moved, that a select committee be appointed to enquire into the state of the Criminal and Pauper Lunatics in England and Wales, and of the laws relative thereto, and to report the same with their observations to the house. It was a year and a half since he had called the attention of the house to this subject, which demanded immediate interference. The consequence of the attempt made by Hatfield on the life of his majesty, was an act empowering the judges in cases of acquittal on the ground of insanity, to order the person so acquitted to be detained in custody, until his majesty's pleasure re–specting them should be known. Under this act, several unfortunate persons were now lying in public jails; of all places, the most improper for their abode. He re–ferred to an instance in the county which he had the honour to represent, of a per–son who, having been tried for murder and acquitted, on the ground of insanity, had been imprisoned in the public jail, in which all possible care was taken of him that could be expected from persons igno–rant of the mode of treatment, peculiarly requisite for lunatics, committed another murder on a felon in the same prison. Pauper lunatics, as the law then stood, were maintained by the parish, so that it became the interest of overseers that these unhappy people should commit some out–rage by which the parishes might be relieved from the burthen of them. There were not less than 1700 pauper lunatics now in confinement. How to proceed, whether asy–lums should be erected to comprehend more than one county, or in what other way relief should be afforded, would be a proper subject of consideration for the committee which he proposed to institute.

asked why the hon. gent. did not include in his reference to the com–mittee, the Criminal and Pauper Lunatics of Scotland and Ireland?

replied, that in those countries there were provisions which ren–dered the necessity of any interposition of the legislature less pressing than in England and Wales.—A committee was then appointed.

said, he rose in pursuance of the notice he had given with reference to one of the members of that house. He felt himself unfortunate in his inability to perform the task he had undertaken, in the manner its importance demanded. He assured the house, that he had not the slightest enmity or rancour towards the person who was the object of his motion and he had therefore neither claimed nor solicited the support of any individual He had felt himself called upon by an imperious sense of his duty as a member of the house, but above all, by his sincere wish to maintain the honour and character of the profession to which he had been attached for upwards of 30 years. Actuated as he was by these sentiments, it could not be surprising that he should look up with respect to the decisions of those courts martial whose proceedings he was persuaded were uniformly dictated by justice and impartiality. Thinking as he did, he felt that a person who had been tried by 16 of the most respectable characters among the officers of the army, and found guilty of 11 charges out of 14, and who had been convicted of a crime only short of felony, was not a fit person to sit among the representatives of the country. He wished the house to be in full possession of the case and then to put it to the dignity and honour of the house, whether a person who had been so stigmatized was worthy of a seat in parliament? He should conclude with his motion; at the same time he trusted that if a debate arose, he might have the privilege of expressing himself more at large. He moved, "That the Charges made against John Fenton Cawthorne, esq. a member of this house, and the sentence pronounced against him in consequence by the Court Martial appointed to try him, together with the proceedings of the house thereon in session 1795–6, be now read." The motion was seconded by Mr. Spencer Stanhope.

wished the hon. general had stated more fully his sentiments, and had adduced precedents which might have induced the house to go immediately and without delay into the proceeding. There were certainly many precedents for expulsion, but not one of them rested on the grounds on which the present case stood. In the whole code of British juris–prudence there was no rle more strong than that any man who had been acquitted or condemned could not again be tried for the same offence. This was a principle of our established law, rooted as he hoped in every man's breast, and against which he trusted that no one would dare to set his face. There was another circumstance which ought to weigh heavily in the con–sideration of the house. He stood there legally qualified; he had been returned, and returned without opposition, by a very large body of electors. If he had been thought ineligible, the moment of election had been the time for stating that ineligi–bility; but no such attempt had been made, and he had been unanimously re–turned for one of the largest county towns in the kingdom. He would not enter into any discussion of the merits of the sentence by the court martial, although that was a subject from which he would never shrink when it came regularly before the house. With regard to precedents of expulsion, there were several in the cases of Mr. Wilkes, Mr. Walpole, and others; but he contended, that none of these cases was applicable to his own. The hon. general had disclaimed any feeling of personal hos–tility towards him. It was certainly very kind of him to bring the subject forward. This he would declare, that when he stood in a similar situation before, he felt much more depressed, and much more oppressed than he then did. But had he at the time to which he alluded known what he then knew, he would not have troubled that house for a moment on the subject. He meant, had he known that the first law officer in the house, the Attorney Ge–neral of that day, had declared that the sentence of a court martial was too flimsy a ground on which to found the proceed–ings which had terminated in his expulsion from the house.

would not have said any thing upon this motion, had it not been for some expressions which fell from the hon. mem–ber who had spoken last. He apprehended that that hon. member had mistaken the na–ture of the case entirely, when he talked about another trial for the same offence, about his election and his qualification. This was not a question of election or qua–lification. The objection did not stand on these grounds. The view which his hon. friend had taken of the case was this: whether it was consistent with the dignity, the purity, and the honour of that house, that a person labouring under the stigma attached to his character, by the sentence of a court martial, and the proceedings on which it was founded, should be consider–ed as a fit member to sit among them? The question was, whether the house pos–sessed the power of re-expulsion, and if it did, whether it was fit and proper to ex–ercise it in this particular instance? It was a proceeding undoubtedly of the utmost importance; for whether it was considered as affecting the character of the individual, and the character and purity of that house, or as involving those great constitutional principles that ought to govern the right of election, there was no question more deserving of the serious attention and care–ful examination of every person who had to decide upon in merits. It had afforded him, and must have afforded to others, great satisfaction to observe, that in bringing forward this business no mixture of passion or personal rancour had appeared. His hon. friend, from the manner and temper with which he proposed his motion, had evinced, what indeed be was well aware of before, that he acted from prin–ciple and not from passion—that he had truly stated that he was not an oppressor, but that he was actuated only by a con–scientious regard to the best interests of his profession, of the house, and of the public. In this temper he hoped the in–vestigation would be pursued, and therefore be was very much disposed to accede to a suggestion that seemed to be thrown out by the person who spoke last, when he said, that he rested his case on precedents. In order to ascertain what precedents were analo–gous to the present case, or in any degree bore upon it, it was his intention, if the motion had passed, to have moved for the appointment of a committee to search into precedents. Cases precisely similar to the present, perhaps, they could find none, but they might find many cases analogous to it, and some of these might probably be in the recollection of several members of that house. At all events, it would be of advantage to proceed with our judgments instructed by a careful exami–nation of the journals of the house. This was so clear, that he believed he need say nothing further in support of it. He was not aware that any objection whatever could be urged to this method. The interest of all parties concerned would be best consulted by proceeding upon sound and constitutional principles, by adhering to the general rules of justice, and keeping the individual case as much as possible out of view, except in so far as it de–pended on these rules and principles. The only objection to this which he could pos–sibly anticipate was the delay which it would occasion, and the consequent painful suspense in which the individual might thus be involved. But the delay would not be very long, and the individual ought to recollect that he now stood in a situ–ation in which he was sorry that, after what had passed, he had placed himself. After this motion had passed, he would move for a committee to search into the precedents, and, after the report of that committee should be on the table, then his hon. friend would have an opportunity to propose whatever he thought best becoming the dignity of the house, the ho–nour of the profession, and the interests of the public.

having seconded the motion, would say merely that he had intended to submit to the house, after the disposal of the present motion, a motion similar to that which the noble lord had just declared it was his intention to pro–pose. For the question ought assuredly to come to a solid and impartial decision, and were it even only pro formâ, it would he the duty of the house, on such a solemn occasion, to appoint a committee to search the Journals for precedents.

observed, that it was not his intention to oppose the motion; but he felt himself called upon to express his opinion. With regard to the question, it did not appear to him to be one which could rest on precedent. The only question was, whether the house, had a pri–mary right of expulsion, and whether it had a right of re-expulsion? Then the only remaining question would be with re–gard to the propriety of enforcing that right, and whether there were grounds for exercising that discretionary power? The proof of this right could not rest on prece–dent. No person could deny the exis–tence of the primary right of expulsion. If that was allowed, the other right of re-expulsion must follow as of course. It was a question, consequently, not of pre–cedent, but of principle. He conceived that it was a right which was vested in the house, for the maintenance of its own rights, principles, honour and dignity. He was aware that some persons would argue, that the exercise of such a right by the house trenched upon the right of the electors. That he denied: he conceived it was a right inherent in the house for its own protection. There could be no right in the electors in contradiction to the right of the house; without such a right in the house, accumulated disgrace might attach to its character. The same individual might be sent back to parliament, whom it had stigmatized in the face of Europe and the world. As it seemed to be the opinion of the house that this question should be referred to precedent, he had no objection that it should be put in posses–sion of every possible information, and should therefore not resist the motion.

asked, why the house was to be kept in suspence upon such a question? It appeared to him that the pro–position of the noble lord was the sugges–tion of the member against whom the mo–tion was directed; and yet the noble lord had said, that he should not have risen had it not been for what had fallen from that member. What were the precedents to which the noble lord thought fit to refer the house? If he was inclined to trespass upon the time of the house, he would take every one of the precedents, and would shew that they had no more to do with this question than they had to do with a ques–tion of bankruptcy. If the house an–xiously wished to see precedents, he had no objection; but upon the principle of their conveying any information to the house, he was against the motion. There was one precedent before the house upon which the house could not be mistaken. There was the precedent, that John Fenton Cawthorne was, for infamous and ungentleman like conduct in the year 1796, expelled the house. Till that could be erased from the Journals of the house, there could not be a precedent more decisive. He was sorry that the decision might hurt the feel–ings of the member to whom it was refer–red, but he had himself rendered the dis–cussion necessary. Supposing there was not to be found any precedent which ap–lied to the present case, was the house to make one merely to cover that which was disgraceful and infamous? If a precedent was to be made, let it be one for the pu–nishment of a sinner, and not to conceal his iniquity. What the house should de–cide, would become a precedent, for it was to the glory of the nation, and the honour of the military character, that there was no case directly in point. If the object of the noble lord was delay, he could assure him it would answer no purpose, for the ques–tion should certainly be decided. He trusted it was not to be supposed that the noble lord meant to throw the broad shield of power over the member who had so conducted himself. If such a construction could be put upon the motion, he hoped the noble lord would withdraw it.

thought that the two last gentlemen who had addressed the house had mistaken the question, which was merely, whether the proceedings of 1796 should be read. He hoped it would not be assumed by the hon. gent. opposite, that his arguments had been assented to, because they had not been answered. The hon. gent. seemed averse to going into a committee, and had stated that there was no precedent that applied to the present case. He could assure him that he was so con–vinced there was not a precedent, that he intended to have made a similar motion to that which the noble lord had suggested; and the noble lord would allow him to state, that there being no precedent was a strong argument to bring forward in an–swer to a proposition for expelling a member, and therefore he should support the no–ble lord's proposition. There was an ex–pression used by the same hon. gent., and also by the noble lord, with reference to the disagreeable feelings the discussion might excite. They had observed, that if such disagreeable feelings were experienced, the person must thank himself. He admitted, that upon a question of this kind, personal feelings must be left entirely out of the case; but he thought it extremely unfair to prejudice the house, by stating that a member had put himself in a situation in which disagreeable feelings were likely to be excited. Perhaps, it might turn out that the person alluded to had as much right to sit in this house as any other member. In such case, it would be peculiarly unjust to reproach him with having placed him–self in a situation in which he was liable to have his feelings wounded. It was his wish, and he hoped it was the wish of every one, to have this question decided as spee–dily as possible. The Attorney-General said, that his only motive for assenting to the motion which the hon. general had made, was that of which notice had been given by the noble lord. If the noble lord had not announced his intention of moving the house that search should be made in the Journals for that information which the Journals affor–ded, he was quite free to declare that he should have given the motion of the hon. general his immediate negative, undismay–ed by any of those menaces he had often heard uttered in that house. He should have thought it his duty to the public, his duty to the law of the land, his duty to the constitution of the country, his duty to the rights of electors of the country, who formed the constituting body of the house of commons, to have given his immediate and decided negative to the mo–tion. He should have done so, because he was at a loss to conceive that the minutes proposed to be read before the house, could be made the ground of any proceed–ings by a parliament recently elected, and because he thought that the house would have been justified in putting a negative on a proposition for the adoption of any proceedings upon such a ground. He should have done so, because he should have thought it his duty to have guarded against trusting himself with any power that was not subject to law, and to those rules, in the exercise of which he had some system to act upon. He should have rejected those rules of proceeding, by which he was called upon to consult the feelings he might more or less kindly en–tertain towards a particular individual. He should not have been less disposed to have done so when it was proposed that he was to act upon the sentence of such a court as had been described; not that he had any thing to say to the prejudice of such a court, or its utility for the purposes for which it was instituted for military of–fences;—for offences truly military, he be–lieved a Court Martial was the most pro–per tribunal. But to ask him at once, with–out his knowing whether there were any pre–cedents to make the sentence of a court martial, in which there was no trial by jury, no challenge of jurors, in fact, none of the privileges that constituted the trial by jury—to ask him to inflict a penalty that never attached to any sentence of a court of common law, was to ask him to do that to which it was impossible he could assent; and particularly when, at the same time, he was required to adopt such a principle, he was to be denied the means of informing himself, and no precedent what–ever was offered. He trusted such a pro–position would be discountenanced. He had thought it necessary to trouble the house with his opinion thus early, on ac–count of the manner in which the question had been treated. The noble lord had been cautioned not to throw the shield of power over the member to whom the discussion referred. The noble lord had not thrown the shield of power over the member. He had thrown the shield of the constitution over the member, as he hoped he would over every member, if he should stand in need of it. There had been allusions made to certain fanciful notions of honour and dishonour, which could never be made the ground of any rational proceedings in any court of justice. It was impossible that the house could found proceedings on any maxims or principles of such a nature. He believed that the electors of this country, as long as they possessed those feelings which an attachment to their own rights and the constitution of the country was calculated excite, would be convinced, that those who opposed the motion of the hon. ge–neral were the true friends of their rights, and of the constitution.

said, that it was necessary for him, who had been a mem–ber of the parliament in which the member referred to had been expelled, to vindi–cate it from something that had fallen from a learned gent. (the attorney-general) who was not a member of that parliament. He begged to be understood as not wishing to enter into the question, either of the pro–priety of searching for precedents, or of reading the proceedings of the house. As to the question of searching for precedents, no material objection had been made. He could have wished that in this early stage of the discussion, the consideration of personal feelings had not been introduced. It could have no other effect than that of preventing the cool and dispassionate de–cision of the question. However, it was only his intention to notice what had fallen from the learned gent. Did he mean to say that the proceedings of the court martial were not now, or were not then, a proper ground for the house to exercise a privilege not disputed, of expelling one of its members? No such opinion, he was persuaded, had been maintained in the house when the question was determined by the last parliament. It appeared to him that the question ought to he disentangled of all legal niceties. It was monstrous to say, that if the house was satisfied there was such a body of crime proved to have existed, whether the crime was of a military nature or in a moral view, that it had not power to act. But the learned gent. should have stated what he meant by a crime purely military; a crime might be military, and yet, in the course of the enquiry before a court martial, there might arise, as in this instance, a case of moral turpitude. The ground on which he apprehended parliament de–cided was, that there was such a corpus delicti, as fully justified them in the exer–cise of their power. It was impossible to carry the question before a court where it could have been better decided. When it came on again before the present parliament, he trusted that no objection would be made on the ground of the defect of evidence, or any statute of limitation which seemed to be hinted at, as if this par–liament could not look at the same evidence that had been given during a previous par–liament. If it was fit to re-exercise a right now, which had been exercised before, there could be no difficulty. If the exer–cise of the right was not bad then, it could not be bad now. The only question was, whe–ther the house could re-expel a member who had been expelled by a former parliament?

asked, if the learned gent. thought the sentence of a court mar–tial too fmsy a ground of proceeding, what ground would he expect? The learn–ed gent. was in error when he said that no right existed in the person tried by a court martial to challenge his judges. It was both the right and the practice. He was surprised how the learned gent. could think as he had expressed himself, without deem–ing the act of the last parliament a flagrant injustice.

stated, in explanation, that he did not say the broad shield of government had been thrown over the delin–quent. He only cautioned the noble lord to avoid doing any thing which might be so misconstrued; nor did he say that the house should take the proceedings of a court martial for their guide; although he differed from the learned gent. on his notions of honour, he was as willing to abide by the honour of a court martial, as the decision of a court of justice.

observed, that although this question had been already dis–cussed and decided, still there was no reason why the house should not, under the present circumstances, exercise its discretion, and come to an opinion.

did not rise to detain the house by entering into the merits of this ques–tion, his object merely was, to receive further explanations from the learned gent. (the attorney-general) as to his application of fanci–ful notions of honour, &c. to courts martial.

declared, that he did not apply the words honour or disho–nour to a court martial; he had already stated, that the acceptation of proceeding on any such fanciful phrase would not be received in a court of justice.

was exceedingly sorry to feel himself obliged to trouble the house on this subject, after the ample discussion it had undergone in this preliminary stage; but the warmth of some members having superseded the perfect good humour with which the noble lord had introduced his motion, made him rise, in the hope of es–tablishing the question on its original ground; and certainly he must confess, that the mode proposed by the noble lord appeared to him the best which the nature and importance of the case demanded. It was a proceeding founded on the princi–ples of the constitution, to which every member was willing to submit, at the same time that it maintained the dignity of the house, and the regularity of its proceed–ings. He was a little surprised to hear a distinction taken between principle and precedent; for his part, he did not think there was any, as applied to this case, for the one would be found to contain the other; or, to be more explicit, he thought that precedent contained principle. He was old enough to remember the proceedings in 1764, on the expulsion of Wilkes for his publication of the North Briton; he also well remembered the question agitated res–pecting the same individual in 1769, on which occasion he was in the minority. It must be in the recollection of many members of the house, that in 1782 the expulsion pre–viously voted had been reversed, and all the resolutions respecting it expunged from the journals by a majority, of which he was one. Though this was not a case in point, yet he apprehended that it settled the law of parliament on the subject of expulsion. Having made these loose ob–servations with a view of bringing the question only before the house, he should conclude therefore with trusting that the motion of the noble lord would be adop–ted, being the best in any point of view which could, in his opinion, be suggested.

was astonished that a person of the ability of the learned gent. who spoke last, should say that there was no distinction between principle and precedent. They were far as the poles asunder. Pre–cedent might illustrate, but did not con–stitute a principle. He would support the motion for searching precedents, however, as they would shew what had been done in similar cases, if there were any. It there were no precedents, then we must resort to the principle, and make a precedent for the future.—The motion was then agreed to, and the sentence of the court martial,and the proceedings of parliament thereon in the session of 1795–6 read in brief; after which it was moved by

that a committee be ap–pointed to examine into the journals of that house, and the records of parliament, for precedents of cases, in which members had been expelled by that house, who had been returned to it, and to report thereon to the house.

in seconding the motion, thought it his duty to abstain from giving any opinion upon the case by antici–pation, one way or the other.

perfectly agreed with the noble lord as to the course of proceeding which he recommended, but thought, that as the motion was worded, it would nar–row the view of the case. Gentlemen conversant with the records of that house, would be aware, that of cases similar to the present there were none, and of analo–gous cases extremely few. There were many cases to he found, which, as the motion was worded, the committee would think themselves bound to report. He thought, therefore, that it would be desire-able to make the words of the motion larger, in order to come at the main spring upon which the house acted in such cases, which would enable them to discharge their painful duty in this instance. The hon. gent. suggested to enlarge the words of the motion to all cases of expulsion, distinguishing those in which the expelled members had been again returned.

adopted the suggestion of the hon. gent., and moved, "that, a com–mittee be appointed to examine the jour–nals of this house, and records of parlia–ment for precedents of cases of members who have been expelled by this house, and for what causes they have been so expel–led, and also of cases in which members, having been expelled by this house, have been again returned; and to report the same to the house, together with the pro–ceedings thereon:" which was agreed to.

proposed to pre–sent a petition to the house from a very considerable number of the freemen of Lancaster. It had been put into his hands as he came into the house, and he thought it his duty to present it. But in doing this he would not pledge himself to any opinion upon the case. As he had been a member of the court mar–tial whose sentence had been alluded to, he should abstain from taking any share in those discussions. Of the contents of the petition he was ignorant, but if the house would consent to receive it, they would be enabled to judge of its contents when it should be read at the table.—The petition was then ordered to be brought up and read. It stated, "that the petitioners have been informed, that some measure, not being a petition from any party inter–ested, is depending before the house, having for its object to prevent, them from being represented in parliament by John Fenton Cawthorne, esq., one of the members chosen at the last general election to represent the borough of Lancaster in parliament: That the petitioners submit, that, according to the uniform practice in such cases, the legality of any election of a member of the house cannot be questioned, unless the same is made the sub–ject of a petition presented to the house within 14 days from the first meeting of parliament after such election; and that any attempt to invalidate such election, by any other means than such as are spe–cified in the several statutes in such case made and provided, must be contrary to law, and ought to be discouraged by the house: but, if it is not intended to bring into question the legality of the election of the said J. F. Cawthorne, and the same is admitted to be a legal election, then the petitioners humbly submit, that the house has no jurisdiction to exclude from the privilege of sitting and voting as a mem–ber of parliament any person who has be–come a member of the house by a lawful election, except for some matter arising subsequent to such election to disqualify such member from sitting and voting: That the petitioners having elected the said J. F. Cawthorne, with a full knowledge of all the circumstances which they are informed are now to be made the grounds of his expulsion, submit, with the greatest confidence, that unless such circumstances amounted to a legal disability to sit in the house of commons (in which case the pe–titioners submit that the question ought to be tried upon a petition, and before a select committee,) the exercise of a power by the house of commons, to defeat such election would be subversive of the rights of elec–tors in general, and highly injurious to the petitioners, who insist they have a right to return to the house any person as their representative not previously disqualified by any known rule of law: and therefore praying, that no such measures may be adopted by the house, and that they may be heard against any such measure, by themselves, or their counsel, at the bar of the house." On the motion that the petition do lie on the table,

asked the noble lord who presented it, whether it was really the petition of the freemen of Lancaster? If it was, it appeared to him not to be in the light of a petition, but as a dictatorial and insolent attempt to controul parliament. The last paragraph appeared most reprehensible, where they acknowledged that they were acquainted with all the infamy that was the object of the motion. This admission would almost justify the house in disfranchising the borough. (A loud cry of no! no!) There certainly could be no doubt that a person declared incapable of serving his majesty in any capacity, was not fit for any trust.

replied, that it had been put into his hands by persons of re–spectability, and was signed also by per- sons of character. He could only say, like most members who presented petitions, that he believed it to have been subscribed by those whose names appeared to it.

observed, that the hon. gent. had taken up the question very warmly, but appeared to be totally unacquainted with the circumstances of the case. He could shew him an alphabetical list of the subscribers to the petition, which had been taken from the list of the freemen of Lancaster, and transmitted to him. Amongst them were the names of the chairman and magistrates of the quarter ses–sions, and many land-owners in the hun–dreds about the town. It was not by any personal considerations that he was influ–enced on this occasion, but by a regard to the rights of the gentlemen who had sent him to that house.

observed, that this was a petition against a motion made, though no proceeding had taken place on the subject to which it alluded, till a few minutes ago. This was strange conduct, for which he did not think there was any precedent.

was of opinion, that this petition was of a nature so dictatorial, that it ought not to be suffered to remain upon the table of the house; but he would not agree, that it would justify a disfranchisement of the borough, because that would confound the innocent with the guilty. The petition was in the hands of the noble lord before any motion was made on the subject, or the petitioners could know whether their rights would be affected thereby. The petition was dictatorial, and presumed to lay down the law, and there–fore ought not to be laid on the table.

entered his protest against the doctrines that had been laid down by the noble lord, and by the hon. gent. who had contended, that the language of the petition was so improper, as to justify the disfranchisement of the borough. The pe–titioners had a right to petition, if they apprehended, no matter upon what ground, that their rights were danger of being invaded. The language of the petition was the same with the language recorded upon the Journals of the house, that an attempt to invalidate a return, where the person was not legally disqualified, was subversive of the rights of electors. Had not the petitioners a right to use the same language as the house? He had risen only to protest against such novel and uncon- stitutional doctrines, in order that it might not be supposed, if they were suffered to pass unnoticed, that they were assented to in that house.

appealed to the speaker, whether it was consistent with the forms and practice of the house to receive a petition against any proceeding not im–mediately under consideration of the house.

agreed in the sentiments of the hon. gent. opposite (Mr. S. Bourne), and entirely concurred in the doctrine, laid down by the chair, that a petition from the subject was entitled to the atten–tion of that house, provided it was not couched in offensive language. The language of this petition seemed not to be of that description, for the petitioners humbly submitted that the apprehended proceed–ing would be subversive of the rights of electors. They should not construe too technically the letter of the petition.—The petition was ordered to lie on the table.

On the motion of Mr. T. Grenville, the. house went into a committee of supply upon the Navy Estimates for the current year.

rose, in pursuance of his motion, to move for a vote of 10,000 seamen, in addition to the 120,000 already granted. In moving a resolution to that effect, he felt it necessary to make some observation in reference to a charge of sup–posed neglect that had come from the other side of the house, upon the ground of the necessity of this additional supply not having been foreseen, when the late grant was made, for that nothing possibly could have occurred since the late de–mand was complied with to justify a sub–sequent demand for an additional vote of seamen. It would be found, however, upon examination, that his conduct had been, in this instance, strictly regular, and was to be justified upon the usual grounds of proceeding; the accounts ending the 30th of Sept. took in the estimates but for three-fourths of the year, and it was not for him to decide competently until furnished with the remaining quarterly account, ending the 31st Dec. In time of war the levies for each succeeding month are re–gulated by the report of the past month's recruiting, which however in such a crisis is never to be checked beyond a certain limit. It was a great satisfaction to him to state to the committee, that it appeared by this last quarter's estimates, that the number of British seamen exceeded 126,000 men, and that this considerable increase had taken place within the last five months. It might appear a question, why, if the numbers had exceeded by more than 6000 the ordinary supply, there should now be a further demand for an, additional 10,000. When gentlemen came to consider the variety of increased expenditure in the department relative to the marines, they might be led to think this difficulty sufficiently obviated. And here he would take occasion freely to state his sentiments upon a subject that had not been as yet, in his opinion, satisfactorily propounded. He alluded to the present mode of submitting to the house the naval supplies, and contended that, according to that mod, it was impossible that the members could be put in possession of all the information that was indispensably ne–cessary to their forming a right judgment upon the estimates required; the mode of proceeding hitherto adopted seemed to be grounded upon a scale of arithmetical rea–soning, which could not be brought to apply; at present the allowance for the 120,000 voted was at the rate of 7l. per man; before the session of 1797, it was but 4l. per man; and until the allowance was increased, the naval debt was progressively increasing to a most inconvenient dispro–portion. As he thought that gentlemen should be possessed of the most minute details, he took this opportunity of acquainting the committee that he had in contemplation so to arrange the statement of the naval estimate in future, (should he have the honour of again submitting the, estimates to any future committee) as to render them clear and intelligible to every gentleman who might be anxious to ex–amine them minutely; he was at the same time aware that there were estimates of a nature that made it impossible to give such in detail—as, for instance, all those arising from the unforeseen damages, los- ses, and accidents, to which the sea service was so peculiarly liable. Gentlemen must see that in cases of such uncertainty, there could be no room for calculation, even of a general kind, much less of an exact detail of the minute expences. He felt confident in saying, that where it was admissible, the plan in contemplation would be found to be eminently qualified for removing all the many difficulties that had hitherto precluded gentlemen the ne–cessary information, and he spoke with more confidence in its praise, because the labour had not been his own. To give gentlemen a clearer idea of the advantages expected to result from the proposed plan of statement, he should trouble them with an enumeration of the distinct heads under which the different articles of de–tail should be arranged. The first should be a reference to wages to officers; 2d, seamen; 3d, marines; 4th, and 5th, pilo–tage and wages; 6th, wear and tear, which would be found to be a most im–portant and comprehensive head of expence; 7th, pensions; 8th, salaries to the admiralties, &c.; 9th, workmen in yards, &c.; 10th, rebuilding ships in merchants' yards by contract; 11th, hired armed ships; 12th, the most difficult branch of all others to detail, purchase of stores to replenish his majesty's magazines, an article in itself requiring no less a sum than 3,600,000l.; the 13th head he should entitle bills of exchange; 14th, incidental expences; and 15th and last, the victualling board. Under the above 15 heads, it was proposed that every minutia of charge should be fully detailed, each classed under its respective article, so that any gentleman anxious for minute examination, would hay only to turn to the index, that would refer him at the instant to the point upon which he wished for information. As a proof of the necessity of such an arrangement, he would beg leave to mention one instance that of the navy estimates, including charge of 600,000l. for the victualling bills for the army in garrisons abroad. This surely was going beyond the navy department, and consequently introducing much confusion in the public accounts. The last estimate he had to submit to the committee, was six months' salary due to the commissioners of naval revision. This commission would have expired in December last, but as the gentlemen composing it had applied to him for further time, specifying that it would be of importance, that an abrupt stop to their labours hi–therto should not now defeat the result of them; to such an application the hon. member said, that he thought it his duty to concede, though at the same time he must say, much as he individually respec–ted the talents and experience of the gen–tlemen composing this commission, still he thought the commission inconvenient in its operation, and not the most infallible in some of its suggestions. While the same person was at the head of the admiralty, and this commission, no such incon–venience was to be dreaded. He could not approve of the report, that considered general establishments of pay, as connec–ted with the pay of all officers whatever, or that recommended increase of pay to the officers in the dock-yards. The right hon. gent. then concluded with moving his first resolution—"That it is the opinion of this committee that 10,000 additional seamen be raised for the service of the year 1807, including 2,400 royal marines."

thought the right hon. gent. certainly satisfactory in the clear and comprehensive view he took of his propo–sed improvement in the way of presenting the navy estimates for the future to that house. He, however, did not think the gentleman equally satisfactory in explain–ing why this additional grant of seamen had not been moved for when the 120,000 men were voted. He could not reconcile it to his mind that it was satisfactory to hear that the first lord of the admiralty did not know upon the 30th of September the number of seamen in the service. He was, however, glad to hear this promise of detail, and hoped it would be extended to articles of expenditure, as well as of sup–ply; he hoped that the estimates might be printed, and did not see why (if the measures suggested by the commission of revi–sion were censurable) the right hon. gent. acceded to them the indulgence of six mouths' grace.

thought it no ground for not continuing the commission of review, to say that its suggestions were not appro–ved of by his majesty's ministers, because nothing was more possible than that that commission might suggest measures as wise as his majesty's ministers could do.

said, that the commission of revision had never been recommended by the commissioners of naval enquiry. He thought, however, his right hon. friend right in not putting an abrupt close to the proceedings of the commission, particular–ly as it had been stated that the said pro–ceedings would be brought to their desired issue within six months. With respect to what had fallen from a right hon. gent. opposite (Mr. Rose), as to the facility of stating the accounts in the form proposed, he begged leave to ask why the gentleman himself had not before adopted a method so easy and so desireable?

said, that when he applied upon a former occasion for the ac–counts of repairs done in ship-merchants' yards, the answer he received from gentlemen then in power was, that it was a thing impossible to be effected.

denied that he had said that the commissioners of review had been recommended by the naval enquiry commissioners.

to prove the justice of his al–legations, was willing to lay before the house a minute statement of all the char–ges for the last 8 or 10 years he was in office.

asked, if it was fair or consistent, in the same instant, to censure him for laying the accounts before the committee in the usual way, and when he pro–posed a fuller and more satisfactory way of doing the same, to charge him with neglect, because he had not sooner made the discovery. As to granting a longer existence to the commissioners, he did not feel that it involved him in dilemma: the commissioners required time to wind up their labour, and he should have thought it a waste of all the former time and expence, if they were not continued the six months longer.

was astonished at the suspicion which seemed to be entertained by the gentlemen on the other side, that because he wished to have the accounts of the navy laid before parliament in a more detailed and intelligible shape than they had hitherto been, he therefore meant any reflection upon those who had preceded him in office. He could assure gentlemen that he had no intention whetever to act with any such hostility. The right hon. gentleman who had just sat down had sta–ted, that such accounts as he desired for the information of parliament, were made out in the offices for several years back, and had gone out of the house to produce a paper to shew that; but all that he could say to that was, that he could never find such accounts in any of the offices. The old and ordinary mode of making out the accounts was all that he could discover, and that he wished to amend. And surely that wish which it appeared was in direct consonance with that which the right hon. gent. alleged to have been the practice, in a way that did not officially appear, could not be deemed any reproach either upon himself or his predecessors, by whom the right hon. gent. ascertained that wish was entertained and acted upon.

disclaimed the suspicions imputed to him. The right hon. gent. was not among those whom he supposed capable of censuring the conduct of his right hon. friend. All he meant to say with respect to the accounts referred to, was this, that his late right hon. friend had been in the habit, for several years, of obtaining similar accounts from the office of the comptroller of the navy.

declared that he had never seen such an account in the treasury, and maintained that such an account as that alluded to by his right hon. friend, was continually necessary, in order to enable ministers to make out correct esti–mates, and also to render to parliament a correct account of the public expenditure.

took occasion to complain of the conduct of public officers in not leaving in their offices any official documents which might be communicated to them. He was sorry to say that this conduct was particularly remarkable in the office which he had the honour to occupy, as upon his accession to it he did not find a single paper relative to previous official proceedings, at least on this side of the channel. Papers which contained, any official information, and which were communicated for public purposes, ought, as appeared to him, to be in no case removed from the proper offices, as they belonged not to the persons who might occupy any particular office, but to the public.

stated, that the paper he had was his own property, as it was a case for which he himself paid, and that the original ought to be in the treasury.

asked where the original was, in what office, and what denomination?

did not know what particular place, as he was not keeper of the papers. The motion for the grant of 10,000 men was agreed to, as were the following mo–tions: 240,500l. for wages for ditto, for 13 months; 247,000l. for victualling, &c.; 390,000l. for wear and tear of ships; 32,500l. for ordnance; 1,135,434l. for the ordinaries of the navy; 2,134,903l. for building ships in merchants' yards, and other extra expences; 1,500,000l. for the hire of transports; 300,000l. for sick and wounded seamen; 500,000l. for prisoners of war.

moved the following sums for miscellaneous service: 6,853l. for the superintendance of aliens; 12,000l. for defraying the expences of the public office in Bow Street; 51,350l. for con–victs at home; 15,000l. for contingencies in the offices of the three secretaries of state; 12,000l. for messengers for the secretaries' offices, &c.; 175,000l. for foreign and secret service money; 20,000l. for law charges; 3,000l. for the expence of prosecuting those concerned in the forgery of coin, &c.; 11,600l. for sheriffs of counties to defray the extra expence incur–red in the conviction of felons, &c.; 140,199l. for the relief of French, Dutch, and Corsican emigrants, and also of American loyalists; 1,432l. 13s. 6d. to pay the balance advanced for ditto in 1806; 1,336l. for the relief of poor dissenting ministers, and French refugees; 1,828l. for the use of a certain class of ministers; 1,934l. for stationery, &c. to the court a exchequer, &c.; 5,210l. for the salaries and other expences of certain offices con–nected with both houses of parliament, 39,760l. to defray the expence of certain improvements that have been made, am are still to be made in the buildings of both houses of parliament; 11,800l, to make good the vote of last session for defraying the expence of certain additions to the houses of parliament, and also to that of the speaker; 4,993l. for paying the expence of military roads in North Britain.—The several motions were agreed to, the house resumed, and the report was ordered to be brought up on Monday.

brought up the report of the Army Esti–mates. Upon the first resolution being read,

rose. He said, that considering the lateness of the hour, he should confine himself to a very few ob–servations. As to the new military sys–tem being productive of an immediate sup–ply for the army, it was now proved that it had not had that effect; and although the right hon. gent. (Mr. Windham) might not have been very sanguine as to the num–ber that it might raise, yet it must be sup–posed that the advocates of the system did expect that it would at least produce some increase; whereas, on the contrary, it appeared by the estimates that it had occa–sioned a diminution. In order to make room for this system, which had only produced 5000 men in a year, we had repealed a former system which had produced 15,000. However his majesty's ministers might hope that this measure would ultimately be beneficial, he must ask them, did not they consider that some supply was neces–sary for the army in the present year, and whether any of their measures had a ten–dency to procure that supply? The hon. secretary at war had contented himself with saying, no bad effects have been yet felt from this measure; he thought, howe–ver, that he should have gone a little far–ther, and shewed that some good effects had been produced by it. As to the train–ing bill, it was a measure he extremely wished to be carried into effect. If ever there was a moment in which the measure was necessary, it was no less necessary at the present moment. The danger was not to be despised because it was somewhat distant; but, on the contrary, we should take that opportunity of being fully prepa–red to meet it when it should come. If the bill ever was a good one, it ought now to be carried into effect; but if, in the opi–nion of parliament, it was a bad bill, it ought to be repealed. As to the volun–teers, although it had been said by a noble lord that they were as numerous now as at any former time, yet it was notorious that there was by no means the same attend–ance at drills and musters that there was formerly, and that consequently the force could not be so effective.

rose and addressed the house as follows.—Sir; I admit that it would be much more convenient to agree to the adjournment proposed by the hon. member (Mr. Rose), though it certainly does not come with the best grace from this side of the house [the general spoke from the opposition bench], for, in their long calculations, they forgot to calculate time. (A laugh.) Before I observe upon what has fallen in the course of this discussion, I wish, sir, to account for my addressing you from this side of the house, differing so materially as I do upon this subject from the gentlemen who usually sit here. I have not, in truth, come into their camp to spy the nakedness of the land; but speak from this side for reasons, perhaps, similar to those of some of my neighbours; because we cannot get good places at the other side. [This created a general burst of laughter throughout the house.] I perfectly concur with my hon. friend who spoke last (sir James Pulteney), that we ought to have an augmented, a well-organised, and well-disciplined army; that we should allow no relaxation of our efforts to obtain that desirable object; because I feel that the perils which call for that army are by no means abated; that although danger is at a distance, it is not at an end. But yet I differ most materially from my hon. friend as to the means of providing the army we require. I differ from him, particularly, as to his opinion respecting the Additional Force act. That act appears to me to have done almost every thing but what it professed to have in view. When it was active, it was mischievous; when it was inactive only, it was tolerable. After 18 months trial, it was found defective, but then ministers were just going to mend it. This puts me in mind of one of our poets, who was very deformed, and who was in the habit of exclaiming, "God mend me!" and having once uttered it before a country clown—"mend thee!" quoth Hodge, "it would be easier to make a do–zen new ones, than mend such an ill-formed one as thou art." So it may be said of this act. (A laugh.) The time they proposed for the amendment, reminds me of the story of a certain priest's maid, who, when found fault with for having omitted to do any thing, her constant reply was, "I was just going to do it." The priest, to try how far she would carry her excuses, asked her, why she had not washed his books and pa–pers? "Lord, sir," replied she, "I was just going to do it." (A loud laugh.) In this they (the late ministers) seemed to have resembled duke Wharton's puppies, who never opened their eyes till they were in the act of drowning. The Parish bill was to aid the ordinary recruiting; but in this it followed the French example, and began by cutting off the resources of its new ally; whereas the plan of the right hon. secretary is calculated to produce a good regular income, without racking the tenantry. It appears from the statement of the noble lord (Howick), that since it has be–gun to operate, it has produced more men, for a similar period, than the Parish bill and ordinary recruiting put together, even without including the enlistments at head quarters, and the desertions considerably diminished; and here I must say, that the right hon. secretary has not treated his measure so well as the measure has treated him, by having lost so much time in carrying it into effect. I will not follow the no–ble lord (Castlereagh) in his infinite series of diverging calculation, which, rapidly ac–cumulating in its progress, was to over–whelm the country with the expence of providing for its brave and worn-out defen–ders. A calculation that would deprive the veteran of a chance of spending, in calm repose, the evening of that day he had de–dicated to the service of his country, and bring "his grey hairs with sorrow to the grave." A calculation which stooped to visit the truckle-bed of infirmity, in Chelsea and Kilmainham hospitals. A calculation which wanted nothing but just data to stand upon; thereby following the mode of demonstration ascribed by Mr. Locke to a certain class of unhappy people, who always reason right from wrong principles. (A laugh.)—I am perfectly willing to pay every tribute to the eloquence of the noble lord, and his right hon. friend. I cannot, however, but deeply lament, that it should, at such a moment, be employed in obstructing that unanimity so essential to the interests of the country, and which gentlemen themselves profess to have so much at heart; for, surely, there never was a period in the annals of our history, when unanimity was so imperiously demanded: for a nation, no more than a house, divided against itself, can long stand. But I am not so romantic as to suppose that political hostility shall be for ever buried in oblivion. I had only hoped it would have been allowed to sleep, till the great object of national security was perfect and complete. I am aware, sir, that in a free country like this, an opposition is a whole–some check upon ministers: if so, the greater the talents in opposition, the more effectual the check. Now, as every man must admit the present opposition to pos–sess great talents, it follows, as a natural corollary, that, the longer the present gen- tlemen remain in that state, the better for their country. (A laugh.) But, to give them greater weight, I would humbly recom–mend they should adopt the words, as they have done the arguments, of M. Talleyrand, and make them serve as a proemium to their speeches against the treasury bench—"nous ne vous demandons rien;" in plain English, "we seek for nothing that you possess." (A laugh.) The noble lord alluded to the negociation, which I am the more surprised at, after the unanimous vote of the house, approving of the measures that had been taken to up–hold the character of the country in that transaction. The proposition originated with France—the negociation commenced under auspices the most propitious At the head of the foreign department was that minister (Mr. Fox) whose loss the nation so justly deplores—a man who, amid the endowments of a mighty mind, was peculiarly gifted with those qualities which fitted him for negociation in difficult times. To a vast, comprehensive, and cultivated understanding, he joined the most intimate knowledge of the various interests of Europe, a suavity of manner, and a spirit of conciliation, engaged foreign ministers to treat, while his probity and known honour insured the confidence of their masters. Devoid of guile, he had nothing equivocal in his conduct—nothing ambiguous in his language. He moved straight onward to his object, without turning aside into the winding ways of crooked policy or left-handed wisdom. There was nothing counterfeit in him—his affability flowed from the heart—his natural greatness required not the aid of assumed arrogance to give him consequence; he was too great to be haughty, too wise to be cunning. He was one of the few statesmen who knew the value of that adage, which, though homely, is true in politics as in morals, that "honesty is the best policy." Far be it from me to at–tempt his praise; it would require powers gigantic as his own to do him justice. Were he living, I should be silent. I never received favours at his hand. I leave it to those who have, to treat his memory lightly. I speak of him, as a man who loves his country must do, whilst deploring its brightest ornament. (Hear! hear!) If Mr. Fox were qualified for negociation in general, circumstances rendered him peculiarly so for that with France. His character stood high on the continent, as at home; and a former acquaintance with the prime minister of France, gave a faci–lity in his case, that would not have applied to other ministers, however capable. Thus commenced the negociation; in its whole progress, it was conducted, on the part of England, in the true spirit of peace, and with a sincerity which has always characterized this country. Its rupture was occasioned by the duplicity of a government, whose fidelity to its engagements is measured by no other standard than that of its own immediate interest. If gentlemen were serious in their professions of unani–mity, here was a favourable opportunity to display it; for it was not a question of party, but one between France and England, to be tried at the tribunal of the nations of the world; and it was essential to the character of the country, that its good faith should stand contrasted to public view, with the chicane and subtilty of its wily opponent. Whatever dif–ferences of opinion may prevail in this house, upon the various topics generally brought before it, there are two points upon which I cannot anticipate much diversity of sentiment; the one, the in–creased danger to which this country is exposed by recent events upon the conti–nent; the other, the necessity of meeting that danger with the spirit and energy befitting a brave people, determined to be free. With respect to the danger, I believe there are few sceptics; but least of all can they be found in the ranks of those who composed the late administration; for if the alarm they spread throughout the land, was then well founded, in what a multiplied ratio is the danger now increased? But if any man doubt of the danger, let him look at the extent of coast from the Adriatic to the Baltic; the immense population; the numerous well-disciplined and well-commanded armies; and let him consider, that all these resources are at the uncontrolled disposal of that man who has sworn upon his altars eternal hatred to Britain. But I learn, that an idea prevails, that this country is secure as long as she preserves her superiority at sea. No opinion more natural to be formed; no opinion more dangerous to be relied on. If this were true, then indeed might every man in the nation lay his head upon his pillow in perfect security. It is impossible to value more, highly, or to feel more proudly than I do, the brilliant achievements of our gallant tars. I know, that when the fleets of France are met by those of England, vic–tory is no longer doubtful; and that the only question now asked by a British commander is, not, what is the force, but, where is the enemy?—But knowing all this, I also know that the sea is wide, and that the elements are fickle: and ministers must be endowed with supernatural powers; they must "ride in the whirlwind, and direct the storm;" they must be able to tell the sea, "Thus far shalt thou go, and no farther; here shall thy proud waves be stayed." All this they must do, before I can trust the safety of my country merely to its superiority at sea. It is true, the ports of the enemy are blockaded; and, as it is affectedly expressed, their fleets are hermetically sealed up. As long as this blockade continues, and the seals remain unbroken, the country may be safe; but the same gale that forces our fleets to seek shelter in their own ports, gives free egress to those of the enemy to escape from theirs. What has been, may be; none can forget that the expedition under Hoche was prevented from landing in Ireland, solely by the interposition of a providential hurricane. Now, as I have not learned that ministers have laid in a stock of spare hurricanes, or that they have entered into any commercial treaty with the old ladies at Lapland, who are said to traffick in this article; I cannot conclude the country safe, merely because it is supe–rior at sea. But in stating the danger, I trust none will imagine that I mean to create dismay or despondency. I know that if the danger is great, the spirit and resources of the nation are equal to meet it; but I wish to alarm to vigilance, to excite to caution, and to rouse into action, the energies of the country, for the salvation of the country. But above all things, I am an–xious that we should not slumber under the shade of false security, "lest in that sleep we meet death."—Having shewn that government has not been able to re–store the blessings of peace, and that the continuation of the war is inevitable; ha–ving stated the danger as it appears to me, and having pointed out the fallacy of relying solely upon our naval strength, splendid as its renown is, I now come to the other arm of our national force, so essential in either of the supposed cases. The excellence of our present army is acknowledged by every man in the nation, and it lives in the recollection of the enemies of our country: we are inferior to the enemy in numerical force alone. But to return to the plan of the right hon. secretary. It has been remarked, that this measure of limiting the term of service, would have no effect upon the minds of soldiers, or those likely to become so. Now, I have in my hand, sir, two papers that will shew the futility of an observation so opposite to common reason. The one is the return of a battalion of reserved men, in which, for the six months previous to the new measure, 147 men engaged for general service, while 334 engaged in the six months subsequent to his measure. The other is a still stronger case; for seven months prior to this change, only one man, out of a battalion of 400 men, extended his services; but in the month when the right hon. secretary's plan was explained to the battalion, 264 immediately turned out; thus polling, as it were by acclamation, for his measure. (Hear! hear!) These were good men, fit to be soldiers, capable of a military life, and not such as were received into the army, under the Parish bill; for the recruits obtained under the right hon. secretary's measure are not only superior in quantity, but better in quality, than those furnished by that notable bill. There has, been a great difference in the desertions also, as a right hon. gent. has observed. But perhaps it is not quite correct to set down as deserters all those who received bounty under the Parish bill, and were never heard of more—for such fellows never joined, or meant to join any corps, and therefore could not strictly be called deserters, but robbers; and I am not sure that it would be quite incorrect to consider those as accomplices who held out such temptations to them. A great part of those, whom this bill collected, were, in fact, unfit for service; even where they were honest enough to shew a disposition to serve. How many of them have I seen, each bring a wife and six children! The old adage says, that it requires 9 tailors to make a man: but 19 of the fellows I have alluded to, would not make a soldier. They were really for the most part such as Falstaff would be ashamed to march through Co–ventry. You would in fact imagine that they were raised by a general gaol delivery of the nation, and a discharge of all the parish workhouses. It was, in short, taking a heavy load off the parishes, and trans–ferring it to the army. The force which is entitled to our confidence, must have the habit, the shape, the character, the soul of an army. I lay it down as a proposition, incontrovertible as any theorem in Euclid, that whatever weapon the enemy as- sails you with, he must be met by one of equal efficiency. If the enemy were to invade you with the trained bands of Paris, I should be content to meet him with the trained bands of London. But as he will come, if he can, with a regular disciplined army, inflated on the one hand by recent victories on the continent, and impelled on the other by the prospective plunder of this country, he must be met by a regular disciplined army, prepared to conquer or to die. But by this allusion, although it na–turally induces a reference to the volunteers, I would by no means be understood to speak lightly of that meritorious body. I admired, as much as any man, that brilliant effusion of national spirit and valour, which burst forth so nobly in the hour of danger; and, I have no doubt, that the manifestation of that spirit made a very powerful impression on the enemy. It is not, however, inconsistent with the respect and regard which I always entertained for those gallant men, to express my disapprobation of the system under which they were originally organized and trained. A great deal of unnecessary instruction and inappropriate discipline was, at the outset, attempted to be communicated to them. It did happen to me in America to meet with a circumstance from which I derived much useful information on this head. About 150 recruits were sent out to the regiment of which I was adjutant; I immediately proceeded to have them taught, secundém artem, eyes to the right, toes out, &c. But I was interrupted in my course by the ma–jor, who was a very sensible, intelligent man, and who told me, that "I began at the wrong end." I accordingly changed my course, and taught my men to manage the firelock. This was the major's advice, who thought it most necessary, particularly when time pressed, that the men should learn to fire at the enemy, and this proved to be wise, for in three weeks after they arrived, these recruits had to meet the enemy. Now the volunteers ought to have been so instructed, for the invasion by the enemy was almost daily expected at the very time that a kind of discipline was commenced, which they could not learn for months, and which was unnecessary even if they could. They would be ex–tremely useful as auxiliaries to our army, if the enemy landed, particularly from the nature of the country, and their local knowledge, were they merely trained as light troops; in which case, the physical powers of the individual, and his patriotic spirit, would have fair play. Besides, it is the species of force, in which we are the most deficient and which is peculiarly ap–plicable to an inclosed country. But perhaps I ought to apologise for speaking so much upon a military subject, because those who are not military, speak most learnedly upon it. Although, in other cases, men seek to know the practice as well as theory of a subject, before they venture to advise upon it, at least it is but natural that others should enquire, whether they have that knowledge, before their ad–vice is taken. We generally conclude men to have some knowledge of their own pro–fession in the ordinary concerns of life. We don't send our watch to be mended by a shoemaker; unless, indeed, we inverted Horace's rule of "Omnis sapiens est sutor;" but even in that case, his further directions should be observed, "Ne sutor ultra crepidam." (Hear! hear!) But I will not proceed farther upon this topic at present, as other opportunities will occur for discussing it. And now let me implore gentlemen to recollect, that the eyes, not only of this country, but of Europe, and of the whole civilized world, are anxiously fixed upon the proceedings of the British senate, as the last remaining prop of expiring liberty. The hopes and destinies of Europe hang upon your decisions: then let it not be said, that the imperial parliament, forgetting the great objects of its dignified character, shall occupy itself with the little disputes of party politics, contending how to get this man in, or to get that man out of the government, instead of employing all its energies to keep out the arch-enemy of all legitimate governments. We are engaged in no ordinary warfare: we contend with no common enemy, unless, indeed, the common enemy of mankind. He has sworn vengeance. Your sins are of a nature he cannot forgive. You are loyal, content, and free; you aggravate these crimes, you resolve to continue free. Your punishment would be extirpation. He comes not for conquest only, neither would pillage satiate his wrath. Desolation and destruction are his objects;—the Delenda Carthago he applies to you. The existence of all you hold dear is at stake—property, liberty, life. Be but unanimous—banish party dissentions, let every hand and heart be joined in the common cause. Be but vigilant—let him advance—he will be met by free men, determined to lose their liber–ties but with their lives. (Loud cries of hear! hear!)

contended, that the statements made on a former evening by the noble lord (Castlereagh) had hitherto remained unanswered. He congratulated, however, the gentlemen on the other side, on the new discovery they had made re–specting the merits of the administration of a noble viscount (Sidmouth). After ha–ving, at a former period, heaped upon that noble viscount as a minister every term of reprobation which their imagination could conceive, they had at length found out that his administration was the most ener–getic of any for these three years past. As to the boasted measure of the right hon. gent. (Mr. Windham) for recruiting the army, it must be evident that it had com–pletely failed. This appeared from the right hon. gentleman's own statement. It could not be expected that it would produce any other result. Was it by frittering away the bounty of the country in pen–nies and twopences that an army was to be raised? Was it not rather by holding out splendid rewards, which, though only falling to the lot of a few, were inducements to the many, that an army was to be expected to be created? Ministers how–ever, had not recurred to any thing of this nature, they had rather chosen to go on in the old way, and to grant promotions only to favour and to connections. What was to prevent them from recruiting from the militia? According to the right hon. gent.'s plan, the militia were to be reduced to 40,000 men; from the surplus number, therefore, the army might be strongly recruited. Yet, notwithstanding the ease with which this mode of recruiting might be resorted to, it had not been adopted. Why, the real reason he believed to be, because ministers were afraid of offending the militia colonels. This, of course, they could not state in that house, but this he believed to be the real reason. It had again been stated by a right hon. secretary of the treasury this evening, that he (Mr. J.) had pledged himself to make a motion re–specting the conduct of ministers relative to their professions of economy. He thought it necessary therefore again to deny, that he had so pledged himself. At the same time, he conceived that ministers had acted Wholly contrary to their professions of eco–nomy, and that all they had done was to give salaries to themselves, and with re–spect to salary granted to one of them he did intend to make it a subject of discussion in that house. The hon. gent. pro- ceeded to enter into an examination of the estimates, contending that there was no proof whatever in them of economy, and particularly noticing the item of contingen–cies, which was stated at 52,000l. Upon another point also be wished for some sa–tisfactory information, which as, what were the nature of the duties executed by the muster-master general of Ireland, and why it was thought necessary for that office to be executed by two persons?

expressed his regret at being obliged to detain the house at so late an hour, but he felt it his duty to make a few observa–tions, in consequence of its having been asserted by gentlemen on the other side, that if these estimates had been brought forward by the late administration, the amount would have been 5 or 600,000l. greater than their present amount. He could not avoid, however, digressing from this subject, to notice two or three other points. He had listened to the panegyric of the hon. baro–net, sir John Doyle, upon present and former statesmen, and was extremely sur–prised to hear him praise ministers for their conduct during the late negotiation, a measure which, above all others, in his opinion, was calculated to hold them up to the contempt of the country. The other point was the delay in sending reinforce–ments to Buenos Ayres. It was admitted that ministers received intelligence of sir Home Popham's expedition on the 24th of June, and yet no reinforcements were sent out till October. It had been alleged that there were no transports. Why were there not? During the greater part of the administration of his right hon. friend, now no more, transports were kept constantly ly–ing at Spithead, sufficient for three thou–sand men, with victuallers ready to accom–pany them. It was not to be expected that transports were to be ready for a stay of four or five years, in any place to which they Might be sent, but certainly transports were at the disposal of ministers, sufficient to enable them to send a strong reinforce–ment to that expedition. His right hon. friend also constantly took care that there should be a brigade of three or four thou–sand men kept ready for any emergency. Returning to the subject of the estimates, he found that the amount of them was ac–tually 475,000l. more than those of 1805. This was a sufficient answer to the assertion, that the late ministers would have made the estimates higher. With respect to the increased allowances in the Chelsea establishment, he would be the last man to object to an increase of the rewards grant–ed to those who had spent great part of their lives in the service of their country, but he dreaded the effect of these increased allowances in a peace establishment. In the event of a peace, probably 50,000 men would be discharged, and, adding the in–creased allowances, an additional expence would accrue of 6 or 700,000l.

thought the measure of the right hon. gent. (Mr. Windham) for recruiting the army, deserved the highest praise as a general and permanent system, but he doubted its effect in providing for immediate defence. He approved highly of converting the service for life into a service for years. He approved also of the training bill, as tending to diffuse a mili–tary spirit throughout the country, but at the same time he thought it was calculated to do any thing rather than provide for im–mediate defence. The right hon. gent. had on former occasions given them the tone in calling for measures calculated to pro–cure an immediate supply for the army, and he must allow them to give him the tone again, in calling for measures of a similar nature. Much time was necessarily lost in preparing great measures, and in carrying them into execution, and he felt anxious for some measure that should in the mean while meet the immediate exi–gencies of the country.

made a few observations relative to the capture of Buenos Ayres. Among other things, he stated that a most able and intelligent officer, a gentleman who had been particularly noticed in the dispatches from that place, had informed him that nothing but the great prompti–tude of general Beresford, prevented the army from laying down their arms; and that, if it were not that the most active and spirited exertions were made by that officer, if they were delayed for the space of two or three hours, the whole army must have met with inevitable destruction. An account of the recapture of that place had been put into his hands since he had come into the house; but from a compa–rison of the date of that communication, and the place it came from, with the date of the original capture, and the situation of the city itself, he found that it was im–possible that the fact could then have ta–ken place, and therefore could not suppose from that authority, that it had taken place at all. To have carried the intelligence from the one place to the other at that time, the bearer must, without the convenience of stage coaches, have travelled between 3 and 4000 miles in the course of 72 days, and that over roads considerably worse than those of the Alps, or the very worst parts of the continent of Europe.

corrected some apprehensions which appeared to have prevailed among gentlemen on the opposite side of the house. It was stated, that the number of men raised according to the papers on the table, did not equal the amount of what his right hon. friends had stated in their speeches. It was to be recollected, however, the papers began the account from the month of March last, and, of course, they did not contain a year's return. Now, if gentlemen would have the goodness to wait until the month of March next, he was confident, from the result of the most minute enquiries which he had made in the best informed quarters, that by that time the numbers would even exceed those stated in the estimate of his right hon. friends; the house had also the testimony of a gallant officer near him (general Doyle), that the measure of the right hon. secretary was already the means of adding to the consideration and character of our army: then, when he considered that it was thought by the noble lord (Cas–tlereagh) and the other gentlemen on the opposite side of the house, to be a most grievous piece of expence, that some trifling addition should be given to the sol–dier who was disabled in the service of his country; when he reflected on this, he could not say that he envied the feelings of those noble and honourable members. Oh miserable thought to their minds, if some happy man should, after the faithful discharge of his duty to his king and coun–try, enjoy perhaps some 20l. a year! For his own part, he was anxious to reform abuses and diminish expences where the practices were known to be corrupt or the establishments useless; and he would challenge the gentlemen on the opposite side to contradict him when he stated to the house, that in the staff at home, there had been, within the last year, a saving of 43,000l. and in the barrack department, notwithstanding there had been last year a retrenchment to the amount of 500,000l. there was in this year a further saving of 50,000l. and in the commissariat depart–ment there were nine places less than in the preceding year. Put to give grud- gingly to the worn-out veteran was a thought which he could not bear; and he was of opinion, that his right hon. friend (Mr. Windham) was entitled to the thanks of the country for the act, not of generosity, but of humanity and justice, he must call it, which he had done in their name to a most deserving set of men. The volun–teer corps had been mentioned on the other hand, with a view of reflecting on ministers for having made a saving in the expence of that establishment; but, to the volunteers, he would give the credit that belonged to them, and say he knew that they were not to be looked upon as a mer–cenary body; he was well convinced that they would not look with a magnifying glass at every little saving that was made in the public expence attendant on their establishment. When he looked at the to–tal of the estimates, and heard gentlemen opposite say, "Oh, but if you had let us stay in another year, you should have seen what vast savings we should have made!" it reminded him of what was said of a man, who wished to become celebrated for a wit: That his wit was very good, but that it was all borrowed from yesterday; in speak–ing of those gentlemen, he must reverse this observation, and say that all their clever–ness was borrowed from to-morrow.—After some further observations, the resolutions were read a second time and agreed to.