House was exceedingly full when I left it, which was about one o'clock in the morning; but several Members went away before the division. The motion was lost by a majority of only a single vote; the numbers being 193 to 194. The House did not rise till three in the morning. The minority resolved to try their strength again upon the same question: accordingly the day before yesterday, General Conway moved the following resolution: “That after the long and fruitless continuance of the offensive war in America, for the purpose of subduing the revolted Colonies by force, it is evident that that object is impracticable, inasmuch as it takes from our exertions some part of that strength which ought to be employed against our European enemies, and is contrary to his Majesty's inclination, expressed in his speech to both Houses, in which he declared it to be his royal wish to restore peace and tranquillity." I was not in the House, but the arguments used in the debate were much the same as had been employed before. The House did not divide till half past one o'clock, when the motion was carried against the Ministry by a majority of 19; 234 for the motion to 215 against it. This happy event occasioned, the next day, a rise of the stocks of one and a half per cent. LETTER XVIII. Dear Roget, Gray's Inn, March 8, 1782. In my last letter I mentioned General Conway's motion: as soon as it had passed the House, a motion was made for putting it into the form of an address, and carrying it up to the Crown. An address was accordingly carried up, to which the King answered, "that the House might be assured that, in pursuance to their desire, he would take such measures as should appear to him to be most conducive to the restoration of harmony between Great Britain and the revolted Colonies." The day after the motion passed, there were rejoicings in several places; the bells were rung, and a great many houses were illuminated; and papers were cried about the streets," news for England-Lord North in the dumps, and peace with America." The Ministers affected to take the alarm, and sent advice to the Lord Mayor, that they had notice of intended riots; but every thing was very peaceable, as, I believe, everybody expected. The joy of this victory over the Ministers was much damped by their still continuing in office. Lord North, a few days after when pressed with his own declaration, did not scruple to say he would stay in his place till the House voted that he should be removed; which may be fairly interpreted thus, that as his administration had lasted in calamity to his country, so it should end in utter disgrace to himself. Since the success of his last motion, General Conway moved the House to come to a resolution, "That whoever should be hereafter concerned in advising, or by any means attempting, the further prosecution of offensive war on the Continent of North America, for the purpose of reducing the revolted Colonies to obedience by force, were declared and should be considered as enemies to their King and country." The Ministry said the motion was useless; that when the House voted the address, that implied a censure upon those who should dare to disobey it: but the Ministry, probably feeling their weakness, would not divide the House upon the motion, and it passed. We have since received news of the loss of Minorca and of St. Christopher's in the West Indies. Some very important motion is to come on to-day in the House of Commons; it is said to be for a total change of Ministers: in my next I will tell you the fate of it. I forgot to mention before, that the Attorney-General has brought in a Bill preparatory to a peace with America. Charles Fox said, a few days ago, in the House, that he knew peace with America might be had immediately; that there were persons in Europe empowered by the Congress to treat for peace; and that he himself, as much as he detested the Ministry, would, if they would give him authority, negotiate with those men. Lord North answered, that services so offered he disdained. I am much surprised you thought anything in my letter worth communicating to M. de Végobre. On the subject of the Cross Elections he seems to think that political energy is not essentially necessary in your commonwealth [Geneva], except in such a crisis as the present; and that such a crisis is not likely soon to recur. He may be assured it never will recur if the citizens are once unmanned and enervated. Perhaps I am mistaken; but it is my opinion that political indifference must at all times be mortal to a small republic. If the cross elections do not produce the effect which I think most natural, that of stifling all zeal for the people, they will be still more dangerous to the peace of the community. A demagogue in office is infinitely less dangerous than when excluded and persecuted into importance. In office, the demagogue is fettered by the known extent of his power, his views are restrained and his proposals overruled by his colleagues; but when excluded and kept in a private condition, he stands alone; his power being illegal knows no limits, and as he cannot take a single step without an infringement of the constitution, as, to be active at all, he must come under the animadversion of the law, he little heeds how desperate may be his measures. Suppose him to be actuated by the ambition of acquiring honours; which is wisest, to cut off the possibility of his gratifying that ambition without the subversion of the state, or to lure his attention from more dangerous objects by leaving certain places in view, which, when he attains them, disarm him of half his power? When Wilkes was forced into popularity by expulsions and exclusions from Parliament, his power over the populace was little less absolute than that of eastern despots; they yoked themselves like slaves to his coach; they rescued him out of the hands of the ministers of justice; and, when afterwards he voluntarily surrendered himself up, they besieged his prison, and shed their blood in his cause: but the moment he was admitted into the House of Commons, his power fell to be that of a single vote in a small minority; for none of the talents which make a demagogue important with the multitude have much influence in a senate. What avails it ten members of a council that each is a Demosthenes in eloquence, in zeal, and in patriotism, if they have to oppose the silent votes of eleven pedestrian 1 senators? Adieu. Yours most affectionately, S. R. Dear Roget, LETTER XIX. Gray's Inn, March 24, 1782. Though I have received your and my dear Kitty's letter of the 2nd of this month, I must postpone answering it, till I have given you some account of the fortunate event which has taken place here since the date of my last letter. You may remember I then talked of a motion that was to be made that day in the House of Commons, and from which much was expected. The motion was for a removal of the whole administration: it was lost by 226 votes against 216. The Friday following, another motion was made, different in form, but the same in substance; that, too, was lost by 236 against 227. How the ministers began already to tremble for their places you may judge by the topics on which they were defended in the debate; the principal of which were, that the Ministers were not the authors of the American war, which, it was admitted, was the source of all our calamities: that that war was the unavoidable consequence of measures adopted before any of the present Ministers came into office, particularly the Stamp Duty and the Declaratory Act: that to enforce our right of taxation over the Americans was not a project of the Ministers, but of the whole nation, expressed by their representative, the House of Commons: that if the present ministry were now to be removed, they must be succeeded by men who entertained the most dangerous and unconstitutional principles of government, and who had pledged themselves to the nation to reduce those principles into practice (for Charles Fox had protested a few days before, that, if ever he came into office, he would act upon the same principles which he had 1 Roman senators who voted but did not speak were called Pedarii, from their expressing no opinion but with their feet. always professed in opposition, and that he should hold any man who did otherwise in the most sovereign contempt and abhorrence): that we should soon see half the boroughs in the kingdom stripped of their rights of election, Parliaments made triennial or even annual, and the populace assembled to give their advice in matters of legislation and government: that unanimity was now more than ever requisite: that it was unanimity to which we owed all our success in the last war: that a change of ministers ought to be effected, not by turning out one party and bringing in another, which was to aggravate, not to heal our divisions; but by a coalition of all parties, who, uniting cordially in the common cause, might destroy the very name of opposition. To all this it was answered, that the question was not now who were the authors of the war, but whether, after that series of disasters and disgraces which had overwhelmed us under the present administration, it was proper to intrust them any longer with the conduct of our affairs: that the sanction of Parliament, under which the Ministers sought to shield themselves, had been obtained by deceit and misrepresentation of our having innumerable friends in America, of all the powers of Europe being resolved to remain at peace, of the certainty of our being always able to command a fleet equal to that of the House of Bourbon: that whatever the political principles of a new ministry, no innovation could be established till after it had received, in the constitutional form, the assent of the King and both Houses of Parliament; that unanimity was desirable, but not an unanimity obstinately to pursue impracticable schemes of ambition, and complete that ruin which was so far advanced that the unanimity of the last war was produced by no coalition, but by discarding an obnoxious administration and forming a new one agreeably to the wishes of the people: that a coalition with the men now in office was impossible, for what the nation required was, not a change of men, but of system; and that the government should no longer be founded on corruption, but on the affections and confidence of the people. Upon this motion being lost, notice was given that |