« PreviousContinue »
cause as he had last described; and to what other could he attribute it? Had not every method which invention could suggest been practised for the purposes of union; but had not all beeu unsuccessful ? He, for his own share, was so much impressed with the awfulness of the crisis, that he was still ready to avow the strongest inclination to sacrifice every thing-, to introduce and establish union. On this point he had formerly given his sentiments. To these sentiments he now adhered. He again avowed them, and he hoped gentlemen would at least give him credit, when he affirmed, that no motive would ever induce him to obtrude himself in office, or to throw an obstruction in the way of producing that union between parties which was so ardently desired. What then could be the reason for Ministers retaining their places, contrary to the opinion, and in defiance of the lesolutions of the House? All their objections had been obviated. The India bill, that monster which they had conjured up, was to be shaped to their own liking, at least its most exceptionable clauses were to be placed under proper restrictions. India was therefore out of the way. He himself was out of the way. On what ground then, on what plausible pretexts could Ministers either rest their claim to office, or shelter themselves in the retention of their places? He was happy to find that all their ostensible reasons^were now removed, and they were driven to the last shift, that of asserting, that their remaining in office was now no point of public concern, but a duty which they owed themselves. A right honourable gentleman (Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer) has declared, that he must be driven from his situation — that he should contaminate himself by yielding to the sentiments of the House. But how can he support such sentiments? Is his submitting himself to the decision of this House a circumstance of contamination or reproach? In the situation in which he himself had been placed some years ago, he yielded to the sentiments of the House; but did this concession of sentiment imply guilt, or criminate him either personally or publicly? Quite the reverse — In his conduct on that occasion be had only acted as it became every Minister to do—He had yielded to the fense of Parliament, and of the House of Commons, a duty which he should always reckon himself bound to fulfil. Much had been said of the intemperate language and intemperate procedure of opposition. But
X 2 how bow could such assertions be supported? Had they not conducted themselves with the utmost deference to Majesty and the dignity of that House? Yet their moderation was denominated violence, and the temper of their conduct rashness and precipitation. But had such assertions any foundation, or were they admissible in propriety of lanr guage? If words were not altered, if they had not ceased to be the vera vocabula rerum, they could not be applied. The right honourable gentleman now challenges the'decision of the House on the supplies. He wishes to listen to the opinion of Parliament. Theft condescensions gave him much satisfaction. He was happy to find that the right honourable gentleman shewed any disposition whatever to attend to the sentiments and decisions of the House. This was surely a revolution both of principle and conduct in him, and totally different from what in former instances he had avowed and practised. Before he sat down he would advert to one circumstance respecting what the right honourable gentleman had stated in regard to the resignation of Ministers. He had observed that right honourable gentleman sometimes inaccurate and inarticulate on particular points which did not just answer his purpose. He should therefore be glad to know whether the right honourable gentleman had said that Ministers had not resigned, or that they had not yet resigned. The monosyllable yet, in this instance, which, perhaps, by a fraud of inarticulation, the right honourable gentleman might have smuggled, was of the utmost importance to be known. Much had been said of the popularity of the present Administration—From what sources did the Minister borrow such sentiments, and such nostrums? Was it from those that sat round him? or was it from the tumultuary meeting which had been held last Saturday in Westminster Hall? He was convinced that on the complection of that meeting it was extremely difficult to decide;— One description of citizens had cried out No coalition! Another had called out No back-stairs influence! but which of these popular clamours had predominated, depended on the utmost nicety of ear to determine. These vociferations pf the multitude, besides, were not altogether the result of the dispassionate decision of the citizens of Westminster, but owed their origin, as he had learned, very much to the nervous, impassionate gesticulation, and sonorous eloquence of one noble Lord, and to the very disinterested eloquence of another (Lord Mountmorris) who, to be sure, was riot biafled by Britifii property,t who had exposed himself in his voyage to this kingdom, to the perils of the seas, who professed himself a citizen of the World, an advocate for the universal rights of mankind; who had abandoned his own country; who had eve-i left its freedom at hazard for the purpole that he might devote his endeavours to the interests and salvation of this nation. From the influence of such characters on the minds of the people of this country, there was no reasoning, nor were these the proper test of popular approbation. The noble Lord again lamented the circumstances of the present crisis, in which the two powers of the country were drawn to extremes. He hoped this calamitous situation would be averted, if possible, and that the right honourable gentleman would think of making some sacrifice of his mighty dignity. It was a cruel circumstance for the House to be compelled to come to a resolution derogatory of the prerogatives of a Monarch, who had so frequently expressed his predilection in favour of its dignity, jts honour, and its privileges.
Mr. Brooke Watson said as reference had been made to the Mr. Brook* sentiments of the people out of doors, respecting the popula- Watson, rity of Ministers, he would state to the House the opinion, though not of the body, yet of a considerable body of the people on that subject. It was that of the citizens of London assembled in Guildhall last week. At that meeting, they had given an explicit sentiment in favour of Administration. He dwelt on the hazards arising from postponing public business as connected with public bankruptcy. He said that the meeting which had given its sentiments respecting Ministry, was not assembled improperly, was not tumultuary; there was no hustling or jostling there, but all was decency and respect.
The Solicitor General expressed his surprise that a noble Lord (Lord North) who had expressed in his speech his apprehenCon, with respect to the present crisis, should at the same time, and during the progress of his speech, have shewn so much levity, and indulged so much humour. These were contrarieties of manner which he could not easily reconcile. He then" combated an idea, which he stated had been thrown out by Mr. Fox, that a cafe similar to the present, in which Majesty had refused to attend to the voice of the House of Commons, and the House of Commons had on that account refused to grant him supplies, had occurred since the time of the Revolution. Here he was reminded by a general cry of the House, that Mr. Fox had restricted his period to that of
the accession. of his present Majesty. He affirmed, however, that Mr. Fox had consined himself to the æra of the RovoJution, and he was of course entitled to reason on that point. He would state, in opposition to this mode of reasoning, a cafe directly in point. On the 13th of May, 1701, the House of Commons, after various resolutions, at last agreed to address his Majesty to remove for ever from his presence Lord Somers, Lord Orford, and the Earl of Portland.— After doing this, however, did they suspend the supplies till such time as his Majesty's inclination was known ? No; for the very next day, on the 14th of May, they voted a supply for guards and garrisons, which was nearly the fame thing with an ordnance estimate. He adverted to the precipitancy of the manner in which the resolutions had been pasted, and contrasted that circumstance with the affected moderation of the present motion. He said, test in ofsice had been called for from Ministers. The House would not allow them to give evidence of their ability and character. It insists on the Minister's retiring, and by such a resignation declaring himself guilty. He expatiated on the popular qualities ot the Minister, and declared, that he was the Minister of the people. He reasoned on the late addresses which had been presented to the Throne, and insisted, with many signisicant nods, that they were not the effects of imposture.
Sir William Dalben said the motion and the whole of the late conduct and proceedings of the House tended to abridge the prerogative of the Crown, and to leave nothing but the shadow of prerogative. That which would be left would resemble Sancho's feast of prerogatives, where he must not touch one of them. He objected to all this violence therefore, and hoped he Ihould fee the House return again to moderation and their temper.
Lord Delaval, Mr. Gilbert, Lord George Cavendish, and one or two other members spoke; but the question was so loudly called for, the House divided. Ayes, 208 j Noes, 196. Majority for the adjournment, 12. It was agreed to postpone the motion till next day.
Tovrfs. Mr. Po-mjs requested the House would indulge him with a moment's attention, while he should say a few words in vindication of his character, which, in common with the rest of those members who composed the majority last night, had betn improperly attacked by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, fchequer, a little before the House adjourned: That right honourable gentleman ascribed motives to the majority on the last night's division, which he could venture to declare did not actuate his conduct. The right honourable gentleman charged the majority with having refused the supply; but he would as roundly assert, that the majority did not refuse the supply. He could speak best for himself; and for one, he assured the House, that when he voted last night against the motion for bringing up the report from the Committee of Supply, nothing could be farther from his intention than to refuse the supply; his only motive, and that he believed of the whole majority, was merely to delay the consideration of it, until the House should have time to take some previous steps, which the exigencies of the times required: and in order to convince the right honourable gentleman that this was his motive, he would to-morrow prove to him, by voting for the supply, that he did not mean ultimately to refuse it: at the same time, however, he thought it proper to say, that the vote of supply ought to be preceded by some such resolution as he proposed last night; and therefore he would endeavour to new model it in such a way as to remove any ambiguity, to which it appeared liable in the opinion of some gentlemen last night; and having so given notice, he said, he would move it to-morrow before the House sliould proceed to vote the supply.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer replied, that as he did not The Chanmean to anticipate the debate upon the motion, of which the £^e0>y*e honourable gentleman had just given notice, he would not fay any thing at present on the subject. He agreed with the honourable member, that the most effectual mode by which he could convince him and the public that by his vote of last night he did not intend to refuse the supply ultimately, would be to grant it to-morrow. When that event should have taken place, he would then retract the opinion he delivered last night, that the .intention of the majority was to refuse the supply.
Mr. Fox laid, that when the right honourable gentleman Mr. Fcx. was pleased to say that the majority of the House, on last' night's division, meant wholly to refuse the supply, he did so in direct opposition to the declaration of every man who spoke on the question, which was carried by the majority; for they one and all declared, that they had not the least intention to withhold the supply; but that they thought it necessary to pause a while, in order to consider what measures ought to be taken in so new and extraordinary a situation of