, seeing the Sec. at War in his place, stated, that there were certain papers connected with that right hon. gent.'s department, which he wished to move for. After some remarks, he accordingly moved, that there be presented to the house, 1. A copy of the contracts entered into between the several builders and the barrack-master general. 2. An account of the respective periods at which the several barracks were to be completed, and what penalties were annexed to the non fulfilment of such engagements. 3. Copies of the certificates granted to contractors, shewing the barracks to be in that state of readiness as to entitle them to payment. 4. An account of the several barracks, with the number of men and horses they were fit to accommodate in the possession of government at the peace of Amiens, distinguishing such as were hired.

stated, that though the hon. admiral had been kind enough to shew him the motion several days ago, he could not discover any necessity for such papers. The hon. gent. had brought forward his motion from an idea that the expenses of the barrack department had been extraordinary, without recollecting that extraordinary exertions required extraordinary expenses. As to the first paper moved for, he could see no good purpose its production could serve, as an account of the same nature had been, in fact, already before the house, in consequence of a motion made some time ago, and as no return can be made on this subject different from that already in possession of the house. He had no objection, however to produce a copy of the mode of the certificates, and begged the hon. gent. to recollect in general that at the peace of Amiens, some of the barracks were sold, and some had been only hired during the war.

contended, that all that had been laid before the house respecting the barrack contracts had been extracts only, whereas his object was to see the contracts themselves, which in his apprehension had been so ill digested, and whether or not there were any penalties attached to them. From the experience he had had in a certain board, contracts of this description ought always to be accompanied with penalties. He wished only to see if the barrack board had made such contracts as they ought to make.

admitted that there were no penalties in any of the contracts in question; but at the same time contended, that no board had ever more controul over the contractors, than the barrack board, which rendered such penalties unnecessary. If the hon. Admiral would move the production of any individual contract, he should have no objection to the motion.

then moved, instead of the first paper, for a copy of the contract entered into on July the 26th, 1803, between T. Neil and the barrack-master general for the barrack of Chichester. The hon. Admiral wished it to be understood that he had selected that one from no particular motive, but merely as one of those taken notice of in the papers alluded to by the right hon. Secretary, and being in his own vicinity.—The first motion, thus amended, was accordingly passed. The second motion passed without opposition. The third also passed, after receiving an amendment suggested by the Sec. at War, that instead of loading the table of the house with a variety of such certificates, it would be better that a copy only of the form and mode of such certificates be presented. The fourth motion was also agreed to.

claimed the indulgence of the house, while he stated briefly his opinion of the measure before it. In whatever view he considered it, he could not regard it but as an impolitic, imperfect, and inadequate measure. In point of policy, it appeared to him only calculated to remedy a defect which had arisen from the misconduct of his Majesty's ministers. He recollected, that at the close of the late war, an order had been issued by the adjutant-general, for discarding not embodying the Irish militia, which order had been sanctioned by his Majesty's crown officers in Ireland. A short time after, however, it was deemed expedient to renew the militia establishment in that country, and the measure for that purpose allowed but a bounty of two guineas per man, which proving insufficient, another act had passed about a year since, enlarging the bounty to four guineas, and at that time the bounty for general service was but five guineas. He and his friends had on that occasion opposed the measure, on the ground that it would annihilate the recruiting for the army in Ireland, and recommended, if the militia were to be raised by bounties like sensible, to take their services accordingly. What could have been without impropriety done in that instance, was now proposed to be done when it would be a breach of faith and a violation of the constitution of the militia. It had been then stated, that a militia was the natural defence of a country, and that Ireland ought to have a force of that description. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had adverted, too, with exultation, to the gallant exploits of the Irish militia, and even the right hon. sec. had stated, on a late occasion, that they possessed that nonchalance which peculiarly suited them for becoming good soldiers, and, as if they would be inefficient in Ireland, he proposed to bring them to this country to complete their education. The hon. gent. then stated, that his objection to the measure arose chiefly from its not being taken up on necessity, and in this view he differed with his noble friend (Lord Castlereagh); because the necessity might constitute the policy of a measure, he could admit the converse. He also objected to it, because it would place the men out of the circumstances of service for which they had entered, and introduce a system of deliberation among them which would be subversive of discipline. Another important topic was, that the offers, though perhaps spontaneous in some instances, were not so in all; and that many individuals would be dragged into the offer by apprehensions from their comrades. He lamented that the only instance in which a name had been inserted in the lists on the table should be with respect to an officer, who had refused to volunteer, and he contended that the officer was strictly justifiable in limiting his services to the terms of his original engagement if he thought proper. The only argument he had heard like an argument was, that by bringing over 8 or 10,000 of the Irish militia to this country, the same number of the disposable force would be set free; but he contended, that it was no less desirable to augment the disposable force in Ireland. With what view the present measure had been resorted to be could not conceive. He remembered that one of the objections against the union had been, that it would increase the number of absentees from Ireland, and he was convinced it would neither be politic nor just to bring over so great a proportion of the magistrates and gents. of Ireland, as composed the officers of such a number of militia regiments, without sending an equal number of our own in return to that country. The hon. gent. was sure, that every militia officer who was an enemy to innovation in the constitution of that force, would oppose a measure the probable effect of which would induce the English militia to make offers in return. On all these grounds he felt himself called upon to oppose the measure, because it was not founded either on expediency or necessity, and if it were to be adopted at all, a reciprocal interchange of services should be established for the militia of both countries.

said, he had listened with considerable attention to the speech of the hon. member, but had not been fortunate enough to hear from him any thing to convince him of the justice of the objections he had made to this salutary measure. He adverted to the state of the country at the time Admiral Bruix sailed from Toulon, when it was not accurately known whether the French fleet was destined eastward or westward, in the year 1799, a period when the danger to England was not certainly so great as to Ireland, or as it is at present. Then a bill was passed by the Irish parliament, allowing the Irish militia to come over here. Where could be the consistency of the hon. member, who was then a member of the Irish parliament, and held a high situation under the crown, opposing such a measure as the present at this time? But still more strange was it, to find it opposed by the right hon. gent. on the same bench (Mr. Windham), who was then actually a cabinet minister. He should like to hear such apparent inconsistency explained. He wished shortly to stae his view of the subject. He had before stated to the house, that this measure was a part of a general plan, all of which was not now before the house, for augmenting the disposable military force of the country. If this force were brought over here, we set free so many regular troops for such services as might be required of them. The original principle of the militia, on which so much was said, had in the last war been in two instances departed from, both with the English and with the Irish militia. There was no wish, in any degree, to decrease the efficient force of Ireland. If 8 or 10,000 militia were brought away, their place could be supplied by an equal number of troops from hence. For instance, he would mention the troops of the army of reserve, and also by the augmentation of the Irish militia in the same proportion as they may have been reduced. He could very easily see that the danger of Ireland was great, and might be greater; but he could also see, that, in certain cases, the danger of G. Britain might still be greater. The hon. gent. had spoken of the disbanding the Irish militia with seeming displeasure, but he should have recollected, that from the nature of their different terms of service, they could not have been retained any length of time. When he spoke of ministers coming to parliament to revive the militia, he had spoken in terms tending to shew himself, if not unfriendly to the militia, at least as considering a militia a bad system for defence. But his objections to the amount of bounties to the militia were not effectual, for the bounty of two guineas was in the first bill in Sept. 1802, but the four guineas were not given till Sept. 1803, after the King's message, when symptoms of war appeared, and when the war bounty was announced. But then he had accused ministers of breaking through a constitutional principle of the militia. Now, when the Irish militia was revived, there was no kind of question about bringing them over here, and therefore no breaking in upon any constitutional principle whatever in that measure. But, the measure now submitted was entirely owing to the noble and spontaneous offers of the militia themselves. He must think that it was infinitely better not to have interfered at all with this subject at the revival of the Irish militia, but to leave the spirit of loyalty, of patriotism, and of bravery, to the spur and exigency of the times, more particularly as our force was of a nature and constitution so different from that of the continental powers. But the hon. member accused administration of a great inconsistency, in saying the Irish militia was an admirable force, and afterwards not considering them as a fit force in their own country. Who had ever said so? which of his Majesty's ministers? none that he had heard. He was surprised, therefore, to hear it asserted. The truth was, the Irish militia were excellent in either country, equally good in both. They had now testified, in a marked manner, their voluntary zeal, and he was confident, wheresoever they were, they would be found constantly to do their duty against an enemy, and would yield to no other troops in the essential and constituent qualities of brave soldiers. The hon. member had said a good deal about an over-ruling necessity, the first offer from the English militia to go over to Ireland, being during the rebellion in the sister island, and the threat of a French invasion being very strong. All this was true. It was all very good so far; hut, in point of fact, this act was continued long afterwards, and acted upon too; for many regiments were sent there, when this overruling necessity had actually ceased. Upon that principle of an over-ruling necessity to justify the transferring of the militia, not another regiment should have been sent, after it was clearly ascertained that the French fleet had gone up the Mediterranean, and Ireland was consequently placed in a situation, comparatively so, much less dangerous. But when the Irish parliament passed the act, there was, in fact, no such thing as an over-ruling necessity. He could not understand what was meant by the objections raised to the receiving voluntary offers from the militia, on the score of deliberation. He could not see that there was any sort of dangerous deliberation or discussion whatever. Was it reckoned a dangerous system of deliberation, when the captain of a company called on his men to ask them concerning the stoppage of their pay, or matters of that kind, for particular purposes? But, if this was so dreadful a thing, how did it apply during last war? What was the case with those corps who volunteered from limited to general service? What was it with the 20th regiment? What with the 40th, which did so much in Egypt under Colonel Spencer? What with the ancient Irish fencibles, and various other corps, who had distinguished themselves, but who had never been considered as impaired by their volunteering, which gents. chose to consider a mode of dangerous deliberation? What could the right hon. gent. (Mr. Windham) say to all these instances, which happened when he was in office, and which were the precedents, and very excellent precedents too, for ministers now; precedents of the right hon. gent's. own making? There must be a strange inconsistency, which he should like to have explained, as he had a great respect for every thing that fell from that right hon. gent. The hon. member had stated that this was not altogether a spontaneous measure. On the part of some individuals offering, it might, perhaps, be possible to raise such an objection. Even in that house of parliament, he supposed that those gents. who voted together on a particular question, did not all vote from the same reason, or exactly upon the same principle. The hon. gent. had asked what view govt. had in this measure, whether they adopted it for the moment, or with some larger view, such as making it a reciprocal affair? In answer to this last point, he could only say, that no such idea was entertained by ministers, and no such question was, in fact, before the house. Two regiments, indeed, had made such voluntary offer, but there was no such plan in the view of govt. But, if the overruling necessity spoken of should occur again, by another cruel, bloody, and terrible rebellion in Ireland, aided by French power, then certainly govt. would feel justified in resorting to such a measure for saving that bright jewel of the British crown. But he thought the Irish militia were now making a return to that of England, for what they had done for Ireland in the hour of danger and distress. In that gallantry he saw nothing but what he should have expected from their characteristic loyalty. He had wished to go through the principal points of objection that had been urged to this measure, and could only say, that as a militia officer himself, he saw nothing to object to in it, but great advantages accruing, as it must be admitted that G. Britain was in as great danger as Ireland from the common enemy of them both.

was desirous to say a few words on the present occasion, and had felt anxious to catch the speaker's eye immediately after the right hon. gent. who had just sat down. Though he agreed with that right hon. gent. in two or three points, he could not admit that the arguments he had used had reconciled him to what he looked upon as a breach of the fundamental constitution of the militia force. If an over-ruling necessity existed, he was sure there would be no difference of opinion in the house. But it had been said, that the offers of the Irish militia were in payment of the debt of gratitude which they owed this country for the services of the English militia; he contended that these debts, when paid, would involve the English militia in a similar offer in return. The question was not justifiable on constitutional grounds, nor on the grounds of policy or expediency. The right hon. gent. had passed over the constitutional consideration of the question altogether. If he had looked into the preamble of the militia acts, he would find it there stated, that it was expedient to keep up within the realm a well ordered and well disciplined militia. If the service was to be altered so as to prevent the gentlemen of property from entering into it, the militia could not be well ordered, and if the militia should be made a deliberative body, it could not be well disciplined. This had taken place already with respect to one part of the military force of the country, the volunteers, and he trusted it would not be extended to the rest of it. He maintained, that it was a degrading situation for an officer to be placed in, to assemble his men about him, and ask them, however noble his object, whether they should be disposed to engage in a particular service with him. He was of opinion, that, unless the service should be reciprocal, the service of the militia of either country should be kept out of sight of the other, though, in an extreme case, it might not be so. If a landing of the enemy should unfortunately take place here, and there should be no attempt on that country nor probability of attack, it would, in such a case, be justifiable to bring the militia over. It was the opinion of military men of experience, that militia regiments would be more effectually employed in their own counties than out of them, because they would be more warmly assisted by their friends and acquaintances in case of actual danger, and that was the reason why a military officer in one of the maritime districts, kept as many of the militia regiments in their counties as could conveniently be done. There was no comparison between the present period and 1798, when a rebellion raged in Ireland; a French force had landed there, and an exhausted army in this country precluded the means of reinforcing the troops in that country in any other manner than by accepting the offers of the militia regiments. Though he had been one of those who had volunteered on that occasion, yet, finding it now used as a precedent, he believed it had been wiser to attach the individuals who volunteered from the militia to old regular regiments, as had been then recommended by gentlemen who opposed the violation of the militia constitution. He was ready to allow every credit to the loyalty, the patriotism, and good intentions of the gentlemen of the Irish militia, who had offered their services in the present instance; and he trusted they would attribute the same motives to him and those who opposed the present measure. The militia was raised on the landed property of the country; and, if the present offers should be accepted, the consequence would be, that the landed gentlemen of Ireland would be obliged to provide for 8,000 or 10,000 after having raised 18,000, which had been looked upon as a just proportion for the country. If the object was to augment the force of the country, if ought to be done generally, not in the Irish militia in particular. There was no question of the loyalty and efficiency of the Irish militia, but he could not see why 10,000 of them were to be removed, if to be replaced by so many from the army of reserve, of nearly the same state of discipline. The augmentation, though that question was not properly before the house, would raise a competition against the 6 new battalions to be raised in Ireland. The hon. gent. who had opened the debate, had alluded to the ill consequence of taking so many of the gentlemen of property from Ireland, as should come over with their regiments, and the same observation would apply to English gentlemen. The right hon. gent. had stated, that it was not the intention of govt. to weaken the military force in Ireland, for that if 10,000 were to be withdrawn from it, a like number was to be sent over in their place. He would ask them, what was to be gained but a breach of the great constitutional principle on which the militia was formed? When in 1802 the interchange of the service of the militia of both countries had been agitated, the house had decided, that they should be confined to the respective countries. If ministers wished to get rid of the militia altogether, they ought to say so, and not keep it hanging over gentlemen, that if they should not join in an offer of service at some future period, they should be told they were ungrateful. The constitution of the militia should not be trenched upon by a side wind, nor in a collateral manner. As to the offers of the Irish militia in 1799, which the right hon. gentleman had quoted as a precedent, they were only a return for the services of the English militia; but this measure would go to overturn the whole system, by laying the English militia under an obligation of making other offers in return for those now made. If any ground of necessity or expediency had, been laid for the bill, he should not have opposed it, but contemplating it under the unfavourable consequences which appeared to him likely to result from it, he should oppose the speaker's leaving the chair.

was happy to hear the question argued on constitutional grounds with the fairness and candour with which the hon. gent. who had just sat down had treated it. He was particularly gratified at his having taken it up in that view, because the measure had been charged from another quarter as a consequence of the incapacity of his Majesty's govt.; and he must say, that the allegations of incapacity were much too frequently employed, as well that there was no description of force provided for the defence of the country, militia, reserve, volunteers, &c. that had not been degraded by the manner in which they had been adverted to by gentlemen. He thought that on every ground of public policy, the offers of the Irish militia ought to be accepted, as it appeared to him that no opportunity should be omitted for augmenting the disposable force in this country. If Ireland were the object of the enemy, it could only be attacked from Brest, or some of the ports of Holland, but not by any part of the great Boulogne flotilla. He contended, that, in a constitutional point of view, nothing could be brought into precedent that should not be sanctioned by the wisdom of the legislature, and that the legislature of the day would always guard against any injury that might be apprehended from the influence of the precedent not justified by circumstances. As to the observation, that this measure would convert the militia into a deliberative body, he contended that it was unfounded, because as soon as the act was over, the deliberation ceased, and an individual act constituted no system. If the time should arrive that Ireland should be attacked, he was convinced that there was not a man in England who would not willingly shed his blood in its defence. The hon. gent. then adverted to the number of shipping and convenience of ports in England for conveying a disposable force to any foreign destination, and concluded with giving his support to the motion for the speaker's leaving the chair.

could not but consider the present measure as one of the most important subjects that could arrest the attention of the legislature. It was a direct infringement of the militia system, and was resorted to, in his mind, without any necessity to justify it. If we ceased to adhere to the principles upon which that system was founded, we might be found to act without the guidance of any principle at all, and we might soon be hurried into a stream which we should be unable to resist, and by which we might be carried to incalculable extremities. It was only the extremely perilous and unnatural state in which Ireland was placed in 1798, that could by any means permit us to overlook those principles which before had uniformly been held sacred. What is the object of the present bill? It goes to take away from Ireland, the most vulnerable part of the country, 10,000 men of its best disciplined force, and of that species of force which it is least able to spare. So far the plan must be acknowledged to be novel and surprising. Both countries may be in real danger; but it is universally acknowledged that Ireland is in ten times more danger than G. Britain. Were that not the case, why should we be so lavish of our panegyric on the patience, the perseverance, and the intrepidity of our blockading force under Adm. Cornwallis, unless we were sure that to his vigilance in preventing the sailing of the Brest fleet, the safety of Ireland is chiefly to be ascribed? But we are told, that if this force be taken away from Ireland, it is to be supplied by another; and by what other? By a portion of the army of reserve. Can that be regarded as an effectual supply? Surely not. For the one you take must be confessed to be of superior discipline. Indeed, the whole of the business seems so unaccountable to common reason, that ministers must be supposed to have some private motives for their conduct, which they are unwilling to disclose. They surely would not openly violate the militia laws, were it not that they intended to introduce for all times and occasions a reciprocation of the services of the militia of both countries. This mutual interchange of services could not, however, be placed on the same ground. The militia of Ireland was raised on a different footing from that of England. The latter was raised by ballot; the former by bounties, and, consequently, might be more manageable. As to the voluntary offers said to be made here and in Ireland, they deserved any thing but the name of voluntary. On the part of the officers, the offer might arise at the moment from a sense of duty, or a point of honour; but it should never be ascribed to spontaneous and unprompted alacrity. The direct contrary was well known to be the fact. Indeed, whether the offer came from the officers or the men, it was equally objectionable. On the part of the officers it might be suggested by ambitious views, or a wish to ingratiate themselves with persons in power. If it came from the men, the danger attending it would be tenfold greater, and would involve all the inconveniencies and confusion that must arise from military men erecting themselves into deliberative bodies. Over such men, fired by the zeal and spirit with which declaimers amongst them might then be naturally actuated, what authority could officers retain and exercise? The services of the English militia may soon be called for under the same pretence of a voluntary offer; nor will it stick there. The same mode may be applied to the volunteers. The exuberant zeal of some of the corps may suggest the offer, and advantage might soon be taken of such an example. It no discrimination was to be made in these offers of voluntary service, where could they be conceived to stop? The fatal tendency of such an example, he trusted, the wisdom and caution of the house would reasonably provide against, and not permit them to be so easily worked upon as they were in the year 1798. They should recollect, that permitting innovations of this nature, must render a service, easy and acceptable in its origin, grievous and oppressive by an abuse or infringement of its principles, and that the operations of it must prove of such personal inconvenience and national detriment, that it is enough to dissolve and disorganize the whole militia service. There were other and more effectual modes of raising the force required: they might indeed require something of more expense. But, under the present circumstances of the country, a trifling addition of expense should not be attended to; we should no doubt be grateful for the gallant offer which the zeal of the Irish militia has prompted them to make; but the prudence of parliament should dictate something more to be relied upon than such temporary and occasional expedients.

, after a few introductory observations, proceeded to state the grounds on which he felt it his duty to support the bill. He should support it as a measure which could not fail to have the happiest effects on the situation of Ireland. He wished, however, to state distinctly to the house, the grounds on which this opinion was founded. It was from an idea that the interests of all ranks of the community in Ireland would be benefitted by the measure, that he was determined to vote for it on the present occasion. The manufacturers and agricultural peasants of Ireland, would, by coming to this country, have an opportunity of contemplating the happiness which prevailed among the lower orders, and would be prompted to emulate and to cultivate those habits from which this happiness and comfort proceeded. They would have an opportunity of observing in how many respects the inhabitants of this part of the united empire, excelled those of a similar description in Ireland; and it was not to be denied that the circumstances of superiority were various, and, from such a review, they would see the propriety of acting on the principles by which this superiority was procured. They would learn to appreciate the value of husbanding their time, and would see the advantage of pursuing that system of habitual industry which, in this country, was the distinguishing feature of the lowest, in common with the highest ranks in society. The advantages arising from union of public sentiment, would not fail to excite their attention, and, from the comparison which must arise in their minds, it was natural to anticipate the most important alteration of national opinion on their return to their native land. Respect for the people of this country would necessarily be created, and a degree of affection would be contracted which, under the present circumstances of the empire, could not possibly exist. It would be seen that they came into a country where they were received as fellow citizens, as sharers of the same constitutional privileges and political rights. The consequence of such an interchange of opinions was obvious. It was, more than any other circumstance, calculated to destroy those feelings of prejudice, which it was so material to eradicate. They would unlearn much of that misconception which, from a variety of circumstances, now prevailed. But, above all, the beneficial effects of the measure would operate in shewing the people of Ireland, that there was a great distinction to be made betwixt the feelings of this country at large, and the opinions and system, not of this ministry alone, but of any cabinet that had hitherto been formed. It would convince them, that whatever the perversity and wickedness of any cabinet might be with regard to Ireland, this policy was not countenanced or supported by public opinion. Ministers might act on narrow, illiberal principles, but the sentiments of an English public would be found to be candid, liberal, and generous. The militia of Ireland, who now volunteered their services to this country, would leave it with the impression that the people were not partakers in the persecuting policy of any administration, but were inspired with every wish of extending to all parts of the empire the blessings of an equitable system of govt. But this was not the only view which he entertained of the beneficial consequences of the measure. The gents. who were to command the militia regiments which were to volunteer their services to this country, would likewise learn many important lessons by this extension of their services. The house would keep in view, that they were principally land-owners, who necessarily maintained a most important and interesting relation with the lower orders in Ireland. He entertained a hope that they would feel it their duty to compare the situation of the tenantry of England with that of the tenantry of Ireland, to view their relative degrees of comfort and happiness, and on their return to Ireland employ themselves in introducing the improvements which such a review would naturally suggest. Such a review must indeed most powerfully impress, on the mind of every land-owner, that his real interest consisted, not in the number of pounds which he was enabled to put into his pocket, but in the general diffusion of that domestic enjoyment which rendered the lower orders the best tenants, as well as the most valuable members of society. These were the general principles and views on which he felt himself called on to give his support to the bill. But, while he was resolved to give the measure his support, he begged leave to add, that he, could not give this support unconnected with certain conditions. He would be sorry, indeed, to think that an offer so liberal as that of the Irish militia, should be received without some corresponding return of liberality, and even justice, on the part of this country. The present was a moment of the greatest interest for the security of both countries, and when it was considered how great was the armed force of this country, Ireland was not to be deprived of a large proportion of well disciplined troops, without receiving an equivalent for this diminution of the existing means of defence. This was not, however, the only point of view in which the effects of the measure could be contemplated. It was not merely the armed force of the privates in the militia regiments volunteering their services to this country, that Ireland would lose by the measure. As these had already remarked, the great majority of the officers were land-owners, whose presence at all times of high importance, was more especially requisite at a crisis of unparalleled difficulty and danger. One great source of the present unfortunate state of Ireland was, that there was not a sufficient number of the country gentlemen resident in the country. Of this description of the inhabitants of Ireland, the services were of the highest moment to the interests and the happiness of the lower and industrious orders. It was their peculiar business to be the supporters of the poor under circumstances of distress, to be their advisers in circumstances of difficulty, to be their patrons and protectors against schemes of oppression. One great objection against the union was, that the residence of the land-owners would be discouraged. Whatever advantages might arise from the union, in relation to the general interests of the empire, this was an evil which had materially increased. In agreeing to the present bill, therefore, he could not discharge his duty without requiring that, before Ireland should be deprived of the residence of so great a part of the landed interest, some adequate return should be afforded. It would be contrary to every sentiment of justice, as well as every feeling of humanity, to increase in Ireland an evil already so crying and so enormous, without taking precautions to prevent its further progress, so far as it could be affected by the bill now before the house.—The return then which he asked was, that a certain proportion of the militia corps of this country should be sent to Ireland in the room of those regiments of Irish militia which had agreed to extend their services to this country. He was not inclined to deny, that in asking this exchange, he asked for a return which, by many members, would be considered as of the highest value. It was certainly asking a good deal of the officers and privates of militia corps in this country, to give up all the comforts they enjoyed here for the purpose of volunteering their services to Ireland. In this case, however, it was to be considered, that the inconvenience only one of a temporary duration; whereas the union of the two countries had placed the gents. of Ireland under inconveniencies which were permanent in their duration. He would put it to the candour of the house, whether Irish gents. were not labouring under a very considerable inconvenience, in consequence of their attendance in parliament in this country? This inconvenience, however, they cheerfully submitted to, from an enlarged consideration of the advantages accruing to the whole of a great empire. When he proposed the return which he had alluded to, he did not think, therefore, that he asked what was unfair, unreasonable, or oppressive. The best claim on the militia of this country to volunteer their services to Ireland was, that by this extension of service they materially contributed to the defence and security of the kingdom in one part where it was most peculiarly vulnerable. In the case of the attendance of Irish gents., an inconvenience never to be removed was submitted to. In the present instance, all that was called for on the part of Ireland was submission to an inconvenience of a temporary nature, at a crisis when all that was dearest to both countries was at stake. But a good deal had been insisted on as to the violation of the principles of the militia establishment. He could not help thinking that, if gents. who urged this objection had taken the trouble to allude a little to the records and usages of parliament, they would not have laid so much stress as they appeared to do on the argument. Gents. would do well to recollect that a standing army, such as it now stood, was repugnant to the original principles of the constitution, but a difference of circum stances had in the lapse of years produced the present extended establishment. In judging of the expediency of the measure now before the house, he thought it but fair therefore, to look back to former precedents, and not to stand so closely by the strict letter of the militia system. Precedents of the same description certainly did exist, and it was too rigid a mode of reasoning to hold up due principle one day and to disclaim it on another occasion, when, perhaps, it was found convenient to hold another species of argument. On the general principle, then, he did not think that the measure was liable to the objections which had been urged against it in the course of the discussion. There were, however, several points on which he wished to make a few observations. If the right hon. gent. on the other side (Mr. Yorke) meant, that the only return to be made for the militia regiments volunteering to this country should consist of a new body of militia to be raised in Ireland, he should most strongly oppose such an arrangement as highly objectionable. If it was meant that the deficiency should be made up by foreign corps, his objection, so far from being weakened would be materially strengthened. He had no difficulty in declaring, that he had the strongest objection to the introduction of foreign corps into any part of the empire, but he more particularly objected to their introduction into Ireland in the present circumstances of that country. To suppose that the people of England wanted foreign corps to defend them against the attempts of France, would be disgraceful to the national character. What would the posterity of the present age think of the inhabitants of England being so luxurious or so corrupted as to trust the defence of all that is dearest to men to be upheld by no considerations but the mere low consideration of pecuniary reward? As to Ireland, more particularly, he begged leave to enter his most solemn protest against such a measure, as the introduction of any foreign corps. On various occasions ministers had stated, and they had stated truly, that there was a very visible change in the sentiments and feelings of the people of Ireland, as far as related to the invasion of a French force. Fortunately, a most important change on this head had taken place, and at this moment he believed that no part of the population of Ireland entertained any confidence in the false and delusive promises of the despot of France, who was now threatening a descent on our shores. There was no wish far assistance from a power which was regarded with universal detestation and abhorrence. But, though it was true, that the people of Ireland had no wish for French assistance, it did not by any means follow that they were satisfied with the conduct of ministers. Such an assertion had not indeed been made by ministers, and it was right that it had not been made, for it was an assertion contrary to fact. The hon. member, in illustration of this sentiment, drew a very animated picture of the situation of Ireland, at the moment when the offers which formed the ground of the present bill were brought forward. He particularly referred to the letters written by the lord chancellor of that country. He characterised this production as one calculated, not to instruct, but misrepresent; not to conciliate, but to irritate. It was a production fitted to insult and degrade the religious opinions of a great majority of the Irish people. It was evidently intended to dictate in matters connected only with the Divine Being and the individuals concerned. It was an indecent, an unjustifiable libel on the character of the people of Ireland. He stated his decided dissent from any idea being entertained, that the people of Ireland were at all satisfied with the measures pursued by ministers since their accession to power, so far as the affairs of that part of the empire were concerned. He particularly quoted several passages from the speech of the right hon. gent. now at the head of his Majesty's govt., previous to the union, and in recommendation of that measure, which demonstrated his opinion, that the situation of Ireland was one which admitted of many important improvements. He was proceeding to ask of the house what improvements that right hon. gent.'s administration had produced? when he was called to order by

, who said, the present stage of the bill was not the proper one for such a discussion. The colonel not being supported, however, by the opinion of the speaker,

was allowed to proceed. Be said, he was just about to conclude his observations, when the hon. member had thought proper to interrupt him. He did not wish to add to the irritation of his countrymen, by making any allusions which could have that effect, but he conceived that, even in the present stage of the bill, he had a right to explain his sentiments fully, and to demonstrate on what grounds he was led to support a bill which went to accept the offer of 10,000 of his countrymen to serve in Great Britain. He had no idea of smuggling such a bill through the house at a moment when we ought not to shrink from our duty. He appealed to the house whether he had not always endeavoured to induce his Majesty's ministers to attend se- riously to the concerns of Ireland, in order to remove the cause of that discontent and agitation, which seemed to excite so much alarm in the mind of the hon. member; but surely this was not a time to shrink from the discharge of public duty; every man should speak out boldly, and warn the govt. of the danger to which it may be exposed, from persevering in an iniquitous system, that was tried for centuries, with occasional variation, but had always failed. He felt, in common with every member of the house, and every person in the country, who valued its interest, that private considerations ought to be sacrificed, prejudice combated, the passions moderated, and party spirit, as well as religious discord, extinguished; the terrible effects of this were too keenly felt, and were likely to be still experienced, if not removed by seasonable and sound policy, instead of that which encouraged and fomented this dreadful cause, which

"Called truth itself to testify a fraud,

And stampt imposture with the seal of God."

The hon. member concluded, with giving his support to the bill.

thought that a great part of the hon. gent's speech had nothing to do with the question before the house. He applied this observation particularly to the employment of foreign corps, and the remarks made on the letters of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland. He contended, that many of the general objections against the bill would be very powerful under the ordinary circumstances of the country. It was to be recollected, however, that the present was not a period of ordinary danger, but a crisis of unexampled interest it was on this principle that he judged of the bill, and on this ground it had his support. It did not appear to him fair to argue against the bill on the ground that the Irish militia, who volunteered their services to this country, were to be immediately removed from Ireland. If he had conceived that the bill necessarily implied this, he could not but have viewed it in a very different light. As it struck his mind, however, all that was meant by the measure was, to enable parliament to sanction any preparatory measures which particular circumstances might render desirable at a moment of peculiar emergency. Such an emergency might occur at no remote period, and it would be very extraordinary policy, never to think of precautions till the day of actual danger approached. Would any man say, that we ought to wait till the fleet from Brest, or any of the enemy's ports, had eluded our vigi- lance, before we had recourse to plans for the safety of the united kingdoms? He assented, therefore, to the bill, from a conviction that such were the objects of it, and that no immediate withdrawing of these forces from Ireland was to take place, till the exigencies of this country absolutely and urgently required them.

delivered his sentiments in opposition to the bill. He had not intended to deliver his sentiments, but to content himself with a silent vote, but the view of the subject taken by his hon. friend who spoke last, induced him to trouble the house with a few observations. In judging of the bill, there were three points to be taken into consideration. It was to be considered, how far the measure was at all necessary? how far Ireland possessed the means of supplying the force proposed to be sent into this country? and in what manner the deficiency created by this supply was to be repaired? On the first of these points, he wished to postpone his observations, till he had alluded to the means possessed by Ireland, of furnishing the supply of troops to be raised by the bill. On this point he contended, that an hon. gent. on the other side (Col. Hutchinson) had, so far from being out of order, argued in a manner the most strictly logical. When speaking of the means of Ireland to supply the force wanted, nothing was more natural than to allude to the political circumstances and situation of Ireland. When discussing this subject, gents ought to keep in view, that Ireland at this moment laboured under martial law, that the habeas corpus act was suspended, that a rebellion had burst forth, and that some new insurrection might ere long make its appearance. How far Ireland possessed the means of giving the supply of troops wanted, was therefore a matter of serious inquiry. How far the measure was expedient was an inquiry not less interesting. The principle of the bill, as described by a right hon. gent. below (Mr. Yorke), was to procure, by the speediest means, an augmentation of our disposable force. That such an augmentation was desirable, all parties allowed, and the only question was, how it was to be most speedily effected. The house had been told by ministers, that, even with an establishment of 70,000 English militia, and 380,000 volunteers, our whole regular force was locked up from offensive operations. How, then, was this inconveniency to be removed? Why, the fact was, according to the reasoning of ministers, that what this immense force could not accomplish, was to be effected by an addition of 10,000 Irish militia. True it was, that we had previously 70,000 militia, and 380,000 volunteers; but this was quite unavailing. But only allow us 10,000 Irish militia, and the scale will be immediately turned. Our whole regular force would be at liberty, and we should have as many men as we required to be dispatched on any distant expeditions. Such was the only intelligible view of the reasoning of ministers; but what could be more ridiculous or absurd? But he wished to put the matter in a point of view, if possible, still more striking. Ministers insisted much on the necessity of a disposable force. But how was it that this force was to be procured? The fact was, that ministers introduced into this country a proportion of the force of Ireland, raised for limited service; and how did they propose to supply the place of this force? They proposed to do this by raising a new proportion of force for limited service in the same country. The consequence was obvious. The disposable force of the empire was not augmented, while ministers, by augmenting the force for limited service, cut off the supplies of the regular army. Ministers had nothing consistent or uniform in their views. They knew not what they proposed, and they took no effectual means of carrying any of their plans into effect. They were subject to eternal variations of opinion. They never advanced boldly to any object. "They lightly waddled to the end in view."—He did not mean to undervalue these offers of extended service, by his hesitation in voting for the bill. He denied that Ireland could spare that force, or that England stood in need of it, and therefore concluded with voting against the bill.

said, he thought the present measures were quite contrary to the constitution of the militia, on whom the country greatly relied for the expulsion of the enemy. Those regiments were limited to particular services, and it was proper they should continue so, because the nearer these regiments were to the place where they were raised, the more influence they would have, and the more service they would render. He hoped the militia would never again be exposed to the measures adopted during last war. He had heard rumours of a regiment of Irish militia having made offers of extended service to this country, without the consent of one single officer belonging to it. He knew that there were certain regiments who adopted such measures during last war, merely for the purpose of spiting their officers. This bill gave rise to a system of deliberation in regiments, and so far from assisting the recruiting of the regular army, it injured it, by raising the competition.

thought the measure came rather prematurely, without any previous consideration of the situation of Ireland, or any danger of an immediate descent on this country. If there even were an apparent necessity, it was a measure of such a nature that the house ought to look askew at it. It was impossible to see where innovation would end, if a rash zeal was to be spoken of in terms of such exultation. This measure was, he knew, considered as the key-stone of a new system; but he was one of those who adhered to the original contract. This was considered as a kind of intermarriage; but without diminishing the gallantry of the Irish nation, when be considered their propensity to celibacy, and the character of the English ladies, he doubted whether one link would be added to the connubial chain. However he might approve the principle of returning the visit of the militia of this country, he condemned the Irish nation for giving way so much to bashfulness as to think that necessary. It was but yesterday that ministers wanted to brighten over this blooming act of the Irish nation, which they said did not want to be glossed over by any further operation. Now the offer was too fascinating to be rejected. He admired this generous tender of loyalty, but to make use of it, would be to admit that the constitution was vulnerable, and that it was necessary it should have an Hibernian pier to rest upon. But before any Irish militia was admitted into this country, he thought there should have been a message from his Majesty, declaring that all religious and political enmities in that country were at an end. If the invasion should come, the people of Ireland would call loudly for their militia. If the bill should pass the house, it would go to make an united, an amphibious militia. Considering the object for which this measure was brought forward, at this moment of unexampled danger, he saw it with infinite concern. Alarm had apparently seized the public mind, but it ought to be crushed without this measure. It would not be crushed, however, while we had an administration whose management of the forces of the country was to be estimated in the same manner as the use made of cyphers by the mathematicians, which being mul- tiplied three or four fold, produced nothing.

said, that it was a subject upon which military men were the most competent to decide; and he begged leave to read, as part of his speech, a letter he had received from a nephew of his, who had seen considerable service in Toulon, Egypt, and in Ireland; and who, though a young man, had attained the rank of brigadier general. Sir Richard then read part of the letter, which expressed a strong opinion of the advantages that would result from an interchange of the militia; and spoke in high terms of the Irish militia. There were no better troops than the Irish militia, and if they were under good officers, they may be depended upon for any service.

was gratified, even by the admission of the hon. baronet's correspondent, that the Irish militia may be depended upon if well officered. He was sure that all the Irish militia, and particularly the regiment he had the honour to command, would, if England were invaded, vie with each other who should be the foremost to come to her assistance. But when Ireland was equally threatened with England, and when there was a French fleet expressly destined to attack Ireland, he could not see the merit of the attachment, loyalty, and zeal, as they were called, of volunteering services to another part of the empire not more in danger. He was particularly adverse to the measure, as the Sec. of State admitted that the regiments were as highly disciplined as troops of the line, and, in fact, they did garrison duty, and other duty with troops of the line, and on the same footing. From the most vulnerable part of the British isles, as he contended Ireland was, this measure proposed to take 10,000 of the best disciplined of this admirable militia, and to replace it with 10,000 of the army of reserve, who, if they were such men as he saw in Ireland belonging to the army of reserve, were not worth 1000 of the men that composed the Irish militia. He contended that the service of the English militia to Ireland was returned by the vote of the Irish parliament, and the actual transfer of two regiments of the Irish militia to Guernsey and Jersey. If these 10,000 men were to be replaced by an equal number of English militia, he should have no objection; an interchange of this nature had been held out as one of the beneficial consequences of the union. If England were invaded, or if the Brest fleet were disabled from in- vading Ireland, and England were then threatened, he would be the first to volunteer in her defence; but while the danger was the same, if not greater, with respect to Ireland, he thought it his duty to defend his country first. The safety of his own country was dearer to him than that of all the world: the safety of England was next. The question was put, when

rose. He supposed that as the right hon. gentlemen on the other side found they did not make much progress by argument, they meant to carry the question by some other means. It was true, that what had been urged against them this night was not new; but it was not possible to consider this or any other military measure, without reference to the whole of our military system. He should now confine what he had to say to the measure before the house, reserving what else he had to offer for the other measure, which was to be discussed to-morrow or some other day. He confessed he was one of those who was glad that there was to be an opportunity for gentlemen "exercising their lungs," as the right hon. secretary called it, he supposed in contradistinction to what on a former day he had termed "solid votes," on both measures separately. He contended that what took place in 1798, when the English militia volunteered to Ireland, was entirely distinct. The constitutional principle of holding the militia to limited service was not inflexible. There was no inconsistency in those who consented to give way in some circumstances, refusing to give way in others, and those who consented then, were not bound by that consent from future opposition. The other question, as to the vote in 1799, was toto cœlo different, for there was then a rebellion in Ireland, a foreign enemy was also in the country, and menacing it with a greater force. The proposition originated with the Irish parliament, and the circumstances of the present time were entirely different. As to the return of the visit, it would never end; visit would beget visit, and continued transition and intermixture would be established, except the thing rested upon the first return. It was probable that in 1799, while the rebellion still subsisted, the English militia were thought a safer description of force for Ireland. He at that time supported the sending English militia to Ireland, and the transfer of the services of a part of the Irish militia to another part of the empire. The experience gained by that proceeding was one reason for his op- position to the present measure. The effects which the precedent had on the character and discipline of the militia force, had been stated fully by the hon. gent. who went before him (Mr. Bastard). He first objected to the measure that it was a breach of good faith. The maxim of volenti non fit injuria could not be justly applied, as the men felt themselves in a disagreeable situation, and a sort of necessity was put upon them, when part of their corps offered, to follow the example. He instanced the situation of Lieut. Browne, mentioned in a sort of way in the papers, so as to admit of an invidious construction: this gent. had in reality shewn more manliness by refusing to volunteer. He recollected a similar instance where the member for Nottingham (Mr. Pierrepont), was the only man that refused to give his assent at a time when the act for enabling the English militia to serve in Ireland was passed, as it were, by acclamation. The effect on the discipline of the militia was most pernicious. One deliberation led to another; and if it even ended on the instant, was it not a degrading and pernicious thing that a commanding officer should be obliged, even for that once, to descend to a canvass and solicitation of his men. Let gentlemen take a lesson from experience. It was well known that the officers who had been obliged to take such a step, had never been able to recover their authority. The present high state of discipline in the militia, was owing to its long, regular, and unchanged establishment. If the system should be broke in upon, that cause of perfection would no longer remain. These two main objections lay to the plan as laid down. If parliament was called upon to vote the measure on trust that was intelligible. If ministers offered one set of reasons while they acted on another, how was parliament to decide? It was argued, that though the power was given, it was not meant to use it immediately. If any thing required immediate use and was unfit to keep, it was certainly an offer of voluntary service. It was more liable to spoil than mackerel itself. The circumstances would change, and the disposition of the men would change with them. It was certainly a great effort of ingenuity to create a disposable force by transferring from one island to another a force in its own nature not disposable; and it was extremely whimsical to think of creating a force for offensive operations, not by increasing the army, but by raising more militia. As to the recruiting service, it could not go on. Gentlemen met themselves in their own market; the moment they went to Ireland to raise new regiments for general service they would find themselves there already raising 8 or 10,000 militia. The effect of the measure was to bring a force from a country where it was more wanted, to a country where it was less wanted; then, to replace it, a fresh militia is to be got at a higher price, and to run the same round. Gentlemen who were better acquainted with the character of the Irish militia than he, but not better than the hon. gent. who spoke last in opposition to the measure, may see reasons for accepting the offers which he did not see. He therefore voted against the motion.

said, the right hon. gent. who just sat down had weakened his charge by admitting, with all the ingenuity that he was known to possess, and the unexampled facility of giving an air of novelty to what had been often repeated, that he could add nothing new to the familiar arguments urged against the present measure. He did not think it right, after the able statement of his right hon. friend at the commencement of this debate, to go over the same ground at length; but as the charge of silence had been made, he begged leave merely to state the purpose of the measure. It was not an exchange of militia services, on any enlarged principle, that was in the contemplation of his Majesty's ministers. Though, if that measure could be effected without driving from the militia the gentlemen of property, it would render the militia the great bulwark of the empire. Looking upon that as one of the best measures that could be adopted, he was sure it would disgust the militia if it should now be prematurely pressed forward. The sentiments and disposition of the militia on this head, ought to be watched and followed up, not anticipated. He thought it right, therefore, to say, that his Majesty's ministers did not mean this even a beginning or introduction to such a system. They did not even mean to put the matter upon the footing of the year 1798, when a rebellion raged in Ireland, though he was sure if the same necessity existed, there would be bat one feeling with respect to voluntary service, without limit of time or place. In his opinion, a high motive of policy was a good ground for accepting a service from the militia beyond what it was bound to by their original constitution. He deprecated the mode of arguing against granting the power, by assuming that it would be abused when it was granted. He contended that soldiers were frequently put in a deliberative capacity, particularly when called upon to volunteer in a storming party, or on a forlorn hope, or any other service of extraordinary danger. He was sure no person would be more ready than his hon. friend over the way (Col. Vereker), to volunteer services of danger for the safety of any part of the empire, but he could not approve of the idea of a local patriotism, preferring one part to all the rest. As to the mischief of bringing away the men of property and magistrates in the Irish militia, this would only apply if each regiment were kept in its own district. As it was now, and had always been the case in the Irish militia, to serve in counties distant from their own, he could see no difference between their serving in England, and in a remote part of Ireland. As to the next objection, that the raising of an additional militia force would cripple the recruiting, experience had proved it would not. As to the argument that sensible ought to be raised, he conceived it would be sufficient to reflect, that the men would be raised more speedily, more cheaply, and more rapidly by being incorporated with militia regiments already highly disciplined. Besides, there was no source from which experienced officers could be found for sensible regiments. It was the opinion of the best officers, that with eight new regiments, and ten new battalions, with the existing disposable force more at liberty by the present measure, we should be in a condition to undertake offensive operations. It was not the object of the present measure to lessen the defence of Ireland. If that was the object the removal of the regular troops would more naturally be thought of. He disclaimed the idea of bringing the Irish militia to this country from any motive of suspicion. He knew the difficulties men had to contend with in their own country; but he had seen the Irish militia tried in the year 1798 by plans of seduction beyond any thing that the ingenuity or wickedness of men would for its own sake ever practise again; and though a few had fallen victims, the great mass had proved inaccessible.

remarked an inconsistency among the speakers on the opposite side. The right hon. secretary adduced the transactions of 1798 and 1799, as precedents to sanction the present proceedings, while the noble lord disclaimed making such a use of them. He denied that there was any analogy between the circumstances of the voluntary offer in 1798, and a cold cabinet measure like the present. The noble lord disclaimed, for his Majesty's ministers, any idea of making this measure even the foundation of an interchange of militia; but he doubted, whether the manner in which his lordship spoke, would have the effect of quieting the apprehension which some of his hearers might entertain on that subject. There were many modes in a voluntary offer, that might be procured in a manner little short of actual violence. He noticed, as a great inconsistency, that while the paper on the table stated, the offer to come only from 6,000, the bill empowered the disposal of 10,000. With all respect for the Irish militia, and believing them to be as gallant men as any in the world, he did not think either English or Irish militia equal to regular troops, nor could he believe, that the removal of 10,000 Irish militia to this country would give a regular force of the same amount. It was a whimsical argument to say, that this was the quickest way of obtaining 10,000 men, while it was said, that the power, though given, was not to be speedily used. True, the appeal to the volunteer spirit of the army for the formation of storming parties and forlorn hopes, was giving them a deliberative power, but it was a deliberation to be decided on the impulse of the moment, to which Britons would never be wanting. It was widely distinct from a cold deliberation like that of the present measure. He complained, that in matters which were so intimately connected with the regular army, the house was called upon to vote without any account of the regular army before them. Sometimes one minister and sometimes another took from their pockets papers, which they read as such accounts, and which they put in their pockets again. He thought it wrong that this measure was divided from that which was to replace the force to be taken away. Both should be connected, and gentlemen would thus have the opportunity of considering the whole together. At present, if this bill passed, there was no security that the force, the removal of which it would authorise, would be replaced.

, in explanation, allowed that he had expressed himself decidedly against replacing the Irish militia by foreign troops; but he approved of their being replaced by English militia.

said, he was astonished to see the house so long deliberating upon the propriety of accepting the services of their loyal fellow subjects in Ireland, so gallantly, so disinterestedly, tendered by them at the present crisis. He contended, that the union of the two kingdoms was incomplete, till a general measure upon the grounds of mutual benefits and reciprocal assistance was established; but, as this was at the present moment impracticable, it was an unfair proceeding in the house to couple the two things together; one point, and one alone, could be considered, and that one was, whether we shall, at this moment of peril, condescend to avail ourselves of the volunteer services of our brethren in Ireland, or shall we contumeliously tell them, that even their services are beneath our consideration.—Upon what principle it was that this occasion had been taken to reprobate the system of volunteer services in the army, he could not understand.—No man was a greater enemy to the deliberation of soldiers in arms than himself, but, without volunteer services, great achievements had never been performed, nor did he see the wisdom in questioning the use of volunteer exertions at a moment when almost the entire defence of the country depended upon the volunteers. It was a against the true spirit of the union he contended, that these difficulties were made—that measure which was to strengthen the empire, and increase its consequence, what was its proposed operation, what must foreign nations say, when for the first time it is brought into consideration, they shall learn, that a doubt arose whether the two kingdoms should mutually assist each other, and that this point was gravely debated in the parliament of the empire?—And shall nothing be said on the part of the people of Ireland, are they to have no feeling for your contumely?—A kingdom, he said, as independent as your own, whose independence you was forced to acknowledge, or we would not have treated with you, a people, who have sacrificed that independence, who have cashiered their parliament, who have given up their consequence as a nation, to coalesce with you as friends, is it meant that this people should be told that their present situation, is so abject, that even their services are not worth your acceptance. Gentlemen cannot be in earnest? it is impossible.

The question being loudly called for, the house divided on the motion that the speaker do leave the chair, when there appeared,

The bill was accordingly committed, and the report ordered to be received on Thursday.