with the present ministry; he meant not, however, to covet their places; frequent ministerial changes he strongly reprobated, and thought that country the best governed, where ministers remained such; while their abilities, their diligence, and their honesty, stood unimpeached.

A variety of historical passages were adduced by lord Mulgrave, on this occasion, in favour of the mi. nisterial determination to persist in the war. The French, he observed, had frequently met with the most signal reverses of fortune, after ob. taining the most astonishing successes. Lewis XIV, was a remarkable instance of this in the last, and in the beginning of the present century; no monarch had been more victorious, but none was finally reduced to more distress, In the memory of living witnesses, the French had begun with triumph, and ended with disgrace; as particularly in the war of 1755. It was unmanly, therefore, as well as unreasonable, to look on the present progress of the French as irresistible. Whatever were our sufferings, they ought cheerfully to be borne, when it was reflected, that we were struggling for our national preservation. speaking of Corsica, he noticed the intrinsic unimportance of Minorca and Gibraltar, which, however, by their local situation, were highly useful to Great Britain.

In

Lord Stanhope seconded, with his usual emphasis, the amendment moved by lord Guildford, and was replied to by lord Mansfield. This speaker represented the pecuniary resources of France as totally exhausted. The expenditure of France in the last campaign amounted to one hundred and forty-four millions

sterling; the assignats, in actual cir. culation, were two hundred and forty millions, and the quantity of forged assignats was immense: hence they were altogether so depreciated, that no person would take them but at an incredible discount, reducing their value almost to nothing.

It was remarked, on this subject, by lord Lauderdale, that if the fi. nances of France were in reality so reduced, the French would never retain so haughty a style; nor ought they to be so heavily charged with ambitious views, when it was well known they were, at that time, so. liciting peace from one of the coalesced powers; and had scrupulously observed the stipulations with neutral states. He dwelt severely on the prospect, held out by lord Spencer, of the most formidable navy, in a few months, ever put to sea; while, at the same time, the admiralty were not apprized, that the French were masters of the entrance of the Channel. He censured the ministry for not sending out a larger force to the West Indies, where the French were most vulnerable; and ascribed to their weakness, in rendering the public a security for the Imperial loan, the facility with which it was procured by the Austrian agents.

The arguments, that had been alleged for and against the continuance of the war, were reviewed by lord Grenville, who concluded for the prudence and propriety of continuing it with additional spirit. The marquis of Abercorn, and the duke of Leeds, rejected the amendment; though they refused to bind themselves with the ministerial party to the support of the war,

The

The speech of the d ke of Bed ford, like those he had already de. livered, was extremely animated. It had, he said, been explicitly af. firmed, by ministers, that the French were utterly unable to defray the charges of another campaign; and yet, experience had shewn that they had, in the last, baffled all the calculations founded on their inability. It was absurd to infer their want of means from the prodigiousness of their expences; and of these no valid proofs had been stated. He condemned, with great warmth, the idea of a war of mutual extermination, which was, in fact, the object pursued and recommended by ministers. He concluded with point. ed strictures on the exhortation of ministers, to unite in supporting what they styled the generous exertions of war: these words he stigmatised, as inconsistent with the miseries and distresses accompanying a military life; and, more than all, with the sensations that must be felt, by men torn from all domestic comforts, and compelled to leave their dearest relatives exposed to want and wretchedness.

Lord Grenville ended the debate, by declaring that, notwithstanding the insinuations, that the royal speech purported no peace would be made with France while it continued a republic, such a construc. tion was erroneous, and could not be warranted by any part of it. On putting the question for lord Guild. ford's amendment, it was rejected by one hundred and seven votes against twelve,

In the house of commons, it being usual, previously to moving the address, to read the bill for the prosecuting of clandestine outlawries, the speaker, of course, presented the

bill; but Mr. Sheridan opposed its reading. His reason was, that it being a custom established, merely to assert the right of the house to proceed to any business they judged proper, before that of the royal speech, they ought to realize that right, with which they were, doubt. less, invested for useful purposes. Instead of reading, therefore, the outlawry bill, he would move the reading of another of much more importance, at the present juncture. They were called together to give their advice to the king, on subjects of the highest consequence to the nation; but before they could consider themselves in a situation to advise with freedom and impartiality, it was proper they should be in a state of liberty; and this they could not be while under the terrors of a suspension of the habeas corpus act: his intention, therefore, was to move for a repeal of that suspension.

This motion was warmly opposed by Mr. Dundas, who declared himself of opinion, that instead of being repealed it ought to be renewed. He was supported by the solicitorgeneral, who, in a speech of some length, asserted that the evidence on the late trials had proved the reality of a conspiracy, though by the verdict of the jury, the persons acquitted could not be brought to a second trial, Others beside him. self were, he said, of this opinion. He then detailed the proceedings of the several societies, and concluded by condemning, in violent terms, their claim to universal suffrage.

The solicitor-general was opposed by Mr. Fox. According to the spirit as well as the letter of the law and the constitution, it appeared to him, that a jury's acquittal established [L4]

the

the innocence of the party accused; but the speech he had now heard tended to overturn the validity of a jury's verdict, which was the strongest fence of the con. stitution, by securing the personal freedom of the subject. The intent of that speech was to maintain the doctrine of constructive trea, son: which, if it were not vigo rously opposed by the house, might, in time, be held out as the law of the land. If the solicitor-general thought himself better informed than the jury, why did he not com. municate this superior information to them on the trial, or to the house at present? but the truth was, that jury consisted of disinterested men, who had no favours to ask, nor to expect from government. Was it the opinion of a crown-lawyer, or of an English jury, that would have the greatest weight in deciding the character of an individual?

In answer to Mr. Fox, Mr. ser. jeant Adair reviewed the proceed. ings of the societies, and demanded whether it were probable that their designs did not aim at the destruc. tion of the monarch, or the consti. tution? The guilty were often acquitted in courts of justice; not be cause they were considered as innocent, but merely because there was no strictly legal evidence produced against them. A doubt of their guilt was sufficient, in the breast of the jury, for their acquittal; but that did by no means clear the character of the acoused.

There was no reason, Mr. Pitt alleged, for repealing the bill, unless it were proved that it had been enacted upon erroneous grounds, and without sufficient deliberation; or that government had abused the power it had entrusted to them.

Those causes of alarm that had oc. casioned it had not been disproved, nor that the accused were involved in a conspiracy as dangerous as treason itself. The verdict in their favour could not, therefore, operate as a motive for repealing the act, even admitting that their indict. ment for high-treason had not been supported by legal proofs; and if the judicious and unbiassed public looked upon them as guilty of an attempt, for which the law had not provided a due punishment, it was the duty of parliament to make such provision.

In reply to Mr. Pitt, it was asserted, by Mr. Sheridan, that the bill had been hurried through the house in two days, without the usual notice, a circumstance far from implying requisite deliberation. He was convinced, by what he had heard, that a farther suspension of the bill was determined upon; but he was resolved to oppose it with every argument he was able to adduce, that ministers might have no opportunity of grounding it on apprehensions of their own creating, and reasons which, if not combated, they might represent as unanswerable.

Mr. Sheridan proceeded next to call in question the propriety of Mr. Dundas's appearing in the house as a member. By Mr. Burke's hill of reform, the office of third secretary of state had been abolished, and an act passed, that if it should be revived, and conferred on a member of parliament, his seat should thereby be vacated. Mr. Pitt answered this objection, by intimating that the duke of Portland was the third secretary of state: an explanation that Mr. Fox and Mr. Sheridan thought disrespectful to that

that nobleman, who had formerly concurred in the abolition of that office.

These discussions being thus terminated, the address was moved by sir Francis Knatchbull, and second. ed by Mr. Canning; who observed, that though unfavourable circumstances had occurred abroad, they ought not to prevent a vigorous prosecution of the war: they had been occasioned by the desertion of our allies, and not by the misconduct of ministers. The fall of Roberspierre, and the subsequent changes in the government of France, did not warrant this country to attempt a treaty. The French divided their enemies in two classes: the instigators of the coalitionagainst them, and those who had joined it through compulsion. We were in the first class, the Dutch in the second: the treatment of the latter would shortly shew what we had to expect; but a pacification with them, at present, would bring so little security, that no diminution of our fleets and armies could ensue, and our expences must remain as great as ever.

Mr. Wilberforce objected to the address, as pledging the house to carry on the war till a counterrevolution was effected in France. The alterations in that country made it appear, in his opinion, more inclined to moderation than hereto. fore. Jacobinism had been suppressed; and the government had assumed an aspect of lenity, in com. pliance with the general sense of the people, who were sincerely desirous of peace. The coalition, he observed, was dissolved, and we could not expect to overcome, with our single strength, a nation that had resisted so powerful a confederacy,

pressing upon them from abroad; while they were, at the same time, assailed with near fifty insurrectiona at home. He did not think a mo. narchy the fittest form of govern. ment for the French, at the present juncture. Were monarchy restored, the country would not be pacified, as its friends and enemies would still preserve their animosities, and the latter still remain the superiors in number. It ought to be recol. lected, by those who thought a counter-revolution id France, practicable, that six years had now elapsed since the first revolution; during that space, a new genera. tion of young men had been care. fully trained, and brought up, in republican principles; and numbers of the elderly, and others averse to these, were either dead, or had emigrated to other countries. He concluded by moving a negotiation for peace, which, whether successful or not, would prove to the people that the government desired peace. The nation would then feel the necessity of uniting with ministers, whose offers of reconciliation had been rejected by the enemy, and would cordially give their vigorous support to what no one could deny, in such a case, to be a just and necessary war.

The motion of Mr. Wilberforce was seconded by Mr. Duncombe and Mr. Burdon, but opposed by Mr. Windham. The ill success of the war he solely imputed to the misconduct of some of the allies. Comparing the events of the present with those of former wars, he asserted, that all that could be said on this subject was, that hitherto it had only been nega. tively successful. The most alarm. ing circumstance attending it,

was