Col. Hart ley. and faid, he would go as far to fupport them, as to defend the privileges of the People. The fenfe of the nation, he afferted, was entirely with the prefent Minifters, and fo it would be found. He mentioued Mr. Fox's having faid a little time ago, that there were not more than 160 names fubfcribed to an addrefs from Wolverhampton; to comfort that honourable gentleman, he would affure him that another addrefs, figned by 3000 perfons, and those of the first character in the town, was coming up from Wolverhampton. He faid farther, that above ten times ten thousand names would foon be fubfcribed to addreffes, thanking his Majefty for having difmiffed his late Minifters. Mr. Powney alfo mentioned the withholding the fupplies, and the other topics of the day, which he treated as other gentlemen had treated them, who had declared they should vote against the motion. Colonel Hartley faid, he certainly had met the honourable gentleman who spoke laft at Reading, where he had been forry to find that the fenfe of the meeting was different from his political principles. His conftituents had, however, indulged him with a patient hearing, and he had fairly explained to them the grounds on which he acted. If what he faid had not the effect of bringing those prefent at the meeting over to his opinion, it had at leaft proved to them, that he had acted to the best of his judgement, and he had not a doubt but the day would come, when they would find that he had not acted erroneoufly; in the mean time he thought himself highly honoured with their indulgent hearing.. The Colonel ftated, that a noble Earl had been prefent at the meeting at Reading, and had thanked God he had contributed to fave the Conftitution; upon which the Colonel had faid, he thanked God, he too had done his best to fave the Conftitution, though by a very different line of conduct from that pursued by the noble Earl. He remembered to have seen the honourable gentleman who fpoke laft at Reading, and that they left their politics in the hall, and dined very cheerfully together. Having difmiffed this part of his fpeech, the Colonel proceeded to the queftion of the day, and declared he fhould give it his vote, because he held it to be extremely new and highly improper for a Minifter to remain in office after that Houfe had declared it could not give him its confidence. He gave Mr. Pitt due credit for his ability and integrity; but reininded him of the oppofite conduct of the Earl of Chatham, who had ever ftrove to fupport the dig nity nity of that affembly, and had thought that the title of Minifter of the Houfe of Commons was much more glorious than that of Minifter of the Crown. Sir Matthew White Ridley said, that he had not attended his Sir M W. duty in that House fo foon as he wifhed and ought to have Ridley. done, private domeftic concerns having detained him in the country. When he came to town he found the refolutions on the journals, but finding that the question on which they all turned, was, Whether the privileges of that House should be upheld or not, he hesitated not a moment to determine which fide he fhould take. Sir Matthew entered into a very able differtation on the neceffity of the Houfe acting firmly, and exerting every conftitutional means to fupport its dignity. He pointed out the mifchievous confequences that muft follow their giving way in a ftruggle of fo much importance. He mentioned the power of refufing the fupplies as the great weapon of defence which the Constitution had armed them with, but agreed that it ought not to be wielded on flight occafions. At prefent, he denied that the sword was drawn, and the fcabbard thrown away, as Lord Nugent had stated, but faid, the vote of Wednesday was of a different fort. The Houfe might then be faid to have clapped its hand to the hilt of the weapon of its defence, but it was not yet drawn, and he hoped Minifters would be wife enough not to render it neceffary. If they perfifted in their unaccountable conduct, and the right honourable gentleman, either through pride or obftinacy, ftill refufed to refign, that House would be juftified in going farther than it had yet ventured. It would in that cafe be idle to talk of the confufions and diftractions that might follow; the confequences, however fatal, would lie at the door of Minifters. Mr. Drake faid, he was always forry to differ from gentle- Mr. Drake. men of refpectability. He could not, however, agree with the honourable member who made the motion, because he was of opinion, that the fentiments of the House ought always to be fully and accurately expreffed, though in general terms; nor could he fubfcribe to the amendment, which implied the resolutions formerly voted; these he had always thought unfounded, and therefore could not admit of any propofition in oppofition to that conviction. He adverted to the fituation of the right honourable gentleman. His abilities entitled him to all the honours he had received, or which this country could bestow on a fubject, and confequently he was in poffeffion of great and refpectable confidence every where, except in that House. Sir SirC.Cocks, Mr. Fox. Sir Charles Cocks praifed the virtues and talents of the Mi-. nifter; and wondered how it could be imagined he should be turned out of office before he had an opportunity of proving to his country either his merits or demerits. Confidence could only be forfeited by an abuse of it, which, however, was in his cafe impoffible. After feveral pertinent obfervations on variety of public topics, he took occafion to remark, that the word coalition had become obfolete in fome degree, on account of that odium which rested on the event which it was meant to defcribe. But union was now the word which every one feemed fo fond of. As to the punctilios of honour, fo much toffed from one fide of the Houfe to the other, he could not help obferving, that he was often at a loss to understand what it meant, especially as he had always conceived the general good of the country at large to conftitute the exclufive and peculiar honour of the reprefentives of the people in Parliament affembled. Sir Philip Jennings Clerke fpoke for the motion with earnestness. Mr. Fox faid, the queftion was of too much importance for him to give a filent vote upon it, especially after what had fallen in the courfe of the debate; before, however, he proceeded to touch upon any of the various topics that had been brought forward, he could not but express his fatisfaction at the debate's having been managed as it had been by country gentlemen, by men perfectly independent in principle, and known to have no view to office, nor any motive whatever, but a wifh to promote the public welfare. The opinions of fuch characters must at all times have their weight with that House and with the nation; it had therefore afforded him particular pleasure to have heard the motion fo fairly difcuffed, and he could not but flatter himself, that it would tend more effectually to open the eyes of the public, than any arguments he could advance, or that all the oratory of both fides of the Houfe combined could produce and maintain. In the progress of the conteft that had engaged their attention for fome weeks paft, the Ministers and their friends had studiously endeavoured to load him and those who did him the honour to think with him, and to act accordingly, with all the unpopularity and all the odium, that art could imagine, and malice impute. Thus, from day to day, new colours for their conduct were held out, equally fallacious and foreign from the true motives of their proceedings, but all equally tending to mislead, confound, and delude. The point moft laboured at by the other fide of the House was, was, to charge them with having flopped the fupplies, and thence not only very confiderably impeded the progrefs of the public bufinefs, but given a fatal blow to the national credit. A charge more ferious could fcarcely be fuggefted, but a charge more falfe had never been hazarded. That the power of withholding the fupplies was a weapon with which the Conftitution had armed that House, and that it was warrantable for that Houfe to wield this weapon whenever fit occafion required, was a maxim founded in undeniable truth, and a maxim which he never would abandon. That the fupplies ought not to be withheld wantonly, rafhly, and lightly, was an affertion which he had repeatedly made, and which no man felt a fuller conviction of than himself. The queftion lay therefore wholly in the expediency of the exercise of this right, the undoubted privilege of that House, the representative of the Commons of England. The present ftruggle was clearly a struggle between the prerogatives of the Crown and the privileges of the people. In defence of the latter, that Houfe was bound to exert every nerve of the power with which it was conftitutionally invested. The power of withholding the fupplies, as it was the most formidable weapon in its hands, ought undoubtedly to be the laft ufed. Should the Minifters perfift in their obftinacy, and push matters to an extremity, it would be juftifiable to wield that weapon, the right to use which was the only diftinction that he knew between a free people and the flaves of an abfolute monarchy. He thanked God the conteft had not been carried fo far as to render fuch a dreadful refort neceffary; and he hoped, prompt as Minifters appeared to provoke that Houfe by infult, and determined as they were to treat its refolutions with defiance, the House would keep its temper, would preferve its moderation, and would adopt every means of procraftination, to avoid bringing the contest to its crifis. As yet, they had not stopped the fupplies; they had indeed poftponed them for eight and forty hours, and that on an occafion that would have juftified a harfher measure, and in a cafe where their poftponement could be attended with no poffible injury. An honourable gentleman (Mr. Marsham) had faid in the course of the debate, that he would grant no fupplies during the continuance in office of the prefent Minifters, excepting only from time to time, and when the fupplies afked were declared to be immediately neceffary. Mr. Fox faid, he would not go fo far, he would not say that he would refufe fupplies on the one hand, nor that he would grant them on the other; but govern his conduct by the cir ci mf ances I cumstances of each particular cafe. Many gentlemen who had spoken in the course of the debate had faid generally, that to withhold the fupplies was to injure the national credit. This affertion went not to the extent to which it had been carried, but was founded in error; the mistake arofe entirely from the diftinction between the fupplies and the ways and means not being kept in mind and preferved. The annual expence, if gentlemen would reflect a moment, they would fee confifted of two parts, the money appropriated to pay the intereft of the public funds and the national debt, and the money voted to defray the charge of particular fervices. The former confifted not of the fums raised by incidental means, but of the produce of permanent taxes, enforced by perpetual acts of Parliament, and fpecially appropriated. The appropriation of the produce of these taxes was inalienable, and in the case of failure, the finking fund was pledged as a fecurity. Nothing therefore could shake the national credit, but a refufal to pass the bills of fuch of the appropriated taxes as were annual; a refufal that, he trufted, no man in his fenfes would think of. He could not exemplify this more ftrongly, than by ftating, that if the Receipt tax had either been given up or left in its unproductive ftate, without a new tax being propofed and adopted to make up the deficiency, and the Sinking Fund had not proved equal to supplying it, in that cafe the national creditor would have been injured, but in no other. The other part of the public expence was of a very different nature. It confifted of providing for eftimates of expences to be incurred, and which neceffarily were -optional in their nature. Thefe, as fervices to be performed, refted entirely on the difcretion of the House, and the confidence they placed in Ministers. Thus the estimate for the Ordnance, and he could not, he said, choose a case more directly in point, was the estimate of an expence to be incurred, and confequently a fpecies of fupply upon which that House might exercise its prudence without detriment to the national credit. To poftpone it therefore could be no poffible harm. This, he faid, was the diftinction between fupplies and ways and means. The one refpected public credit, the other pub lic fafety. The former might be refufed without rifque to the national credit in many inftances, the latter in none. Ways and means were the provifions for expences actually voted; fupplies the expences themselves. The worst Minifters, or the most unconftitutional monarch that ever reigned, muft not be refused the one, but it might be highly inexpedient to vote the other, even in the reigns of Princes whose own |