more nearly concerned them to humble ourmerchants than to succour our allies, and therefore admitted theSpaniards into Italy; by which prudent conduct they dexterously at oncegratified the house of Bourbon, embarrassed the queen of Hungary, andendangered the effects of the British merchants, lying at Leghorn;effects which were lately valued at six hundred thousand pounds, butwhich, by the seasonable arrival of the Spaniards, are happily reducedto half their price. 

I hope, therefore, I need not urge to your lordships the necessity ofconfining our address to thanks and congratulations, because it is notnecessary to say how inconsistent it must be thought with the dignity ofthis house to echo falsehood, and to countenance perfidy. 

Then the duke of NEWCASTLE spoke to the following effect:--My lords, themanner in which the noble lord who spoke last expresses his sentiments, never fails to give pleasure, even where his arguments produce noconviction; and his eloquence always receives its praise, though it maysometimes be disappointed of its more important effects. 

In the present debate, my lords, I have heard no argument, by which I aminclined to change the usual forms of address, or to reject the motionwhich has been made to us. 

The address which has been proposed, is not, in my opinion, justlychargeable either with flattery to the ministers, or with disingenuitywith respect to the people; nor can I discover in it any of thosepositions which have been represented so fallacious and dangerous. Itcontains only a general declaration of our gratitude, and an assertionof our zeal; a declaration and assertion to which I hope no lord in thisassembly will be unwilling to subscribe. 

As an inquiry into the propriety of this address has produced, whethernecessarily or not, many observations on the present state of Europe, and many animadversions upon the late conduct, it cannot be improper forme to offer to your lordships my opinion of the measures which have beenpursued by us, as well in the war with Spain, as with regard to thequeen of Hungary, and to propose my conjectures concerning the eventswhich may probably be produced by the distractions on the continent. 

This deviation from the question before us, will at least be as easilypardoned in me as in the noble lords who have exhibited so gloomy arepresentation of our approaching condition, who have lamented theslavery with which they imagine all the states of Europe about to beharassed, and described the insolence and ravages of those oppressors towhom their apprehensions have already given the empire of the world. Forsurely, my lords, it is an endeavour no less laudable to dispel terrour, than to excite it; and he who brings us such accounts as we desire toreceive, is generally listened to with indulgence, however unelegant maybe his expressions, or however irregular his narration. 

That the power of the family of Bourbon is arrived at a very dangerousand formidable extent; that it never was hitherto employed but todisturb the happiness of the universe; that the same schemes which ourancestors laboured so ardently and so successfully to destroy, are nowformed afresh, and intended to be put in immediate execution; that theempire is designed to be held henceforward in dependence on France; andthat the house of Austria, by which the common rights of mankind havebeen so long supported, is now marked out for destruction, is tooevident to be contested. 

It is allowed, my lords, that the power of the house of Austria, whichthere was once reason to dread, lest it might have been employed againstus, is now almost extinguished; and that name, which has for so manyages filled the histories of Europe, is in danger of being forgotten. Itis allowed, that the house of Austria cannot fall without exposing allthose who have hitherto been supported by its alliance, to the utmostdanger; and I need not add, that they ought, therefore, to assist itwith the utmost expedition, and the most vigorous measures. 

It may be suggested, my lords, that this assistance has been alreadydelayed till it is become useless, that the utmost expedition will betoo slow, and the most vigorous measures too weak to stop the torrent ofthe conquests of France: that the fatal blow will be struck, before weshall have an opportunity to ward it off, and that our regard for thehouse of Austria will be only compassion for the dead. 

But these, my lords, I hope, are only the apprehensions of a mindoverborne with sudden terrours, and perplexed by a confused survey ofcomplicated danger; for if we consider more distinctly the powers whichmay be brought in opposition to France, we shall find no reason fordespairing that we may once more stand up with success in defence of ourreligion and the liberty of mankind, and once more reduce thosetroublers of the world to the necessity of abandoning their destructivedesigns. 

The noble lord has already mentioned the present disposition of threepowerful states, as a motive for vigorous resolutions, and aconsideration that may, at least, preserve us from despair; and it is nosmall satisfaction to me to observe, that his penetration and experienceincline him to hope upon the prospect of affairs as they now appear;because I doubt not but that hope will be improved into confidence, bythe account which I can now give your lordships of the intention ofanother power, yet more formidable, to engage with us in the greatdesign of repressing the insolence of France. 

A treaty of alliance, my lords, has been for some time concerted withthe emperour of Muscovy, and has been negotiated with such diligence, that it is now completed, and I doubt not but the last ratificationswill arrive at this court in a few days; by which it will appear to yourlordships, that the interest of this nation has been vigilantlyregarded, and to our allies, that the faith of Britain has never yetbeen shaken. It will appear to the French, that they have precipitatedtheir triumphs, that they have imagined themselves masters of nations bywhom they will be in a short time driven back to their own confines, andthat, perhaps, they have parcelled out kingdoms which they are neverlikely to possess. 

It was affirmed, and with just discernment, that applications ought tobe made to this powerful court, as the professed adversary of France;and if it was not hitherto known that their assistance had beenassiduously solicited, our endeavours were kept secret only that theirsuccess might be more certain, and that they might surprise morepowerfully by their effects. 

Nor have the two other princes, which were mentioned by the noble lord, been forgotten, whose concurrence is at this time so necessary to us:and I doubt not but that the representations which have been made withall the force of truth, and all the zeal that is awakened by interestand by danger, will in time produce the effects for which they wereintended; by convincing those princes that they endanger themselves byflattering the French ambition, that they are divesting themselves ofthat defence of which they will quickly regret the loss, and that theyare only not attacked at present, that they may be destroyed more easilyhereafter. 

But it is always to be remembered, my lords, that in publicktransactions, as in private life, interest acts with less force as it isat greater distance, and that the immediate motive will generallyprevail. Futurity impairs the influence of the most important objects ofconsideration, even when it does not lessen their certainty; and withregard to events only probable, events which a thousand accidents mayobviate, they are almost annihilated, with regard to the human mind, bybeing placed at a distance from us. Wherever imagination can exert itspower, we easily dwell upon the most pleasing views, and flatterourselves with those consequences, which though perhaps least to beexpected, are most desired. Wherever different events may arise, whichis the state of all human transactions, we naturally promote our hopes, and repress our fears; and in time so far deceive ourselves, as to quietall our suspicions, lay all our terrours asleep, and believe what atfirst we only wished. 

This, my lords, must be the delusion by which some states are induced tofavour, and others to neglect the encroachments of France. Men areimpolitick, as they are wicked; because they prefer the gratification ofthe present hour to the assurance of solid and permanent, but distanthappiness. The French take advantage of this general weakness of thehuman mind, and by magnificent promises to one prince, and petty grantsto another, reconcile them to their designs. Each finds that he shallgain more by contracting an alliance with them, than with another statewhich has no view besides that of preserving to every sovereign his justrights, and which, therefore, as it plunders none, will have nothing tobestow. 

This, my lords, is the disadvantage under which our negotiators labouragainst those of France; we have no kingdoms to parcel out among thosewhose confederacy we solicit; we can promise them no superiority abovethe neighbouring princes which they do not now possess; we assume notthe province of adjusting the boundaries of dominion, or of decidingcontested titles: we promise only the preservation of quiet, and theestablishment of safety. 

But the French, my lords, oppose us with other arguments, argumentswhich, indeed, receive their force from folly and credulity; but whatmore powerful assistance can be desired? They promise not mere negativeadvantages, not an exemption from remote oppression, or an escape fromslavery, which, as it was yet never felt, is very little dreaded; theyoffer an immediate augmentation of dominion, and an extension of power;they propose new tracts of commerce, and open new sources of wealth;they invite confederacies, not for defence, but for conquests; forconquests to be divided among the powers by whose union they shall bemade. 

Let it not, therefore, be objected, my lords, to our ministers, or ournegotiators, that the French obtain more influence than they; that theyare more easily listened to, or more readily believed: for while such isthe condition of mankind, that what is desired is easily credited, whileprofit is more powerful than reason, the French eloquence willfrequently prevail. 

Whether, my lords, our seeming want of success in the war with Spainadmits of as easy a solution, my degree of knowledge in militaryaffairs, does not enable me to determine. An account of this part of ourconduct is to be expected from the commissioners of the admiralty, bywhom, I doubt not, but such reasons will be assigned for all theoperations of our naval forces, and such vindications offered of allthose measures, which have been hitherto imputed too precipitately tonegligence, cowardice, or treachery, as will satisfy those who have beenmost vehement in their censures. 

But because it does not seem to me very difficult to apologize for thosemiscarriages which have occasioned the loudest complaints, I will laybefore your lordships what I have been able to collect from inquiry, orto conjecture from observation; and doubt not but it will easily appear, that nothing has been omitted from any apparent design of betraying ourcountry, and that our ministers and commanders will deserve, at least, to be heard before they are condemned. 

That great numbers of our trading vessels have been seized by theSpaniards, and that our commerce has, therefore, been very muchembarrassed and interrupted, is sufficiently manifest; but to me, mylords, this appears one of the certain and necessary consequences ofwar, which are always to be expected, and to be set in our consultationsagainst the advantages which we propose to obtain. It is as rational toexpect, that of an army sent against our enemies, every man shouldreturn unhurt to his acquaintances, as that every merchant should seehis ship and cargo sail safely into port. 

If we examine, my lords, the late war, of which the conduct has been solavishly applauded, in which the victories which we obtained have beenso loudly celebrated, and which has been proposed to the imitation ofall future ministers, it will appear, that our losses of the same kindwere then very frequent, and, perhaps, not less complained of, thoughthe murmurs are now forgotten, and the acclamations transmitted toposterity, because we naturally relate what has given us satisfaction, and suppress what we cannot recollect without uneasiness. 

If we look farther backward, my lords, and inquire into the event of anyother war in which we engaged since commerce has constituted so large apart of the interest of this nation, I doubt not but in proportion toour trade will be found our losses; and in all future wars, as in thepresent, I shall expect the same calamities and the same complaints. Forthe escape of any number of ships raises no transport, nor produces anygratitude; but the loss of a few will always give occasion to clamoursand discontent. For vigilance, however diligent, can never produce moresafety than will be naturally expected from our incontestablesuperiority at sea, by which a great part of the nation is so fardeceived as to imagine, that because we cannot be conquered, we cannotbe molested. 

Nor do I see how it is possible to employ our power more effectually forthe protection of our trade than by the method now pursued of coveringthe ocean with our fleets, and stationing our ships of war in everyplace where danger can be apprehended. If it be urged, that theinefficacy of our measures is a sufficient proof of their impropriety, it will be proper to substitute another plan of operation, of which thesuccess may be more probable. To me, my lords, the loss of some of ourmercantile vessels shows only the disproportion between the number ofour ships of war, and the extent of the sea, which is a region too vastto be completely garrisoned, and of which the frequenters mustinevitably be subject to the sudden incursions of subtle rovers. 

The disposition of our squadrons has been such, as was doubtlessdictated by the most acute sagacity, and the most enlightenedexperience. The squadron which was appointed to guard our coasts hasbeen ridiculed as an useless expense; and its frequent excursions andreturns, without any memorable attempt, have given occasion to endlessraillery, and incessant exclamations of wonder and contempt. But it isto be considered, my lords, that the enemies of this nation, eithersecret or declared, had powerful squadrons in many ports of theMediterranean, which, had they known that our coasts were withoutdefence, might have issued out on a sudden, and have appearedunexpectedly in our Channel, from whence they might have laid our townsin ruin, entered our docks, burnt up all our preparations for futureexpeditions, carried into slavery the inhabitants of our villages, andleft the maritime provinces of this kingdom in a state of generaldesolation. 

Out of this squadron, however necessary, there was yet a reinforcementof five ships ordered to assist Haddock, that he might be enabled tooppose the designs of the Spaniards, though assisted by their Frenchconfederates, whom it is known that he was so far from favouring, thathe was stationed before Barcelona to block them up. Why he departed fromthat port, and upon what motives of policy, or maxims of war, hesuffered the Spaniards to prosecute their scheme, he only is able toinform us. 

That the Spaniards have not at least been spared by design, is evidentfrom their sufferings in this war, which have been much greater thanours. Many of our ships have, indeed, been snatched up by the rapacityof private adventurers, whom the ardour of interest had made vigilant, and whose celerity of pursuit as well as flight, enables them to takethe advantage of the situation of their own ports, and those of theirfriends. But as none of our ships have been denied convoys, I know nothow the loss of them can be imputed to the ministry; and if any of thosewho sailed under the protection of ships of war have been lost, thecommanders may be required to vindicate themselves from the charge ofnegligence or treachery. 

But this inquiry, my lords, must be, in my opinion, reserved for anotherday, when it may become the immediate subject of our consultations, withwhich it has at present no coherence, or to which, at least, it is veryremotely related. For I am not able, upon the most impartial and themost attentive consideration of the address now proposed to yourlordships, to perceive any necessity of a previous inquiry into theconduct of the war, the transaction of our negotiations, or the state ofthe kingdom, in order to our compliance with this motion, by which weshall be far from sheltering any crime from punishment, or any doubtfulconduct from inquiry; shall be far from obstructing the course ofnational justice, or approving what we do not understand. 

The chief tendency of his majesty's speech is to ask our advice on thisextraordinary conjuncture of affairs; a conduct undoubtedly worthy of aBritish monarch, and which we ought not to requite with disrespect; butwhat less can be inferred from an alteration of our established forms ofaddress, by an omission of any part of the speech? For what will beimagined by his majesty, by the nation, and by the whole world, but thatwe did not approve what we did not answer?

The duke of ARGYLE spoke to the following purpose:--My lords, it is withgreat reason that the present time has been represented to us from thethrone as a time of uncommon danger and disturbance, a time in which thebarriers of kingdoms are broken down, in contempt of every law of heavenand of earth, and in which ambition, rapine, and oppression, seem to belet loose upon mankind; a time in which some nations send out armies andinvade the territories of their neighbours, in opposition to the mostsolemn treaties, of which others, with equal perfidy, silently suffer, or secretly favour the violation. 

At a time like this, when treaties are considered only as momentaryexpedients, and alliances confer no security, it is evident that thepreservation of our rights, our interest, and our commerce, must dependonly on our natural strength; and that instead of cultivating thefriendship of foreign powers, which we must purchase upondisadvantageous conditions, and which will be withdrawn from us wheneverwe shall need it; we ought, therefore, to collect our own force, andshow the world how little we stand in need of assistance, and how littlewe have to fear from the most powerful of our enemies. 

Our country, my lords, seems designed by nature to subsist without anydependence on other nations, and by a steady and resolute improvement ofthese advantages with which providence has blessed it, may bid defianceto mankind; it might become, by the extension of our commerce, thegeneral centre at which the wealth of the whole earth might be collectedtogether, and from whence it might be issued upon proper occasions, forthe diffusion of liberty, the repression of insolence, and thepreservation of peace. 

But this glory, and this influence, my lords, must arise from domestickfelicity; and domestick felicity can only be produced by a mutualconfidence between the government and the people. Where the governoursdistrust the affections of their subjects, they will not be verysolicitous to advance their happiness; for who will endeavour toincrease that wealth which will, as he believes, be employed againsthim? Nor will the subjects cheerfully concur even with the necessarymeasures of their governours, whose general designs they conceive to becontrary to the publick interest; because any temporary success oraccidental reputation, will only dazzle the eyes of the multitude, whiletheir liberties are stolen away. 

This confidence, my lords, must be promoted where it exists, andregained where it is lost, by the open administration of justice, byimpartial inquiries into publick transactions, by the exaltation ofthose whose wisdom and bravery has advanced the publick reputation, orincreased the happiness of the nation, and the censure of those, howeverelate with dignities, or surrounded with dependants, who by theirunskilfulness or dishonesty, have either embarrassed their country orbetrayed it. 

For this reason, my lords, it is, in my opinion, necessary to gratifythe nation, at the present juncture, with the prospect of thosemeasures, without which no people can reasonably be satisfied; and topacify their resentment of past injuries, and quiet their apprehensionsof future miseries, by a possibility, at least, that they may see theauthors of all our miscarriages called to a trial in open day, and themerit of those men acknowledged and rewarded, by whose resolution andintegrity they imagine that the final ruin of themselves and posterityhas been hitherto prevented. 

That the present discontent of the British nation is almost universal, that suspicion has infused itself into every rank and denomination ofmen, that complaints of the neglect of our commerce, the misapplicationof our treasure, and the unsuccessfulness of our arms, are to be heardfrom every mouth, and in every place, where men dare utter theirsentiments, I suppose, my lords, no man will deny; for whoever shouldstand up in opposition to the truth of a fact so generally known, woulddistinguish himself, even in this age of effrontery and corruption, by acontempt of reputation, not yet known amongst mankind. 

And indeed, my lords, it must be confessed that these discontents andclamours are produced by such an appearance of folly, or of treachery, as few ages or nations have ever known; by such an obstinateperseverance in bad measures, as shame has hitherto prevented in thoseupon whom nobler motives, fidelity to their trust, and love of theircountry, had lost their influence. 

Other ministers, when they have formed designs of sacrificing thepublick interest to their own, have been compelled to better measures bytimely discoveries, and just representations; they have been criminalonly because they hoped for secrecy, and have vindicated their conductno longer than while they had hopes that their apologies might deceive. 

But our heroick ministers, my lords, have set themselves free from theshackles of circumspection, they have disburdened themselves of theembarrassments of caution, and claim an exemption from the necessity ofsupporting their measures by laborious deductions and artful reasonings;they defy the publick when they can no longer delude it, and prosecute, in the face of the sun, those measures which they have not been able tosupport, and of which the fatal consequences are foreseen by the wholenation. 

When they have been detected in one absurdity, they take shelter inanother; when experience has shown that one of their attempts wasdesigned only to injure their country, they propose a second of the samekind with equal confidence, boast again of their integrity, and againrequire the concurrence of the legislature, and the support of thepeople. 

When they had for a long time suffered our trading vessels to be seizedin sight of our own ports, when they had despatched fleets into theMediterranean, only to lie exposed to the injuries of the weather, andto sail from one coast to another, only to show that they had no hostileintentions, and that they were fitted out by the friends of theSpaniards, only to amuse and exhaust the nation, they at length thoughtit necessary to lull the impatience of the people, who began to discoverthat they had hitherto been harassed with taxes and impresses to nopurpose, by the appearance of a new effort for the subjection of theenemy, and to divert, by the expectations which an army and a fleetnaturally raise, any clamours at their past conduct'. 

For this end, having entered into their usual consultations, theyprojected an expedition into America, for which they raised forces andprocured transports, with all the pomp of preparation for the conquestof half the continent, not so much to alarm the Spaniards, which Iconceive but a secondary view, as to fill the people of Britain withamusing prospects of great achievements, of the addition of newdominions to this empire, and an ample reparation for all their damages. 

Thus provided with forces sufficient, in appearance, for this mightyenterprise, they embarked them after many delays, and dismissed them totheir fate, having first disposed their regulations in such a manner, that it was impossible that they should meet with success. 

I can call your lordships to witness, that this impossibility was notdiscovered by me after the event, for I foretold in this house, thattheir designs, so conducted, must evidently miscarry. 

Nor was this prediction, my lords, the effect of any uncommon sagacity, or any accidental conjecture on future consequences which happened to beright; for to any man who has had opportunities of observing thatknowledge in war is necessary to success, and experience is thefoundation of knowledge, it was sufficiently plain that our forces mustbe repulsed. 

The forces sent into America, my lords, were newly raised, placed underthe direction of officers not less ignorant than themselves, andcommanded by a man who never had commanded any troops before; and who, however laudable he might have discharged the duty of a captain, waswholly unacquainted with the province of a general. 

Yet was this man, my lords, preferred, not only to a multitude of otherofficers, to whom experience must have been of small advantage, if itdid not furnish them with knowledge far superiour to his, but to fiveand forty generals, of whom I hope the nation has no reason to suspectthat any of them would not gladly have served it on an occasion of sogreat importance, and willingly have conducted an expedition intended toretrieve the honour of the British name, the terrour of our arms, andthe security of our commerce. 

When raw troops, my lords, with young officers, are to act under thecommand of an unskilful general, what is it reasonable to expect, butwhat has happened--overthrow, slaughter, and ignominy? What but thatcheap victories should heighten the insolence, and harden the obstinacyof our enemies; and that we should not only be weakened by our loss, butdispirited by our disgrace; by the disgrace of being overthrown by thosewhom we have despised, and with whom nothing but our own folly couldhave reduced us to a level. 

The other conjecture which I ventured to propose to your lordships, withregard to the queen of Hungary, was not founded on facts equally evidentwith the former, though experience has discovered that it was equallytrue. It was then asserted, both by other lords and myself, that moneywould be chosen by that princess as an assistance more useful thanforces; an opinion, which the lords who are engaged in theadministration vigorously opposed. In consequence of theirdetermination, forces were hired, for what purpose--let them nowdeclare, since none but themselves have yet known. 

That at least they were not taken into our pay for the service for whichthey were required, the succour of the house of Austria, is mostevident, unless the name of armies is imagined sufficient to intimidatethe French, as the Spaniards are to be subdued by the sight of fleets. They never marched towards her frontiers, never opposed her enemies, orafforded her the least assistance, but stood idle and unconcerned in theterritories of Hanover; nor was it known that they existed by any otherproof than that remittances were made for their pay. 

Such, my lords, was the assistance, asked with so much solicitude, andlevied with so much expedition, for the queen of Hungary; such were theeffects of the zeal of our illustrious ministers for the preservation ofthat august house, to whose alliance we are perhaps indebted for thepreservation of our religion and our liberties, and to which all Europemust have recourse for shelter from the oppression of France. 

When this formidable body of men was assembled, my lords, and reviewed, they were perhaps found too graceful and too well sorted to be exposedto the dangers of a battle; and the same tenderness that has so longpreserved our own forces from any other field than the park, mightrescue them from the fatigues of accompanying the active hussars intheir incursions, or the steady Austrians in their conflicts. 

Whatever was the reason, my lords, it is certain that they have beenreserved for other opportunities of signalizing their courage; and theyslept in quiet, and fattened upon the wealth of Britain, while theenemies of our illustrious, magnanimous, and unfortunate ally, enteredher territories without opposition, marched through them uninterrupted, and rather took possession than made conquests. 

That in this condition of her affairs, the queen would refuse an offerof twelve thousand men; that when she was driven from one country toanother, attended by an army scarcely sufficient to form a flying camp, she would not gladly have accepted a reinforcement so powerful, letthose believe, my lords, who have yet never been deceived by ministerialfaith. 

The real designs of the ministry, my lords, are sufficiently obvious, nor is any thing more certain, than that they had, in requiring thismock assistance for the queen of Hungary, no other design than that ofraising her expectations only to deceive them; and to divert her, byconfidence in their preparations, from having recourse to moreefficacious expedients, that she might become, without resistance, theslave of France. 

For this purpose they determined to succour her with forces rather thanwith money, because many reasons might be pretended, by which the marchof the forces might be retarded; but the money, my lords, when granted, must have been more speedily remitted. 

At last the queen, weary with delays, and undoubtedly sufficientlyinformed of those designs, which are now, however generally discovered, confidently denied, desired a supply of money, which might be grantedwithout leaving Hanover exposed to an invasion. With this demand, whichthey had no pretence to deny, they have yet found expedients to delaytheir compliance. For it does not appear that the whole sum granted hasyet been paid; and it would well become those noble lords, whose officesgive them an opportunity of observing the distribution of the publickmoney, to justify themselves from the suspicions of the nation, bydeclaring openly what has been remitted, and what yet remains to bedisbursed for some other purpose. 

Is it not, therefore, evident, my lords, that by promising assistance tothis unhappy princess, the ministry intended to deceive her? That whenthey flattered her with the approach of auxiliary forces, they designedonly to station them where they might garrison the frontiers of Hanover?And that when they forced her to solicit for pecuniary aid, they delayedthe payment of the subsidy, that it might not be received till it couldproduce no effect?

This, my lords, is not only evident from the manifest absurdity of theirconduct upon any other supposition, but from the general scheme whichhas always been pursued by the man whose dictatorial instructionsregulate the opinions of all those that constitute the ministry, and ofwhom it is well known, that it has been the great purpose of his life toaggrandize France, by applying to her for assistance in imaginarydistresses from fictitious confederacies, and by sacrificing to her inreturn the house of Austria, and the commerce of Britain. 

How then, my lords, can it be asserted by us, that the house of Austriahas been vigilantly supported? How can we approve measures, of which wediscover no effect but the expense of the nation? A double expense, produced first by raising troops, which though granted for theassistance of the Austrians, have been made use of only for theprotection of Hanover, and by the grant of money in the place of thesetroops, which were thus fallaciously obtained, and thus unprofitablyemployed!

For what purpose these forces were in reality raised, I suppose no mancan be ignorant, and no man to whom it is known can possibly approve it. How then, my lords, can we concur in an address by which the people mustbe persuaded, that we either are deceived ourselves, or endeavour toimpose upon them; that we either dare not condemn any measures, howeverdestructive, or that, at least, we are in haste to approve them, lestinquiry should discover their tendency too plainly to leave us the powerof applauding them, without an open declaration of our own impotence, ordisregard for the welfare of the publick. 

The complaints of the people are already clamorous, and their discontentopen and universal; and surely the voice of the people ought, at least, to awake us to an examination of their condition. And though we shouldnot immediately condemn those whom they censure and detest, as theauthors of their miseries, we ought, at least, to pay so much regard tothe accusation of the whole community, as not to reject it withoutinquiry, as a suspicion merely chimerical. 

Whether these complaints and suspicions, my lords, proceed from realinjuries and imminent dangers, or from false accusations and groundlessterrours, they equally deserve the attention of this house, whose greatcare is the happiness of the people: people equally worthy of yourtenderness and regard, whether they are betrayed by one party oranother; whether they are plundered by the advocates of theadministration, under pretence of supporting the government, oraffrighted with unreasonable clamours by the opponents of the court, under the specious appearance of protecting liberty. The people, mylords, are in either case equally miserable, and deserve equally to berescued from distress. 

By what method, my lords, can this be effected, but by some publickassurance from this house, that the transactions of the nation shall nolonger be concealed in impenetrable secrecy; that measures shall be nolonger approved without examination; that publick evils shall be tracedto their causes; and that disgrace, which they have hitherto broughtupon the publick, shall fall for the future only upon the authors ofthem. 

Of giving this assurance, and of quieting by it the clamours of thepeople; clamours which, whether just or not, are too formidable to beslighted, and too loud not to be heard, we have now the most properopportunity before us. The address which the practice of our ancestorsrequires us to make to his majesty, may give us occasion of expressingat once our loyalty to the crown, and our fidelity to our country; ourzeal for the honour of our sovereign, and our regard for the happinessof the people. 

For this purpose it is necessary that, as we preserve the practice ofour ancestors in one respect, we revive it in another; that we imitatethose in just freedom of language whom we follow in the decent forms ofceremony; and show that as we preserve, like them, a due sense of theregal dignity, so, like them, we know likewise how to preserve our own, and despise flattery on one side, as we decline rudeness on the other. 

A practice, my lords, has prevailed of late, which cannot but be allowedpernicious to the publick, and derogatory from the honour of thisassembly; a practice of retaining in our address the words of thespeech, and of following it servilely from period to period, as if itwere expected that we should always adopt the sentiments of the court;as if we were not summoned to advise, but to approve, and approvewithout examination. 

By such addresses, my lords, all inquiries may be easily precluded; forthe minister by whom the speech is compiled, may easily introduce themost criminal transactions in such a manner, as that they may obtain theapprobation of this house; which he may plead afterwards at our bar, when he shall be called before it, and either involve us in the disgraceof inconsistency, and expose us to general contempt, or be acquitted byour former suffrages, which it would be reproachful to retract, and yetcriminal to confirm. 

It is not necessary, my lords, on this occasion to observe, what allparties have long since acknowledged, when it did not promote theirinterest to deny it, that every speech from the throne is to beconsidered as the work of the minister, because it is generally writtenby him; or if composed by the king himself, must be drawn up inpursuance of the information and counsel of the ministry, to whom it is, therefore, ultimately to be referred, and may consequently be examinedwithout any failure of respect to the person of the prince. 

This ought, however, to be observed, my lords, that it may appear moreplainly how certainly this practice may be imputed to the artifices ofministers, since it does not promote the honour of the prince, andmanifestly obstructs the interest of the people; since it is a practiceirrational in itself, because it is inconsistent with the great purposeof this assembly, and can, therefore, serve no other purpose than thatof procuring indemnity to the ministers, by placing them out of thereach of future animadversion. 

Let not, my lords, the uninterrupted continuance of this practice forsome reigns be pleaded in its defence; for nothing is more worthy of thedignity of this house, than to prevent the multiplication of dangerousprecedents. That a custom manifestly injurious to the publick hascontinued long, is the strongest reason for breaking it, because itacquires every year new authority and greater veneration: if when anation is alarmed and distracted, a custom of twenty years is not to beinfringed, it may in twenty years more be so firmly established, thatmany may think it necessary to be supported, even when those calamitiesare incontestably felt, which, perhaps, now are only feared. 

I shall, therefore, my lords, propose, that of the address moved for, all be left out but the first paragraph; it will then be more consistentwith the honour of your lordships, with our regard for the people, andwith our duty to the crown, and hope no lord will refuse hisconcurrence. 

Lord HARDWICKE rose next, and spoke to the following effect:--My lords, upon an attentive consideration of the address now proposed, I am notable to discover any objections which can justly hinder the unanimousconcurrence of this assembly, since there is not any propositioncontained in it either dangerous or uncertain. 

The noble lords who have opposed this motion with the most ardentvehemence, are very far from denying what is asserted in it; theyreadily grant that designs are concerted by many formidable powersagainst the house of Austria, and that the consequences of the ruin ofthat family must extend to the utmost parts of Europe, and endanger theliberties of Britain itself; that the power of France will then bewithout a rival, and that she may afterwards gratify her ambitionwithout fear and without danger. 

Nor is it, my lords, less obvious in itself, or less generally allowed, that this is a time which demands the most active vigour, the mostinvariable unanimity, and the most diligent despatch; that nothing caninterrupt the course of our common enemies but the wisest counsels, andthe most resolute opposition; and that upon our conduct at this greatconjuncture may probably depend the happiness and liberty of ourselves, our allies, and our posterity. 

All this, my lords, is allowed to be apparently and indisputably true; Iam, therefore, at a loss to conceive what can be the occasion of thedebate in which some of your lordships have engaged. As the causes ofthe calamities which are said to threaten us are not assigned in theaddress, we shall leave ourselves at full liberty to charge them uponthose who shall appear from future inquiries to deserve so heavy anaccusation. 

If the ministers of the court have, by any inconstancy in theirmeasures, or folly in their negotiations, given an opportunity to theenemies of Europe to extend their influence, or endangered either ourown interest, or that of our allies; if they have by oppression ornegligence alienated from his majesty the affections of his people, orthe confidence of his confederates, nothing that is contained in theaddress now before us can be produced by them in justification of theirconduct, or secure them from accusation, censure, and punishment. 

If the war, my lords, has been hitherto carried on with clandestinestipulations, or treacherous compacts; if our admirals have receivedorders to retire from the coast of Spain, only to give our enemies anopportunity of invading the dominions of the queen of Hungary, or have, without directions, deserted their stations, and abandoned theprotection of our commerce and our colonies; we shall, notwithstandingthis address, retain in our hands the privilege of inquiring into theirconduct, and the power, if it be found criminal, of inflicting suchpenalties as justice shall require. 

I know not, therefore, my lords, upon what motives the debate iscontinued, nor what objections they are which hinder our unanimity, at atime when all petty controversies ought to be forgot, and all nominaldistinctions laid aside; at a time when general danger may justly claimgeneral attention, and we ought to suspend the assertion of ourparticular opinions, and the prosecution of our separate interests, andregard only the opposition of France, the support of our allies, and thepreservation of our country. 

The noble lords who have offered their sentiments on this occasion, havevery diffusely expatiated on the miseries that impend over us, and haveshown uncommon dexterity and acuteness in tracing them all to onesource, the weakness or dishonesty of the British ministry. 

For my part, my lords, though, perhaps, I believe that manycircumstances of the present distress are to be imputed to accidentswhich could not be foreseen, and that the conduct of the ministry, however sometimes disappointed of the effects intended by it, was yetprudent and sincere, I shall at present forbear to engage in theirdefence, because the discussion of a question so complicated mustnecessarily require much time, and because I think it not so useful toinquire how we were involved in our present difficulties, as by whatmeans we may be extricated from them. 

The method by which weak states are made strong, and by which those thatare already powerful, are enabled to exert their strength with efficacy, is the promotion of union, and the abolition of all suspicions by whichthe people may be incited to a distrust of their sovereign, or thesovereign provoked to a disregard of his people. With this view, mylords, all addresses ought to be drawn up, and this consideration willbe sufficient to restrain us from any innovations at a time like this. 

If it should be granted, my lords, that the ancient method were betteradapted to the general intention of addresses, more correspondent to thedignity of this house, and liable to fewer inconveniencies than thatwhich later times have introduced, yet it will not follow that we cannow safely change it. 

Nothing in the whole doctrine of politicks is better known, than thatthere are times when the redress of grievances, inveterate andcustomary, is not to be attempted; times when the utmost care is barelysufficient to avert extreme calamities, and prevent a total dissolution;and in which the consideration of lighter evils must not be suffered tointerrupt more important counsels, or divert that attention which thepreservation of the state necessarily demands. 

Such, my lords, is the present time, even by the confession of those whohave opposed the motion, and of whom, therefore, it may be reasonablydemanded, why they waste these important hours in debates upon forms andwords?

For that only forms and words have produced the debate, must beapparent, even to themselves, when the fervour of controversy shall haveslackened; when that vehemence, with which the most moderate aresometimes transported, and that acrimony, which candour itself cannotalways forbear, shall give way to reflection and to reason. That thedanger is pressing, and that pressing dangers require expedition andunanimity, they willingly grant; and what more is asserted in theaddress?

That any lord should be unwilling to concur in the customary expressionsof thankfulness and duty to his majesty, or in acknowledgments of thatregard for this assembly with which he asks our assistance and advice, Iam unwilling to suspect; nor can I imagine that any part of theopposition to this proposal can be produced by unwillingness to complywith his majesty's demands, and to promise that advice and assistance, which it is our duty, both to our sovereign, our country, and ourselves, to offer. 

That those, my lords, who have expressed in terms so full of indignationtheir resentment of the imaginary neglect of the queen of Hungary'sinterest, have declared the house of Austria the only bulwark of Europe, and expressed their dread of the encroachments of France with emotionswhich nothing but real passion can produce, should be unwilling toassert their resolution of adhering to the Pragmatick sanction, and ofdefending the liberties of the empire, cannot be supposed. 

And yet, my lords, what other reasons of their conduct can be assignedeither by the emperour, or the people, or the allies of Britain; thoseallies whose claim they so warmly assert, and whose merits they soloudly extol? Will it not be imagined in foreign courts, that themeasures now recommended by the emperour, are thought not consistentwith the interest of the nation? Will it not be readily believed, thatwe propose to abandon those designs of which we cannot be persuaded todeclare our approbation?

What will be the consequence of such an opinion artfully propagated byFrance, and confirmed by appearances so likely to deceive, may easily beforeseen, and safely predicted. The French will prosecute their schemeswith fresh ardour, when they dread no longer any interruption from theonly nation able to resist them; and it is well known, my lords, howoften confidence, by exciting courage, produces success. 

Nor, indeed, can the success of their endeavours, thus animated andquickened, be easily doubted, since the same appearances that encouragethem will intimidate their enemies. Our allies will then think no longerof union against the general enemy; they must imagine their united forceinsufficient, and the only emulation amongst them will quickly be, whichshall first offer his liberty to sale, who shall first pay his court tothe masters of the world, and merit mercy by a speedy submission. 

Thus, my lords, will the house of Austria, that house so faithful toBritain, and so steady in its opposition to the designs of the Frenchambition, be finally sunk in irrecoverable ruin, by those who appear toplease themselves with declamations in its praise, and resolutions forits defence; and who never speak of the French without rage anddetestation. 

If on this occasion, my lords, we should give any suspicion of unusualdiscontent, what could be concluded but that we are unwilling any longerto embarrass ourselves with remote considerations, to load this nationwith taxes for the preservation of the rights of other sovereigns, andto hazard armies in the defence of the continent? What can our alliesthink, but that we are at present weary of the burdensome and expensivehonour of holding the balance of power in our hands, are content toresign the unquiet province of the arbiters of Europe, and propose toconfine our care henceforward to our immediate interest, and shut upourselves in our own island?

That this is the real design of any of those noble lords who haveopposed the motion, I do not intend to insinuate; for I doubt not butthey believe the general interest both of this nation and its allies, most likely to be promoted by the method of address which theyrecommend, since they declare that they do not think our statedesperate, and confess the importance of the affairs on which we arerequired by his majesty to deliberate, to be such, that nothing ought torepress our endeavours but impossibility of success. 

Such is the knowledge and experience of those noble lords, that thehopes which I had formed of seeing the destructive attempts of theFrench once more defeated, and power restored again to that equipoisewhich is necessary to the continuance of tranquillity and happiness, have received new strength from their concurrence, and I shall now hearwith less solicitude the threats of France. 

That the French, my lords, are not invincible, the noble duke who spokelast has often experienced; nor is there any reason for imagining thatthey are now more formidable than when we encountered them in the fieldsof Blenheim and Ramillies. Nothing is requisite but a firm union amongthose princes who are immediately in danger from their encroachments, toreduce them to withdraw their forces from the countries of theirneighbours, and quit, for the defence of their own territories, theirschemes of bestowing empires, and dividing dominions. 

That such an union is now cultivated, we have been informed by hismajesty, whose endeavours will probably be successful, however they mayat first be thwarted and obstructed; because the near approach of dangerwill rouse those whom avarice has stupified, or negligence intoxicated;thus truth and reason will become every day more powerful, and sophistryand artifice be in time certainly detected. 

When, therefore, my lords, we are engaged in consultations which mayaffect the liberties of a great part of mankind, and by which ourposterity to many ages may be made happy or miserable; when the dailyprogress of the enemies of justice and of freedom ought to awaken us tovigilance and expedition, and there are yet just hopes that diligenceand firmness may preserve us from ruin, let us not waste our time inunnecessary debates, and keep the nations of Europe in suspense by thediscussion of a question, the decision of which may be delayed foryears, without any manifest inconvenience. Let us not embarrass hismajesty by an unusual form of address, at a time when he his negotiatingalliances, and forming plans for the rescue of the empire. 

Nothing, my lords, is more remote from the real end of addresses, than arepresentation of them as made only to the minister; for if there be anycommerce between a prince and his subjects, in which he is the immediateagent, if his personal dignity be interested in any act of government, Ithink it is not to be denied, that in receiving the addresses of the twohouses, he assumes a peculiar and distinct character, which cannot beconfounded with his council or ministry. 

The duke of ARGYLE rose again, and spoke to this effect:--My lords, ifthere was now any contest amongst us for superiority of regard to hismajesty, of zeal for his honour, or reverence of his person, I shouldnot doubt of proving that no lord in this house can boast of moreardour, fidelity, or respect than myself; and if the chief question nowamongst us related to the terms in which he deserves to be addressed byus, I should be unwilling that any man should propose language moresubmissive and reverend, or more forcible and comprehensive than myself. 

But addresses, however they may for present purposes be represented asregarding the personal character of the king, are in reality nothingmore than replies to a speech composed by the minister, whose measures, if we should appear to commend, our panegyrick may, in some futureproceeding, be cited against us. Every address, therefore, ought to beconsidered as a publick record, and to be drawn up, to inform thenation, not to mislead our sovereign. 

The address now proposed, is, indeed, equally indefensible to whomsoeverit may be supposed to relate. If it respects the people, it can onlydrive them to despair; if it be confined to the sovereign, our advice, not our panegyrick, is now required, and Europe is to be preserved fromruin, not by our eloquence, but our sincerity. Respect to his majesty, my lords, will be best shown by preserving his influence in othernations, and his authority in his own empire. This can only be done byshowing him how the one has been impaired, and how the other may be intime endangered. 

By addresses like this which is now proposed, my lords, has his majestybeen betrayed into an inadvertent appro bation of measures pernicious tothe nation, and dishonourable to himself, and will now be kept ignorantof the despicable conduct of the war, the treacherous connivance at thedescent of the Spaniards upon the dominions of the queen of Hungary, andthe contempt with which every nation of the continent has heard of theneutrality lately concluded. By addresses like this, my lords, have therights of the nation been silently given up, and the invaders ofliberty, and violators of our laws, preserved from prosecution; by suchaddresses have our monarchs been ruined at one time, and our countryenslaved at another. 

Lord HARRINGTON spoke next, in the following manner:--My lords, it isnecessary to explain that treaty of neutrality which has been mentionedby some lords as an act to the last degree shameful, an act by which thenation has been dishonoured, and the general liberties of Europe havebeen betrayed; a representation so distant from the truth, that it canonly be imputed to want of information. 

This treaty of neutrality, my lords, is so far from being reproachful tothis nation, that it has no relation to it, being made by his majestynot in the character of emperour of Britain, but elector of Hanover, noris any thing stipulated by it but security of the dominions of Hanover, from the invasion of the French for a single year. 

What part of this transaction, my lords, can be supposed to fall underthe cognizance of this assembly? Or with what propriety can it bementioned in our debates, or produce an argument on either side? Thatthe dominions of Britain and Hanover are distinct, and independent oneach other, has often been asserted, and asserted with truth; and I hopethose who so studiously separate their interest on all other occasions, will not now unite them only to reflect maliciously on the conduct ofhis majesty. 

I do not, indeed, charge any lord with a design so malignant and unjust;having already asserted it as my opinion, that these reproaches wereproduced only by ignorance of the true state of the affair, but cannotwith equal readiness allow that ignorance to be wholly blameless. 

It is necessary, my lords, in common life, to every man who would avoidcontempt and ridicule, to refrain from speaking, at least from speakingwith confidence, on subjects with which he has not made himselfsufficiently acquainted. This caution, my lords, is more necessary whenhis discourse tends to the accusation or reproach of another, because hecan then only escape contempt himself by bringing it, perhaps unjustly, on him whom he condemns. It is more necessary still, to him who speaksin the publick council of the nation, and who may, by false reflections, injure the publick interest; and is yet more indispensably required inhim who assumes the province of examining the conduct of his sovereign. 

Lord ISLAY spoke in substance as follows:--'My lords, it appears thatall those who have spoke on either side of the present question, howeverthey may generally differ in their opinions, agree at least in oneassertion, that the time which is spent in this debate might be far moreusefully employed, and that we, in some degree, desert the great causeof liberty, by giving way to trifling altercations. This, indeed, is anargument of equal force for a concession on either side; but, as inaffairs of such importance, no man ought to act in a manner contrary tothe convictions of his own reason, it cannot be expected that we shouldbe unanimous in our opinions, or that the dispute should be determinedotherwise than by the vote. 

I have, indeed, heard no arguments against the motion, which requirelong consideration; for little of what has been urged, has, in myopinion, been very nearly connected with the question before us, whichis not whether the ministers have pursued or neglected the interest ofthe nation, whether the laws have been violated or observed, the wartimorously or magnanimously conducted, or our negotiations managed withdexterity or weakness, but whether we shall offer to his majesty theaddress proposed. 

In this address, my lords, it has never yet been proved that anyassertions are contained either false or uncertain in themselves, orcontrary to the dignity of this assembly; that any act of cowardice ortreachery, any crime, or any errour, will be secured by it fromdetection and from punishment. 

That this, my lords, may appear more plainly, I move that the motion maybe read; nor do I doubt but that the question will, by a closerexamination, be speedily decided. 

[The motion being again read, in order to put the question. ]

Lord BATHURST spoke to the effect following:--My lords, I know not whythe noble lord should expect, that by reading the motion, a more speedydetermination of the question would be produced; for if the repeatedconsideration of it operates upon the minds of the lords that haveopposed it, in the same manner as upon mine, it will only confirm theiropinion, and strengthen their resolution. 

We are required, my lords, to join in an address of thanks to hismajesty for his endeavours to _maintain_ the balance of power; in anaddress, that implies a falsehood open and indisputable, and which will, therefore, only make us contemptible to our fellow-subjects, our allies, and our enemies. 

What is meant, my lords, by the balance of power, but such adistribution of dominion, as may keep the sovereign powers in mutualdread of each other, and, by consequence, preserve peace; such anequality of strength between one prince, or one confederacy and another, that the hazard of war shall be nearly equal on each side? But which ofyour lordships will affirm, that this is now the state of Europe?

It is evident, my lords, that the French are far from imagining thatthere is now any power which can be put in the balance against theirown, and therefore distribute kingdoms by caprice, and exalt emperoursupon their own terms. 

It is evident, that the continuance of the balance of power is not nowto be perceived by its natural consequences, tranquillity and liberty;the whole continent is now in confusion, laid waste by the ravages ofarmies, subject to one sovereign to-day, and to-morrow to another: thereis scarcely any place where the calamities of war are not felt orexpected, and where property, by consequence, is not uncertain, and lifeitself in continual danger. 

One happy corner of the world, indeed, is to be found, my lords, securedfrom rapine and massacre, for one year at least, by a well-timedneutrality, of which, on what terms it was obtained, I would gladlyhear, and whether it was purchased at the expense of the honour ofBritain, though the advantages of it are confined to Hanover. 

But as I am not of opinion, my lords, that the balance of power ispreserved by the security of Hanover; or that those territories, howeverimportant, will be able to furnish forces equivalent to the power ofFrance, I cannot agree to promise, in an address of this house, toassist his majesty in _maintaining_ the balance of power, though I shallcheerfully give my concurrence in every just and vigorous effort to_restore_ it. 

But, as it may be urged, that any direct expressions of discontent maybe too wide a deviation from the common forms, which for a long timehave admitted nothing but submission and adulation, I shall only ventureto propose that we may, at least, contract our address, that if we donot in plain language declare all our sentiments, we may, however, affirm nothing that we do not think; and I am confident, that all thepraises which can be justly bestowed on the late measures, may becomprised in a very few words. 

It has been insinuated, that this change of our style may, perhaps, surprise his majesty, and raise in him some suspicions of discontent anddisapprobation; that it may incline him to believe his measures, eithernot understood by us, or not applauded, and divert him from his presentschemes, by the necessity of an inquiry into the reasons of our dislike. 

And for what other purpose, my lords, should such a change of our stylebe proposed? Why should we deny on this occasion the encomiasticklanguage which has been of late so profusely bestowed, but to show thatwe think this time too dangerous for flattery, and the measures nowpursued, such as none but the most abject flatterers can commend?

I should hope, that if it be asked by his majesty to what cause it is tobe imputed, that the address of this house is so much contracted, therewould be found some amongst us honest enough to answer, that all whichcan be said with truth is contained in it, and that flattery andfalsehood were not consistent with the dignity of the lords of Britain. 

I hope, my lords, some one amongst us would explain to his majesty thedecency as well as the integrity of our conduct, and inform him that wehave hinted our discontent in the most respectful manner; and wherethere was sufficient room for the loudest censure, have satisfiedourselves with modest silence, with a mere negation of applause. 

Should we, my lords, in opposition to the complaints of our countrymen, to the representations of our allies, and all the conviction which ourreason can admit, or our senses produce, continue to act this farce ofapprobation, what can his majesty conceive, but that those measureswhich we applaud, ought to be prosecuted as the most effectual and safe?And what consequence but total ruin can arise from the prosecution ofmeasures, by which we are already reduced to penury and contempt?

Lord CHOLMONDELEY spoke next to the following purpose:--My lords, it isnever without grief and wonder that I hear any suspicion insinuated ofinjustice or impropriety in his majesty's measures, of whose wisdom andgoodness I have so much knowledge, as to affirm, with the utmostconfidence, that he is better acquainted than any lord in this assemblywith the present state of Europe; so that he is more able to judge bywhat methods tranquillity may be reestablished; and that he pursues thebest methods with the utmost purity of intention, and the most incessantdiligence and application. 

That the justest intentions may be sometimes defeated, and the wisestendeavours fail of success, I shall readily grant; but it will notfollow, that we ought not to acknowledge that wisdom and integrity whichis exerted in the prosecution of our interest, or that we ought not tobe grateful for the benefits which were sincerely intended, though notactually received. 

The wisdom of his majesty's counsels, my lords, is not sufficientlyadmired, because the difficulties which he has to encounter are notknown, or not observed. Upon his majesty, my lords, lies the task ofteaching the powers of the continent to prefer their real to theirseeming interest, and to disregard, for the sake of distant happiness, immediate acquisitions and certain advantages. His majesty isendeavouring to unite in the support of the Pragmatick sanction thosepowers whose dominions will be enlarged by the violation of it, and whomFrance bribes to her interest with the spoils of Austria; and who canwonder that success is not easy in attempts like this?

In such measures we ought, doubtless, to endeavour to animate hismajesty, by an address, at least not less expressive of duty and respectthan those which he has been accustomed to receive; and, therefore, Ishall concur with the noble lords who made and supported the motion. 

[The question, on a division, passed in the affirmative, Content, 89. Not Content, 43. ]